COSTESSEY TOWN COUNCIL
RESPONSE TO SNC CONSULTATION ON THE GOVERNANCE
REVIEW AT QUEEN’S HILLS
Notes from the NALC Guidance on Community Governance Reviews:
Criteria: the Act requires principal authorities to take account of certain criteria when
conducting a review, namely:
They are also advised to consider factors such as:
What impact proposed community governance arrangements might have on community
cohesion; and
Whether the size (area), population and boundaries proposed for local governance make
sense on the ground and contribute to the above criteria.
The guidance refers to people’s sense of place and their historic attachment to areas.
Overall, local council arrangements should lead to: improved local democracy; greater
community engagement; and better local service delivery.
CTC’S RESPONSE:
Identity – Sense of Place and Historic Links:





Historical integrity & identity – the land in the current parish of Costessey belonged to
the Stafford / Jerningham families, based at Costessey Hall since Tudor times when
Elizabeth I gave her name to wooded hills where she rode. Road signs in Costessey
remind drivers that this was the historic estate of Lord Stafford.
Geographic integrity - The River Tud valley unifies New and Old Costessey, including
Queens Hills, in terms of landscape and as a wildlife corridor. It is a significant natural
feature and the TC has been instrumental in promoting the protection and enhancement
of the whole of the river valley through the establishment of the Friends of the Tud
Valley.
Holistic development: The development was always known as “Land at West Costessey,
north of the River Tud” (or West Costessey for short). Queen’s Hills was a geographical
name on the OS map adopted by the house developers for marketing purposes. From
the beginning the Queen’s Hills development was always seen as an integral part of
Costessey. Also, the link to Ringland Lane as well as the Dereham Road reinforces the
idea of joining the new development to the rest of its community
Access to the development is via roads which, even if Queen’s Hills became a separate
parish, would remain in Costessey
Community Cohesion: Children attend schools (eg St Augustine’s and Ormiston Victory
Academy) in other parts of Costessey and so have forged friendship bonds with children
in other parts of the parish. Residents are catered for by the Roundwell Surgery at the
junction of Dereham Road and Longwater Lane. A proposed bus service would link
West End / Old Costessey with the new development and provide an alternative route
for public transport off Queen’s Hills. Another, separate parish council for QH in the Old
Costessey Ward would be divisive
1
CTC COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE RESPONSE

The area suggested is very limited in scope; it is not as large in area as other parishes
and not likely to be a viable entity for a new parish.
Representation – effective & convenient governance:



Residents of Queen’s Hills have had representation at Town (parish) & District level
from the start. This was not an accident, but by design, as the existing parish council
lobbied for an extra councillor due to rising population on the development. CPC/CTC
particularly co-opted residents living on Queen’s Hills to the Parish/Town Council (3
parish councillors =18% and 2 town/parish councillors = 12%) and ensured that QH
residents were nominated to stand for election at District level. Queen’s Hills residents
have been elected to CTC at ordinary elections.
The existing polling area might have to be adjusted to include all the dwellings in the
new development. Consideration should be given as to whether Model Farm should be
included in an amended polling district/boundary.
Many small parishes have difficulty in attracting volunteers to stand as parish
councillors. Indeed, at the Town Council elections in May, councillors were elected
unopposed as the number of candidates equalled the number of vacancies. A new
parish might have difficulty in filling the vacancies.
Investment by Costessey TC in the Queen’s Hill area - Better Local Service
Delivery:









