BOROUGH OF POOLE
ENVIRONMENT OVERVIEW GROUP
1ST DECEMBER 2005
The meeting commenced at 7.00 p.m. and finished at 8.10 p.m.
Present:
Councillor Adams (Chairman)
Councillor Mrs Hives (Vice-Chairman)
Councillors Brooke (Substituting for Cllr Eades), Collier, Curtis, Mrs Deas (Substituting for Cllr White), Gillard, Mrs Lavender, Sorton , Trent and Miss Wilson.
1.APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for Absence were received from Councillors Eades and White.
2.MINUTES
RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 24th October 2005 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to the following amendments:-
Members present: Delete ‘Clemance’ and insert ‘Clements’. Delete the word ‘Miss’ before Sorton.
Item 2 – Declarations of Interest: Delete the word ‘Miss’ and insert the word ‘Mrs’ between the words ‘Councillor’ and ‘Hives’.
3.DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
In order to allow Councillors the opportunity of declaring an interest, Councillor Adams drew to Members’ attention the tabled item headed ‘Poole Park Dredging and Island Creation’ which he intended to take as a matter of urgency.
Councillor Gillard declared a personal interest in ‘Poole Park – Dredging and Island Creation’ as a member of the Planning Committee.
4.POOLE PARK – DREDGING AND ISLAND CREATION (URGENT BUSINESS)
Clive Smith, Head of Leisure Services, presented his tabled Report which had been considered by the Planning Obligations (Recreational Contributions) Sub-Group at its meeting earlier in the day and set out a programme to dredge the lake, create islands and introduce wider water based activities with the following recommendations:
a)“Support the proposal to dredge the saline lake, create a series of islands and acknowledge the link this work would have with the introduction of greater usage of the lake from water based activities; and
b)Support the allocation of £200,000 from planning obligations funds collected for the benefit of Poole Park”.
In view of the cost exceeding the £50,000 limit for approval under delegated powers, the matter would need to be referred to the Environment Overview Group and Cabinet for decision.
In answer to questions by Members, the Head of Leisure Services responded as follows:
Publicity: There had been plenty of public consultation. The proposal was top priority and received strong support.
Environmental Impact: Extensive consultation had been carried out with the Environmental Agency who were content with the proposals.
Creation of Islands: How would the development of the islands affect the annual rowing gala?
Clive Smith produced a plan showing the islands, dredging and present boat yard. Considerable areas had been kept free for boats leaving a deeper area of water for sailing. The islands would be no higher than the existing shore lines. He advised that it may be desirable to create access via a bridge. This would allow for sailing activities to be based from the island, thereby taking pressure off the lake edge and ensuring the securing of boats when not in use. It was expected that funding to deliver the bridge would be sought externally, and so at this stage it could not be guaranteed.
Water based activities that would be facilitated through this Project included sailing, rowing boats and pedalos. A concessionaire had already been selected to deliver these services and its operation would be based at the Boat House, part of the new restaurant anticipated in 2006.
Planning permission was awaited for the creation of the island, together with this application for funding so it was not yet possible to provide a firm timetable for delivery of the Project. It was predicted that subject to these permissions, the Project could be delivered prior to the busy summer period 2006.
A Member raised concerns about the extent of consultation and referred to Ward Councillors and Area Committees not being included. He asked whether or not other parties, i.e. Poole Forum, had been consulted and if not, wider consultation was required. He thought the matter should be deferred for more details to be made available.
A Member reminded Members of the huge level of consultation that had taken place with the Poole Park Plan which had been to Area Committees, Libraries, users of the lakes, etc. He indicated that he wanted the matter in the public domain and it would therefore go to the next round of Area Committees. He considered the proposal was good news for Poole Park.
It was AGREED that the Environment Overview Group support the work of the Planning Obligations Sub-Group and ask the Officers to continue with more detailed plans for wider consultation.
FOR: Unanimous.
5.PETITION – ST. GEORGES PLAYGROUND, OAKDALE
Members considered the following Petition had been submitted to Council on 25th October 2005 and referred to this Group for consideration.
“We feel very strongly that playgrounds are important and that all residential areas should have a fun, stimulating and safe play area for children to play. We consider Oakdale’s playground to be sadly lacking in equipment and a poor example of what you would expect in this area. We believe that this community needs to provide better playground facilities by re-developing its existing park in St. Georges for its children and future generations to enjoy”.
