Agenda and minutes

After an initial welcome and the reading of the emergency evacuation procedure by the presiding Chairman, the Council will be asked to approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 22 January 2019, a copy of which is circulated with this agenda.

The Chairman of the Council, Mrs E Hamilton (West Wittering), welcomed Chichester District Council (CDC) members and officers, the public and media representatives, to the final Council meeting of the 2015-2019 administration before the CDC elections on Thursday 2 May 2019. The next meeting would be the Annual Council on Tuesday 21 May 2019. The size of the Council would be reducing at those elections from 48 to 36 members and for that reason, and also retirements and the vagaries of elections, some members present would not be returning. She explained the emergency evacuation procedure.

The Council formally received the minutes of its previous meeting on Tuesday 22 January 2019, a copy of which had been circulated with the agenda for this meeting.

There were no proposed changes to the minutes. 

The Chairman sought and obtained the Council’s approval for her to sign and date the minutes as a correct record.   

Decision

The Council voted unanimously on a show of hands to make the resolution below.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting of the Council on Tuesday 22 January 2019 be approved as a correct record.

The Chairman then duly signed and dated as a correct record the final (twenty-fourth) page of the official version of the aforesaid minutes.

[Note This para and paras 70 to 84 below summarise the consideration of and conclusion to agenda items 1 to 16 inclusive but for full details of the matters summarised hereunder (save for the exempt item 16) reference should be made to the audio recording facility via the link below:

http://chichester.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=132&MId=923&Ver=4 ]

[Note Hereafter in these minutes Chichester District Council is denoted by CDC]

The presiding Chairman will announce any late including urgent items which are to be dealt with under Late Items.

There were no late including urgent items for consideration at this meeting.

Members and officers are reminded to make any declarations of disclosable pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interests they may have in respect of matters on the agenda for this meeting.

Declarations of interests were made by eight members as follows:

·       Mr P Budge (Chichester North) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 7 (City Centre Upgrade of CCTV) as a member of Chichester City Council.

·       Mr J Connor (Selsey North) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Chichester Harbour Management Plan as a Chichester District Council appointed member of Chichester Harbour Conservancy.

·       Mr A Moss (Fishbourne) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Chichester Harbour Management Plan as a Chichester District Council appointed deputy member of Chichester Harbour Conservancy.

·       Dr K O’Kelly (Rogate) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 6 Budget Spending Plans 2019-2020 as a member of West Sussex County Council.

·       Mr S Oakley (Tangmere) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 11 Consideration of Consultation Responses and Modifications to the District Council’s Infrastructure Business Plan as a member of West Sussex County Council.

·       Mrs P Plant (Bosham) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Chichester Harbour Management Plan as a Chichester District Council appointed deputy member of Chichester Harbour Conservancy.

·       Mr R Plowman (Chichester West) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 7 (City Centre Upgrade of CCTV) as a member of Chichester City Council.

·       Mr R Plowman (Chichester West) declared a personal interest in respect of exempt agenda item 16 (Southern Gateway) as a director of Gateway + and stated that he would refrain from participating in the debate or decision. 

·       Mrs L C Purnell (Selsey North) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 11 Consideration of Consultation Responses and Modifications to the District Council’s Infrastructure Business Plan as a member of West Sussex County Council.

Apologies for absence will be notified at this point.

The presiding Chairman will make any specific announcements.

The Chairman read out the names of the following six members, each of whom had submitted apologies for absence:

Mr G Barrett (West Wittering), Mr R Barrow (Selsey South), Mrs J Duncton (Petworth), Mr M Dunn (Westbourne), Mr J W Elliott (Selsey South) and Mr N Galloway (Chichester South).

The Chairman made four specific announcements as follows:

·       The problems members had been experiencing with receiving and reading e-mails via their mobile devices was being addressed by CDC’s IT department and in the meantime use should be made of the VPN token to access e-mails.

·       On Monday 4 March 2019 she had attended the formal opening of the six new commercial units at Ravenna Point in Terminus Road Chichester. She commended the attractive design, facilities and rents. There were still a couple of units available and members would do well to make that known.

·       There would a member briefing on the Chichester Local Plan Review and the Community Infrastructure Levy at 13:00 on Wednesday 6 March 2019.

·       To each member who would not be standing again in the forthcoming district elections great gratitude was owed for the service and commitment which they had given to CDC, their communities and constituents.  

