Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

The Chair will make any specific announcements for this meeting and advise of any late items which due to special circumstances will be given urgent consideration under Late Items.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Desai.

The Cabinet is requested to approve as a correct record the minutes of its meeting on Tuesday 5 March 2024.

In a vote the following resolution was agreed:

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the Cabinet meeting on 5 March 2024 be approved and signed as a correct record.

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

Mr Bennett declared an interest in item 13 as a member of his family works for the team. He withdrew from the room for the item.

In accordance with Chichester District Council’s scheme for public question time the Cabinet will receive any questions which have been submitted by members of the public in writing by noon two working days before the meeting. Each questioner will be given up to three minutes to ask their question. The total time allocated for public question time is 15 minutes subject to the Chair’s discretion to extend that period.

Question 1 from Simon Oakley:

Noting the flooding in way of the holiday and caravan parks at Bracklesham and Earnley last week, and the importance of sites such as these to Chichester District's visitor economy, could you advise as to what engagement CDC and its coastal engineering service, Coastal Partners, have had with the Environment Agency over the past two years with regards the state, and future, of the groynes and shingle covered, clay cored, coastal defence bank which lies, and in part lay, between the Western rock arm of the Medmerry re-alignment scheme and the East end of East Bracklesham Drive, given what happens to this coastal frontage will have implications for the coastal defence of the permanent dwellings in the Eastern part of Bracklesham?  

Response from Cllr Brown to question 1:

Thank you for the question. The council’s Coastal Partners have been working closely with the Environment Agency on all matters associated with managing these risks. The events affecting Medmerry Caravan Site and Bracklesham Caravan and Boat Club last week involved tidal levels that were similar to or exceeded the highest tidal levels ever recorded locally and are a stern reminder of the risks associated with the coast. The beach in front of the caravan parks is managed by the EA, but the beach is updrift of the section of foreshore managed by the District Council and thus impacts our management and so it is essential that we continue to communicate regularly with the EA. When we identified erosion to the west of the Medmerry rock arm (between Medmerry and Bracklesham) the council began more specific engagement with the EA over the past couple of years, and remain abreast of their monitoring, thinking and proposals. The focus for our coastal service is to ensure flood & coastal erosion risk is effectively managed, and to ascertain the potential impact any decision or works will have on adjacent frontages.

These interactions have unsurprisingly intensified with the recent flooding, and the EA have begun re-profiling the beach which should lead to a reduction of the risk of a recurrence of the recent flooding.

Mr Oakley was permitted a supplementary question which was as follows:

What is CDCs' understanding of the EAs intentions/Policy for the future of this frontage? Is it "hold the line" or "managed retreat", noting the deterioration of the groynes and clay core of the bank along this frontage and that the frontage in way of the Medmerry re-alignment scheme's breach has rolled back considerably further than originally envisaged which, if managed retreat applies to the West of Western Rock Arm frontage, would have significant implications for the holiday parks and the East end of Bracklesham?

Cllr Brown responded that his understanding is that there is not a policy of managed retreat. Mrs Stevens explained that the council uses coastal partners as its engineering service. There is a shoreline management plan which outlines policy for frontage. She added that she could not be sure if they have been updated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 134.

The Cabinet is requested to consider the report and its appendix and make the following recommendation to Council:

That Cabinet recommend to Council that the Chichester Harbour Management Plan 2024-2025 is adopted.

*RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL

That Cabinet recommend to Council that the Chichester Harbour Management Plan 2024-2025 is adopted.

Cllr Brown introduced the report. Mr Day was present.

Cllr Bangert asked if it would be possible for the Management Plan to provide a more defined buffer between the coast and the harbour. Cllr Brown explained that planning applications have to give due regard to the area and surroundings. He noted that he shared concerns relating to the effects on the harbour. Mr Frost explained that a Management Plan is not the tool for establishing the buffer. Taking account of the setting is a subjective matter which members need to bear in mind going forward.

