Christchurch Town Council Old Town Hall 30 High Street

Christchurch Dorset, BH23 1AY Full Council Agenda Monday, 15 March 2021, 6.00pm

You are summoned to attend a meeting of the Christchurch Town Council to be held via Zoom conferencing facilities on Monday 15 March 2021 at 6.00pm.

Membership: Mayor: Cllr L Dedman Deputy Mayor: Cllr Mrs S Bungey

Cllr J A Abbott Cllr G R Jarvis Cllr V Charrett Cllr D C Jones Cllr A E Coulton Cllr T Lane Cllr F J M Cox Cllr S J McCormack Cllr M Cox Cllr F F T Neale Cllr S Fotheringham Cllr G E E Polson Cllr C A Gardiner Cllr Mrs S Spittle Cllr W Grace Cllr M J Tarling Cllr P Hilliard Members of the public wishing to attend the meeting should use the link: https://zoom.us/j/94336400930?from=addon

Meeting ID: 943 3640 0930 Passcode: 750146

The business to be transacted is set out overleaf.

Daniel Lucas Town Clerk 9 March 2021

For further information please contact Daniel Lucas on 01202 022479 or email [email protected] Agenda

• 1. • Prayers • • • • Prayers will be said by the Mayor’s Chaplain, the • Reverend Canon Charles Stewart. • • • 2. • Apologies for Absence • • • • To receive apologies for absence • • • • • 3. • Declaration of Interests • • • • • • Members are reminded that any disclosable pecuniary• • interests must be declared including any issues which• • may arise through predetermination of bias. • • • • • 4. • Minutes of Previous Meeting • • • • • To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the last• 7 – 18 • ordinary meeting held on 18 January 2021 and• • Extraordinary meetings held on 18 January 2021 and• 29 January 2021 (copies attached). Exempt Minutes• • withheld from agenda pack but to be confirmed also. • • • • • 5. • Announcements • • • • • • Announcements from the Mayor or Town Clerk. • • • • • • • • 6. • Public Participation • • • • • • In accordance with the Council’s Standing Orders the• • period of time designated for Public Participation cannot• • exceed 15 minutes unless directed by the Chairman of• the meeting and a member of the public shall not speak • • for more than 5 minutes. • • • • • • Public Questions • 7. • • • • • Members of the public who wish to ask a question at the • • meeting shall give notice to the Town Clerk of the • • question no later than 12 noon on the working day • • before the meeting is on. The question stated in the• • notice shall be the question asked at the meeting. The • • Mayor will call on those wishing to speak in turn, each • • questioner being allowed to speak for a maximin of 3 • minutes. Those wishing to speak shall state their name• • and address. • • • • • • •

2

• • • • • • • • 8. • Questions from Councillors • • • 9. • To Receive any verbal reports from Partner • Organisations • • • • • 10. • Committee Minutes • • • • To receive the Committee Minutes for the last cycle of• meetings and to consider any recommendations arising• from these meetings as follows: • • • • • • Planning Committee, 26 January 2021 • 19 – 23 • To receive the Minutes of the meeting held on 26• January 2021 and to consider the recommendation arising therefrom: • • Minute No: 212 - Proposed Development of the Civic• Offices in Bridge Street, Christchurch. •

RECOMMENDATION: the Proposed Development of• the Civic Offices in Bridge Street be considered at the• next Full Council meeting. • • • Resources Committee, 9 February 2021 24 – 26 • To receive the Minutes of the meeting held on 9• February 2021. • • Community Committee, 16 February 2021 • • To receive the Minutes of the meeting held on 16• 27 – 30 February 2021. • • • • Planning Committee, 23 February 2021 • • To receive the Minutes of the meeting held on 23• 31 – 35 February 2021. • • • Planning Committee, 1 March 2021 • To receive the Minutes of the Extraordinary meeting 36 – 38 held on 1 March 2021. • • Resources Committee, 9 March 2021 • To receive the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 March 2021 and to consider the proposed recommendation To follow arising therefrom: -

Reserves 39 - 42

3

PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION that:

(a) The committee considers the proposals to earmark the Councils General Reserves to those earmarked budget lines identified at table 1. (ii) (iii) (b) Recommends to Full Council the proposals at table 1: Project Proposed Reserve Allocation Town Hall Roof £230,000 Repair Town Hall Internal £17,825 Redecoration Druitt Hall Windows £40,000 Community £44,000 Infrastructure Levy Total £331,825. (iv) (v)

• 11. • Confirmation of the Climate Change Task and Finish Verbal report • Group Membership. • • • • • • Members are asked to consider the Membership of the• • Climate Change Task and Finish Group. • • • • • • RECOMMENDATION: • • • • a) That Members confirm the membership of the • Climate Change Task and Finish Group: • • • • Cllr Neale F (Chairman) • Cllr Abbott J A • • Cllr Gardiner C • • Cllr Jarvis G R • • Cllr Tarling • • • • Motion Received from Cllr Neale: That Council (vi) • recommends that the Task and Finish Group should • comprise 7 Members so as to include all those • Members who applied for consideration, which • includes Cllrs Jones and Polson who were • unsuccessful in the exhaustive ballot. • 12. • • • Recommendations from the Community Grants • • 43 - 44 Working Group Meetings held on Tuesday 2, 3 & 5• • February 2021. • • • • • •

4

• 13. • Internal Audit – Auditor Appointment • • Verbal • • RECOMMENDATION: To appoint “Do the Numbers Ltd” Report • to act as the Council’s internal auditor for 2020/2021 • • • • • • • • 14. • Committee/Other Body Membership Procedure 45 - 47 • Update

•

• Members are invited to consider the attached procedure note and to debate, amend or accept accordingly. • • It is RECOMMENDED that Council adopts a formal • procedure note in the manner as attached. • • • • CiLCA and General Power of Competence 15. Verbal report • • • • Event Enquiry • 16. • Verbal Report

• • • • • • 17. Ducking Stool Board Walk 4 48 – 58 • • Members are invited to consider the proposal from BCP • Council/Businesses/Residents to assist in this matter • (Appendices 1 and 2). The Town Clerk can advise • members that the Council with its current resources can • comfortably assist here. It is advised that members • utilise a proportion of the Community Infrastructure Levy • received from BCP Council this financial year to provide • this one-off grant. None of these monies have been • assigned to any capital projects. Guidance from BCP • Council (Appendix 3) also illustrates that providing this • grant meets the initiatives and purpose of tasking CIL • monies in “provision, improvement, replacement, • operation or maintenance of infrastructure”. • It is RECOMMENDED that Members consider the • proposal at Appendix 1 and: •

• a) Grants to BCP Council the sum of £25,000 • coming from the Community Infrastructure Levy • for the purposes of improving the footpath known • as the Ducking Stool Boardwalk so that it shall be • adopted by BCP Council as a highway • maintainable at public expense; • • b) That the grant shall be awarded under section • 50(2) of the Highways Act 1980 which permits the • council of a parish to undertake the maintenance • of any footpath within the parish whether or not

5

• any other person is under a duty to maintain the • footpath. This subsection also makes clear that • nothing in this part of the Act affects the duty of • any other person to maintain such footpath. • • c) That the grant shall be for the one-off • maintenance required to bring the footpath into an adoptable standard and on the basis that no • further commitment shall be provided by this • Council if such unforeseeable costs arise. • • d) That the Council shall not be liable for any • accidents or nuisances arising due to the • negligence or otherwise of BCP Council and/or its • contractors in performing the maintenance works. • The award of the grant being no acceptance of • liability for, or the duty to maintain the boardwalk. • • e) That the Council shall require notification of the • completion of the works and adoption of the • highway within 3 years of the date of this • resolution, failing which the Town Council shall be • at liberty to ask for the grant to be paid back to • the Town Council. • • • • 18. • Exempt Business • • • RECOMMENDATION: To consider passing a resolution • to exclude the press and public pursuant to the Public • Bodies (Admissions to Meetings) Act 1960 due to the • matter relating to the financial and business affairs of the • authority. • • • 19. CCLA Investment Management Limited - Public To Follow • Sector Deposit Fund (Exempt) • • • • • No other items of business can be considered unless the Chairman decides the matter is urgent for reasons that must be specified and recorded in the Minutes.

6

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL

FULL COUNCIL

Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting held on 18 January 2021 at 6.00pm via Zoom conferencing facilities.

Present:-

Cllr Mrs L Dedman – Mayor

Cllr Mrs S Bungey – Deputy Mayor

Present: Cllr J Abbott, Cllr V Charrett, Cllr A E Coulton, Cllr Mrs F Cox, Cllr M Cox, Cllr S Fotheringham, Cllr C A Gardiner, Cllr W Grace, Cllr P Hilliard, Cllr G R Jarvis, Cllr D C Jones, Cllr T Lane, Cllr S J McCormack, Cllr F F T Neale and Cllr Mrs S Spittle.

Also in Past Mayors, Cllr D Flagg, Mrs D Jones, Mrs P Jamieson, Mrs J attendance: Spencer and Michael Turvey.

Officers Cllr Daniel Lucas, Town Clerk Present: Susan Roxby, Administrative Support Officer

Members of the 4 Public present:

Members of the None present. Press present:

Declarations of Interest

Councillors Jones, Neale and Spittle declared a non-pecuniary interest in Minute No.193 (Notice of Motion Received in Accordance with Procedural Rule No.9) as they were former Christchurch Borough Council Members and knew Mr Michael Turvey in his capacity of the former Town Clerk and Chief Executive of Christchurch Borough Council, and remained present for the discussion and voting thereon.

Notice of Motion Received in Accordance with Procedural Rule No.9

In accordance with the Civic Handbook the Council was asked to consider the following Motion proposed by Councillor Jones, seconded by the Deputy Mayor, Cllr Mrs Bungey, and signed by the prerequisite number of Councillors.

7

“That this Council

Noting that in recognition of the eminent services rendered to the community by serving as the former Town Clerk and Chief Executive of Christchurch Borough Council and working tirelessly for the residents of Christchurch in many ways.

