Agenda and draft minutes

Council
Tuesday 22 January 2019 2.00 pm

Venue: Committee Rooms, East Pallant House. View directions

Contact: Graham Thrussell on 01243 534653  Email:  gthrussell@chichester.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

51.

Approval of Minutes pdf icon PDF 279 KB

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 on Tuesday 20 November 2018, a copy of which is circulated with this agenda.

 

Minutes:

The Chairman of the Council, Mrs E Hamilton (West Wittering) welcomed everyone present, Chichester District Council (CDC) members and officers, members of the public and media representatives, to the first Council meeting of 2019. Having extended New Year greetings, she explained the emergency evacuation procedure.

 

The Council formally received the minutes of its previous meeting on Tuesday 20 November 2018, 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 20 November 2018 be approved as a correct record.

 

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

 

[Note This para and paras 52 to 68 below summarise the consideration of and conclusion to agenda items 1 to 18 inclusive but for full details of the matters summarised hereunder (save for the exempt items 17 and 18) 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]

 

 

52.

Late Items

The presiding chairman will announce any late including urgent items which are to be dealt with under agenda item 15 (Late Items).

 

Minutes:

There were no late items for consideration at this meeting.

 

 

53.

Declarations of Interests

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

 

Minutes:

Declarations of interests were made by members and officers as follows.

 

A - MEMBERS

 

·       Mrs J Duncton (Petworth) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 9: Emerging Vision Projects and Resources) as a member of the Petworth Vision Steering Group.

 

·       Mrs J Kilby  (Chichester East) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 9: Emerging Vision Projects and Resources) as a Chichester City Council member of the Chichester Vision Steering Group.

 

·       Mrs E Lintill  (Petworth) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 9: Emerging Vision Projects and Resources) as a member of the Petworth Vision Steering Group.

 

·       Mr G McAra (Midhurst) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 9: Emerging Vision Projects and Resources) as a member of the Midhurst Vision Steering Group.

 

·       Mr S Morley (Midhurst) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 9: Emerging Vision Projects and Resources) as a member of the Midhurst Vision Steering Group.

 

·       Dr K O’Kelly (Rogate) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 7: Expanding the Gigabit project to achieve a ‘lit up city) as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

·       Dr K O’Kelly (Rogate) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 9: Emerging Vision Projects and Resources) as a member of the Midhurst Vision Steering Group in her capacity as the West Sussex County Council member for the Midhurst Division.

 

·       Mr S Oakley (Tangmere) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 6 Financial Strategy and Plan 2019-2020 (recommendation (4): localisation business rate pilot for 2019-2020) as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

·       Mr S Oakley (Tangmere) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 5: Priory Park – Phase Two Option Appraisal) as a user of Priory Park’s cricket facilities in his capacity as an umpire.

 

·       Mr S Oakley (Tangmere) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 7: Expanding the Gigabit project to achieve a ‘lit up city) as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

·       Mrs L C Purnell (Selsey North) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 2: East Beach Selsey Land/Asset Opportunities) as a member of Selsey Town Council.

 

·       Mrs L C Purnell (Selsey North) declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 10 Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan (appendix 7: Expanding the Gigabit project to achieve a ‘lit up city) as a member of West Sussex County Council.

 

·       Mrs L C Purnell (Selsey  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

54.

Chairman's Announcements

Apologies for absence will be notified at this point.

 

The presiding chairman will make any specific announcements.

 

Minutes:

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

 

Mr J Brown (Southbourne), Mr M Dunn (Westbourne), Mr J F Elliott (Bury), Mr N Galloway (Chichester South), Mr G Hicks (Southbourne), Mr K Martin (East Wittering), Mr J Ridd (Donnington) and Mr N Thomas (Plaistow).

 

The Chairman made two specific announcements as follows:

 

·       She was very appreciative of the very kind goodwill messages during her illness in late 2018 (which had necessitated her absence at the last Council meeting) and she was thankful to say that she had mostly recovered.

 

·       She was delighted to mention several recent awards received by CDC and to congratulate the members of staff whose hard work had resulted in and been recognised by those awards, namely:

 

(1)  South of England and Channel Islands Pride - Gold Award - CDC’s Against Litter Campaign The Chartered Institute of Public Relations judges recognised CDC’s Public Relations team as having conceived and conducted the best community relations campaign of the year. They praised the strong community involvement in the campaign, the reduction in litter and the campaign’s clear message that littering was a crime and would be treated as one.

