Meeting documents

Members are reminded of the need to consider whether they have a disclosable pecuniary, prejudicial or other (personal) interest to declare in any items on this agenda.  Details of any interest must be declared at the start of the meeting or as soon as any interest becomes apparent during the meeting.  The attached form must also be completed. Any advice required should ideally be sought before the day of the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest received.

Public questions of which due notice has been given and which are relevant to the business of the committee.

There was one public question received from Mr James Corrigan and also a public statement received from a Shirley Sheppard and Tony Fenter, which was read out by the Chair at the meeting and highlighted Levelling up funding from government documents; purchase of Pavilion House and Comet; and acquiring planning permission.  Both the questions and statement related to item 6 on the agenda, Scarborough Town Centre Regeneration (Student Accommodation Scheme).

The Chair invited Mr Corrigan to read out his questions, and noted the questions had been submitted in two parts:

Questions

Q. "Whilst acknowledging that the report 21/193 does not affect any review of the business case in accordance with the motion passed at full Council, please confirm:

a)    That the maximum price for the scheme to be paid to the developer, as referred to in para 4.9, is a fixed amount agreed at the time of carrying out the assessment for the Viability Condition, and

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 1^st September, 2021.

RESOLVED: that the minutes of the meetings held on 1^st September, 2021 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

A presentation will be given on measures being taken to address dog fouling issues. 

The Committee received an oral update and presentation on dog fouling issues.

Harry Briggs, Deputy Head of Operations, Transport and Countryside service, Environmental services attended the meeting and gave a verbal update on on-going work and progress in relation to tackling dog fouling and associated issues. Mr Briggs also introduced and welcomed to the meeting Mark Benton, an industry specialist and environmental crime consultant, Benton Consultancy Services.

Mr Benton gave a detailed power point presentation to the meeting which highlighted the following:

·         Background – highlighting nationally there had been an increase nationally there were now 12.5million dogs in the UK (an increase from 9 million in 2019);

·         Dog fouling controls;

·         Consultees;

·         Dog wardens and roles;

·         Where are we now?

·         Recommendation 1 – do and be seen to be doing something;

·         Recommendation 2 – communicate better and set the agenda;

·         Recommendation 3 – SBC organisation – produce a dog fouling / control strategy, along with a delivery plan.

Following the presentation, Mr Benton invited and responded to the Committee’s questions, comments and concerns on the matters raised.  He also welcomed any more ideas the Committee would like to have included or considered for inclusion in the strategy.

Comments included comparisons with other local authorities, learning from best practice in how they dealt with dog control measures.  More pro-active measures and the positive use of social media to convey messages on dog control.

Another Member felt a review of the dog warden and beach superintendent uniforms to make them more recognisable in their roles and on signage was also raised as possible areas for improvements.

Another Member talked about the balance of education and enforcement methods on dog fouling issues.  The adequacy and placement of dog waste bins and provision for the emptying of them was also raised and discussed. There was also a discussion with both pro and con views expressed as to whether the local authority should consider being a provider of dog bags to the public for dog waste disposal. A number of Members suggested the Council should undertake a trial providing dog bags at a number of locations to assess the effectiveness of use. 

The effective use of banners; dogs on leads; the Public Services Protection Order (PSPO) and impact on health, particularly that of children, through in serious cases toxic infections arising from coming into contact with dog fouling.

Another Member felt the Council’s website could be improved to highlight those beach areas where dogs could be exercised or where they could not go.

Councillor Tony Randerson, Cabinet Member, whose portfolio covered dog fouling issues addressed Members on the subject of dog fouling and associated issues with the Committee’s permission.  He had listened to the Committee’s debate on this matter and had been briefed by Harry Briggs and Mark Benton on their thoughts and suggestions on this subject a couple of weeks ago. In terms of banners, he preferred any advertising being for a dog friendly borough. 

