Public Document Pack Council
Members of the Council of Gravesham Borough Council are summoned to attend a meeting to be held at the Civic Centre, Windmill Street, Gravesend, Kent on Tuesday, 27 April 2010 at 7.00 pm when the business specified in the following agenda is proposed to be transacted.
S Kilkie Assistant Director (Communities)
Agenda
Part A Items likely to be considered in Public 1. Prayer
2. Presentation of Awards The Mayor will acknowledge and congratulate on behalf of the Council the recipients of the under mentioned awards which have been received in respect of the Cobham Ashenbank Management Scheme:-
Country Life ‘Country House of the Year 2009’
RTPI South East Region Planning Awards 2009: Winner; Heritage and Rural Regeneration Winner; Overall Awards
RTPI National Planning Awards 2009: Commendation; Heritage
Kent Design Awards 2009 Winner; Restoration Winner; Lord Sandy Bruce Lockhart Award, Project of the Year
3. Apologies for absence
4. Minutes of meeting Tuesday, 2 March 2010 of Council (Pages 1 - 12)
5. Minutes of meeting Tuesday, 9 March 2010 of Council (Pages 13 - 20)
Civic Centre, Windmill Street, Gravesend Kent DA12 1AU 6. To declare any interests members may have in the items contained on this agenda. When declaring an interest a member must state what their interest is
7. To answer any questions received from members of the public of which notice has been given under Council Procedure Rule 13
8. Minutes To receive and adopt the proceedings, reports and recommendations of the following committees, except those items reserved under Council Procedure Rule 5.2 (6) and to ratify and confirm the orders made by them.
a) Minutes of meeting Monday, 8 March 2010 of Cabinet (Pages 21 - 26) b) Minutes of meeting of 11 March 2010 of Crime and Disorder (Pages 27 - 30) Scrutiny Committee c) Minutes of meeting Wednesday, 17 March 2010 of Regulatory (Pages 31 - 44) Board d) Minutes of meeting Thursday, 25 March 2010 of Overview Scrutiny (Pages 45 - 48) Committee e) Minutes of meeting Tuesday, 30 March 2010 of Finance and Audit (Pages 49 - 56) Committee f) Minutes of meeting Tuesday, 6 April 2010 of Cabinet (Pages 57 - 64) g) Minutes of meeting Wednesday, 14 April 2010 of Regulatory Board - to follow. h) Minutes of meeting Thursday, 15 April 2010 of Overview Scrutiny Committee - to follow. i) Minutes of meeting Monday, 19 April 2010 of Regulatory Board - to follow. 9. Minutes of the Gravesham Joint Transportation Board
a) Minutes of meeting Wednesday, 24 March 2010 of Gravesham (Pages 65 - 72) Joint Transportation Board 10. Reserved Minutes To receive and adopt the proceedings, reports and recommendations of committees contained in the list of items reserved under Council Procedure Rule 5.2(6) and to ratify and confirm the orders made by them.
The reserved minutes will be dealt with in the following order:- The Cabinet Regulatory Board Finance & Audit Committee Overview Scrutiny Committee Crime & Disorder Scrutiny Committee
11. To consider reports from Officers of the Council
a) Amendments to the Constitution - 2.7 Contract Procedure Rules (Pages 73 - 76) b) Review of Scrutiny Procedure Rules (Pages 77 - 86) 12. To consider questions from Members of the Council of which notice has been given under Council Procedure Rule 14.
13. To receive the Mayor's Announcements.
This page is intentionally left blank Page 1 Agenda Item 4
Gravesham Borough Council
Council
Tuesday, 2 March 2010 7.00pm
Present:
The Worshipful the Mayor Cllr Bronwen McGarrity The Deputy Mayor Cllr William Lambert
Cllrs: Graeme Biggs Sara Langdale Ronald Bowman Rosemary Leadley Lesley Boycott John Loughlin Conrad Broadley Diane Marsh John Burden Lyn Milner John Caller Alex Moore Harold Craske Patricia Oakeshott Jane Cribbon Anthony Pritchard Lee Croxton Makhan Singh John Cubitt Narinderjit Singh-Thandi Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi Richard Smith William Dyke Michael Snelling Greta Goatley Bryan Sweetland Glen Handley Robin Theobald Leslie Hills David Turner Les Howes Adrian Warburton Susan Howes Andrea Webb David Hurley Michael Wenban Kenneth Jones
Glyn Thomson - Chief Executive Nick Brown - Director (Transformation & Finance) Kevin Burbidge - Director (Business) Melanie Norris - Director (Communities) Cheryl Russell - Director (Housing and Environment) Mike Hayley - Assistant Director (Business & Law) Andy Chequers - Assistant Director (Housing & Environment) Julie Gibbs - Service Manager, Finance Stuart Bobby - Principal Accountant Sue Hill - Committee & Elections Manager Nick Channon - Committee Services Officer Graham Cole - Communications Manager
55. Prayer
The Mayor's Chaplain opened the meeting with Prayer.
Council Page 2 2.03.2010
56. Apologies
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Colin Caller, Samir Jassal, Laura Hryniewicz and Derek Sales.
57. Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 8 December 2009 were signed by the Mayor.
58. Declarations of Interest
No declarations were made.
59. Reports of Committees
Motions that proceedings, reports and recommendations of committees, except those reserved under Council Procedure Rule 5.2(b) as referred to below, be received and adopted and where applicable the Orders made by them be ratified and confirmed were duly proposed, seconded and resolved in each case.
Regulatory Board of 9 December 2009 Cabinet of 21 December 2009 Cabinet of 11 January 2010 Overview Scrutiny Committee of 12 January 2010 Regulatory Board of 13 January 2010 Overview Scrutiny Committee of 21 January 2010 Cabinet of 8 February 2010 Finance & Audit Committee of 15 February 2010 Regulatory Board of 17 February 2010 Overview Scrutiny Committee of 18 February 2010
60. Gravesham Joint Transportation Board
The minutes of the Gravesham Joint Transportation Board held on 16 December 2009 were noted.
61. Reserved Minutes
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr David Turner that -
the reserved minute of the Cabinet meeting held on 21 December 2009 be ratified and confirmed.
It was moved by Cllr Leslie Hills and seconded by Cllr Diane Marsh that -
the reserved minutes of the Finance & Audit Committee held on 15 February 2010 be ratified and confirmed.
2 Council Page 3 2.03.2010
It was moved by Cllr John Burden and seconded by Cllr Alex Moore that -
the reserved minute of the Overview Scrutiny Committee held on 18 February 2010 be ratified and confirmed.
62. Order of Agenda
The Mayor stated that the Council would now deal with agenda items 9, 10 and 11 before returning to the minute contained on the list of Minutes that have been reserved.
63. Council Tax Motion
The Council consented under Council Procedure Rule 17.4.1 to an extension of time being given to Cllr Michael Snelling and to an equal amount of time being given to Cllr John Burden in his response.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr David Turner that -
the motion circulated and now before the Council be approved as set out on pages 79 to 90 in the order paper and that minutes 116 (General Fund Revenue Estimates and Capital Programme) and 117 (Housing Revenue Account Estimates and Housing Capital Programme 2010/11) of the Cabinet held on 8 February 2010 be adopted.
It was moved by Cllr John Burden and seconded by Cllr Lee Croxton that -
(1) the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2010/11 to 2012/13 be adopted as a policy document although the rates increase for the financial year 2010/11 be set at 0%;
(2) the Council ratify the attached Council Tax Base as identified in Appendix B;
(3) the application of the Equal Installments Methodology for Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) calculation on all new capital expenditure be approved for 2010/11 and beyond in accordance with the Authority’s Capital Programme;
(4) Members note that the government will be providing £160,000 additional funding to that required for the forthcoming financial year in respect of Concessionary Travel costs, any excess in income over the cost of keeping the Council Tax levy at 0% be transferred to the councils reserves;
(5) the Council sets the Council Tax level increase for the financial year 2010 to 2011 at 0%;
3 Council Page 4 2.03.2010
(6) the Council notes no car park strategy has been produced which demonstrates the provision of a temporary car park at Lord Street at £196,000 is required as such this cost not expended in this financial year as detailed be returned to the reserves;
(7) the Council supports the health strategy of getting under 16’s fit, as such it will provide free swimming to under 16’s during the forthcoming year, as supported in other authorities, at a cost of £147,000 to be taken from the reserves.
The amendment was put to the meeting and declared to be lost by 23 votes to 15.
The substantive motion was put to the meeting and declared to be carried by 23 votes to 15.
It was therefore resolved:-
(1) that it be noted that on 15 January 2010 the Service Manager, Finance calculated the following amounts for the year 2010/11 in accordance with regulations made under Section 33(5) of the Local Government Finance Act, 1992:-
(a) £35,048.94 being the amount calculated, in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992 (as amended), as its council tax base for the year.
(b) Part of the Council's area:
Cobham 665.41 Higham 1,611.56 Luddesdown 103.98 Meopham 3,055.13 Shorne 1,172.48 Vigo 729.53
being the amounts calculated, in accordance with Regulation 6 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992 (as amended), as the amounts of its council tax base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate.
(2) that the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2010/11.
(a) £58,886,320 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 32(2)(a) to (e) of the Act.
(b) £44,442,020 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 32(3)(a) to (c) of the Act.
4 Council Page 5 2.03.2010
(c) £14,444,300 being the amount by which the aggregate at 2(a) above exceeds the aggregate at 2(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 32(4) of the Act, as its budget requirement for the year.
(d) £8,420,800 being the aggregate of the sums which the Council estimates will be payable for the year into its general fund in respect of re-distributed non-domestic rates, revenue support grant and additional grant increased by the amount which the Council estimates will be transferred from its collection fund to its general fund pursuant to section 98(4) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 and reduced by the Authority’s estimate of the amount to be transferred from its general fund to its collection fund pursuant to sections 97(4) and 98(5) of the above Act.
(e) £171.859691 being the amount at 2(c) above less the amount at 2(d) above, all divided by the amount at 1(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 33(1) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year.
(f) £216,240 being the aggregate amount of all special items referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act.
(g) £165.690032 being the amount at 2(e) above less the result given by dividing the amount at 2(f) above by the amount at 1(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates.
(h) Part of the Council's area £ Parish of:
Cobham 182.22 Higham 185.30 Luddesdown 213.39 Meopham 187.62 Shorne 176.61 Vigo 287.50
being the amounts given by adding to the amount at 2(g) above the amounts of the special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council's area mentioned above divided in each case by the amount at 1(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(3) of the Act, as the basic amounts of its council tax for the year for the dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate.
5 Council Page 6 2.03.2010
(i) Part of the Valuation Bands Council's area A B C D E F G H Parish of: £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Cobham 121.48 141.73 161.97 182.22 222.71 263.21 303.70 364.44 Higham 123.53 144.12 164.71 185.30 226.48 267.66 308.83 370.60 Luddesdown 142.26 165.97 189.68 213.39 260.81 308.23 355.65 426.78 Meopham 125.08 145.93 166.77 187.62 229.31 271.01 312.70 375.24 Shorne 117.74 137.36 156.99 176.61 215.86 255.10 294.35 353.22 Vigo 191.67 223.61 255.56 287.50 351.39 415.28 479.17 575.00 All other parts 110.46 128.87 147.28 165.69 202.51 239.33 276.15 331.38
being the amounts given by multiplying the amounts at 2(g) and 2(h) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5(1) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36(1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands.
(3) that it be noted that for the year 2010/11 the Kent County Council has stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:-
Valuation Bands
A B C D E F G H £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ 698.52 814.94 931.36 1,047.78 1,280.62 1,513.46 1,746.30 2,095.56
(4) that it be noted that for the year 2010/11 the Kent Police Authority has stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:-
Valuation Bands
A B C D E F G H £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ 92.45 107.86 123.27 138.68 169.50 200.32 231.13 277.36
(5) that it be noted that for the year 2010/11 the Kent Fire and Rescue Authority, in accordance with section 83 of the Local Government Act 2003, has stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, for each of the categories of dwellings shown below: -
6 Council Page 7 2.03.2010
Valuation Bands
A B C D E F G H £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ 45.30 52.85 60.40 67.95 83.05 98.15 113.25 135.90
(6) that, having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at 2(i), 3, 4 and 5 above, the Council, in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the following amounts as the amounts of council tax for the year 2010-11 for each of the categories of dwellings shown below:-
Part of the Council's area Valuation Bands
A B C D E F G H Parish of: £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £
Cobham 957.75 1,117.38 1,277.00 1,436.63 1,755.88 2,075.14 2,394.38 2,873.26 Higham 959.80 1,119.77 1,279.74 1,439.71 1,759.65 2,079.59 2,399.51 2,879.42 Luddesdown 978.53 1,141.62 1,304.71 1,467.80 1,793.98 2,120.16 2,446.33 2,935.60 Meopham 961.35 1,121.58 1,281.80 1,442.03 1,762.48 2,082.94 2,403.38 2,884.06 Shorne 954.01 1,113.01 1,272.02 1,431.02 1,749.03 2,067.03 2,385.03 2,862.04 Vigo 1,027.94 1,199.26 1,370.59 1,541.91 1,884.56 2,227.21 2,569.85 3,083.82 All other parts 946.73 1,104.52 1,262.31 1,420.10 1,735.68 2,051.26 2,366.83 2,840.20
(7) the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2010/11 to 2012/13 be adopted as a policy document;
(8) the Council Tax Base be ratified;
(9) the application of the Equal Instalments Methology for Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) calculation on all new capital expenditure be approved for 2010/11 and beyond in accordance with the Authority's Capital Programme;
(10) minutes 116 (General Fund Revenue Estimates and Capital Programme) and 117 (Housing Revenue Account Estimates and Housing Capital Programme 2010/11) of the Cabinet held on 8 February 2010 be adopted.
64. Members Allowances 2010/11
The Council considered the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel arising from its meeting on 3 December 2009.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr Harold Craske that -
(1) the Independent Remuneration Panel be thanked for their consideration on and their proposals in respect of Members' Allowances for 2010/11;
(2) the Council accepts the principles set out in the recommendations from the panel but, in the light that staff
7 Council Page 8 2.03.2010
may not receive any increases to their salaries through the national pay awards plus the difficulties organisations such as charities face due to the economic recession, will not implement the rises for the municipal year of 2010/11 and instead will vire the proposed increases to the Members' Allowance Scheme of £3,300 to the Mayor's Charity Fund;
(3) as recommended by the Panel, no increase be made to the Members Subsistence/mileage allowance.
With the consent of both the mover and seconder of the motion it was agreed that recommendation (2) be amended to read as follows:-
(2) the Council accepts the principles set out in the recommendations from the panel but, in the light that staff may not receive any increases to their salaries through the national pay awards plus the difficulties organisations such as charities face due to the economic recession, will not implement the rises for the municipal year of 2010/11 and instead will vire the proposed increases to the Members' Allowance Scheme of £3,300 to a budget line in respect of charities to be identified by Cllrs Michael Snelling and John Burden.
The motion, as amended, was put to the Council and declared to be carried.
65. Review of Scrutiny Procedures
Members considered proposals for changes to the Constitution in respect of the Council's scrutiny procedures which had been received without debate at the Council meeting held on 8 December 2009.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr David Turner that -
the proposals for changes to the Constitution in respect of the Council's scrutiny procedures be approved and adopted.
The motion was put to the meeting and declared to be carried.
66. Scrutiny of Crime and Disorder Matters
Members considered proposals for the scrutiny of crime and disorder matters to meet the requirements of Section 19 of the Police and Justice Act 2006.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr David Turner that -
(1) the Council endorse the Cabinet decision taken on 11 January 2010 that the Community Safety/ Environment POC take on the function of the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee;
(2) Council approves the required changes to the Constitution;
8 Council Page 9 2.03.2010
(3) Council agrees to the meeting of the Community Safety/Environment POC on 11 March 2010 to be its first meeting as the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee.
The motion was put to the meeting and declared to be carried.
67. Code of Corporate Governance for Gravesham Borough Council
Members were presented with an updated Code of Corporate Governance for Gravesham Borough Council for formal adoption.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr David Turner that -
the Council adopts the Code of Corporate Governance for incorporation into the Council's Constitution.
The motion was put to the meeting and declared to be carried.
68. Working in Partnership Framework for Gravesham Borough Council
Members considered the formal adoption of the updated "Working in Partnership Framework" for Gravesham Borough Council.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr David Turner that -
the Council adopts the Working in Partnership Framework for incorporation into the Council's Policy Framework.
The motion was put to the meeting and declared to be carried.
69. Appointments to Outside Bodies
(1) Appointment of two Members to sit on the Board of The Alpha Foundation.
This item was deferred at the meeting of the Council held on 8 December 2009.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr John Cubitt that -
Cllrs David Turner and John Burden be appointed to the main Board of The Alpha Foundation.
The motion was put to the Council and declared to be carried by 23 votes with 11 abstensions.
(2) Representative Trustee to Elizabeth Huggins Cottages Charity.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr John Cubitt that -
Cllr Bronwen McGarrity be appointed Representative Trustee to the Elizabeth Huggins Cottages Charity for a four year period.
9 Council Page 10 2.03.2010
The motion was put to the meeting and declared to be carried. (3) Gravesend Age Concern.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr David Turner that -
Cllr Patricia Oakeshott be appointed as a representative to Gravesend Age Concern in place of Cllr Diane Marsh.
The motion was put to the meeting and declared to be carried.
(4) Gravesham District Partnership.
It was moved by Cllr Michael Snelling and seconded by Cllr David Turner that -
Cllr Ronald Bowman be appointed to the Gravesham District Partnership Group in place of Cllr Diane Marsh.