 

(2)  Beautiful South Tourism Awards 2018-2019 - Tourism Event/Festival of the Year – Bronze Award – Chichester Roman Week – The Novium Museum Chichester West Sussex The ceremony for these awards was held at The Grand Brighton on 5 December 2018 and at which The Novium Museum had received a bronze award in the Tourism Event/Festival of the Year category for the Chichester Roman Week it had arranged. This accolade was a telling testimony to the team’s hard work in devising and displaying the exhibition.

 

(3)  Loo of the Year Platinum Award - CDC’s Public Conveniences at Little London, Florence Road and Avenue de Chartres The assessments were made with regard to 101 criteria and the award was recognised and supported by national tourist bodies. Such awards were not only very pleasing but very important since the quality of public conveniences was one of the first and most obvious ways in which visitors formed an impression of a city or town.

 

55.

Public Question Time

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).

 

Minutes:

One public question had been submitted for this meeting, details of which appear below.

 

The text of the question had been circulated within the Council Chamber for CDC members, the press and the public prior to the start of this meeting. The Chairman invited the member of the public to come to the designated microphone in order to read out his question before an oral response was provided.

 

The question (with the date of submission shown within [ ] at the end of the text), any supplementary question and the answer given by the designated Cabinet member were as follows.

 

Question: Mr Andrew Relf

 

[Note The text of the question as formally submitted by Mr Relf is set out below, although (as can be heard in the audio recording) it was largely paraphrased while being asked]

 

The Chichester District Council Local Plan Review - Policy DM 8

 

This states that any development must minimize and not create or add to problems of highway safety, congestion, air pollution or other damage.

 

I have a long history on the planning and construction of Fishbourne roundabout as a Consultee, and the 40 year refusal by government to upgrade the A27 across East and West Sussex.  We are again met by the stubborn refusal of government to spend any money south of London.

 

Common sense predicts that the Fishbourne roundabout plans will not be able to cope with current traffic, the additional traffic from Whitehouse Farm whose access to the A27 is Fishbourne, the proposed new flow from the development south of the A27, Terminus Road, and future Manhood traffic together with the 2500 houses proposed for the A259.

 

I am told that the traffic assumption was 50 cars per 100 households, which is seriously flawed.  A study of the Flavian Fields development of 97 houses in Fishbourne revealed that there were two cars per household, and 64% of the residents were working.  Fishbourne already has the highest car dependency in Chichester District as we have no facilities even though designated as a service village under the plan.

 

There is little employment on the A259 corridor and so every worker has to leave the area, in addition to the mothers who have to drive to schools outside our area as the schools are full.

 

Now consider the 1000 homes planned for Fishbourne, Bosham and Chidham. Your planning assumption is 500 cars. The reality is at least 1000 cars moving at peak time.   Each car is an average of 4.8 metres long, with 1.5 metre gaps between them. At very best that is 6 metres of road space per car. One thousand cars at 6 metres joining already static queues.  Six kilometres is Fishbourne roundabout to Chidham.

 

I challenge the possibility of meeting any facet of Policy DM8 against this evidence.

 

My question is will the Council revisit the flawed assumptions with West Sussex and Highways England on the ability of the current road structure to handle the current and proposed traffic?

I  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

56.

Financial Strategy and Plan 2019-2020

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 33 to 37 of the agenda and 1 to 19 of the (main) agenda supplement considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 4 December 2018.

 

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

 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

 

(1)  That the key financial principles and actions of the five year Financial Strategy set out in appendix 1 to the agenda report be approved.

 

(2)  That the current five year Financial Model detailed in appendix 2 to the agenda report be noted.

 

(3)  That, having considered the recommendations from the Corporate Governance and Audit Committee, the Minimum Level of the General Fund Reserves be set at £6.3m.

 

(4)  That the Director of Corporate Services be given delegated authority, following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, to accept the government’s offer to participate in the 75% localisation business rate pilot for 2019-2020, if the West Sussex councils’ bid is successful or if not to revert back to the Coastal West Sussex existing pooling arrangement for the coming financial year.

 

(5)  That the current resources position as set out in appendix 3 to the agenda report be noted.

 

Minutes:

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 4 December 2018, as set out in pages 33 to 37 of the agenda report and pages 1 to 19 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 Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place).