Cllr Brisbane referred to the reference to ‘traditional farming practice’. He raised concerns that farming is a significant contributor to nitrogen levels. He asked if it would be possible to introduce more robust measures for farming run off other than the interim five metre buffer.

Cllr Moss clarified that Chichester Harbour Conservancy are the authors of the Management Plan with the Cabinet being asked to approve.  In response to Cllr Brisbane Mr Day added that the five metre buffer is standard farming practices based on national guidelines and best practice. Anything beyond that would need to be considered in the 2025-2030 Plan.

Cllr Moss gave his support to the Chichester Harbour Management Plan noting its benefit to the community.

In a vote the following recommendation was agreed:

RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL

That Cabinet recommend to Council that the Chichester Harbour Management Plan 2024-2025 is adopted.

The Cabinet is requested to consider the report and its appendices and make the following resolutions:

That Cabinet:

a)    approves the options for consultation as outlined in Appendix 1; and;

b)    approves the consultation process and budget Option 2 - £15,000 as outlined in Appendix 2, to be funded from General Fund reserves.

RESOLVED

That Cabinet:

a) approves the options for consultation as outlined in Appendix 1; and;

b) approves the consultation process and budget Option 2 - £15,000 as outlined in Appendix 2, to be funded from General Fund reserves.

Cllr Brown introduced the report. Mr Day was present. He reiterated that the key considerations are the options and rankings made by the Environment Panel. He added that the format of the document will be more accessible for the website.

Cllr Moss noted the importance of the consultation and reiterated that the document will be accessible on the website. 

Cllr Brown explained that the Climate Champions network is a new idea for Chichester. He confirmed the aim to work with communities to help cascade ideas outwards. He explained it would involve the sharing of ideas and best practices from within the community to build momentum.

In a vote the following resolutions were agreed:

RESOLVED

That Cabinet:

a) approves the options for consultation as outlined in Appendix 1; and;

b) approves the consultation process and budget Option 2 - £15,000 as outlined in Appendix 2, to be funded from General Fund reserves.

The Cabinet is requested to consider the report and its appendix and make the following resolution:

That the Cabinet accepts the revised Alcohol & Drug Misuse Policy.

RESOLVED

That the Cabinet accepts the revised Alcohol & Drug Misuse Policy.

Cllr Chilton introduced the report. Mr Radcliffe was present. Mr Radcliffe explained that he had worked closely with Corporate Health and Safety and in conjunction with Horsham District Council. He hoped that in practice there would not be a requirement for many tests as the Policy would act as a deterrent. He confirmed that courses are being organised from 1 July 2024 for those managers and supervisors who may need to test their staff.

Cllr Bangert asked whether there was any data from other councils. Mr Radcliffe explained that the council does not to carry out many tests. He reiterated the council’s working partnership with Horsham District Council. He explained that Eastbourne and Lewes councils have also started to carry out random testing. Cllr Bangert requested assurance that support will be provided to staff when needed too.

Cllr Brown-Fuller asked whether there will be an area which is safe and private where the person will wait and whether they be supported by another member of staff of their choosing at that time. Mr Radcliffe explained that if the Policy is supported by Cabinet an area will be available.

Cllr Brown asked whether any historic incidents had been identified where the Policy would have been of use. Mr Radcliffe explained that there had been incidents where people driving for the council have had to be sent home.

Cllr Chilton noted that the type of Policy is usual practice in corporate organisations.

In a vote the following resolution was agreed:

RESOLVED

That the Cabinet accepts the revised Alcohol & Drug Misuse Policy.

The Cabinet is requested to consider the report and its appendix and make the following resolutions:

1.    That Cabinet agree the release of £50,000 from reserves to fund a Gypsy Traveller Liaison Role (as described in the Appendix) for the 24/25 financial year.

2.    That the post is included in base budget from 25/26 (subject to review).

RESOLVED

1.    That Cabinet agree the release of £50,000 from reserves to fund a Gypsy Traveller Liaison Role (as described in the Appendix) for the 24/25 financial year.

