Agenda and minutes

Prior to considering the matters before the Committee, the Committee resolved, in terms of Section 50(A) (4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, to exclude the press and public from the meeting for article 32 only, so as to avoid disclosure of exempt information of the class described in paragraphs 8 and 10 of Schedule 7(A) to the Act.

The Committee heard from the Convener who congratulated External Funding Officer Susie McCorquodale and Senior Planner Scott Dalgarno for coming first place in the Scottish Councils and English District Councils category within the Young Local Authority of the Year 2011 competition held in Lancaster. 

She advised that as part of the competition Susie and Scott had been tasked with creating an argument paper on a matter of interest to them that was not related to their day-to-day working lives.  They had chosen the subject of the Amazon Kindle and its sudden appearance as a threat to the print industry.  They worked together over a number of weeks, and delivered the presentation to a panel of adjudicators as well as other participants at the event.

The Committee resolved:-

to congratulate Susie McCorquodale and Scott Dalgarno on achieving the award.

The Committee had before it the minute of its previous meeting of
18 January, 2011. 

The Committee resolved:-

to approve the minute as an accurate record.

The Committee had before it the minute of the meeting of the Controlled Parking Areas Working Party of 24 February, 2011 which presented the following recommendations regarding a wide range of issues relating to on and off-street parking policies in Aberdeen for consideration:-

(1)       That the introduction of exclusively residential bays in the most central zones (where they did not exist at the moment) would be detrimental to the economy of the city centre and should not be progressed.

(2)       That city centre residential permits be able to be used within Chapel Street, West North Street, Mearns Street and lower ground floor of Denburn off-street car parks during off-peak hours (i.e.  1800-0800 hours).

(3)       That residents of developments specifically put forward as low or no car housing developments should not be able to purchase on-street permits.

(4)       That any resident/business with access to off-road parking as part of a development should not be able to purchase an additional on-street parking permit.

(5)       That a review of the entire parking charges set by other Council services, and the value judgements implicit in it, be reported to the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee, in the first instance to allow that Committee to assess it from the point of view of transportation strategy.

(6)       That an emissions-based permit system for the city centre, with incentives for the lowest emitting cars and a financial disincentive for the highest not be established at this time, but to affirm that, in the longer term, the principle of emissions-based incentives and disincentives was a coherent proposal.

(7)       That a revised city centre parking boundary be established (i.e.  for the one-permit per household zones) on the basis of a single subdivision into east and west parking zones, which would be simpler to understand, and formalise the existing tendency for drivers to stray into neighbouring zones (which was outwith the rules but often made the subject of discretion on the part of parking attendants).

(8)       That the price of city centre residential permits (ie those released in the areas where only one permit per household was allowed) should not be increased from £80 per year to £160 per year, that an intermediate zone immediately beyond the city centre should not be established (for the purposes of pricing policy only) in which the first of two permits would cost £120 (instead of £80) and the second of two permits £180 (instead of £120), but that prices further out, in the peripheral zones, remain unchanged.

(9)       That Sunday charging hours applicable in central areas from 1.00pm until 5.00pm at the moment should not be extended to run from 11.00am until to 5.00pm, to match Sunday retail hours.

(10)     That the recently-introduced overnight charge of £1.50 in off-street car parks be removed, and that it be replaced by extended operational hours in the most straightforward sense (ie 8.00am until 10.00pm instead of 8.00am until 8.00pm).

(11)     To decline to comment on the proposal that the price of parking vouchers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The Committee had before it a statement of pending and outstanding Committee Business, which had been prepared by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services. 

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to delete items 2 (Energy Futures Centre), 8 (Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009), 9 (Controlled Parking Areas Working Party Minute),  13 (Complementary Uses of Existing and Future Park and Ride/Choose Sites), 17 (Future Funding and Development of AECC), 20 (Various, Small Scale Traffic Management and Development Associated Proposals (New Works), 26 (Strategic Public Transport), 27 (Bus Information Strategy Consultative Draft), and 28 (Car Club Parking Bays in Aberdeen City Centre), subject to the matter being dealt with later on the agenda;  and

(ii)        to otherwise note the updates contained within the statement. 

The Committee had before it a statement of outstanding motions under the Committee’s remit, which had been prepared by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services. 

The Committee resolved:-

to note the updates contained therein.

With reference to article 6 of the minute of the meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 18 January, 2011, the Committee had before it the following motion which had been submitted by Councillor Young:-

            "That this Council investigates the need for a pedestrian crossing to be situated at Scotstown Road directly across from Scotstown School to enable children of all ages and other member of the Bridge of Don community to safely cross what was now becoming an extremely busy road." 

In terms of Standing Order 18(1) (iii), the Convener ruled the motion incompetent.

With reference to article 21 of the minute of the meeting of Council of
23 February, 2011, the Committee had before it the following motion which had been submitted by Councillor Boulton:-

            "That Aberdeen City Council makes an official approach to the bus companies serving Aberdeen to negotiate a more appropriate fare structure for pupils still in full time education - raising the age at which children start paying an adult fare when still at school." 