 

Mr Wilding presented the Cabinet’s recommendation. He explained that the report updated the Financial Strategy and Plan for 2019-2020 and created the framework within which the council tax base was set (agenda item 8) as well as setting the scene for approval of the budget in March 2019. The backdrop to the strategy was one of increasing political uncertainty and reducing central government funding for local government. CDC was in the fourth and final year of its agreed settlement with central government, so there was certainty over its government funding stream in 2019-2020. Retained business rates would continue to provide an increased proportion of CDC’s funding. However, much of its other income, for example car parks and planning fees, was dependent on the state of the wider economy and so was much less predictable.

 

He drew attention to the following:

 

(1)  CDC’s key priorities set out in appendix 1, one of which was to manage CDC’s finances prudently and effectively. The Finance Strategy was linked to this specific corporate priority, as were also the key financial principles which underpinned CDC’s financial planning approach listed in annex A.

 

(2)  The updated five-year financial model in appendix 2, which reflected the consolidated budget from the service areas, central government funding and the most up-to-date estimates for wider CDC activities including the programme boards, and other planned savings.

 

(3)  The risks and opportunities estimates in section 4 of appendix 1. The key assumptions were:

 

(a)  An assumed £5 increase in council tax (for a band D property) for each year in the five-year financial model (equivalent to approximately 3% increase per annum). The Council would make the decision in March 2019 as to the council tax level for 2019-2020 following the local government settlement.

 

(b)  Recent quarterly revenue monitoring had identified some deterioration in car park and planning income and in recognition of this an adjustment of £300,000 had been built into the model for each year of the five-year period.

 

(c)  A number of costs during the past year which could not be met from the Asset Replacement Programme and so were financed from reserves.  An extra provision of £200,000 for asset replacement had therefore been included in the model for each year over the five-year period. A detailed review was underway and the precise amount required would be built into the annual budget.

 

(d)  The provisional finance settlement for 2019-2020 and the outcome of the bids for participating in the pilot 75% Business Rates Retention Scheme for 2019-2020 were announced by the Ministry of Housing, Communities  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

57.

Increasing the Provision of the Council's Temporary Accommodation at Freeland Close Chichester

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 39 to 43 of the agenda and 21 to 43 of the (main) agenda supplement considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 4 December 2018.

 

The following recommendation was made by the Cabinet to the Council:

 

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

 

That the allocation of £102,000 from the Housing Investment Reserve be approved to enable the scheme design to be finalised and submitted for planning approval.

 

Minutes:

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 4 December 2018, as set out in pages 39 to 43 of the agenda report and pages 21 to 43 of the agenda supplement for that meeting.  

 

Mrs J Kilby (Cabinet Member for Housing 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).

 

In presenting the Cabinet’s recommendation Mrs Kilby said that during the preceding six months there had been an increase of more than 13% in the number of people who were homeless contacting CDC, which included many families. The existing emergency accommodation had been operating at full capacity for the past year and there had been problems trying to find suitable accommodation for larger families, with the consequent unfortunate result that it had been necessary to resort to bed and breakfast accommodation, often outside Chichester District. This was far from ideal for those involved, especially for families with young children.

 

In December 2017 CDC had purchased a property adjacent to its existing temporary accommodation, since when it had been bought back into use to provide four one-bedroom flats as temporary accommodation while a full options appraisal to evaluate the most effective use of the property was undertaken. A budget of £15,000 had been approved for that appraisal and also a further £10,000 to progress the preferred option to the planning application stage. Since the Cabinet’s approval of the initial project initiation document (PID) in February 2017, it had become apparent that there were greater development opportunities on the site than originally anticipated. Following the appraisal it was proposed to demolish and rebuild the existing building and to provide a flexible property asset which could provide up to 21 units of additional short-term accommodation for homeless families and single vulnerable people. As a result, consultancy costs to bring a scheme to planning permission had risen to reflect the size and scope of the development: now £40,000 rather than the original estimate of £10,000. The cost to finalise the design after a grant of planning permission was estimated at £72,000.

 

Accordingly it was proposed that the Council should be asked to approve the allocation of £102,000 from the Housing Investment Reserve, which would enable the scheme design to be fully developed to conduct the procurement and take all steps including seeking tenders up to the award of contract stage. Contractors’ bids would be presented to the Cabinet following their receipt and analysis for an award of contract to be agreed. At that stage approval would be sought from the Council for funds to cover the costs of the redevelopment.