Noting also, he became Deputy Chairman of the Christchurch Community Partnership, served as Chairman of the Governors of Grange School for many years, and is now a member of the Board of the Twynham Learning Multi-Academy Trust, comprising six primary and secondary schools local to Christchurch. Michael is Lead Board Member for Resources. He also served as Deputy Chairman and latterly Chairman of the Christchurch Housing Society.

He achieved international recognition, spending a month working with New Zealand Councils. He has also visited professionally, the United States and Bosnia as a consultant on Local Government.

More recently he has been of great assistance to the Town Council, joining the Neighbourhood Plan Working Party and chairing the selection meetings for the volunteers. He is also a member of the Council’s Community Grants Panel.

Resolves therefore in pursuance of these powers and in recognition of his services to the Town and Parish to confer on the said Michael Arthur Turvey the title of Honorary Freeman of the Parish of Christchurch”.

The Mayor Cllr Dedman, Past Mayors Mrs Jamieson, Mrs Jones, Cllr Neale and Cllr Mrs Spittle, Deputy Mayor Cllr Mrs Bungey and Cllr Jones spoke in support of the motion highlighting the tireless work carried out by Mr Michael Turvey.

Members were advised that Section 249 of the Local Government Act 1972 prescribed that the resolution at Council must be passed by not less than two-thirds of the Members voting at the meeting.

Further to this Members were advised that following the above motion being agreed by Council in accordance with Section 249 of the Local Government Act 1972 and in accordance with the Civic Handbook a formal presentation would take place at a special ceremony at a later date which will include the signing of the Freeman’s Roll, with the Mayor and the Chief Executive and Town Clerk witnessing the signature.

RESOLVED that in recognition of his service to the Town and Parish the title of Honorary Freeman of the Parish of Christchurch be conferred to Mr Michael Arthur Turvey with immediate effect.

Voting: unanimous

8

Councillors Jones, Neale and Spittle declared a non-pecuniary interest in this item as they were former Christchurch Borough Council Members and knew Mr Michael Turvey in his capacity of the former Town Clerk and Chief Executive of Christchurch Borough Council, and remained present for the discussion and voting thereon.

Meeting ended at 6.38pm

The

CHAIRMAN

9

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL

FULL COUNCIL

Minutes of the Meeting held on 18 January 2021 at 6.39pm via Zoom conferencing facilities

Present:-

Cllr Mrs L Dedman – Mayor

Cllr Mrs S Bungey – Deputy Mayor

Present: Cllr J Abbott, Cllr V Charrett, Cllr A E Coulton, Cllr Mrs F Cox, Cllr M Cox, Cllr S Fotheringham, Cllr C A Gardiner, Cllr W Grace, Cllr P Hilliard, Cllr G R Jarvis, Cllr D C Jones, Cllr T Lane, Cllr S J McCormack, Cllr F F T Neale, Cllr Mrs S Spittle and Cllr M J Tarling.

Officers Cllr Daniel Lucas, Town Clerk Present: Susan Roxby, Administrative Support Officer

Members of the Public present:

Members of the Press present: None present.

Prayers

The Mayor’s Chaplain, the Reverend Canon Charles Stewart opened the proceedings with prayers.

Cllr M Tarling joined the meeting at 6.42pm.

Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest on this occasion.

Minutes of Previous Meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on 23 November 2020 were agreed and signed as an accurate record.

Voting: nem. con

10

Announcements

The Mayor

The Mayor announced that since the last meeting of the Council, she had attended Mayoral engagements by Zoom conferencing facilities only due to COVID-19. The Mayor thanked the Town Clerk and Administration Officer for the continued work of the Town Council.

The Town Clerk

The Town Clerk informed Members that the Community Grants Scheme deadline was today, 18 November for applicants to apply for a grant in the second tranche of the Community Grants Scheme which had been well received.

Public Participation

There had been no Members of the Public registered to speak in accordance with the Council’s Standing orders.

Public Questions

There were no questions submitted to the Town Clerk in accordance with the Council’s Standing Orders.

Questions from Councillors

There were no questions submitted from Members in accordance with the Council’s Standing orders.

Motions from Councillors

The Council was advised by the Town Clerk that the following motion had been proposed by Councillor Gardiner in accordance with the Council’s Standing orders: -

That this Council RESOLVES to declare a Climate Emergency in Christchurch.

Following action taken by BCP in July 2019, I propose that we should declare a formal “Climate Emergency” in Christchurch. Speaking to several my residents on the matter, they are strongly in favour of the idea. There is a widespread feeling that we need to do something now for the sake of our future generations to preserve the town centre & other low-lying parts of Christchurch which are in danger of being submerged because of predicted rises in sea levels linked to climate change, and to ensure an adequate supply of homes for inhabitants in the future.

11

In 2019 a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment of Christchurch was commissioned. The aim of the Level 2 SFRA is to provide a more detailed assessment of flood risk from fluvial and tidal sources to Christchurch as a whole. The report concludes that parts of the airport site are currently at risk of flooding and the extent of the area at risk is likely to increase significantly because of climate change effects, although depth and hazard are generally expected to remain low in most areas. Given the large area at risk, and the potential for flooding of airport infrastructure, strategic flood mitigation measures may be needed in this area. Other area that are potential risk from flooding are Purewell, the centre of Christchurch, Stanpit, and Riverland Court on the Lower Stour are at particular risk. If sea levels do increase at the predicted rates, then additional measures may be needed to protect Christchurch from tidal flooding and allow development of the town. Although current defences for the 1 in 200 present day tidal event appear to contain water within the harbour area, future flood risk is likely to significantly increase because of sea level rise On the Lower Stour, the current defences are predicted to be overtopped in all climate change scenarios modelled as part of this study, suggesting the present-day standard of protection is not expected to continue in the future and that improvements here may also be needed to address the effect of climate change. This is particularly prominent in the areas around Jumpers Common and Riverland Court, both of which exhibit high hazard and depth values in the climate change scenarios. It provides the starting point for developers to fully address the relevant climate change forecast flood levels (tidal, fluvial, surface water, sewer) for the 2093 and 2133 timeframes, which represent the predicted lifetime of commercial (60 years) and residential (100 years) development. Recommendations to help reduce the effects of Climate change in Christchurch. Local Plans must incorporate climate change mitigation policies including aims for significant carbon reduction measures. Ensure that through any Local Government Re- organisation local authorities in Christchurch are strongly encouraged to continue to act in their role as community leaders to mitigate climate change both across the local area and internally within their own estate and operations. Specific Renewable energy All new buildings should meet a significant proportion of their energy requirements from renewable and low carbon energy sources. Strong encouragement and support should be made for community led initiatives for renewable and low carbon energy across Christchurch. Businesses, householders, and the public sector should be encouraged to install locally appropriate renewable energy technologies wherever possible, buying from reputable local installers. Energy efficiency All new build and building restoration should meet the highest levels of energy efficiency with real ambitions towards carbon neutral buildings. Insulation (walls, floors, and roofs) of existing homes and more efficient and lower carbon heating systems should be encouraged.

12

As many fuel poor homes in Christchurch as is reasonably practicable should achieve a minimum energy efficiency rating of Band C properties by 2030 in line with national targets. Businesses should be encouraged and supported to significantly improve their energy performance. Sustainable travel Action to design an integrated transport system that promotes the use of alternatives to road transport across Christchurch should be coordinated and scaled up. Sustainable travel should be encouraged by creating safe cycling and walking routes both for leisure and travel to work, supporting both a low carbon and heathy community. Infrastructure (charging points and solar PV) should be installed to enable greater take up of electric and hybrid cars which are improving in their design and affordability. Food miles Allotment spaces and/or community growing spaces should be included in new developments, through green infrastructure plans and existing spaces should be protected. Greater support for local food should be encouraged with consumers, retailers, hospitality sector, and public sector procurement. Sustainable settlements Planning systems should be used as a positive tool to reduce emissions through encouraging mixed settlements with provision for housing, employment, and retail in proximity. Planning applications should include a climate change impact assessment as part of the planning process (with reference to National Planning Policy Framework and good practice elsewhere). There is virtually unanimous scientific agreement that climate change is already happening and that it is significantly driven by human action. Cllr Cox supported this proposal which he felt was a very important issue. Cllr Jones stated that there were objections in the world and there was not a consensus on climate change. Cllr Jones felt that there was climate change, and questioned what could be done about it effectively as a Town Council and supported some of the principles in Cllr Gardiner’s original proposal and proposed the following amendment: Council notes the growing public concern that our climate is possibly changing, the potential effects of this on Christchurch, and what steps should be taken by this Council to mitigate the effects of adverse climate change. Council therefore establishes a Task and Finish group of the Chairman of Community Committee (who shall be Chairman) and four Members, to define what is meant by “climate emergency”, what effect this will have on the Burh, and how this Council can act so that any malign effects may be mitigated. The amendment was seconded by Councillor Neale.

Following further debate the amendment to the proposal as set out above was put to the vote and lost. Members expressed concern with regards to word ‘possibly’ being included in the amendment as this indicated that the Council was a Climate Change

13

denier and requested that ‘possibly’ be removed from the amended motion. Cllr Jones and Cllr Neale did not wish to remove the word ‘possibly’ from the amendment to the original proposal.

Voting: 3:14 (1 abstention by Cllr Dedman)

Following debate, a motion was proposed by Cllr Jones and seconded by Cllr Neale that:

Council notes the growing public concern that our climate is changing, the potential effects of this on Christchurch, and what steps should be taken by this Council to mitigate the effects of adverse climate change.

Council therefore establishes a Task and Finish group of the Chairman of Community Committee (who shall be Chairman) and four Members, to define what is meant by “climate emergency”, what effect this will have on the Burh, and how this Council can act so that any malign effects may be mitigated.

Following comprehensive debate, the above motion became the substantive motion and was set to the vote and carried.

Cllr Jones thanked Cllr Gardiner for her proposal on climate change.

