The Places Overview and Scrutiny Committee met to discuss a range of issues including environmental services, planning reforms, and regeneration projects. The committee agreed to re-establish the Transport Users' Sub-Committee and also discussed the Cabinet Member's response to the How Clean is our Borough? report. Members also reviewed the performance of the Environmental Enforcement Contract, received an update on Erith placemaking, and discussed planning reforms and the committee's future work programme.

How Clean is our Borough?

The committee discussed the Cabinet Member's response to the recommendations of the scrutiny project sub-group: How Clean is our Borough? The sub-group had made several recommendations to improve street cleaning and waste management in the borough, and the Cabinet Member had responded to each of these.

Councillor Slaughter raised concerns about weed control across the borough, noting that pavements adjacent to the road seemed to be getting worse. Officers explained that there were three weed applications, and they had to happen when the weeds were live enough so that the spray sticks. Ms. Michova, an officer, added that the first application was completed in March, and the second application started on 9 June. The third application would start on 26 August and continue for six weeks.

Councillor Pirella asked if there had been any pre-scrutiny of the grounds maintenance contract before it was awarded. He also raised concerns about why HMOs¹ were targeted in recommendation five, arguing that other properties were also an issue with waste and fly-tipping. Councillor Sandy explained that HMOs were targeted because there was a feeling that people did not take responsibility for their waste in these properties.

Councillor Sandy asked what was being done in terms of lobbying government. A Cabinet Member responded that the subgroup was mentioned in the council's response to the London Plan consultation.

Councillor McEwen asked for an update on the QR codes, how they were being rolled out, and what locations they were being placed in. She also raised concerns about bins being left on the path and causing obstruction to less able people. Officers responded that QR codes would be included on new fly-tipping signs, and enforcement action could be taken against residents who leave bins on the path.

Councillor Davy asked for more information on the weed spraying, including when it would finish and when the August application would start and end. Officers responded that the second application started on 9 June and would take six weeks. The third application would start on 26 August and continue for six weeks.

Environmental Enforcement Contract Performance

The committee discussed the Environmental Enforcement Contract Performance with Waste Investigations Support & Enforcement (WISE) Ltd. A key point of discussion was the number of Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) that had been issued but not paid, and the reasons for this.

Councillor questions focused on the low number of FPNs that had been paid, and the high number that had been written off. She expressed concern that people would learn that they did not have to pay FPNs if they just waited it out. Officers responded that if someone refused to pay, they were taken straight to court. They added that the cancellation of FPNs was not something that officers did, and there were systems in place to ensure that cancellations were only made in appropriate circumstances. They offered to provide a snapshot of some of the reasons why FPNs had been cancelled outside of the meeting.

Councillor Reid asked how Bexley compared with other authorities in dealing with FPNs. Officers responded that it had been difficult to get benchmarking data, but the current contract was performing much better than the previous one.

Councillor Obanair asked about the social value targets in the contract, and whether the contractor was delivering on these. Officers responded that the contractor had delivered four good activities in 12 months, and they were continuing to advertise for positions locally.

Councillor Bacon asked about spitting and urinating in public, and how these offences were dealt with. She also asked for an update on commercial waste presentation. Officers responded that they had to witness the offence to issue a fine for spitting or urinating in public. They added that commercial waste presentation was about how a business presents their waste for collection.

Councillor McClellan asked for a financial breakdown of the contract, including the cost of the contract and what the enforcement officers were being paid. He also asked who was guiding the contractor to go to certain areas of the borough. Officers responded that they could not share the cost of the contract in a public session, but they were happy to set up a teams meeting to discuss this. They added that officers decide on deployment patterns depending on trends and complaints.

Councillor Davey asked if the expiry of the FPN period was due to the council being slow in acting on these. He also asked if FPNs were kept on the book after they had been written off, and whether there was a punitive element to stop repeat offenders. Officers responded that there were different reasons why FPNs were cancelled, and they would come back and check on what happens to an FPN that is issued.

Councillor Gower raised concerns about the assault against an enforcement officer, and whether action had been taken against the person responsible. Officers responded that they would normally report it to the police and their organisation, and they would record it as an accident.

It was agreed that a teams meeting would be set up to discuss the contract in more detail.

Erith Placemaking Update

The committee received an Erith Placemaking Update. Councillor Reid raised concerns about access to Erith, saying that the original access down Avenue Road, which was shut many years ago, deterred people from going to Erith. He also raised concerns about vandalism. Officers responded that they were aware of the severance caused by the dual carriageway and the main line, and they were looking at ways to reduce this. They added that they were also looking at reopening Avenue Road. They said that good design could help reduce vandalism, and they were working with the local community to co-design things.

Councillor Burrera said that there was a need to get not just houses in Erith, but also facilities such as leisure facilities and NHS provision. He asked what the one key thing was that needed to be done in Erith to start changing the redevelopment of Erith. Officers responded that the one key thing was to realise and embrace working in partnership with other stakeholders.

Councillor Lucia-Hennis said that Erith was made on the river, and the council should look at using the river more. She suggested that cruise liners could come to Erith, which would bring in lots of capital. She also asked if Morrison's was closing. Officers responded that there was nothing happening in Morrison's, and they were doing a booming trade. They added that they had looked at the river, but one of the big concerns was the way the jetty was.

Councillor Derry said that the water side was totally underutilised. Councillor Ovendare said that the shopping centre had pre-existing issues with shoplifting and antisocial behaviour. He suggested that an enhanced police presence would do a lot by way of reassurance.

Councillor Hinkley said that the gardens were brilliant, but not enough. He asked what the measures of success were for regeneration, and who the partners were in the community. Officers responded that the measures of success were increased footfall and driving down the number of vacant units. They added that they needed more partners in the community.

Planning Reforms

The committee discussed an Update on Planning Reforms. Councillor Ogundayo said that the local plans were brilliant, and Bexley should be building more homes. He added that building more homes would open the opportunity to have the DLR² and Elizabeth line extended.

Councillor Slaughter said that the report outlined matters which were of significant concern, particularly relating to the green belt. He added that the mayor of London did not understand outer London, and it was a crime to cut into the green belt. He said that the number of applications that were dealt with by members today were far fewer than they were in years gone by, and this was a loss of local democracy.

Councillor said that residents expected them to make planning decisions, and it would be an absolute outrage to take that away from them.

Councillor Bacon said that she welcomed the development of new homes across the borough, but they needed to be the right types of development in the right places. She added that she was very concerned about the influence of the London Plan.

Councillor Davy said that the planning reforms were an absolute disaster, and they would result in even less democratic control. He added that the London mayor considered the whole of London to be a one size fits all, but Bexley had totally different requirements from central London.

Councillor said that one positive thing about the planning reforms was that the council could change its fees.

Councillor Barella said that the mayor of London had done really well on building council housing and affordable housing. He added that Bexley Council's record in affordable housing was abysmal.

Officers said that they had been in a perfect storm in terms of viability, and developers had found it extremely difficult to build out decent viability numbers to provide affordable housing. They added that the London Plan would continue to set the overall target for London, and then subdivide that target amongst the boroughs.

Work Programme

The committee discussed its Work Programme for the coming year. It was agreed that more detail would be provided for the Celebrating Bexley item in January, and that the budget implications for places would be looked at.

Councillor suggested that a sustainable transport task and finish group should be established. This was agreed.

Councillor said that the committee should be looking at community centres. It was agreed that this would be looked at after the review of the premises that the council owns.