CouncillorBoulton was in attendance and spoke to her motion explaining the rationale behind her request.

The Committee resolved:-

to write to the Local Authorities Bus Operators Forum regarding this matter, and that officers submit a report following those discussions to a future meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee for consideration.

With reference to article 22 of the minute of the meeting of Council of
23 February, 2011, the Committee had before it the following motion which had been submitted by Councillor Boulton:-

            "That consideration was given to reducing the speed limit on the road from Countesswells to Kingswells due to the high level of accidents." 

CouncillorBoulton was in attendance and spoke to her motion explaining the rationale behind her request.

The Committee resolved:-

to request officers to report on the terms of the motion to the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee in two cycles.

The Audit and Risk Committee resolved to approve the recommendations in principle and to refer the matter to the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee for further progression in terms of the operational impact.

The Committee had under consideration, upon a remit from the Audit and Risk Committee on 25 January, 2010 (article 7 refers), a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure requesting that the Committee consider the report for further progression in terms of the operational impact.

The report advised that the Logical Transport system had been introduced in 2006, and had been designed to be a transport scheduler for transport services specified by the Council’s Public Transport Unit, including internal fleet transport, school transport and social work transport.  It had been anticipated that introducing a transport scheduler would improve the efficiency of the transport provided by the Council and would schedule runs in a more effective manner with the additional benefit that this would potentially reduce the cost of the transport provided. 

The report provided an overview of the work that had been undertaken to date, highlighting various deficiencies with the system and difficulties that had been encountered in the rollout of the system across the Public Transport Unit. 

The report underlined that it had always been intended to rollout the Logical Transport system to other operational areas of the Public Transport Unit, however, due to the difficulties that had been experienced, to do so would require a substantial level of staff resource to undertake the various tasks associated with implementation and maintenance of the system.  Officers were no longer confident that the Logical Transport system would be able to schedule school and social work transport in a more efficient manner. 

The report concluded that as part of the Priority Based Budgeting Service Review, members had approved the proposal to investigate a shared service Public Transport Unit between Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council, which would present various opportunities in regard to transport scheduling. 

The Committee heard from the Head of Planning and Sustainable Development who advised that there was no operational impact.

The Committee resolved:-

to note the report.

With reference to article 11 of the minute of the meeting of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 18 January, 2011, the Committee had before it a joint report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure and the Head of Finance which provided an update on the progress made on various projects within the Non-Housing Capital Programme previously approved by the Council (now aligned to the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Services). 

Appendix A to the report outlined the Non-Housing Capital Programme projects aligned to the Services and provided, for each project, the budget for 2010/2011, to date to the end of January, 2011 and the forecast outturn position.  Comments on particular projects, where appropriate, were included in the narrative. 

The report advised that the spend to the end of January, 2011 only reflected the payments made and thus excluded commitments made which were due to be paid by the end of the year.  Such commitments would be reflected in the minimum spend required.

In particular, the report highlighted that monies required to fund the Capital Programme were achieved through external borrowing, capital receipts and grant income.  In recent years the overall programme had been set at a level which assumed a certain level of underspend would be achieved and thus the funding available was set on that basis.  In previous years, such underspend had been achievable, but with significant spend this year on Corporate Accommodation, this was at risk.  In light of this, the Corporate Asset Group had worked with services to determine their minimum spend requirement for the year.  This had now been successful in bringing this requirement within the funding available.  Finally, the budget for 2011/2012 which was approved by Council on 10 February, 2011, took into account the difficulties in sustaining the previously agreed capital position due to reducing capital funding support from the Scottish Government, including also borrowing and following revenue funding.

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to instruct the relevant officers to work closely with the Corporate Asset Group, and in particular the Head of Asset Management and Operations and the Head of Finance, to ensure effective managing of the programme going forward;  and

(ii)        to note the content of the report in relation to the projects outlined at appendix A.

With reference to article 11 of the minute of the meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 18 January, 2011, the Committee had before it a joint report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure and the Head of Finance, which highlighted the current year revenue budget performance to date for the services which related to the Committee and advised on any areas of risk and management action. 

Appended to the report was a summary monitoring statement for the revenue budget 2010/2011, which outlined the budget for the year, detailed the actual spend to end January, 2011, and explained variances.  It also outlined whether or not there were any cost pressures that were immediately identifiable from the expenditure incurred to date and the actions being undertaken to manage these. 

At this time, it was anticipated that the service would see a shortfall in income of £2.2 million and it was working to reduce costs to mitigate the impact of this shortfall.  To mitigate the effect of these risks, the management of vacant posts was being actively pursued and additional savings of £800,000 were forecast for the full year.

The following areas of risk were highlighted together with the management action being taken. 

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to instruct that officers continue to review budget performance and report on service strategies as required to ensure a balanced budget; 

(ii)        to instruct officers to report, in due course, on the actual out-turn compared to budget following completion of the 2010/2011 financial statements;  and

(iii)       to note the report on the performance to date and the forecast out-turn and the information on risks and management actions that was contained therein.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which presented applications for financial assistance from the 2010/2011 International Twinning Budget.

