Agenda Item 2__
CABINET
Minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on Monday 14 May 2012 at the Council
Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 10.00am.
Members Present:
Mrs H Eales (Chairman)
Mrs A Fitch-Tillett
Mr T FitzPatrick
Mr T Ivory
Mr John Lee
Mr W Northam
Also attending:
Mrs L Brettle
Mrs P Grove-Jones
Mr P High
Mr N Lloyd
Ms B Palmer
Mr E Seward
Mr R Shepherd
Mr B Smith
Mr H Thompson
Mr S Ward
Mr G Williams
Mr D Young
Officers in
Attendance:
Also in
Attendance:
1.
The Chief Executive, Corporate Director (S. Blatch),
Corporate Director (N. Baker), the Policy and Performance
Management Officer (for item 7), the Estates and Valuation Manager
(for item 8), the Coastal Engineer (for item 11)
The press and the public
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Mr K Johnson
2.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting held on 16 April 2012 were confirmed as a correct record
and signed by the Chairman after the following amendments had been agreed.
a) Minute 118, Development of the Offshore Wind Energy Sector off the North Norfolk
Coast – A Strategic Positioning Paper and Proposal for Local Partnership Working
Arrangements, item 1(ii), page 6, to change to: ‘An Area Action Plan to cover the
development along the B1105 corridor to include, not only the traffic flow, but also
Site Specific Plans for development sites’.
b) Minute 118, Development of the Offshore Wind Energy Sector off the North Norfolk
Coast – A Strategic Positioning Paper and Proposal for Local Partnership Working
Arrangements, item 1(iii), page 6, to change to ‘A report on the possibility of raising
s106 contributions from offshore windfarm support bases and infrastructure
developments’.
3.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None
4.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None
Cabinet
14 May 2012
5.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None
6.
PLANNING POLICY AND BUILT HERITAGE WORKING PARTY
MINUTE 32: NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK - PUBLICATION
RESOLVED that
Pending further consideration the Council continues to apply full weight to adopted
Core Strategy policies as a basis for reaching decisions on planning applications.
7.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK INCLUDING PERFORMANCE
MANAGEMENT OF THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN 2012/13
The Leader, Mrs H Eales, introduced this item. She explained that The Performance
Management Framework had been revised to reflect the development of a new
Corporate Plan and Annual Action Plan 2012/13. There were three sets of
performance measures to ensure the delivery of the first Annual Action Plan 2012-13:
1. Operational performance indicators for which the Council sets targets and
where there is a high level of control over the outcome.
2. Performance measures which indicate that the position is improving but
where NNDC does not have sufficient control over the outcome to set a
target. These would be managed by assessing direction of travel.
3. Measures reviewed on an annual basis that show the combined impact of all
the activities undertaken by the Council and demonstrate the level of need for
further action.
The Leader acknowledged that some targets, such as housebuilding were
aspirational. Continued nationwide financial instability meant that it was hard to
forecast effectively in such areas and even if planning permission was granted for
new homes there was the possibility that developments would not come to fruition.
She concluded by referring to the Annual Health Indicators for the District, as outlined
within the Performance Measures. It was intended that these would indicate where
the Council should focus their efforts in the following year.
Mr G Williams commented on the second performance measure for the Annual
Action Plan. He said that it would be more appropriate to state ‘to indicate that the
position is changing’ rather than improving. He acknowledged that it was hard to set
targets where there was no baseline but said that it would be helpful to have a
clarification on the term ‘review and report’. The Leader said that the item would be
going to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 23rd May and members would
have the opportunity to make comments then. Full Council would receive the
Performance Management Framework for approval on 30th May. 2012.
RECOMMENDED TO FULL COUNCIL
To approve:
a) The revised Performance Management Framework, and
b) The performance measures for the Annual Action Plan
Cabinet
14 May 2012
8.
COMMUNITY ASSET TRANSFER POLICY
Mr W Northam, Portfolio Holder for Corporate Assets, introduced this item. He
explained that the Community Asset Transfer Policy set out how the Council would
respond to requests from community groups wanting to take over ownership of
NNDC owned property assets. A community asset was defined as an asset owned
by the District Council which was not held for investment reasons and not essential
for operational purposes. He stressed that the policy was not an alternative to the
provisions of the Localism Act relating to the disposal of Assets of Community Value
but was intended to complement this.
The Portfolio Holder clarified that the term ‘community asset transfer’ related
primarily to long leasehold or freehold transfer. It was anticipated that the majority of
such assets would be leased for a peppercorn rent. In cases where the organisation
was an unincorporated association which was not registered as a charity, it was likely
that the only appropriate option would be a shorter term lease. He concluded by
saying that it was important to have a comprehensive policy in place to ensure that
the full worth of community assets was recognised and to ensure that transfers were
sustainable and successful in the long term.