The motion was put to the meeting and declared to be carried.
70. Reserved Items (Continued)
Cabinet of 21 December 2009
With reference to Minute 92, the Minute was noted.
Finance & Audit Committee of 15 February 2010
With reference to Minute 59, the Minute was noted.
With reference to Minute 61, the Minute was noted.
With reference to Minute 66, the Minute was noted.
Overview Scrutiny Committee of 18 February 2010
With reference to Minute 51, the Minute was noted.
Note: During consideration of the item the Mayor drew Members attention to the time and stated that the guillotine will be imposed.
71. Mayor's Announcements
The Mayor made the following announcements:-
(1) The State of the Borough Council meeting will be held on 9 March 2010 at 7.00pm;
(2) The Mayor's Ball will be held on Friday, 5 March 2010 in the Woodville Halls;
10 Council Page 11 2.03.2010
(3) A race night will be held on Monday, 29 March 2010 at the Conservative Club, Parrock Road, Gravesend;
(4) A Fish 'N Chip supper will be held on Thursday, 22 April 2010.
Close of meeting
The meeting ended at 10.03 pm.
11 Page 12
This page is intentionally left blank Page 13 Agenda Item 5
Gravesham Borough Council
State of the Borough Council Meeting
Tuesday, 9 March 2010 7.00pm
Present:
The Worshipful the Mayor Cllr Bronwen McGarrity The Deputy Mayor Cllr William Lambert
Cllrs: Graeme Biggs Samir Jassal Ronald Bowman Kenneth Jones Conrad Broadley Sara Langdale John Burden John Loughlin Colin Caller Diane Marsh John Caller Lyn Milner Harold Craske Alex Moore Jane Cribbon Anthony Pritchard Lee Croxton Makhan Singh John Cubitt Narinderjit Singh-Thandi Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi Richard Smith Greta Goatley Michael Snelling Glen Handley Bryan Sweetland Leslie Hills Robin Theobald Les Howes David Turner Susan Howes Adrian Warburton Laura Hryniewicz Andrea Webb David Hurley Michael Wenban
Glyn Thomson - Chief Executive Nick Brown - Director (Transformation & Finance) Kevin Burbidge - Director (Business) Melanie Norris - Director (Communities) Mike Hayley - Assistant Director (Business & Law) Sarah Kilkie - Assistant Director (Communities) Sue Hill - Committee & Elections Manager Nick Channon - Committee Services Officer Graham Cole - Communications Manager
72. Prayer
The Mayor's Chaplain opened the meeting with Prayer.
73. Apologies
Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Lesley Boycott, William Dyke, Rosemary Leadley, Patricia Oakeshott and Derek Sales. State of the Borough Council Meeting Page 14 9.03.2010
74. Declarations of Interest
No declarations were made.
75. State of the Borough Debate
The Chief Executive stated that the State of the Borough debate will be held on an annual basis and that future State of the Borough Debates will normally be held in January of each year.
The debate will commence with a speech from the Leader of the Executive, Cllr Michael Snelling, followed by a reply from the Leader of the Opposition, Cllr John Burden, and a right of reply from the Leader of the Executive. These are the only two Members who speak on this issue.
The Leader of the Executive, Cllr Michael Snelling, in opening the debate stated that when the Conservative administration took control of the Council in May 2007 the priority was to implement the promises made by his Party. Cllr Snelling listed the following initiatives, projects and redevelopment schemes in order to restore pride within the Borough.
• financial situation repaired; • enhancement of the Christmas lights scheme in the town centre; • introduced the St George's Day Parade and retention of the Big Day Out; • funding of £300,000 towards a pontoon to allow cruise liners to moor on the Town Pier; • the re-generation of the town centre including the Transport Quarter, the Heritage Quarter and the introduction of the High Speed Train Service (HS1); • the Family Friendly Town Initiative had been launched; • new partnerships with businesses; • a temporary car park in Lord Street; • repayment of over £300,000 to the Housing Capital Account; • acquisition of the Ebbsfleet United Football Ground thus securing the long term future of the Football Club.
The Leader stated that Gravesham Borough Council was in its thirty sixth year of existence.
Current population statistics showed that 86 per cent of the population (of 98,000) live in the urban area and 80 per cent of the borough was made up of rural land.
There were vulnerable wards within the borough with large discrepancies between life expectancy and health and education inequalities which needed to be addressed. Crime within the borough showed a downward trend.
In the future the borough needs to capitalise on its assets and the recent introduction of the High Speed Rail Service from Gravesend and the International Station at Ebbsfleet will make an enormous difference to the borough.
Cllr Michael Snelling emphasised the importance of partnership working with other agencies.
2 State of the Borough Council Meeting Page 15 9.03.2010
Cllr John Burden in his response stated that the community want to know the basic issue of what elected Members do and why they do it. The Council needs to care for all the needs of all of its residents and be responsible for its actions in undertaking this role.
The Government over the past four years had allocated grant funding of over £700,000 to the borough.
The Town Pier had been purchased by Central Government funding together with the preservation of the Old Town Hall, The Darnley Mausoleum and other initiatives under the Cobham Ashenbank Management Scheme for the enjoyment of the borough's residents.
Central Government funding had also been used towards the funding of the Transport Quarter, the moving and widening of the A2 between Cobham and Pepper Hill to improve the air quality of residents along the A2.
New cycle paths had also been introduced and the hospital at Darenth opened which had benefited residents of the borough.
Crime had reduced as a result of local authority working in partnership with the Police and since 1998 an additional 17,000 police officers had been employed nationally dealing with local issues and concerns of residents.
Cllr Burden wished to see free swimming introduced for children under 16 within the borough. The Council needs to think of the children and build on initiatives to secure their future.
The Labour Group had proposed a zero increase in the borough's element of the council tax over the last two years. Working with neighbouring councils, charities and other key partners was crucial as was listening to the views of residents.
In concluding the State of the Borough Debate the Leader of the Executive, Cllr Michael Snelling, stated that with the current economic climate it is inevitable that cuts will need to be made and the public need to make a judgement.
Cllr Snelling was grateful that Gravesham was an integral part of the Thameside Gateway Area.
All grants and external funding received by the Council is put into good use, a prime example being the A2 Activity Centre which will incorporate a cycle park and other activities at a cost of £9 million.
In respect of crime in the borough there was disparity with the rest of Kent and there was a need to change the behavioural patterns of young offenders and those likely to offend.
As the borough had two of the most deprived wards in Kent, it had been prioritised for action under the Schools for the Future Programme. Proposals were currently being progressed in Gravesham.
Cllr Snelling concluded the debate by thanking Members of the Citizens Panel for their continued contribution on consultations prioritising how public money should be spent within the borough.
3 State of the Borough Council Meeting Page 16 9.03.2010
76. Topics for debate
The Chief Executive stated that the next part of the meeting would be to debate two topics chosen by members of the Residents Panel by public poll from a list of six topics of which three each were submitted by each political group.
Each topic would be introduced by a Cabinet Member with the Shadow Cabinet Member being the second speaker.
The penultimate speaker would be the Leader of the Opposition and The Leader would close the debate on each topic.
The Chief Executive stated further that the debate would not be making formal decisions during the evening. A report would be submitted to the Cabinet outlining what had happened at this Council meeting and seeking to summarise the main points that were made. This would enable any points to be progressed if action was required.
He also reminded Members that, as at any time of the year, there were a number of planning applications for sites in the town centre that were with the Council to determine. It was not for this meeting of the Council to discuss these but for the Regulatory Board on other occasions.
Topic 1
Our vision for the future of our town centre embracing pursuit of "the family friendly Gravesend" concept, current regeneration plans and projects, capitalising on High Speed 1, utilising our river asset and opportunities from the 2012 Olympics.
The debate on the topic was introduced by Cllr John Cubitt, Cabinet Member for Community Safety/Environment.
Cllr Cubitt outlined a vision for the town centre and stated that due to the current downturn in the economy some aspects for the future look gloomy but there are also many positives. Cllr Cubitt stated that funding had been acquired to undertake a deep clean of the town centre and that the Council's Community Safety Unit was highly skilled and been responsible in partnership with the Police for delivering some of the best crime reduction initiatives in the County.
Cllr Cubitt asked that Members debate the Family Friendly Gravesham Initiative, Christmas Lighting Scheme, St George's Parade, Vasaki Festival, Festival of Lights, Car Parking and the Heritage Quarter under this topic.
Cllr Andrea Webb, Shadow Cabinet Member for Community Safety/Environment stated that the key to receiving a legacy for future generations is sometimes by looking back at the past in order to build plans for the future and by consulting with the community.
There is a need for diversification and Gravesham is on the brink of many beneficial ideals.
The creation of new jobs and businesses must be undertaken with the agreement of residents. The sympathetic regeneration of the town centre together with the possibilities for growth must be undertaken through the consultation process.
4 State of the Borough Council Meeting Page 17 9.03.2010
There is a need to encourage people to live in the town centre to make it a safer place to live and work.
One of the main assets of the borough is the River Thames.
Several other Members spoke to the debate and raised the following points:-
• the Thames Gateway and 2012 Olympics will be key generators of employment and tourism for the borough; • High Speed 1 will attract new residents to the town. Both new and existing communities will need to access services provided by the Council; • the Sure Start Scheme has been crucial in providing activities for children; • Gravesham is a Riparian Borough and the river should be left open to allow free access to it. The Town Pier and the proposed pontoon will benefit the borough and enhance use of the river. • green spaces and the borough's heritage need to be protected; • free swimming for the under 16's needs to be introduced at the Council's Leisure Centre; • the 2012 Olympics will generate tourism for the borough. The main Olympic site is less than 20 minutes from Gravesend by rail; • the Council will need to exploit the 2012 Olympics in order to leave a legacy and encourage people to stay in the borough beyond this period; • in order to enhance the Olympics it is hoped that a floating 5 star hotel will be moored at Gravesend, which will be significant; • camp sites will be provided in the borough during the duration of the 2012 Olympics; • the Tour de France when it came through Kent (and Gravesend) in July 2007 generated an estimated £3m in tourism etc. It is hoped that the income generated in the borough during the 2012 Olympics will far exceed this figure; • as the borough strives to be family friendly, the A2 Activity Park will be a great asset in providing a place where residents can meet, walk, cycle and take their children; • the Council gained "Beacon Status" during 2001/02 for town centre regeneration; • future developments for the town centre need to be of a high quality avoiding cramped sterile developments; • regeneration and community safety had been identified by the Residents Panel as the top two priorities for the Council to concentrate on; • the Local Development Framework, once adopted, will provide the framework for future development and will need to revitalise riverside opportunities; • the new Gurdwara is nearing completion and will complement the town; • the provision of Affordable Housing, in particular to attract key workers to the borough will be needed; • currently there are no public slipways, walk on - walk off facilities on the Thames (apart from St Katherine's Dock), therefore the provision of a pontoon will be a step in the right direction. A river boat service from Gravesend to London for commuters should also be investigated; • the Council is listening to young people. A Vox Box (Youth Council) has been established and consulted over the Heritage Quarter and Transport Quarter. Currently a group of young people are engaged in a Councillor Shadowing Scheme; • the Big Gig is facilitated by the young people as part of the Big Day Out and Big 7 celebrations. The adizone will soon be on stream and Multi Purpose Games Areas (MUGAs) are being provided at various locations within the borough. The use of these facilities is free;
5 State of the Borough Council Meeting Page 18 9.03.2010
• the Council still has almost 6,000 council properties. These will be compliant with the Decent Homes Standard during 2010. In respect of negative subsidy the Council will await the outcome of government proposals after the General Election. The Council works in partnership with Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) on housing projects. One success story has been the redevelopment of the Christian Fields estate; • the introduction of High Speed 1 will lead to an increase in commuter traffic. The borough does not want to be seen as another "portal" for London. The recession has caused problems but Ebbsfleet can be used as a support centre in respect of the 2012 Olympics.
Cllr John Burden, being the penultimate speaker on the topic, made the following points:-
• the Transport Quarter, The River Thames, High Speed 1 and Eurostar are and will be assets to the borough. The biggest asset is the residents of the borough themselves; • Gravesham is at the heart of Kent and regeneration is the key to its enhancement. Residents need to be encouraged to contact the Council to express what they want the Council to provide.
Cllr Michael Snelling closed the debate on the topic and made the following comments:-
• the borough cannot stand still - it can either go forward or backwards; • Gravesend town centre has, in the shadow of Bluewater, retained many of its key stores- Marks & Spencer's, Debenhams and British Home Stores; • there is a need for a better "night time" economy and for the licensing laws to be looked at; • the future of the town centre is very bright.
Topic 2
The type of Council we can and should run against a backdrop of less Government money to support our duties and objectives.
The topic was introduced by Cllr Adrian Warburton, Cabinet Member for Transformation.
• there will be considerable spending cuts next year. Local government will be a soft target as rather than raise money through taxation grants to local government will be reduced. The Council budget includes a projection that the government Grant will reduce by 10 per cent in 2011/12, 5 per cent in 2012/13 and 2013/14. The Council will need to make significant savings; • there will be a streamlining of the Customer Services base. Initiatives such as "e" billing will be implemented. The use of the Council's website will be promoted and an automated telephone service will be implemented so there will be "avoidable contact". There will be a "fast tracking" of claims etc. via a one-stop shop facility.
Cllr Lee Croxton spoke as the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and Shadow Cabinet member for Housing.
• there is a north/south divide within the Borough - those who live to the north of the A2 and those who live to the south of the A2; • 50 jobs at the Council have been lost over the last five years and there will be more jobs lost over the next three years;
6 State of the Borough Council Meeting Page 19 9.03.2010
• a unitary authority comprising Gravesham, Dartford, Swanley and possibly Tilbury could best serve the residents of the borough.
Several other Members spoke to the debate and raised the following points:-
• there are challenging times ahead for the borough. Those people who are most vulnerable need to be prioritised. The Council needs to work in partnership with neighbouring authorities and must utilise private and public schemes; • the finances of the Council were running at an overspend when the Conservatives took control of the authority in 2007. Initiatives were introduced to make identified services more competitive and streamlined; • due to the recession the Benefits Section are dealing with twice as many claims as at the time when the Conservatives took control of the Council; • the Council is always looking at ways to cut costs but also to improve the quality of services given to its residents; • the Building Control Partnership, comprising Gravesham, Medway and Swale Councils, was put in place by the Labour Administration; • it will be a retrograde step if Gravesham was to combine with other Councils to become a unitary authority. The Council would lose its identity. Residents will continue to be best served by Gravesham Borough Council and Kent County Council; • the level of Government Grant the council receives each year will be decided upon by which ever government is in power. The present administration needs to be careful in that it does not count the cost of everything and the value of nothing; • Kent County Council "lost " £50m by investing in Icelandic Banks - where was the money to grit the footpaths for elderly people during the recent bad weather; • the Council must serve the people the Council represents. To balance the books is a difficult task without the cutting of services. The Council does not want to have to introduce fortnightly refuse collection rounds; • the Council needs to utilise and work closely with the voluntary sector.
Cllr John Burden, being the penultimate speaker on the topic, made the following points:-
• the debate on this topic has focussed on money rather than service delivery and the services the Council is going to provide; • there is a need for less duplication on what the Council is doing now and there is too much emphasis on monitoring. There is a case for a Unitary Authority which will lead to more streamlined working.
Cllr Michael Snelling closed the debate on this topic and made the following comments:-
• on the subject of Unitary Authorities, whoever is in power following the General Election will not pursue this option due to the high costs involved; • the Council will be one that does things. Residents want good quality leisure facilities, a safe borough, the Big Day Out, firework displays etc. The Council is heading towards "shared services" but will retain the special identity of the borough.
77. Close of meeting
The Mayor thanked people for their attendance and closed the meeting at 9pm.
7 Page 20
This page is intentionally left blank Page 21 Agenda Item 8a
Cabinet
Monday, 8 March 2010 7.00pm
Present:
Cllr Michael Snelling (Chairman) Cllr David Turner (Vice-Chairman)
Cllrs: John Cubitt Anthony Pritchard Adrian Warburton
Note: Cllrs Lee Croxton and Andrea Webb were also in attendance
Glyn Thomson Chief Executive Nick Brown Director (Transformation & Finance) Kevin Burbidge Director (Business) Melanie Norris Director (Communities) Cheryl Russell Director (Housing and Environment) Mike Hayley Assistant Director (Business & Law) Sarah Kilkie Assistant Director (Communities) S Sangha Assistant Director (Special Projects) Nick Channon Committee Services Officer John Pexton Transport Quarter Project Manager
120. Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 8 February 2010 were signed by the Chairman.
121. Declarations of Interest
No declarations of interest were made.
122. Delegated Decisions - Cabinet
The following decision had been taken by the Leader of the Executive on 11 February 2010.
That land adjoining 170 Livingstone Road, Gravesend be declared surplus to requirements and the Director (Business) in association with the Assistant Director (Business & Law) be authorised to formally dispose of the land to the owner of 170 Livingstone Road, Gravesend.
123. Review of Scrutiny Procedures
The Cabinet was advised of the review of Scrutiny Procedures Working Group's findings on pre-decision scrutiny and the scrutiny of partnerships.
1 Page 22 Cabinet 8.03.2010
In respect of pre-decision scrutiny the Working Group concluded that it was not practicable to include all decisions in Gravesham's Forward Plan, nor use divisional service plans as pre-decision aide. It is suggested that the time covered by the Forward Plan should be extended to six months and that the final limits for inclusion be reduced. If the changes recommended by the Working Party in respect of pre-decision scrutiny are adopted changes would be required to the Constitution and the Articles to the Constitution, therefore requiring them to be submitted to meetings of the Council.
