CABINET
Minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on Monday 10 September 2012 at the
Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 10.00am.
Members Present:
Mrs A Fitch-Tillett
Mr T FitzPatrick
Mr T Ivory
Mr K Johnson (Chairman)
Mr J Lee
Mr W Northam
Also attending:
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds
Ms V Gay
Mrs P Grove-Jones
Mr P High
Mr G Jones
Mr N Lloyd
Mrs A Moore
Mr P W Moore
Mr R Oliver
Ms B Palmer
Mr R Reynolds
Mr E Seward
Mr B Smith
Officers in
Attendance:
Also in
Attendance:
The Chief Executive, Corporate Director (N. Baker), Corporate
Director (S. Blatch) the Coastal Engineer (for item 31) the Housing
Services Manager, the Strategy Team Leader, the Economic and
Tourism Development Manager, the Economic and Tourism
Development Officer, the Policy and Performance Management
Officer, the Head of Organisational Development, the Coastal
Community Projects Manager
The press
34.
LEADER’S COMMUNICATIONS
The Leader commented on the recent successful weekend across the District – with
the Tour of Britain event hosted by Bewilderwood and Greenbuild at Felbrigg Hall. He
said that this had been an excellent conclusion to a very successful summer
nationally and he thanked volunteers and staff who had given up their time to help.
35.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
None received
36.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting held on 16 July 2012 were confirmed as a correct record
and signed by the Chairman.
Mrs A Fitch-Tillett commented on Minute 31: Cromer Coast Protection Strategy. She
said that all statutory consents had been granted and the work could now
commence.
Cabinet
10 September 2012
37.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
Questions had been received from Mr Burke and Mr Berry. The questions concerned
Agenda item 4, Items of Urgent Business – Happisburgh Beach Access Steps. Mr
Burke, a resident of Happisburgh, requested that the Council reconsider their
decision to remove the steps. He referred to a petition of more than 1600 signatures
supporting this request. Mr Berry, Chairman of Happisburgh Parish Council spoke in
favour of removing the steps and storing them locally whilst the cliffs were monitored.
He said that the Parish Council would prefer money to be spent on strengthening the
ramp access to the beach.
The Chairman advised that the item of urgent business would be taken directly
following the public questions.
38.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
There was one item of urgent business relating to Happisburgh Beach Access Steps.
Ms V Gay read out the following statement on behalf of the Local Member for
Happisburgh, Mrs L Walker:
‘I stand by my letter to the Eastern Daily Press (EDP). The officers are doing a
brilliant job and I fully accept their advice on storing the steps until the coastal activity
stabilises. Malcolm Kerby’s letter to the North Norfolk News and later the EDP put
everything into perspective. I know the petition contains a lot of signatures and I
applaud those signatories taking the time to make their views known. However, I
question if they were given the full facts about the situation. I have not seen the
second section of the petition and would be interested to see how many council tax
paying residents have signed. The Parish Council supports the officers views and is
willing to store the steps. As local member I fully support the proposed action of the
Council’.
The Portfolio Holder for Coastal Issues then read out the following statement:
‘This item has come about as a matter of public interest in response to a petition.
The petition calls upon North Norfolk District Council to:“Re-open the metal steps to allow residents and visitors to access the west beach at
Happisburgh” and to “to look again at the options for reinstating the bridge to the
steps, including making the bridge a design feature”.
It is regrettable that the bridge to the steps had to be removed but this was done in
the light of rapid erosion of the cliffs last winter, to protect the safety of potential
users. Since the bridge has been removed, cliff top recession has continued and it is
not a practical option for the bridge to be reinstated.
The base of the steps is now submerged, not only at high water spring tides but far
more frequently on normal high water tides. This would make it impractical and
unsafe to use the steps for much of the time, even if the bridge remained in position.
