Please Contact: Emma Denny
Please email: emma.denny@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Please Direct Dial on: 01263 516010
02 May 2012
A meeting of the Cabinet of North Norfolk District Council will be held in the Council Chamber at
the Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer on Monday, 14 May 2012 at 10.00 a.m.
At the discretion of the Chairman, a short break will be taken after the meeting has been running
for approximately one and a half hours. Coffee will be available in the staff restaurant at 9.30 a.m.
and at the break.
Members of the public who wish to ask a question or speak on an agenda item are requested to
arrive at least 15 minutes before the start of the meeting. It will not always be possible to
accommodate requests after that time. This is to allow time for the Committee Chair to rearrange
the order of items on the agenda for the convenience of members of the public. Further information
on the procedure for public speaking can be obtained from Democratic Services, Tel: 01263
516047, Email: democraticservices@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Sheila Oxtoby
Chief Executive
To: Mrs H Eales, Mr T FitzPatrick, Mrs A Fitch-Tillett, Mr T Ivory, Mr K Johnson, Mr J Lee,
Mr W Northam.
All other Members of the Council for information.
Members of the Management Team, appropriate Officers, Press and Public.
If you have any special requirements in order
to attend this meeting, please let us know in advance
If you would like any document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format
or in a different language please contact us
Chief Executive: Sheila Oxtoby
Corporate Directors: Nick Baker & Steve Blatch
Tel 01263 513811 Fax 01263 515042 Minicom 01263 516005
Email districtcouncil@north-norfolk.gov.uk Web site northnorfolk.org
AGENDA
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2.
MINUTES
(attached – p.1)
To approve, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 12
March 2012.
3.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
To receive questions from the public, if any.
4.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
To determine any other items of business which the Chairman decides should be
considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government
Act 1972.
5.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any of the
following items on the agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members requires that
declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is a personal or prejudicial
interest.
6.
PLANNING POLICY AND BUILT HERITAGE WORKING PARTY
The following recommendation was made to Cabinet:at the meeting of the Planning Policy
and Built Heritage Working Party on 23rd April 2012:
MINUTE 32: NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK - PUBLICATION
RESOLVED
That Cabinet be recommended 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
(attached – p.9)
(Appendix A– p.12 ) (Appendix B – p.16)
Summary:
This report presents the revised Performance Management
Framework. In addition a draft set of performance measures
being developed to performance manage delivery of the Annual
Action Plan are presented for approval.
Conclusions:
A robust performance management framework is essential for
the delivery of the council’s objectives as set out in the
Corporate Plan 2012-15.
Recommendations: That Cabinet approve:
a) the revised Performance Management Framework,
and
b) the performance measures for the Annual Action
Plan 2012/13
Cabinet Member(s):
Keith Johnson
Wards Affected:
All
Contact Officer, telephone number
and email:
8.
Helen Thomas, 01263 516214
Helen.Thomas@north-norfolk.gov.uk
COMMUNITY ASSET TRANSFER POLICY
(attached – p.22)
(Appendix C – p.24)
Summary:
This report sets out how the District Council will respond to
requests from community groups to take over ownership of
NNDC owned property assets.
Conclusions:
Under the Localism agenda, and in the new corporate plan,
there is likely to be an increase in interest by community
groups to request an asset transfer of District Council owned
properties. A new policy is therefore needed to supplement the
Property Acquisitions, Investment and Disposal Policy to
ensure that the policy framework and procedures are in place
to respond to such requests.
Recommendations:
To approve the Draft Community Asset Transfer Policy as
the basis for consultation with relevant community
groups, town and parish councils.
Cabinet member(s):
Wards affected
All
All
Contact Officer, telephone number, Jill Fisher 01263 516037
and e-mail:
Jill.Fisher@north-norfolk.gov.uk
9.
A POLICY POSITION ON SECTION 106 FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS ASSOCIATED
WITH RETAIL DEVELOPMENTS
(attached – p.39)
Summary:
At the present time North Norfolk District Council does not have
an agreed procedure or framework in respect of negotiating
Section 106 contributions from new retail developments in the
District. The Council is aware of a number of proposals for new
retail developments which might be considered acceptable
subject to assessing the impact of the proposals and any
mitigating measures on established town centres in the District.
The Council therefore needs to agree a procedure in respect of
such proposals as a matter of some priority.
Conclusions:
In order to consider the impact of new retail proposals on the
vitality and viability of established town centres across the
District the Council should develop a clear procedure with regard
to such proposals as a matter of priority.
Recommendations:
Cabinet is therefore asked to recommend to Full Council
that the key principles detailed at paragraph 4.1 of this
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.
Cabinet member(s):
Ward(s) affected
Keith Johnson
Wards in North Norfolk’s eight principal settlements
Contact Officer,
telephone.number, and e-mail:
Steve Blatch, Corporate Director
Tel:- 01263 516232
Steve.blatch@north-norfolk.gov.uk
CABBELL PARK
(attached – p.44)
Summary:
The Council is the beneficiary of the land at Cabbell
Park under a Trust Deed dated 4 December 1922
which is held as open space. A proposal for
purchase and development of the site from
Medcentres Plc has been put forward to the Council
and is currently being evaluated by the Property
Services Team. This report provides an update to
members on the current position and next steps.
Conclusions:
That the proposal from Medcentres Plc merits
further investigation and assessment and once this
has been completed Members should consider the
matter again.
Before any further progress can be made in relation
to Cabbell Park the legal estate needs to be
transferred under the terms of the Trust Deed.
Recommendations
•
That Trustees be approached to transfer
the legal title of Cabbell Park to the
Council.
•
That the Chief Executive be given
delegated authority to negotiate a way
forward with any interested parties and
•
That the matter returns to Cabinet for
consideration once an agreement has
been reached.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
John Lee and K Johnson
Cromer/ Suffield Park
Contact Officer,
Telephone number
and email:
Emma Duncan Legal & Democratic Services Manager
01263 516043,
emma.duncan@north-norfolk.gov.uk
11.
COASTAL WORKS MEASURED TERM CONTRACT
(attached – p.48)
(Appendix D – p.51)
(*Exempt Appendix 1 – page 53)
*The exempt appendix is not for publication by virtue of paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule
12A (as amended) of the Local Government Act 1972.
Definition of paragraph 3: Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any
particular person (including the authority holding that information).
Summary
This report outlines the need for and procurement process
undertaken for Coastal defence small scale repair and
maintenance works for the coast under the Council’s Coast
Projection responsibilities.
Conclusions:
Officers consider that the Measured Term Contract is the best
way to procure small scale coastal works. A procurement
exercise has been undertaken and the successful tenderer is
Renosteel Construction. Subject to approval by Cabinet, the
contract can commence on 1st June 2012.
Recommendations:
That Cabinet agree to award the Coastal Measured Term
Contract to Renosteel Construction Ltd.
Cabinet member(s):
Wards affected
Contact Officer,
telephone number,
and e-mail:
12.
Angie Fitch-Tillett
All Coastal Wards
Jill Fisher/ Brian J Farrow
01263 516193.
brian.farrow@north-norfolk.gov.uk
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
To pass the following resolution:
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be
excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that they
involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs _ of Part I of
Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act.”
13.
TO CONSIDER ANY EXEMPT MATTERS ARISING FROM CONSIDERATION OF THE
PUBLIC BUSINESS OF THE AGENDA
Agenda Item 2__
CABINET
Minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on Monday 16 April 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 K Johnson
Mr John Lee
Mr W Northam
Also attending:
Mrs L Brettle
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds
Mr P High
Mr N Lloyd
Mr R Reynolds
Mr E Seward
Mr R Shepherd
Mr B Smith
Mrs P Terrington
Mrs H Thompson
Mr G Williams
Officers in
Attendance:
Also in
Attendance:
108.
The Chief Executive, Corporate Director (S. Blatch),
Corporate Director (N. Baker), the Policy and Performance
Management Officer (for item 117), and the Community Projects
Manager (for item 119)
The press for minutes 108 – 119
The public for minutes 108 -116
MOTION WITHOUT NOTICE
Mr T FitzPatrick, Portfolio Holder for ICT and Democratic Services proposed the
following resolution: ‘that under Procedure Rule 14.1(n) of the Constitution, Rule 20.3
regarding the switching off of mobile telephones and electronic equipment is
suspended for the duration of the meeting to allow Members to continue to use their
tablets’.
RESOLVED
To accept the Motion
109.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
None
110.
MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of Cabinet held on 12 March 2012 were confirmed as a
correct record and signed by the Chairman.
111.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
Questions had been received from Mr Harrison-Robertshaw, Mrs C Candish and Mr J
Morgan. The questions concerned Agenda item 10, North Lodge Park Development
Proposal.
Cabinet
1
16 April 2012
The Chairman advised that the item would be taken earlier than scheduled. There
would be a one minute right of reply, following the Portfolio Holder’s response to the
questions and any discussion by Members.
112.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None
113.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Member(s)
114.
Item
Interest
Mr K Johnson
Minute
No.
116
North Lodge Park
Development Proposal
Personal and non
prejudicial as a
Member of Cromer
Town Council
Mr T FitzPatrick
118
Development of the Offshore
Wind Energy Sector of the
North Norfolk Coast
Personal and non
prejudicial - rents
facilities at Egmere
Business Park
MEMBERS TRAINING DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT GROUP
Mr K Johnson, Chairman of the Members Training Development and Support Group,
proposed that the recommendations be adopted. He informed Members that the
Council had made a written commitment to achieve the Members’ Charter in 2008. It
was hoped that all members would sign up to the Skills Portal and fully support the
commitment to the Charter.
Mr E Seward asked whether use of the Members’ Skills Portal would be monitored.
Mr K Johnson replied that several members of the Members Training Development
and Support Group had been trialling the Skills Portal and they were keen to provide
feedback. All Members were encouraged to join the scheme and report on the
outcome.
RESOLVED that
The minutes of the meeting of the Members’ Training, Development and Support
Working Group held on 28th February 2012 be received and the recommendations
contained therein be adopted as follows:
MINUTE 4: TRIAL OF PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
RESOLVED
To agree:
1.
2.
Cabinet
That Cabinet re-affirms the Council’s commitment to achieving the Members
Development Charter and recommends the adoption of the action plan
To the payment of 1 year’s subscription at a cost of £997 for the Members
Skills Portal to be provided by the South East Employers
2
16 April 2012
3.
4.
5.
115.
To confirm that all members are to be encouraged to use the Skills Portal,
including the 360 feedback process.
That the Member Training Development and Support Group will provide
regular reports to Cabinet relating to progress being made in achieving the
Charter and installing the skills
That Cabinet makes a long-term commitment to the Members Development
Charter.
JOINT STAFF CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
Mr K Johnson, Chairman of the Joint Staff Consultative Committee informed
Members that a report on the Pay and Grading Review would be presented to Full
Council on 18th April 2012.