In accordance with Chichester District Council’s public questions scheme and with reference to standing order 6 in Part 4 A and section 5.6 in Part 5 of the Chichester District Council Constitution, consideration will be given at this point in the meeting to questions which have been submitted by members of the public in writing by 12.00 on the previous working day. The time allocated for public question time is subject to the Chairman’s discretion to extend the period for each member of the public (five minutes) or the total time for public questions (15 minutes).

The Chairman stated that no public questions had been received for this meeting.

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 23 to 30 of the agenda and its four appendices considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 5 February 2019.

The following recommendations were made by the Cabinet to the Council:

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

That:

a)    That a net budget requirement of £13,829,600 for 2019-20 be approved.

b)    That Council tax be increased by £5 from £155.81 to £160.81 for a band D equivalent in 2019-2020.

c)     That the Investment Opportunities Reserve be increased by £532,500.

d)    The capital programme, including the asset renewal programme (appendix 1c and 1d to the agenda report) be approved.

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 5 February 2019, as set out on pages 23 to 30 of the agenda report and its four appendices on pages 1 to 57 of the main agenda supplement for that meeting. 

That recommendation had been revised and the text thereof and the Council Tax Resolution report were set out in the agenda supplement published for this Council meeting.

A sheet had been circulated within the Council Chamber shortly before the start of this meeting with an amendment to recommendation 6 (1) iv. in the agenda supplement which would be proposed by Mr A Moss (Fishbourne and Leader of the Opposition) namely:

‘That recommendation 6 (1) iv. be replaced with:

6 (1) iv. The £532,500 previously proposed for the Investment Opportunity Reserve be instead held in an earmarked reserve and the Cabinet is tasked with consideration of the following initiatives to be funded from that reserve:

Amendment A

(A) The appointment of a Climate Emergency Officer on a three-year fixed term contract to support Chichester District Council in the development of policies on climate change, the protection of biodiversity and to identify specific actions for Chichester District Council to undertake, with the maximum employment costs to be £150,000.

Amendment B

(B) Evening parking to be free of charge in Northgate and New Park Centre car parks for an initial fixed term of three years, with an estimated loss in revenue to Chichester District Council of £115,000 per year.

Amendment C

(C) Any remaining balance to be placed in the Investment Opportunity Reserve account.’

The Chairman pointed out that, as stated in the agenda and the agenda supplement, the revised recommendation and any proposed amendments thereto were required to be decided by a recorded vote.

Mr A Moss (Fishbourne) intimated that he would propose the aforesaid amendments when invited to do so by the Chairman.

Mr P Wilding (Cabinet Member for Corporate Services) formally moved the Cabinet’s revised recommendation and this was seconded by Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place).

Mr P Wilding presented and commended the Cabinet’s revised recommendation, which followed from the Council’s approval at its last meeting of the Financial Strategy and Plan 2019-2020. He summarised (a) the contents of the Cabinet report, which detailed the budget spending plans of each of Cabinet portfolio - those plans and the various funding streams underpinned the balanced budget which was before the Council for approval and (b) the Council Tax Resolution report, which detailed the basis for setting the council tax having regard to the three precepts required. The overall proposed council tax by band for each parish, broken down by precepting authority, was in appendix B to the latter report. He pointed out that for a band D property the annual CDC council tax was £160.81, which was less than the Police and Crime Commissioner and West Sussex County Council precepts.

He commented on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 74.

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 31 to 33 of the agenda and its appendix considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 5 February 2019.

The following recommendations were made by the Cabinet to the Council:

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

That the release of £165,000 from reserves be approved.

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 5 February 2019, as set out on pages 31 to 33 of the agenda report and its appendix on pages 59 to 65 of the main agenda supplement for that meeting. 

Mrs E Lintill (Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Community Services) formally moved the Cabinet’s recommendation and this was seconded by Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place).

Mrs Lintill presented the Cabinet’s recommendation. At its meeting on Tuesday 5 February 2019 the Cabinet had approved a project initiation document (PID) to combine the Asset Renewal Programme for CCTV funding for the six-year period 2017-2023 to enable an upgrade of 11 city centre cameras and the reinstatement of two cameras in the Avenue de Chartres car park. The Council’s approval for the release of £165,000 from reserves to achieve the PID’s objective was sought. She explained the rationale for this with reference to sections 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9 of the report.

During the debate members commended the public security benefits and improved quality of CCTV in the city centre and the advantages of having more and better quality cameras.