In respect of partnership scrutiny the Cabinet had previously recommended that the possibility of Policy Overview Committees being given responsibility for scrutinising partnerships that fall within their remit be approved in principle and officers be requested to submit a further report setting out proposals to take this forward. Members were reminded that Section 5 of the Working in Partnership Framework - Partnership Monitoring and Review paragraph 5.6 - Scrutiny Partnership Arrangements states "Members will have responsibility for the scrutiny of partnerships in line with the Council's Constitution".
The Corporate Register of Partnerships has 25 partnerships listed as "significant". With a number of significant partnerships and the added responsibility placed on Policy Overview Committees of pre-decision scrutiny the Working Group concluded that the key significant partnerships need to be identified and allocated to the relevant Policy Overview Committee. The identification of key significant partnerships needed to consider different elements of each partnership such as its strategic importance, financial commitment and other issues including officer time. The Overview Scrutiny Committee could scrutinise some of the more over-arching partnerships such as the Local Strategic Partnership.
A work programme of pre-decision scrutiny and the scrutiny of partnerships will need to be developed and the protocol outlining the scrutiny process and the role of partners in that process needs to be prepared.
It is therefore likely that further amendments to the Constitution will need to be made to take account of the inclusion of the scrutiny of partnerships, the response to any reports or recommendations coming out of the partnership review. Amendments to the terms of reference of Policy Overview Committees may also be necessary.
Resolved that
(1) the working group be thanked for its work;
(2) topics for pre-decision scrutiny be selected from the key decisions listed in the Forward Plan;
(3) the value threshold for key decisions be reduced to £100k;
(4) the period covered by the Forward Plan be extended to six months;
(5) topics for pre-decision scrutiny be jointly agreed between the Chairman of a Policy Overview Committee and the relevant Shadow Lead Member;
(6) pre-decision scrutiny be carried out by the relevant Policy Overview Committee and where cross portfolio issues are being scrutinised either by each Policy Overview Committee or a combined meeting of the relevant Policy Overview Committees;
2 Page 23 Cabinet 8.03.2010
(7) officers in the department from which the pre-decision item is chosen will be responsible for providing any additional information required for its scrutiny;
(8) the amendments to Article 13 of the Constitution and Annex 2.2 – Access to Information Procedure Rules arising from the changes to the Forward Plan process be submitted to the 27 April 2010 meeting of Council without debate and then to the June meeting for discussion/adoption;
(9) a pilot programme of one key partnership per Policy Overview Committee be prepared and circulated to Cabinet and Policy Overview Committee Chairmen;
(10) a protocol for the scrutiny of partnerships be prepared and together with any necessary amendments to the Constitution, be submitted to Cabinet for consideration.
124. Harden Road, Northfleet - Update on Development Project The Cabinet was updated on the Harden Road development project and was requested to authorise the entering into a contract to deliver the proposed new Council homes.
Following a bid to the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) in October 2009 it was announced in mid-January 2010 that the Council had been successful in its bid and had been allocated £345,000 which amounts to approximately 50 per cent of the total scheme costs. Members had previously agreed that up to £400,000 be made available through prudential borrowing in order to match fund the level of grant received from the HCA with the annual cost of repaying the borrowing met by the rental income from the new homes.
Members were informed that the HCA has imposed a very tight timescale on the implementation of this scheme requiring development to commence in June 2010. If this date is not achieved the entire HCA funding may be forfeited. The timetable which needed to be followed in order to comply with these timescales was detailed for Members.
Resolved that the Director (Business) in consultation with the Director (Housing & Environment), Assistant Director (Business & Law) and Lead Member for Housing to award a contract for the Harden Road scheme following a tender process that is compliant with the Council’s Procurement Rules be approved.
125. Outstanding Repairs and Maintenance
The Cabinet was requested to approve the details for the allocation of funding during 2010/11 towards the priorities for repairs and maintenance workload.
Consideration was given to the latest priority list. For 2010/11 the sum has remained at £150,000. Any sums not expended by the end of the financial year will be rolled over to the 2011/12 budget to ensure as much work is completed for the available budget.
Resolved that the proposed weighting of priorities for repairs and cyclical maintenance be approved.
3 Page 24 Cabinet 8.03.2010
126. Gravesend Transport Quarter
The Cabinet was updated on the progress with the Transport Quarter Project including the purchase of properties and materials required to deliver the scheme and proposals for dealing with the temporary re-location of the station car park.
The results of the consultation exercise had been published on the Council's website and hard copies had been made available for viewing at the TownCentric and the Civic Centre.
A planning application for the re-configuration of the Woodville Halls scenery store to facilitate the scheme was given consent in December 2009 and an outline planning application for the overall scheme, together with the conservation area consent was lodged on 8 February 2010 which is likely to go to the May 2010 Regulatory Board for determination.
The Cabinet was also updated on property acquisition and procurement issues in order to progress the scheme, the procurement of granite materials and the Basic Services Agreement with Network Rail including the temporary location of the station car park to the Lord Street site.
The Cabinet thanked the Assistant Director (Business & Law), the Assistant Director (Special Projects) and the Transport Quarter Project Manager for their hard work and endeavour in progressing this scheme.
Resolved that
(1) the Assistant Director (Special Projects) in consultation with the Leader of the Executive and the Assistant Director (Business and Law) be authorised to take all necessary steps to:-
(i) complete the purchase of 15 Darnley Road and also to complete the purchase of 13 Darnley Road, the Lodge at the rear and the poster site affixed to the side of the building subject to agreeing terms;
(ii) secure the procurement of granite paving, sets and kerbing materials suitable for use for highways and paving works required to implement the Transport Quarter masterplan;
(iii) enter into a Basic Services Agreement with Network Rail to a value of £25,000.
(2) the relocation of the 72 spaces at the railway station car park to the temporary Lord Street car park for the duration of the works for the construction of the Transport Quarter interchange;
(3) all costs for resolutions (1) and (2) above to be underwritten by the grant funding from the Homes and Communities Agency.
4 Page 25 Cabinet 8.03.2010
127. Strategic Risk Management - Draft Risk Management Strategy and Draft Corporate Risk Register 2010/11
The Cabinet considered the Council's draft Risk Management Strategy and draft Corporate Risk Register for 2010/11 which had been updated in accordance with the Council's Strategic Risk Management Framework involving Members and officers.
The draft Risk Management Strategy and draft Corporate Risk Register 2010/11 had been considered by both the Finance & Audit Committee and the Transformation Policy Overview Committee and any comments made by the two committees had been taken on board and incorporated into the Draft Risk Management Strategy and Draft Corporate Risk Register for 2010/11.
Resolved that
(1) the updated Risk Management Strategy be approved;
(2) the updated Corporate Risk Register 2010/11 be approved;
(3) the continued publication of the Risk Management Strategy and the Corporate Risk Register 2010/11 on the Council’s website be approved.
128. Data Quality Policy for Gravesham
The Cabinet considered the updated Data quality Policy for the Council. Members were informed that in order to further strengthen the Council's arrangement for Data Quality a review of the Council's Data Quality Policy was undertaken alongside best practice to ensure that the policy remains as comprehensive as possible. The review identified that the Council's existing Data Quality Policy was already in line with best practice and whilst some minor amendments were made to further strengthen the policy there had been a number of items included in the Gravesham Policy which had not been included in others.
Members were informed that the Data Quality Policy may require updating throughout the year and the policy allows for such amendments to be made in agreement with the Council's management team. The Data Quality Policy will be fully reviewed every two years and any updates to the policy from this review will be presented back to Cabinet for approval.
Resolved that the Data Quality Policy be approved.
Close of meeting
The meeting ended at 7.30 pm.
5 Page 26
This page is intentionally left blank Page 27 Agenda Item 8b
Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee
Thursday, 11 March 2010 7.00pm
Present:
Cllr Michael Wenban (Chairman)
Cllrs: Harold Craske Jane Cribbon Glen Handley Leslie Hills Rosemary Leadley Richard Smith
Note: Cllr John Cubitt was also in attendance
Melanie Norris Director (Communities) Sarah Kilkie Assistant Director (Communities) Kath Donald Community Safety Advisor Chief Inspector Philip Painter Kent Police Inspector Mike Coltham Kent Police Doug Finch Scrutiny Officer
1. Apologies
Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Alex Moore, Patricia Oakeshott and Andrea Webb.
2. Strategic Assessment 2009
The Strategic Manager, Community Safety gave a brief overview of the Strategic Assessment which documents the work done by the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) over the previous 12 months up to the end of September 2009. The Assessment compiles information from all the CDRP’s statutory partners and sets the context for the priorities for 2010.
She also referred to the Community Safety Performance Report which showed that there had been a 20.8 per cent reduction in total crime levels between April/Dec 2008 and April/Dec 2009. This was the largest reduction in the County. The priorities for Partnership action for 2010 are:-
1. Acquisitive crime 2. Anti-Social behaviour 3. Substance Misuse 4. Violent Crime 5. Young people 6. Public Confidence/Reassurance.
1 Page 28 Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee 11.03.2010
1. Acquisitive Crime
Gravesham has seen a 32.2 per cent reduction in the theft of motor vehicles. The Kent Probation Service has recently become a statutory partner of the CDRP and as such will be able to help the partnership tackle prolific and repeat offenders. The GSafe membership in Gravesham Town Centre has been maintained despite the recession and is looking to expand to include secondary retailers. There was good partnership working between Gsafe, CCTV and local policing teams and there were plans to extend the coverage of CCTV.
2. Anti-Social Behaviour
Anti-social behaviour has a negative effect on the public’s perception of the borough. The Strategic Manager mentioned the Huntley Avenue project as an example of how the residents and voluntary groups had tackled anti-social behaviour and graffiti to turn the area around and set up it’s own residents association. This community type project was going to be rolled out to other areas in the coming year.
3. Substance Mis-use
Substance mis-use is linked to violent crime and domestic violence. The partnership intends to direct resources at repeat offenders and will use information from NHS partners on hospital admissions to target specific areas and age groups.
4. Violent Crime
The level of serious violent crime in Gravesham is very low at 0.3 offences per 1000 population.
There is a Community Domestic Abuse programme running in North Kent. Perpetrators of abuse have to volunteer and each programme can accommodate up to 12 people. The programme lasts 22 weeks and there are victim support workers allocated to each case to monitor the impact of the programme.
Gravesham’s One Stop Shop for domestic abuse opened in April 2009. On average about two people per week are accessing the service and a publicity drive is currently underway to raise awareness.
5. Young People
There is a Youth Sub-Group of the CDRP which is looking at reducing the number of young people getting into crime. The CDRP wants to change the perception of young people by others and get across that a group of youngsters is not always a bad thing and should not stop people from coming into town to use its facilities.
6. Public Confidence/Reassurance
A communication strategy has been written for the work of the CDRP as a tool to change the public’s perception of crime and disorder in the borough which is seen by the partnership as crucial.
There needs to be a campaign of good news stories and positive messages across the borough throughout the year. Obviously where there are problems these will also be
2 Page 29 Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee 11.03.2010
publicised and what is going to be done about them to present a balanced view. The CDRP website needs to have its profile raised. Publicity needs to underpin everything the CDRP does.
3. Review
The Committee welcomed the opportunity to scrutinise crime and disorder matters but felt that some training was necessary. The Director (Communities) said that in the normal course of events the Committee would have had training in advance but due to the need to fit in one meeting of the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee in the current municipal year this had not been possible.
Members were interested to know how the partnership intended to address the ‘perception of crime’ issue.
Inspector Colton added that tackling the perception issue would not be solved in one go and needed to be dealt with “one bite at a time”
The Committee were concerned that when incidents were reported to the police no one got back to them.
Chief Inspector Painter said that they were introducing a ‘Victims Charter’ which will be part of a system that will update people. The system gives information on current criminal investigations and details of any updates giving officers the opportunity to keep victims informed of the progress of any investigation.
Councillor Cubitt, speaking with the leave of the Chairman, said that reports of anti-social behaviour and graffiti would be coming into the Council to be logged by the Community Safety Unit (CSU) and that the same standards as the police would be applied to the feedback on the investigation of these incidents.
Members said that many of their constituents felt unsafe in the town centre after about 10pm and felt that this was down to a lack of a police presence. Chief Inspector Painter said that there were up to 22 foot patrols in Dartford and Gravesend Town Centres. He added that the recently introduced street pastors were a significant success. He concluded by saying that “it is a safe place to be”.
The Committee wondered whether, with “rubbish or litter lying around” being the highest concern of Gravesham residents, the authority still had an enforcement officer.
The Assistant Director (Communities) replied that yes we do still have an enforcement officer and several other officers and PCSOs that can issue fixed penalty notices for littering offences.
The Committee were concerned that burglary is often described as a “minor” crime when it had a devastating effect on its victims.
Chief Inspector Painter said that neither he nor any of his colleagues would ever describe burglary as a minor crime. He went on to say that currently the average number of burglaries was two per day whereas three years ago this figure would have been 20 to 30. This reduction had been achieved by the rigorous pursuing and conviction of the perpetrators.
3 Page 30 Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee 11.03.2010
The Committee was pleased to hear that the CDRP gives burglary a high priority
When there is a spate of bogus callers Gravesham warns as many people as it can through its wardens, homesafe and PCSOs. These agencies take a door to door approach including the most vulnerable warning everyone that bogus callers are working in the area and at the same time offering advice on additional security to residents.
Resolved that (1) training on the scrutiny of partnerships be arranged for Members of the Committee;
(2) the Committee welcomed the opportunity to scrutinise crime and disorder issues and looked forward to reviewing the progress of the CDRP’s priorities for 2010 later in the year.
Close of meeting
The meeting ended at 8.45 pm.
4 Page 31 Agenda Item 8c
Regulatory Board
Wednesday, 17 March 2010 7.00pm
Present:
Cllr Harold Craske (Chairman) Cllr Robin Theobald (Vice-Chairman)
Cllrs:: Conrad Broadley John Burden Jane Cribbon Kenneth Jones Susan Howes Patricia Oakeshott Richard Smith Michael Wenban
Note: Cllrs Leslie Hills, Anthony Pritchard (for part of the meeting) and Michael Snelling were also in attendance
Martin Goodman Corporate Lawyer Clive Gilbert Service Manager (Development Control) Peter Price Principal Planner Rob Bright Senior Engineer (Development) Martin Rayner Highways Engineer, Kent County Council Carlie Plowman Committee & Scrutiny Assistant
91. Apologies
An apology for absence was received from Cllr Alex Moore. Cllr Patricia Oakeshott attended as his respective substitute.
92. Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 17 February 2010 were signed by the Chairman.
93. Declarations of Interest
Cllr Harold Craske declared a non-prejudicial interest in application GR/2010/0079 - Former Multi Storey Car Park Site, Eden Place/Lord Street, Gravesend, Kent. Cllr Craske made a comment at a Neighbourhood Forum meeting that may have given the impression that he had prejudged this application.
Cllr John Burden declared a non-prejudicial interest in application GR/2009/0979 - Land rear of The Theatre Guild, Vale Road, Northfleet, Kent. Cllr Burden is the Chairman on the Board of Northfleet Age Concern.
1 Page 32 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
Cllr Harold Craske declared a non-prejudicial interest in application GR/2009/0979 - Land rear of The Theatre Guild, Vale Road, Northfleet, Kent. Cllr Craske is a Trustee on the Board of Northfleet Age Concern.
Cllr Susan Howes declared a non-prejudicial interest in application GR/2009/0979 - Land rear of The Theatre Guild, Vale Road, Northfleet, Kent. Cllr Howes is a patient at this surgery.
Cllr Harold Craske, Robin Theobald, Conrad Broadley, John Burden, Jane Cribbon, Kenneth Jones, Susan Howes, Patricia Oakeshott, Richard Smith and Michael Wenban declared a non-prejudicial interest in application GR/2010/0007 - Land rear of 27, 28, 29 & 30 The Russets, Meopham, Kent as they know one of the applicants, Cllr Anthony Pritchard.
Cllr Anthony Pritchard declared a personal and prejudicial interest in application GR/2010/0007 - Land rear of 27, 28, 29 & 30 The Russets, Meopham, Kent. Cllr Pritchard is one of the applicants. Pursuant to paragraph 2.5.2 of the Code of Conduct Cllr Pritchard remained entitled to make representations and answer questions about the application before withdrawing from the Chamber while it was considered.
Vice-Chair in the Chair
94. GR/2010/0079 - Former Multi Storey Car Park Site, Eden Place/Lord Street, Gravesend, Kent
The Board considered application GR/2010/0079 for the laying out of temporary car park for approximately 185 vehicles with associated vehicular access/egress from/onto Eden Place/ Lord Street and re-instatement of pedestrian footpath to Manor Road.
Resolved that application GR/2010/0079 be DELEGATED to the Service Manager (Development Control) for PERMISSION, subject to the views of the Environment Agency, and subject to the following conditions:-
(1) the use hereby permitted as a temporary car park cease not later than three years from the date of permission;
(2) before the use hereby permitted is commenced, a scheme for dust suppression shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority, and the approved arrangements shall be maintained at all times that the car park is in use;
(3) prior to the site coming into use as a public car park, details of all matters relating to highway signposting, entry control and works within Eden Place to be submitted to the Planning and Highway Authorities for approval along with matters relating to the future adoption/stopping up of highway areas necessary to access the proposed site. Such works and procedures are to be completed to the satisfaction of both authorities prior to operational use;
(4) any existing York Stone Flag Surface on the pedestrian link over the railway must be retained and not be tarmaced over, and the details and samples of any further materials and finishes to be used on the pedestrian link must be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.