RESOLVED that
The minutes of the meeting of the Joint Staff Consultative Committee held on 21
November 2011 be received.
116.
NORTH LODGE PARK DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
Three questions had been received for this item:
1. Mr A Harrison-Robertshaw spoke in favour of a site for a skate park at North
Lodge Park. He said that he was concerned that local residents had not been
consulted on the development proposals and that a recent poll conducted by
campaigners for the skate park showed 614 residents were in favour of a skate
park compared to 32 for an outdoor gym. He handed the results of the poll to the
Legal and Democratic Services Manager.
2. Mrs C Candish spoke on behalf of Cromer Preservation Society (CPS). She said
that they supported investment into the regeneration of North Lodge Park but that
there should be a full public consultation. The CPS was concerned that the report
implied that they had been consulted on the proposals and they felt this was
misleading as no agreement had been reached. She added that they felt there
was no cohesive design for the park as a whole and that the proposals were
causing tension within the town.
3. Mr J Morgan told Members that he had previously been employed by Kier to
maintain the putting greens at North Lodge Park. He had kept a tally during 2011
of the number of people using the greens and submitted a report to Kier on how
to increase usage. He pointed out that the Cabinet report indicated that there
were 4 putting greens in Cromer. The green at the Meadows was a pitch and putt
not a putting green. He felt that the amount attributed to the cost of grounds
maintenance for the putting area was too high and sought clarification on this
figure. He added that there was very little maintenance during the winter months.
Mr J Lee, Portfolio Holder for Tourism, Leisure and Cultural Services said that he
welcomed input from members of the public. He believed that the development
proposal would revitalise a tired-looking asset and leave a legacy for the town. The
plans were a product of consultation with Cromer Town Council and although a
significant sum was involved it would be recovered.
He responded to the points raised by members of the public:
a) The new children’s play area would include an outdoor gym which would enable
adults to exercise whilst their children played. It would be open to everyone and
free of charge. The Council was hoping to work with Fit Together to provide a
programme of supervised sessions to encourage uptake of the facilities. New
Cabinet
3
16 April 2012
toilets would be provided closer to the play area and it had been agreed in
principle that a contribution to the cost of maintaining the toilets and the Park
would be undertaken by Cromer Town Council.
b) Cromer was well provided for putting greens. The intention was to grass over
them to encourage people to picnic there. The Town Council’s proposal for a
communal garden in place of the bowling green should be welcomed as a chance
to commemorate the Diamond Jubilee.
c) Cabinet were meeting with campaigners for the Skate Park on Thursday 19th
April. They would discuss the possibility of incorporating a facility into North
Lodge Park or the Meadow. He added that any scheme would require planning
permission and funding.
The Portfolio Holder concluded by saying that there would be ongoing discussions
with Cromer Preservation Society regarding the upgrading of the park.
Members discussed the report:
a) Mrs H Thompson, Local Member for Suffield Park said that there had been
previous public consultations on North Lodge Park and they had always caused
agitation within the town. She had always supported the campaign for a skate
park but it should be acknowledged that members of the public had objected to
previous proposals with regards to the location and noise levels.
b) Mr T Ivory said that the proposal to provide an outdoor gym did not preclude a
skate park being constructed at North Lodge Park. He asked for more information
regarding the extent of the consultation. Mr N Baker, Corporate Director, said that
the report made clear that the provision of an outdoor gym would not preclude a
skate park. He said that there had not been a public consultation regarding these
specific proposals but there had been a local referendum on the provision of a car
park at North Lodge Park in recent years. He added that the Town Council had
been consulted and they represented local residents.
c) The Leader proposed that the first recommendation was amended to include
‘further consultation including representatives for the skate park’
d) Mr N Lloyd was concerned about possible inaccuracies regarding the cost of
maintaining the putting greens and other provision within the town. Mr N Baker
replied that the figure for maintenance of the putting greens had been provided by
the leisure contractor. Any savings would accrue from the Town Council’s offer
towards the upkeep of the park and toilets. He acknowledged that the Meadows
site offered a ‘pitch and putt’ rather than a putting green.
e) Mr G Williams said that it was important that the Council continued to invest in
parks and open spaces and that the focus should be on getting it right.
f) Mr K Johnson, Local Member for Cromer Town said there had been several
public consultations on North Lodge Park over the last 30 years and it had always
been impossible to keep everyone happy. He added that Cromer Town Council
had considerable input into the current proposals and he felt that real progress
was being made. He supported the Leader’s amendment to the first
recommendation.
g) Mr T Ivory added that the involvement of Cromer Town Council indicated that
there was support for the proposals. He agreed that individuals should also have
the opportunity to comment.
h) Mr W Northam proposed that any consultation should have a timescale to ensure
that it did not last indefinitely.
Cabinet
4
16 April 2012
The Leader asked Members of the Public that had raised questions whether they
wished to respond further:
1. Mr A Harrison-Robertshaw reiterated that a large number of residents supported
the provision of a skate park in North Lodge Park.
2. Mrs C Candish said that she was very pleased with the proposal to take the views
of the public into consideration and the implementation of a timescale for this.
3. Mr J Morgan stressed that the putting greens at North Lodge Park were Cromer’s
3rd most popular attraction and that they encouraged people of all ages to
exercise.
.
The Portfolio Holder thanked everyone for their input. He reiterated that it was not a
question of an outdoor gym versus a skate park and it was possible that both could
be accommodated. It was hoped that the play area and the outdoor gym would be
ready in time for the arrival of the Olympic torch in Cromer. The Jubilee garden was
intended to be a legacy and would not be completed for June 2012.
He proposed that the first recommendation was amended to include ‘ongoing
dialogue with key stakeholders’.
RESOLVED to
a)
Authorise Officers to progress with a development scheme for North Lodge Park
as described in the report, to include ongoing dialogue with key stakeholders.
b)
Agree to a capital expenditure of £197,000 for the scheme, to be financed from
capital receipts.
c)
Authorise Officers to enter into negotiations and complete legal contracts and,
where necessary, planning applications in respect of:
1)
2)
3)
117.
The financial offer from Cromer Town Council to fund the toilets and the
Park
The transfer of the existing toilet buildings to the Sea View Pre-school
The transfer of the existing bowls green to the Town Council at no
future cost to North Norfolk District Council.
FIRST ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
The Leader, Mrs H Eales, introduced this item. She explained that the Annual Action
Plan underpinned the Corporate Plan and provided the detail on how the Council’s
priorities would be realised over the forthcoming 12 months. The Plan was drawn up
in consultation with Parish and Town Councils and other local bodies.
The Annual Action Plan would be delivered through the application of the
Performance Management .Framework. As this was the first year of the process, it
was intended that lessons would be learnt at the end of the year and the Action Plan
adjusted accordingly to take forward into the following year.
Members discussed the report:
1. Mr G Williams said that he was concerned that the responses to the consultation
had been produced in an electronic format only. He had obtained a printed
version from the Members’ library. It was agreed that additional printed copies
would be provided prior to the meetings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee
and Full Council.
Cabinet
5
16 April 2012
2. Mr E Seward, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee asked whether
the Performance Management Framework would be presented to the Overview
and Scrutiny Committee. The Chief Executive replied that as it was the
mechanism for monitoring the Annual Action Plan, the Performance Management
Framework would be going to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee as part of
the Council’s performance ‘measure’ process. The Leader added that
performance management framework consisted of three parts:
i) Operational – the setting of targets
ii) Performance measures
iii) Review of the measures to ensure they were effective
3. Mr T Ivory said that he supported that Annual Action Plan. He felt that the
responses indicated that there was a lack of understanding that it only focused on
the delivery of the Corporate Plan and that the Council would still be carrying out
their statutory duties.
4. Mr G Williams asked whether the Cabinet was satisfied with 17 responses to the
consultation and whether they would engage with local residents differently in the
future. The Leader said that the majority of responses came from Parish and
Town Councils and other local bodies that represented a large number of people.
RECOMMENDED to Full Council
the adoption of the Annual Action Plan 2012-13.
118.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE OFFSHIRE WIND ENERGY SECTOR OFF THE NORTH
NORFOLK COAST – A STRATEGIC POSITIONING PAPER AND PROPOSAL
FOR LOCAL PARTNERSHIP WORKING ARRANGEMENTS
Mr T FitzPatrick, Portfolio Holder for Business Enterprise and Economic
Development presented this item. He explained that the report provided a strategic
overview of the development of offshore wind energy schemes off the North Norfolk
Coast and proposed a number of actions to allow the District to realise the economic
and employment benefits associated with such developments. It was also proposed
that the Council became a member of the Norfolk and Suffolk Energy Alliance and
worked with local partners through a new North Norfolk Renewables Partnership to
respond positively to enquiries from businesses connected with renewable
technologies wanting to establish facilities in the district.
Mr W Northam seconded the motion and proposed that Mr T FitzPatrick represented
the Council on the Norfolk and Suffolk Energy Alliance.
Members discussed the report:
1. Mr P Terrington, Local Member for Priory Ward said that he was concerned about
the impact of wind farms on the area around Wells-Next-the-Sea. The
development of a support facility at Egmere for SCIRA depended on the capacity
at Wells harbour and this was now bigger than the figure consulted on and
consequently could have a negative impact on tourism and local residents.
He requested the following:
i) Greater representation of local interest groups within the North Norfolk
Renewables Partnership.
ii) An action plan to minimise the impact of the increase in traffic along the B1104
corridor from Fakenham to Wells.
iii) A report on the possibility of raising s106 contributions from offshore wind
farms
iv) Regular reports from the North Norfolk Renewables Partnership to the Council
Cabinet
6
16 April 2012
2. Mr R Reynolds., Local Member for Fakenham said that he fully supported the
proposals and the employment opportunities it would bring to the area.
3. Mr N Lloyd was concerned that the focus was shifting to renewable energy and
that the Gas Terminal at Bacton would not benefit. The Portfolio Holder
responded that the Norfolk and Suffolk Energy Alliance covered the whole energy
sector not just renewables.
4. Mr G Williams felt that the Council could be a junior partner within the Alliance.
The Portfolio Holder replied that this would not be the case. They would be a full
member and joining the Alliance was the only way to ensure they were fully
involved in the decision making process.
The Portfolio Holder advised Members that Walsingham Parish Council fully
supported the development at Egmere. He had also spoken to Mr J Savory, Local
Member for Priory Ward who was broadly in favour of the proposals but wanted to
ensure that tourism interests were protected. He added that Wells Town Council and
Walsingham Parish Council would continue to be consulted.
RESOLVED to
1. Note the contents of the report, particularly as it relates to the proposed
development of offshore wind energy schemes off the North Norfolk coast and to
acknowledge the economic and employment opportunities presented by such
developments to the district over the next fifty years.
2. Endorse the proposal for the Council to become a member of the Norfolk and
Suffolk Energy Alliance for a one-off contribution of £20,000 and to appoint the
Portfolio Holder for Business Enterprise and Economic Development, Councillor
T FitzPatrick to represent the authority on the Alliance Board.