Mrs Lintill, Mr Dignum and Mrs P Bushby (Divisional Manager Communities) replied to members’ questions and comments on various points (details in the audio recording) with regard to (a) financial contributions by Chichester City Council to the cost of cameras; (b) the availability of an annual report on the use of CCTV cameras in investigations, their operational performance and outcomes generally (details would be supplied to members in a written response after this meeting*); (c) the upgrading of CCTV cameras in rural areas: with finite funding, a higher number of incidents in the city centre compared with rural areas and less aged cameras, the need was not as great as for city centre cameras but the situation was kept under review; and (d) the number, age and allocation of cameras across the district (*details of the age and location of cameras would be provided in a written response after this meeting).

[*Note A written response to the points in (b) and (d) was circulated to members by e-mail on Thursday 21 March 2019]  

Decision

On a show of hands the members voted in favour of the Cabinet’s recommendation with no votes against and no abstentions. 

RESOLVED

That the release of £165,000 from reserves be approved.

[Note At the end of this item there was a short adjournment between 15:45 and 15:54]

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 35 to 39 of the agenda and its six appendices considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 5 February 2019.

The following recommendations were made by the Cabinet to the Council:

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

a)    That the Treasury Management Policy Statement, the Treasury ManagementStrategy Statement and Investment Strategy for 2019-20, incorporating the temporary limits established in appendix 6 be approved.

b)    That the Chichester District Council Capital Strategy for 2019-20 to 2023-24be approved.

c)     That the prudential indicators and limits for 2019-20 included in appendix 2be approved.

d)    That the investigation by officers whether to set an indicator to measure theproportionality of commercial income generated by Chichester District Council, and if so, to recommend a suitable indicator for inclusion in the Chichester District Council’s 2020-21 Treasury Strategy be approved.

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 5 February 2019, as set out on pages 35 to 39 of the agenda report and its six appendices on pages 67 to 124 of the main agenda supplement for that meeting. 

Mr P Wilding (Cabinet Member for Corporate Services) formally moved the Cabinet’s recommendation and this was seconded by Mrs E Lintill (Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Community Services).

Mr Wilding presented the Cabinet’s recommendation. The Council was required to approve a treasury management strategy (TMS) each year. The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) had updated the framework within which CDC conducted treasury management and other investing activities, in order to impose a greater focus on risk management and governance. The key changes were (a) treasury management now covered investments made for service and/or commercial reasons and (b) there was a requirement to publish a capital strategy to show how capital expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contributed to the provision of local services and how associated risk was managed by councils. The main focus of CDC’s treasury operation in the next year would be to evaluate and seek to make further prudent investments in external pooled funds. Accordingly the ceiling for external pooled funds in which CDC could invest had been increased from £20m to £35m, thereby enabling up to £17m further investment with a potential annual income revenue generation of £500,000; this could be extremely valuable for maintaining services in uncertain times. Whilst the TMS confirmed CDC’s intention to remain debt free, it proposed an increase in operational and authorised limits for external debt to ensure that sufficient liquidity was available to cover for contingencies such as delayed taxation receipts. The TMS listed approved lenders and safeguards applied. Counterparty limits had been increased. CDC’s Corporate Governance and Audit Committee had reviewed the TMS and made a recommendation relating to the setting of a maximum target level of commercial income. Appendix 6 addressed the potential impact of the European Union Withdrawal Bill. 

The focus of a short discussion was how the investment protocol took into account not only the need for a sound financial basis but also achieving where possible local, social benefits. The making of Brexit contingency plans was commended.

Decision

On a show of hands the members voted in favour of the Cabinet’s recommendation with no votes against and no abstentions. 

RESOLVED

(1)  That the Treasury Management Policy Statement, the Treasury ManagementStrategy Statement and Investment Strategy for 2019-2020, incorporating thetemporary limits established in appendix 6 be approved.

(2)  That the Chichester District Council Capital Strategy for 2019-2020 to 2023-2024be approved.

(3)  That the prudential indicators and limits for 2019-2020 included in appendix 2be approved.

(4)  That the investigation by officers whether to set an indicator to measure theproportionality of commercial income generated by Chichester DistrictCouncil, and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 25 to 27 of the agenda considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 5 March 2019.

The report contains the following recommendation for the Cabinet to make to the Council:

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

That the drawdown of Asset Replacement Funding (ARP) (£375,000) allocated for the replacement of ICT Infrastructure (SAN, Oracle) be approved.