 

The preferred option set out in the PID would give CDC an opportunity to provide many more units of flexible temporary accommodation, making it easier to house larger families. This project would make a real long-term difference to homeless families in Chichester District.

 

Several members commended the project, which  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

58.

Adoption of the Chichester Local Plan Site Allocation Development Plan Document

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 19 to 21 of the agenda and 1 to 107 of the (main) agenda supplement considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019.

 

The following recommendation was made by the Cabinet to the Council:

 

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

 

That the submitted Local Plan Site Allocation Development Plan Document 2014-2029, amended to include all the main modifications recommended by the planning inspector to make the Plan sound, together with other more minor modifications already agreed with the inspector, be adopted and published (including any consequential and other appropriate minor amendments) in accordance with regulation 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) Regulations 2012.

 

Minutes:

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019, as set out in pages 19 to 21 of the agenda report and pages 1 to 107 of the agenda supplement for that meeting.  

 

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).

 

In presenting the Cabinet’s recommendation Mrs Taylor said that the main purpose of the Site Allocation Development Plan Document 2014-2029 (SA DPD) (appendix 1) was to deliver non-strategic residential and employment sites as set out in the Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies 2014-2029 (CLP) adopted in July 2015 and provide guidance for the development of those sites. Once adopted it would form part of CDC’s Development Plan. Housing sites included in the SA DPD related only to those parishes which either did not have an adopted neighbourhood development plan (NDP) or which had a NDP that had not reached pre-submission stage by April 2017. The SA DPD also (a) reviewed settlement boundaries and, where appropriate, recommended changes thereto and (b) identified (in accordance with the CLP) a local centre for East Wittering. The SA DPD had been submitted to a rigorous process including a number of formal consultations, culminating in an examination by a planning inspector. The SA DPD was pronounced to be sound in the inspector’s report (appendix 2) subject to the inclusion of the main modifications recommended by and more minor modifications agreed with the inspector (appendix 3). The SA DPD related to the CLP and not the emerging Chichester Local Plan Review.

 

The Chairman pointed out that since the Council was not in a position to amend the SA DPD members would proceed immediately to a vote.

 

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 submitted Local Plan Site Allocation Development Plan Document 2014-2029, amended to include all the main modifications recommended by the planning inspector to make the Plan sound, together with other more minor modifications already agreed with the inspector, be adopted and published (including any consequential and other appropriate minor amendments) in accordance with regulation 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) Regulations 2012.

 

 

 

59.

Corporate Pay Review

The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 23 to 30 of the agenda and its appendix considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019.

 

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

 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

 

(1)  That the proposed New Reward Scheme (NRS) be adopted with effect from 1 April 2019 subject to receipt of the signed collective agreement from Unison.

 

(2)  That the budget allocation of £303,500 per annum to support the NRS, funded by the £300,000 annual budget that has previously been set aside to support the pay review, with the £3,500 shortfall added to the revenue base budget 2019-2020, be approved.

 

(3)  That the release of up to £360,600 from previously earmarked reserves to fund salary protection costs during the three-year period 2019-2020 to 2021-2022 be approved.

 

Minutes:

[Note In accordance with his previous declaration of interest (minute 53), at the outset of this item Mr J Ward (Director of Corporate Services) withdrew from the table reserved for the members of the Senior Leadership Team (SLT) to the public seating area for the duration of this item]

 

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019, as set out in pages 23 to 30 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).

 

In presenting the Cabinet’s recommendation Mr Wilding said that CDC had used the current pay and grading structure for nearly 30 years. Over that time jobs and the wider employment market had evolved significantly, which had created staff recruitment and retention difficulties in certain areas or at certain pay grades. There was also the legal requirement to ensure equal jobs were rewarded with equal pay and this review would ensure CDC’s compliance therewith. Since the Cabinet had first considered a report setting out the available options in September 2016, a comprehensive review of all job roles had been undertaken. All job profiles (excluding Chichester Contract Services, which was on local terms and conditions) had now been rewritten and subsequently re-evaluated to ensure that CDC maintained a fair and consistent pay structure.The current pay and grading structure had also been reviewed, using independent benchmarking (taking into account local recruitment and retention factors) to highlight specific areas requiring attention. CDC officers and the external consultants had created a new proposed pay structure (appendix 1) which addressed all of the issues identified.

