Agenda and minutes

Culture and Environment Scrutiny Committee - Tuesday, 6th February, 2024 6.30 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Judd Street, London WC1H 9JE. View directions

Contact: Sola Odusina  Email: Sola.odusina@camden.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Sharon Hardwick.

 

 

 

2.

Declarations by Members of Statutory Disclosable Pecuniary Interests, Compulsory Registerable Non-Pecuniary Interests and Voluntary Registerable Non-Pecuniary Interests in Matters on this Agenda

Members will be asked to declare any pecuniary, non-pecuniary and any other interests in respect of items on the agenda.

 

 

Minutes:

Councillor Kirk declared in relation to item 6 (Climate Action Plan) that he held some shares in Power North, the Community Energy Group based that worked with the Council to install solar panels on a number of buildings in Camden.

 

 

 

 

 

3.

Announcements (If any)

Webcasting of the Meeting

 

The Chair to announce the following: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record and film public meetings, I would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for six months after the meeting.  After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available on DVD upon request.

 

If you are seated in the room it is likely that the Council’s cameras will capture your image and you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes.”

 

Any other announcements

 

Minutes:

The Chair announced that the meeting was broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and could be viewed on the website for six months after the meeting.  After that time, webcasts were archived and could be made available on DVD upon request. Those who were seated in the Council Chamber or participated via Teams were deemed to have consented to their contributions being recorded and broadcast and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.

 

 

 

4.

Deputations (if any) pdf icon PDF 193 KB

Requests to speak at the Committee on a matter within its terms of reference must be made in writing to the clerk named on the front of this agenda by 5pm two working days before the meeting.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chair informed members that three deputations had been received and accepted, copies of the deputation statements were included in the supplementary agenda.

 

The 3 deputations related to item 7 Camden Strategy Annual Update 2023 and were from Ben Pearson accompanied by Rachel Mawby of Save the London Motorcycling Group, John Chamberlain from Camden Cycling Campaign and David Harrison from London Living Streets. The deputations would be heard when that item was reached on the agenda.

 

 

 

5.

Notification of any items of business that the chair decides to take as urgent

Minutes:

There was none.

 

 

 

6.

Climate Action Plan - Annual Review 2022/23 pdf icon PDF 251 KB

Report of the Director of Environment and Sustainability.

 

Camden Council declared a climate emergency in 2019 and committed to do all that it could to help tackle the climate crisis.  The Climate Action Plan 2020-2025 was developed to set a vision for climate action across the borough.

 

The Climate Action Plan committed to an annual review to share progress on the actions completed and include new actions developed in response to completed feasibility work or new regional or national policy.

 

The report provides a summary of the 2022/23 annual review (the 3rd Annual Review), which shows that 98% of all Climate Action Plan actions have either been completed or are in delivery. An update on greenhouse gas emission reductions has also been provided, showing that borough wide CO2 emissions have fallen by 45% since 2005, while emissions from our own estate and operations are 59% lower since 2010. The report also highlights key progress updates on all actions and explores examples of climate action taking place in the community and among the Council’s own operations.

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Environment and Sustainability.

 

Members made the following comments:

 

·       There was lots of good stuff in the report, there were 40 actions crossed off and 6 opened in the course of the year does that reflect a reduction in the Council’s ambitions.

·       It was always good to receive feedback on the progress the Council had made in achieving its goals.

·       It was a very good report.

 

In response to questions, the Head of Sustainability, Air Quality and Energy Harold Garner, Sustainability Officer Maggie Tappa and Richard Bradbury (Director of Environment and Sustainability) made the following points:

 

·       There was work underway to decarbonise the Council’s fleet of vehicles led by the Camden Accessible Travel team. They had just completed a feasibility study with the Carbon Trust Energy Saving Trust, which was looking at the fleet as a whole and the transition that could be made within the budgets that were available to get it to zero emission by 2030.

·       A lot of the actions in the Action Progress Update were continuing actions, there were a lot of actions still open indicating that there was a lot of work going on. The additions represented developments from the original action plan.

·       The plan was developed through the Citizen’s Assembly model with a lot of the ideas and suggestions coming from residents and what they wanted rather than what would lead to the biggest carbon savings.

·       A lot of the individual actions were difficult to quantify in terms of carbon savings for instance a lot of the work the Council did with community groups was around promoting and sharing ideas around climate action and facilitating change, which was quite difficult to quantify in terms of carbon savings. However, in terms of engaging people on climate change and getting them thinking about acting against the climate crisis, was a different way of measuring it.

·       What the Council had done was to introduce a number of metrics which had been developed with the Citizens Assembly Panel and which was felt to be reflective of the main pieces of work across 4 themes of which most importantly were carbon emission outcomes and borough wide emissions. There were strong outcome focussed metrics to guide the work done.

·       The Council was installing air source heat pumps, but not so many ground source heat pumps due to constraints with space. The Council had delivered a few key projects across its corporate estates recently, such as Swiss Cottage Library which had a £3.7m retrofit of the whole building which included air source heat pumps and Acland Burlghley School.

·       The Council had secured £10m from the Government’s Public Sector Carbonisation Scheme and Social Housing Retrofit Scheme, to retrofit about 350 social housing properties. Funding was also available from the Camden Climate Fund to support residents with heat pump installations. This had generated a lot of interest from residents.

·       There were still a lot of Camden properties left to retrofit however this could only  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Camden Transport Strategy Annual Update 2023 pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Report of the Director of Environment and Sustainability.

 

 

The Camden Transport Strategy (CTS) was adopted by the Council in April 2019. In December 2022 a report to Cabinet reviewed progress in delivering the CTS to that point, and sought and received approval for a new 3 year Delivery Plan covering the period 2022/23 to 2024/25.