[Note The Chairman directed that this matter, which was listed as item 12 in the agenda, should immediately precede item 9, Business Continuity Infrastructure (minute 78 below) because a decision with respect to this item was logically prior to determining that item and the minutes reflect this change in the order of business]  

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 5 March 2019 as set out on pages 25 to 27 of the agenda report and its appendix for that meeting. 

Mr P Wilding (Cabinet Member for Corporate Services) formally moved the Cabinet’s recommendation and this was seconded by Mrs E Lintill (Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Community Services).

Mr Wilding presented the Cabinet’s recommendation to approve the drawdown of £375,500 funding from the Asset Replacement Programme allocated for ICT infrastructure replacement. Core elements of CDC’s IT infrastructure would require end-of-life replacement during the ensuing twelve months. The continued use of such equipment posed the risk of the withdrawal of product maintenance and support. Periodic replacement afforded the opportunity for new technology, lower costs and benefits from economies of scale. The proposal was to combine both the Infrastructure Replacement Programme and the Business Continuity Infrastructure project (agenda item 9 for this meeting) to maximise project resources and consolidate benefits.

Mr Wilding answered a question by Mr F Hobbs (Easebourne) about the officers’ preference for owning rather than licensing the equipment.

Decision

On a show of hands the members voted in favour of the Cabinet’s recommendation with no votes against and no abstentions. 

RESOLVED

That the drawdown of Asset Replacement funding (£375,000) allocated for the replacement of ICT Infrastructure (SAN, Oracle) be approved.

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 13 to 16 of the agenda and its appendix considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 5 March 2019.

The report contains the following recommendation for the Cabinet to make to the Council:

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

a)    That funding be approved for the creation of the duplicate server facility.

b)    That new capital funding of £129,800 be approved from reserves to supplement the ICT Asset Replacement Programme funding.

[Note The Chairman directed that this matter, which was listed as item 9 in the agenda, should be immediately preceded by item 12, ICT Infrastructure Replacement Programme (minute 77 above) because a decision with respect to that item was logically prior to determining this item and the minutes reflect this change in the order of business]  

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 5 March 2019 as set out on pages 13 to 16 of the agenda report and its appendix on pages 1 to 10 of the agenda supplement for that meeting. 

Mr P Wilding (Cabinet Member for Corporate Services) formally moved the Cabinet’s recommendation and this was seconded by Mrs E Lintill (Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Community Services).

Mr Wilding presented the Cabinet’s recommendation. CDC was becoming increasingly reliant on its IT systems both on its premises and remotely for the provision of services.  Major disruption to the main IT environment at East Pallant House (EPH) could take at least ten weeks to replace IT servers and systems and re-establish the service, which was an unacceptable risk. Having discounted alternative options, it was proposed to create a disaster recovery capability by building a mirrored server site at the Westhampnett Depot and linking it to EPH via the new gigabit local area network. This would fundamentally improve CDC’s ability to resume operations and provide services following such a major disruption. It would also permit daily disk back-up rather than the current weekly tape back-up, which would reduce the maximum loss of data to one day. The Westhampnett site would have exactly the same server and storage as at EPH, an uninterruptible power supply, new back-up generator and a server room with optimal specifications. It would be a cold site ie the equipment would be powered up only when needed, which avoided the need to duplicate costly software licenses. The project would be delivered internally and completed by November 2019. 

Mr Wilding, Mr J Mildred (Divisional Manager Business Support) and Mr A Forward (ICT Manager) answered members’ questions and comments on points of detail with respect to (a) the reasons for choosing the Westhampnett Depot rather than a centre in the north of the district; (b) protection against flooding risk and cyber-attacks; (c) the spare capacity at the Depot for offering Arun District Council a back-up solution to replace its current arrangement with West Sussex County Council; and (d) the funding would cover the cost of purchasing new equipment.

Members expressed their support for the project.  

Decision

On a show of hands the members voted in favour of the Cabinet’s recommendation with no votes against and no abstentions. 

RESOLVED

(1)  That funding be approved for the creation of the duplicate server facility.

(2)  That new capital funding of £129,800 be approved from reserves to supplement the ICT Asset Replacement Programme funding.

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 17 to 19 of the agenda and its appendix considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 5 March 2019.

The report contains the following recommendation for the Cabinet to make to the Council:

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

That the Chichester Harbour Management Plan 2019-2014 with the exception of the Planning Principles in Section 3 be adopted.

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 5 March 2019 as set out on pages 17 to 19 of the agenda report for that meeting (its appendix, which contained the draft Chichester Harbour Management Plan, was available to view only electronically). 