 

The impact on staff as a result of the proposed changes was as follows:

 

(a)  46% of staff would see an increase in total pay

 

(b)  42% of staff would see no change in total pay

 

(c)  12% of staff would see a reduction in total pay

 

Any members of staff who were negatively affected would be covered by CDC’s pay protection scheme, whereby any salary reduction would be phased in over a three-year period. During November 2018 formal consultation took place with staff representatives and Unison. A detailed statistical analysis of the proposal had been undertaken by Unison, which demonstrated that the revised pay and grading structure was well-balanced and complied with equalities standards. Unison had confirmed it would support the corporate pay review scheme. 

 

The Cabinet had previously agreed to set aside £300,000 per year to support the new pay structure; this estimate had been revised to £303,500 per year on CDC’s annual revenue budget. The release of up to £360,600 from previously earmarked reserves, covering the periods 2019-2020 to 2021-2022, was also being recommended to fund salary protection costs for staff who would receive a reduced salary, although this might not need to be fully utilised since if  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

60.

Initial Project Proposals 2019-2020 and Corporate Plan pdf icon PDF 1020 KB

The material relevant to this item is the report at pages 31 to 34 of the agenda and its nine appendices* at pages 109 to 135 of the (main) agenda supplement considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019.

 

*During the meeting amendments were made to seven of the nine of the appendices and accordingly all of the appendices as amended are being circulated with this agenda.               

 

In addition to resolutions made by the Cabinet, the following recommendations were made to the Council:

 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

 

(1)  That it be agreed that the Corporate Plan approved in January 2018 shall remain unchanged for the year 2019-2020.

 

(2)  That the release of £206,000 from Chichester District Council’s General Fund Reserve to fund the feasibility work and small projects identified in para 5.2 (as amended) of the agenda report for 2019-2020 be approved and that £30,000 of this funding be released with immediate effect to allow for the Novium business plan feasibility work.

 

[Note Para 5.2 (f) of the agenda report was amended by the deletion of the second bullet point namely ‘Branding (Chichester) - £40,000 for consultants’]

Minutes:

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019. The relevant Cabinet papers were as follows: (a) the agenda report at pages 31 to 34, (b) its nine appendices at pages 109 to 135 of the agenda supplement, (c) an amended version of those appendices circulated with the Council agenda (some amendments were made during the Cabinet’s meeting); and (d) a summary of those amendments, which was circulated within the Council Chamber as a single double-sided sheet prior to the start of this meeting.

 

The agenda explained in a note the nature of the amendment mentioned in the second of the Cabinet’s two recommendations, namely a deletion from para 5.2 of the agenda report of one of the Emerging Vision projects with a resulting saving of £40,000.

 

Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place) 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 Dignuminitially presented this matter. He explained that whilst it was proposed that the Corporate Plan 2018-2021, approved by the Council in January 2018, should remain unchanged for 2019-2020, there were several new initial project proposal documents (IPPD) being recommended together with the release of funds to enable the requisite feasibility work in respect thereof to be undertaken. He referred members to the amended versions of the appendices in the Council agenda. He also drew attention to the aforesaid summary sheet which set out the amendments made by the Cabinet to the IPPDs: (a) changes prior to its meeting with respect to the IPPDs in appendices 2, 3, 5, 7 and 9 and (b) a change made at its meeting with respect to the IPPD in appendix 3. 

 

The nine IPPDs were each considered in turn with an introduction, any proposed amendments and officers’ responses to members’ questions as summarised below. During the presentations of the various IPPDs members expressed their support for them.

 

(1)  Resurfacing and Improved Drainage at Westhampnett Depot (Appendix 1)

 

This was introduced by Mr R Barrow (Cabinet Member for Residents Services).

 

Mr Barrow and Mrs J Dodsworth (Director of Residents Services) replied to members’ questions and comments on points of details with respect to (a) the adequacy of the proposed foul drainage link (third bullet point in the In scope sub- section on page 35) to cope with volume and chemical content; (b) the opportunity for commercial use after installation of the foul drainage link; and (c) the need to undertake archaeological investigations as part of this project.

 

(2)  East Beach Selsey Land/Asset Opportunities(Appendix 2)

 

This was introduced by Mr J Connor (Cabinet Member for Environment Services).

 

Mr J Connor replied to a member’s question about CDC exploring with Selsey Town Council the potential for, say, a commercial use of the site.

 

(3)  East Wittering and Bracklesham Vision(Appendix 3)

 

This was introduced by Mrs S Taylor (Cabinet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

61.