Voting: 12:5 (1 Abstention by Cllr Dedman)

Verbal Reports from Partner Organisations

Cllr Mrs Spittle informed members that due to COVID-19 that there had been a delay on an update for the Christchurch bid.

Committee Minutes

The Committee Minutes for the last cycle of meetings were received as follows:

Planning Committee, 1 December 2020

The Minutes of the meeting held on 1 December 2020 were received.

Voting: Nem. con

Resources Committee, 8 December 2020

The Minutes of the meeting held on 8 December 2020 were received.

Voting: Nem. con.

Community Committee, 15 December 2020

The Minutes of the meeting held on 15 December 2020 were received.

Voting: Nem.con.

14

Planning Committee, 5 January 2021

The Minutes of the meeting held on 5 January 2021 were received.

Voting: nem.con

Planning Committee, 10 January 2021

The Minutes of the extraordinary meeting held on 10 January 2021 were received.

Voting: nem.con

Resources Committee, 12 January 2021

The Minutes of the meeting held on 12 January 2021 were received.

The recommendations arising from the meeting was considered and approved:

Minute: 188. Draft Budget

Members consider the report and the attached draft budget for 2021/2022; (b) Recommends to Full Council the attached budget; Voting: 17: 0 (1 Abstention by Cllr Neale)

(c) Agrees to the virement from the Office of the Mayor to the Salary Budget of £10,970, AND the virement of £25,000 of the Britain in Bloom budget to a new budget line for “Christmas Festival/Lights”.

Voting: 17:1

Minute: 190. Training and Development Policy

Voting: unanimous

Minute: 191. Strategic Plan

Voting: unanimous

Schedule of Meetings 2021/2022

The Schedule of Meetings for the 2021/2022 civic year was submitted to Council, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

RESOLVED that the Schedule of Meetings for 2021/2022 be approved.

Cllr Fotheringham left the meeting at 7.50pm.

Voting: Nem. con.

15

Neighbourhood Plan Update

Members were updated by the Chairman of the Neighbourhood Plan that the Working Group had delegated the scoping on the consultation to a subgroup. Housing numbers were to be defined by BCP Council and the Chairman stated that a seminar open to members of the Town Council should be requested.

The Town Clerk advised that flyers have been printed to be delivered by the Royal mail and website training for the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group members would take place this week.

RESOLVED that the verbal update be noted.

Voting: Nem. con.

Christmas Lights

Cllr Coulton raised the matter of the Christmas Lights for 2021 and proposed that that this be dealt with at officer level and be reported back to the Community Committee.

The Mayor requested that the BCP Christmas Lights contract be investigated.

Cllr Tarling requested that the budget of £25,000 was not just spent on the Christmas lights only, but on the whole of the Christmas Festival.

Cllr Neale stated that the Christmas Festival would be placed on the agenda of the next Community Committee for consideration.

RESOLVED that the verbal update be noted.

Voting: Nem. con.

Meeting ended at 8.09pm

The

CHAIRMAN

16

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL

FULL COUNCIL

Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting held on 29 January 2021 at 6.00pm via Zoom conferencing facilities.

Present:-

Cllr Mrs L Dedman – Mayor

Cllr Mrs S Bungey – Deputy Mayor

Present: Cllr J Abbott, Cllr V Charrett, Cllr A E Coulton, Cllr M Cox, Cllr S Fotheringham, Cllr W Grace, Cllr P Hilliard, Cllr G R Jarvis, Cllr D C Jones, Cllr T Lane, Cllr S J McCormack, Cllr F F T Neale, Cllr G Polson, Cllr Mrs S Spittle and Cllr M Tarling.

Apologies: Cllr Mrs F Cox and Cllr C A Gardiner.

Officers Cllr Daniel Lucas, Town Clerk Present: Susan Roxby, Administrative Support Officer

Members of the None present. Public present:

Members of the None present. Press present:

Apologies for absence

Cllr Lane joined the meeting at 6.03pm.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Mrs Cox and Cllr Gardiner.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Cox declared a non-pecuniary interest in minute number 217 and remained present for the discussion and voting thereon.

Exempt Business

RESOLVED to exclude the press and public pursuant to the Public Bodies (Admissions to Meetings) Act 1960 due to the matter relating to the financial and business affairs of the authority concerning negotiations for a contract.

17

Voting: unanimous

Contract Negotiations (Exempt)

Members were asked to consider a report on legal advice for Contract Negotiations.

Councillor Cox declared a non-pecuniary interest in this item and remained present for the discussion and voting thereon.

Meeting ended at 7.32pm

The

CHAIRMAN

18

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL

PLANNING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Meeting held on 26 January 2021 at 6.00pm via Zoom conferencing facilities.

Present:-

Chairman: Cllr D Jones

Vice-Chairman: Cllr F F T Neale

Present: Cllr J A Abbott, Cllr L Dedman, Cllr G R Jarvis, Cllr T Lane and Cllr M J Tarling. Also in attendance: Cllr V Charrett and Cllr A Coulton.

Officers Daniel Lucas, Town Clerk present: Susan Roxby, Administrative Support Officer

Members of the 2 Public present:

Members of the Press present: None present

Declarations of Interest

Cllr Dedman and Cllr Lane joined the meeting at 6.05pm.

There were no declarations of interest on this occasion.

Minutes of Previous Meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on and 5 January 2020 were agreed and signed as an accurate record.

Voting: unanimous

Public Participation

Mr Peter Fenning spoke in objection to Planning Application 8/20/1084/FUL.

Public Questions

There were no questions from the public on this occasion.

19

Planning Applications:

Members were asked to consider the application listed below and that the following comments be forwarded to Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council:

Application: 8/20/1084/FUL- 13 Wick Lane, Christchurch BH23 1HT

Demolition of existing commercial unit to side/rear of existing property. Construction of single storey side and 2 storey rear extension with full refurbishment of existing property. Construction of garage to the rear and formation of 2 x parking spaces via existing access. Mr Peter Fenning spoke in objection to this Planning Application and raised the following concerns:

Heritage - the application is in a conversation area and he considered that the building should be renovated without substantial alteration. The High wall abuts the pavement and conflicts with the view of the boundary wall to all 7 properties nearby and contrary to Town Plan policies B4 1 and B4 2.

Ecology - as the Saxon burh defences were excavated nearby, he felt that any planning permission should be supported by an archaeology condition before any development commences, policy HE 1 states that all heritage assets would be protected and enhanced,

Cllr Tarling stated that the bat survey did not comply, and that further information was required regarding reports on ecological, heritage, conservation, and arboriculture issues, and stated that there had been no consultation with Historic England, he proposed a motion that objection be raised to this application, this was seconded by Cllr Lane.

Cllr Jones proposed an amendment to the motion to include the loss of a historical asset.

Cllr Tarling did not wish to accept the amendment. Cllr Lane stated that the plans blended in well and agreed with Cllr Tarling that he did not wish to accept the amendment.

Cllr Dedman proposed an amendment to the original motion to include the loss of a historical asset and that the proposed application would have a detrimental impact on the conservation area, this was seconded by Cllr Neale.

The amendment to the motion as set out above was put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED that OBJECTION be raised for the following reasons:

The application site is located in an historic part of Christchurch and there is no assessment of the potential archaeological interest of the site by either a desk-based assessment or field assessment contrary to Policy HE1 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan – Part 1 Core Strategy. It is noted that previous applications have remarked upon the archaeological

20 interest in the vicinity (cf: Application ref: 8/070185) and that a standard archaeological condition without any prior assessment runs the risk of not protecting any archaeological potential.

The application refers to a bat certificate and a letter from Hearne Arboriculture without much further details submitted. Without any updated arboricutural details other than the landscape plan; and with the loss of tree cover proposed to the rear of the property, the scheme does not provide sufficient details to make an assessment. Further, without sight of the details accompanying the bat certification there is insufficient detail to again make assessment. The Scheme therefore is contrary to Policies ME1 concerning a priority species and HE3 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan – Part 1 Core Strategy.

The proposed scheme given the loss of tree cover and the loss of the commercial unit will create less than substantial harm to the significance of the conservation area contrary to Policy HE1 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan – Part 1 Core Strategy and paragraphs 196 and 197 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Voting: unanimous

Application: 8/20/1116/FUL - 143-147 Somerford Road, Christchurch BH23 3PY

Re-development to provide for a mix of Class E, Class B 1, B2 and B8 uses together with drive thru facilities and A3 /A5 units (Also Class E / sui generis.)

Cllr Abbott raised residents’ concerns regarding traffic congestion.

The Chairman felt that a condition should be appended to the application requiring a suitable traffic plan to include a one way exit from the site and a signal junction.

Cllr Tarling stated that the fast-food establishments caused issues with the traffic and felt that a pedestrian crossing was required across Wilverley Road or double yellow lines to stop people parking.

Cllr Dedman proposed that the application be objected to due to the traffic dangers. There was no seconder to the proposal, and Cllr Dedman withdrew this proposal.

Cllr Tarling proposed a motion that we raise no objection and that a traffic safety plan be considered to include a 30 mile zoom for safety of pedestrians along Somerford Road, this was seconded by Cllr Lane.

The proposal as set out above was put to the vote and lost.

Voting: 2:4 (1 abstention by Cllr Jarvis)

Cllr Dedman requested that her vote against the motion be recorded in the minutes.

21

Cllr Dedman proposed a motion that objection be raised due to traffic concerns for vehicle access to the site and the danger to pedestrians, this proposal was seconded by Cllr Abbott.

The motion as set out above was put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED that objection be raised and delegate to the Town Clerk in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-chairman to raise traffic concerns with BCP Council for vehicle conflict and access to the site, and conflict to pedestrians along Somerford Road.

Voting: unanimous

Proposed Development of the Civic Offices in Bridge Street, Christchurch.

The Town Clerk had been approached by Cllr Lane who wished to raise the matter of the Proposed Development of the Civic Offices in Bridge Street, Christchurch for Councillors’ attention and consideration.

Cllr Lane raised concerns for issues of contamination, potential for flooding due to global warming, ecological issues, housing development and public rights of way protection.