There is no doubt that further recession of the cliffs at this point will continue and the
steps are in fact redundant in their current location and the Council has no alternative
but to remove them. Re-opening them or reinstating the bridge are simply not
feasible options and the Council cannot therefore do what the petition asks for.
Cabinet
10 September 2012
Together with the local community, the Council has invested a huge amount of time,
effort and money into managing the impacts of coastal change in Happisburgh in
support of the local economy, the quality of life of villagers and the overall
sustainability of the village. It is proposed, with the support of Happisburgh Parish
Council, to remove the steps and to store them locally, whilst cliff recession rates are
closely monitored.
If the steps remain in-situ they will become merely another relic and a reminder of the
adverse impacts of coastal erosion, a potential danger to beach users and a symbol
of blight.
I suggest we follow the Council’s procedure outlined in the Council’s ‘Petitions
Scheme’ and report it to the Overview and Scrutiny meeting on 25th September and
Full Council on 26th September. It should be noted, however, that for the reasons
outlined above the steps have to be removed. I further suggest that Overview and
Scrutiny committee should oversee the decision relating to the possible reinstatement
of the steps at a later date after a suitable monitoring period.
I can sympathise with the views of those seeking to retain access to the beach in this
location, via the steps, but regret that this is not currently feasible. I am grateful to the
local landowner who has offered to store the structure once it has been removed and
very much hope that the cliff stabilises sufficiently for it to be feasible for the steps to
be reinstated at some point in the future.’
Mr E Seward, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee agreed that the
Committee would oversee the decision relating to the possible reinstatement of the
steps at a later date.
The proposal was discussed:
1. Mr G Jones said that he believed the petition was ill-conceived as it did not refer
to the costs involved in reinstating the steps.
2. Mr P W Moore, Vice-Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee was
concerned about the proposal to wait a further year before reassessing the
situation regarding the steps. Mrs A Fitch-Tillett replied that it was necessary to
allow sufficient time to monitor the movement in the cliffs.
3. Mr B Farrow, Coastal Engineer, explained that the Council had always been keen
to promote access to Happisburgh beach, however, they were guided by national
policy which was not to prevent erosion. It was impractical to keep the steps
where they were and even if they were retained they would have to be moved. He
concluded by saying that a lot of money from the Pathfinder scheme had been
invested in improving access to the east beach and providing parking facilities.
It was proposed by Mrs A Fitch-Tillett, seconded by Mr W Northam and
RESOLVED
a)
b)
c)
d)
Cabinet
That the steps and bridge be removed and stored at Happisburgh
The whole structure is securely stored and maintained locally
That erosion rates of the cliffs in the area continue to be monitored
That a report is brought to Cabinet/Council within the next twelve months with a
recommendation regarding the future of the structure
10 September 2012
39.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None
40.
COUNCIL TAX SUPPORT WORKING PARTY
RESOLVED that
the minutes of the meeting of the Council Tax Support Working Party held on 7th
August 2012 be received.
41.
PLANNING POLICY AND BUILT HERITAGE WORKING PARTY
Mr T Ivory queried the second recommendation in Minute 12 of the meeting held on
23 July – ‘That the quantity of affordable dwellings exceeds the quantity of market
housing’. He felt that it repeated the first recommendation to some extent and that it
could set a target for housebuilders to negotiate. It would be better to rely on the
viability test proposed in the first recommendation. He added that if rural exception
sites were the only option and they could not meet the proposed target for affordable
housing then they would be excluded from consideration and that was not a sensible
way forward.
It was proposed by Mr T Ivory, seconded by Mr T FitzPatrick and
RESOLVED that
1. The minutes of the Planning Policy and Built Heritage Working Party meetings
held on 23 July and 20 August 2012 be received.
2. The Stalham Development Brief be approved subject to:
The Highways Authority supporting the conclusions in the Traffic Assessment
A minimum of .5 ha being designated for community use
An increase in the amount of boundary ‘buffer’ landscaping between the
employment land and existing /proposed residential land; and
Clarity on the issue of phased implementation of the public park and access to
serve the employment/community use land.