The Chairman supported the sentiments expressed in the Petition and had held discussions with Leisure Services Officers to work up a scheme. He was supported by a Member who stated that local people did not want their playground re-located anywhere else on the playing field.
In response to questions by Members about the possibility of objections from people living close by in regard to intensification of use of the site, Clive Smith, Head of Leisure Services, indicated that although one or two might object, the best option would be to improve the existing site with planning obligations funding and demonstrate clear support for the project. He further confirmed that such a project did not conflict with play strategy and had been on the list for some time.
The question of disturbance to residents caused by intensification could be addressed. It was stressed that locals were positive about the scheme and the installation of more equipment would be welcomed. It was noted that football was played regularly on the site.
A Member asked whether setting up a group involving some of the residents would be a good idea. The scheme could then go to Area Committee.
A Member indicated her support for play facilities that were needed and asked if there was sufficient funding if the project ran over budget.
RESOLVED unanimously that:
a)The request for improved play facilities at St. Georges Playground, Oakdale, be supported; and
b)The matter be referred to the Planning Obligations (Recreational Contributions) Sub-Group.
6.THE GAMBLING ACT 2005
The Head of Environmental and Consumer Protection introduced Lucy McGill to the Overview Group. He then presented a report on the expected timescale for the development of a Policy Statement prior to full implementation of the Gambling Act 2005. He sought approval for the creation of a Member/Officer Working Group.
He indicated that the law on gambling was more than 30 years old. The Government had reviewed the existing laws and produced new legislation in the form of the Gambling Act 2005 to ensure it could respond flexibly to future technological and market developments.
The major change in the legislation was the transfer of responsibility for issuing premises licenses from the Magistrate’s Court to Local Authorities. It also expanded the groupings of gaming machines, introduced new groupings for casino premises and allowed for temporary use notices.
The legislation was now in line with the Licensing Act 2003 and the Licensing Authority would be responsible for dealing with applications under the Gambling Act 2005. It would be required to produce, for each 3 year period, a policy statement setting out the principles that the Council proposed to apply in exercising its functions under the Act. The policy must be approved by full Council.
Representations to applications would be heard by the Licensing Authority which was also a responsible authority that would make representations.
Although the Gambling Act 2005 did not come into force until October 2007, applications for premises licenses could be made to Local Authorities from January 2007. Drafting the Policy Statement would need to commence in January 2006 to be ready for consideration by the Environmental Overview Group and Council in late spring. The draft policy would be subject to a 12 week period of consultation in June. The policy statement could be finalised in September to be considered by the Environmental Overview Group and ratified by the Council in December 2006 ready for publication in January 2007.
The Portfolio Holder for Environmental Areas including Leisure and Recreation stated that Officers were to be congratulated on the fantastic job done on work under the Licensing Act 2003 and thanked the Chairman and two Co Vice-Chairmen for their efforts. He indicated that the excellent template could be used again. The Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group indicated that he would be happy to support the setting up of a cross party working group.
RESOLVED unanimously that the Licensing Committee be requested to establish a five member, politically balanced working group from members of its Committee to work with Officers to draft the Borough’s Policy Statement under the Gambling Act 2005.
7.MERCURY EMISSIONS LEGISLATION – POOLE CREMATORIUM
The Head of Leisure Services indicated the need to determine the Council’s position on mercury abatement at Poole Crematorium and associated costs.
Members noted that Central Government was requiring all crematoria to reduce mercury emissions and in order to meet the costs of installing the necessary equipment had recommended that the polluters should pay through increased cremation fees. The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) had been investigating mercury emissions into the atmosphere over the past five years and had now assessed that around 16% of mercury emissions in the UK was from crematoria (primarily from dental amalgam). DEFRA had advised that all local authorities running crematoria services had until 31st December 2005 to notify their Local Authority Regulator how they intended to meet DEFRA’s deadline for compliance. The statutory guidance required a natural 50% reduction in emissions by 31st December 20012, but the Government had recently been considering a commitment to 100% cessation by the year 2020.
For normal crematoria, the only way to achieve abatement would be to install filtration equipment designed to remove emissions from the cremators. The alternative would be the forced closure of crematoria for non-compliance.