Mr J Connor (Cabinet Member for Environment Services) formally moved the Cabinet’s recommendation and this was seconded by Mrs E Lintill (Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Community Services).

Mr Connor presented the Cabinet’s recommendation. He emphasised the multi-faceted importance of the Chichester Harbour AONB to the district’s residents and visitors. There was a statutory duty to prepare every five years a management plan for the AONB, which had been undertaken by CDC, Chichester Harbour Conservancy (CHC) as the lead authority, Havant Borough Council, Hampshire County Council and West Sussex County Council. At the heart of the draft plan in section 2 were the policies for the protection of the AONB and the actions for each of the partners. Section 3 set out the planning principles which would guide the CHC’s responses to planning applications within and adjacent to the AONB. In view of its role as the local planning authority (LPA), CDC would not be adopting the planning principles in section 3 of the draft management plan.   

Mr Connor and Mr A Frost (Director of Planning and Environment) answered questions by Mr A Moss (Fishbourne) and Mr S Oakley (Tangmere) with respect to the rationale for not adopting the planning principles in section 3 of the draft document and how CDC as the LPA would treat those principles in determining planning applications for sites within the AONB.  

Decision

On a show of hands the members voted in favour of the Cabinet’s recommendation with no votes against and no abstentions. 

RESOLVED

That the Chichester Harbour Management Plan 2019-2024, with the exception of the planning principles in section 3, be adopted.

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 21 to 24 of the agenda and its two appendices considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 5 March 2019.

The report contains the following recommendations for the Cabinet to make to the Council:

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

a)    That the proposed responses to the representations received and subsequent modifications to the Infrastructure Business Plan (IBP) as set out in Appendix 1 be approved.

b)    That the amended IBP including CIL Spending Plan attached as Appendix 2 be approved.

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 5 March 2019 as set out on pages 21 to 24 of the agenda report and appendix 1 and an extract of appendix 2 on pages 11 to 33 of the agenda supplement for that meeting. The entirety of the Infrastructure Business Plan (IBP) in appendix 2 was available to view only electronically.

Mrs S Taylor (Cabinet Member for Planning Services) formally moved the Cabinet’s recommendation and this was seconded by Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place).

Mrs Taylor presented the Cabinet’s recommendation. The report and appendix 1 set out the representations received as a result of the IBP consultation and suggested modifications to the IBP. The Council was requested to approve the IBP and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) spending plan in appendix 2. The Chichester Growth Board, and CDC’s Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel had considered the proposed responses to the representations received and their views were reflected in the two appendices. Most of the consultation responses related to: re-phasing of projects; updates to the IBP text; projects to be deleted as they had been delivered or were no longer required; updated details for the projects; and new projects to be added. Further information was expected from West Sussex County Council (WSCC) about which schools would be expanded and more accurate costings would be provided in due course. WSCC had requested that IBP/329: primary school at Graylingwell should be removed from the IBP as the project was not required as the development had not yielded the expected number of school children. WSCC requested that the Chichester Road Space Audit projects were moved from 2019-2020 to 2020-20/21. Should a design for a city-wide parking management plan be approved, WSCC had proposed that the costs of implementation (cost of signs and lines) should be part-funded by WSCC, as some of the issues were historic. The costs would be assessed once an initial design had been completed. The overall cost estimate for the work was £750,000 as identified in IBP/654, IBP/655 and IBP/665. Any additional enforcement costs associated with the city-wide plan would be met by WSCC. The effect of this change to the IBP CIL Spending Plan and the adjustments relating to the amount of CIL expected to be collected in relation to the housing trajectory January 2019 were shown in appendix 2.

Mr S Oakley (Tangmere) commented on various aspects of the IBP and CIL Spending Plan: the questionable utility of the real time passenger information system; the difficulty in planning for the need for new schools; and the road space audit.

Mr Oakley also commended the excellent work undertaken by Mrs K Dower (Principal Planning Officer) in overseeing the IBP, which was a very important collation of data about infrastructure provision and priorities, the funding and design and delivery principles.

Mrs Taylor concurred with Mr Oakley’s commendation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

In accordance with standing order 14.11 of Chichester District Council’s Constitution, this item is allocated a maximum duration of 40 minutes.

The questions to the executive asked by members and the responses given were as follows:

Question: Update on increase in police numbers

Mrs C Apel (Chichester West) referred to the appalling increase in knife-crime incidents and asked for an update on the increase in police numbers promised by the Police and Crime Commissioner for Sussex and the likely number of extra officers.