CTC persuaded the Planning Authority (SNC) to allow it to build West Costessey Hall
based on its track record of delivering the Costessey Centre; CTC received the full
£675,000 (raised from £500k due to long delays by developers) in S106 monies on
producing invoices from John Youngs. These were certified by our Quantity Surveyor
via our contract administrators & architects Vincent & Gorbing.
CTC’s then Deputy Clerk and County Councillor’s efforts to obtain funding resulted in
CTC receiving a grant from SNC for £15,009.26 and also a grant from Norfolk County
Council for £100,000.00
The balance of the costs of West Costessey Hall has come from (and as CTC is still
paying for the hall, continues to come from) the Reserves, which were built up from the
sale of the Youth Centre in New Costessey and the Parish Rooms in Old Costessey and
from setting aside Council tax collected from ALL Costessey residents over the years.
The original plans drawn up by the developers for West Costessey Hall were totally
inadequate & the parish council worked hard in conjunction with its architects to design
a building which was fit for purpose, enhanced the QH development, would be a credit
to the community and a pleasure to use
CTC had to spend an extra £10,000 on legal fees for a licence to clear the site, a licence
to build and a licence to occupy the site as the land on which the hall is built is still
owned by the developers.
West Costessey Hall is run as a service to the community (as are the other two halls)
They are all subsidised by Council Tax payers.
CTC has lobbied over the last 12 years to improve the access to the development,
including a second access onto the A47, the dedicated left-turn slip road by NEXT Plc,
the widening of Dereham Road and the improvement of the Longwater Interchange
CTC lobbied the CoD and play park designers to upgrade the Eastern & Western play
areas, otherwise they would have been similar to the Dene and Cavalry Court play
areas with knee high wooden fences and no play equipment to speak of. Unfortunately
the developers had a ceiling on their budget and would not upgrade the Dene & Cavalry
Court to the same standard.
CTC has spent many hours in meetings re: the new hall, the play area, the country park
(in conjunction with the Costessey-based Friends of the Tud Valley) and the sports
pitches fighting for the best outcomes and common-sense solutions to the issues raised
2
CTC COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE RESPONSE



Sports Pitches - proposed football pitches. CTC has lobbied and are continuing to lobby
for the correct drainage and surfacing. Costessey Sports Club have a first claim on the
use of the pitches due to their business plan attracting funding.
Country Park – CTC has raised the issue of accessibility on the paths, queried their
DDA compliance (as there are steps) and the dangers of lagoon near the proposed
sports pitches
Youth Service – the QUBE youth worker is paid for by CTC and has rooms at WCH free
of charge. A new Council would have to take them on or allow the service to be
dropped to the detriment of QH residents (Budget 2015-16: £3,000)
Transfer of Public Services to a new parish:





Hirer customer service – transfer of procedures & systems. This would be timeconsuming and costly
Burials – QH residents are Costessey residents and able to be buried in LWL Cemetery
at a standard rate. Non-Costessey residents are charged three times the standard rate
– QH residents would cease to be Costessey residents for this purpose
Allotments - these are provided by the Parochial Charity to residents of Costessey, with
CTC providing admin & grounds staff support. CTC has negotiated with developers for
more allotments on the Lodge Farm development for residents. QH residents would not
necessarily be eligible (as the Parochial Charity is for the relief of the poor of Costessey)
or they might go to the back of the queue
Dog poo bins - 5 bins emptied @ £63.30 per bin per year (2015-16) = £316.30 + VAT
Bus Shelter cleaning - There will be at least 3 new bus shelters provided by the
developers, but there is no S106 money for cleaning/maintenance. CTC’s existing bus
shelters are included in the general hall cleaning contract.
Set-up & Handover costs: (IF a new parish were formed)







Finance – central government money is for creating new parishes in unparished areas
– eg Norwich and Gt Yarmouth, not where there is already representation
Accounts - separation of monies from CTC’s accounts – this would be complex and time
consuming
Training for new Clerk & Councillors needed (CiLCA for Clerk and on-going Norfolk ALC
courses for Councillors
IT computer system at WCH are an integral part of CTC IT system based at CC – new
IT systems would need to be set up and the finances and admin separated – new
Council would have to bear the cost
Costessey Sports Club Business Plan included expansion to cater for Queen’s Hills
residents and granted money for the Costessey Centre on that basis - as Costessey
Sports members play at various grounds in Costessey depending on the team’s age –
CTC Clerk still has to fill in forms for 30 years to Norfolk Football Foundation – How
would CTC be compensated or the terms of the agreement be resolved/adjusted?
(£222,591)
Set-up Admin costs possibly higher than anticipated: eg insurance, H&S systems set-up,
transfer of maintenance contracts
Equipment costs – both admin & grounds equipment
Staffing & Contracts with other bodies:


Staffing – IF a new parish were formed a Qualified Clerk would be needed and Grounds
Staff, as well as possible transfer of staff under TUPE legislation
Existing contracts with cleaners/caretakers/licensee and agency grass cutting
arrangement with Norfolk CC would need to be honoured/accommodated/re-negotiated
IF a new parish were formed
3
CTC COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE RESPONSE