2 Page 33 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
INFORMATIVE: REASONS FOR GRANT OF PERMISSION
(1) Having regard to all relevant material planning considerations, permission has been granted because, subject to compliance with the planning conditions, the development would not materially harm any interest of acknowledged importance.
(2) The decision has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals of the development plan, principally:
Gravesham Local Plan (First Review) 1994: Policy P1: Public Car Parking in Central Gravesend Proposal PP1: Public Car Parking in Central Gravesend Policy AP9: Manor Road Policy T1: Impact of Development on Highway Network Policy T2: Impact of Development on Highway Network Policy T3: Impact of Development on Highway Network (Adjacent to) Policy TC3: Development affecting a Conservation Area
Chairman in the Chair
95. GR/2009/1011 - Gala Bingo Hall, 65 New Road, Gravesend, Kent
The Board considered application GR/2009/1011 for the use of premises as D2 (including use as dance hall and concert hall) supplemented by D1 use (exhibition hall for special interests and conferences) and A3 banqueting hall.
Resolved that subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement, application GR/2009/1011 be PERMITTED subject to:-
(1) the development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted. The use shall cease not later than 3 years after it is first commenced;
(2) prior to the to the commencement of the use hereby permitted details of all proposed external lighting including location, type and luminosity shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved lighting shall thereafter be fully installed on site prior to commencement of the permitted use;
(3) prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted details of proposed refuse storage shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and continue to be employed unless written permission is firstly obtained from the Local planning Authority. Storage facilities provided shall be of sufficient capacity having regard to the quantity of waste produced and the frequency of waste collection. All waste shall be removed from site on a regular basis by a licensed waste carrier and disposed of at a licensed waste disposal site;
(4) the use hereby permitted shall not open to customers other than between of the hours of 11.00 and 24.00 in respect of the A3 and D2 uses and 9.00
3 Page 34 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
to 21.00 in respect of the D1 use. Public entry and exit (except in an emergency) shall only be via the New Road entrance;
(5) prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted details of any proposed extraction particularly regarding odour elimination abilities and likely noise emissions, system shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any installation approved shall be installed prior to the commencement of the permitted use and thereafter operated and maintained in accordance with the approved details;
(6) prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted a scheme of sound insulation for the building shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details;
(7) (a) the rating level of the noise emitted from any plant and equipment associated with these premise (other than noise from the exit or entry of road vehicles), shall not exceed the existing background noise level by more than 3dB. The noise levels shall be determined at nearest noise sensitive premises. The measurements and assessments shall be made according to BS4142:1997; (b) the applicant shall provide a suitable noise report demonstrating that amplified sound from these premises shall not exceed Noise Rating Curve 30 over the full spectrum octave range at nearby noise sensitive premises’ habitable rooms (locations to be agreed with Local Planning Authority prior to the report being commissioned). No events with amplified sound shall take place in the premises until the report has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the works in the report agreed as being necessary have been carried out to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
INFORMATIVE: REASON FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION
The proposed change of use is not considered to potentially cause unacceptable demonstrable harm to the local environment or other matters of acknowledged interest given the existing ambient conditions and in the light of the safeguards provided by the conditions attached to the permission and a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act.
Licensing Informative:
It is likely that these premises will require to be licensed under the Licensing Act 2003. The applicant should discuss this proposal further with The Councils Licensing Team. They can be contacted on (01474) 33 71 83.
Control of noise emitted from premises:
The rating level of the noise emitted from any plant and equipment associated with these premise (other than noise from the exit or entry of road vehicles), shall not exceed the existing background noise level by more than 3dB. The noise levels shall be determined at nearest noise sensitive premises. The measurements and assessments shall be made according to BS4142:1997.
4 Page 35 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
Control of noise emitted from premises:
The applicant shall provide a suitable noise report demonstrating that amplified sound from these premises shall not exceed Noise Rating Curve 30 over the full spectrum octave range at the nearest noise sensitive premise’s habitable room. No events with amplified sound shall take place in the premises until the report has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the works in the report agreed as being necessary have been carried out to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Ventilation Extraction System Requirements:
Details of ventilation extraction system, particularly regarding odour elimination abilities and likely noise emissions, to be submitted for approval in writing to the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of works.
Ventilation Extraction System - Advisory Notes:
Compliance with the following is required regarding the ventilation extraction system:-
• the extraction system including odour reduction equipment shall be maintained at all times; • a full spectrum octave analysis of the ventilation fan shall be made demonstrating that the Noise Rating Curve 30 will not breached at the nearest residential premises; • inclusion of activated carbon filtration into the installation; • the ventilation system should be capable of achieving 30 air changes per hour after the odour reduction filters have been fitted; • the flue outlet shall be situated one metre (1.0m) above the eaves of the roof.
It should be noted that compliance with such requirements however, may not necessarily preclude action taken by this Department with regards to noise or odour nuisance arising from the ventilation extraction installation.
Further information can be obtained by contacting the Regulatory Services, Telephone [01474] 337334.
Commercial Refuse Arrangements - Advisory Notes:
Compliance with the Environmental Protection Act 1990 "Duty of Care" is essential.
Advice on Solid Waste Management can be obtained from Waste Services on [01474] 337533.
Licensing Informative:
It is likely that these premises will require to be licensed under the Licensing Act 2003. The applicant should discuss this proposal further with The Councils Licensing Team. They can be contacted on (01474) 33 71 83.
5 Page 36 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
96. GR/2009/0979 - Land rear of The Theatre Guild, Vale Road, Northfleet, Kent
The Board considered application GR/2009/0979 for the erection of part two storey, part single storey building to provide a primary care centre and pharmacy (Stage 3) with associated car parking and landscaping.
Resolved that application GR/2009/0979 be PERMITTED subject to the following conditions:-
(1) the development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted;
(2) the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in its entirety and in complete accordance with the approved plans and particulars and pursuant to any conditions contained hereinafter;
(3) the building hereby permitted shall be used as a primary medical care centre within Class D1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended and for no other purpose;
(4) the car parking area shown on the approved drawing, including any access and turning areas shall be formed, surfaced, drained and marked out in accordance with details to be first submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the bringing into use of the building hereby permitted; thereafter it shall be used for and kept available for such use at all times when the building is in use;
(5) full details of all boundary treatments to the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development; the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before the building hereby permitted is brought into use;
(6) full details of all surface treatments and hard and soft landscaping to the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development; such details shall include details of all existing trees on the site including any replacement for those to be removed; the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before the building hereby permitted is brought into use and any new plating shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Authority for a period of five years following implementation;
(7) details and samples of the external facing materials including colour finishes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development; the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;
(8) the development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and in particular the following mitigation measures:-
6 Page 37 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
(i) identification and provision of a safe route into and out of the northern side of the site;
(ii) finished floor levels are set no lower than 300mm above local ground level.
(9) prior to the commencement of development approved by this permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) a contaminated land assessment (in accordance with the CLEA guidelines and CLR 11 methodology) and associated remedial strategy, together with a timetable of works, being submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval:-
(a) the contaminated land assessment shall include a desk study to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The desk study shall detail the history of the site uses and propose a site investigation strategy based on the relevant information discovered by the desk study. The strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to investigations commencing on site;
(b) the site investigation, including relevant soil, soil gas, surface and groundwater sampling, shall be carried out by a suitably qualified and accredited consultant/contractor in accordance with a Quality Assured sampling and analysis methodology;
(c) a site investigation report detailing all investigative works and sampling on site, together with the results of analysis, risk assessment to any receptors and a proposed remediation strategy shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority shall approve such remedial works as required prior to any remediation commencing on site. The works shall be of such a nature so as to render harmless the identified contamination given the proposed end-use of the site and surrounding environment including any controlled waters;
(d) approved remediation works shall be carried out in full on site under a quality assurance scheme to demonstrate compliance with the proposed methodology and best practice guidance (ref.3). If during any works contamination is encountered which has not previously been identified then the additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme agreed with the Local Planning Authority;
(e) upon completion of the works, this condition shall not be discharged until a closure report has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The closure report shall include details of the proposed remediation works and the quality assurance certificates to show that the works have been carried our in full in accordance with the approved methodology. Details of any post remediation sampling and analysis to show the site has reached the required clean-up criteria shall be included in the closure report together with the
7 Page 38 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
necessary documentation detailing what waste materials have been removed from the site;
(f) where applicable, a monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over an agreed period of time, and the provision of reports on the same, must be prepared and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Following completion of the measures identified in that scheme, and when the remediation objectives have been achieved, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced and submitted to the local planning authority.
(10) the development hereby permitted shall incorporate some or all of the following building design measures:-
(i) the provision of a gas impermeable membrane in a competent floor slab;
(ii) above ground entry of services such that the floor slab is maintained intact;
(iii) the sealing of service ducts and entry points against the ingress of landfill gases. It is advisable that service junctions into buildings should be through vented junction boxes;
(iv) the provision of below floor venting by active or passive means. Passive means are by provision of air vents in outer walls to the below floor airspace. Air flow can be improved by adding vertical stacks incorporating a rotating cowl if required. Active venting is by means of positive ventilation systems. Air vents in passive systems must be kept free of any growth, a concentrate apron around the outer wall may secure this provision;
(v) the provision of methane and carbon dioxide gas monitors/alarms in below floor spaces and dead air spaces within the building;
(vi) the provision of open hole windows in all occupied buildings;
(vii) further measures to protect the site as a whole may include gas venting trenches and open grassed areas.
(11) construction of the development shall not commence until details of the proposed means of foul and surface water sewerage disposal have been submitted to, and approved, in writing by, the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Southern Water; the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;
(12) the developer shall notify the Local Planning Authority (in consultation with Southern Water) of the measures which will be undertaken to protect/divert the public sewers, prior to the commencement of the development;
8 Page 39 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
(13) the rating level of the noise emitted from any plant and equipment associated with this site (other than noise from the exit or entry of road vehicles), shall not exceed the existing background noise level by more than 3dB. The noise levels shall be determined at nearest noise sensitive premises. The measurements and assessments shall be made according to BS4142:1997;
(14) full details of any external lighting to the site or building and hours of illumination thereof shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development; the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before the building hereby permitted is brought into use and any lighting installed pursuant to this condition shall not be illuminated outside of these hours so approved;
(15) full details of the finished ground levels of the building hereby permitted including the method of construction shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development; the details shall show in cross sections full details of any cut and fill including details of any retaining structures; the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before the building hereby permitted is brought into use;
(16) the developer shall maintain an archaeological watching brief during the ground-works stage of the development hereby permitted. The developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to any archaeologist nominated by the Local Planning Authority and shall allow him/her to observe the works and record items of interest or finds;
(17) the building hereby permitted shall be open to patients and the public as a primary care medical centre with ancillary pharmacy between the hours of 8am and 8pm only on any day; any out of hours use beyond those times shall only be permitted if approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority;
(18) full details of the measures to provide safety and security to the site and building particularly outside of operating hours shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development; the measures shall follow the advice in Secured by Design; such measures as may be approved shall be implemented before the first occupation of the building and thereafter maintained in place at all times;
(19) full details of pedestrian routes and any alterations to them into the Northfleet Urban Country Park from Thames Way and the existing access road within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development; such details shall include any temporary arrangements during construction of the development hereby permitted and how the mobility impaired will be catered for; the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approve details;
(20) full details of secure and weatherproof cycle storage facilities to be provided within the site for both staff and patients shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commence of the
9 Page 40 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
development; the facilities as may be approved shall be implemented before the first occupation of the building and thereafter be kept available for such use at all times when the building is in use.
(21) full details of the design and location of any bin storage areas within the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development: the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
(22) full details of the temporary access arrangements for both emergency and service/maintenance vehicles and also for the general public to gain access to the urban country park and other facilities at the site during the construction works shall be submitted to and approached in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development; the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details;
(23) full details of vehicular crossover and footway improvements, supported by an independent Stage 1 safety audit, at the junction of the access to Vale Road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Kent Highway Services before the commencement of development, or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority; the highway works shall be implemented via an appropriate form of agreement or similar with the Highway Authority prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted.
(24) before the commencement of the development on site or such other date or stage in the development as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority an ecological and biodiversity monitoring survey of the site shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority; any mitigation measures arising from the findings of the survey shall be implemented before the development hereby permitted is first occupied.
(25) the floorspace of the pharmacy as shown in the approved drawings shall be used only for the dispensing of prescriptions, and the sale of medical supplies and related products ancillary to the use of the building as a primary care medical centre and for no other purpose including any other purpose within Class A1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, as amended.
INFORMATIVES:
INFORMATIVE: REASONS FOR GRANT OF PERMISSION
(1) Having regard to all relevant material planning considerations, permission has been granted because, subject to compliance with the planning conditions, the development would not materially harm any interest of acknowledged importance.
(2) The decision has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals of the development plan and in particular:
10 Page 41 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
Gravesham Local Plan (First Review) 1994:
Proposal PM10: Vale Road and Springhead Road, Northfleet Proposal PLT1: Additional Open Space including Public Open Space and/or Playing Fields Policy S2: Change of Use to Shopping Policy M2: Development on or near sites used for the deposit of refuse or waste.
Gravesham Local Plan (Second Review) Deposit Version 2000:
Policy LT2: Green Grid Site Protection Policy SC1: Social and Community Strategy and Provision Policy NE15: Contaminated Land and Landfill Sites Policy NE23: Tidal Flood Risk Area
South East Plan 2009:
Policy S2: Promoting Sustainable Health Services Policy S6: Community Infrastructure Policy KTG6: Flood Risk
(3) In addition the Local Planning Authority had regard to:
Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol of the Human Rights Act 1998. Central Government Planning Policy Guidance including PPS1, PPS4, PPG13, PPG17, PPS23 and PPS25
COMMERCIAL REFUSE ARRANGEMENTS
Storage facilities provided shall be of sufficient capacity having regard to the quantity of waste produced and the frequency of waste collection. All waste shall be removed from site on a regular basis by a licensed waste carrier and disposed of at a licensed waste disposal site.
COMMERCIAL REFUSE ARRANGEMENTS - ADVISORY NOTES
Compliance with the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (Duty of Care) is essential. Advice on Solid Waste Management can be obtained from Waste Services on (01474) 337533.
PUBLIC SEWER
The applicants are advised that a formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development. To initial a sewer capacity check to identify the appropriate connection points for the development, please contact Atkins Ltd, Anglo St James House, 39A Southgate Street, Winchester, SO23 9EH (tel 01962 858 688), or www.southernwater.co.uk.
11 Page 42 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY ADVICE
The application is advised that condition 9 above re contaminated land is sequential and may be discharged at any period in the various stages, depending on the information submitted and perceived risk to sensitive receptors.
Certain stringent building designs may be applicable in order to reduce the risk of landfill gas ingress associated with the Springhead Road Landfill. However, buildings sited in site close proximity would have no "guarantee" of safety. Due regard should be given to the Building Research Establishment document BR212 "Construction of new buildings on gas contaminated land", the Approved Document C Building Regulations and Waste Management Paper 27 DoE 1991.
We note that both surface and foul water drainage are to discharge to mains sewers. There is no objection to this. The developer has previously discussed plans to relocate a surface water drain on site. If the drain is to be relocated near to the vent trench, then it is important that it will not act as a preferential pathway for gas migrating from the landfill. Impermeable plugs should therefore be installed at intervals along the drainage run to ensure this can not occur. We will have no objection to the proximity of the drainage pipe to the vent trench if this method is used.
APPROVED DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTS
0228(FG) P(0)001 (Site Layout) 0228(FG) P(0)002 (Ground Floor Plan as proposed) 0228(FG) P(0)003 (First Floor Plan as proposed) 0228(FG) P(0)004 (Elevations as proposed) 0228(FG) P(0)005 (Sections as proposed) 0228(FG) P(0)006 (Site Layout and Access) 0228(FG) P(0)007 (Site Location Plan) 0228(TA) P(0)008 (Existing Site Plan) BTP Hyder-Phase 1 Contamination Desk Study BTP Hyder-Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) Design and Access Statement Dated 30.10.2009
CODE OF PRACTICE FOR CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION SITES WITHIN THE BOROUGH OF GRAVESHAM
Appended to the decision Notice.
Note: (1) Mr A Weston, agent for the applicant and Mr A Bishton, representative for the applicant addressed the Board.
97. GR/2009/0877 - Rear garden of Ranmorene, Old Watling Street, Gravesend, Kent
The Board considered application GR/2009/0877 for the erection of detached two bedroom bungalow with detached double garage.
12 Page 43 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
Resolved that application GR/2009/0877 be DEFERRED for one cycle pending further negotiations regarding the roof design (including the garage) and elevations.
Note: (1) Mr R Lingham, agent for the applicant, addressed the Board.
(2) Objector, Mr I Foulds, addressed the Board.
98. GR/2010/0007 - Land rear of 27, 28, 29 & 30 The Russets, Meopham, Kent
The Board considered application GR/10/0007 for the continued use of agricultural/grazing land as residential garden.