Response

Mrs E Lintill (Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Community Services) said that this was complicated to answer. The police precept levied in the 2018-2019 council tax demand included an extra 200 police officers. However, the length of training for new recruits, the drop-out rate and the actual pass rate meant that that increase would not be quickly attained.

Mrs P Dignum (Chichester South), who was the chairman of CDC’s Community Safety Review Task and Finish Group (CSR TFG) and a member of its Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC), said that Chief Inspector Kris Ottery of Sussex Police had recently given evidence to the CSR TFG on a range of matters including how Sussex Police was dealing with the ever greater demands on its resources but with fewer officers. The CSR TFG’s report would be considered by the OSC at its meeting on Tuesday 12 March 2019. 

Question: Prosecution for removal of trees and hedgerows

Mr J Brown (Southbourne) referred to several incidents in his ward of trees and hedgerows being removed, often in breach of planning control. He wished to know the current position and about replanting and prosecuting in such cases. 

Response

On behalf of the executive Mr A Frost (Director of Planning and Environment) said that a decision to prosecute would depend on the facts of the case. He offered to meet with Mr Brown to discuss any particular cases. 

Question: Ecological protection and need for a standard planning condition to regulate planting of hedgerows

Mr S Oakley (Tangmere) asked about (a) legislative protection of sites with ecological value which had been granted planning permission and (b) the need for a standard planning condition to regulate the planting of hedgerows and the prohibition of their removal without approval of the local planning authority.

Response

On behalf of the executive Mr A Frost (Director of Planning and Environment) said that (a) there were powers available to the local planning authority under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and (b) it would be unreasonable to impose a planting condition of indefinite duration.

Mrs L C Purnell (Selsey North) said that landowners and developers could and did remove hedgerows etc before the grant of planning permission and the enforcement sanctions were not sufficiently strong. There was a clear need for powers and inducements to prevent this unilateral action.

Mr J Brown (Southbourne) agreed with Mrs Purnell and said that it would help if CDC could undertake a few successful prosecutions.

Mr Potter (Boxgrove) commented that the responsibility for tree removal lay ultimately with the tree surgeon engaged by the developer or landowner.

Mr Hayes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

(a)        Items added to the agenda papers and made available for public inspection.

(b)        Items which the Chairman has agreed should be taken as matters of urgency by reason of special circumstances to be reported at the meeting and recorded in the minutes.

As stated by the Chairman during agenda item 2, there were no late including urgent items for consideration at this meeting.

The Council is asked to consider in respect of agenda item 15 (Southern Gateway) to make the following resolution:

RESOLUTION BY THE COUNCIL

That the public including the press should be excluded from the meeting on the grounds of exemption in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 namely (a) in the case of agenda item 17 Paragraph 3 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)) and (b) in the case of agenda item 15 Paragraph 1 (information relating to any individual) and because, in all circumstances of the case in (a) and (b), the public interest in maintaining the exemption of that information outweighs the public interest in disclosing that information.  

A resolution to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during the final agenda item 16, Southern Gateway, was formally proposed by Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place) and seconded by Mr R Hayes (Southbourne).

Decision

On a show of hands the members voted in favour of the resolution set out below with no votes against and no abstentions. 

RESOLVED

That the public including the press should be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of agenda 16, Southern Gateway, on the following ground of exemption in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 namely Paragraph 3 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)) and because in all the circumstances of the case the public interest in maintaining the exemption of that information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

The Council is asked to consider recommendations arising from Cabinet's part 2 exempt report being considered at 5 March Cabinet meeting.

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 5 March 2019, as set out on pages 89 to 147 of the exempt confidential agenda report, to which was attached the first, third and fourth confidential exempt appendices for that meeting. It also had regard to the second confidential exempt appendix which had been circulated in the third agenda supplement.

Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place) formally moved the Cabinet’s recommendation and Mrs E Lintill (Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Community Services) seconded it.

Mr N Bennett (Divisional Manager Democratic and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer) was in attendance for this item.

The report was presented by Mr Dignum.

The matter was discussed by the Council.

Mr Dignum, Mr P E Over (Deputy Chief Executive) and Mrs D Shepherd (Chief Executive) responded to members’ questions and comments on points of detail.

Decision

On a show of hands the members voted in favour of the Cabinet’s recommendation with no votes against and one abstention (Mr R Plowman (Chichester West)). 

RESOLVED

That an amendment to the terms of reference for the Chichester District Growth Board in accordance with para 6.1.3 of the confidential exempt Cabinet report dated 5 March 2019 be approved.