Agenda, decisions and minutes

The Chairman opened the meeting by welcoming those present. He especially welcomed the five new Cabinet Members. He thanked Mrs Eileen Lintill, Deputy Leader of the Council, for her support and help to him since his election as Leader.

To approve as a correct record the minutesof the special Cabinet meeting held on 24 April 2015

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the special meeting of the Cabinet held on 24 April 2015 be signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the special meeting of the Cabinet held on 24 April 2015 be signed as a correct record.

Chairman to announce any urgent items which due to special circumstances are to be dealt with under agenda item 10(b).

There were no 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.

No interests were declared at this meeting.

Questions submitted by members of the public in writing by noon on the previous working day (for a period up to 15 minutes).

No public questions had been submitted.

Further to minute 726 of 11 February 2015, following marketing of the site, the report seeks authority to sell the Council’s land comprising part of the former Portfield Football Ground at Church Road, Chichester.

RESOLVED

(1)  That the company referred to in paragraph 6.4 of the report (no. 2 on the list of bidders) be selected as the preferred bidder, subject to due diligence.

(2)  That the Head of Commercial Services be authorised to undertake further negotiations with the selected preferred bidder and, following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Commercial Services, to conclude a sale of the land.

(3)  That, should the sale to the selected preferred bidder not complete, the Head of Commercial Services be authorised, following consultation with the Executive Director and with the Cabinet Member for Commercial Services, to conclude a sale to another bidder at an affordable housing percentage of not less than 40% and of not less than the figure stated in Appendix 2 (exempt) as the acceptable minimum sale price.

Further to minute 726 of 11 February 2015, the Cabinet considered the report circulated with the agenda (copy, except Appendix 2, attached to the official minutes), An updated version of the restricted Appendix 2 (list of offers received and impact on projected capital receipt) was circulated at the meeting.

Mrs Keegan introduced the report. She reminded the Cabinet of the decision at the meeting on 11 February to resubmit the extension of time planning application and to market the site with the benefit of the remaining life of the outline permission. The site had been marketed and the schedule of bids received was set out in Appendix 2.

Mr Legood (Valuation and Estates Manager) explained that the tender was not straightforward, because it was based on the provision of affordable housing units and planning position as well as sale price. However, further clarification of the detail of the tenders received had been obtained since the writing of the report and the officers now had a clear recommendation in favour of bidder number 2 on Appendix 2, which provided significant benefits in terms of receipt and affordable homes. This offer was subject to satisfactory planning permission, for which the bidder would submit a new application. Officers, therefore, sought approval to proceed with this bidder, subject to due diligence, in order to enter into a conditional contract subject to planning permission. Officers also sought the Cabinet’s instructions on how to proceed with another bidder, should bidder number 2 fail to complete, in terms of affordable housing percentage and minimum acceptable sale price.

Members of the Cabinet expressed preference for bidder number 2, subject to due diligence. Mr Over explained that due diligence required officers to be satisfied that the bidder had the resources to pay the offered sale price and to develop the site with the proposed number of houses, 75% of which would be affordable.

By leave of the Chairman, Mr Ransley suggested that, given the high financial and social importance of the site, final decisions on the sale terms to the preferred bidder or any other bidder should be made by the Cabinet and not delegated to officers. This would require omitting recommendation 2.3 and adding to 2.2 ‘subject to cabinet approval’. He felt that there was no urgency to sell, given that the marketing exercise had demonstrated an appetite in the market to purchase and develop the site. The Cabinet’s responsibility should be to achieve best value, including provision of the appropriate number of affordable housing units.

Mr Over pointed out that the marketing exercise had warmed up the market and it was important to proceed now.

The Cabinet agreed that the Cabinet Member for Commercial Services should be consulted before officers exercised delegated powers. After discussion they agreed that any sale to an alternative bidder, in the event of the sale to the preferred bidder failing, should be at a price not less than the minimum acceptable sale price proposed in Appendix 2 and with a minimum affordable  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Further to minute 709 of 6 January 2015, the report seeks approval to proceed with the project for the redevelopment of the Council’s site at 21, Terminus Road, Chichester for business, industrial, storage or distribution uses.