Cllr Tarling felt that potential options be considered for the site and that BCP Council should have a public consultation and to include the Town Council.

Cllr Jarvis raised concerns for the public conservation area, 106 land, flood, decontamination, and parking issues and stated that this should be duly considered by Full Council for all members to make comment. Cllr Jarvis raised a motion that this committee noting the rumors for a large-scale marina on the former Civic Offices site, refers the matter to be considered at the next Full Council meeting, this was seconded by Cllr Neale.

Cllr Dedman supported this and was happy to include this item on the next Full Council agenda.

The Chairman raised concerns that Councillors did not have a predetermined view or bias without hearing all the facts. The Town Clerk advised that Councillors did not have a predetermined view or bias as they this would be considered by Councillors at the next Full Council meeting.

RESOLVED that the Proposed Development of the Civic Offices in Bridge Street be considered at the next Full Council meeting.

Voting: unanimous.

.

Actions and Recommendations from the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group. The Vice-Chairman advised that the Neighbourhood Plan subgroup was progressing

22 with the scoping on social media, and that the website and survey would go live at the beginning of February.

RESOLVED that the verbal update be noted.

Voting: unanimous

The meeting ended at 7.50pm

CHAIRMAN

23

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL

RESOURCES COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Meeting held on 9 February 2021 at 6.00pm via Zoom conferencing facilities

Present:-

Chairman: Cllr P Hilliard

Vice Chairman: Cllr A Coulton

Present: Cllr V Charrett, Cllr C A Gardiner, Cllr W Grace, Cllr F F T Neale, Cllr S Spittle and Cllr Tarling. Also in attendance: Cllr D Jones

Apologies: Cllr M Cox

Officers Daniel Lucas, Town Clerk present: Susan Roxby, Administrative Support Officer

Members of the 1 Public present:

Members of the Press present: None present.

Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest on this occasion.

Minutes of Previous Meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 January 2021 were agreed and signed as an accurate record.

Voting: unanimous

Public Participation

There was no public participation on this occasion.

Public Questions

There were no questions from the public on this occasion.

24

Town Clerk’s Report

An updated schedule of payments for the period 01.01.2021 to 05.02.2021 was submitted and approved and signed, a copy of which had been circulated to each member and a copy of which appears as Appendix ‘A’ to these minutes in the minute book.

The updated monthly accounts for the period to the end of January 2021 was submitted, a copy of which had been circulated to each member and a copy of which appears as Appendix ‘B’ to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Members questioned the Christmas free parking days in Christchurch and why covers had not been placed over the payment meters to ensure that the public did not pay during the free parking period. Members realised that it would not be possible to have the overpayments by residents itemised by BCP Council, as officer time to produce the figures would out way the cost of any refund of overpayments.

Cllr Coulton left the meeting at 6.21pm.

Cllr Coulton joined the meeting at 6.24pm.

RESOLVED that:

the schedule of payments for the period 01.01.2021 to 05.02.2021 be approved; and

the monthly accounts for the period to the end of January 2021 be noted.

Voting: unanimous

Risk Management Strategy – Review

A report was submitted, a copy of which had been circulated to each member and a copy of which appears as Appendix ‘C’ to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

The Town Clerk provided Members within an overview of the Risk Management Strategy for 2021. Members were informed that the ongoing management of trees had been identified as red and requiring immediate/moderate attention. Tree consultants were now instructed and the management and actions of those problem trees identified were being actively managed.

Cllr Neale raised the issue of lone working policy and suggested that through technology we could reduce this risk from amber to green if we installed an app on officers’ phones which had alert buttons to raise the emergency services.

Cllr Mrs Spittle raised the issue of Covid19 and whether this should be included on the risk management strategy. The Town Clerk advised that officers were presently working from home and the Town Hall was closed to the public. The Town Clerk advised that this could be added to the strategy if members felt this necessary, but

25

considered that the measures in place was sufficient. Members considered Covid19 should be included in the strategy.

Cllr Spittle left the meeting at 6.34pm.

RESOLVED that:

(a) Members noted the Risk Management Strategy for 2021/2022; and

(b) the Risk Management Strategy for 2021/2022 be updated in the Safety of staff and Visitors section to include the mitigation of Covid19.

Voting: unanimous

Any Other Business

Members raised the issue that residents felt that one Planning Committee for the whole of BCP Council may not be the best way for the specific characteristics of the 3 former Boroughs to be fully understood and recognised.

Members suggested that Christchurch Town Council, Highcliffe and Walkford Parish Council, Hurn Parish Council, Burton Parish Council could jointly employ the services of a property consultant to independently review the structure and functioning of the planning committee used in BCP Council single committee in comparison to similar Council’s operating practice.

The Town Clerk stated that this issue could not be considered at this committee and that this item would be considered at the next Planning committee scheduled on 23 February 2021.

RESOLVED that Members noted the verbal update.

The meeting ended at 7.00pm

CHAIRMAN

26

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL

COMMUNITY COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Meeting held on 16 February 2021 at 6.00pm via Zoom conferencing facilities

Present:-

Chairman: Cllr F F T Neale

Present: Cllr Mrs S Bungey, Cllr A E Coulton, Cllr C A Gardiner, Cllr W Grace, Cllr G R Jarvis, Cllr S J McCormack, Cllr G E E Polson, and Cllr Mrs S Spittle.

Also in Cllr V Charrett and Cllr L Dedman. attendance:

Apologies:

Officers Daniel Lucas, Town Clerk and Susan Roxby, Administrative present: Support Officer.

Members of the Public present: 1

Members of the Press present: None present

Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest on this occasion.

Minutes of Previous Meeting

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 December 2020 were agreed and signed as an accurate subject to the attendance record being amended to read Cllr F F T Neale.

Voting: unanimous

Public Participation

There was no public participation on this occasion.

Public Questions

27

There were no questions from the public on this occasion.

Christchurch and District Sports Council

A report was submitted, a copy of which had been circulated to each member and a copy of which appears as Appendix ‘A’ to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Members were informed that the Town Clerk had been approached by BCP Council to enquire whether this Town Council wished to support the endeavours of the Christchurch and District Sports Council (CDSC).

Members felt that the CDSC did considerable work with the leading bodies for sports, and that the links with various sports clubs could be lost if CDSC were not to continue.

Cllr Mrs Bungey stated that she would like to put her name forward to attend the group and wished to promote the CDSC during her Mayoral year, and felt that there should be more than one Councillor on the CDSC group.

Cllr Gardiner also wished to join the group as she was an assistant teacher and had various links with the local schools and was keen to work with young people.

Cllr Jarvis and Cllr Grace also expressed an interest in joining the CDSC group.

Cllr Dedman joined the meeting as an observer at 6.22pm.

RESOLVED that:

Members agreed the proposal at Appendix 2 option 5 to continue involvement with CDSC in principle and offer support; and

delegate to the Town Clerk in consultation with the Chairman, Vice-Chairman of Community Committee and Cllr Mrs Bungey to formulate agreed proposals with CDSC for future consideration for Full Council.

Voting: unanimous

Trees at Christchurch Quay

A schedule of works was submitted, a copy of which had been circulated to each member and a copy of which appears as Appendix ‘B’ to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Members were asked to consider the professional report from Hayden’s Arboricultural Consultants of 4th February 2021, which summarised the health of two trees at Christchurch Quay – Poplar (T002) and Willow (T0013) and provided health and safety concerns for the two trees discussed and all trees identified in the schedule of works.

The Town Clerk confirmed to Members that the trees would be replaced.

28

RESOLVED that Members authorises Hayden’s Arboricultural Consultants to submit to the Local Planning Authority a section 211 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Conservation Area notification and/or any other associated application required under the Planning Acts and ancillary regulations.

Voting: unanimous

Cllr Grace left the meeting at 7pm.

Bank Close Car Park - Footpath

Cllr Coulton provided Members with a presentation on Bank Close Car Park, a copy of which appears as appendix ‘C’ to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Cllr Coulton informed members of residents’ concerns regarding Bank Close car park footpath and the safety of the public entering and leaving the carpark. Cllr Coulton felt that BCP Council should be requested due to safety concerns to move the footpath to the right- hand side of the carpark as they had a duty of care.

Cllrs Spittle and Bungey both supported this proposal and felt that BCP had a responsibility. The Chairman felt that BCP should undertake a health and safety check on the carpark.

The Town Clerk Informed Members that the Town Council could ask BCP Council for their risk assessment of the carpark.

RESOLVED that the Town Clerk be delegated to write to BCP Council requesting disclosure of accident reports, certification, risk assessment, and any abandoned proposals for the entrance to Bank Close Car Park.

Voting: unanimous

Druitt Hall Survey

The Town Clerk informed members that he had approached 2 local surveyors to provide a quotation for a survey on Druitt Hall. One company did not wish to operate during the COVID-19 Lockdown and the second company, Elcock Associates, Christchurch had quoted £2500 plus VAT.

RESOLVED that:

Community Committee authorised payment of the quotation of £2,500 provided by Elcock Associates; and

delegates to the Town Clerk to liaise with the tenant of Druitt Hall to provide access to the surveying company.

29

Voting: unanimous

The meeting ended at 7.25pm

CHAIRMAN

30

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL

PLANNING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Meeting held on 23 February 2021 at 6.00pm via Zoom conferencing facilities.

Present:-

Chairman: Cllr D Jones

Vice-Chairman: Cllr F F T Neale

Present: Cllr J A Abbott, Cllr M Cox, Cllr L Dedman, Cllr S Fotheringham, Cllr G R Jarvis, Cllr T Lane and Cllr M J Tarling. Also in attendance:

Officers Daniel Lucas, Town Clerk present: Susan Roxby, Administrative Support Officer

Members of the 4 Public present:

Members of the Press present: None present

Declarations of Interest There were no declarations of interest on this occasion.

Minutes of Previous Meeting The minutes of the meeting held on and 26 January 2020 were agreed and signed as an accurate record. Voting: unanimous

Cllr Jarvis joined the meeting at 6.06pm.