3. Endorse the proposal for the Council to work with local partners through a North
Norfolk Renewables Partnership to promote the district to businesses operating in
the renewable energy sector and respond positively to inward investment and
new business enquiries from businesses operating in this expanding economic
sector.
119.
HOLT VISION
Mr T Ivory, Portfolio Holder for Localism and the Big Society introduced this item. He
said that the initiative for the Holt Vision Study had come from the residents of Holt.
The purpose of the report was to emphasise that the Council supported the Vision
and fully endorsed it.
Mr P High, Local Member for Holt said that he had been involved with the project
from the beginning. He was concerned that there did not appear to have been any
discussion with Holt Town Council regarding the Neighbourhood Plan. At this stage
he wanted to reserve judgment on the merits of the Vision Study.
Mrs L Brettle, Local Member for Glaven Valley said that a thriving town was in
everyone’s interest. She was concerned that some car parking would be lost if some
of the proposals were implemented and this would need to be addressed. The
Portfolio Holder agreed that car parking was a fundamental issue and needed to be
worked on in conjunction with the Holt Vision project.
Mr G Williams asked how the Council would mesh local plans with the Annual Action
Plan. The Portfolio Holder said that he believed there was a link and it was important
that town and parish councils worked with the Council. He acknowledged that there
Cabinet
7
16 April 2012
was a resource issue and this had been factored into the proposed Senior
Management Restructure that would be considered at Full Council on 18th April 2012.
There would also be additional support via the Service Level Agreements which
supported the Council’s Big Society Fund.
RESOLVED to
1. Endorse the Vision for Holt and acknowledge the value of the study in identifying
various urban design, traffic management and economic and community
schemes that can be taken forward by named lead and partner organisations.
2. Agree that where NNDC can support actions based on the assessment of the
merits of the proposals put forward, that officers will seek approval from Cabinet,
on an individual basis for support in the development of those proposals.
The Meeting closed at 11.27 am
_______________
Chairman
Cabinet
8
16 April 2012
Agenda Item No_____7_______
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK INCLUDING PERFORMANCE
MANAGEMENT OF THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN 2012/13
Summary:
This report presents the revised Performance
Management Framework. In addition a draft set of
performance measures being developed to performance
manage delivery of the Annual Action Plan are
presented for approval.
Conclusions:
A robust performance management framework is
essential for the delivery of the council’s objectives as
set out in the Corporate Plan 2012-15.
Recommendations:
That Cabinet approve:
a) the revised Performance Management
Framework, and
b) the performance measures for the Annual
Action Plan 2012/13
Cabinet Member(s):
Wards affected:
Keith Johnson
All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
Helen Thomas, 01263 516214, Helen.Thomas@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
Final Annual Action Plan 2012-13
The final Annual Action Plan 2012-13 was approved by Full Council on 18th April
2012.
2.
Performance Management Framework
A performance management framework ensures that all key activity within the
Council is performance managed to ensure the achievement of objectives.
The Performance Management Framework (Appendix A) has been revised to take
account of recent changes at the Council. The key changes are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Development of a new Corporate Plan and Annual Action Plan 2012-13
Changes to management structures
Removal of Organisational Development Plans
Activities will be reported on monthly and performance measures quarterly and
the performance system will show clearly where reporting has not taken place.
9
3.
Performance Management of the delivery of the Annual Action Plan
2012-2013
The Annual Action Plan 2012-13 will be delivered by applying the Performance
Management Framework. Specifically;
1. Activities in the Annual Action Plan will be monitored monthly by Corporate
Leadership Team (CLT).
2. An Exceptions Report will be prepared for the Performance and Risk
Management Board, Cabinet and Overview and Scrutiny Committee on a
quarterly basis. This will consist of;
1. Performance Measures – Exceptions will be shown because; No
information has been provided, or there has been a significant change
in the direction of travel, or targets are not being achieved
2. Activities - Exceptions will be shown because; No information has
been provided, or there is an issue that needs addressing because an
activity has problems, is failing, or is on hold when it should be
progressing.
3. Access to all up-to-date progress reports for all performance measures and
activities will be accessible through the Intranet site.
4. A full report will be prepared on all aspects of the Annual Action Plan for the
Performance and Risk Management Board, Cabinet and Overview and
Scrutiny Committee on an annual basis and published on our website as our
Annual Report.
Annual Action Plan Performance Measures
A set of performance measures have been developed to ensure delivery
of the priorities in the Corporate Plan and specifically delivery of the first
Annual Action Plan 2012-13. These performance measures are;
1. Operational performance indicators for which we set targets.
These are performance indicators where we have a high level of
control over the outcome. These are managed through assessing
performance against target, direction of travel and progress
reports from responsible managers.
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. We are taking action to improve
performance against a measure which demonstrates an
improvement in the position. Managed through assessing direction
of travel
×=improving,
Ø=worsening,
Ù=stable/static, and
progress reports from the responsible managers.
3. Measures we review on an annual basis that show the combined
impact of all the activities we are undertaking and demonstrate the
level of need for further action.
The performance measures are attached for your approval in Appendix B.
10
4.
Implications and Risks
Failure to implement a robust Performance Management Framework, which
produces evidence of performance improvements and identifies areas requiring
corrective action, could have a number of consequences. These may include:
1. Inaccurate or less effective decision-making;
2. Inappropriate resource allocations;
3. Reduced reputation arising from poor data quality or accuracy;
4. Adverse comment in our annual direction of travel statement.
5.
Financial Implications and Risks
There are no direct financial implications associated with this report. However, there
are performance measures and targets, and activities included in the Annual Action
Plan that are specifically related to finance. In addition, corrective action may have
financial implications that would need to be made clear at the time any action is
agreed.
6.
Sustainability
There are no direct implications for sustainability in this report. However, the Annual
Action Plan it presents seeks to increase the sustainability of the social, economic
and environmental situation in North Norfolk.
7.
Equality and Diversity
There are no direct implications for equality and diversity in this report. However, the
Annual Action Plan it presents seeks to increase equality in North Norfolk.
8.
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
There are no implications for Crime and Disorder in this report
11
Appendix A
Performance Management
Framework
March 2012
Document Name
Document Description
Document Status
Lead Officer
Sponsor
Produced by (service name)
Relevant to the services listed or all NNDC
Approved by
Approval date
Type of document
Equality Impact Assessment details
Review interval
Next review date
Version
1
V01.01
V01.51
V01.52
V02.00
V02.01
V02.02
Performance Management Framework
This document details the performance management
framework for North Norfolk District Council. This
framework ensures that all key activity within the
Council is performance managed. NNDC will
manage performance using standardised reporting.
Performance monitoring will be integrated with
budget monitoring and risk management at
corporate and service levels.
Draft
Helen Thomas, Policy and Performance
Management Officer
Sheila Oxtoby, Deputy Chief Executive
Policy and Performance
All NNDC
Performance and Risk Management Board
4th November 2011
Strategy
Not required
3 years
January 2015
Description
First version
Minor updates
Review first draft
Review second draft for consultation
Final for approval
Reviewed subsequent to development of
the Annual Action Plan 2012/13 and
revised management structure
Minor amendments at Performance and
Risk Management Board
Performance Management Framework v02.02
Date
January 2007
26th March 2010
2nd November 2011
4th November 2011
17th November 2011
26th March 2012
27th April 2012
Page 1 of 4
12
Appendix A
1.
NNDC will manage performance using standardised reporting of the
following information:
The Corporate Plan
The Corporate Plan lays out the high level strategic priorities for the Council. Each
Annual Action Plan will contain specific measures and key activities to address those
priorities.
Local Performance Measures set out in the Corporate Plan – Annual
Action Plans
Presentation/monitoring format for each performance indicator:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Target and/or desired direction of travel
Current performance
Relevant commentary and additional action to be taken if necessary
Assessment of trends
Activities set out in the Corporate Plan - Annual Action Plans
Progress on delivering projects and activities, to include relevant timescales,
commentary and action to be taken.
Annual Report
ƒ
Progress on delivering the Corporate Plan – Annual Action Plan, including
achieving targets and delivering activities
Major NNDC Projects
ƒ
Progress on delivering projects, to include relevant timescales and commentaries
Service Plans
ƒ
Progress on delivering the Service Plan, including achieving targets, delivering
services and activities in support of the Corporate Plan.
Corporate Governance action plans
ƒ
Progress on meeting/implementing recommendations, to include relevant
timescales, commentaries and action.
External/internal audit inspections and reports
ƒ
2.
Progress on meeting/implementing recommendations, to include relevant
timescales and commentaries
Performance monitoring will be integrated with budget monitoring and
risk management at corporate and service levels. This process will be
undertaken:
Corporately
Performance Management Framework v02.02
Page 2 of 4
13
Appendix A
•
by the Performance and Risk Management Board, who will monitor the
information detailed in Section 1 on a quarterly basis and review
recommendations from the Performance Panel sessions,
•
by the Performance Panel, who will review Service Plans at performance
review sessions
•
by Cabinet and Overview and Scrutiny quarterly – delivery of the Annual
Action Plan.
•
by Audit Committee quarterly – audit recommendations
•
by Members through the Members’ Bulletin quarterly – major projects
in Services
•
at Head of Service level Management Team meetings monthly
•
at service team briefings monthly
All staff should be updated on local performance achievement monthly and
encouraged to participate in a performance dialogue, particularly where targets
and/or desired direction of travel are not being achieved.
3.
4.
Data maintenance
•
All quarterly performance measures will be updated by the 10th of the month
following the end of the quarter.
•
All annual performance measures will be updated by the end of the month
following the end of the year.
•
Progress in delivering all activities will be reviewed and updated monthly.
•
Exceptions may be made with prior agreement from the Performance and
Risk Management Board.
Data Quality
Data will be collected and managed in accordance with the Data Quality Policy.
5.
Roles and Responsibilities
Within the Council roles and responsibility for Performance Management are as
follows:
ƒ
The Chief Executive has senior management responsibility for performance
management and is the officer Performance Management Champion.
ƒ
The Portfolio holder for Organisational Development has senior Member
responsibility for Performance Management and is Member Performance
Management Champion.
Performance Management Framework v02.02
Page 3 of 4
14
Appendix A
ƒ
The Performance and Risk Management Board has responsibility to review
Performance Management issues to ensure that performance and risk
perspectives are dealt with and can authorise setting up a Performance Panel to
deal with specific performance issues.
ƒ
The Policy and Performance Management Officer will be the Performance
Management co-ordinator with responsibility for promoting the importance of
Performance Management throughout the organisation.
ƒ
The Policy and Performance Management Officer will collect and maintain a
database of all Performance Management reporting.
ƒ
The Policy and Performance Management Officer will maintain a list of all staff
with Performance Management responsibilities and develop and maintain the
performance management system.
ƒ
Heads of Service are responsible for performance management within their
services including delivery of service plans, monitoring of data and delivery of
assigned corporate projects.