Resolved that application GR/2010/0007 be REFUSED on the following grounds and if necessary enforcement action be taken:-
(1) the development is contrary to Policies SP5 & KTG1 of the South East Plan (May 2009), Policies GB2 & C18 of the adopted Gravesham Local Plan (First Review) 1994 and Policies RA2 & RA21 of the Deposit Draft Gravesham Local (Second Review) 2000 which include the site within the Metropolitan Green Belt. Within the Green Belt there is a strong presumption against permitting any new development outside the present defined extent of urban areas and the present built up extent of any village, unless it conforms with the open recreation functions of the Green Belt or is directly related to agriculture and other uses appropriate to a rural area; the proposal does not fall within these categories and therefore constitutes inappropriate development given the open character of the area. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal does not fall within such exceptions and more over is visually obtrusive and would result in a disproportionate extension of the residential gardens which, with their associated paraphernalia, is harmful to and seriously prejudices the openness of the Green Belt, contrary to the advice in PPG2 (Green Belts);
(2) the development is contrary to Policies C4 & C5 of the South East Plan (May 2009), Policies C2 & C4 of the adopted Gravesham Local Plan (First Review) 1994, Policy NE2 of the Deposit draft Gravesham Local Plan (Second Review) 2000 and guidance contained within PPS 7 and the Gravesham Landscape Character Assessment (May 2009). These policies give long term protection to the countryside and Special Landscape Areas and will normally give priority to the protection of landscape over other planning considerations. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority erection of two metre high close boarded fencing, with potential for associated residential paraphernalia, seriously detracts from the openness of the site and adversely effects the landscape quality of the area.
Further Recommendation:
That if the unauthorised use does not cease and the development is not removed, enforcement action be taken requiring:
(a) the cessation of the use of the land as residential garden;
13 Page 44 Regulatory Board 17.03.2010
(b) the removal of all ancillary operational development including fencing, shrubs, trees, hedging, planting and general residential garden paraphernalia. The period of compliance for the works to be undertaken being three months.
Note: Mr A Pritchard, applicant for the application, addressed the Board.
Close of meeting
The meeting ended at 9.10 pm.
14 Page 45 Agenda Item 8d
Overview Scrutiny Committee
Thursday, 25 March 2010 7.00pm
Present:
Cllr John Burden (Chairman) Cllr Alex Moore (Vice-Chairman)
Cllrs: Lee Croxton Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi William Dyke Greta Goatley Leslie Hills William Lambert Lyn Milner Bryan Sweetland
Note: Cllr David Turner (Lead Member for Community) was also in attendance
Nick Brown Director (Transformation & Finance) Kevin Burbidge Director (Business) John Miller Service Manager, Property Michelle Parfitt Performance & Policy Manager Doug Finch Scrutiny Officer
55. Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 18 February 2010 were signed by the Chairman.
56. Declarations of Interest
No declarations were made.
57. Call in of Cabinet decision on 8 March 2010 - Outstanding Repairs & Maintenance
The Director (Business) introduced the report and said that this methodology for the prioritising of outstanding works had been introduced in 2008 and followed Audit Commission guidelines on the weighting of priorities and getting Members involved in the process. The budget for these works was part of the budget setting process and the purpose was to suggest a prioritisation of necessary schemes for Member comment / endorsement.
Ongoing regular maintenance of the Council’s buildings was cost effective and prevented the need for large scale expenditure in future years through neglect.
The Committee were concerned about some items on the list such as mixing valves, auto taps and the cost of air blade hand driers installed in the Civic Centre but not on the list. The
1 Page 46 Overview Scrutiny Committee 25.03.2010
Service Manager, Property replied that mixing valves and auto taps were a priority in the Woodville Halls as the temperature of the water for staff and members of the public using the facilities in the theatre needs to be strictly controlled to prevent anyone from being scalded.
The air blade hand driers were purchased because they were the most efficient and guaranteed for five years. They were funded from the consumable budget as the need for paper towels is removed.
Members also queried the refurbishment of the catering kitchen in the Woodville Halls. Their concerns were about whether this was being carried out under Health and Safety or to improve the hireability of the facility in which case it should be funded from an alternative budget.
The main aim of the refurbishment was to change from gas to electricity as there were health and safety implications for ventilation of the kitchen with the continuing use of gas. The Committee felt that the reasoning, justification and financing of this item should be reviewed and included in that review should be details of the income from hiring out this facility for the last two years.
A number of the facilities on the list were Grade 2 listed and the Committee were interested to know whether an agency such as English Heritage asked us to do something we had to do it. The Director (Business) said that regular inspections of listed buildings in the Borough were carried out and this, in conjunction with booklets issued by English Heritage of buildings at risk, enables the repairs and maintenance to be effectively managed. However, if there was an urgent major issue then it would have to be dealt with.
The Committee asked how items were selected for the list. For example there is a need for sensor controlled lights in the Member’s area as this is a safety issue for members of staff returning to Committee Section following evening meetings. The Director (Business) said that in October each year Directors and Service Managers were invited to put forward items for consideration. However, he would look into this patricular issue as health and safety is a matter of priority.
Members felt that a seminar on how this list was compiled including how the levels of weighting were determined would be of great benefit.
Resolved that
(1) the report be noted;
(2) Cabinet review item 13, Woodville Halls Catering Kitchen Refurbishment, on the Required and Cyclical Maintenance list for 2010/11 in regard of the reasoning, weighting, justification and funding of this item;
(3) all Members be given training on how the system of selecting and prioritising outstanding repairs and maintenance works;
(4) that the health and safety issue of staff returning to Committee Section in the dark following evening meetings be addressed.
Note: Cllr Turner spoke with the leave of the Chairman on this item.
2 Page 47 Overview Scrutiny Committee 25.03.2010
58. Call in of Cabinet decision on 8 March 2010 - Data Quality Policy for Gravesham
The Performance & Policy Manager introduced the report. The Data Quality Policy document outlines the Council’s approach to delivering and improving data quality across the whole authority. It also demonstrates the Council’s commitment to ensuring that all information retained or provided by the Council is robust.
The Director (Transformation & Finance) said that procedures are in place to comply with the data protection act. He said that within the authority no data is stored on the hard drives of laptops. All removable storage devices permitted to be used are those supplied by our IT department and properly encrypted. Members of staff accessing the system from home use an encoded connection. Gravesham Borough Council had been one of the first authorities to achieve accreditation for the security and effectiveness of its data protection. However, he added that even with all the possible protection systems in place it was still up to people to do the right thing.
The Committee was concerned about the exchange of information between Gravesham Borough Council and other authorities and agencies.
The Director (Transformation & Finance) said that sharing data in a controlled manner was just getting started. There was a Kent wide IT group of technical experts that were looking into all aspects of this. He assured the committee that no data would be sent to other authorities or agencies until security systems were in place.
Individuals are informed that their data is being collected and will be held for as long as it is necessary.
The Members asked whether the inappropriate use of data by individuals is a criminal offence. The Director (Transformation & Finance) said it was not but was dealt with by the Data Protection Registrar. Any breaches by employees of the Council would be seen as a serious disciplinary offence.
The Committee asked what tracking software was used to monitor attempts to hack into the system. An audit trail is inherent in major systems and the authority has contracted outside firms to carry out ‘penetration testing’ of the system to identify weaknesses. Different firms have been used to come at this problem from a different angle. The last testing was carried out over 12 months ago but it is expensive so the risks against costs have to be considered.
Resolved that
(1) the report be noted;
(2) the Committee were impressed with the authority’s systematic approach to and implementation of data protection.
Note: Cllr Turner spoke with the leave of the Chairman on this item.
Close of meeting
The meeting ended at 9.02 pm.
3 Page 48
This page is intentionally left blank Page 49 Agenda Item 8e
Finance and Audit Committee
Tuesday, 30 March 2010 7.00pm
Present:
Cllr Samir Jassal (Chairman) Cllr Leslie Hills (Vice-Chairman)
Cllrs: Lesley Boycott John Burden Lee Croxton Diane Marsh
Note: Cllrs John Cubitt (Lead Member for Community Safety & Environment) and Derek Shelbrooke were also in attendance
Kevin Burbidge Director (Business) Julie Gibbs Service Manager (Finance) Sarah Parfitt Service Manager (Audit & Performance) Stuart Bobby Principal Accountant Katey Durkin Senior Auditor Doug Finch Scrutiny Officer
68. Apologies
An apology was received from Cllr Narinderjit Singh Thandi. Cllr Lee Croxton attended as his substitute.
69. Minutes
The Minutes of the meeting held on 15 February 2010 were signed by the Chairman.
70. Declarations of Interest
Cllr John Burden declared a personal but non-prejudicial interest in Item 9 Accounting Policies 2009/10, owing to the fact he is a member of Kent County Council’s Superannuation Fund Committee.
71. Regeneration Inspection - Update on progress against Action Plan
The Director (Business) presented Members with the Action Plan from the Audit Commission Service Inspection of the Council’s Regeneration Service.
At the 23 September 2009 meeting, Members endorsed the Action Plan identifying the action that officers will be taking in response to the recommendations made by the Audit Commission.
1 Page 50 Finance and Audit Committee 30.03.2010
Significant progress has been made in the field of customer and community profiling, with the resource being used to inform key documents including the Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy.
The Committee asked how the Council had identified its vulnerable communities and how best to communicate with these communities. The Committee felt that they would benefit from a table which outlined the groups that had been consulted, how they had been engaged in the consultation and what if any problems had been encountered.
The Service Manager (Audit & Performance) said that all Council consultations were critiqued by the Cross-Practitioners Group to ensure that the right questions were asked of the right people in the most effective way to ensure a meaningful response rate. Cllr Burden suggested that consideration should be given to this group including members of the public; this would be fed back to the Service Manager (Communities) for consideration.
The Director (Business) fielded questions from Members, including the following:-
Q. Do we learn from our mistakes?
A. We discuss with our partners (Medway and Swale) the areas requiring attention that come out of inspections and share best practice. Some things may not work for one partner but might for another.
Q. What did the Audit Commission think of progress on the Action Plan?
A. Unable to comment, but would come back to the Committee.
Q. The LDF Core Strategy had been through scrutiny with the recommendation that the Strategy be written in plain English. This recommendation would appear to have been ignored?
A. The Strategy is a very large document and whilst some of the points raised by the Scrutiny Committee had been incorporated there had not been enough time to make the document readable for all. There will be a smaller summary document which will be more readable.
The Director (Business) said that Dartford had been invited to join regeneration inspection colleagues at Gravesham, Swale and Medway to make a North Kent Area which would enable more effective bench marking.
Resolved that the recommended Action Plan, identifying the action that officers will be taking in response to the recommendations made by the Audit Commission, be endorsed.
72. Annual Audit Letter - Update on Action Plan
The Service Manager (Finance) updated the Committee on progress made in responding to the recommendations made by the Audit Commission’s Annual Audit Letter.
The Annual Audit Letter summarised findings from the 2008/09 audit undertaken by the Audit Commission and was presented to the Finance & Audit Committee in February 2010.
2 Page 51 Finance and Audit Committee 30.03.2010
The report contained two recommendations for continued improvement which were accepted by the Committee.
The Service Manager (Finance) fielded questions from members, including the following:-
Q. What is the Public Finance Sub Group?
A. The sub group is made up of seven members of the public whose terms of reference are to ensure that finance information given to the public by the authority is easily understandable. For example their comments on our 2009/10 council tax leaflet have been incorporated in this years leaflet.
Q. What level of information does this group have access to?
A. Only that which is in the public domain. They do not have access to any confidential information.
Following recent consultations a further five members of the public had expressed an interest in joining this group. The existing group members had discussed expanding the group but had concerns about the management of a larger group. However the group agreed to increase the group to 10 as a first step.
The Chairman suggested whether members of the Public Finance Sub-Group could be invited to relevant training provided to Finance & Audit Committee Members or whether it would be useful for a Member of the Finance & Audit Committee to occasionally attend Public Finance Sub-Group meetings. The Service Manager (Finance) agreed to take these suggestions away for consideration.
Members expressed concern that, whilst it was important to get the public’s views, care should be taken not to sideline the 44 Members who had been elected to represent the residents of Gravesham.
Q. There are regular updates to the Medium Term Financial Plan. How do we react to change in these turbulent financial times?
A. The Medium Term Financial Plan includes sensitivity analysis e.g. what a ½ per cent drop in government funding would mean. Reasonable assumptions are made guided by other authorities, outside firms and current publications to make the MTFP robust and fit for purpose.
Q. Is the Audit Commission satisfied with progress on the Action Plan?
A. Yes, there is positive movement in the financial statement and we are more than happy with the progress on engagement across the borough.
Resolved that the progress made against the action plan from the report by the Audit Commission be noted.
Note : Cllr John Cubitt spoke with the leave of the Chairman on this item.
3 Page 52 Finance and Audit Committee 30.03.2010
73. Business Transformation review - Update on progress against Action Plan
The Service Manager (Audit & Performance) provided Members with an update on progress in responding to the recommendations made by the Audit Commission’s review of the Council’s Business Transformation Strategy.
In March 2009 the Audit Commission completed a short review of the Council’s arrangements relating to business transformation, specifically examining the Business Transformation Strategy and the mechanisms used to deliver the objectives of the strategy. The review report was finalised and presented to the Finance & Audit Committee in September 2009 and contained four recommendations for improvement which were accepted by the Council.
The Service Manager (Audit & Performance) said that the Transformation Strategy had been reviewed and has become more focussed on demonstrating changes to services. Staff awareness was also being raised through staff talks and the Value for Money review process. She went on to add that Sevenoaks District Council had expressed an interest in Gravesham Borough Council's Value for Money methodology. The Committee then asked a number of questions including the following:-
Q. What issues remain to be resolved in the reporting system to enable the production of accurate reports?
A. This is an ongoing problem with the Northgate Revenues and Benefits system that affects not only us but other authorities using the system. The issue is the reporting of overpayments. The information can be extracted but it is not as easy as it should be. We are working with Northgate through a product user group to resolve this issue.
Q. What is meant by ‘culture change aspects of transformation’?
A. To get people to understand what we mean by transformation and to challenge the way we do things. Staff often know what is wrong and have solutions as to how services can be improved.
Resolved that the progress made against the action plan from the report by the Audit Commission be noted.
74. Corporate Risk Register and Risk Strategy 2010/11
The Service Manager (Audit & Performance) presented Members of the Finance & Audit Committee with the Risk Management Strategy and Corporate Risk Register for 2010/11, both of which were approved by Cabinet on 8 March 2010.
The Service Manager (Audit & Performance) fielded questions from Members, including the following:-
Q. Have there been any changes to the draft since the review in February?
A. Yes, as suggested by this Committee, there have been additional actions added to Risk 3, Capacity.
4 Page 53 Finance and Audit Committee 30.03.2010
Q. There is a potential risk to the Authority arising from insurance cover for members on outside bodies that needs to be resolved?
A. This issue has been raised with officers and a meeting arranged to discuss this further in the next few weeks
The Committee felt that the implications arising from the introduction of IFRS accounting should be included in the Strategy, following the training received earlier in the evening. To elaborate, the Principal Accountant explained that the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) had implications on the risks of signing leases after 31 March 2010 and therefore could result in an impact upon the available level of revenue resources.
Councillor Marsh requested that the Transformation POC be involved in development of the Council’s Risk Register for 2011/12.
Resolved that the Report and Appendices be noted.
75. Accounting Policies (2009/10 Statement of Accounts)
The Principal Accountant advised Members of the Accounting Policies to be used in formulating the Financial Statements for the authority for the financial year 2009/10.
The Principal Accountant fielded questions from members, including the following:-
Q. What leeway do we have to put our own stamp on things?
A. Very little. The recommended practice is very prescriptive.
Q . What do the changes to Accounting Policies 30 & 31 mean?
A. They will only include the element that relates to GBC. For example on NNDR currently the amount owed is £18m under the new arrangements this will change to £11.8m. The debts to KCC, Police and Fire authorities will be shown on their own balance sheets.
Q. How do we determine the depreciation of assets.
A. Depreciation is determined from the point of acquisition of the asset and is based on its useful life. It generally only applies to buildings and equipment.
Resolved that the use of the Accounting Policies as outlined at Appendix 1 to the report be endorsed.
76. Certification of claims and returns - Annual Report 2008/09
The Audit Commission presented Members with a summary of the external audit findings and issues arising from Grant Claim certification work during 2008/09.
The Audit Commission identified that there is a substantial amount of work undertaken in relation to claims and returns during the year with the results not being historically reported to Those Charged with Governance (for Gravesham this is the Finance & Audit Committee).
5 Page 54 Finance and Audit Committee 30.03.2010
The Audit Commission fielded questions from Members, including the following:-
Q. Why do we need to keep the original documentation. Surely in this day and age scanning the documents and keeping them electronically must be the way forward?
A. Yes but in some instances original documentation is a requirement for certification by the grant paying body.
Q. What does qualification actually mean in this context?
A. Grant paying bodies will have prescriptive certification instructions which set out the specific tests that the auditors have to undertake. If the auditors find that the Council has not fully met the requirements of these tests, however minor this may be, the auditor is required to issue a qualification. This is different from qualification in relation to the Statement of Accounts, which is likely to be a more serious issue.
Q. Can you explain the fees charged for grant certification work?
A. The audit fee is set for the number of claims, their value and the number of days worked. We were required to conduct testing of 80 benefit cases on the Housing & Council Tax Subsidy claim; these were worked through which identified some changes to be made by officers. When these changes were made they had to be reviewed by the Audit Commission, hence the additional fees.
Resolved that the report be noted and approved.
77. External Audit Progress Report and Briefing March 2010
The Audit Commission informed Members of the progress to date on the work of external audit as agreed in the 2009/10 Audit Fee Letter.
The 2009/10 Audit Fee Letter was approved by Members at the June 2009 Finance & Audit Committee. The plan sets out the audit and inspection work to be completed in relation to the 2009/10 financial year.
The Audit Commission have recognised the importance of formal progress monitoring to Members and decided to include a progress report on the work completed to date and briefing on recent Audit Commission publications on every Finance & Audit Committee agenda.