The report recommended:-

that the Committee approve a grant of £504 from the 2010/2011 International Twinning Budget towards the cost of a representative of Aberdeen Maritime Museum attending the Joint Meeting of European Oil and Gas Archives and European Oil Museums in Stavanger from 25 to 27 May, 2011.

The Committee resolved:-

to approve the recommendation.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which sought approval for a revised City Events programme for 2011/2012 following a reduction in budget of £198,000, and support of the transfer of the 50+ City Events Officer from the City Events Team to the Social Care and Wellbeing Service.

The report advised that the events detailed in the programme contributed to the Common Good of the city, were all-inclusive, maintained and developed the city’s continued civic pride and showcasedAberdeen’s ability to attract and host major cultural and sporting events. 

With regards financing of the events, it was highlighted that in order to address the reduction in funding in 2011/12, City Events Officers would look to develop a suitable charging regime for each event in an effort to gradually reduce the cost of delivering future events to the Council.  The team would also explore ways to maximise income through sponsorship and the recovery of fees for advice and consultancy time allocated to support external event organisers who ran commercial activities in the city.

The proposed City Events programme for 2011/2012, which totalled a budget of £360,000, was attached as appendix 1 to the report.

In relation to the structure of the City Events Team, it was advised that at present the 50+ programme of activities had been undertaken by the City Events Team, in partnership with the team in Social Care and Wellbeing relating to the older population in Aberdeen.  However, following positive discussions with the service it had been agreed that approval would be sought to transfer the post of 50+ City Events Officer from the City Events Team within Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure to Social Care and Wellbeing by 1 April, 2011.  All costs for the programme and the salary had been approved by the Common Good Fund for the financial year 2011/2012. 

Finally, it was advised that during the recent restructuring of Economic and Business Development Team, it was decided that the activities associated with the Council’s Twinning responsibilities would be aligned with the work of the City Events Team.

The report recommended:-

that the Committee -

(a)       support the revised City Events programme due to a budgetary reduction of £198,000; and

(b)       support the transfer of the 50+ City Events Officer from the City Events Team located in Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure to Social Care and Wellbeing; 

The Convener, seconded by the Vice-Convener, moved:-

that the recommendations be approved and that officers explore:- (1) the possibility of asking city centre businesses to contribute towards fireworks for Hogmanay; and (2) introducing volunteer groups to assist with festive weekend events across the city.

As an amendment, Councillor Crockett, seconded by Councillor Boulton, moved:-

that officers encourage businesses to support the Hogmanay fireworks financially and that the Council start the contribution to the required funding through ceasing the Tartan day and Wallace celebrations and allocating the £28,000 to the Hogmanay fireworks.

On a division, there voted:-  for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which advised of the work of the City Promotions Team in relation to the promotion of Aberdeen in 2011/2012 and to seek approval of a budget of £100,000 for Regional Identity activities that ACSEF could bid to for project support.

The report advised that the City Promotions team within the Council would continue to focus their efforts in 2011/12 on attracting investors, skilled workers, potential students and visitors to the city.  The team would also seek to support the proposed Civic Pride campaign currently being developed by the Civic Office to encourage the local citizens of Aberdeen to take pride in their city and seek opportunities to promote the city’s main positive attributes to local residents. 

The report explained that as part of the 5 Year Business Plan, a strategy for Economic and Business Development was currently being drafted and within the City Promotions Business Plan focused activity would aim to attract high value investors to the city, encourage business growth and job creation and the promotion of Aberdeen as a business and leisure tourist destination.  To achieve this the team would ensure that all activity undertaken to promote Aberdeen and its core strengths to the identified target markets would seek to maximise cross selling of promotional opportunities from visit to sector led campaigns, ensuring that marketing activities were not fragmented and achieve best value for the authority.  Specifically, in conjunction with the service teams of Business Growth and International Trade and Projects and Partnership, the Team would develop a programme of relevant trade development events including exhibitions, conferences and inward/outward trade missions to local, national and international target markets as identified by its local business community.  The recent completion of the Export Survey for Aberdeen City and Shire would provide the invaluable data to direct future trade and business activities. 

In terms of moving forward, it was advised that initially a new marketing brochure would be produced to position Aberdeen as a compact city with creativity, innovation and ongoing development at its core.  Also a Marketing and Communications Plan would also be developed to assist with partnership working on directing the promotional strategy for the city.  The final City Promotions programme for 2011/2012 would be presented to a future meeting of the Committee as part of the Economic and Business Development Business Plan.

The report provided a detailed background to the previous work undertaken by the Council in relation to Regional Identity, wherein it was advised that in the five years that the Regional Identity had been in place the Council had provided over £500,000 of financial support and considerable officer time to ensure their regionalised identity was adopted appropriately by a significant number of our partners and managed effectively as a tool for promoting the region and its strengths in conjunction with Aberdeenshire Council.  However, in the current financial climate, the Council required to focus its efforts on its ongoing programme of promotional  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

With reference to article 48 of the minute of the meeting of the former Resources Management Committee of 28 August, 2007, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which advised on the status of the proposed Energy Futures Centre.

