To
select appropriate items from the Cabinet agenda for pre-decision scrutiny
(reports enclosed for Scrutiny Members)
Minutes:
The Committee
scrutinised the following Cabinet Board items
Accessibility to
Aberavon beach via the new Slipway Access Ramp at Scarlett Avenue Car Park
Members received
a report in relation to the accessibility to Aberavon beach via the new slipway
access ramp at Scarlett Avenue car park.
Officers
provided an overview of the circulated report which contained four different
options that the Council could consider implementing, along with the associated
risks; option one and option three were noted to be the most suitable options,
particularly option one which minimised the many risks associated with using
the ramp. It was added that Officers had received some correspondence from the
public in regards to having access via the ramp, in which option three would
permit; however, this would include taking on board the risks associated with
this and carrying out the relevant measures listed in the circulated report
including installing signage and additional disabled car parking close to ramp.
Local Members for
Sandfields West and Sandfields East, who were in attendance at the meeting,
shared their concerns in regards to the recommended option one and the
accessibility issues to Aberavon Beach; some of these concerns had also been
highlighted by a number of their residents. The local Members also provided
their thoughts on the other options contained within the circulated report and
why the ramp should be utilised for access onto the beach.
Taking account
of the Council’s duty of care to the public and its obligations under the
Equality Act 2010 and other relevant legislation, Officers stated that they
would not recommend simply opening the ramp for public use as it had not been
designed for this; if Members wanted to look into this as an option, it was
noted that the Committee would require an additional report.
Members were
informed that it was as a result of a planning condition, as to why the ramp
wasn’t allowed to be opened to the public, through biodiversity approaches
etc.; the ramp was built to provide access for coastal defence work and to an
associated standard which did not include for general public access. It was subsequently retained to provide
access and egress to the foreshore for beach cleaners and emergency access
only. The options were prepared in this context.
A discussion
took place in relation to the timescales of implementing option three, to which
it was noted that progress could be made within a month to six weeks.
Concerns were
expressed in relation to leaving the gate open as it could encourage people to
drive onto the beach, which would have an impact on the safety of other users.
On the other hand, it was noted that the ramps onto the beach were the only way
to bring sail boats and the like onto the beach; this was an opportunity for the
community and could encourage more people to use it.
A formal
amendment to the recommendation contained within the circulated report was
proposed and seconded, which changed the recommendation from ‘option one’ to
‘option three’; the details of which were contained within the report.
It was
determined that the Committee were in support of the amendment to be considered
by Cabinet Board.
Traffic
Regulation Order/s: Cilfrew
A report was
provided on a proposed 20 mph speed limit traffic regulation order at Cilfrew
Village in Neath.
The Committee
was informed that in 2020, the Council received a road safety grant from Welsh
Government to implement traffic calming measures to reduce speed, for example
speed ramps; there was a lot of opposition to that scheme from the local
residents. However, it was highlighted that speeding was a significant issue in
the area, which is why Welsh Government originally supported the scheme; 85th
percentile of traffic were travelling at 38mph which was concerning to the
department and the Road Safety Manager.
Following this,
it was stated that a petition was submitted by the community, opposing the
proposals at that time and asking if alternative measures could be considered
in terms of trying to reduce the traffic in the locality; subsequently, the
Road Safety Manager had further dialogue with Welsh Governments Road Safety
Teams and it became known that they were going to be considering 20mph pilots
that Authorities were able to bid into. It was explained that there were six pilots
that were taking place across South Wales and Neath Port Talbot Council were
fortunate enough to be successful in making a bid to participate in that pilot,
and can now work with Welsh Government and GoSafe around implementing a
different type of road safety measure in the area.
Subject to
Cabinet Board approval, it was noted that Officers would be sending out circa 500
letters within the local community, and both the local Member and the Road
Safety Manager will be going into the community and making themselves available
during the consultation period to promote the scheme and to discuss the
proposals with the local community; the proceedings with the letters and the
advert would commence on 1 June 2021.
Members asked
for detail on the initial cost of the whole project, to which it was stated
that it was in the region of around £72K this year, the total grant was £140K.
Officers were
asked why there was a need for 20mph in small housing closes. It was confirmed
that the criteria around the pilot required to cover a whole community area and
it was recognised that in some of the areas individuals wouldn’t be travelling
at that speed; the feeder road and the main road were the key areas of concern.