RECOMMENDED to Full Council
a) That in response to the NNPF, the Council resolves to support the inclusion of
elements of market housing within rural exception schemes which otherwise
comply with the provisions of Policy HO3 subject to clear demonstration that the
inclusion of market housing is necessary to deliver affordable dwellings which
otherwise would not be provided.
b) That Council support the following revised policy approach to the re-use of rural
buildings in response to the NPPF, subject to considering the introduction of an
affordable housing tariff in respect of the enhanced value arising from conversion
to permanent residential use and further consideration of the potential impacts
arising from the loss of existing tourism and other business uses:
i.
The economic re-use of rural buildings will be supported and full weight
will continue to be applied to Policy EC2.
ii.
Cabinet
In relation to the application of Policy H09 and residential conversion that
weight be attached to the NPPF with the affect that:
10 September 2012
•
•
•
42.
Proposals for the reuse of disused or redundant buildings will be
subject to compliance with criteria 2, 3, 4 and 5 but not criteria 1 which
limits location.
Proposals for the change of use/variation of occupancy of buildings in
holiday use to allow residential use will be subject to compliance with
criteria 2, 3, 4 and 5 and where applicable Policy EC8 but not criteria 1
in relation to location.
Proposals for the change of use of all other commercial buildings will
be subject to compliance with criteria 2, 3, 4 and 5 and a presumption
that those providing a significant number of jobs (three or more)
should normally be retained in employment uses.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH NORFOLK INTEGRATED APPROACH TO
COASTAL MANAGEMENT
Mrs A Fitch-Tillett, Portfolio Holder for Coastal Issues introduced this item. She
explained that the Council was embarking on developing an integrated approach to
coastal management. This would involve developing appropriate ways of managing
the coast with reference to the communities’ needs, coastal processes, policy context
and the availability of funding. The approach would offer improved coastal
information, development of funding opportunities and implementation of a broad
spectrum of initiatives and schemes for managing the coast across the frontage.
Mr E Seward, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee said that the
Committee would be considering the policy aspects of the report. He said it was
anticipated that there would be a positive response to the proposals.
It was proposed by Mrs A Fitch-Tillett, seconded by Mr W Northam and
RECOMMENDED to Full Council:
a) That the integrated approach to coastal management, in particular the work
schemes set out in Table 1 of the report be endorsed
b) That the remaining unallocated coastal pathfinder budget (approximately £65,000
revenue) and receipts including the Coastal Erosion Assistance Grant (£60,000
capital) and any income from successful Pathfinder replacement housing are
incorporated into a new integrated coastal budget for the purpose of funding
specific coastal projects and resources in line with the integrated approach.
c) That the allocation of the integrated coastal budget is delegated to the Chief
Executive in consultation with the Coastal Portfolio Holder.
43.
BUDGET MONITORING 2012/13 PERIOD 4
Mr W Northam, Portfolio Holder for Financial Services, introduced this item. He
explained that the report summarised the budget monitoring position for the revenue
account and capital programme to the end of July 2012. The overall position at the
end of period 4 showed a forecast overspend of £69,074 for the current financial year
on the revenue account.
Mr W Northam said that car parking income was £40,000 above the budgeted
amount. He had spent considerable time speaking to people visiting his local car park
and there had been no concerns about the level of charges. Mr G Jones commented
that he would be interested to know how much of the car parks income was made up
of fines for non-payment.
Cabinet
10 September 2012
It was proposed by Mr W Northam, seconded by Mr T Ivory and
RESOLVED to
a) Note the contents of the report and the current forecast for the current financial
year
b) Note the current position on the approved capital programme and approve the
recommended amendments.
44.
