To receive declarations of personal and prejudicial interest (if any) from Members/Officers in accordance with the provisions of the Members Code of Conduct adopted by Council from 1 September 2008 (including whipping declarations)

Councillor N Clarke declared a personal interest in agenda item 5 – Town Centre Regeneration because she knew one of the invitees.

Councillor S Baldwin declared a personal interest in agenda item 5 – Town Centre Regeneration because he was the Director/owner of a business in Bridgend.

To receive for approval the minutes of the meeting of the 06 12 17

RESOLVED:            1) Forward Work Programme Update - That subject to the addition of “item” following “delegated” in conclusion 1, and the addition of a full stop at the end of the first sentence in conclusion 2, the minutes of the meeting of the Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committee 3 of 6 December 2017 be approved as a true and accurate record.

                                2) Members asked why the Minutes from the 17^th January 2018 had not been listed on the Agenda for approval. The Scrutiny Officer explained that the meetings had fallen close together in the diary and the minutes were not ready at the time of publication. Officers were aware of the recommendations contained in the minutes and would be taking action where appropriate.

Invitees

Mark Shephard, Corporate Director Communities

Satwant Pryce, Head of Regeneration and Economic Development

Cllr Charles Smith, Cabinet Member Education and Regeneration

Cllr Richard Young, Cabinet Member Communities

Geraint Thomas, Clerk Pencoed Town Council

Representative from Maesteg Town Council

Cllr Richard Collins, Chair of Chamber Trade Maesteg

Justin Jenkins, Bridgend BID

The Corporate Director – Communities presented a report providing Members with information on the service responsibilities within Town Centre Regeneration, how they were managed, how they could be developed with reduced resources and how they impacted on the three main town centres and their regeneration. The report also covered the specific requests previously made by the Subject Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

The Corporate Director – Communities stressed that it was important to note that the authority was not able to influence some areas as much as it would like eg empty properties but there were many examples of success when it came to funding requests, car parking pilots and highway improvements and the Council remained ambitious.

The Chairperson welcomed the invitees to the meeting.

A Member raised the issue of paying to park and asked why residents in Bridgend and Porthcawl had to pay, Maesteg was covered by a covenant but parking in Pencoed was free.  The Corporate Director – Communities explained that he did not know the history but he suspected that payment for parking was used as a method of controlling parking which was not as much of an issue in Pencoed where street parking was available.

A Member asked for clarification on whether or not Pencoed was a town  

and if not, why did it have a Town Council and a Mayor. She was pleased to see that the report referred to the Council lobbying UK government to enable the implementation of a designed scheme to replace the railway level crossing with a re-modelled road bridge. The Cabinet Member for Education and Regeneration provided a background to the issue and added that a planning officer had sent an explanation to Members on how towns were dealt with in planning terms. There was a scheme for a major development at the level crossing and the next stage was securing support from Network Rail. The Cabinet Member for Communities said that there was no dispute, Pencoed was a town. The three principal towns had older town centres and major problems compared to Pencoed. A Member suggested that paying to park in Pencoed should be included in the car parking review. The Head of Neighbourhood Services explained that the review had been undertaken over the last few months and a report would be submitted to Cabinet in March with options for consultation and income suggestions. There were no specific recommendations in relation to Pencoed.     

A Member asked if the car parking review covered parking in schools. The Corporate Director - Communities explained that payment for car parking was used as a method to manage inconsiderate and dangerous parking and there was a risk that payment for car parking where this was not an issue would encourage parking on the roads which would lead to chaos. Payment for parking was generally used in town centres.   

A Member asked if there were any proposals for parking meters in the town centres. The Head of Neighbourhood Services explained that this had been considered  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

To consider any item(s) of business in respect of which notice has been given in

accordance with Part 4 (paragraph 4) of the Council Procedure Rules and which the person presiding at the meeting is of the opinion should by reason of special circumstances be transacted at the meeting as a matter of urgency.

None