The report advised that the basis of the proposal to develop an Energy Futures Centre was to create a multi-function building which would emphasise the City’s pre-eminence in energy, both oil and gas and renewables.  Details of the proposed functions of the Centre were detailed. 

The report explained that a previous decision of the Council was that officers be authorised to work with the Aberdeen Renewable Energy Group (AREG) to develop the proposal.  Work to date had concentrated on the development of a viable business model.  In this regard, four financial models were developed, all of which relied on a combination of earned income and public sector funding.  Given current constraints on economic activity, public sector finances and the ability to borrow or raise development capital, none of the financial models were currently regarded as sustainable.  Improvements in the economic climate or specific opportunities arising might in the future allow a sustainable business model to be developed.  As such the project was currently on hold, however, it was suggested that it was possible for the Council to consider any other credible development proposals for one or both of the sites identified.

The Committee resolved:-

to note that given constraints on economic activity and in the property development market in particular, that the proposed Energy Futures Centre project was currently on hold.

DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS

Councillors Crockett and Milne declared interests in the following item of business as members of the Board of Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre (AECC) and left the meeting prior to the Committee’s deliberations. 

With reference to article 19 of the minute of the meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 18 January, 2011, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which provided an update on activities relating to the Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre (AECC).

The report presented a table which detailed the progress to date in respect of the key action points identified in the recent reports to the Council regarding the operation of the AECC.

The report recommended:-

that the Committee -

(i)         agree that future update reports on the AECC be submitted to the Committee Information Bulletin;  and

(ii)        otherwise note the contents of the report.

The Convener, seconded by the Vice-Convener, moved:-

that the recommendations be approved.

As an amendment, Councillor Adam, seconded by Councillor Young, moved:-

that future update reports on the AECC be considered by the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee and not contained in the Committee’s Information Bulletin.

On a division, there voted:-  for the motion (9) – the Convener;  the Vice-Convener;  and Councillors Cormie, Greig, Jaffrey, McCaig, Penny,  Robertson and Wendy Stuart;  for the amendment (3) – Councillors Adam, Boulton, and Young.

The Committee resolved:-

to adopt the motion.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which presented the third Development Plan Scheme, a detailed timetable and programme for the preparation of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan. 

The report advised that the Development Plan Scheme was a requirement of the Planning Etc.  (Scotland) Act 2006 and must be reviewed annually and submitted to Scottish Ministers.  The report highlighted that the Scheme differed from the first and second Local Development Plans in that it provided an update on the consultation stages carried out so far.  Otherwise, the Council’s overall programme remained the same with the adoption of the Local Development Plan anticipated for March, 2012.  Appended to the report were:- (1) the Council’s Local Scheme 3;  and (2) a list of key agencies and consultees which it was proposed that the Local Development Plan Scheme 3 be circulated to.

The Committee resolved:-

to approve the adoption of the Aberdeen Local Development Plan Scheme 3, its publication (including electronically), and sending it to Scottish Ministers, and sending it to, or informing, the key agencies and consultees listed in the Aberdeen Local Development Plan Scheme 2.

With reference to article 21 of the minute of the meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 20 April, 2010, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which presented new supplementary guidance to support the proposed Aberdeen Local Development Plan (Local Development Plan), which would replace the existing Open Space Development Guidelines for Greenfield Sites 2001.  The document also included guidance on the implementation of the Green Space Network Policy in the proposed LDP.

By way of background, the report advised that the need for reviewing the existing Open Space Development guidelines was identified by an audit of Aberdeen’s Open Space which was carried out by the Planning and Sustainable Development Service during 2009 and 2010.  As a recommendation of that report, the revised standards were circulated for consultation with the public partners and the development industry.  The supplementary guidance contained these standards, amended where necessary as a result of consultation responses, along with further explanation and advice on their implementation. 

The report highlighted that at present there was no consistent approach to maintaining public open space in new developments and several forms of arrangement existed within Aberdeen.  Consultation on the Open Space Audit had sought views on the three main arrangements for maintenance, and had shown that where responsibility for public open space lay with residents, or with third parties, problems arose later, which frequently resulted in the Council being asked to step in to maintain what residents saw as a public resource, or to resolve conflicts over the standards of maintenance.  These problems involved time-consuming negotiations with significant impacts on staff time, with the outcome often being that the Council took responsibility for the land anyway after being paid the commuted sum from residents.  There was general agreement through internal and external consultation that, provided that the costs of maintenance were reasonably accurately calculated and paid to the Council by the developer through commuted sums, the preferred option was for the Council to take responsibility for the maintenance of the new open space.  There was, however, a need to ensure that the Council’s internal processes for recovering, distributing and monitoring these funds was appropriate for this arrangement to work and to avoid creating additional burdens on the Council’s finances. 

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         approve the Open Space Supplementary Guidance as a draft for eight weeks public consultation;  and

(ii)        to instruct officers in Planning and Sustainable Development to develop an internal process for recovering and allocating sums of money received from developers for maintaining open spaces, in collaboration with Finance and Environment Services.