Questions to the Executive

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

Minutes:

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

 

Question: Report to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the Chichester ice rink

 

Mrs C Apel (Chichester West) requested, in her capacity as the chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC), for a report to be submitted to the OSC as soon as possible on the subject and issues of the temporary ice rink in Priory Park Chichester following the final day of its operation on 6 January 2019.

 

Response

 

Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place) said he would defer to officers for a response but he agreed that the matter should be brought to the OSC for consideration.

 

Question: Recent visit by the Leader of the Council to Midhurst Society public meeting

 

Mr F Hobbs (Easebourne) thanked Mr A Dignum (Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Growth and Place) and his wife Mrs P Dignum (Chichester South) for their attendance by the invitation of the Midhurst Society to a public meeting in Midhurst. He asked for Mr Dignum’s appraisal of the value of the evening and whether he would attend a similar event in the future. He also referred to the emerging Midhurst Vision and said that he felt that once it was completed it would be valuable for relevant members and officers to meet with the community to discuss how to implement the project.

 

Response

 

Mr A Dignum said that it had been a very worthwhile occasion for the airing and addressing of issues of concern to local residents. On the subject of the disposal of the land at the Grange for example, whereas inevitably some people felt unable to alter their strongly-held opinions, other people were willing to engage in discussion about the issues.

 

Mrs P Dignum added that she was aware that the Midhurst Society believed it had been a worthwhile event with people feeling that their voice had been heard and their point of view taken into account even if not all their hopes, views and wishes could be realised. Local people had appreciated that CDC had chosen to engage with their community. She hoped that this event would help the town to move forward towards cohesion.     

 

Question: Need for recreational opportunities for young people in Midhurst

 

Caroline Neville (Stedham) described how, after the aforementioned Midhurst Society meeting which she had attended, she was approached by several people who canvassed with her the lack of opportunities for the youth in the town and a feeling that they had nowhere to go. She had previously raised this matter with a request for a venue to be provided in the town for the local youth to be able to meet after school free from disapproving scrutiny of older people who did not understand them or their need for social interaction with their peers. The town’s youth club was only open during term time from 18:00 to 20:00 on Tuesdays for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

62.

Constitutional Amendment pdf icon PDF 79 KB

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

 

RESOLUTIONS BY THE COUNCIL

 

(1)  That the membership of committees shall be amended as set out in the appendix to the agenda report from the date of the May 2019 elections.

 

(2)  That the Monitoring Officer be required to provide a report annually to the Corporate Governance and Audit Committee as to the use of his delegated powers to amend the Constitution.

 

(3)  That the wording regarding the approval of designation of neighbourhood areas in accordance with the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012  be amended to further state: ‘….and following the Director of Planning and Environment informing the appropriate Cabinet Member and the relevant ward member(s)’.

 

(4)  That the Monitoring Officer be directed to amend the Constitution to clarify that attendance by members for the purposes of section 85 (1) of the Local Government Act 1972 shall be limited to the Council or a committee to which that member is allocated only.

 

(5)  That the consideration by the Task and Finish Group of the Monitoring Officer delegations as to the Constitution and its recommendation that these remain unchanged be noted.

 

(6)  That the delegation to the Deputy Section 151 Officer be amended such that the post-holder shall have delegation in the absence of the Section 151 Officer for all financial matters.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council considered the report and its appendix circulated with the agenda for this meeting.

 

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

 

Mr A Dignum said that the report detailed a series of changes to be implemented as suggested by a task and finish group (TFG) which had met in 2018.  The TFG consisted of four majority party and two opposition members. Its recommendations were unanimous.  There were two main elements of the work undertaken by the TFG: (1) to follow through changes to CDC’s Constitution resulting from the May 2019 restructuring from 48 to 36 members and (2) to look at any other updates which seemed appropriate since the previous major review of the Constitution in 2016. Appendix 1 set out the proposed changes to the committee memberships from May 2019. The TFG debated those numbers at length, ensuring that the agreed numbers were appropriate to the workloads of each committee. The remaining changes set out in the recommendations were all designed to provide transparency in one way or another. CDC’s Corporate Governance and Audit Committee recently considered the first report by the Monitoring Officer (MO) outlining the minor changes to the Constitution which he was responsible for making. It was recommended that such a report be submitted annually so that members were kept aware of the MO’s use of his delegated powers in this regard. The changes to the neighbourhood planning regulations, the councillor attendance calculations and the deputy section 151 officer delegations were also the subject of recommendations. The changes simply ensured that what was hitherto accepted as implied in the Constitution would now be more clearly articulated.