ƒ
Heads of Service will ensure that performance management information which
supports the management processes outlined in Section 1 and Section 2 is kept
up-to-date in line with Section 3 of this document.
ƒ
Heads of Service will ensure that staff within their services fulfil their performance
management responsibilities.
ƒ
Staff with performance management responsibilities, as detailed in the
performance management system, will deliver those responsibilities and ensure
progress reports on the performance management system are kept up-to-date in
line with Section 3 of this document.
ƒ
Everyone in the organisation will be responsible for complying with this
Performance Management Framework.
Commitment to Performance Management will be clearly stated in job descriptions
for all relevant roles within the council, ensuring that corporate directors, managers,
administrative staff and others recognise their responsibilities as an integral part of
their role and profession.
Performance Management Framework v02.02
Page 4 of 4
15
Appendix B
Delivering the Annual Action Plan 2012/13
Performance Measures
V12
Jobs and the Local Economy
Quarterly
Measure
Outcome Baseline (Year)
2012/13
Assist 25 businesses to retain Jobs and/or increase
employment
25
57 (2011/12)
Rate of take up of new designated employment land
Review
Not yet available
Number of businesses who access Loans & Grants
under the North Norfolk Coastal Pathfinder
revolving Loan Fund and Small Business Grant
Fund
15
NA
Percentage of Loans fund that can be reapplied
c.20%
NA
Annual
Measure
Outcome Baseline
2012/13
(Year)
Customer satisfaction with business support – produce
annual report
Page 1 of 6
16
Review
NA
Appendix B
Housing and Infrastructure
Quarterly
Measure
Outcome
2012/13
Baseline (Year)
Review and report
Not known
4
None produced in
previous years
Number of affordable homes built
Review and report
65 (2011/12)
Number of planning permissions granted –
affordable homes
Review and report
Not available
The estimated worth (£) of investment
secured in new infrastructure through s106
agreements
Number of development briefs produced on
allocated sites
Annual
Measure
Outcome 2012/13
Number of new homes built of all tenures
250
178 (201011)
Number of planning permissions granted (all
tenure types)
Review and report
Not available
Reduction of 40
from base
973 (Oct
2009)
828 (Oct
2010)
786 (Oct
2011)
Number of long term empty homes (6 months or
more) brought back into use
(CTB 1)
Baseline
(Year)
Coast, Countryside and Built Heritage
Quarterly
Measure
Conservation area
plans that have been
completed or
reviewed
Defaults in our waste
contract for
cleanliness
Number of
rectifications issued to
the contractor for
cleansing
Outcome 2012/13
Baseline (Year)
4
(Cromer, Sheringham,
Walsingham and Wells)
8 (2010/11)
Review and report
1 for period 1st April 2010 to
23rd March 2012
Low is good
Review and report
14 (1st April 2011 to 25th
March 2012)
Low is good
Page 2 of 6
17
Appendix B
Measure
Outcome 2012/13
Baseline (Year)
Target response time
to fly tipping and all
other pollution
complaints (within 2
working days)
100%
96.90% (2010/11)
87.39% (up to Feb 2011/12)
Planning processing
times – major
applications
determined within 17
weeks
Planning processing
times – minor
applications
determined within 8
weeks
Planning processing
times – other
applications
determined within 8
weeks
Percentage of
planning appeals
allowed
Percentage of
planning decisions
taken under
delegation
Number of pollution
prosecutions
Level of fines issued
Review and report
31.58% within 13 weeks
(2011/12). Development
Control are investigating to
see if their systems can
calculate performance to a
17 week deadline.
72%
39.13% (2011/12)
80%
53.46% (2011/12)
Review and report exceptions
28.57% (2011/12)
Low is good
Review and report exceptions 93.28% (2011/12)
tbc
tbc
tbc
tbc
Annual
Measure
Annual
Outcome
Baseline
(Year)
Number of applications received for
the Graham Allen Awards
Review and report
exceptions
14 (June 2011)
Number of blue flag beaches
3
3 (2010)
Number of green flags for parks and
countryside
2 (new flag at Sadlers
Wood, North Walsham)
1 Holt Country
Park (2011)
Page 3 of 6
18
Appendix B
Localism
Quarterly
Measure
Number of grants awarded to local
communities from the Big Society Fund
Amount of funding investment in
community projects from the Big Society
Fund
Outcome
2012/13
Baseline (Year)
Review and report
NA
Review and report
Funding available
£423,000 2012/13
Delivering the Vision
Quarterly
Measure
Outcome 2012/13
Baseline (Year)
Staff sickness levels (number
of days per Full Time
Equivalent employee)
Review and report
5.17 days per FTE
(2011/12)
Percentage of (High Priority)
audit recommendations
implemented on time
100%
Percentage of (Medium
Priority) audit
recommendations
implemented on time
80%
Level of
overspend/underspend (£) by
the new service groupings
Level of
overspend/underspend (%) by
the new service groupings
Percentage of audit days
delivered
High and Medium
combined=47%
(2010/11)
72%(2011/12 to
mid Jan)
High and Medium
combined=47%
(2010/11)
72%(2011/12 to
mid Jan)
Review and report exceptions NA
Review and report exceptions NA
100%
100% (2010/11)
Annual
Measure
Outcome 2012/13
Number of actions identified in the
Annual Governance Statement action
plan completed on time
Derived from the Annual
Governance Statement in
June 2012
Page 4 of 6
19
Baseline
(Year)
3 out of 3
(2010/11)
Appendix B
Annual health indicators for the District
Jobs and the Local Economy
Measure
Baseline (Year)
The number of VAT registered businesses
4710 (31 March 2011)
The number of Job Seeker Allowance (JSA) 18 –
24 year old claimants
The number of job seekers finding employment
with Council support
The number of economically active - employed &
self-employed people
Number of settlements that have had Broadband
upgraded
The leverage index of external funding in relation
to base budget (£s of external funding levered for
every £ put in by the council).
595 April 2012 (NOMIS)
89 (2011/12 to date)
42900 2012 (NOMIS)
NA
NA
The number of vacant retail units within town
centres
76 units during the 2007-2009
period. 30 vacant units taken up
during the same period.
The percentage of existing employment land
occupied
Not yet available
Business rate base
Not yet available
The estimated worth of new investment and
interest
The percentage of existing employment land
occupied
Not yet available
Not yet available
Housing and Infrastructure
Measure
Baseline (Year)
Number of
people on the
housing register
Changes to the housing register system and criteria are planned
for 2012. These will be presented to Cabinet in July 2012 for
implementation in Autumn 2012. Establish baseline for new
measure in time to manage from 1st April 2013 onwards.
Number of relets from the
housing register
477 (2011/12)
Coast, Countryside and Built Heritage
Page 5 of 6
20
Appendix B
Measure
Baseline
(Year)
Percentage of development on brownfield land and/or allocated sites
(housing or all development?)
Not yet
available
Localism
Measure
Baseline (Year)
Town / Parish Council satisfaction with support
provided by and engagement with NNDC
The number of services / activities handed over to
Town / Parish Councils
NA
NA
Voter turnout at elections
District 49.71%, Parish
51.95% (May 2011)
Number of registered volunteers in North Norfolk
Not yet available
Page 6 of 6
21
Cabinet
May 2012
Agenda Item No______8_______
Community Asset Transfer Policy
Summary:
This report sets out how the District Council will respond to requests
from community groups to take over ownership of NNDC owned
property assets.
Conclusions:
Under the Localism agenda, and in the new corporate plan, there is
likely to be an increase in interest by community groups to request an
asset transfer of District Council owned properties. A new policy is
therefore needed to supplement the Property Acquisitions, Investment
and Disposal Policy to ensure that the policy framework and
procedures are in place to respond to such requests.
Recommendations:
To approve the Draft Community Asset Transfer Policy as the
basis for consultation with relevant community groups, town and
parish councils.
Cabinet member(s):
Ward(s) affected:
All
All
Jill Fisher 6037
Contact Officer, telephone number,
Jill.Fisher@north-norfolk.gov.uk
and e-mail:
1.
Background
1.1. As part of the Localism agenda, there is an increasing interest by
community groups to seek to take on the management of community buildings.
The Localism Bill includes both the community right to challenge and the
community right to bid. Although this policy is not specifically addressing these
proposals, as the act has not yet come into force and no guidance has been
produced, it provides the framework for asset transfer to community groups
which may be an aspect of those initiatives.
1.2. The Council’s Corporate Plan includes the priority “to embrace the
Government’s Localism agenda to empower individuals and communities to take
more responsibility for their own futures and to build a stronger civic society.”
The draft action plans states that “we will establish a protocol and put in place the
means to respond positively to requests from Town and Parish Councils to take
over the running of services within their area/communities to ensure that they
share in the benefits of growth” and “subject to guidance, we will assess
expressions of interest from voluntary or community groups who wish to take
over the running of a service and/or community asset, and complete the initial
22
Cabinet
May 2012
assessment within three months of receiving the request.” This policy provides an
important element of this process in addressing the property asset element of
these actions.
2.
The Community Asset Transfer Policy
2.1. The proposed policy document can be found in Appendix C. It sets out a
procedure for consideration of requests from community groups.
2.2. The Asset Management Board considered a draft of this policy on 12
March 2012. It is proposed that a period of consultation with interest and
community groups, town and parish councils should be undertaken on the policy
before adoption by the Council.
2.3. The consultation will take the form of a web-based consultation for a
period of 8 weeks, closing on 13 July 2012. Following consultation a final draft
will be reported to Cabinet for adoption.
3.
Risk
3.1. The adoption of a Community Asset Transfer policy with clear procedural
guidelines should reduce the council’s corporate risk, as greater clarity will be
provided to community groups, members and staff.
3.2. The legal responsibility for the buildings transferred by long lease or
freehold will transfer most maintenance and legislative responsibilities to the
tenant in line with the terms of the lease.
4.
Financial Implications
4.1. The adoption of the policy itself has no financial implications. The financial
implications of acquisitions or disposals will be considered on a case by case
basis and via the Asset Management Board and Cabinet when making decisions
on individual cases. The policy relates to disposals at less than best
consideration, to that there will be financial implications for the council.
5.
Equality and Diversity Implications
5.1. No equality and diversity implications have been identified as part of
adoption of the Property Acquisitions and Disposals policy.
6.
Sustainability Implications
6.1. It is hoped that the transfer of buildings into community ownership and
management will ensure buildings are used sustainably.
23
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
24
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
Contents
1. Background
2. Policy context
3. Policy statement.
4. Legal context
5. The Community Asset Transfer process.
Appendices
25
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
1. Background and Purpose
1.1. The purpose of this policy is to set a clear framework to enable asset transfer
from the Council to Third Sector Organisations (TSOs) and ensure transfers are
sustainable and successful in the long term.