Maintenance contracts with equipment suppliers: eg: building maintenance contracts
would have to be set up for West Costessey Hall, plus grounds equipment annual
maintenance IF a new parish were formed
Revenue costs:





Draft Budget for 2019-20 would have to be projected from CTC’s 2015-16 figures: Band
D rate of £110.41 on a tax base of 4599. What would be the tax base of a new parish IF
a new parish were formed?
West Costessey Hall Revenue Costs: 2015-16 Budgeted £37,800 with income projected
at £12,500
Maintenance costs for WCH grounds & garden, car park and boundary edges etc will be
on-going, but have not yet been calculated.
Ongoing maintenance & support services costs:
Other costs & separation of precept/precept support grant/invoices/accounts etc would
need to be considered IF a new parish were formed
Asset transfer:




West Costessey Hall: This was funded from the sale of the Youth Centre in New
Costessey & The Parish Rooms in Old Costessey as well as hundreds of thousands of
pounds from CTC’s Reserves – final retention payment is still due. Clerk’s time/legal
fees/contract with Architects and Main Contractor for snagging/contents - costs to cover
architects’ fees, legal fees, other professional fees, land clearance, construction, fit out,
staff time over the past 10 years
Dog poo bins: 5 bins emptied @ £63.30 per bin per year (2015-16) = £316.30 + VAT
Bus Shelters: 3 bus shelters on SAM & Kestrel Avenue (lay-over and by school).
Play areas: presuming they have been taken on by CTC before 2019
Misunderstandings:





Residents appear to believe that there is a pot of money which they will inherit if they
become a new parish council. (However, Government money is for creating parishes in
un-parished areas)
Residents also seem to believe that they are entitled to S106 monies, but S106 monies
which CTC received were spent on West Costessey Hall (plus further grants and
hundreds of thousands of pounds from CTC’s reserves). CTC could only claim the 106
money back from SNC when it produced the invoices which it paid.
No more S106 or CIL monies are likely to be attached to Queen’s Hills as the
development is already planned, and no new development is expected beyond what has
been agreed.
Residents also seem to believe that they will have exclusively Queen’s Hills residents on
a new parish council, but the law states that councillors must live within 3 miles of a
parish boundary, so Costessey, Easton, Bawburgh, Ringland, Drayton, Taverham,
Bowthorpe and Hellesdon residents could be voted on to a new QH parish council.
This review does not alter the District or County boundaries, so unless SNC alter those
in their regular upcoming review the area will still have the same representation at
District and County level.
4
CTC COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE RESPONSE
CONCLUSIONS:
1 Costessey TC DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT RESIDENTS WOULD BE BETTER
SERVED BY SETTING UP A SEPARATE PARISH, given the costs and time
involved, or the geographical unity of the area.
2 Costessey TC RECOMMENDS that the outer boundaries of the existing
Costessey parish SHOULD NOT be altered
3 Costessey TC RECOMMENDS that the Queen’s Hills area of Costessey be made
into a separate ward within the jurisdiction of Costessey Town Council, with
representation by extra councillors as per the Government’s recommendations &
guidance on population/electorate figures. Given the likely electorate of up to
4,000 at Queen’s Hills, the number of councillors should be recalculated along
with an adjustment to the Old Costessey Ward for the extra electors who will
reside on the Lodge Farm developments. It is possible that by 2019 the
electorate will have risen so that Costessey is entitled to 18, 19 or even 20
Councillors for the entire parish/town. This would satisfy the guidelines which
state that local council arrangements should lead to improved local democracy.
4 Costessey TC RECOMMENDS that any changes should come into force at the
ordinary elections in 2019, especially if ward boundary adjustments are made.
This will allow existing councillors to complete their term of office, as well as be
cost effective in not having to hold extra elections before 2019.
5 Costessey TC RECOMMENDS that when the review of County Council
boundaries is undertaken there should be NO CHANGE in the representation at
County Council level
6 Costessey TC RECOMMENDS that the name of a new ward should be “West
Costessey”
5
CTC COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE RESPONSE