The Audit Commission reported that the stage 1 of the pre-statement audit had been completed and some minor weaknesses had been found. The use of resources audit has started. The initial scores will be submitted to the Southern Region Quality Control Team on 21 April 2010. The final scores will be provided to officers on 30 July 2010 and presented to the Finance & Audit Committee at its September meeting. The Audit Commission were unable to expand further on what these initial scores would be but did note that there was positive improvement in some of the Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE).
The Audit Commission drew Members attention to paragraphs eight to 11 of the report and the requirement for the Committee to provide specific assurances to the Audit Commission as part of their 2009/10 opinion work.
6 Page 55 Finance and Audit Committee 30.03.2010
Q. How does the council respond to fraud and learn from these?
A. There is a specific team within benefits that looks at fraud. Where it finds fraud claims processes are changed to prevent similar frauds happening in the future.
Instances of corporate fraud are reported to management team after each investigation. Recommendations are made and the implementation of these recommendations are monitored.
The Service Manager (Audit & Performance) said that there had been an excellent response to a recent Member and Staff survey on Fraud Awareness.
There was a brief discussion between Members on the sources of assurance available to the Committee and the best way to provide the assurances requested by the Audit Commission.
Resolved that:
(1) the Committee (Members and Subs) meet with the Audit Commission to formulate the Committee’s response to the 2009/10 opinion work assurances;
(2) the progress against the Audit Fee Letter be noted.
78. Opinion Audit Plan
The Audit Commission informed Members of the planned approach and risks identified in relation to the audit of the 2009/10 financial statements. These are based on the audit approach methodology, the Audit Commissions ongoing liaison with officers throughout the Council and their findings of the pre-statements stage 1 audit.
The Audit Commission fielded questions from Members, including the following:-
Q. The list of specific risks included in the report do not feature on the Council’s Risk Register. Where have these risks come from?
A. These are not necessarily risks to the Council but instead are risks to the Audit Commission being able to give an opinion on the accounts. For example, there were concerns that the recent retirement of the capital accountant could increase pressure on the Finance Team with the subsequent higher risk of errors in financial reporting although this is being managed by the Authority.
Q. These specific risks in the report are not scored or prioritised, so how can we and officers understand how significant they are and whether we need to take any action?
A. We do not necessarily score the risks we identify in this process but we will work with the Council should we become aware of any risk that is not being managed.
Q. What is a ‘group accounts situation’ and how could this affect Gravesham Borough Council and GCLL?
A. The agreement between the Council and Gravesham Leisure Limited could be classified as a joint venture and as such would necessitate the consolidation of the
7 Page 56 Finance and Audit Committee 30.03.2010
two sets of accounts. GCLL’s accounts are audited independently, and would only require consolidation if a Group Account relationship were determined and the inclusion of GCLL’s financial figures exceeded the current materiality threshold for the Council of approximately £750,000. The Audit Commission would have to get assurance from GCLL’s auditors of their accounts before giving an opinion on Gravesham’s accounts and this could cause additional pressures.
Resolved that the report be noted.
Close of meeting
The meeting ended at 9.30 pm.
8 Page 57 Agenda Item 8f
Cabinet
Tuesday, 6 April 2010 7.00pm
Present:
Cllr Michael Snelling (Chairman)
Cllrs: John Cubitt Laura Hryniewicz Anthony Pritchard Adrian Warburton
Note: Cllr John Burden was also in attendance
Glyn Thomson Chief Executive Nick Brown Director (Transformation & Finance) Melanie Norris Director (Communities) Sarah Kilkie Assistant Director (Communities) Nick Channon Committee Services Officer
129. Apologies
An apology for absence was received from the Vice-Chairman, Cllr David Turner.
130. Minutes
The Minutes of the meeting held on 8 March 2010 were signed by the Chairman.
131. Declarations of Interest
No declarations of interest were made.
132. Delegated Decisions - Cabinet Members
No decisions had been taken by Cabinet Members under their delegated powers since the last meeting of the Cabinet.
133. Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee - Minutes
The Cabinet considered the Minutes of the meeting of the Crime & Disorder Scrutiny Committee held on 11 March 2010.
Resolved that the Minutes be approved, subject to the incorporation into the resolution that the Strategic Assessment 2009 and the priorities incorporated within it be approved.
1 Page 58 Cabinet 6.04.2010
134. Update on Community Involvement/Engagement activities
The Cabinet was advised on the progress being made in respect of Community Involvement and Engagement Activities.
Following learning visits to other local borough and district councils a process was embarked upon to recruit, inform and support members of the public to engage with the Council. Officers with support from Management Team, undertook to establish a working agreement with those willing to participate that set out the frequency with which they would be contacted and how information would be fed back.
In parallel with this an internal cross-practitioner's group was established involving all officers who undertake community consultation and engagement, the purpose of which is to co-ordinate all such activity across the Council.
Council officers undertook to run the Council Tax Consultation activity in-house and Members were informed that previous initiatives had been facilitated by BMG at a cost of around £13,000 for each occasion.
The results from the 2008/09 PLACE survey placed Gravesham at the top of the Kent table for responses to NI4 (the percentage of people who feel they can influence local decisions) with a 30.4 per cent positive response which is up from the same question asked in the General User Survey (GUS) in 2007/07 at 29.93 per cent and in the top quartile for the Council's CIPFA group.
The Cabinet was advised that between April 2008 and March 2010 the Council had undertaken 14 consultation exercises, mainly involving the 700 active participants that make up the Residents Panel. It was clear that the Residents Panel was not being used effectively by BMG and since running the Panel in-house they are now actively involved in consultation, engagement and empowerment and the percentage of Members responding to consultations is consistently high ranging between 50 and 65 per cent. The activities undertaken to date and the results were detailed for Members. A separate programme to engage young people with Vox Box has been initiated and the Council embarked on a national political shadowing programme which links young people with elected Members.
Members were advised of future plans in respect of the Residents Panel, the Disability Equality Reference Group, the operation of the 2012 Census, Mosaic profiling and the fact that the Communities Directorate will be taking over the managing of the grants and Service Level Agreements from April 2010 in order that they can be more closely monitored.
Resolved that the content of the report be accepted and that the plans for the future be endorsed.
135. Donation to Community Chest
The Cabinet was reminded that the Council at its meeting held on 2 March 2010 had considered the recommendation of the Independent Remuneration Panel when it had been agreed to vire the proposed increase of £3,300 to a budget line in respect of charities to be identified by the Leader (Cllr Michael Snelling) and the Leader of the Opposition (Cllr John Burden).
2 Page 59 Cabinet 6.04.2010
Cllrs Snelling and Burden have now met and decided that it is appropriate for the £3,300 to go to the Community Chest for the 2010/11 financial year.
Resolved that
(1) the donation to the Community Chest be endorsed;
(2) in respect of the 2010/11 financial year Members give the Taking Pride in Gravesham Panel discretion to award up to three Community Chest grants at an increased limit of £1000 each.
136. Gravesham Gateway
The Cabinet was advised of the proposed Gravesham Gateway Programme. The Gateway is a multi-channel (telephone, web and face-to-face) programme led by Kent County Council and was built on a partnership drawn from central and local government, voluntary and private sector organisations operating within the Kent and Medway or neighbouring regions.
Gateway as a brand brings together four main service options:-
• information; • self help; • routine advice/transactions; • multi agency approach.
The aim is to deliver excellent customer service and joined up services with opportunities for an extended programme of engagement.
The Gateway Programme is a joint venture between Kent County Council and Districts operating on the principle that customer needs determines the location and mix of services provided by the Gateway facility.
There are now seven physical Gateways in operation across Kent each offering a mixture of services delivered by a range of partners including County, District, National Health Service and the Voluntary Sector. Partner services are delivered either on a full time, part time or surgery basis, depending upon customer demand.
Building on the already successful approach of sharing space with the Police and County Court, Gravesham Borough Council have committed to investigate the feasibility of the Gravesham Gateway. Initial meetings have been held to discuss and understand practicalities such as space, timescales and potential partners.
If approval is given the Gateway would be implemented in phases. Phase 1 would include the existing services of Gravesham Borough Council, the Police and County Court and look to include partners from the Voluntary Sectors such as the Citizens Advice Bureau, Volunteer Bureau, Hi-Kent, the Department for Works & Pensions/ Jobcentre Plus; Dartford & Gravesham Race Equality, STG Building Control partnership and Kent County Council Services such as Highways, Adult Education and Kent Contact and Assessment Services (Social Services referral - Children, Adults, Mental Health and Disability).
Future phases will extend the range of services available by investigating additional, suitable partners and increasing facilities, such as introducing a Change in Place facility - full adult
3 Page 60 Cabinet 6.04.2010
changing unit, shower and toilet suitable for persons with disabilities. Visits had been undertaken to existing Gateways in Maidstone, Tunbridge Wells and Ashford and information has been gathered to understand their operations, customer demand and service provision.
Resolved that
(1) the provision of a Gravesham Gateway be approved;
(2) delegated authority be given to the Director (Communities) in consultation with the Lead Member (Transformation) and the other relevant officers e.g. Assistant Director (Business & Law), to deal with all matters and agreements in relation to the project. This is aside from any increased revenue cost which will be reported to Cabinet for decision.
137. The Role of the Appeals Sub-Committee
Resolved that this item be deferred to the next meeting of the Cabinet for consideration.
138. Value for Money Review Programme 2010/11
The Cabinet was updated on the progress of the Council's Value for Money Review Programme.
The Council has developed a Value for Money (VfM) review methodology and the first review was completed in January 2009. Since then reviews have been completed within planning, internal audit, housing benefits, council tax and reprographics, with a review of customer services (customer contact centre and reception) currently underway.
The Cabinet was advised that reviews conducted to date had had a positive impact on service delivery and improving outcomes.
In developing the VfM Review Programme for previous years consideration has been given to the Audit Commission's VfM tool kit to identify services highlighted by the tool kit as potentially being high cost and low performance when compared to other local authorities. This had proved not to be helpful this year as the information held on the Audit Commission's tool kit has not been updated and is therefore not considered to provide a fair representation of the quality or performance of Council services on which to base the VfM Review Programme for 2010/11.
It was stated that the Council's Value for Money Programme has focussed on improving performance and the efficiency in delivery of services provided directly by the Council will continue to be a focus for the Review Programme during 2010/11. However, it could be seen that for the Review Programme to truly contribute to the transformation of Council services, value for money work also needed to engage with and contribute to work by the Council to collaborate with others in the delivery of services to the local community.
The Cabinet considered the proposed Value for Money Review Programme for 2010/11 and were informed of the difference between service area reviews and work to support and drive forward collaboration opportunities.
4 Page 61 Cabinet 6.04.2010
Sevenoaks District Council has visited Gravesham to learn about our approach to conducting VfM reviews. Sevenoaks District Council has decided to adopt Gravesham's approach and a training package is now being developed to be used by both Councils to help develop VfM review skills more widely across both Councils.
Once this training has been completed it is anticipated that Gravesham will be able to increase the extent of VfM assessments carried out during the year and the results of the training will also generate new opportunities for peer review and peer challenge of services between the two Councils.
Members were advised that during recent inspections and assessments the Audit Commission has increasingly looked for the Council to demonstrate value for money in its services through specific VfM indicators. Whilst the Council already collects some performance information to demonstrate process efficiency and effectiveness of service outputs, work is underway to take these arrangements further to enable the Council to quickly and effectively measure and demonstrate value for money in its services.
Resolved that
(1) the Value for Money (VfM) reviews completed to date and the key outcomes achieved from these reviews be noted;
(2) the proposed Value for Money Review Programme for 2010/11 be approved.
139. Transformation Strategy and Plan 2010/11
The Cabinet considered an updated Transformation Strategy for the Council. The Council's existing Transformation Strategy for the authority was last approved by Cabinet in January 2009.
In July 2009 the Cabinet was presented with the Transformation annual report which gave a summary of progress made to date in respect of Transformation. The Cabinet was asked to consider the Transformation actions planned for 2010/11.
Members were informed that in November 2009 the Transformation Group reviewed the approach being taken in relation to the Transformation agenda. The review highlighted that as the review plans become more embedded in service business plans some areas of work could potentially be duplicated.
To avoid any duplications of work the Transformation Group revamped the delivery plans into a single "Annual Transformation Plan for 2010/11" which highlights one or two key actions along with expected outcomes for each of the Transformation work streams. This approach will ensure that focus is maintained on actions that are Transformational for the authority rather than actions which are now being carried out as part of day-to-day business plans.
"Customer Service" and "Community Engagement and Empowerment" were separated, and "Gateway to Services" was added as Transformation work streams which reflects the renewed importance of these areas of work in 2010/11. The main driver for maximising transformation opportunities will be the implementation of the Transformation Plan 2010/11 which incorporates recommendations from the Audit Commission's review of Business
5 Page 62 Cabinet 6.04.2010
Transformation in March 2009. More specifically, cultural change is recognised as an important aspect of the Transformation agenda.
Resolved that
(1) the updated Transformation Strategy be approved;
(2) the Transformation Plan be approved.
140. South Thames Gateway (STG) Building Control Partnership
The Cabinet was reminded that the South Thames Gateway Business Plan 2009/10 was approved at the Annual General Meeting of the Joint Committee held on 9 June 2009 following consultation with the three partner authorities.
The Business Plan has been revised several times at the drafting stage in order to try and realistically incorporate the financial affects of the economic down turn on the construction sector and Gravesham's agreed contribution was set at £35,542. This contribution is based on the assumed non-fee earning work load of the partnership.
Members were reminded that monthly monitoring is carried out by the STG Partnership and this is now routinely included in monthly budget monitoring reports to informal Cabinet and also in the quarterly monitoring reports to Cabinet and to Finance & Audit Committee. The emphasis during the year has been to maximise income from fee earning work and to reduce costs.
Unfortunately the effects of the economic recession have been apparent throughout the 2009/10 financial year with reduced fee earning work. In the final quarter which is normally a highly active quarter fee income fell well short of projections, with the adverse weather conditions over Christmas and New Year being a further causative factor.
It is currently forecast that STG will end the 2009/10 financial year with a deficit of £216,072, of this Gravesham's deficit allocation will be £43,214. This is £9,900 more than the January projection of £33,315 which has already been factored into the Council's budget process.
Consideration was given to two options for presenting the year end financial situation to partners. Option 1 suggests that the charge for core non-fee earning activities is kept at the original amount i.e. £427,752 overall with a Gravesham contribution of £85,552 and that a deficit of £216,072 as reported with Gravesham's share being £43,214.
Option 2 suggests that the partners are requested to pay an increased amount for the core non-fee earning activities (£543,476 overall) with a Gravesham contribution of £108,695 and that a deficit of £100,355 is reported with Gravesham's share being £20,071. Options 1 and 2 both equate to a total of £43,214 additional monies to be paid by Gravesham.
At its meeting on 18 March 2010 Members of the Joint Committee felt Option 2 to be the preferred Option in terms of presenting a clear position of the budget but appreciated that the respective financial officers may feel differently. The Joint Committee therefore delegated the final decision on how the deficit was to be presented, i.e. either as Option 1 or as Option 2 to officers.
6 Page 63 Cabinet 6.04.2010
On consideration of the two options the financial officers at Gravesham advised that deficit reporting should be as proposed in Option1 as this option presents the figures for core activities against the original budgeted amount and the financial officers at Medway and Swale support this as the favoured Option.
Resolved that
(1) the Assistant Director (Communities), in consultation with the Leader, is delegated the authority for the Council to pay the additional Gravesham contribution (currently projected at £43,214; and whether presented as outlined at Option 1 or Option 2 as referred to in paragraph 2.8) to balance the 2009/10 South Thames Gateway Building Control Partnership budget. This to be met by £33,315 already included in Gravesham Borough Council’s 2009/10 revenue budget and the balance (currently projected as £9,899) to be taken from reserves;
(2) Members to support the officer advice that Gravesham indicates to partners a preference for Option 1 when reporting the deficit and additional contribution figures for 2009/10. This on the basis that Option 1 better demonstrates consistency and transparency with the financial monitoring that has been ongoing and reported throughout the year than does Option 2;
(3) Members recognise that should the economic downturn and its adverse effect on the building trade continue; then in future the partner contributions proposed when STG business plans are drawn up may need to be adjusted upwards to more realistically reflect the non-fee earning workload of the partnership where evidence supports this stance;
(4) officers be requested to prepare a report to Cabinet which looks at Value for Money in respect of Gravesham’s participation in the STG partnership and seeks to set out what the Council's financial position would have been had the Partnership not been put in place.
Close of meeting
The meeting ended at 7.40 pm.
7 Page 64
This page is intentionally left blank Page 65 Agenda Item 9a
Gravesham Joint Transportation Board
Wednesday, 24 March 2010 7.00pm
Present:
Cllr Leslie Hills (Chairman) County Councillor Michael Snelling (Vice-Chairman)
Cllrs: Jane Cribbon William Dyke Sara Langdale Leslie Christie (KCC) Harold Craske (KCC) John Cubitt (KCC) Bryan Sweetland (KCC)
Note: Cllr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi was also in attendance
Also in Attendance:
Mr W Fisher, Meopham Parish Council Mr R Davis, United Taxi Group
Paul Gibbons Service Manager, (Parking & Amenities) David Aspinall Operations Manager (KCC) Andrew Burton Highway Schemes Manager (KCC) Peter Slaughter Transportation Engineer (KCC) Colin Martin Transportation Engineer (KCC) Kerry Prescott Transportation Engineer (KCC) Carlie Plowman Committee & Scrutiny Assistant
50. Minutes
The Minutes of the meeting held on 16 December 2009 were signed by the Chairman, subject to the inclusion of additional text in minute 39 to read ‘Alanbrooke, Gravesend’.
