Agenda and minutes

Any member who is substituting for another member should so indicate, together with the name of the relevant absent member.

The following substitution was declared:

Councillor John Augustine substituting for Councillor Sarah Stamp.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Simon Brown, Joe Mason and Sarah Stamp.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 11 November 2021 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 November 2021 were confirmed as correct record and signed by the Chair.

Members are reminded of their responsibility to declare any pecuniary or local non pecuniary interest which they have in any item of business on the agenda, no later than when that item is reached and, when appropriate, to leave the meeting prior to discussion and voting on the item.

Members’ declarations of interest are recorded under the item to which the declaration relates.

The Chair informed members the Vice-Chair attended Cabinet on 7 December 2021 and presented the Committee’s report from the meeting held on 11 November 2021. 

As per the minutes confirmed above, the Vice-Chair updated Cabinet on the Health Portfolio Overview presented by Councillor Sara Mildmay-White; the Air Quality and Anti-Idling update; the Suffolk County Health Scrutiny meeting held on 13 October 2021; the Cabinet Decisions Plan and Work Programme update, which were noted by Cabinet.

Members of the public who live or work in the district are welcome to speak and may ask one question or make a statement of not more than three minutes duration relating to items to be discussed in Part 1 of the agenda only. 

If a question is asked and answered within three minutes, the person who asked the question may ask a supplementary question that arises from the reply.

In accordance with government guidance, the Council has developed general protocols on operating buildings safely in order to reduce the risk of the spread of coronavirus and will apply to members of the public registered to speak.

We would therefore strongly urge anyone who wishes to register to speak to notify Democratic Services by 9am on the day of the meeting so that advice can be given on the arrangements in place.

There is an overall limit of 15 minutes for public speaking, which may be extended at the Chair’s discretion.

There were no members of the public in attendance on this occasion.

Report number: OAS/WS/22/001

On 10 June 2021 Councillor Trevor Beckwith submitted a CCfA entitled “Impact of the Eastern Relief Road and A14 Junction 45 on the Moreton Hall Residential Area” for the Committee’s consideration.

On 2 September 2021, the Committee heard from a variety of organisations and witnesses who have been involved in this issue.  The Committee made a number of recommendations to Suffolk County Council and requested a three-month progress report for its January 2022 meeting.

The Committee on 13 January 2022 received Report number: OAS/WS/22/001, which updated members on the six recommendations, and included the responses provided by Suffolk County Council, which were set out below as follows:

Recommendation 1:

Installing signage along the A14 and at J45 to direct HGVs to specific Industrial Estates and Business Parks; and revisiting existing signage within the Business Parking to ensure HGVs are directed to J45, where internal roads join the Eastern Relief Road.

SCC Response:

The A14 is a trunk road and entirely the responsibility of National Highways (NH), not Suffolk County Council (SCC). We have passed on this request to NH, for their information and will discuss with them, as required. Should NH come up with a signing scheme for their network we would be consulted as a Local Highway Authority (LHA) and would look at ways of supporting this through changes to signing on the local road network.

However, amending the routing of HGVs would have to be considered in the round to ensure that larger vehicles are not displaced on to less suitable narrow rural roads and residential streets.

That is why SCC is carrying out a Suffolk wide HGV review and the results of this review will inform amendments to the Suffolk lorry routing map.

The current version is available to view here:

https://www.suffolk.gov.uk/assets/Roads-and-transport/lorry-management/Lorry-Route-Map-Amended-MAY-17.pdf

Recommendation 2:

Undertake day and night monitoring of HGV traffic flow, overnight parking on Moreton Hall in retail and industrial areas, air pollution and noise along Orttewell Road, Bury St Edmunds to provide a clear evidence base for further action.

SCC Response:

SCC conduct periodic monitoring of our network and additional survey work has been conducted as part of the Suffolk Wide HGV review.

Specific local issues should be flagged using the Highways Reporting Tool and will be investigated accordingly. See below link:

https://highwaysreporting.suffolk.gov.uk/

Please note that noise, air pollution and residential amenity are the responsibilities of West Suffolk Council (WSC), not SCC. However, we discuss these matters with WSC officers regularly and will engage positively with any initiatives WSC officers carry out in these areas.

Recommendation 3:

To consult on a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order prohibiting HGVs using Orttewell Road, Bury St Edmunds and monitoring the impact of this.

SCC Response:

SCC has no current plans to carry out a Traffic Regulation Order consultation at this location. Orttewell Road is a modern road, built to a high standard without frontage development. Any restrictions on this road would have the impact of displacing HGV traffic onto less suitable roads. This would be especially the case  ...  view the full minutes text for item 156.

Report number: OAS/WS/22/002

The Committee received Report number OAS/WS/22/002, presented by the Chair of the Working Group, Councillor John Burns, which updated Members on the progress of the Markets Review Working Group to date.

The purpose behind the review is to look at the strategic role West Suffolk Council, aligning the operation of the markets to the council’s strategic vision and supporting their development to meet the corporate priorities.

To date the Group has met three times online.  The Group had received baseline information about the markets in each of the towns, discussed the visions for the markets and confirmed the expectations of the review, received a presentation on case studies of best practice at markets elsewhere and agreed proposals for the engagement plan. 

A comprehensive market survey was created towards the end of last year to capture feedback from visitors, stall holders and traders, local businesses/stakeholders, town and parish councils, members and young people.

At the Review Groups next meeting scheduled for 7 February 2022, it will question some invited “expert witnesses”, such as from BIDS; Market Traders Federation and others.

The Review Group would then work up its recommendations, which would be presented to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in June 2022 and once agreed, recommended to Cabinet in July 2022.

The Committee considered the update report and asked questions to which responses were provided. In particular discussions were held on the responses received from the survey; parking on the markets and whether the Review Group would be looking at the management and layout of the markets. 

In response to a question raised by Councillor Paul Hopfensperger, relating to the Bury St Edmunds market, and whether a particular fruit and veg trader had been involved/responded to the survey.  Councillor John Burns advised he was not aware of specific responses from individuals due to data protection and agreed to look into this further and would respond back to Councillor Hopfensperger accordingly. 

There being no decision required at this point in the review, the Committee therefore noted the update from the Markets Review Working Group.

Report number: OAS/WS/22/003

The Committee received report number: OAS/WS/22/003, which updated members on the current status of its rolling work programme of items for scrutiny during 2022 (Appendix 1).

In reviewing the Committees work programme Councillor Tony Brown raised the topic of Planning Enforcement in relation to enforcement outcomes and levels of performance and Councillor Julia Wakelam raised Barley Homes relating to sustainable standards and whether someone could come to a future meeting of the Committee to discuss the process. 

In response to Planning Enforcement, the Chair advised that he was happy to discuss this further with Councillor Tony Brown following the meeting.

In response to the Barley Homes suggestion, the Chair informed the Committee that he and Councillors Diane Hind and Mike Chester sat on the Barley Homes Shareholders Advisory Group as nominated observers and was happy to discuss this further following the meeting with Councillor Wakelam. 

The Chair advised that with any topic suggestions, members were reminded to complete the work programme suggestion form following discussions taking place with the relevant Portfolio Holder before submitting to the Committee for its consideration.

There being no decision required, the Committee noted the update.