With reference to article 21 of the minute of the meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 20 April, 2010, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which sought approval of the Draft Aberdeen Open Space Strategy for Public Consultation. 

The report advised that the Strategy would replace the Parks and Green Space Strategy 2005 and Aberdeen Strategy for Access to the Outdoors 2004.  The draft Strategy had been prepared in line with the Scottish Planning Policy and National Best Practice Guidelines. 

The draft Strategy along with responses to the Open Space Strategy Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) scoping report were appended to the report.

The Committee resolved:-

to approve the draft Open Space Strategy, associated Action Plan and  Strategic Environmental Assessment SEA Environmental Report for public consultation.

With reference to article 15 of the minute of the meeting of the former Policy and Strategy Committee of 28 April, 2009, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which presented and sought approval to adopt and publish the Directional Signage Guidance for Paths which provided advice on the planning, design and implementation of directional signage on paths in open spaces.

The report provided a detailed overview of the legislative and policy background to the requirement for the guidance.  In recognition of the requirements for significant additional signage resulting from these commitments, and in order to realise the benefits of increased path promotion through signage, the proposed Directional Signage Guidance for Paths was developed in order to provide advise on the planning and implementation of signage and to detail a city-wide standard for signage design.  The development of the standard approach to signage was consistent with current Best Practice guidelines.

The proposed guidance was attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to approve the proposed Directional Signage Guidance for Paths;  and

(ii)        to instruct officers to publish the guidance.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure providing an account with traffic management measures considered necessary at the above locations. 

At Great northern Road/Anderson Drive, the intention was to introduce a prohibition of right-turns into Anderson Road.  At Brodiach Road the proposal was to extend the existing 30mph speed limit from the existing limit at Westhill to appoint 120metres east of the city boundary.  Whilst on North Deeside Road, it was proposed that the part-time 20mph speed limit proposal at the International School be withdrawn.  At Little Belmont Street it was requested that the Street pastors “Safe Space” vehicle be exempt from the existing “at any time” waiting restriction during 9pm to 5am.  The proposed extension of the existing 30mph on North Deeside Road to meet the current 30mph within the village of Cults was not considered necessary and therefore existing speed limits would remain.  Otherwise, at all other locations, the intention was to establish prohibitions of waiting at any time.

The report also promoted 12 applications for the new blue badge parking bays under the Disabled Persons Parking Places (Scotland) Act 2009.  The following table lists the specific 26 spaces:-

On-Street Parking

Off-Street Parking

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to approve the proposals, in principle, and to request officers to commence the necessary legislative procedures for these schemes, and if no significant objections were received, then to progress with the public advertisement and report the results to a future meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee;  and

(ii)       to instruct officers to commence the combined statutory consultation for the traffic regulation order for the list of blue badge parking spaces as detailed above, and to report back to a future meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Corporate Governance providing an account of the single statutory objection received in association with the traffic order providing for on-street car club parking spaces.

The report advised that the order would provide for the establishment of a number of on-street parking bays reserved exclusively for vehicles operated by an associated car club.  The cars entitled to use the bays would be identifiable by their registration numbers and also by the display of special parking permits issued to the car club in terms of the traffic order.

One objection had been received in relation to the proposal from Miss Margaret Greig of 9 Crimon Place, who had first of all identified a blind corner at the end of her street, just before Golden Square (and also coming off Golden Square into Crimon Place, in the other direction).  Ms Greig thought that having two cars parked on that very short part of the street would be dangerous and that the obvious place for the bays would be around the statue at the centre of Golden Square.  A response to Miss Greig’s concerns was provided. 

The Committee resolved:-

that the objection be overruled and the order made as originally envisaged.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Corporate Governance providing an account of the statutory objection received in association with the traffic order providing for bus lanes in Aberdeen.

The report advised that during the main statutory objection period, no representations came in.  However, a preliminary consultative response was being held over from the earlier (preliminary) statutory stage, this having been received from Mr Derek Williams, on behalf of Aberdeen Cycle Forum.

The Cycle Forum welcomed the assistance that bus lanes could give to cyclists on busy routes, but had concerns with the current proposal.  Firstly, the Forum expressed the view that bus punctuality was a problem at the location in question (at the top of King Street leading round into Castle Street).  In addition, the new bus lane would be too narrow to allow safe overtaking of cyclists by buses or taxis (especially at peak times when the outside lane would be busy).  The Forum also rejected the idea that a part-time bus lane offered a like-for-like replacement of a cycle lane.  Finally, the Forum raised a complaint that the proposal actually offered advantages to car users.  A response to each of the points raised by the Cycle Forum was provided.

The Committee resolved:-

that the objection be overruled and the order made as originally envisaged.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

Councillor Young declared an interest by virtue of his position as a Council appointed Governor to the Board of Oakbank School and left the meeting prior to the Committee’s deliberations.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which advised of the outcome of pedestrian surveys, undertaken in accordance with methods adopted by Aberdeen City Council, to determine whether a controlled pedestrian crossing facility was justified on King’s Gate near to its junction with Forest Road.