The Chairman advised Members that this was his last meeting as Chairman of the Board and that Colin Martin from Kent Highways Service is retiring at the end of April 2010. The Board thanked Colin Martin for his good service in support of the Joint Transportation Board and for working in partnership with officers and Members at Gravesham Borough Council.
With reference to Minute 37 (16.12.2009) Kent Highway Services informed the Board that a report on the ‘Functions of the Joint Transportation Board’ was due to be placed on the agenda. However, due to legal reasons Kent County Council’s Democratic Services Department had advised that it was not pertinent to discuss this issue at this time. The Board was advised that they can submit urgent items/issues to Kent County Council’s Policy Overview Committees or to County Councillor Nick Chard.
1 Page 66 Gravesham Joint Transportation Board 24.03.2010
The Chairman stated that the protocols and functions of the Joint Transportation Board were due to change in the near future.
With reference to Minute 40 (16.12.2009) it was agreed that a report on Heavy Good Vehicle’s be submitted to the next meeting of the Joint Transportation Board by Kent Highway Services.
51. Declarations of Interest
No declarations were made.
52. Cross Lane East Closure
Further to Minute 41 (16.12.2010) Members received a verbal update on the situation regarding the Cross Lane East closure and proposed scheme.
Kent Highway Services are currently firming up the design work, implementation of the proposed scheme and the cost estimate which will be reported to County Councillor’s John Cubitt and Bryan Sweetland. The final design will include waiting restrictions along the majority of the shop frontages at the Echo Square end of Cross Lane.
It was noted that Kent Highway Services will be carrying out overnight resurfacing works to the roundabout and all approach roads on Monday 19 April 2010. The grassed area has been top soiled and the replanting of the roundabout is being organised by Gravesham Horticultural Services.
Members requested that the area is improved as soon as practicable as local residents have been living with the temporary design for two years.
The Board thanked Colin Martin for the work he has undertaken to date on this scheme.
Resolved that the information given be noted.
53. Gas Main Replacement Works in Springhead Road, Portland Avenue and Sun Lane
The Board was informed of the gas main replacement and resurfacing works that have or are due to take place on roads in Gravesham which include Portland Avenue, Sun Lane (Smarts Road – Echo Square), Echo Square Roundabout, Springhead Road, Parrock Street, A227/Old A2 Bridge, Wainscott By Pass, A227 Wrotham Road Istead Rise and A277 Wrotham Road Meopham.
Resolved that the information given be noted.
54. Manor Road Gate, Gravesend, Kent
The Board was advised that Jacobs have been commissioned to undertake the design and procurement works for the gate in Manor Road, Gravesend.
The proposal is a single width gate (3 metres wide) similar to the existing one in Windmill Street. It will be located at the eastern end of the Manor Shades frontage, visible from the
2 Page 67 Gravesham Joint Transportation Board 24.03.2010
Windmill Street entry point. There will be a bypass route for cyclists alongside the gate and fixed bollards to force motorised vehicles to negotiate the gate.
Of the 24 letters sent out to local traders four responses were received. Two were in favour and one was against the proposed gate along with one respondent who was undecided. Kent Police support the gate as an “experimental measure” with the provision that it will be removed if there is an increase in injury accidents on Manor Road. They expressed some concern about the gate swinging open or if not secured by the drivers.
Resolved that the information given be noted.
55. Northfleet - Ebbsfleet station pedestrian links
Further to Minute 49 (16.12.2009) the Board was informed of the plans to improve pedestrian links between Northfleet and Ebbsfleet station.
The pedestrian links between Ebbsfleet station and Northfleet are currently inadequate as the routes are unnecessarily lengthy, there are no direct signs and there is a lack of dropped kerbs for people with mobility problems. The most direct pedestrian route from Ebbsfleet station to Northfleet is via the northern station car park and the footway of Thames Way.
It was noted that footpaths NU7A/1 and NU7A/2 form a route from South Kent Avenue to Thames Way at the entrance to the Northfleet Cement Works site. The route crosses the “North Kent” railway line on a high level bridge, and south of this crossed the sidings on another bridge that has been removed for renovation. Kent Highway Services advised that the missing bridge is scheduled to be replaced in April 2010 which will form a useful pedestrian link from Northfleet to Ebbsfleet.
The report detailed various proposals for future link from Northfleet station to Ebbsfleet station. Members were advised that as there is little possibility of creating more direct routes in the short term, Kent Highway Services are planning to make improvements to the existing pedestrian route between Northfleet station and Ebbsfleet station. The changes will include:-
• sign posts to show the route from one station to the other; • dropped kerbs in Railway Street; • dropped kerbs and new footway at the roundabout entrance to Ebbsfleet station.
Kent Highway Services are liaising with consultants working for High Speed One in order to promote better access to Ebbsfleet station. The consultants have proposed that High Speed One consider constructing a footway (or shared-use footway/cycle path) around the barriers at the entrance to the station car park.
Resolved that the report be noted.
56. Verge Parking - Hall Road, Springhead Road, Old Road East
Further to Minute 42 (16.12.2009) Members were updated on the situation regarding footway and verge parking on Hall Road, Springhead Road and Old Road East.
3 Page 68 Gravesham Joint Transportation Board 24.03.2010
Springhead Road - Residents of Springhead Road were consulted regarding the proposed parking bays. Of the 19 responses received four were in favour, 12 were against and three were undecided. The Board was advised that Gravesham Borough Council in consultation with Kent Highway Services will be investigating the option of a one way system on Springhead Road.
Members were advised that a report will be submitted to the next meeting of the Board detailing the proposals for a one-way system in Springhead Road and outcomes of the consultation carried out in Hall Road and Old Road East.
Members expressed concern that no further progress has been made and requested that a report be submitted to the next meeting of the Board detailing proposals and recommendations for Hall Road, Springhead Road, and Old Road East.
Resolved that a report be submitted to the next meeting of the Board detailing proposals and recommendations for Hall Road, Springhead Road, and Old Road East.
57. To make the verge parking experimental Order permanent
On 26 February 2009 an experimental Order was introduced in seven sites in the Borough to test the effectiveness of a ban on parking on the footway or verge. An experimental Order can only operate for a maximum period of 18 months before consideration has to be given to cancel the Order or to make it a permanent Traffic Order.
Members were advised that the Order has been effective in many sites and has changed parking habits allowing the verge or pavement to be returned to full pedestrian use. There are several sites that require regular attention from the parking enforcement team and this will continue as part of the daily patrols.
It was noted that Members can suggest future inclusion of sites and that these should be submitted to the Service Manager (Parking and Amenities). It was recommended that a Sub Group be appointed to consider the suggested sites and ensure that these sites meet the criteria to be included on the list and be submitted to the Board at different intervals for agreement.
Resolved that
(1) members approved the Order being made into a permanent Traffic Order;
(2) a Sub Group be appointed as shown below to consider the suggested sites and ensure that these sites meet the criteria to be included on the list and will be submitted to the Board at different intervals to be agreed;
(3) the Sub Group comprise:-
Cllrs: Leslie Hills (Chairman) Leslie Christie Harold Craske John Cubitt
Note: Mr W Fisher, Meopham Parish Council, spoke under the term of the agreement.
4 Page 69 Gravesham Joint Transportation Board 24.03.2010
58. St Mark's Avenue (Northfleet) proposed one-way street
Further to Minute 44 (16.12.2010) this report was produced to inform Members of the results of residents' consultation, and (as agreed by the County Council Cabinet Member) to help Members decide if the proposed one-way system would be beneficial overall to road safety.
County Councillor Leslie Christie and his helpers delivered reply-paid consultation letters to properties comprising the full lengths of St Mark’s Avenue, Marina Drive, Beresford Road, Collington Close, Cremorne Road, Vauxhall Close, Ranelagh Gardens and Beaumont Drive, plus numbers 55 and 56 London Road (at the entrance to Beresford Road), 73-74 London Road (at entrance to Marina Drive) and 75-85 London Road which have back access via St Mark’s Avenue.
Of the 510 consultation letters produced, 211 were returned. 183 supported the scheme and 27 were against the scheme. One respondent was not in favour of the proposal as specified, but was not against it. A detailed evaluation of the responses was detailed in the report.
The emergency services were also consulted regarding the proposal. Kent Police expressed concern about any proposed one-way system in the St Mark’s Avenue area and that it is almost certain to lead to an increase in vehicle speeds and an increase risk of crashes. Kent Fire and Rescue advised that access in the area is sometimes difficult because of the on-road parking, however they do not see that the proposed one-way on St Mark’s Avenue from London Road to Cremore Road would make access any worse. No response has been received from the Ambulance Service.
Kent Highway Services thanked County Councillor Leslie Christie and his helpers for delivering the consultation letters.
Resolved that the proposal to make St Mark’s Avenue from its junction with London Road to its junction with Cremorne Road one way southwards be implemented and reviewed by the Joint Transportation Board after six months of operation.
Note: Cllr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi spoke with leave of the Chairman on this item.
59. Fountain Walk Consultation
Further to Minute 45 (16.12.2009) Members were informed that residents were consulted regarding a scheme to assist parking by residents and improve access in Fountain Walk, Beresford Road, London Road and Marina Drive. The Chairman of the Fountain Walk Residents Association helped to deliver the consultation letter and 30 responses were received. It was noted that most of these responses were positive and will be used to design a detailed scheme which will be submitted to the next meeting of the Board.
Resolved that a report be submitted to the next meeting of the Board.
60. London Road, Northfleet - Proposed Zebra Crossing near Gordon Road
The Board was informed that in 2008, Kent Highways Service received a request from the County Councillors, local residents and Nursery School for the zebra crossing at Fountain Walk to be relocated outside the Nursery School. This zebra crossing serves the main
5 Page 70 Gravesham Joint Transportation Board 24.03.2010
desire line from Fountain Walk to the Post Office and other amenities. Kent Highway Services consider that such a move may be inappropriate.
Kent Highway Services carried out surveys of pedestrian movements and traffic speeds to determine if there was sufficient justification for an additional crossing close to the Nursery School. The results of the surveys indicated that an additional zebra crossing is required and the reduction of the speed limit in London Road from 40mph to 30mph east of the junction with Rural Vale .
These works are unable to be included in the bid for funds under KCC’s Local Transportation Plan integrated transport programme 2010/11, therefore County Councillors Leslie Christie and Harold Craske have agreed to fund these works from their Members Highway Fund.
Resolved that
(1) the proposal illustrated as Appendix B to the report be endorsed;
(2) the reduction in the speed limit in London Road/Overcliffe from 40mph to 30mph east of the junction with Rural Vale be endorsed.
Note: Cllr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi spoke with leave of the Chairman on this item.
61. Petition - Hever Court Road, Gravesend, Kent
A petition signed by 149 residents was received from Hever Court Road and Linear Park users, requesting a reduction in speed limit from 40mph to 30mph and/or traffic calming. The petitioners reported that the vehicles using Hever Court Road are exceeding the speed limit and causing a safety problem. Concerns were also expressed regarding the children’s nursery which is located near this road as the entrances are concealed and there are no pedestrian crossing facilities to the Linear Park entrances.
Members were advised that there is no evidence of a speeding problem on Hever Court Road and that there is no evidence of demand for a formal crossing point at this location.
It was noted that the Countrywide Speed Limit Review is currently being implemented to ensure that all A and B roads meet the standards given in a Department for Transport document called ‘Circular Roads 1/2006 Setting Local Speed Limits’ by 2011. Until this work is completed changes to speed limits on all other roads cannot be considered except where a lower speed limit is likely to reduce the number of personal injury crashes. Members expressed concern that a speed limit can only be reduced after a personal injury crash happens. It was suggested that Hever Court Road be considered after the Speed Limit Review has been implemented.
The Board requested that Ward Members, both Borough and County Councillors, be notified when a petition is received as the Members for this Ward were not informed of this petition.
Resolved that
(1) the speed limit remains 40mph, and traffic calming is not pursued at this time;
(2) the lead petitioner be informed of the decision.
6 Page 71 Gravesham Joint Transportation Board 24.03.2010
62. Petition - Willow Walk, Culverstone, Meopham, Kent
A petition signed by nine residents of Willow Walk was received, requesting double yellow lines along the length of the road to prevent the blocking of driveways particularly at school times.
Member were advised that the there is no firm evidence to suggest that further restrictions are needed in this road and that it is necessary to carry out surveys and investigations to establish the nature and extent of the parking problem. The introduction of further restrictions will displace the problem somewhere else.
Resolved that officers carry out surveys and investigations to establish the nature of the problem and advise at the next meeting of the Board on any action to be taken.
Note: Mr W Fisher, Meopham Parish Council, spoke under the term of the agreement.
63. County's position regarding pot holes
The Board was advised that following the snow in December 2009 and January 2010 Kent Highway Services have pooled all their resources to repair the pot holes. Kent Highways Services have received additional funding and are currently tendering for companies to undertake pot hole repairs.
Members were advised to report any roads that need repairing to KCC’s Contact Centre.
Resolved that the verbal report be noted.
64. Consultation documents for winter service policy
The Board was informed that following the winter period in December 2010 and January 2011 Kent Highway Services will be consulting with stakeholders, Policy Overview Committees and the Joint Transportation Boards to ask for their views and suggestion as to how Kent Highway Service’s can improve its Winter Service Policy.
It was noted that the consultation exercise will be carried out in April 2010 and the winter service policy will be published by September 2010.
Members advised that the Kent Highway Services consider the views received from the public who attended the Neighbourhood Forum meetings.
Resolved that the verbal report be noted.
65. Highway and Transportation Schemes Progress Report
The Board received a report detailing the progress of highway and transportation schemes in Gravesham. The schemes have progressed the programme, however due to the heavy snow in December and January some works lost their slotted road possession and have been rescheduled later than originally planned.
Members were advised that in March 2007 Northfleet Technology College’s School Travel Plan had identified a need to encourage more pupils to walk and cycle to school. A proposal
7 Page 72 Gravesham Joint Transportation Board 24.03.2010
was put forward by officers to improve the walking/cycling route along Hall Road and on the land alongside Cygnet Leisure Centre. This proposal was allocated £80,000 from Kent County Councils ‘Smarter Choices’ initiative. As it has not proved possible to develop a scheme that satisfies all the site’s constraints, KCC’s Highway Schemes Manager carried out a project review. The outcome of the review comprises land ownership issues, the required planning application and the temporary use of the land as a fire evacuation area for the school which make it unlikely that the proposed path alongside the west side of the Cygnet Leisure Centre can be built in 2010/11. Without this new link, the case for the remainder of the scheme is significantly weakened and therefore this scheme be removed from the Local Transport Plan 2006/11.
Resolved that
(1) the progress of highway improvements schemes in Gravesham be noted;
(2) the removal of the proposed cycling/walking route (illustrated at Appendix A to the report) from the Local Transport Plan 2006/11 be endorsed.
66. Sole Street - Pedestrian Facilities across the Railway Bridge
The Board was informed that the lack of footway over the railway bridge in Sole Street has been a cause of concern to some train passengers, pedestrians, residents and local Members. In order to resolve these concerns white hatched road-markings were painted on the station-side of the carriageway across the bridge for pedestrians to walk on in order to stay out of the path of traffic. To provide further guidance to drivers, double white centre- lines were painted on, and on both approaches to, the bridge.
Kent Police carried out a routine road safety assessment which revealed some concerns with regards to the legitimacy and enforceability of these road markings. To comply with the legislation Kent Highway Services removed the hatched area without consulting residents, local Members and the Parish Council. These changes were immediately unpopular and was agreed that a road marking scheme be reinstated across the bridge. These remedial works were completed in November but current design standards means that the resultant hatched area for pedestrians to walk along is noticeably narrower than it had been. The proposed scheme comprises a proper footway and Kent Highway Services have secured £22,000 funding from the repair and renewal budget to implement this scheme.
Kent Highway Services are working with Network Rail to refine the scheme’s design in order to minimise the proposed footway’s effect on the bridge’s structure.
Resolved that the proposal illustrated at Appendix A of the report be endorsed.
Note: Mr W Fisher, Meopham Parish Council, spoke under the terms of the agreement.
Close of meeting
The meeting ended at 9.10 pm.
8 Page 73 Agenda Item 11a
Gravesham Borough Council
Report to: Council
Date: 27 April 2010
Reporting officer: Assistant Director (Communities) Assistant Director (Business and Law)/Monitoring Officer
Subject: Amendments to the Constitution: 2.7 Contract Procedure Rules
Purpose and summary of report: To set out the proposed amendments to Annex 2.7, Contract Procedure Rules, to the Constitution resulting from the ongoing comprehensive review of the Constitution
Recommendations: That the proposed revisions to Annex 2.7 Contract Procedure Rules be endorsed
1 Introduction
1.1 The proposed amendments are designed to establish the correct application of the Contract Procedure Rules to the aggregation of Council expenditure for the purpose of meeting competitive requirements
1.2 The amendment to Annex 2.7 Contract Procedure Rules has been highlighted and is reproduced at Appendices 1 to this report
2 Contract Procedure Rules
2.1 The existing Paragraph 14.1 requires that opportunities to maximise the Council’s purchasing power should be taken and that separate contracts are not entered into for the purposes of minimising the application of the Rules in relation to calculating the contract value.
2.2 Following discussion with Legal Services it is considered advantageous that the Rules include an explicit requirement, for officers, to apply the aggregation rule when calculating the estimated total value of a contract.