1.2. The “Third Sector” is the voluntary sector of the economy which is neither public
(such as central or local government) or private sector (such as private individuals or
profit-making business). With the Big Society and Localism initiatives, it is the Third
Sector which is now being promoted as one of the most efficient and productive
elements of a dynamic and healthy society. However, lower tiers of local government
(parish and town councils) are included within this initiative.
1.3. For the purposes of this policy, a community asset is defined as an asset owned
by the District Council which is not held for investment reasons and not essential for
operational purposes. It may include operational assets such as Tourist Information
Centres, Public Conveniences, Community Centres, Theatres and Sports Clubs.
Asset transfer can relate to freehold transfer but, more commonly, a long-term (over
25 years) lease.
1.4. An asset transfer decision will usually be a choice between:
•
Maintaining the status quo;
•
Commercial disposal on the open market;
•
Seeking the service and community benefits generated by a decision to
transfer an asset to a TSO (Community Asset Transfer);
This policy relates to the situation when the last of these three choices is the
appropriate one.
1.5. It is important not to confuse Community Asset Transfer with the provisions of
the Localism Act relating to disposal of Assets of Community Value. Essentially, the
Localism Act will introduce a moratorium on sale of “Assets of Community Value” to
allow community groups a right to make a bid (at open market value). The list of
Assets of Community Value will relate to both public and privately held assets. The
26
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
government is in the process of producing guidance in relation to the relevant
sections of the Act which have yet to come into force.
1.6. The Localism Act also provides the Community Right to Challenge which is a
right provided in the first instance to community or voluntary groups to request taking
on themselves the provision of services provided by the local authority. In some
cases, there may be a relationship between taking on a service and related local
authority assets. However, at this stage, this policy considers the process for
discretionary community asset transfer outside of the provisions of the Localism Act
2011.
1.7 The term ‘community asset transfer’ relates primarily to long leasehold or
freehold transfer in order that the asset may be used or managed by a TSO at less
than ‘open market value’ e.g. transferred as a gift or leased for a peppercorn or
below market rental.
2. Policy context
2.1. The 2006 Local Government White Paper confirmed the last Government’s
intention to increase opportunities for community asset ownership and management,
and promoted asset transfer as part of a local authority’s ‘place-shaping’ role. The
Secretary of State for Communities commissioned Barry Quirk, Chief Executive of
the London Borough of Lewisham to carry out a review into the barriers preventing
community asset transfer. It also indicated that a fund would be established to help
with this, later announced as the £30 million Community Assets Fund managed by
the Big Lottery Fund.
2.2. The ‘Quirk Review’s’ findings Making Assets Work were published in May 2007.
All the Review’s recommendations were accepted by the Government and published
a week later as an implementation plan in Opening the transfer window: the
government’s response to the Quirk Review. The Government’s plan for taking the
review forward included an asset transfer demonstration programme with local
authorities and their partners, a guide to managing risks in asset transfer and a
series of regional awareness-raising workshops.
27
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
2.3. The Quirk Review found that a careful increase in the community’s stake in an
asset can bring a wide range of additional benefits for the community, the
organisation receiving the asset and the local authority facilitating the transfer. The
benefits of community ownership and management can outweigh risks and
opportunity costs.
2.4. The Government’s Empowerment Action Plan published in 2007 included
actions relating to the transfer of assets and to a programme of support for
community anchors, including the availability of further funding to support the
development of anchors.
2.5. In July 2008 the Communities and Local Government White Paper “Communities
in Control: real people, real power” confirmed ongoing support for the Quirk review,
announced the establishment of a national Asset Transfer Unit, extended the
Advancing Assets programme by a further year and announced a £70m “Community
Builders” fund. The origins of this agenda go back to the ODPM’s 2003 Communities
Plan Sustainable Communities: Building for the future). This acknowledged that
sustainability is only possible where local communities play a leading role in
determining their own future development.
2.6. In November 2011, the Localism Act was given royal assent. While most of its
provisions have yet to take effect, it can be seen that the Government’s agenda is to
continue and extend the previous government’s policy of asset transfer for
community benefit. The Council’s Asset Management Plan will ultimately be
adjusted to take account of the new Localism Act provisions (re Assets of Community
Value and the Community Right to Challenge mentioned above.)
2.7. As mentioned above, this policy does not concern “market value” transfers which
are dealt with as part of the Council’s Asset Management Plan.
2.8.The Council has a long record of commitment to supporting community groups
and the principles of Community Asset Transfer. The following local policy
28
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
documents cite asset management and transfer to the third sector/partners as central
objectives:
• The Corporate Plan
• The Asset Management Plan
3. Policy statement
3.1. The Council recognises that the way its physical assets are managed can have a
positive impact on the long-term strength of the third sector and local communities
more generally. Through asset ownership and management, TSOs can grow and
become more secure, gaining access to sources of additional investment that the
Council itself may not be able to access. The aim is to ensure that the way assets are
managed underpins the wider corporate aims and where appropriate, will use asset
transfer as a means of enabling TSOs to become sustainable on a long-term basis.
3.2. The Council’s existing assets include land, buildings and other structures used
for a variety of different social, community and public purposes. For some of these
assets community management and ownership could deliver:
•
benefits to the local community; e.g. closer association and influence over the
management of the facility making it more responsive to local needs with
reduced overhead running costs (enabling fees and charges to be kept
relatively low) ;
•
greater use of the facility with the potential to increase new social and
economic opportunities for communities that extend their capacity to support
localities and organisations where they live and improved health and other
well being outcomes for the community.
•
benefits to the Council and other public sector service providers; e.g improved
levels of volunteering, civic participation, and engagement in positive activities
in the area; reduced financial implications for the Council, including staff and
asset overhead costs and business rates.
•
benefits for the organisation taking ownership; both financial and non
financial; e.g. charitable tax exemptions, improved access to funding
opportunities at local, regional and national levels for both capital and
29
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
revenue based support; accessible staff and/or volunteer learning and
development opportunities as part of a career path; building partnership with
other organizations and users to promote economic development and social
enterprise.
3.3. Public assets are rarely used by everyone, their ‘value’ being locked-in to a
particular use or a particular group of people. However, changing ownership or
management can offer opportunities to make assets and their services more
accessible, more innovative, more flexible and more relevant to communities,
increasing their value in relation to the numbers of people that benefit and the range
of opportunities offered. Community-lead ownership can offer additional opportunities
to secure resources within a local area and to empower local citizens and
communities.
4.
Legal Context
4.1. As Community Asset Transfers, under this policy, will be at under market value,
community benefit will have to be demonstrated pursuant to s123 Local Government
Act 1972 as further refined by Local Government Act 1972: General Disposal
Consent (England) 2003.
4.2. Under this statutory guidance, community benefit is judged in terms of whether
the disposal will secure the promotion or improvement of the economic, social and
environmental well being of the inhabitants of the district. In these respects an
assessment will be made of the TSO’s Business Plan, their experience/skills to
deliver the Plan and to complement the Council’s Corporate objectives such as
promoting tourism, environmentally sustainable economic growth and healthy
lifestyles.
4.3. Independence of the TSO from the Council will need to be demonstrated in order
to maintain clarity of roles and responsibilities in any partnership arrangements or
agreements.
30
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
4.4. It is important to note that Community Asset Transfer will not involve a freehold
transfer in most cases. Even in a situation where a TSO is a fully constituted charity
with corporate status, a long lease at peppercorn rental will, in general, be the
preferred option in relation to the use of valuable assets as a leasehold structure
provides legal mechanisms through which the Council’s interests of provision of
community benefit can be protected in the long term.
4.5. In cases where the organisation is an unincorporated association which is not
registered as a charity, it is likely that the only appropriate option will be a shorter
term lease (e.g. up to 15 years) but, again, with below market rental. The reason for
this is that the Council would always wish to avoid the intractable legal problems
which can occur when land is transferred into the name of private individuals on trust
for an unincorporated association. For example, if a property is held by a number of
individuals as trustees, then upon their retirements or deaths the property must be
formally assigned to new trustees. However, it is easy for small voluntary
organisations to omit to take on such an onerous task of formal legal transfer (which
can only take place by deed). This may ultimately lead to a situation in which all the
original trustees retire or die and the true legal owner is untraceable. For this reason
(inter alia), any TSO which seeks to take a long lease or freehold, must first gain
charitable status and/or incorporate as a not-for-profit company.
5
The Community Asset Transfer Process
The Council will consider requests for Community Asset Transfer in the following
manner:
•
Initial application and response (1&2)
•
Full application (3)
•
Agreement of Heads of Terms and Asset Management agreement
(4&5)
•
Cabinet Decision (6)
•
Legal Transaction (7)
The seven key stages in this process including the requirements on an applicant are
set out below:
Stage 1: Initial application
31
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
A TSO which believes it could successfully take over and run a Council-owned
property should submit an initial application and expression of interest to the Head of
Service for Assets. They should use the application form shown in Appendix 1 or
submit a more informal request. An informal request will probably be no more than 23 sides of A4 and it should contain the following information.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Name of Organisation
Contact details
Address for correspondence
Telephone number
Email address
Status of organisation (charity, club, new group)
Charity or Company registration number
Date when organisation established in present form
Governance arrangements (e.g. constitution, set or rules etc)
Proposals for incorporation, registration as CIC or application for charitable
status (if these have not yet been achieved).
Number of members
Number of members of management committee
Number of staff/volunteers
Insurance policy/public liability/professional indemnity levels of cover
Details of lease and name of current trustees (if currently a sitting tenant
holding as unincorporated association)
A short statement saying why the asset is needed
If the applicant is a sitting tenant, a statement saying why an extended lease
or freehold transfer is needed
Future objectives upon transfer
Details of indications of support from sponsors.
Stage 2: Initial response
All initial applications will be report to the Asset Management Board with a
recommendation to continue or to reject, providing reasons for rejection which will be
shared with the applicant.
If the Asset Management Board agrees that the proposal has merit, the applicant will
be asked to submit a full application.
Stage 3
Full application
A full application to be submitted by a TSO will include the following:-
32
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
1)
A statement of objectives (a mission statement for the organisation).
2)
Full details of legal form of the organisation (NB for consideration of a grant of
a long leasehold interest of over 15 years, it must have corporate or charitable status
or both).
3)
Details of the asset applied for and the holding sought with reasons including
details of funding and external funding commitments or opportunities.
4)
A business plan for the whole organisation (not just a specific project)
demonstrating the following:How asset will be used
•
A summary of wider benefits for the organisation, the public and the Council.