ENTERPRISE NORFOLK
The Deputy Leader introduced this item. He outlined a new business start-up support
programme called Enterprise Norfolk. He explained that since the loss of the East of
England Development Agency (EEDA) and Business Link, local authorities were left
to fill the gaps of providing support to entrepreneurs and companies to start and grow
their businesses. Norfolk County Council’s Cabinet had recognised the need for
county-wide enterprise support by providing a budget of £200,000 per year for 2
years initially. It was proposed that £35,000 per year was made available to North
Norfolk District Council in 2012/13 as a grant to provide and enhance a business
start-up service in one or more venues across the District. Norfolk County Council
had encouraged the Council to support this grant with a proportion of match funding
to provide an enhanced local provision.
The following options were considered:
Option 1 – To accept the £35K per annum for two years NCC grant and to authorise
the release of £25K per annum for two years from the Economic Development
Service budget to enable a high level of enhanced local support for business startups.
Option 2 – To accept the £35K per annum for two years NCC grant and to authorise
the release of a lesser amount of additional funding which will enable a lower level of
enhanced support for business start-ups.
Option 3 – To accept the £35K per annum for two years NCC grant and to not
authorise any additional funding and offer no additional support for business startups after the initial training.
Option 4 – Not to accept the £35K per annum for two years NCC grant.
Members discussed the report:
1. Ms V Gay commented that green business was one of the most resilient sectors
of the economy and she wondered how the Council would promote this. Mr T
FitzPatrick replied that the recent Greenbuild event had shown the large number
of local business in this sector and the Council would continue to support and
promote them.
2. Mr G Jones said that it was important that regular feedback should be provided
on the number of businesses assisted by the Enterprise Norfolk scheme.
3. Mr E Seward commented that lessons could be learnt from businesses that
weren’t successful.
RESOLVED to
accept the NCC grant of £35,000 per annum over the period 2012/13 and
2013/14 (£70,000 for two years) and authorise the release of £25,000 per
annum over the period 2012/13 and 2013/14 (£50,000 for two years) from
Cabinet
10 September 2012
the Economic Development Service budget as match funding to that NCC
grant to deliver a business start-up support programme called Enterprise
Norfolk and to ultimately increase the number of Business Start-Ups (NI 171
– New business registrations) in the district. This programme seeks to assist
a minimum of 300 beneficiaries and create 50 new business starts.
45.
NORTH NORFOLK HOUSING STRATEGY 2012-2015 (MAKING BEST USE OF
THE EXISTING HOUSING STOCK
The Leader introduced this item. He said that the recent Housing workshops for
Members had been very successful.
This was the second in a series of three Housing Strategy documents. It considered
how to make the best use of the existing housing stock in North Norfolk and
contained a detailed action plan for the period 2012/15 setting out the Council’s
objectives.
It was proposed by Mr K Johnson, seconded by Mr T Ivory and
RECOMMENDED to Full Council
That the North Norfolk Housing Strategy (Making Best Use of the Existing Housing
Stock) document be adopted.
46.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT – DELIVERY OF ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
2012/12 QUARTER 1
The Leader introduced this item. He explained that the report covered the
performance of the Council against the priorities set out in the Annual Action Plan
2012/13. The first Annual Action Plan outlined how the priorities in the Corporate
Plan would be realised over the 12 months from 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2013.
Mr E Seward, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee requested figures
on previous years housing allocations for when the document was considered by the
Committee.
It was proposed by Mr K Johnson, seconded by Mr T FitzPatrick and
RESOLVED
To note the current position with the waste and cleansing contract as set out in the
briefing note shown at Appendix 3 of the report.
RECOMMENDED to Full Council
that two additional planning assistants be recruited on a temporary basis for a 12
month period pending the outcome of the peer challenge, to be funded from a
combination of the HPDG earmarked reserve and the additional revenue from the
proposed national fee increase from October 2012. That additional support for
planning enforcement is progressed with Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough
Council
Mr N Lloyd requested that any future reports on the North Walsham Dual Use Sports
Centre should be considered by Full Council.
The Meeting closed at 10.55am
Cabinet
10 September 2012