As a result of the relocation of Mile-End School from its former site on Midstocket Road to the new location off Raeden Park Road, concerns were raised at a public meeting by the Mile-End Primary School Parent Council and the elected members in relation to suitability of crossing points on King’s Gate.  At the time of the initial enquiry, the new school had not yet opened, therefore it was agreed that pedestrian surveys would be undertaken following the opening of the school to assess whether a controlled crossing was justified.

The report provided an overview of the current situation at King’s Gate for Mile-End School pupils.  In terms of the survey undertaken, it was advised that when considering possible sites for a pedestrian facility, standard methods of assessment adopted by Aberdeen City Council had been utilised.  These methods measure not only traffic and pedestrian flow, but also other factors such as carriageway width, accident history, and local facilities such as schools, shops, etc.  A detailed explanation of the survey utilised was provided.

In accordance with the aforementioned approved policy, a PV² value of 1.0 x 10⁸ or above would qualify for the provision of a controlled crossing.  A value of less than 0.7 x 10⁸ would not qualify for any type of crossing facility but the location in question would continue to be monitored.  At locations where a PV² value of between 0.7 x 10⁸ and 1.0 x 10⁸ the provision of a zebra crossing would be considered.  The survey carried out in April 2010 generated a PV² figure of 0.523x10⁸.  The figure calculated from the January 2011 survey results was 0.489x10⁸ thus a controlled pedestrian crossing facility was not justified at this location based upon national guidance and the locally adopted policy.

Finally, the report highlighted that a planning application for a residential development on the former Oakbank school site had been submitted and was due for determination in the very near future.  The proposed development, if approved, would make provision for a controlled pedestrian crossing on Kings Gate to meet the accessibility needs of the application.  It was intended that officers would meet with the developer to consider a crossing position that met the needs of the development and address the existing road safety concern. 

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to agree that no further action be taken in relation to the provision of a controlled pedestrian crossing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which presented the proposed Roads and Transportation programme for 2011/2012, together with a provisional list of programmes for 2012/2013, and requested the Committee to approve the specific schemes where detailed and the budget headings for the remainder. 

The thirteen appendices, detailed below, set out the proposed programme of works which would be funded through the approved Capital budgets of the Council together with linkages to the neighbourhood community action plans. 

Appendix A – Traffic Lights and Pedestrian Crossing - £400,000

Appendix B – Lighting Improvements - £300,000.

Appendix C – Cycling Walking Safer Streets: A grant of £307,000

Appendix D – Road Safety Schemes - £50,000

Appendix E – Footway Resurfacing - £400,000

Appendix F – Footway resurfacing reserve programme

Appendix G – Carriageway Resurfacing - £2,175,000.

Appendix H – Carriageway Resurfacing reserve programme

Appendix J – Drainage - £150,000

Appendix K – Road Sign Replacement - £50,000

Appendix L - the road condition index

Appendix M - NESTRANS Capital Budgets for 2011/12

Appendix N - the Road Condition Index

Separately, the report advised that £50,000 was allocated to weak bridge and major bridge repairs, and £50,000 to flood prevention schemes.

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to approve the schemes listed in the Appendices as the detailed proposals for expenditure within budget headings;

(ii)        to instruct appropriate officials to implement the detailed programme;

(iii)       to agree for officers to amend the programme in consultation with local members should priorities change during the year;

(iv)       where traffic legislation was necessary, to approve the proposals in principle and instruct the appropriate officials to progress the necessary legal procedures, and that where no significant objections had been received at the statutory consultation or public advertisement stages to instruct the appropriate officials to implement the scheme, otherwise these would be reported back to future meeting of the Committee; and

(v)        to grant approval to appropriate officers to award contracts on receipt of a valid tender submission subject to necessary funding in the approved revenue and capital budget.

With reference to article 18 of the minute of the meeting of the former Resources Management Committee of 20 April, 2005, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which reviewed existing charges for Street Occupations and sought consideration of the implementation of additional charges for driveway applications and traffic signal management requests.

By way of background the report advised that in accordance with statutory obligations the Council as the Local Roads Authority had a responsibility to regulate and manage street occupations to ensure that essential works had a minimal impact on the road network and that the infrastructure was protected in line with specification and guidelines.  Considerable officer time was dedicated to the management of the road network and the consideration of applications for various road work operations and street occupations.  A scale of charges for this service was previously set by the former Resources Management Committee in April 2005 but had not been reviewed since that date.  Given the timescale since the current charges were approved, it was now considered appropriate to review the charges in connection with street occupations and its associated activities. 

The report advised that officers had reviewed the charging regime and prepared a revised scale of charges which were detailed in Appendix A to the report.  The revised charges had been generally increased in line with inflation.  However, where charges were applied as a result of illegal operations or to reduce occupation periods these charges had been significantly increased to encourage contractors, skip operators etc to comply with regulatory requirements and to minimise disruption to all road users.