2.3 The proposed amendments to the Contract Procedure Rules are shown in Appendix 1 and have been developed through consultation with Legal Services
2.4 The aggregation rule requires public sector organisations to consider the total value of similar procurements, across the whole organisation, when deciding whether financial thresholds have been reached. It should be applied to Page 74 Appendices 1
procurements, of any value, which involve recurrent transactions for the same types of items or services. It is not acceptable to split up contracts to avoid the thresholds stated within the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules and European procurement legislation.
2.5 The purpose of the rule is to ensure genuine competition for those procurements exceeding defined thresholds and to safeguard against the placement of multiple low value contracts in an attempt to avoid the application of the thresholds.
2.6 It is important that an accurate estimate of the anticipated financial value of a proposed contract is made because this calculation will determine the procurement process to be followed.
2.7 The correct use of the aggregation rule is particularly important to procurements managed in accordance with the European Procurement Directive. A failure to apply the aggregation rule may result in legal action being taken against the Council
2.8 Maximising the Council’s procurement power through the aggregation of similar requirements increases opportunities to deliver financial and service efficiencies
2.9 The recommended amendments provide for a definition of total value in relation to the calculation of a contract value. They are constructed from model Contract Procedure Rules clauses published by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy.
3 Financial Implications
3.1 There are no financial implications to this report.
4. Risk Assessment
4.1 There is a duty to review and monitor the Constitution on a regular basis, with a general review to be undertaken at least every 10 years.
4.2 Failing to correctly aggregate proposed expenditure exposes the Council to the risk of legal challenge and reduces the potential to benefit from the economies of scale associated with best practice collective procurement
5. Section 17 Crime and Disorder Act 1998
5.1 Public confidence in the democratic process contributes to community well- being and cohesion.
6. Background Papers
6.1 CIPFA / Local Government Task Force Model Contract Procedure Rules
2 Page 75 Appendices 1
8. European Union Procurement Directives and Regulations
8.1 Notwithstanding any other provision contained in these Rules, all contracts for the supply of goods or services, or for the execution of works:- (1) which exceed during the period of the contract such value as may be prescribed from time to time (known as the EU Threshold), details of which shall be maintained by the Assistant Director (Business and Law); and (2) the letting of which are regulated by the EU Procurement Directive or Regulations. shall be let in accordance with the requirements of the Directives or Regulations and in consultation with the Assistant Director (Business & Law) or such other person which he/she may nominate to act on his/her behalf.
8.2 Paragraphs 10, 11, 12 and 14 of these Contract Procedure Rules shall not apply to those contracts covered by Paragraph 8.1.
13. Contracts subject to the European Procurement Directives
Where an estimated value of a contract (or two or more contracts relating to a single requirement in the aggregate) exceed(s) the current European Union thresholds then the contract shall be tendered in accordance with the Directives except where in consultation with Legal Services or Procurement it is agreed to use an appropriate third party contract or framework arrangement.
14. Invitation to Tender Dependent on Value
14.1 Opportunities to maximise the Council's purchasing power must be taken and officers should not enter into separate contracts nor select a method of calculating the total contract value in order to minimise the application of the Contract Procedure Rules.
14.2 The estimated total value of a contract shall be calculated as follows:
(1) where the contract is for a fixed period, by taking the total price to be paid or which might be paid during the whole of the period
(2) where the purchase involves recurrent transaction for the same type of item, by aggregating the value of those transactions in the coming twelve months
(3) where the contract is for an uncertain duration, by multiplying the monthly payment by forty-eight
(4) If the Council is to enter into two or more contracts in order to meet a single requirement then the value of the contracts should be aggregated to determine whether the estimated total value exceeds or is likely to exceed the EU threshold
3 Page 76 Appendices 1
14.3 The method of invitation to tender shall vary having regard to the appropriate Chief Officer’s opinion as to the estimated total cost of the goods or services to be provided or works to be executed and shall be as follows:-
Estimated Total Requirement Request to quote/tender to Value (£) include as a minimum (1) Up to £10,000 One quotation to be • Sufficient specification to confirmed in writing. enable the submission of a competitive offer.
• Details of the quantity of goods/services to be provided.
• Delivery requirements
• The proposed contract start and finish dates and to include any provisions for options and extension. Contract periods to be reasonable and in accordance with legislation
(2) £10,000.01 to Three written • As in (1) above plus:- £50,000 quotations. • The invitation to quote to be issued to all invitees at the same time, containing the same information and subject to the same conditions.
• The invitation to quote to be issued in writing and the responses received in writing. (3) £50,000.01 to Invitations to tender • As in (1) and (2) above plus:- EC threshold to at least five tenderers. • Formal tender documentation to be issued and receipt and tenders to be in accordance with Contract Procedure Rule 15.
(4) Above EC In accordance with • As per the European threshold the provisions of the Procurement Directives. Consult the European Procurement Procurement Manager or the Directives. Assistant Director (Business and Law) for advice.
4 Page 77 Agenda Item 11b
Gravesham Borough Council
Report to: Council
Date: 27 April 2010
Reporting officer: Assistant Director (Communities)
Subject: Review of Scrutiny Procedures.
Purpose and summary of report: To put to Council proposals for changes to the Constitution following the Review of Scrutiny Procedures working group’s findings on pre decision scrutiny.
Recommendations: To receive the report without debate at this meeting and to refer it to the next ordinary meeting of the council on 22 June 2010.
1. Background
1.1 A working group had been set up to carry out a review of the Council’s scrutiny procedures.
1.2 The terms of reference for the review were:
To review by various means, including learning visits to other authorities and the involvement of South East Employers, the Overview and Scrutiny function within the Council and identify if the committee could better fulfil its role through
• pre-Cabinet scrutiny of key decisions and the role that the Overview Scrutiny Committee or the Policy Overview Committees (POCs) may play in this process
• an improved relationship between the Cabinet Overview Scrutiny Committee, and what form this could take
• the development of a clear protocol for use of the call-in tool, and
Page 78
• enhanced selection and prioritisation of topics for scrutiny review
To submit recommendations to Cabinet and Overview Scrutiny Committee based on the evidence gathered during the review.
1.3 The Overview Scrutiny Committee considered the review working group’s report at its meeting on 23 July 2009 and resolved that the recommendations in the final report be endorsed with the following amendments:-
Recommendation 5 – the call in form was unnecessary as the e-mail system recently adopted was working well.
Recommendation 9 – the wording be changed slightly to make the recommendation clearer
1.4 The working group submitted its final report and recommendations to cabinet on 16 November 2009. (Executive summary of report at Appendix B)
1.5 One of the recommendations was to further investigate pre-decision scrutiny.
2. Pre-decision scrutiny
2.1 At the Cabinet meeting on 8 March 2010 it was decided that: • topics for pre-decision scrutiny be selected from the key decisions listed in the Forward Plan; • the value threshold for key decisions be reduced to £100k; • the period covered by the Forward Plan be extended to six months; • topics for pre-decision scrutiny be jointly agreed between the chairman of a POC and the relevant shadow lead member; • pre-decision scrutiny be carried out by the relevant POC and where cross portfolio issues are being scrutinised either by each POC or a combined meeting of the relevant POCs; • officers in the department from which the pre-decision item is chosen will be responsible for providing any additional information required for its scrutiny; • amendments to the Constitution arising from the changes to the Forward Plan process be submitted to the 27 April 2010 meeting of Council without debate and then to the June meeting for discussion/adoption
2.2 The necessary amendments to the Article 13.04 of the Constitution and Annexes 1.7, 1.17 and 2.2 are detailed in Appendix A attached to this report.
There are no background papers pertaining to this report. Page 79
Amendments to the Constitution
Pre-Decision Scrutiny and the Forward Plan
Article 13.04 – Decision Making
(6) Forward Plan
Each month the Leader of the Executive will arrange for a list of the Key Decisions that, so far as is reasonably practicable and foreseeable, the Cabinet anticipates will be taken over the coming six (changed from four ) months (known as the ‘Forward Plan’) to be drawn up and published.
The Forward Plan should, so far as is reasonably practicable, identify those anticipated decisions which it is considered will be Key Decisions, including those which are to be taken under powers delegated to sub-committees, area and joint committees or by officers.
Not all Key Decisions can be identified six (changed from four) months in advance. Some decisions (such as the adoption of Strategies forming part of the Policy Framework) can readily be predicted and will therefore be in the Forward Plan for some time, whereas others may not be known until a few weeks before the decision is taken. Therefore the Forward Plan will normally include more decisions to be taken within the first month than in the sixth (changed from fourth) month of the period covered and should be viewed as a planning tool for managing the work programme of the Cabinet in an open and accessible manner.
The Forward Plan must be made publicly available and in particular, the Leader of the Executive will ensure that it is made available to all Members of the Scrutiny Committee whose Terms of Reference include responsibility for scrutiny of executive decisions in respect of the matter concerned at least 2 weeks in advance of the start of the period covered.
Annex 1.7 Terms of Reference for Policy Overview Committees
1. To assist and advise the Leader and the Cabinet on the development of the Council’s Policy Framework by investigating topics referred to them by the Leader or the Cabinet.
2. To carry out pre-decision scrutiny of items on the Forward Plan
3. To request the Leader, Cabinet members and officers to attend and answer questions.
4. To invite input, where appropriate from external sources, to assist in the Committees’ deliberations.
5. To investigate service performance, policy issues and possible options.
Page 80
6. To make recommendations to the Leader and Cabinet arising from the exercise of the preceding terms of reference or affecting Gravesham or its inhabitants within the allocated areas of responsibility of the committee.
7. In the case of the Community Safety/Environment Policy Overview Committee, to scrutinise the work of the community safety partnership and the partners who comprise it, insofar as their activities relate to the partnership itself, and from time-to- time to act as a Crime and Disorder Committee constituted pursuant to section 19 of the Police and Justice Act 2006.
Notes
The Committees may invite such other persons as appear appropriate to attend and take part in their deliberations, subject to the non-disclosure of confidential and exempt information (as defined in the Access to Information Rules set out in Annex 2.2 to this Constitution).
When acting as Crime and Disorder Committee the Community Safety/Environment Policy Overview committee shall conduct itself in accordance with the Council Procedure Rules as apply to committees and as set out in Annex 2.1
Annex 1.17 Key Decisions – Indicative Financial Thresholds
Budget Heading Financial Threshold (£)
1. General Fund Services: 1.1 Capital Expenditure Projects 100,000 (changed from 250,000 ) 1.2 Revenue Expenditure 100,000 (changed from 250,000 )
2 Housing Revenue Account Services 2.1 Capital Expenditure Projects 100,000 (changed from 250,000 ) 2.2 Revenue Expenditure 100,000 (changed from 250,000 )
Page 81
Annex 2.2 – Access to Information Procedure Rules
16. The Forward Plan
16.1 Period of the Forward Plan
Forward Plans will be prepared by the Leader of the Executive to cover a period of six (changed from four) months, beginning with the first day of any month. They will be prepared on a monthly basis and subsequent Plans will cover a period beginning with the first day of the second month covered in the preceding Plan.
16.2 Contents of the Forward Plan
16.2.1 The Forward Plan will contain matters which the Leader of the Executive has reason to believe will be subject of a Key Decision to be taken by:-
(1) the Cabinet;
(2) a committee of the Cabinet;
(3) individual Members of the Cabinet;
(4) officers;
(5) area Committees, or under joint arrangements, in the course of the discharge of a Cabinet function during the period covered by the Plan.
16.2.2 It will describe the following particulars in so far as the information is available or might reasonably be obtained:-
(1) the matter in respect of which a decision is to be made;
(2) where the decision-taker is an individual, his/her name and title (if any) and, where the decision-taker is a body, its name and details of its Membership;
(3) the date on which, or the period within which, the decision will be taken;
(4) the identity of the principal groups whom the decision-taker proposes to consult before taking the decision;
(5) the means by which any such consultation is proposed to be undertaken;
(6) the steps any person might take who wishes to make representations to the Cabinet or decision-taker about the matter in respect of which the decision is to be made, and the date by which those steps must be taken; and Page 82
(7) a list of the documents submitted to the decision-taker for consideration in relation to the matter.
16.2.3 The Forward Plan must be published at least 14 days before the start of the period covered.
16.2.4 The Proper Officer will publish once a year a notice in at least one newspaper circulating in the area, stating:-
(1) that Key Decisions are to be taken on behalf of the Council;
(2) that a Forward Plan containing particulars of the matters on which decisions are to be taken will be prepared on a monthly basis;
(3) that the Plan will contain details of the Key Decisions to be made for the six (changed from four) month period following its publication;
(4) that each Plan will be available for inspection at reasonable hours free of charge at the Council’s offices;
(5) that each Plan will contain a list of the documents submitted to the decision-takers for consideration in relation to the Key Decisions on the Plan;
(6) the address from which, subject to any prohibition or restriction on their disclosure, copies of, or extracts from, any document listed in the Forward Plan is available;
(7) that other documents may be submitted to decision-takers;
(8) the procedure for requesting details of documents (if any) as they become available; and
(9) the dates on each month in the following year on which each Forward Plan will be published and available to the public at the Council’s offices.
16.2.5 Exempt information need not be included in a Forward Plan and confidential information cannot be included.
Page 83
Appendix B
Review of Overview Scrutiny Procedures at Gravesham Borough Council
Report of the Task Group
1 Executive summary.
1.1 At the request of the Cabinet a task group consisting of the Deputy Leader, Cllr David Turner, as Chairman along with Cllr John Burden the Chairman of Scrutiny, Cllr John Cubitt the Lead Member for Community Safety/Environment and Cllrs Andrea Webb and Harold Craske both substitutes for the Overview Scrutiny Committee was set up to undertake the review.
1.2 Terms of reference
To review by various means, including learning visits to other authorities and the involvement of South East Employers, the Overview Scrutiny function within the Council and identify if the committee could better fulfil its role through
• pre-Cabinet scrutiny of key decisions and the role that Overview Scrutiny Committee or the Policy Overview Committees may play in this process
• an improved relationship between the Cabinet Overview Scrutiny Committee, and what form this could take
• the development of a clear protocol for use of the call-in tool, and
• enhanced selection and prioritisation of topics for scrutiny review
To submit recommendations to Cabinet and Overview Scrutiny Committee based on the evidence gathered during the review.
1.3 Recommendations to Cabinet are:-
1. That the committee maintains political impartiality, including appointment of an opposition member as chairman.
2. That the Executive acknowledges the importance of impartiality and values it, not least in the light of the view of the Audit Commission and the way it will view the council if the functions of scrutiny are not seen to be working (see note below).
3. That there is follow up on the implementation of recommendations: (1) At meeting following their resolution, response to recommendations. (2) After 6 months, automatic agenda item to receive report on (a) actions completed and their outcomes and (b) status of actions in progress.
Page 84
4. That members of the ruling group on the committee be encouraged to freely challenge the Executive without being ‘primed’ on what questions to ask.
5. That a form for call-ins be implemented, to include the reasons for the call-in, and a format for discussing called-in items be agreed.
6. That there be cross-party agreement of criteria for call-in.
7. That there be additional training for members to include the scrutiny of partnerships (eg CDRP, LSP, local boards, delivery board).
8. That there is ability for the Overview Scrutiny Committee to co-opt other councillors with specific expertise onto scrutiny in a nonvoting capacity when appropriate.
9. That there is ability for the Overview Scrutiny Committee to co-opt non-elected members with specific expertise onto scrutiny, in a non- voting capacity.
10. That there be further investigation into practicality of pre-decision scrutiny at GBC and report back in two months.
11. That POCs be permitted and encouraged to identify actions/projects in support of council policies.
12. That suggestions for topic reviews from a wider audienceincluding cabinet, POCs, other members, officers and the public be permitted and encouraged.
13. That a rolling programme of topic reviews be established and maintained.
14. That informal mechanisms for local health scrutiny reviews bedeveloped and strengthening of district representation on county health scrutiny committees be sought.
15. That a work programme be developed based on the strategic aims of the Sustainable Community Strategy.
16. That a methodology for the scrutiny of partnerships be developed.
17. That protocols for Councillor Call for Action (CCfA) be developed.
Note At a recent seminar on the function of scrutiny in CAA Alison Kelly (Strategy Advisor Governance and Accountability for the Audit Commission) stated that scrutiny was “absolutely key” to an authority’s future prospects for improvement under CAA. “The chairmen of scrutiny, lead members and directors should be working together. The Audit Commission also holds the view that Finance & Audit and Standards committees had a role to play in the scrutiny function, indeed Standards should be proactive.”
1.4 The context in which this review was undertaken was the outcome of a training Page 85
session entitled ‘Overview and Scrutiny – realising the potential’ held in September 2008 facilitated by South East Employers.
1.5 Evidence Gathering
Evidence gathering sessions were held with the Vice Chairman and an opposition member of the Overview Scrutiny Committee, Cllr Mike Snelling the leader of the council and Glyn Thomson the Chief Executive. Mr Graham Smith who is employed by South East Employers to facilitate training sessions as one of their peer councillors and experts on scrutiny was also involved at an early stage to help shape the review (he was one of the facilitators at the training session mentioned above). Members of the task group visited scrutiny committee meetings at both Dartford and Maidstone Borough Councils and spoke to the respective chairmen of those meetings and a Kent County Council select committee. The task group also attended a LGiU seminar “Comprehensive Area Assessments – the Role of Scrutiny”. Enquiries were made of the other Kent authorities as to whether they had specific criteria for call-ins.
1.6 Conclusion
The review concluded that only a limited amount can be learnt from the study of the scrutiny processes at other authorities. The success or failure of scrutiny revolves around the relationship between the committee and the executive and the commitment of the members to take on the responsibilities of the overview and scrutiny function.
Page 86
This page is intentionally left blank