•
Stakeholders engaged in current and future management and use of the
asset
•
Core activities and services delivered currently
•
Proposed projects, activities and actions that will be developed through future
management of the asset
•
Organisational management (structure, number, posts both paid and
voluntary)
•
Experience and track record including experience/expertise of management
board etc
•
Robustness of governance structure (in place or being developed)
•
Details of partnership working if any
•
Community involvement and engagement currently and in the future
•
User involvement (including membership information, age profile of users,
public use, educational use)
•
Financial projections including a three year cash-flow forecast, projected
income and investment (grants/loans) including any relating to development
of the asset and consideration of overheads such as utilities and business
rates
•
Analysis of funding opportunities with realistic assessment of risk
•
Projected facility user numbers and rates of use over three year period
•
Effective management of the asset (bookings, health and safety, repair and
maintenance)
33
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
•
Professional advice or details of advisers to be used and how this will be
funded
5) Sitting tenants should additionally demonstrate:
•
Effective management and maintenance of the asset to date
•
Last three years’ accounts
•
Sufficiently wide and diverse membership
•
Effective bookings system
•
Suitable occupancy agreements for any third party use
Stage 4: Consideration, valuation and negotiation
Following submission of a full application, the Head of Service for Assets will appoint
a member or members of his/her team to correspond with the TSO to consider
professional valuation of the asset (if that is deemed necessary and, if so, how the
valuation is to be funded) and to draft Heads of Terms. The Council will also arrange
for an internal title report to be produced to identify any legal issues such as
restrictive covenants which may affect the asset.
While stated briefly, this stage will probably be the longest in duration. It may take
several months to complete and involve significant, detailed work and
correspondence. If it is not possible to agree Heads of Terms, the reasons will be
given to the applicant and alternatives (such as short term lease or licence) will be
explored. By way of additional policy guidance, in assessing the merits of the
application and negotiating Heads of Terms, the Council will ask itself the questions
set out in the Appendix 2 below.
Stage 5: Report to AMB
If Heads of Terms are agreed, the Head of Service for Assets will submit a report to
the Asset Management Board containing the full application and the business plan
with recommendation as to the specific details of the proposed asset transfer which
have been provisionally agreed with the TSO i.e. heads of terms, leasehold
conditions, asset-lock proposals etc.
34
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
The Asset Management Board will consider the report and decide whether the
transfer should proceed and add further conditions, or not as it deems necessary.
In the event that the AMB recommend the proposed asset transfer, a report will be
submitted to Cabinet recommending that authorisation is granted to proceed.
The impact on Council resources needs to be assessed by the Asset Management
Board. This might include:
•
The level of initial and ongoing support/advice required from services e.g.
Property, Legal, Environmental, Planning
•
Any capital contribution, match funding or loans required
•
Initial involvement in setting up a legal trust body, social enterprise or legally
constituted community group
•
Ongoing obligations that may fall to the Council under the terms of a Lease
and associated costs that it incurs as a result of those obligations
•
Consideration of an exit strategy in the event that the asset transfer fails.
Stage 6: Report to Cabinet
Cabinet will consider the report and add any conditions they deem appropriate or not
and, should they agree with the recommendation will provide delegated authority to
the Council’s Legal and Democratic Services Manager to carry out the transaction.
Stage 7: Legal transaction
The applicant will be informed of the Cabinet’s decision and in the event that the
decision is to proceed with transfer, the legal process of Asset transfer will be carried
out between the Council’s lawyers and the applicant TSO’s lawyers. Again, while
simply stated, the legal process may take several months depending on the
complexity of the title or proposed lease and the readiness of the applicant to engage
in the legal process that is required for transfer of the asset to be completed .
35
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
Appendix1: Application form
COMMUNITY ASSET TRANSFER
APPLICATION FORM
Name of Community Group or Organisation
Contact address
Email
Telephone number (s)
Status of organisation
(charity, club, new group)
Charity and/or Company
registration number
Date when organisation
established
in present form
Governance arrangements
(e.g. constitution, set or
rules etc)
Proposals for
incorporation, registration
as CIC or application for
charitable status (if these
have not yet been
achieved)
Accounts available (Y/N)
How many years accounts?
36
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
Number of members
Number of members of
management committee
Number of staff/ volunteers
Insurance policy/public
liability/professional
indemnity levels of cover
Details of lease and name
of current trustees (if
currently a sitting tenant
holding as unincorporated
If the applicant is a sitting
tenant a statement saying
why an extended lease or
freehold transfer is needed
Future objectives upon
transfer
Details of indications of
support from sponsors
Any other relevant
supporting information
A short statement saying why the asset is being requested for transfer
37
Appendix C
North Norfolk District Council
Community Asset Transfer Policy
Appendix 2
Assessment of application
•
Is it part of long-term support to / engagement and partnership with the
third sector?
•
Is it sustainable in the long term (for both the TSO and the Council) and
are the terms and conditions imposed upon the TSO not unduly onerous
but reasonable and affordable (TSO governance arrangements,
robustness of Business Plan and terms of any Service Level Agreement)?
•
Does it complement the Council’s corporate strategy and priorities,
allowing a comparison with open market disposal?
•
Does the assessment of the TSO’s Business Plan identify clear economic,
social or environmental outcomes and demonstrate the TSO’s ability and
experience to deliver these?
•
Can the community benefit be demonstrated under the Local Government
Act 1972: General Disposal Consent (England) 2003, if the Council is
considering disposal for less than open market value?
•
Does the TSO have policies and commitment towards actions on
staff/volunteer training and development, safeguarding children, equalities
and climate change, or is seeking to provide to meet the conditions of
asset transfer?
•
Has the proposed transfer been appraised alongside the options of - (i)
Maintaining the status quo; (ii) Expenditure on other services made
possible as a result of a decision for ‘commercial’ disposal?
•
What are the risks of service failure, TSO failure, misuse/disuse of assets,
premature changes to any proposed SLA and what is the exit strategy
that is in place and the best possible transfer type (leasehold, freehold), if
still appropriate?
38
Cabinet
14th May 2012
Overview & Scrutiny
23rd May 2012
Full Council
30th May 2012
Agenda Item No______9_______
A policy position on Section 106 financial contributions associated with retail
developments
Summary:
At the present time North Norfolk District Council does not have an
agreed procedure or framework in respect of negotiating Section 106
contributions from new retail developments in the District. The
Council is aware of a number of proposals for new retail developments
which might be considered acceptable subject to assessing the impact
of the proposals and any mitigating measures on established town
centres in the District. The Council therefore needs to agree a
procedure in respect of such proposals as a matter of some priority.
Conclusions:
In order to consider the impact of new retail proposals on the vitality
and viability of established town centres across the District the
Council should develop a clear procedure with regard to such
proposals as a matter of priority.
Recommendations:
Cabinet is therefore asked to recommend to Full Council that the
key principles detailed at paragraph 4.1 of this 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.
Cabinet member(s):
Ward(s) affected:
Cllr Keith Johnson
Wards in North Norfolk’s eight principal settlements
Contact Officer, telephone number,
and e-mail:
Steve Blatch, Corporate Director
Steve.blatch@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Tel:- 01263 516232
39
Cabinet
14th May 2012
Overview & Scrutiny
23rd May 2012
Full Council
30th May 2012
1.0
Introduction
1.1
At the meeting of Full Council held on 18th April 2012, Members received a report which
explained that at the present time the District Council does not have an approved policy
framework in place for the negotiation of Section 106 planning obligations in respect of
new retail proposals in the District. With a number of new retail developments now being
proposed in the District, Full Council agreed that Cabinet should be asked to consider
this matter and propose a draft policy framework as a matter of priority, with the matter
being referred back to the next meeting of Full Council on 30th May 2012.
1.2
This report therefore outlines the options available to Cabinet in considering this issue
and recommends a draft policy framework approach for agreement and subsequent
recommendation for endorsement by Full Council.
2.0
Background
2.1
In recent weeks a number of new retail developments have been proposed in locations
across the District – i.e. at North Walsham, Holt and Wells; in respect of which questions
have been asked about the Council’s ability to secure financial contributions from such
proposals through formal legal agreements in order to mitigate the impact of new
developments upon established town centres.
2.2
The legislation providing local planning authorities with the powers to enter into legal
(Section 106) agreements, often referred to as planning obligations, with applicants for
planning permission so as to regulate the use and development of land which might
involve payment of a financial contribution for off-site works, is set out in the Community
Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (para. 122) and restated in the National Planning
Policy Framework published on 27th March 2012. The guidance indicates that planning
obligations should only be sought where they meet all of the following tests:•
•
•
necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;
directly related to the development; and
fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
2.3
The District Council’s adopted Core Strategy policy CT2 – Developer Contributions
provides the context in which developer contributions can be negotiated or secured, and
the policy makes specific reference to “substantial commercial development” which
would apply to new retail development proposals outside the defined town centre policy
areas identified for each town in the District. However, whilst the policy proposed that a
Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) would be prepared which would provide
further guidance on the approach the Council would take in negotiating planning
obligations to date the Planning Policy Team has not progressed this piece of work due
to other work pressures including the consideration of the possible introduction of a
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). It is therefore proposed that the Council adopts an
interim policy framework in respect of planning obligations related to new retail
developments, pending a decision to introduce a CIL or a Planning Obligations SPD is
prepared.
3.0
Current policy framework
3.1
Policy EC5 – Location of Retail and Commercial Leisure Development of the adopted North
Norfolk Core Strategy details the approach the Council will adopt in considering
proposals for new food / convenience retail proposals. Whilst the policy makes
reference to the impact such proposals might have on the vitality and viability of existing
40
Cabinet
14th May 2012
Overview & Scrutiny
23rd May 2012
Full Council
30th May 2012
town centres, it does not describe the process by which any negotiations to secure
planning obligations from such developments, which might seek to address any impacts
to the point that the development proposal might be considered acceptable, should be
taken forward.
3.2
Retail policies contained within the adopted Core Strategy were informed by a Retail and
Leisure Study prepared in 2005 which did not identify any quantitative need for new
convenience floorspace in the District over the period to 2016. The current range of
proposals for new stores in North Walsham, Holt and Wells-next-the-Sea seek to
promote increased consumer choice and retention of expenditure within local
catchments and it will therefore be for the Council to determine, in considering planning
applications for these proposals, whether the scale of any impact on established town
centre businesses might be reduced or considered to be acceptable through the funding
of mitigation measures.
3.3
Such measures might include finance being provided for town centre enhancement
works, town centre management and marketing initiatives, local transport services /
infrastructure and support for local Chambers of Trade. Such contributions have been
secured by local authorities approving retail proposals elsewhere in the country over
recent years, but to date the District Council has not negotiated any such payments in
respect of retail proposals in North Norfolk.
3.4
It is important to stress that there can be no automatic expectation that the Council will
be able to secure financial or other contributions from retail operators promoting new
developments in the District. The authority will need to carefully consider the impact of
individual proposals upon the established retail hierarchy of the District and the particular
town centre of the settlement in which development is proposed. The Council has
limited experience of considering such issues and it is therefore suggested that the
Council will need to commission advice from a retail consultant on the scale of any
impacts and whether these impacts might be reduced through mitigating measures to
the degree that a proposal is considered acceptable. Further it is essential that any
financial payments / obligations offered or negotiated comply with guidance contained
within the recently published National Planning Policy Framework if the authority is to be
able to demonstrate reasonableness to potential investors and defend itself from
criticism or challenge from third parties.