An overview of the current situation was presented, specifically highlighting the proposals for driveway applications, applications to switch off and cover/ bag traffic signals to facilitate roadwork operations, and works pertaining to major building projects.  Regarding the later, it was advised that the matter of charges for an occupation of this nature was to be the subject of a separate review and would be reported to the meeting of the Finance and Resources committee on the 21 April, 2011.  At present charges for occupation of the carriageway related too the above are applied and it was recommended that this continued as at present until a further detailed review and Committee decision was taken. 

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to approve the revised charges and instruct that these be applied from 1 May 2011;

(ii)        to approve the charges for driveway applications and traffic signal management requests and instruct that these be applied from 1 May 2011;

(iii)       to instruct officers to review the charges annually; and

(iv)       to refer the report to Finance and Resources Committee meeting on 21 April, 2011, for ratification of the revised charges.

With reference to article 27 of the minute of the meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 18 January, 2011, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which advised of the development of a process for consideration and approval of complementary uses of existing and future Park and Ride/Park and Choose services.  The process developed continued to recognise, support and promote the primary function of these assets which was to support the provision of Park and Ride/Park and Choose services.

By way of background, the report reminded members that the Committee had previously been presented with two options, which would require to be addressed separately, of complementary uses of existing park and Ride sites, namely:-

Category 1.    Temporary, ad hoc events which require no permanent set up e.g.  promotional, community, special events, training and awareness; and

Category 2.    Permanent facilities and/or routine events which would require fixed or invasive set up, or which require lease arrangements

On consideration of the above, the Committee had instructed officers to develop a draft process for the consideration of Category 1 uses in the first instance, similar if possible to the school lets system and also on the possibilities associated with Category 2 uses.  It was emphasised that there should, at the very least, be no additional costs to the Council in supporting, facilitating or enabling any agreed complementary uses.

Firstly, the report highlighted the legal issues surrounding the proposal, wherein it was advised that the use of a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) to acquire the land for the Kingswells car park meant that there could not be full and unrestricted use of the site for alternative uses.  Any uses would need to have some connection to a local authority function, which might include for example, community uses.  Any complementary use that involved commercial or profit making organisations charging to provide a service would not be considered competent given the legal restrictions on the uses which could be made of land acquired under a CPO.  Further, the Council should not apply significant charges for uses, although small charge based on the school lets system, for which the revenue generated would help cover the running costs of the site would not be unreasonable. 

On the basis of the above, the process therefore would need to consider the competency of any use in relation to the CPO restrictions and whether there was some connection to a local authority function.  It was likely that a number of Category 1 uses would provide some sort of community benefit and therefore could be considered to fulfil a Local Authority function.  However, it was possible that even Category 1 uses would involve commercial organisations or individuals charging for a service such as motorcycle training or shopping delivery service.  Given the various possible types of usage, the view was put forward that each individual application should be dealt with on a case by case basis to remove  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

With reference to article 22 of the minute of the meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 9 November, 2010, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which informed of the outcomes of the Bus Information Strategy consultation and sought approval for the launch of a final Aberdeen City Bus Information Strategy. 

The report advised that the purpose of the Strategy was to identify a series of actions to improve the quality and availability of bus information in the City which the Council and bus operators would work together to implement.  Details of the areas encompassed within the Strategy were outlined, and it was highlighted that the Strategy called, firstly, for a general improvement in the currency, accuracy and clarity of information on local bus services and, secondly, for this information to be accessible in as many locations and over as broad a range of media as possible. 

It was anticipated that, by improving public transport information in accordance with the Strategy, citizens of and visitors to Aberdeen would feel more confident and comfortable planning and executing a bus journey.  Improving awareness of the available public transport options might also help combat social exclusion by increasing mobility amongst those without access to, or who chose not to use, the private car. 

A copy of the final draft Strategy was appended to the report, along with a list of comments received on the Draft Aberdeen City Bus Information Strategy.

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to note the progress that had been made to date on the development of a Bus Information Strategy for the City of Aberdeen, particularly the two rounds of public and stakeholder consultation that were undertaken during 2010 and early 2011;

(ii)        to adopt the finalised Aberdeen City Bus Information Strategy; and

(iii)       to instruct officers to continue working with local bus operators and other partners on implementing the various actions and commitments outlined within the adopted Strategy.

With reference to article 20 of the minute of the meeting of the Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure Committee of 26 November, 2009, the Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which provided an update on the progress made to date to implement the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009.

By way of background, the report provided an overview of the aims of and responsibilities in relation to the new Act, wherein it was advised that the new Act enabled provision to be made for implementing the European Communities Floods Directive 1.  The purpose of this Directive was to establish a framework for the assessment and management of flood risks, aiming at the reduction of the adverse consequences for human health, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activity associated with floods.

The Act made provision in relation to the following five main areas:

(a)                           Coordination and cooperation within the domain of flood risk management;

(b)                           Assessment of flood risk and preparation of flood risk maps and flood risk management plans, including implementing the EC Floods Directive;

(c)                           Amendments to local authority and SEPA functions for flood risk management;

(d)                           A revised statutory process for flood protection schemes incorporating deemed planning consent within the Flood Order; and

(e)                           Amendments to the enforcement regime for the safe operation of reservoirs.