Public Participation There was no public participation on this occasion.

Public Questions There were no questions from the public on this occasion. Cllr Jarvis asked the following question to the Chairman of the Planning and Regulatory Committee: “Would the Chairman of the Planning & Regulatory Committee make a statement on the application by the Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole Council to its Licensing Committee regarding the proposed events licence for various open areas along the Christchurch Undercliff from the Town’s border with Highcliffe and Walkford Parish

31

Council and Gundimore, and also for the central Recreation Ground in Christchurch Priory Ward?”

The Chairman thanked Cllr Jarvis for her question and replied to her question as follows:

“I have had various communications from residents concerning this application, which will be discussed by the Planning and Regulatory Committee at a special meeting next week. It is important for the life of Christchurch that events which were, historically, sanctioned by the former Borough Council and brought much pleasure to residents – and much revenue to businesses – continue. I would remind concerned residents, though, that it is not sufficient for a licence to be granted for an event to take place. Landlord’s Consent is also needed and to that end I am sure that applications for future events on Town Council land will be most carefully considered by Community Committee.

The Undercliff is another matter, and it is important to realise that, unlike the Town Centre, this is primarily a residential area. Local residents have unfortunately, experience of events that generate noise and other nuisance but are sanctioned by planning permission, and not surprisingly view the possibility of the wide range of events being considered under this prospective licence with alarm – particularly given that the licence if granted would exempt BCP District Council from consulting – or notifying – residents of proposed new events.

I have asked the Town Clerk to convene an Extraordinary Meeting of the Planning and Regulatory Committee for a week today, 2nd March, which will consider the Application. Residents may write to their Ward Councillors Cllrs Hilliard and Dedman with their concerns and I know that the Committee will take into account all views submitted to it, whether in support of or opposition to this proposal. I must remind all citizens of Christchurch, though, our powers are limited to supporting the application, suggesting conditions to this application, or raising objection.

Since 1 April 2019, all licensing matters are the responsibility of the Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole Council. Residents are free to write in to BCP, expressing their opinions, and may also wish to communicate their views to their local BCP Ward Councillors.

I might just say that the result of this application will demonstrate whether those who opposed, strongly, giving control of such intensely local matters to a body seven-eighth of whom live outside Christchurch and whose knowledge of the sensitivities of local areas cannot be expected to be thorough, were correct.”

Planning Applications: Members were asked to consider the application listed below and that the following comments be forwarded to Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council: Application: 8/20/0759/HOU 55 Kingfisher Way, Christchurch, BH23 4RT.

32

Installation of External inverter Air Conditioning Unit to rear ground floor elevation (Amended Description).

The Town Clerk read out two statements received from neighbours in objection to Planning Application 8/20/0759/HOU, copies of which appears as appendix ‘A’ and appendix ‘B’ to these minutes in the Minute Book.

Cllr Dedman was surprised that a site visit to check noise levels at the property had not been undertaken. Cllr Dedman considered that someone from the Town Council should attend BCP Planning Committee to speak on this application if this item was called in. Cllr Dedman proposed a motion that the revised application be refused as not enough had been done to address the previous objections to the original application. This proposal was seconded by Cllr Neale.

Members felt that moving the External inverter Air Conditioning Unit to the rear of the property would have a detrimental effect to the area.

Objection raised: The design and location of the air-conditioning unit presents an unneighbourly and obtrusive form of development which is detrimental to the amenity and living conditions of residents at 53 and 57 Kingfisher Way. The revised siting of the External inverter Air Conditioning Unit to the rear of the property would have a detrimental effect to the area. Contrary to policy HE2 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan Part 1: Core Strategy and paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Members also considered whether an Enforcement Notice should be served, and it was felt that this would be a proportionate response and recommends to the Local Planning Authority consideration of this action.

Voting: unanimous (1 Abstention by Cllr Tarling)

Cllr Cox left the meeting at 7.16pm prior to the vote.

Highcliffe and Walkford Neighbourhood Plan Consultation

Members were asked to consider Highcliffe and Walkford Parish Council’s pre- submission Draft Neighbourhood Plan. The Council is required to respond to the survey by 8 March 2021.

Cllr Neale proposed a motion that the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group and Chairman and officers should be delegated to discuss and formulate responses to the survey for Highcliffe and Walkford Parish Council’s pre-submission Draft Neighbourhood Plan. This proposal was seconded by Cllr Tarling. RESOLVED that the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group in consultation with the Chairman of Planning Committee and Officers be delegated to formulate the

33

Council’s agreed responses to the survey for Highcliffe and Walkford Parish Council’s pre-submission Draft Neighbourhood Plan and respond by 8 March 2021.

Voting: unanimous.

.

Independent Review of BCP Planning Committee Structure

A quotation was submitted, a copy of which had been circulated to each member and a copy of which appears as Appendix ‘C’ to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Members were asked to consider the quotation from Dorset Planning Consultant Limited to inform an independent review of BCP Council’s single Planning Committee structure which currently does not provide for an area-based committee structure. The consultant would be engaged to offer a comparative analysis and benchmarking with other local authorities.

Cllr Lane joined the meeting at 6.20pm.

Cllr Dedman stated that she could not fault the way that BCP Planning Committee was run, but felt that there was a lack of intrinsic local knowledge by not having 3 separate committees. Cllr Dedman further stated that the neighbouring authority of Dorset Council had 3 separate Planning Committees.

Cllr Dedman proposed that the Council instructs Dorset Planning Consultant Limited to be engaged to review BCP Council’s single Planning Committee structure and offer a comparative analysis and benchmarking with other local authorities; and the contribution from this Council be limited to £500. Cllr Neale seconded the proposition.

RESOLVED that: the Town Clerk be authorised to instruct Dorset Planning Consultant Limited to be engaged to review BCP Council’s single Planning Committee structure and offer a comparative analysis and benchmarking with other local authorities; and the contribution from this Council shall be limited to £500 excluding VAT. Voting: nem.con.

Actions and Recommendations from the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group. Cllr Dedman left the meeting at 7.21pm.

The Town Clerk advised that 666 responses had been received to date for the Neighbourhood Plan survey and that there was until 15 March 2021 to receive further responses.

RESOLVED that the verbal update be noted.

34

Voting: unanimous

The meeting ended at 7.25pm

CHAIRMAN

35

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL

EXTRAORDINARY PLANNING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Meeting held on 1 March 2021 at 6.00pm via Zoom conferencing facilities

Present:-

Chairman: Cllr D Jones

Vice-Chairman: Cllr F F T Neale

Present: Cllr J Abbott, Cllr Cox, Cllr S Fotheringham, Cllr G R Jarvis and Cllr M J Tarling.

Also in Cllr Coulton, Cllr C Gardiner and Cllr P Hilliard. attendance:

Apologies: Cllr L Dedman and Cllr T Lane

Officers Daniel Lucas, Town Clerk present: Susan Roxby, Administrative Support Officer

Members of the 4 Public present:

Members of the Press present: None present

Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest on this occasion.

Public Participation

There was no public participation on this occasion.

Public Questions

There were no questions from the public on this occasion.

Planning Applications:

Members were asked to consider the application listed below and that the following comments be forwarded to Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council:

36

Application: 8/20/1156/FUL 153 Somerford Road Christchurch BH23 3TY

Erection of 2 buildings comprising 10no. flats with associated access and parking.

Cllr Abbott raised concerns for the traffic flow on Somerford Road.

The Chairman stated that the development was not objectional, but the traffic that it would generate was objectional. He would like to see a requirement that the development be provided with a crossing.

Cllr Tarling considered that some of the properties were in close proximity to an electrical sub-station and felt this was not healthy and also raised fire concerns.

Raise OBJECTION:

1) the proposal creates a parking shortfall across the whole site which places pressure upon the immediate highway network as drivers seek to locate parking elsewhere resulting in further unnecessary trips, manoeuvres and parking conflicts resulting in congestion in the immediate vicinity– contrary to policy KS12 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan Part 1 Core Strategy April 2014.

The Council notes the close proximity to an electrical sub-station and asks the Principal Council to consider specifically Part B of the Approved Documents (Fire Safety) – Volume 1 relating to the Building Regulations and any such conditions as appropriate if minded to approve;

The Council notes also that given previous applications at Wilverley Road and the cumulative impact here on the highway network, that the Highway Authority should consider the highway network infrastructure at Wilverley and Somerford Roads specifically and seek to approve those schemes which can support further infrastructure provisions by way of pedestrian crossings and/or associated contributions in this area via section 106 TCPA 1990 or sections 38/278 Highways Act 1980; or in the alternative supports such policies via approved projects in an SPD or its Infrastructure Funding Statement.

Voting: unanimous

BCP Licencing Applications for Christchurch Beaches and Christchurch Recreation Ground.

Members were asked to consider the appendices for Premises Licence Applications at Christchurch Beaches and Barrack Road Recreation Ground, a copy of which had been circulated to each member and a copy of which appears as appendix ‘A’ and appendix ‘B’ to the minutes in the Minute Book.

The Chairman stated that if there is an objection to a Licencing application, then this must be heard by 3 members of BCP’s Licencing Sub-committee.

37

The Town Clerk stated that the licencing applications being considered are a continuation of the status quo, and that these applications existed previously with the former Christchurch Borough Council and that they would now continue with BCP Council.

The Town Clerk informed Members that what occurs on land requires consent by the landlord, which for the beaches is BCP, and for Barrack Road Recreation is BCP and the Town Council once the recreation ground has been transferred to the Town Council.

Cllr Hillard stated that in relation to Mudeford Quay and the Beaches application, that people had seen the notices and did not realise that these applications were just carrying on from what was previously in existence at the former Borough Council.

Cllr Neale considered that the Town Council should be consulted on temporary event notices (Tens) by BCP.

Cllr Cox felt that the Town Council should publicise the Tens consultations on the Town Council website.

The Town Clerk advised that a Tens notice is only required by an event organiser when alcohol is being sold. A Tens notice is organised for events for up to 500 people and that a full licence would be required for over 500 people. Where larger are events held, sometimes part of the event area where alcohol is being sold is cordoned off so that numbers are restricted to under 500 people for crowd control.