2.    That the post is included in base budget from 25/26 (subject to review).

Cllr Bangert introduced the report. Ms Bushby and Mrs Stevens were present.

Cllr Brisbane explained that as well as providing better communications there are also benefits for the planning department. He explained that it is likely that the role will be able to liaise to find out who is occupying the sites. With regard to enforcement he noted that it is likely to speed up the process by having a liaison to help identify who to speak to. 

Cllr Brown explained the importance of finding the right person for the role.

Cllr Moss endorsed the need for the post. He thanked the officers for bringing the report forward.

Cllr Bangert wished to emphasise the wellbeing benefits of the role. She added the importance of the liaison encouraging inoculations and education.

In a vote the following resolutions were agreed:

RESOLVED

1.    That Cabinet agree the release of £50,000 from reserves to fund a Gypsy Traveller Liaison Role (as described in the Appendix) for the 24/25 financial year.

2.    That the post is included in base budget from 25/26 (subject to review).

Members took a short break.

The Cabinet is requested to consider the report and its appendix and make the following resolution:

That the Addendum to the Council’s existing Events Policy, as attached at Appendix 1, be approved to provide further guidance for use of car parks for events and activities.

RESOLVED

That the Addendum to the Council’s existing Events Policy, as attached at Appendix 1, be approved to provide further guidance for use of car parks for events and activities.

Cllr Brown-Fuller introduced the report. Mrs Murphy was present.

Cllr Boulcott was permitted to speak. He asked how the council would differentiate from those attending the event to those parking. He also explained that in East Beach, Selsey most events take place on the grass not the car park. He requested an amendment to the addendum to provide 50% capacity to East Beach car park, Selsey all year round. He noted that events bring people to the area increasing footfall for traders and also car park revenue. He raised concerns that recurring events will be unable to self fund if the licence fee is too high. He requested that the fee be set at a maximum of £100.

Cllr Brown-Fuller thanked Cllr Boulcott for his input and questions. With regard to increasing parking revenue she explained that there could be a loss of income for car parks hosting events. She acknowledged that the nuance would need to be explored by officers and reflected on a case by case basis. She clarified that the percentages in the table indicate the anticipated car park use. The boundaries in the car park during the event would need to be agreed and monitored for overspill. The information would then be used to help decide any future events in that car park. She also clarified that setting a fixed fee would not necessarily cover the administrative costs for the council as it would depend on the size and type of event.

Mrs Murphy confirmed that the Policy allows operational decisions to be made by the parking services team.

Cllr Moss noted that it is important to allow the officers to use their discretion to agree the most appropriate use of the car parks. Cllr Moss added that the impact will be that other organisations will come forward wanting to hold events in the council’s car parks.

Cllr Brown explained that he felt it reasonable to define the Car Club meets as an event. He added that Policy Addendum is designed to enable community groups to hold an event. He clarified that there is no intention to double charge anyone for using the car park for an event and then for parking on top.

Cllr Chilton requested that officers treat the site areas indicated on page 181 with a degree of flexibility. Mrs Hotchkiss explained the service knows what is happening on a day to day basis.

Cllr Brown asked if there is flexibility to review the Policy. Cllr Moss explained that it would be looked at over time. 

In a vote the following resolution was agreed:

RESOLVED

That the Addendum to the Council’s existing Events Policy, as attached at Appendix 1, be approved to provide further guidance for use of car parks for events and activities.

The Cabinet is requested to consider the report and make the following resolution:

That Cabinet considers the options for shingle grading at Bracklesham beach identified in paragraphs 5.1 – 5.8 below and approves its preferred option.

RESOLVED

That Cabinet considers the options for shingle grading at Bracklesham beach identified in paragraphs 5.1 – 5.8 below and approves its preferred option. The preferred option being to Grade the slipway at Bracklesham Bay three times per year for the coming year and if the trial is successful that the Parish Council be asked to take on the ongoing cost of the grading.