Poole Crematorium had three cremators which were installed in 2000 (fully EPA compliant) and would support mercury abatement without significant adjustments. The crematory was sufficient in size to accommodate the bulky abatement equipment, but in additional to the capital cots, some additional construction works would be required.
The cost of filtration plant for all three cremators would be in the region of £425,000 which would achieve 100% abatement of the three existing cremators was the highest cost option. The associated construction work had been estimated to cost in the region of £75,000, making a total cost of £500,000.
An Action Plan for the works was being developed and it would soon be necessary to book the technical works to avoid capacity problems with the limited number of companies available to carry out the works. Depending on the timing of the works, the Council could choose to introduce an environmental levy in addition to the existing cremation fee of £310. The monies from the levy would be held in reserve to offset the anticipated expenditure which would be incurred to meet the requirements of PG5/2(04). It was noted that neighbouring crematoria fees were already in excess of Poole’s and were set to increase due to the same environmental pressure.
Members were also advised of an alternative proposal to assist crematoria in funding abatement works. The Federation of Burial and Cremation Authorities and Crematorium Society had together devised a burden sharing scheme CAMEO (Crematoria Abatement of Mercury Emissions Organisation) designed to spread the cost burden over the duration of the upgrading period. The scheme was complex and Officers from Leisure Services, Financial Services and Legal Services had concluded that the scheme should not be pursued as an alternative to funding abatement works independently,
By implementing an environmental levy on cremation fees, the Council would be able to meet the costs of installing mercury abatement plant, and due to the existing equipment and infrastructure of the crematorium, could achieve either a minimum 50% or the full 100% abatement by 2012, the latter avoiding any future works to meet new Government targets should they be improved.
At this stage, the Council had only to notify the Local Authority Regulator of its intentions to achieve the 50% abatement by 31st December 2012. In order to meet the requirements of PGS/2(04) by the prescribed date a plan to programme the work would be required. This would be produced in-house and reported to a future meeting of the Environmental Overview Group for consideration.
RECOMMENDED to:
a)Note that the Head of Leisure Services would notify the Local Authority Regulator by the required date of 31st December 2005 of the Council’s intention to achieve a minimum 50% abatement of mercury at Poole Crematorium by 31st December 2012 by the installation of filtration equipment to remove mercury form the cremator emissions;
b)Note the Officer recommendation to not pursue the ‘CAMEO’ scheme in accordance with legal and financial advice;
c)Request the Head of Leisure Services to develop an action plan and business case to meet the Government’s requirements within the timescale allowed, by installing filtration equipment, including costs and funding projections; and
d)Recommend that Cabinet delegates to the Head of Leisure Services in consultation with Head of Financial Services and Portfolio Holder for the Environment, the setting and introduction of an environmental levy to cover the costs of abating mercury pollution in line with Government guidance.
- TRANSFER OF MHS VEHICLE FLEET TO BOROUGH OF POOLE ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSUMER PROTETION SERVICES – ITEM FOR INFORMATION
The Overview Group noted from the Report of the Head of Environmental and Consumer Protection Services that following the conclusion of successful negotiations on 1st October 2005, the MHS vehicle fleet had been transferred to the Borough of Poole which had utilised reserves to purchase the fleet and workshop equipment. Workshop employees had been transferred through TUPE to the Council’s direct employment.
With the service now being managed by Environmental and Consumer Protection Services, the priority was to stabilise the service and ensure that all functions required by users were fully satisfied and standards maintained.
Fleet Operations staffing structure was being reviewed to meet operational demands, as agreed by Vacancy Clearance. Contracts and improved working relationships with suppliers had been successfully established. Improvements to the workshop premises were being undertaken with a view to enhancing working conditions. Fleet management support software was being sourced and evaluated to ensure excellence in frontline service delivery. A procurement policy of vehicle replacement was being developed by Environmental and Consumer Protection Services in conjunction with Legal Services, Financial Services and fleet users which highlight the need for modernization of workshops facilities. Once developed, these proposals would be the subject of a further report to Members.
Finally, opportunities for partnership working with neighbouring Local Authorities would be pursued and developed appropriately.
A Member thanked the Officers concerned for a successful conclusion to difficult and protracted negotiations.
AGREED that the Report be noted.
CHAIRMAN
1