 

Mrs P Tull (Sidlesham) commented briefly on the recent consideration by the Corporate Governance and Audit Committee of the MO’s report, which would now be an annual occurrence.

 

Decision

 

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

 

RESOLVED

 

(1)  That the membership of committees shall be amended as set out in the appendix to the agenda report from the date of the May 2019 elections.

 

(2)  That the Monitoring Officer be required to provide a report annually to the Corporate Governance and Audit Committee as to the use of his delegated powers to amend the Constitution.

 

(3)  That the wording regarding the approval of designation of neighbourhood areas in accordance with the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012  be amended to further state: ‘….and following the Director of Planning and Environment informing the appropriate Cabinet Member and the relevant ward member(s)’.

 

(4)  That the Monitoring Officer be directed to amend the Constitution to clarify that attendance by members for the purposes of section 85 (1) of the Local Government Act 1972 shall be limited to the Council or a committee to which that member is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

63.

Discharge of Litter Enforcement Functions pdf icon PDF 59 KB

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

 

RESOLUTION BY THE COUNCIL

 

That it be noted that the Chief Executive intends to use the power conferred by Article 10.02 in Part 2 of the Constitution of Chichester District Council to discharge the enforcement functions detailed in para 5.2 of the agenda report to East Hampshire District Council under powers granted to local authorities under section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972.

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council considered the report and its appendix circulated with the agenda for this meeting.

 

The Chairman said that this was the first of two consecutive agenda items the purpose of which was to comply with a constitutional requirement to report formally certain matters to the Council meeting. This report related to the discharge of CDC’s litter enforcement function. The report and its appendix were self-explanatory. Neither a discussion nor a decision was required with regard to this matter.

 

Accordingly on behalf of the Council the Chairman noted that this matter had been reported to the meeting in accordance with CDC’s Constitution.

 

 

64.

Urgent Decision: Gatwick Airport Draft Master Plan 2018

There is no written report for this agenda item, which is for noting only.

 

In accordance with para 36 in section 4.5 in Part 4 of Chichester District Council’s Constitution, (a) the recent decision by the Cabinet in respect of this matter that it was to be taken as a matter of urgency and (b) the reason for that urgency are hereby being formally reported to the Council.  

 

At its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019 the Cabinet considered a report on the Gatwick Airport Draft Master Plan 2018. The report appears at pages 35 to 40 of the agenda and its two appendices at pages 137 to 140 of the (main) agenda supplement. All members have received those papers and have been requested to bring them to this meeting of the Council. The Cabinet accepted the recommendation in para 2.1 of the report. Having heard at the meeting from the Chairman of the Council, Elizabeth Hamilton, the Cabinet resolved furthermore to treat its decision on this matter as being urgent and so it would not be subject to Chichester District Council’s call-in procedure.

 

The Cabinet’s two-part resolution was as follows:

 

(1)  That the recommended response set out in appendix 2 to the agenda report be endorsed as Chichester District Council’s response to the consultation on the draft Gatwick Airport Master Plan.

 

(2)  That this decision is urgent and so is not subject to Chichester District Council’s call-in procedure, the consent of the Chairman of the Council having been obtained both that this decision is reasonable in all the circumstances and that it should be treated as a matter of urgency, having regard to the consultation’s closing date of 10 January 2019.

 

The Council is requested to note the following points:

 

(a)  The Cabinet considered the decision to be taken in respect of this matter was urgent and so should not be subject to the call-in process.

 

(b)  Any delay caused by the call-in process, if it were to be invoked with regard to this matter, would seriously prejudice Chichester District Council’s interest and/or the public interest, namely the opportunity to influence the emerging Master Plan for Gatwick Airport which has been prepared on behalf of the airport owners as an expression of intent for the future development of the airport. Given the potential implications arising from the draft Master Plan for Chichester District, including residents in the northern parishes, it was considered to be necessary to set out Chichester District Council’s position within the stipulated time-limited opportunity.

 

(c)  The consent of the Chairman of the Council was obtained that the decision was reasonable in all the circumstances and that it should be treated as a matter of urgency.

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes:

There was no written report for this item, the background to and nature of which was set out in the face of the agenda.