Cllr Brown introduced the report. Mrs Stevens and Mr Townsend were present. Mrs Stevens explained that officers had some concerns about the frequency of the grading but understand it is a trial at this stage.

Cllr Moss explained that he visited the site over the weekend. He added that the tide will return the stones therefore on three occasions as a trial the evidence needs to show that it lasts more than 24 hours. He requested that the grading be arranged at the right time to maximise the benefits.

Cllr Brown explained that value for money is whether the community use the beach on the three opportunities that are created.

Cllr Brown-Fuller asked how much flexibility there would be to book the contractor and how it would be communicated with the community so they can make the most of the three opportunities to use the beach. Mr Townsend explained that he hoped it would be completed in a reasonable amount of time. He explained that social media channels would be used to publicise. Mrs Stevens added that there is a long term weather forecast to help timings. With regard to the trial the council may not be able to monitor the usage of the beach. Cllr Moss hoped that the residents and the Parish Council would help demonstrate the value.

Cllr Brisbane added that the Parish Council should be taking a role in communicating when the beach would be available and also contributing to the cost. He added that if the trial is a success then the Parish Council should take on the cost rather than the district council.

Cllr Chilton raised concerns that the evidence is representations made by the Parish Council and the local residents rather than scientific evidence.

Cllr Bangert explained it is important to listen to the residents.

Cllr Brown accepted that decisions need to be evidence based but was mindful of the evidence that is and is not available. Mr Bennett responded. He explained that decisions have to be on the basis that there are reasons to make that decision. There is a concern that there is a distinct lack of evidence available. Those presenting the evidence to the council are those that have an interest in continuing it going forward. At present Mr Bennett was troubled by the fact that there is little to no evidence rather than anything more substantial. He wished to make sure that Cabinet know they need to work from within an evidence base.

Cllr Brown recognised that representations come with their own caveats and potential bias. The absence of evidence does not mean that something is not happening. The stronger the case the local community make will strengthen the case that it is something the Parish Council should be funding. He clarified that there is no longer term commitment, just proposing the trial.

Cllr Moss wished Mr Bennett to confirm if a vote would be appropriate. Mr Bennett confirmed that a vote could take place. He advised that if  ...  view the full minutes text for item 140.

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

b)    Items which the Chair has agreed should be taken as matters of urgency by reason of special circumstances to be reported at the meeting

There were no late items.

The Cabinet is asked to consider in respect of agenda items 13 and 14whether the public including the press should be excluded from the meeting on the following ground of exemption in 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.

[Note The report and its appendices within this part of the agenda are attached for members of the Council and relevant only (printed on salmon paper)]

Cllr Moss proposed that the Cabinet went into Part II. This was seconded by Cllr Brown.

In a vote the following resolution was agreed:

RESOLVED

That the Cabinet considers in respect of agenda items 13-14 that the publicincluding the press should be excluded from the meeting on the followingground of exemption in Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972namely Paragraph 3 (Information relating to the financial or businessaffairs of any particular person (including the authority holding thatinformation)) and because, in all the circumstances of the case, the publicinterest in maintaining the exemption of that information outweighs thepublic interest in disclosing the information.

Members took a short break.

The Cabinet is requested to consider the exempt Part II report and make the resolution as set out in section 2.1 of the report.

RESOLVED

That the resolution as set out in section 2.1 of the report be agreed.

Cllr Chilton introduced the report. Mr Mildred and Ms Stevens were present.

Cllr Brisbane provided comment.

Cllr Brown asked a question about why the item was in Part II. Mr Mildred outlined the reason.

In a vote the following resolution was agreed:

RESOLVED

That the resolution as set out in section 2.1 of the report be agreed.

The Cabinet is requested to formally note the Part II exempt Urgent Decision Notice.

*On behalf of the Cabinet Cllr Moss formally noted the Part II exempt Urgent Decision Notice.

On behalf of the Cabinet Cllr Moss formally noted the Part II exempt Urgent Decision Notice.