3.5
In order that the Council can demonstrate transparency in any negotiations to secure
planning obligations from any new retail proposals in the forthcoming months, it is
suggested that Council agrees and adopts a framework within which Officers will operate
in undertaking negotiations with developers and retail operators promoting new
developments in the District. Agreement of such a framework will also allow the
approach being adopted by the Council to be understood by competitor operators with
established stores in the District, town centre retail businesses and representative
bodies such as local chambers of trade, town and parish councils and the wider public.
4.0
Proposed approach
4.1
It is proposed that the Cabinet agrees the following key principles in developing a
framework for negotiating Section 106 Obligations with promoters of new retail
developments in the District.
• In Principal and Secondary Settlements where new retail proposals are promoted
beyond areas with town centre policy designation; that Officers hold discussions
with local chambers of trade and the relevant town / parish council to identify a
list of possible interventions towards which financial contributions might be
41
Cabinet
14th May 2012
Overview & Scrutiny
23rd May 2012
Full Council
30th May 2012
•
•
•
•
sought, if a detrimental impact upon established retail businesses / town centres
were to be identified through retail impact assessments submitted in support of
proposals or otherwise anticipated by the Council’s retail advisor.
Such a list of possible interventions should not be seen as a “wish-list” to be
presented to potential retail investors with an expectation that they should be
funded by a particular development, rather they should reflect the longer-term
aspirations of a local community about the future development of their town
centre, which could be financed through a variety of means moving forward – e.g.
mainstream funding or Government, Lottery, Big Society or other sources of
external funding and which could therefore be financed in part through planning
obligations if it was assessed that the scale of proposed impact of a new retail
development could be mitigated through a planning obligation.
That the Council would engage a retail consultant to comment upon the retail
impact assessments submitted in respect of individual proposals and advise on
the scale of any impacts and scale and extent or appropriateness of any
mitigation measures, having regard to the tests in the NPPF that the measure
sought is necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, is
directly related to the development and is fairly and reasonably related to it in
scale and kind.
Such advice and any proposal to enter into a planning obligation in respect of
mitigating measures to be outlined to the Development Committee in the wider
consideration of any planning application, with the decision to enter into a
planning obligation resting with the Development Committee taking into account
the advice of the retail consultant and Officers.
Where the Local Planning Authority agrees to enter into a planning obligation,
such obligations to be prepared or approved by the Council’s Planning Legal
Manager and signed by both the Council and the applicant before a Decision
Notice approving development is issued by the Council.
4.2
As detailed at paragraph 2.1 above, there are a number of new retail developments
currently being proposed at North Walsham. Holt and Wells-next-the-Sea; where there
might be an expectation that the impact of one or more of these proposals might be
deemed acceptable in planning terms, subject to mitigation measures being agreed. It is
suggested that at North Walsham and Holt there are already proposed programmes of
local town centre investment / enhancements as identified through the North Walsham
Leadership of Place and Holt Vision initiatives which could form the basis of any
negotiations with promoters of new retail developments in these towns, subject to further
reference back to key stakeholders ie – the Town Councils and Chambers of Trade in
each of these towns. In Wells-next-the-Sea, it is suggested that the Council holds
further discussions with the Town Council, Chamber of Trade and other stakeholders to
establish what kind of measures / investments might be supported in the town if it were
identified that any new retail investment would have a detrimental impact on the
established retail core of the town.
5.0
Financial Implications and Risks
5.1
The District Council is aware of a number of proposals for new retail developments in
the District, which might be considered to be acceptable through the formal planning
application process, subject to assessing the impact of the proposals and any mitigating
measures on established town centres in the District. Where a negative impact is
identified it might be possible to secure a financial contribution from the developer
through a Section 106 Obligation in order that the impact of such developments might be
reduced / mitigated.
42
Cabinet
14th May 2012
Overview & Scrutiny
23rd May 2012
Full Council
30th May 2012
5.2
At the present time the District Council does not have an approved framework or
procedure in place for negotiating or securing planning obligations associated with new
retail proposals. It is therefore important that the Council adopts an interim position in
respect of such proposals as a matter of urgency if it is to seek such contributions from
development proposals which are currently under consideration or are the subject of
pre-application consultation. Without an agreed framework with respect to the
negotiation of such obligations, the authority might face the risk of challenge regarding
any negotiations to secure such payments or fail to secure wider community benefits
from such developments.
5.3
In seeking to agree such a procedure the Council will need to be mindful of possible
perception of pre-determination. This is because some parties might perceive that
discussions held with local communities, about possible measures intended to reduce
the impact of new retail developments identified ahead of any impact being established,
could be interpreted in a way which suggests that the proposed developments are only
deemed to be acceptable provided that certain monies are paid. This risk should be
mitigated by any discussions held with local communities being clearly explained based
on the process outlined in this report.
5.4
Similarly, the Council will need to be careful not to raise expectations about the scale of
any contributions which might be secured for local projects beyond that which can be
directly and reasonably related to a proposed development. Again this risk can be
addressed through providing a clear explanation of the process as outlined in this report.
6.0
Sustainability
6.1
This report does raise some issues in relation to sustainable development, particularly
with respect to the viability and vitality of the district’s town centres. The report proposes
the consideration and development of policy which seeks to reduce or mitigate the
impact of new retail proposals on established town centres.
7.0
Equality and Diversity
7.1
This report does not raise any equality and diversity issues.
8.0
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
8.1
This report does not raise any issues relating to Crime and Disorder.
43
Agenda Item No_____10_______
CABBELL PARK
Summary:
The Council is the beneficiary of the land at Cabbell
Park under a Trust Deed dated 4 December 1922 which
is held as open space. A proposal for purchase and
development of the site from Medcentres Plc has been
put forward to the Council and is currently being
evaluated by the Property Services Team. This report
provides an update to members on the current position
and next steps.
Conclusions:
That the proposal from Medcentres Plc merits further
investigation and assessment and once this has been
completed Members should consider the matter again.
Before any further progress can be made in relation to
Cabbell Park the legal estate needs to be transferred
under the terms of the Trust Deed.
Recommendations
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
•
That Trustees be approached to transfer the
legal title of Cabbell Park to the Council.
•
That the Chief Executive be given delegated
authority to negotiate a way forward with any
interested parties and
•
That the matter returns to Cabinet for
consideration once an agreement has been
reached.
John Lee and K Johnson
Cromer/ Suffield Park
Contact Officer,
Emma Duncan Legal & Democratic Services Manager
telephone number and email: 01263 516043
emma.duncan@north-norfolk.gov.uk
44
1.
Introduction
1.1
Cabbell Park is currently occupied by Cromer Town Football Club (CTFC)
under a Trust Deed dated 4 December 1922.
1.2
Under the Trust Deed CTFC were entitled to occupy Cabbell Park until the
“appointed date”. The appointed date is 21 years after the death of the
survivor of the descendants of HM King Edward VII who were living on 4
December 1922.
1.3
The appointed date passed in January 2012 and CTFC are no longer
permitted under the terms of the Trust Deed to occupy the land as a football
club. The land reverts to the Trustees who must hold it on behalf of the
Council.
1.4
Since the Council became aware of the position it has attempted to broker an
arrangement whereby the needs of CTFC and other groups can be balanced
against the legal requirement to hold this land as open space.
1.5
This report outlines the legal position of the Council and the next steps to be
taken to broker a way forward which will meet the needs of all the parties
concerned.
2.
The Legal Position
2.1
The Council has taken Counsel’s Opinion on it’s position vis-à-vis Cabbell
Park which is as follows;
2.2
The appointed date has passed and CTFC are no longer permitted under the
terms of the Trust Deed to occupy the site.
2.3
On the appointed date the Council became the beneficial owner of the land.
2.4
The Trustees remain the legal owner for the time being but the Council can
request transfer of the legal title to itself at any time.
2.5
There is a requirement imposed by the terms of the Trust that the land at
Cabbell Park be used as “open space” whether the land is held for the benefit
of the Council or whether the Council holds the legal title.
3.
Development Proposals
3.1
The Council has received an offer to purchase part of the site from
Medcentres Plc so that a new surgery and associated parking can be
developed on the site.
3.2
The offer is for part of the site.
3.3
District Valuer advice is currently being sought on this proposal to ensure that
the Council is complying with it’s obligations on asset disposal.
3.4
However Medcentres Plc will not accept a transfer of the freehold for the site
from the Trustees and requires the freehold of the site to be conveyed from
the Council to themselves free from the open space obligation.
45
3.5
Land held as open space can be disposed of by the Council subject to the
requirement in Sections 122 and 123 of the Local Government Act 1972 i.e
advertisement of the proposal and consider any objections. The proposed
nature of the development on the land would NOT meet the open space
requirement imposed by the Trust.
3.6
As the Council need to ^consider^ any proposed objections to the proposed
disposal it is suggested that the Council do not enter into any contractual
arrangements to dispose of the land in advance of the site being advertised
for disposal.
4.
Next Steps
4.1
The Council is keen to find a way forward which meets the needs of all
parties concerned.
4.2
There have been discussions between interested parties and the Council as
to potential options for Cabbell Park.
4.3
The Chief Executive be authorised to continue these discussions to find a
solution which meets the needs involved and the matter be reported to back
to Cabinet in due course.
5.
Conclusion
That the Council should approach the Trustees to trigger the provisions under
the Trust Deed to transfer Cabbell Park to the Council.
The proposal by Medcentres Plc should be the subject of a further report to
Cabinet following the receipt of the advice from the District Valuer.
6.
Implications and Risks
As Medcentres Plc require the transfer of an unencumbered freehold site
from the Council it will be necessary to advertise the proposed disposal of
public open space at a future date. This may produce objections which the
Council will need to consider before making a final decision on the future of
Cabbell Park.
7.
Financial Implications and Risks
Cabbell Park will transfer to the Council, there may be an insurance cost
associated with this and any potential future maintenance costs of a public
open space.
There are also the legal costs associated with the Transfer and advertising for
disposal.
8.
Sustainability
None
46
9.
Equality and Diversity
None
10.
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
None
47
Cabinet
May 2012
Agenda Item No______11_______
Coastal Works Measured Term Contract
Summary
This report outlines the need for and procurement process
undertaken for Coastal defence small scale repair and maintenance
works for the coast under the Council’s Coast Projection
responsibilities.
Conclusions:
Officers consider that the Measured Term Contract is the best way to
procure small scale coastal works. A procurement exercise has been
undertaken and the successful tenderer is Renosteel Construction.
Subject to approval by Cabinet, the contract can commence on 1st
June 2012.
Recommendations:
That Cabinet agree to award the Coastal Measured Term Contract
to Renosteel Construction Ltd.
Cabinet member(s):
Contact Officer, telephone number,
and e-mail:
1.