RESOLVED

That the Council be recommended that Option 3 in the Project Initiation Document (PID) be approved as the Plot 21 Terminus Road Redevelopment Project and

(1)  That funding of £66,000 is released from Capital Reserves to enable the demolition and planning matters to be progressed immediately

(2)  That the balance of the estimated total costs set out in section 7 of the PID (Appendix 1) be released subject to a pre-let agreement being in place delivering a minimum return on investment as set out in section 3.8 of the PID.

Further to minute 709 of 6 January 2015, the Cabinet considered the report circulated with the agenda (copy, except restricted Appendix, attached to the official minutes), Mrs Keegan introduced the report, referring to the previous consideration by the Cabinet of proposals for this site, and the outcomes to be achieved, which were set out in section 5 of the report.

Cabinet members expressed the view that the proposal represented a good use of capital assets and a good return on investment. They had been re-assured about the original under-estimate of the costs of demolishing buildings and clearing the site because of the discovery of the needs for asbestos removal, which had not been anticipated.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL

That Option 3 in the Project Initiation Document (PID) be approved as the Plot 21 Terminus Road Redevelopment Project and

(1)   That funding of £66,000 is released from Capital Reserves to enable the demolition and planning matters to be progressed immediately.

(2)   That the balance of the estimated total costs set out in section 7 of the PID (Appendix) be released subject to a pre-let agreement being in place delivering a minimum return on investment as set out in section 3.8 of the PID.

Further to minute 660 of 14 October 2014, to approve the establishment, terms of reference and District Council membership of a Joint Member Liaison Group with West Sussex County Council to consider the Infrastructure Business Plan.

RESOLVED

(1)  That the Joint Member Liaison Group be established with the Terms of Reference appended to this report.

(2)  That the District Council’s appointments to the Joint Member Liaison Group comprise the Leader of the Council, the Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning and Mr Simon Oakley from the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel.

Further to minute 660 of 14 October 2014, the Cabinet considered the report circulated with the agenda (copy attached to the official minutes). Mrs Taylor introduced the report.

She explained that the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) had been introduced by the Government in 2010, to allow local planning authorities to raise a levy from development that could be used to contribute towards the infrastructure needed to support the growth of the area. The Council was making good progress with its CIL draft charging schedule, which was being examined by a Government Inspector on 9-10 June 2015. Depending on when the Examiner’s report was received, it was hoped to adopt the schedule later in the year. Coupled with the adoption of the Local Plan, this would enable collection of CIL to support the development envisaged in the Local Plan.

In October 2014, the Cabinet had considered the arrangements for governance of CIL, which needed to be carefully planned and managed to ensure that it was spent to the best effect. At the centre of the governance arrangements was preparation of an Infrastructure Business Plan (IBP), which would identify infrastructure needs and priorities and the sources of funding. In recognition of the fact that West Sussex County Council (WSCC) was a major provider of infrastructure, it was proposed that a Joint Member Liaison Group, comprising members of the District Council and WSCC, should be established to oversee the preparation of the IBP.

Mr Finch welcomed the proposal, but enquired how negotiations and consultations with parish councils, which were entitled to a share of CIL, would be managed. Many parish councils were preparing neighbourhood plans, which identified local infrastructure needs.

Mrs Dower (Planning Policy Project Manager) replied that a series of workshops had been held with parish councils, who had provided lists of projects for incorporation in the IBP. Parish councils could decide autonomously how to spend their share of CIL, but it was hoped that they would do so in co-operation with other infrastructure commissioners in order to achieve best effect.

The Chairman commented that Chichester City Council’s priorities might have changed following the election, and Mr Frost (Head of Planning Services) gave a reassurance that the IBP was an iterative process and parish councils would have an opportunity to comment on the draft IBP during a consultation which would follow its initial consideration by the Joint Member Liaison Group.

The Chief Executive confirmed that final decisions on the allocation of CIL and the Council’s own capital programme would be made by the full District Council on consideration of the Cabinet’s recommendations as part of the annual budget.

RESOLVED

(1)       That the Joint Member Liaison Group be established with the Terms of Reference appended to the report.

(2)       That the District Council’s appointments to the Joint Member Liaison Group comprise the Leader of the Council, the Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning and Mr Simon Oakley from the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel.

To establish and appoint members to serve on Panels and Forums for 2015-2016.