Cllr Cox proposed a motion that this committee while raising no objection to either application; notes the public concern and that Temporary Events notices be publicised; requests that the Town Council be advised of Tens; and that BCP constitutes its Licensing Sub-committee to include a representative Councillor from Christchurch. Cllr Neale seconded this proposal.

RESOLVED that this committee while raising no objection to either application; notes the public concern and that Temporary Events notices be publicised; requests that the Town Council be advised of Tens; and that BCP constitutes its Licensing Sub- committee panel to include a representative Councillor from Christchurch.

Voting: unanimous

The meeting ended at 7.35pm

CHAIRMAN

38

CHRISTCHURCH TOWN COUNCIL 9 March 2021

Resources Committee Agenda Item 8

Title:

Report Type: Public Report for Information Purpose of Report: To consider proposals to allocate reserves to projects identified and to be initiated. Recommendations: It is RECOMMENDED that:

a) The committee considers the proposals to earmark the Councils General Reserves to those earmarked budget lines identified at table 1.

(b) Recommends to Full Council the proposals at table 1.

Wards: All Wards

Contact Officer: Daniel Lucas – Town Clerk

1. BACKGROUND 1.1 The Town Council is coming to its second financial year end. The latest budget monitoring report for the financial year (Q3) indicates that the Council shall be in a strong financial position. Attached also is the agreed and set budget for the forthcoming financial year (appendix 1). This strongly suggests that we shall be again in a surplus position. This report highlights those projects Members have expressed support for, and may wish to earmark the Council’s unspent resources ready for the next financial year.

1.2 As can be seen the forecast for the end of this financial year shows a predicated total spend of £193,104.89. Members must appreciate that this forecast is based upon the actual year to date as of the date of compiling and setting the budget (January 2021) and those foreseeable expenditures at this time. When offset against the total budget for this year (£514,416.50) this suggests the Council shall again be in a good financial position, with a forecasted underspend of £321,311.61. The Council’s audited balance sheet for 2019/2020 confirms a general fund balance of £194, 595.91. When taken together this portrays a financial year end position of approximately £516k in surplus. Below are the projects that Members have intimated a strong desire to pursue, and it is recommended the reserves are earmarked accordingly in preparation for project initiation during the forthcoming financial year. Mandatory Projects Town Hall Roof Repair

39

1.3 The Town Hall roof is in pressing need of repair. This comes from the contractor’s reports and observations whilst the cupola replacement project was underway at the beginning of 2020. Furthermore, the Town Hall having suffered two substantial roof leaks at opposite ends of the building causing internal damage would also stress this to be the case. As Members shall know this building is a Grade II listed building and the Council is placed under a statutory duty to maintain the preservation and upkeep of this town heritage asset. Initial cursory discussions with the Principal Council and the previous Cupola contractors suggests that a budget of at least £200k should be set aside for a project of this undertaking. The project shall require a procurement exercise and will need strong project management throughout. At this stage I would also recommend a contingency of 15% of this budget to be earmarked for the Town Hall roof repairs. As such a budget of £230k is recommended to be earmarked in the Reserves for this project. Proposal A: That Members agree an earmarked reserve for the “Town Hall Roof Repair” of £230k. Town Hall Internal Redecoration 1.4 Following two roof leak events, the internal fabric of the Town Hall has been slightly compromised. The roof leak in the actual parlour room has caused damage and discolouration to the internal mouldings and “wedge-wood” ceiling in two separate corners. The carpet has also suffered water damage in one corner by the grandfather clock. This leak-event was the subject of a successful insurance claim and the Council received redress of £5,500. It is recommended that this is set-aside for the redecoration of the parlour room, in and of itself. Secondly, the second leak event above the stairwell of the Town Hall caused water damage and ingress of water to the gentleman’s toilet below, compromising the tiled office ceiling here and the carpet and landing integrity of the stairwell. 1.5 It is recommended that given the Town Hall is a listed asset that the Town Council should not use the “Asset Damage Contingency” for this project which was established as a result of vandalism/criminal damage and general maintenance to recreation ground facilities. The use of this budget-line would not be prudent and would exhaust that operational budget line which was established for “day-job” events in responding to ad-hoc criminal damage matters which are small in nature so as to not warrant continual insurance claims and policy excess fees. The second leak event warrants further earmarked reserves and as an estimation the sum of £10,000 is suggested so as to replace the carpets, the compromised ceiling in the gentleman’s toilet, the repainting of the ceiling with heritage paint and electrical investigations. Taken together the earmarked reserves for the total internal redecoration of the Town Hall would suggest a sum to be set aside for £15,500 and a 15% contingency here would provide an earmarked reserve of £17,825. It is recommended that this figure is revised after receipt of estimations in due course. Proposal B: That Members agree an earmarked reserve for “Internal Town Hall redecoration” of £17,825. Druitt Hall Windows 1.6 As Members are aware the Druitt Hall windows are in need of repair and the tenant has made representations in this regard. The Committee considered this matter on the 27th October 2020 and the quotation provided by the tenant for replacement windows was for the sum of £34,532 (inclusive of VAT) and it was recommended then that a budget be set aside for £40k. The surveyor has been

40

instructed and a site visit is pending, so it would be prudent to earmark the £40k so that the window replacements as a minimum are accounted for. Proposal C: That Members agree an earmarked reserve for “Druitt Hall Window Replacement” of £40k. Community Infrastructure Levy 1.7 The Town Council during the financial year received £44k for its entitlement to Community Infrastructure Levy (“CIL”). At this stage the Council has yet to decide on specific projects to allocate this sum, but it makes prudent sense to earmark this in the reserves fund. Proposal D: That Members agree an earmarked reserve for £44k for “Community Infrastructure Levy”. 1.8 If Members agree to the proposals then the total earmarked above amounts to approximately £332k, which leaves a general fund of approximately £184k (see table 1). Practitioner’s advice known as JPAG1 suggests a general reserves fund of between three and twelve months net revenue expenditure (“NRE”); that is to say precept less any loan repayments and/or amounts included in the precept for capital projects or transfers to earmarked reserves. The JPAG advice suggests the smaller the authority the closer it should be to twelve months, the larger the authority the closer it should be to three months. JPAG here advises: “In practice, any authority with an NRE in excess of £200,000 should plan on 3 months equivalent General Reserve. In all of this it is important that each authority adopt, as a General Reserve policy, the level appropriate to their size and situation and plan their Budget so as to ensure that the adopted level is maintained” (at para 5.32). To this end it is recommended that Council should try and achieve an operating unallocated general fund of approximately three months NRE. When this is assessed against the Council’s budget for 2021/2022 this equates to £123,2292. As table 1 below shows the Council shall be slightly over this suggested sum (suggested £123k, via-a-vis actual of £184k). This equates to 4.5 months NRE3. Table 1

Project Proposed Reserve Allocation Town Hall Roof Repair £230,000 Town Hall Internal Redecoration £17,825 Druitt Hall Windows £40,000 Community Infrastructure Levy £44,000 Total £331,825.

1 Joint Panel on Accountability and Governance: Practitioner’s Guide (March 2020) para 5.32. 2 2021/2022 Annual precept of £513,576.62 - £20,660.12 (precepted transfer to reserves). NRE of £492,916.50. 492,916.50/12 calendar months = monthly NRE of £41,076.38. Monthly NRE x 3 calendar months = £123,229. 3 General fund after earmarked reserves accounted for = £184,000. General fund/monthly NRE = 4.48 months. 41

2 IMPLICATIONS

Legal 2.1 No legal implications raised although Members should be aware that budgetary control requires sound management of the Council’s reserves.

Environmental 2.2 None raised.

Financial and Risk 2.3 This report outlines those projects where it is recommended the Council should allocate its unspent general fund. After such allocation, the Council is in a strong position and operating close to the recommended 3 months suggested advice from JPAG. The recommendations place the Council in a good position to move forwards in the next financial year with these projects accounted for and ready for initiation.

Equalities 2.4 None raised.

Consultation and Engagement 2.5 None required.

3. CONCLUSION 3.1 Members are asked to consider the report and to approve the recommendations outlined.

Appendices:

Appendix 1 Budget – 2021/2022.

42

Agenda item 12

Recommendations from the Community Grants Working Group Meetings held on Tuesday 2, 3 & 5 February 2021

Members agreed to grant 75% of the grant requested and agreed to award a grant of £1875. GRANTED £1,875 to Christchurch Antiquarians.

Members were satisfied with the application and agreed to award the full amount of the grant of £2,500. GRANTED £2,500 to Christchurch Carnival.

Members agreed to grant x 75% of the grant requested and agreed to award a grant of £1,875. GRANTED £ 1,875 to Christchurch Community Partnership.

Members were satisfied with the application and submission and agreed to award the full amount of the grant of £1,500. GRANTED £1,500 to the Christchurch RFC.

Members were satisfied with the application and submission and agreed to award the full amount of the grant of £1,500. GRANTED £1,500 to Christchurch Soup Kitchen.

Members were satisfied with the application and submission and agreed to award the full amount of the grant of £500. GRANTED £500 to Dorset Search & Recue.

Members agreed to grant x 50% of the grant requested and agreed to award a grant of £1,250. GRANTED £1,250 to Friends of Red House Museum.

Members were satisfied with the application and submission and agreed to award the full amount of the grant of £2,500. GRANTED £2,500 to Grange School.

Members agreed to grant x 50% of the grant requested and agreed to award a grant of £1,250. GRANTED £1,250 to Somerford Arc Community Centre.

43

Members were satisfied with the application and submission and agreed to award the full amount of the grant of £1000. GRANTED £1000 to Tiny Tots.

44

AGENDA ITEM 15

PROCEDURE NOTE STANDING COMMITTEES AND OTHER BODIES

STANDING COMMITTEES AND OTHER BODIES – GENERAL

1. Application

These rules apply only to those situations when Council meets once per year at Annual Council and Mayor Making to determine the Membership of each of the Councils Standing Committees (Community Committee, Planning & Regulatory Committee and Resources Committee) and other bodies (Working Groups, Task and Finish Groups, Outside bodies appointment etc..).