Members discussed the report:
a) Mr G Williams asked whether there had been an increase in interest from
community groups hoping to take over council assets. Mr T Ivory, Portfolio Holder
for Localism and the Big Society said that he had recently met with community
groups in Fakenham regarding the Community Campus Project. They had
indicated an interest in taking over some council-owned assets. It was also likely
that the Leadership of Place project in North Walsham would lead to similar
requests.
b) Mr G Williams commented that section 3.3 of the policy statement which referred
to the opportunities created by a transfer of assets to a community should state
that the policy complemented the Council’s support for capacity building. The
Portfolio Holder for Localism and the Big Society agreed with this. He said that
this was a draft version and that amendments could be made prior to the
publication of the final version.
c) Mr D Young was concerned that some incorporated organisations, including
charities, were run by just one or two individuals and there was a risk that they
could fold after a few years. He suggested that a licence to occupy may be
preferable in such cases. The Portfolio Holder for Localism and the Big Society
said that it was advantageous for most organisations to have a longer lease in
place as it could open up avenues for funding. He referred to the Sheringham
Little Theatre which already operated successfully on this basis. He added that
the Council’s commitment to capacity building would ensure that such ventures
would remain viable.
d) Mr N Lloyd asked whether there would be a review process in place to address
any problems that may occur. The Portfolio Holder for Corporate Assets replied
that the Council maintained an overview of any leases and action would be taken
if any problems occurred.
RESOLVED to
Approve the Draft Community Asset Transfer Policy as the basis for consultation with
relevant community groups, town and parish councils.
Cabinet
14 May 2012
9.
A POLICY POSITION ON SECTION 106 FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS
ASSOCIATED WITH RETAIL DEVELOPMENTS
Mr T Ivory introduced this item in Mr K Johnson’s absence. He explained that the
decision to introduce a procedure in respect of negotiating Section 106 contributions
from new retail developments had arisen following several proposals from developers
across the district. The proposed policy framework would consider how the Council
could assess the impact of proposals for new retail developments and implement any
mitigating measures on established town centres. Mr Ivory stressed that any possible
interventions would not be a ‘wish-list’ but would reflect the longer-term aspirations
of the local community and could be financed through a variety of means including,
where appropriate, planning obligations. He concluded by saying that in order to
consider the impact of the current new retail proposals on town centres, the
procedure should be developed and adopted as soon as possible.
Members discussed the report:
1. Ms V Gay asked for further clarification on the proposed appointment of a retail
consultant, in particular whether there would be a series of consultants appointed
for the different areas of the District or whether one retail consultant would be
appointed on a short-term contract. Mrs S Blatch, Corporate Director, replied that
a retail consultant had already been appointed for one of the applications in North
Walsham and the Head of Planning and Building Control was considering
whether a Framework Contract should be put in place for future applications. He
added that an ad hoc arrangement could breach the procurement threshold.
2. Mr G Williams commented on the use of the term ‘wish-list’. He suggested that
‘aspirations’ may be a preferable term.
RECOMMENDED to Full Council
That the key principles detailed at paragraph 4.1 of the report form the basis of
the procedure to be adopted by the Council in negotiating Section 106
contributions from new retail proposals be endorsed with effect from 1st June
2012.
10.
CABBELL PARK
Mr J Lee, Portfolio Holder for Leisure & Cultural Services, introduced this item. He
explained that before any progress could be made in relation to Cabbell Park, the
legal estate needed to be transferred to the Council under the terms of the trust
deed. He added that discussions had taken place with Medcentres, the Town Council
and the Football Club to try and balance their interests with the legal requirement to
hold the land as open space. It was hoped that there would be an opportunity to
secure the future of the Youth Team too.
RESOLVED that
1. The Trustees be approached to transfer the legal title of Cabbell Park to the
Council.
2. The Chief Executive be given delegated authority to negotiate a way forward with
any interested parties and
3. The matter returns to Cabinet for consideration once an agreement has been
reached.
Cabinet
14 May 2012
11.
COASTAL WORKS MEASURED TERM CONTRACT
Mrs A Fitch-Tillett, Portfolio Holder for Coastal Issues introduced this item. She
explained the measured Term Contract was the best way to procure small scale,
reactive coastal works. Under this arrangement a contractor would agree to carry out
a variety of coastal works over a period of time within a defined geographical area
with the works subsequently valued at rates contained in an agreed priced schedule
of rates.
A procurement exercise had been undertaken and the successful tenderer was
Renosteel Construction. It was anticipated that the contract would commence on 1st
June 2012.
RESOLVED to
agree to award the Coastal Measured Term Contract to Renosteel Construction Ltd.
The Meeting closed at 10.38am
_______________
Chairman
Cabinet
14 May 2012