It was highlighted that this pilot would likely run for two years across Wales
in selected areas and it would then inform the precursor to a national default
limit of 20mph in Wales; it didn’t necessarily mean that it will be retained,
however if it worked and the community believed that it had been beneficial,
then it was likely to be retained. Officers added that all of the data and
information that will be gathered from the pilot will be fed into Welsh
Government and into a wider review on the default limits; Welsh Government were
very keen to draw boundary around the whole community as oppose to singular
main road routes.
It was queried
why the area of Cilfrew was picked for the pilot. Officers confirmed they did
look at some other areas across the County Borough, however there were a few
factors in choosing this particular area. It was noted that Welsh Government
had picked different size communities as part of the pilots; in other parts of
Wales they picked a whole town and in other parts, such as rural communities,
they had picked two or three streets. Officers stated that Cilfrew was a
mid-sized cluster of community, with around 500 properties; this fitted in with
the mix of data Welsh Government were trying to obtain to inform the wider
review on the speed limit nationally. It was added that the area also currently
had road safety issues that needed to be addressed. Officers highlighted that
it was recognised that only a certain amount of capacity and resource was
available; a lot of the work would be delivered by the GoSafe partnership and
the Council would be doing the engineering works, however a lot of the work
will also involve data analysis that would be completed behind the scenes.
Members asked if
there had been any road accidents in the area, to which it was confirmed that
there had been; the area would not have met the Welsh Government criteria to be
considered if there wasn’t sufficient factual evidence around this. In order to
qualify on the original application, Members were informed that it required
evidence in relation to the level of speed from the covert speed data information;
Officers and Welsh Government also would have looked at the police statistics
for near misses and accidents with minor injuries. It was mentioned that there
had not been any major incidents in the area where there had been a fatality.
Officers agreed to share the detail of the evidence with Members outside of the
meeting.
Following
Scrutiny, the Committee was supportive of the proposal to be considered by the
Cabinet Board.
Design Options
for the Remediation of Cilmaengwyn Tip above Godre'r Graig Primary School
Members were
presented with a report which proposed to direct award Earth Science
Partnership work to investigate design options and produce budget estimates for
works associated with the remediation of Cilmaengwyn Spoil Tip.
A discussion took
place in relation to the remedial options contained within the circulated
report, in particular option three ‘the demolition of Godre’r Graig Primary
School building and reusing the site with a community benefit’. Members asked
for clarity on how the site could be used for a community benefit, if the site
was not safe for staff and pupils in the primary school. Officers stated that
the consultants would be tasked to identify if there were any suitable
community benefits and would provide feedback to Officers once completed; it
would not likely involve the site being developed in terms of housing or
community halls, however there may be other green-type community benefits that
could be appropriate.
It was asked if
Officers had a timescale for Earth Science
Partnership (ESP) to carry out the feasibility study. Members were informed
that the consultant was part of the South Wales Regional Framework that had
recently been tendered, within that framework the Council could make a quick
award subject to Cabinet Board approval; this could be completed after the
three day call-in period. In regards to the time to undertake the study, it was
noted that the Council had to enter into negotiations with ESP, however it was
likely to be around four to six weeks to complete the study.
Detailed within
the circulated report it stated that the ESP were commissioned in 2019 to
investigate the tip material and landslip above Godre’r Graig School; Members
asked for clarity on what landslip Officers were referring to. It was noted
that the awareness of the Pantteg landslip, Ty Gwyn landslip and the history
around the Godre’r Graig and Cilmaengwyn area raised concerns; the recent
geological activity in Pantteg prompted for a closer look at the Godre’r Graig area, particularly around the
school, keeping in mind the educational review of education in the valley area.
Members were informed that initially, a desktop study was completed, which
flagged some concerns; this led to completing more detailed testing and
analysis work, which unfortunately due to the risks involved there and the
history, resulted in Godre’r Graig Primary School being temporarily closed at
the time. It was added that since completing the monitoring, movement had been
identified in that area; therefore, more investigation was required.
It was asked why
complete removal of the spoil was unlikely to be favourable, as detailed in the
circulated report. Officers stated that anything was doable in terms of
engineering solutions, however it was down to the physical ability to carry out
the activity; whilst also taking into consideration time scales and costs. It
was mentioned that Officers carried out some initial calculations, purely
mathematical, based upon the volume of material on the site that would need to
be taken off site; this was in the region of £4million and didn’t take into
account safe access routes onto the site. It was added that smaller vehicles
would be needed to complete this operation due to the nature of the topography
there, so it could take up to 18 months to two years to take the volume of
material off the site, and carry out the mitigation works that would be
required.
Following
Scrutiny, the Committee was supportive of the proposal to be considered by the
Cabinet Board.