 

This report summarises progress and challenges in delivering that Plan in 2023 (calendar year) and briefly highlights the main activities taking place in 2024. It also includes an assessment of the extent to which the Council is meeting targets (both strategic and local level) set out in the CTS and risks/mitigations to future progress.

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the deputation statements referred to in Item 4 above.

 

The following responses were given by the deputees to members questions:

 

  • Save the Motorcycle Campaign had not spammed Councillors inboxes, the Campaign group had contacted motor cyclists around Camden informing them of what the Council was planning. Motorcyclists were upset with the proposals and were informed how they could make their voices heard.
  • What motor cyclist choose to do with the information that they had been provided was up to the motor cyclists. They were upset and had been emailing Councillors.
  • If Councillors were asking motorcyclists to stop contacting them about what motorcyclists felt were punitive, disproportionate, irrational and unfair policies because Councillors had other matters to deal with, Save the Motor Cyclist Campaign would suggest that the Council engage with motorcyclists and address their concerns.
  • With regards to those roads where there was not a safe alternative for cyclists riding in bus lanes, there had been so many different trials which had all come to the same conclusion, there was no evidence to show that the safety of cyclists were affected when motor cyclists used bus lanes.
  • The Council’s policy on banning motor cyclists from using bus lanes was based solely on arguments put forward from the London Cycling Campaign rather than the evidence.
  • With regards to the serious injuries and fatalities figures on roads, the Camden Cycling Campaign does not know what the cause was but wanted the Council and TfL to work together to reduce the figure further, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists.
  • Cyclists had a lot in common with motor cyclists suffering from similar issues, however there was a difference of opinion regarding motor cyclists use of bus lanes particularly those that were not very wide. The one place cyclists felt safe apart from a dedicated cycle lane was in bus lanes without powered two wheelers.
  • The survey conducted by TfL about how cyclists felt about motor cyclists using bus lanes, found that on balance more cyclists were in favour than against it. It was found that there was no impact on the safety or the perception of safety cyclists felt.
  • The Council’s response had justified its current position with regards to its policy on banning motorcyclists from using bus lanes, Save the Motorcycle Campaign believed that this was a misrepresentation of some of the key points of the evidence. Either the Council had misunderstood the evidence or was biased against the motor cyclist and needed to change its policy.
  • With regards to pedestrian safety, there was an obvious correlation between the amount of traffic and pedestrian and cycling casualties, so the more traffic could be taken out of an area the safer it would be for these other road users.
  • The other issue related to lots of casualties occurring at junctions, therefore it was important to improve and tighten safety at junctions.
  • With regards to Bedford Square, it would be good if a campaign could be started to open Bedford and Fitzroy  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

Use of Pesticides in the Public Realm pdf icon PDF 652 KB

Report of the Director of Recreation.

 

The London Borough of Camden manages public realm space across parks, highways and housing estate land. As part of this responsibility, the council undertakes an integrated weed management approach, which includes the use of pesticides in some circumstances. This report outlines the council’s current approach to the use of pesticides, and Glyphosate in particular, and some of the associated issues.

 

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Recreation.

 

Oliver Jones (Director of Recreation) Richard Bradbury (Director of Environment and Sustainability) and Darrell Abercrombie, (Green Spaces Operations Manager) made the following comments in response to members questions:

 

·       With regards to whether the Council proactively encouraged residents to weed their area like other boroughs such as Lambeth, the Council engaged with local groups and those interested in Parks on how they could keep the parks tidy, how they could plant, as well as what they could do to assist with weeding the environment.

·       The Council had the infrastructure to support engagement with the local community and worked with a lot of Community Groups such as think and do the Climate Action Network. Through these various networks Streets collaborated with the Council on a whole range of issues such as the spray free approach as well as with communities that wanted to plant tree pits which attracted a lot of weeds.

·       The local work done across the Council via various departments such as the Sustainability Team, Environmental Services, The Trees Team, helped the Council understand what the community wanted in the local neighbourhoods and to provide that support appropriately.

·       Rather than distributing leaflets like some other Councils, Camden collaborated with the community in a more focussed way through its networks.

·       Camden had a good balanced integrated weed management approach. The Council had some aspects of what other boroughs such as Hackney did in its approach.

·       Camden tried to manage the risk between what was suitable and a somewhat grey area where there was no clearly defined right approach.

·       Considerable research had been conducted on behalf of Cardiff City Council to determine the climate impact and the right approach. The analysis indicated that alternative approaches had considerable side effects and biodiversity impacts.

·       In relation to gardens, the Council does not spray herbicide on a planted area, the only time herbicide was used was to tackle invasive species.

·       Although Officers were not aware of the situation in Belgium with regards to statements about the eradication of pesticides, in France the bold statement did not quite match the reality. Organisations when making bold statements about absence of pesticides, were in reality mostly referring to a subset of an area rather than the whole area.

·       In relation to use of pesticides, the Council provided an accurate depiction of what it was doing and how it was dealing with the situation and managing the risk.

·       It would be ideal to have a situation where the Council did not have to use chemicals, however this was not the case and the Council continued to look at alternatives and best practise.

·       The scientific report from the EU was confusing, the guidance provided was not clear.

·       Managing green spaces required a wholistic approach and one aspect of this was conservation led maintenance which was introduced by the Council over 7 years ago, this was aimed at improving the soil as well as using manual techniques to improve the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Work Programme pdf icon PDF 692 KB

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities.

 

This paper provides an update on the work programme for the Committee for the 2023/24 municipal year and tracks actions from previous meetings.

 

 

 

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities.

 

RESOLVED –

 

THAT the Work Programme be noted.

 

 

 

10.

Any Other Business that the Chair Considers Urgent

Minutes:

There was none.