RESOLVED

(1)  That the membership of Panels and Forums for 2015/16 be as follows:-

BOUNDARY REVIEW  PANEL (6)

DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND INFRASTRUCTURE PANEL (10)

GRANTS AND CONCESSIONS  PANEL (8)

JOINT EMPLOYEE CONSULTATIVE PANEL (5)

STRATEGIC RISK GROUP (5)

Cabinet representatives

The Chairman of the Strategic Risk Group to be appointed at its first meeting. The Cabinet Member for Finance and Governance to have overall responsibility for risk management.

CHICHESTER DISTRICT PARKING FORUM (5)

(2)  That the Development Plan Panel be re-constituted as the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel, with membership and terms of reference as set out in Appendix 2.

(3)  That the delegation of powers relating to grants and concessions be transferred from the Cabinet Member for Finance and Governance to the Cabinet Member for Community Services, and that the Cabinet Member for Finance and Governance be empowered to act if the Cabinet Member for Community Services has a prejudicial interest or is otherwise unavailable.

(4)  That the IT Advisory Group be discontinued.

The Cabinet considered the report circulated with the agenda (copy attached to the official minutes). The Chairman introduced the report and Mr Coleman (Member Services Manager) reported the nominations made by minority party groups. The Chairman drew attention to the proposed revised membership and terms of reference of the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel and the proposed transfer of delegated powers relating to grants and concessions. He also drew attention to paragraphs 3(f) and (g) of the report.

At the Chairman’s invitation Mr Finch explained the proposal to discontinue the IT Advisory Group. This had previously had two roles: to draw on the expertise of members who had relevant experience from commerce and industry; and to approve projects. However, chief officers and heads of service had delegated powers to approve asset renewal projects and a Business Improvement Board of senior officers and the Cabinet Member had been set up to scrutinise and manage performance of all projects. No other core business of the Council had a members’ advisory group, which would overlap with the arrangements he had just described. However, the benefit of members’ expertise could be brought to bear through the appointment of a special adviser to the Cabinet Member, and he was currently considering this.

RESOLVED

(1)  That the membership of Panels and Forums for 2015/16 be as follows:-

BOUNDARY REVIEW  PANEL (6)

DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND INFRASTRUCTURE PANEL (10)

GRANTS AND CONCESSIONS  PANEL (8)

JOINT EMPLOYEE CONSULTATIVE PANEL (5)

STRATEGIC RISK GROUP (5)

Cabinet representatives

The Chairman of the Strategic Risk Group to be appointed at its first meeting. The Cabinet Member for Finance and Governance to have overall responsibility for risk management.

CHICHESTER DISTRICT PARKING FORUM (5)

(2)  That the Development Plan Panel be re-constituted as the Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel, with membership and terms of reference as set out in Appendix 2.

(3)  That the delegation of powers relating to grants and concessions be transferred from the Cabinet Member for Finance and Governance to the Cabinet Member for Community Services, and that the Cabinet Member for Finance and Governance be empowered to act if the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To appoint representatives to serve on external organisations for 2015-2016.

RESOLVED

(1)  That representatives be appointed to serve on the external organisations for 2015-2016, as set out in the Appendix to this report.

(2)  That members appointed to these organisations be asked to report by April 2016 on whether there is continued merit in a member being appointed, taking account of the interests of the District Council and/or the ward member.

The Cabinet considered the report circulated with the agenda (copy attached to the official minutes).

The Chairman introduced the report and commented that the value of continued membership of some of the organisations listed should be reviewed. He, therefore, proposed that members appointed to these organisations should be asked to report back, before the appointments were made for 2016-17, on whether there was continued merit in member representation in terms of the interests either of the Council or the ward member.

RESOLVED

(1)       That representatives be appointed to serve on the external organisations for 2015-2016, as set out in the Appendix to this report.

(2)       That members appointed to these organisations be asked to report by April 2016 on whether there is continued merit in a member being appointed, taking account of the interests of the District Council and/or the ward member.

There are no restricted items for consideration.

However, the documents listed below include information which is considered to

be exempt under Paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972

and is attached for members of the Cabinet and senior officers only (salmon

paper). If the discussion in respect of items 5 and 6 on the agenda above so warrants it,

the Cabinet will be asked to consider whether the public, including the press,

should be excluded from the meeting on the grounds of exemption under

Paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, 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.

5 Plot 21, Terminus Road, Chichester

Appendix: Project Initiation Document (PID)

6 Land at Church Road, Chichester

Report and Appendix 2: List of Offers received and impact on projected capital receipt

The press and public were not excluded for any part of the meeting.