 

The Chairman said that this was the second of two consecutive agenda items the purpose of which was to comply with a constitutional requirement to report formally certain matters to the Council meeting. In consequence neither a discussion nor a decision was required by the Council. The narrative text was self-explanatory. In short, the Council was being informed of the reason for having treated as urgent a decision of the Cabinet taken on 8 January 2019 to approve CDC’s response to the Gatwick Airport Draft Master Plan 2018, which meant that the call-in procedure was dis-applied. </AI21>

 

Accordingly on behalf of the Council the Chairman noted that this matter had been reported to the meeting in accordance with CDC’s Constitution.

 

 

65.

Late Items

(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.

Minutes:

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

 

 

66.

Exclusion of the Press and Public

The Council is asked in respect of agenda items 17 (St James Industrial Estate) and 18 (Staffing Matters) to make the following resolution:

 

RESOLUTION BY THE COUNCIL

 

That the public including the press should be excluded from the meeting on the following 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 18 Paragraph 1 (information relating to any individual) and because, in all the circumstances of the case in (a) and (b), the public interest in maintaining the exemption of that information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

 

 

 

Minutes:

A resolution (set out below) to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during the final two agenda items, 17 (St James Industrial Estate Chichester) and 18 (Staffing Matters), was formally proposed and seconded.

 

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 on the following 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 18 Paragraph 1 (information relating to any individual) and because, in all the circumstances of the case in (a) and (b), the public interest in maintaining the exemption of that information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

 

 

67.

St James Industrial Estate Chichester

The material relevant to this item is the confidential exempt* agenda report and its two appendices which were printed on salmon-coloured paper for members and relevant officers only within the Cabinet papers for the meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019; the report is at pages 61 to 66 in the agenda and the appendices are at pages 141 to 153 of the (main) agenda supplement.

 

In addition to resolutions made by the Cabinet, the following recommendation was made by the Cabinet to the Council:

 

RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL

 

That the allocation of £5,225,000 of New Homes Bonus Reserves for this project, inclusive of temporary loss of revenue as referred to in section 8.4 of the agenda report, be approved.

 

*[Note The ground for excluding the public and press during this item is that it is likely that there would be a disclosure to them of ‘exempt information’ of the description specified in Paragraph 3 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)) of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972]

 

 

Minutes:

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019, as set out on pages 61 to 66 of the exempt confidential agenda report and its two confidential exempt appendices on pages 141 to 153 of the agenda supplement for that meeting.

 

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.

 

The report was presented by Mr Dignum.

 

The matter was discussed by the Council.

 

Mr Dignum, Mrs J Hotchkiss (Director for Growth and Place) and Mr P Legood (Valuation and Estates Manager) 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 two abstentions (Mr H Potter (Boxgrove) and Mr J Ransley (Wisborough Green)). 

 

RESOLVED

 

That the allocation of £5,225,000 of New Homes Bonus Reserves for this project, inclusive of temporary loss of revenue as referred to in section 8.4 of the agenda report, be approved.

 

 

68.

Staffing Matters

The material relevant to this item is the confidential exempt* agenda report and its two appendices which were printed on salmon-coloured paper for members and a very limited number of officers only within the second agenda supplement for the Cabinet meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019.

 

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

 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

 

That the recommendations set out in the paras 3.1 to 3.5 inclusive of the confidential exempt agenda report be approved.

 

*[Note The ground for excluding the public and press during this item is that it is likely that there would be a disclosure to them of ‘exempt information’ of the description specified in Paragraph 1 (information relating to any individual)  of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972]

Minutes:

[Note Immediately prior to the commencement of this item all CDC officers present, including the members of the Senior Leadership team listed in part B of minute 53 above, withdrew from the Council Chamber for its duration (and indeed the remainder of the meeting) save for the Chief Executive, the two advisory officers named below and the Legal and Democratic Services Officer]

 

The Council considered the recommendation made to it by the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday 8 January 2019, as set out in the confidential exempt report and its two appendices contained in pages 1 to 9 of the second agenda supplement for that meeting.

 

Mr N Bennett (Monitoring Officer and Divisional Manager Legal and Democratic Services) and Mrs H Belenger (Divisional Manager Financial Services) were in attendance for this item. 

 

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.

 

The report was presented by Mrs D Shepherd (Chief Executive)

 

Mrs D Shepherd responded to questions on points of detail asked by two members.

 

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 recommendations set out in the paras 3.1 to 3.5 inclusive of the confidential exempt agenda report be approved.