RESOLVED: that:

(1)  the presentation be received; and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Cabinet at its meeting held on 21^st July, 2020, considered and approved a COVID-19 recovery strategy for the Borough. A report of the Director (LD) will update the Board on the progress of the recovery strategy since that time. – REPORT ATTACHED

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Executive, (Reference 21/202) which provided the Committee with an update on progress against the Council’s Covid-19 Recovery Plan.

Petra Jackson, the Policy and Governance Manager attended the meeting and introduced the report.  She also referenced the draft Scarborough Borough Council recovery plan, attached to the report with appendices, which gave more detail on the national recovery plan; North Yorkshire recovery co-ordination; Scarborough Borough recovery objectives; the journey ahead; and transition, living with Covid.

The report also contained a number of appendices detailing recovery strands, including humanitarian; major projects; operational; Members and Governance Services; financial; and economic business; along with future ways of working and climate and sustainability considerations.

A Covid-19 Recovery action plan – summary of the progress to October, 2021 was also detailed at Appendix 2 to the submitted report.     

RESOLVED: that the assurance update that the Council was continuing to focus on recovery following the Covid-19 Pandemic be welcomed and received.

.

To consider a report from the director (NE) on the Scarborough Town Centre Regeneration (Student Accommodation Scheme) (ref:21/193).

The Committee considered the report of the Director (NE) (Reference 21/193) in relation to the Scarborough Town Centre Regeneration (Student Accommodation Scheme).

As a background to the report, the Director (NE) reminded the Committee of the following motion of the Conservative group in respect of the project to redevelop the former Argos building:- "the Conservative Group on Scarborough Borough Council today call for residents of the Borough’s financial interest in the project to be protected by a full review of the business case in light of the cost pressures being experienced in the building industry at the current time".

The submitted report advised the Committee in detail of the existing contractual provisions contained in the development agreement with Buccleuh Property (Scarborough) Limited.

The Director (NE) then outlined in detail the salient aspects within the report to the Committee.  In particular, he drew attention to paragraph 5:5 of the report – communications and that it was intended that a further report containing a full review of construction costs associated with the scheme would be brought back to this Committee at the viability condition stage. Assuming the planning application was determined in November/December 2021, it was anticipated the report would be brought back to this scrutiny committee in February, 2022.  

The Director (NE) then invited and responded to the Committee’s questions, comments and concerns.

Prior to the discussions the Director (NE) confirmed that it had been announced earlier that morning that it had been announced that the consideration of the planning application had been deferred to the December meeting of the Planning Committee.  The Chair also reminded those Members of the Scrutiny Committee, who were also Planning Committee Members, not to pre-determine anything today before the matter came to Planning Committee.

A Member made the following statement to the Committee on this matter and quoted from the resolution passed at the meeting of the Borough Council last month: "a fullreview of the business case in light of cost pressures being experienced in the building industry at this time."

The report by the Director (NE), together with his input today, very clearly sets out the contractual provisions contained in the development agreement; it includes the safeguards that were built into the paper that was approved by Council in 2019.

However, notwithstanding that comprehensive report, he contended that the Committee had not been provided with the remainder of the information that would have been expected following the Council resolution last month.

The Member referred to paragraph 3.4 of the submitted where the Director (NE) had stated "Significant increases in construction costs have been reported in recent months and this may have an impact on the deliverability of this scheme."

The concern expressed at Full Council was specifically in regard to the escalation of building costs that had been widely reported in the media and confirmed by people in the construction and civil engineering sectors as well as others.  Consequently, the Member expressed both disappointment and concern that there was no  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To consider, agree and/or amend the current Places and Futures Overview

and Scrutiny Committee’s programme of work (reference 21/196), along with

a copy of the latest published version of the Cabinet’s Forward Plan for

consideration.

The Assistant Democratic Services Officer presented the Committee’s current work programme (reference 21/196) for Members’ consideration, along with the most recent copy of the Cabinet Forward Plan.

The Committee discussed the current work programme and Cabinet Forward Plan. In respect of the items listed on the Forward Plan.

RESOLVED: that the work programme, as presented, be approved.