2. Size of Committees and Other Bodies

The size of committees and other bodies (Working Groups, Task and Finish Groups etc..) will be decided by the Council at its Annual Council meeting if known in advance and by an Ordinary Council meeting (or Extraordinary Council Meeting if solely called for such purpose) during the course of a civic year as and when necessary. As agreed at Annual Council on the 15 May 2019 each Standing Committee comprises of 9 elected members with a quorum of 3 (Council, 15 May 2019 Minute No. 9).

3. Terms of Reference

The terms of reference for each Standing Committee and Other Body and those decisions and functions delegated to each Standing Committee and Other Body shall be set by Annual Council and can only be amended by a decision of Full Council.

4. Who may sit on Standing Committees and Other Bodies

All councillors may be members of a committee/other body and can sit on more than 1 committee/other body.

PROCEDURE FOR CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE/OTHER BODY MEMBERSHIP

5. INITIAL EXPRESSION OF INTEREST

The Town Clerk shall before Annual Council call for an “initial expression of interest” via email to all members. This email shall be entitled “Committee Membership4 for [incoming civic year] expressions of interest”.5 The Town Clerk shall provide a clear deadline for date of receipt of expressions of interest which shall be 5 clear working days after the date and time of that email. Expressions of personal interest MUST be in writing via email made personally by a member and cannot be forwarded to the Town Clerk via proxy. The email intimating expression of interest must clearly convey

4 Or “Outside Body membership”, “Working Group membership” etc.. 5 Or words to similar effect. 45

which committee/other body the member wishes to sit upon or such committee(s)/other bodies they currently sit upon and wish to be re-considered for election.

6. Expressions of interest cannot be made for another member.

7. CLOSURE OF EXPRESSION OF INTEREST

The Town Clerk shall write conveying the closure of the period of receipt for initial expressions of interest and shall notify members where there are more expressions of interest than seats on the committee(s)/other body available and where numbers are deficient in some, or all committees/other body. This email shall identify those members who have shown expressions of interest across all committees/other body. It shall become apparent where such committees/other body are over-subscribed by expressions of interest.

8. Where a committees/other body is under-subscribed, a second expression of interest email shall be sent to members entitled in the same format as rule 5 above, this time highlighting those committee/other body under-subscriptions. The Town Clerk shall provide a clear deadline for date of receipt of expressions of interest which shall be 5 clear working days after the date and time of that email. Expressions of personal interest MUST be in writing via email made personally by a member and cannot be forwarded to the Town Clerk via proxy.

9. The process at rule 8 above shall continue until under-subscribed committees/other body meet composition of 9 members exactly for committees, or as designated in terms of number of members for an other body6. If then over-subscribed following a second, third (etc) cycle of expressions of interest the process at rule 10 shall be engaged. A member cannot withdraw from the process upon learning that a committee/other body is over-subscribed. The member understands that expressing an interest may mean that a vote has to be taken to determine such places. To enable a swift and fair and reasonable process without delay to others a member cannot withdraw.7

10. INTERNAL VOTE FOR COMMITTEE/OTHER BODY MEMBERSHIP

Following the closure of expressions of interest and where a committee/other body is over-subscribed the Town Clerk shall conduct an internal exhaustive vote8. This shall be conducted in person (or virtually) with at least 5 clear days’ notice of the informal meeting of Council being conveyed by email with the title “Informal Meeting of Council: Committee Membership Ballot”.9

11. Members who wish to cast votes for membership of committee/other bodies must be present in person or via virtual attendance. NO votes by email, proxy or in writing shall

6 As resolved by Council in creating a working group/task and finish group with the numbers of members having been resolved by Council. 7 A member who still wishes to not sit on that committee/other body once an internal vote has decided the matter and that member is elected, it remains in the gift of that member to tender their resignation to the chairman of the committee at its first meeting. 8 “exhaustive vote” here means the process where if more than 9 members wish to sit on the committee a secret ballot shall be called. The votes of all of council members present at the internal meeting shall be cast for their 9 members of choice. The member with the least number of votes is then removed from the next round of voting. This shall continue ab initio until the committee has 9 members elected by the process. If in the unusual event of a tie for least number of votes, the Mayor shall have the casting vote in favour of who progresses to the next round. 9 Or words of similar effect. 46

be accepted and only those present at the meeting shall have the ability to cast votes. If a Member is late to the meeting and votes already cast for the first round of the exhaustive vote for the committee/other body being considered at the time of arrival shall bar and preclude that member from voting in any subsequent rounds for the committee/other body under consideration at the time. Any further committees/other bodies which have not yet been considered, that late member can then vote accordingly.

12. Following this process and where all committees have full composition of 9 members by internal vote or otherwise, the Town Clerk shall place the settled committee membership on the Annual Council agenda for subsequent resolution. For other bodies, the composition of the group shall be reported to the necessary committee with that delegated function.

13. CHAIRMEN/VICE-CHAIRMEN OF COMMITTEES AND OTHER BODIES

The Town Council has grown from inception to understand the internal dynamics and personalities of Council. As such members agree that it should be for those 9 members of committee to determine as its first order of business who should be the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the committee in question given that the 9 members shall work with the Chairman/Vice-Chairman over the course of the civic year. The Town Clerk shall call the first meeting to order and ask for the election of the Chairman/Vice- Chairman for the committee to take place. The same shall also occur for other bodies where the Working Group/Task and Finish Group etc shall appoint its own Chairman/Vice-Chairman appreciating that where necessary external non-elected members may also have the right in law to vote in such situations.

14. Members shall consider whether a conflict of interest arises or has the potential to arise if they are wishing to be considered for the position of Chairman/Vice-Chairman of a more than one committee and/or other body. Members shall also consider the diversity of life experiences this Council has and the continuing professional development of all members when considering taking office as a Chairman/Vice-Chairman. Consideration should also be given to forthcoming projects and initiatives which may well require experience and expertise.

15. RESIGNATION OF COMMITTEE MEMBER/CAUSUAL VACANCIES

A member may wish to resign from a committee/other body. This should be communicated to the Chairman and Town Clerk in writing in an unequivocal manner. A casual vacancy may also arise due to the death of a councillor or disqualification. Upon resignation or upon learning of a casual vacancy the Town Clerk shall invoke the procedure at rules 5-10.

RESOLVED ON10:

MINUTE NUMBER:

DATE:

REVIEW DUE: 9 March 2022.

AGENDA ITEM 17 – Appendix 1

10 The version as completed and presented having included any necessary amendments as minuted. 47

Dear Dan

Ducking Stool Walk - partnership proposal to co fund the replacement and BCP to adopt PROW

I was asked to summarise the situation for Christchurch Town Council’s further and formal consideration arising from our joint discussions. This was agreed so your Council can consider whether to support this proposal. As you appreciate the main details and issues were considered at the joint meeting on Friday 29th January 2021.

The financial situation has been explored. We have also considered what funding BCP Council would be willing to offer to help replace the Boardwalk. It is felt that a joint approach makes it possible to bring the Boardwalk to adoptable standard. BCP Council is then able to adopt the PROW (Ducking Stool Walk), subject to any formal consents and legal agreements required under the Section 38 process. We have considered suggestions from various parties at various times regarding how best to do this and whether one method or the other helps most financially. The advice we have been given remains unchanged and so too therefore the proposed way to proceed.

The table below shows the current expected figures. I should add that as well as a proposed expenditure attributed to BCP, there is the best part of £25,000 of in-kind work which would normally be attributed to the adoption process. This would usually be paid for by developers and therefore BCP’s overall contribution will be around £75,000 based on the figures below.

Cost estimate of rebuilding the boardwalk £132,000

Item Cost quote (BCP £ VAT £ Total 1 Notes Council Improvement @20% Works Team) £ X VAT Highlighted figures show make up of budget required to complete construction.

BCP 50,333.34 10,066.66 60,400 Based on PMMC max £50,000 cont. (residual and other payment allocations share

PMMC 41,666.66 8,333.34 50,000 PMMC amount to pay = 50,000; rounded expenditure per home of £2,940

Kings Arms 15,000 3,000 18,000 (15,000 + VAT as noted at meeting Hotel with Hotel)

48

CTC 25,000 5,000* 30,000 Funding of up to £25,000 + VAT or grant towards costs ex VAT (*or £25,000 including VAT if VAT recovery is not possible for CTC. A small shortfall would require added funding from BCP Council or other parties)

TOTALS 132,000 26,400 158,400 £132,000 inc contingency

We would appreciate your Council considering the proposals to help pay for the upgrade in the PROW and its infrastructure. The latter was provided by the Developers and secured through a Unilateral Undertaking which now has been inherited by other private owners. The contributions being sought from Local Authorities are based on the recognition that this route is a valued community asset that might suffer from lack of maintenance because of the scale of investment required.

In summary, the proposal is that:

• BCP Council’s Highway Improvement Works Unit will replace the lightweight (currently timber and composite boarding) structure on top of the steel supporting structural H beams built into the Priory Rooms and Priory Mews development. This replacement will comprise an agreed alloy and plastic lumber structure with anti-slip Millboard ‘boardwalk’ decking . Its design life will be 25 years and BCP will maintain and replace this as a Highway asset maintainable at public expense once adopted.

• The adoption under S38 will occur after the replacement has been completed satisfactorily. The owners, who are the Kings Arms Hotel and Priory Mews Management Company, between them will remain the land owners and be responsible for providing structural support, because this is integrated in to their built development. They will remain responsible for meeting any costs for maintaining this structural support in perpetuity.

• We have agreed in principle that BCP Council will adopt the PROW and the new lightweight structures it passes over, should the replacement be undertaken. Our estimate of the ongoing revenue commitment for adoption is in the order of £7,000 - £8,000 per annum.