Five statutory organisations were responsible for delivery of the new legislation, with the majority of the work involved with implementing the new Act being carried out by the local authorities and SEPA. 

In terms of implementing the Act, it was advised that draft guidance on delivering sustainable flood risk management was published by the Scottish Government in January 2011.  The deadline for submission of views and comments was 18 March 2011.  The draft guidance along with the address for submitting comments could be accessed online at the Scottish Government website. 

A table detailing the milestones identified for implementation of the Act was presented. 

The Committee resolved:-

(i)         to note the responsibilities placed on Local Authorities by the Act, the indicative costs involved and the funding allocated by the Scottish Government;

(ii)        to note the progress made to date to implement the Act and the indicative programme for future progress;

(iii)       to note the requirement for the Council to respond to the draft consultation ‘Delivering Sustainable Flood Risk Management’ by 18 March 2011 and authorise officers to respond on behalf of  the Council; and

(iv)       to instruct officers to report annually on progress.

The Committee had under consideration, upon a remit from Nestrans on
16 February, 2011 (article 4(B) refers), a report by the Director of Nestrans requesting that the Committee support the principles detailed in relation to mechanisms for developer contributions; and approve the proposal that Nestrans be the body to manage the fund for delivering strategic infrastructure and manage the processes for prioritisation and delivery.

The report explained that the results of the cumulative impact appraisal work identified a number of locations across Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire where transport interventions would be required to fully support the level of development allocated in the emerging Local Development Plans for the two authorities. 

The report explained that all developments have an impact on the wider transport network and not just on the immediate surroundings.  The report explained that both Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire Councils have incorporated the findings of the Cumulative Transport Appraisal into their proposed Local Development Plans and had identified the need for developments to contribute towards strategic infrastructure to address the cumulative impact of development. 

The report explained that it was recognised there are a number of current priorities identified for the enhancement of the strategic transport network in the region, and alongside this, a range of transport infrastructure would be required to support new development.  The report advised that a Working Group (comprising representatives of Nestrans, the Strategic Development Planning Authority, and the 2 local authorities) had recommended that such transport schemes should be grouped in the following four categories:- 

(a)       committed infrastructure that already had political support and funding allocated;

(b)       schemes which were committed politically and also listed in the Council’s Local Development Plans as committed but funding was not confirmed;

(c)        strategic infrastructure required to address the cumulative impacts of development; and

(d)       local infrastructure requirements required to mitigate the direct impact of specific development sites. 

The report had appended to it the detailed schemes relating to (a), (b) and (c) above and the areas for intervention. 

The report explained that there was an agreement between partners on the Working Group that a regional model for securing developer contributions for strategic infrastructure should be pursued with such a model being based on openness and transparency ensuring equity and common benefit.  The report explained that there was also an agreement amongst those on the Working Group that the proposed approach should be based around the following principles:-

• major developments located within the strategic growth areas in the Aberdeen housing market area should be required to contribute to a single ring-fenced fund set aside to deliver strategic transport improvements to address the cumulative impact of development;
• developer contributions to the strategic fund could be made on either a per-trip or per-house basis, proportionate to the predicted impact on the transport network of the development;
• Nestrans would be an appropriate body to manage this fund for strategic transport infrastructure, with schemes delivered according to a prioritised list agreed by all partners.

The report explained that discussions with Aberdeenshire  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

In accordance with the decision recorded under article 1 of this minute, the following item of business was considered with the press and public excluded.

MATTER OF URGENCY

The Convener intimated that she had directed in terms of Section 50(B)(4)(b) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, that the following item of business be considered as a matter of urgency as it was a matter on which a decision had to be made prior to the existing contract expiring on 31 March, 2011. 

The Committee had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which informed of the current position and the options available for the forthcoming and future installation, maintenance and storage of the City Centre festive lighting.

The report outlined the existing arrangements for the provision of festive lights in the city which would come to an end in March, 2011, although there was provision to extend the contract.  Options available at the present time were outlined and it was detailed that legal had advised that a new tendering exercise should be undertaken.

The report recommended:-

that the Committee authorises officers to procure new festive lighting, which should include arrangements on the design, supply, maintenance, removal and storage as appropriate, for a minimum three year period from 2011 to 2013 to a maximum period of five years from 2011-2015 with maximum annual spend of £185000 to include for energy costs. 

Councillor Young, seconded by the Vice-Convener, moved:-

that the recommendation be approved.

.

As an amendment, Councillor Boulton, seconded by Councillor Jaffrey, moved:-

that the recommendation be approved, and that Councillors willing to be involved in the festive light procurement process undertake the necessary training, and thereafter be part of the process. 

On a division, there voted:-  for the motion (9) – the Convener;  the Vice-Convener;  and Councillors Cormie, Crockett, McCaig, Penny, Robertson, Wendy Stuart and Young;  for the amendment (4) – Councillors Boulton, Grieg, Jaffrey and Milne.

The Committee resolved:-

to adopt the motion.

- COUNCILLOR DEAN, Convener.