Agenda item

a)                 Economic Development & Planning Scrutiny Committee

            – 21             September 2006

Implementation of the recommendations of the Review of the Night Time Economy of Leicester

The above Committee agreed as follows:

‘That Cabinet be requested to provide an extended noise monitoring service, which operates later into the early hours of the morning’.

Councillor Mugglestone responded and informed the Cabinet of the current provision for noise monitoring and proposals for a rationalised service from 1 December 2006.  The proposed new service would incorporate an extension of the hours of operation.  The hours of the new service would be from 0900 until 0200 Monday to Friday, 2000 – 0200 Saturday and Sunday, with no service on Bank Holidays.

He reported that officers were generally of the view that a finishing time of 02:00 was sufficient to deal with the vast majority of noise nuisances, particularly in relation to noise emanating from pubs and clubs; it was unusual for a noise nuisance to begin after 02:00 without having been a problem before this time. However, whilst overall capacity at peak periods might be affected by the merger of the domestic and industrial/commercial services, the extension of the service to Sunday evenings represented a significant extension of the service, which should provide an improved service to the public, particularly those reporting noise problems via the 101 service.

It was also reported that the service would continue to work closely with the Department’s Licensing Team in relation to noise from licensed premises. The potential demand for a service outside of the hours set out above would continue to be kept under review. However, it was noted that any further extension of the hours of operation of this service would require additional resources, which would need to be addressed as part of future revenue budget strategies.

b)                 Aylestone, Eyres Monsell and Freemen Area Committee – 12 October 2006

Traffic Calming in the Milligan Road Area

The following was agreed at the above meeting. 

‘that Cabinet be requested to explain why the traffic calming work in the Milligan Road area hasn’t been undertaken before now’

Councillor Mugglestone explained that the above work had been delayed because priority had been given to works on Saffron Lane in preparation for the opening of the City Academy.  He added that there were also nineteen roads in the City with a higher priority than Milligan Road, because of their higher accident record.

c)            Economic Development & Planning Scrutiny Committee - 19 October             2006

            City Centre

The following was agreed at the above meeting.  

that the following be recommended to Cabinet:-

1)         that when the Council purchases significant goods from places like China, officers should take appropriate steps, before the goods are despatched, to ensure that the goods meet the quality specified in the contract; this may mean that a Council officer has to inspect the goods in person before they are despatched;

(2)       that the Committee expresses its concern that the Market Street improvements will not be completed until April 2007;

(3)       that the Committee expresses its concern that that there is no budget or plan to improve the Belgrave Gate

4)         that the Committee expresses its concern that it was not consulted on the designs of street furniture for Gallowtree Gate;

            (5)            that the Cabinet City Centre Sub-Group be reinstated or some                      other form of senior political strategy group be formed to                                consider issues being faced in the city centre and to ensure that                 there is clear political leadership.

            Councillor Scuplak responded to the recommendations of the             Economic Development & Planning Scrutiny Committee.  In response             to the first recommendation, he reported that officers did inspect the             goods upon delivery, and added that officers were calculating how     much it would cost to send staff to China to carry out inspections.  He       also was satisfied that there was nothing wrong with the materials used    or the quality of the work.

In response to the second recommendation, he reported that the timetable for improvements to Market Street had always been from August 2006 until April 2007, and that the work was due to be completed within this timetable.  This timetable could not be shortened without compromising on work quality.

In response to the third recommendation, he confirmed that there were not sufficient resources to carry out improvement works on Belgrave Gate at the present time.  He also explained that any improvement to Belgrave Gate would depend on the future development of the Haymarket Centre, and that any improvements to Belgrave Gate could be included within a later phase of the programme if it was seen as appropriate.  He also explained that any further improvements to the City Centre at this stage would be detrimental to the public.

In response to the final two recommendations, Councillor Scuplak reported that the relevant scrutiny committee could have asked for a report on street furniture at an earlier stage in the programme.  He also stated that he, as Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Planning, acted as the political leadership for issues being faced in the City Centre.