Ward(s) affected: All coastal wards
Jill Fisher/ Brian J Farrow 01263 516193.
brian.farrow@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Background
1.1. The Council is the Coast Protection Authority for the coastline between Kelling Hard and
Cart Gap, Happisburgh. This stretch of coast is made up of some 34km of soft glacial cliffs and
sandy beaches which are subject to natural erosion from the sea and landslips from ground
water. About 8.5km of this area is fully projected by sea defences with other areas partially or
undefended. The total value of the NNDC defences is in the region of £130m.
1.2. Under the Coast Protection Act 1949 North Norfolk District Council has permissive powers
to undertake coast protection works on its frontage. The Council undertakes a large amount of
minor repair and maintenance of its coast protection structures on an on-going basis and the
revenue budget for this work is currently £320,000 per annum. Approximately £100,000 of this
budget is spent on small scale and reactive repair works. Examples of work include repairs to
sea walls, wooden groynes and revetments, beach access ramps, promenade railings and flood
gates.
1.3. Whilst larger projects and those projects where it is possible to obtain a fixed price are put
out to tender, there are a large number of small scale works and reactive work which are
required. The nature of this work is heavily dependent on variables such as weather and tide
conditions and on beach access so that a measured term contract is likely to represent a more
efficient way of working with better value for money.
1.4. A Measured Term Contract (MTC) is an arrangement whereby a Contractor undertakes to
carry out a variety of works (in this case coastal) over a period of time within a defined
geographical area and where the works are subsequently valued at rates contained in an
agreed priced schedule of rates.
1.5 It is therefore desirable to let a Measured Term Contract for three years (with an option to
extend a further 2 years), with a potential (but not assured) value of approximately £100,000.
48
Cabinet
May 2012
Measured Term Contracts are appropriate in cases where employers have a regular flow of
maintenance and minor works that can be carried out by a single contractor over a specified
period of time where the work is valued on the basis of an agreed schedule of rates.
2.
Works Procurement Process
2.1. An expression of interest for the Measured Term Contract was advertised in the Eastern
Daily Press and on the North Norfolk District Council website between the 5th and 19th
September 2010.The Pre Qualification Questionnaire process included financial, public liability
and health and safety checks and four contractors were short-listed. These four contractors
were then required to complete a series of four written costed exercises. Each exercise required
the contractor to define how he would undertake each piece of work recording any specific
difficulties as well as writing Method Statements, Risk Assessments and completing record
sheets detailing all of the plant labour and material costs. The exercise is provided in Appendix
D.
2.2 The purpose of the exercise was to enable the Contractor to demonstrate his knowledge
and awareness of coastal works to an informed audience and to indicate how the agreed
schedule of rates might typically translate into costs for individual jobs. Importantly it enabled
the client to interrogate the Contractor about his chosen solutions and costs.
2.2. Tenders applications were received from the six contractors shown below and the four
shortlisted contractors were interviewed by a panel of officers on 23rd April 2012.
1
2
3
4
5
6
C G Godfrey
Fisher Bullen
MacKinnon Construction
Reeve Property
Renosteel Construction
Thrower & Rutland
Withdrew from the Tender process
Failed to return tender by deadline
Shortlisted & interviewed
Shortlisted & interviewed
Shortlisted & interviewed
Shortlisted & interviewed
2.3. It is intended that the contract will commence on 1st June 2012. When let, the contract will
enable the Coastal Engineer who will be the Contract Administrator to commission small and
reactive works through the contract. The Property Programme and Project Manager will action
as CDM Coordinator for the contract and be responsible for ensuring the Health and Safety Plan
is adequate, and will undertake contract performance management producing an annual
performance report in March of each year.
3.
Tender Results
3.1. The results of the competitive process were scored in terms of cost, quality, methodology,
experience and health and safety. The scoring scheme and assessment grid is provided in
EXEMPT Appendix 1.
3.2. The contract is awarded on a schedule of rates, but in order to understand which
contractors would offer best value for money, it was necessary to test how each contractor
would price different types of work. For this reason the tenderers were asked to complete
examples of how they would undertake works and price them so that officers could be sure of
both estimated costs and methods of work as outlined in para 2.2. Having undertaken
assessment of the exercises and through the interview process, the contractor who performed
best in the appraisal process is Renosteel Construction.
3.3. The contract will be let as a standard JCT Measured Term Contract (2011). The Joint
Contracts Tribunal is a standard contract for the construction industry.
49
Cabinet
4.
May 2012
Finance
4.1. The Coastal Defence budget is £320,000 per annum. It is estimated that small works let
through the Measured Term Contract will be of the order of £100,000 per annum. This
represents a large programme of small scale repairs and reactive works. The larger repair
schemes are funded from the remainder of the budget.
5.
Sustainability
5.1 There are no sustainability issues in relation to letting this contract.
6.
Equality and Diversity
6.1 There are no equality and diversity issues or opportunities.
7.
Risks
7.1. It is considered that the Measured Term Contract will provide a more cost-effective method
of procuring small scale coastal works. Any individual works over the value of £7,000 will require
a variation instruction from the Contract Administrator.
7.2. The largest risk would be the failure of the contractor to perform against the contract.
However, the contract includes annual performance reviews which will include KPIs for standard
of work, response times, health and safety performance, contractor diligence and value for
money. There is a clause in the contract for either side to terminate the contract with an eight
week notice period.
8.
Crime and Disorder
8.1. There are no crime and disorder issues.
9
Conclusions
9.1. Officers consider that the Measured Term Contract is the best way to procure small scale
coastal works. A procurement exercise has been undertaken and the successful tenderer is
Renosteel Construction. Subject to approval by Cabinet, the contract can commence on 1st
June 2012.
50
Appendix D
Measured Term Contract - Exercises
Preface
You are invited to complete the attached Daywork Sheets, which are designed to show how
you will typically charge for your works on site for plant labour and material as well as your
knowledge of beach works. We realise that this is an exercise and that certain assumptions
will have to be made and this will be understood in any subsequent evaluation.
All timbers needed for all works will be supplied by NNDC but must be collected from our
depot at the Muckleburgh Military Museum at Weybourne. All debris arising form the works
must generate an audit trail to show it has been disposed of through a licensed tip.
You will find attached a set of plans of the coast with Groyne Numbers showing where you
can gain access to all of the examples attached and a set of tide tables. The plans will
indicate the actual work area but you must decide how best to access the works.
You are asked to use your experience of coastal works to give your best estimate of the
times required to undertake the works described for the plant and labour as well as estimate
the quantity and price of materials used.
In addition to completing each Daywork sheet please provide a written description of;
1. How and where you would gain & maintain access to the works
2. Describe any complications you might expect
3. Describe the factors which determine how you will go about the works
4. Provide basic Risk Assessments & Method Statements (RAMS) for each project
5. You are asked to estimate the plant, labour and materials needed for each task
6. Complete the daywork sheet.
We realise that this is an exercise and that the time spent on each piece of work will be very
dependent upon site conditions so we shall assume that the weather is generally clement
with winds in the SW force 3. It is dry with normal visibility at say 10 miles for all works. You
may choose your tides to suit the works and a set of tide tables are attached. All works will
be undertaken between 1st November and 28th February 2012.
Cost is always a prime consideration in every piece of work and needs to be balanced
against the benefits which will accrue. Whilst the decision to undertake the works will always
remain with the Council, the successful contractor will play a major role in controlling those
costs by completing the task in a safe but cost effective manner.
D/W Sheet 1 – Cromer Groynes 3 & 6
Access to Groyne 3 via the gangway & Groyne 6 off the end of the west promenade
To replace four planks on Groyne 3 and six planks on Groyne 6 in Cromer.
Groyne 3 is adjacent and east of Cromer Pier. Groyne 6 is the most westerly Cromer
Groyne. The ten planks will be European Oak 224 x100 mm of varying lengths up to 6
metres long. Planks are to be attached with a single 25 mm dia galvanised bolt (at each
end) with 50 mm square head nut and washer. The nut and head are to be stopped from
turning by using a shaped washer or by spikes being driven alongside one flat face.
The planks will be cut to fit with old bolts removed and new holes drilled as necessary.
Exercises Rev 1 20.03.2012 BJF
1
51
Appendix D
D/W Sheet 1 Cont’d – Cromer Groyne 3 (same week) Access via the Gangway Cromer
Whilst on site in Cromer you are also invited to replace the top mark to the beacon on
Groyne 3. Whilst the beacon support steel work and fixings are in good condition the top
mark has deteriorated. This Groyne only dries out on good spring tides. You will be supplied
with a new purpose made – pre painted top mark. Describe how you would complete this
task indicating the plant and labour required and your estimate of the time – assuming the
next top mark will fit and the tide allows you one or two hours per day maximum.
D/W Sheet 2
Mundesley – Groyne W6 Opposite Sandy Gulls Caravan Park - Access via Vale Road
Opposite Sandy Gulls Caravan Park there is a Groyne with a 400 mm dia outflow pipe
attached on the lee (east) side which drains the rainwater from the highway and outfalls at
the end of the groyne. The pipe is the responsibility of the Highways Authority but managed
by NNDC on their behalf.
The straps and stools securing the pipe have become badly corroded and you are asked to
refit and repair the pipe as necessary. The work will involve the manufacture of purpose
made steel straps as well as repairing cracks or abrasions in the pipe as necessary.
For this job you may assume the work will be completed in 2 weeks on site requiring 8
working days. You may assume that the council will supply any timber needed and that you
will supply 40 galvanised 25mm dia bolts @500 mm long incl nuts, bolts and washers as well
as 15 semi-circular steel straps at 100 mm wide by 12mm thick to fit a 400mm round pipe
with 100mm lugs twice drilled to take 25 mm round bolts to tie the pipe to the Groyne. You
will also describe and supply the materials to patch areas of the pipe which have been
abraded by broken straps leaving six small wear holes in different places in the pipe.
D/W Sheet 3
Mundesley - Lower Apron - west end - Pedestrian access via west promenade
The construction joint in a lower reinforced concrete apron which is underwater at high tide is
showing considerable signs of wear. You are required to make good the joint. In order to
achieve this you will be required to widen the joint to a full 500mm by 100mm deep for the full
20 metre length of the apron. It is mid-winter and the temperature is generally around 5°C
during daylight hours dropping to near freezing overnight.
You must make certain assumptions if the description is insufficient.
D/W Sheet 4
Happisburgh old Revetment – Access via new earth ramp Beach Road
Some fifty linear metres of four metres long steel sheet piles remain in the beach as the only
remnants of a failed revetment. The sheets are all still clutched in and are in reasonable
condition below beach level. However, the tops of the steel sheets have become pointed and
are considered to be an unacceptable hazard to public safety. You are asked to remove the
hazard and make the area safe for the public.
The steel sheets are protruding about 100 mm above the sand which is about 300 mm above
the clay level. Because the cliff toe line has eroded and moved landward over the years the
sheets are now only accessible for perhaps two hours on a good low water spring tide.
Describe the various options you might consider, what technique you would use and what
problems you would expect in order to make them safe.
Exercises Rev 1 20.03.2012 BJF
2
52