• The proposed solution and its funding model is based on shared responsibility and benefits, with parties who have the ability to claim back VAT on their share expected to do so. At the meeting you are aware that initially BCP Council was being asked to look to contribute up to £52,000 to help move this project forward and later the amount extended. We still feel we can agree this level of funding and have taken it through our approvals process which involved consultations with the appropriate Portfolio Holder. I am pleased that we have an understanding but we are unable to extend our funding offer in excess of c£55,000.

On behalf of the parties, BCP Council is seeking a contribution of up to £25,000 (plus VAT if reclaimable) from Christchurch Town Council. At present I have included this figure as it was unclear whether CTC advice on VAT would allow recovery or not.

49

Conclusion

All parties have the common aim of providing a workable and affordable solution to secure the path which means resolving the structural problems currently being faced.

Each proposed contribution is inter-dependent on the contributions of the other parties and at present we understand that the figures for the other parties are the maximum they would be able to make.

Agreeing the way to make this happen has proved challenging but resolving a way to fund this solution is the last major step to take. It would allow Ducking Stool Walk to become an adopted route maintainable at BCP council expense.

I understand your next Council meeting is on 15th March 2021, so if I can offer any further help in order that you are able to report this to your Council I would be pleased to do so. I have copied this to those who attended our meeting but am happy if you need to circulate this more widely to Town Councillors.

Best wishes

Landscape & Countryside Team Leader Community & Open Spaces

bcpcouncil.gov.uk

50

AGENDA ITEM 17 – Appendix 2

51

52

AGENDA ITEM 17 – Appendix 3

BCP Council

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Neighbourhood Portion

Guidance for Parish and Town Councils in the Christchurch area

September 2020

1.1 This guidance note provides information to assist Parish and Town Councils within the Christchurch area of BCP to understand their responsibilities relating to Community Infrastructure Levy and the Neighbourhood Portion.

CIL Background

1.2 The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a levy that local authorities can charge on developments in their area. In the Christchurch area CIL was introduced in January 2017 and is currently charged on liable development within the area. The adopted CIL charging schedule for Christchurch is available from the following link https://www.christchurch.gov.uk/planning- buildings-land/planning-policy/east-dorset/local-development- framework/cil/cil.aspx

1.3 CIL income collected in the area can be used to fund infrastructure required to support new development. The Planning Act 2008 (as amended) states that infrastructure includes: roads and other transport facilities, flood defences, schools and other educational facilities, medical facilities, sporting and recreational facilities, open spaces. Strategic CIL collected in the Christchurch area (excluding the Neighbourhood Proportion) is retained by BCP Council to spend on infrastructure projects required to support development in the area.

1.4 BCP is preparing an ‘Infrastructure Funding Statement’ to be published on the council’s website in December 2020 and subsequently updated on an annual basis. This IFS will set out spending priorities for council retained strategic CIL as well as income and expenditure for strategic CIL and Section 106 Planning Obligations funds.

CIL Neighbourhood Proportion

1.5 National Policy states that in Parish or Town Council areas a CIL Neighbourhood Proportion (NP) must be passed on to local councils.

1.6 In the Christchurch area of BCP, CIL NP collected will be passed directly to the 4 Parish and Town Councils. These are listed as follows and the areas are shown in Map 1 below:-

• Hurn Parish Council • Christchurch Town Council • Burton & Winkton Parish Council • Highcliffe & Walkford Parish Council

53

Map 1: Christchurch Parish and Town Councils

1.7 In parish or town council areas without a Neighbourhood Plan the CIL NP is 15% of CIL receipts (collected within the local council area and capped to £100 per Council Tax dwelling per annum). In areas where a Neighbourhood Plan is in place, the NP is increased to 25% (uncapped). Table 1 below sets out the maximum amount that can be passed to each parish and town council.

Table 1: Maximum CIL receipts Parish and Town Councils without an adopted Neighbourhood Plan can receive annually

(vii) Parish / (viii) No. of (ix) Maximu Town Dwellin m CIL gs per annum (x) Hurn (xi) 295 (xii) £29,500 Parish Council (xiii) Burton & (xiv) 1871 (xv) £187,100 Winkton Parish Council (xvi) Christchur (xvii) 15041 (xviii) £1,504,1 ch Town 00 Council (xix) Highcliffe (xx) 7011 (xxi) £701,100 & Walkford Parish Council

54

Source: BCP Council Tax Records September 2020

1.8 A map showing the BCP Council Neighbourhood Portion funding arrangement areas can be seen at Appendix 1. The Christchurch Parish and Town Councils are shown as Zone C. Bournemouth and Poole areas (Zones A and B) operate under a different process (as they are not covered by parish or town councils) where the local community can apply for funding for projects.

Timing of CIL NP payments

1.9 BCP Council and the Parish / Town Councils can collectively decide the timing of the CL NP payments. BCP Council will work closely with the parish and town councils to agree arrangements and timing for passing on the CIL NP. However, the default position set out in the regulations requires that CIL NP receipts must be paid every 6 months. This would require the CIL NP received between 1 April and 30 September to be paid by 28 October, and the portion for the other half of the financial year to be paid by 28 April.

Time limits for spending CIL NP

1.10 Parish / Town Councils should spend their CIL NP within 5 years of receipt. Where the CIL NP funds are not spent within 5 years of receipt national policy and the CIL regulations enable BCP Council to recover these funds. This is to ensure that CIL money is spent in a timely manner to support development in local council areas.

What can the CIL NP be spent on?

1.11 The Neighbourhood Portion of the levy can be spent on a broader range of projects than the rest of the levy. National Policy states that Parish and Town Councils must use the CIL receipts passed to them to support the development of the parish / town council area by funding:-

(a) The provision, improvement, replacement, operation or maintenance of infrastructure; or (b) Anything else that is concerned with addressing the demands that development places on an area. 1.12 The wider definition means that the neighbourhood funding pot can be spent on things other than infrastructure (as defined in the Community Infrastructure Levy regulations). For example, the pot could be used to fund affordable housing where it would support the development of the area by addressing the demands that development places on the area. This gives parish and town councils freedom to spend their proportion of CIL on the things that address the impacts of development in their area.

1.13 The CIL NP can be spent collaboratively with other Parish / Town Councils or with BCP Council to make the most efficient use of funding to benefit the community. parish / town councils can spend CIL NP on infrastructure outside

55

their area if it would support the development of their area. Where appropriate, they can also agree that BCP Council will keep all or part of their CIL NP funds to spend on a particular item of infrastructure which is needed for their area.

1.14 National Policy sets out that if the CIL NP is not spent in accordance with infrastructure defined in this guidance section BCP Council has the power to recover these funds.

How do Parish and Town Councils identify projects to be funded by CIL NP?

1.15 National guidance advises that Parish / Town Councils should work closely with the charging authority (BCP Council) and neighbouring Parish / Town Councils to agree infrastructure spending priorities. While town and parish councils are not required to spend their CIL NP funds in accordance with BCP Council’s priorities, there could be common infrastructure projects. There may be situations where the parish / town council shares the priorities of the charging authority and agree that BCP Council should retain CIL NP funding to spend on a particular item of infrastructure that benefits the local area.

1.16 Parish / Town Councils will need to be aware of where spending on strategic infrastructure will be made in their area. BCP Council’s Infrastructure Funding Statement will identify BCP’s strategic infrastructure needs and set out priorities for spending on future projects. It is expected that these will include Dorset Heathland and Poole Harbour mitigation (such as SANGS), regeneration initiatives in the area’s town centres, strategic flood defences, school places and strategic transport.

1.17 Parish / Town Councils will have important decisions to make to prioritise infrastructure delivery in their areas which will benefit their parish or town. They could consider producing their own Infrastructure Delivery Plan which identifies the range of infrastructure projects that are essential to support future developments across the local area. This could inform decisions on spending CIL NP.

1.18 If a Neighbourhood Plan is under preparation within the parish/ town council area, this should be used to identify priorities.

1.19 Parish and town councils will need to engage with existing groups and local residents to ensure that the local community contributes to determine how CIL NP should be spent. BCP Council is happy to offer advice as required to local councils to assist in their decision making on CIL infrastructure priorities and to clarify whether proposed CIL spend is in accordance with national policy.

Local Council Monitoring Responsibilities

1.20 Parish and Town Councils are required to report on how the CIL NP funds passed to them have been spent. Regulation 121B sets out the details of what needs to be contained in the report. As on overview, Parish / Town

56

Councils must submit a report to BCP Council setting out the following for the financial year:

• total CIL receipts for the reported year;

• total expenditure for the reported year;

• a summary of what the CIL was spent on;

• details of any notices received from BCP Council in relation to unspent CIL or CIL spent outside the scope of the regulations; and

• the total amount of CIL receipts retained at the end of the reported year from that year and previous years. 1.21 In accordance with the CIL Regulations, the CIL report must be published on the Town / Parish Council website. The report will also be published on BCP Council’s website.

1.22 The monitoring report must be published and sent to the BCP Council by no later than 31st December each year following the reported year (the financial year). The report should include the CIL NP payments made for the financial year.

Parish / Town Council Preparation

1.23 Parish / Town Councils need to consider the following in their preparation to receive and spend CIL NP payments

• How to identify the need for infrastructure to support development in the parish / town; • How to engage with the community on how to spend CIL; • How to decide what to spend CIL on • Ensuring that there are effective reporting mechanisms to show how the Parish / Town Council has spent CIL. 1.24 BCP Council is happy to assist as required in providing further guidance on these matters.

Further information

1.25 Any questions about arrangements for receiving and spending the Community Infrastructure Levy Neighbourhood Portion for Parishes and Town Councils should be emailed to [email protected]. Further general information on CIL can be found at:-

Christchurch and East Dorset CIL

https://www.christchurch.gov.uk/planning-buildings-land/planning/submit- planning-application/community-infrastructure-levy/christchurch-and-east- dorset-community-infrastructure-levy-advice-for-applicants.aspx

National Planning Practice Guidance

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/community-infrastructure-levy

57

Appendix 1: BCP CIL Neighbourhood Portion funding arrangement areas

58