Loading
There is no summary of this meeting yet. Summaries are written once the council publishes the minutes, which are its official record of what a meeting decided. They usually appear a few weeks after the meeting.
None.
The Committee noted their interest in ward related issues held within the report.
The minutes of the previous meeting held on 15th January 2024 were accepted with the following queries: - The Committee requested to note that include the inclusion of Bus Service Update to the draft Forward Work Programme 2024-2025. - The Committee also wished to follow up on a query about the Civic Amenity Site. The Committee noted concerns about whether incineration as an alternative waste disposal method would contribute to pollution problems and climate change, due to smoke and fumes from incineration processes. Concerns were also raised about the transportation of waste to alternative disposal sites, such as incinerators, which could lead to increased emissions from lorries going in and out of the sites. The Committee also wanted clarification about who decides when a landfill site is considered full and how the levels are monitored, especially considering that some waste, such as food waste, would naturally decompose and potentially create more space over time. The Scrutiny Adviser advised the Committee that this would be queried with the relevant Head of Service.
Invitees: - Laura Lacey (Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Assets) - Paul Jones (Strategic Director (Environment and Sustainability) - Joanne Turner (Team Manager- Assets and Planning) - Andrew Brooks (Highways Service Manager) - Daniel Yule (Flood Risk Officer) The Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Assets gave an introduction to the report. The Team Manager – Assets and Planning then gave a presentation to the Committee detailing the Strategy. The Committee asked the following: · The Committee queried the inclusion of companies such as drainage companies in the consultation. The Strategic Director – Environment and Sustainability confirmed that those related to the reports were included but agreed to verify this. · The Committee raised a query about a point in the report pertaining to a street in their ward. The Strategic Director – Environment and Sustainability assured that this would be verified, acknowledging that the information was sourced from various places. · Concerns were raised by the Committee about the limited avenues for consultation. The Team Manager- Assets and Planning acknowledged this and advised they would explore other means to broaden the reach, such as increased use of social media. · The Committee asked if community groups within specific flood risk wards had been contacted by the officer. The Strategic Director - Environment and Sustainability and the Team Manager for Assets and Planning confirmed that some groups had been contacted and expressed willingness to contact more groups suggested by the Committee. · The Committee questioned the use of ARUP in the report creation. The Team Manager- Assets and Planning advised of ARUP's extensive work in the field and their previous involvement in the 2017-2023 report. · The Committee asked about potential partners and challenges from partner organisations. The Team Manager- Assets and Planning and the Strategic Director – Environment and Sustainability discussed the need for prioritisation and the Council's responsibility to prompt partner organisations to act when residents are impacted. · The Committee expressed that the document was highly technical and asked if a simplified version was available for public feedback. The Strategic Director – Environment and Sustainability acknowledged the challenge of simplifying the document without omitting necessary details. · The Committee suggested the report consider long-term solutions and proactive strategies. The Team Manager for Assets and Planning mentioned a sustainable drainage being considered for developments over 100 square metres. · The Committee questioned the consequences if Registered Social Landlords (RSL’s) failed to perform certain cleaning tasks. The Strategic Director - Environment and Sustainability explained that the Council could respond in various ways, including enforcement. · The Committee asked about the timeline for repairing manholes. The Highways Service Manager explained that they evaluate the condition of manholes using historical data and perform reactive maintenance in areas with fewer problems. The Strategic Director - Environment and Sustainability noted that most issues with gullies and gratings are isolated incidents and don't require frequent cleaning. However, if a major weather event occurs, those requiring more frequent cleaning are given first priority. The Highways Service Manager also stated that gratings are promptly cleared as a high priority once an issue is identified. · The Committee asked for clarification on classified and principal routes. The Highways Service Manager explained that A routes are classified, and B routes are typically principal routes. · The Committee noted the 4-week guideline for responding to issues. The Highways Service Manager highlighted that Newport typically responds faster than this. · The Committee asked about the frequency of liaison with riparian landowners and the Council's enforcement options. The Highways Service Manager and the Strategic Director- Environment and Sustainability discussed the Council's approach and the Team Manager- Assets and Planning outlined the enforcement options. · The Committee raised issues within the Stow Hill ward and asked about the works done. The Highways Service Manager confirmed that cleaning occurs annually and other issues could be addressed if necessary. · The Committee asked if inspections would be carried out on substandard works. The Highways Service Manager explained their approach to maintaining standards during the development process. · The Committee asked if a report had been written on the Rhiwderin flood. The Highways Service Manager confirmed that a report would be produced. · The Committee raised issues related to underground springs. The Highways Service Manager discussed potential causes and how they were addressed. · The Committee asked about the process for diverting water flows. The Highways Service Manager explained that water would only be diverted within the asset itself. · The Committee asked about actions taken in response to worsening climate change. The Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Assets, the Strategic Director- Environment and Sustainability, and the Team Manager- Assets and Planning discussed funding, realistic goals, and potential visits to Natural Resources Wales (NRW) works. · The Committee asked why the River Usk was not included in the strategy. The Strategic Director- Environment and Sustainability and the Cabinet Member for Infrastructure and Assets discussed the issue's inclusion in the coastal protection document and the scale of the issue. · The Committee asked about the funding process and the Council's effectiveness in securing and using it. The Team Manager- Assets and Planning and the Strategic Director - Environment and Sustainability discussed the annual grant application, the variability of funding, and the reality of flood defenses. · The Committee asked about Newport's success in securing funding. The Team Manager- Assets and Planning explained that Newport was fairly successful but noted that Welsh Government had less funding available. · The Committee asked about the impact of losing small-scale grants on future planning. The Strategic Director- Environment and Sustainability explained the significant impact, as the funding had helped address problems over the years. · The Committee asked about Newport's role as a Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) in mitigating flood risks. The Team Manager- Assets and Planning outlined their responsibilities, including dealing with riparian landowners and consenting to any structure placed on a water course. · The Committee asked about the expenditure on reactive maintenance. The Strategic Director- Environment and Sustainability agreed to update the document to clarify this figure. · The Committee asked about the perceived budget shortfall. The Strategic Director- Environment and Sustainability expressed that the council was striking the right balance between cost and action. The Committee thanked the officers for their attendance. The Committee noted the content of the Draft Newport Flood Risk Management and wished to make the following recommendations for consideration with the Strategy: - Enhance public consultation methods to reach a wider audience beyond what is currently planned, such as social media channels and local promotion. - Whilst the Committee appreciated the technical nature of the data required for the report, they also wished to consider creating a more accessible version of the report for public consultation to encourage participation. This could include an executive summary highlighting key points, or a glossary of terms and acronyms used in the report. - Following on from this, the Committee recommended that the questionnaire for the public consultation captures the salient points succinctly and stated an interest in seeing the questionnaire and commenting on its questions before it is shared with the public. - The Committee wished to encourage Elected Members to inform local flood groups in their areas about the consultation and possibly provide direct contact details of any groups to the Council for outreach. - The Committee wished to showcase the level of investment the Council spends on flood and drainage management by highlighting this in the consultation, including both reactive maintenance and the maintenance of existing infrastructure. - Develop the strategic approach to Flood Risk Management to further embrace the five ways of working under the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act (Wales) 2015 and explore innovative approaches and long-term thinking through collaboration between officers, partners, and stakeholders. - Share information on the success rate of grant applications for flood management schemes and the level of grant funding received for such schemes over the past years.
Invitee: - Neil Barnett (Scrutiny Adviser) a) Action Sheet The Scrutiny Adviser advised of the completed actions within the Committee’s action sheet and advised that outstanding actions will be chased with the relevant officers.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.