APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

ALNWICK DISTRICT COUNCIL

MEETING OF THE COUNCIL

JUBILEE HALL,

TUESDAY, 16TH OCTOBER, 2007 AT 6.30 P.M.

PRESENT: Councillors P. Dawson (Chairman), Mrs. A.M. Jones (Vice- Chairman), G.R. Arckless, Mrs. E. Bainbridge, L.G. Bilboe, E.M. Blakey, S.C. Bridgett, G. Castle, K. Gray, Miss C. Grey, Mrs. M.E. Haddow, A.M. Harrington, J.M. Hedley, I. Hinson, J.E. Hobrough, J.M. Hope, C.M. Mills, Mrs. M. Mills, H.W. Philipson, D.J.C. Rixon, T.M. Spence, R. Styring, J.A. Taylor, T.N. Thorne, J.G. Watson.

Officers: Chief Executive, Director of Environment and Regeneration, Head of Legal and Democratic Services.

Apologies: Councillors S.A. Bell, Mrs. S.E. Bolam, Mrs. Z.B. Frais, Mrs. E. Gray.

Aldermen J. Hobson and R.H. Huggins.

(* Denotes a Delegated Matter)

189. DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS BY MEMBERS AND OFFICERS

The Chairman reminded Members that it had been agreed that previous disclosures did not need to be made again at the Council meeting provided that this was agreed by Members after a motion had been moved and seconded.

RESOLVED: that all disclosures of interest previously made by Members and Officers at the meetings of Committees, etc., the minutes of which are to be considered at this meeting, are also to be regarded as disclosures for the purposes of this meeting by those Members and Officers present.

The Chairman also advised that interests should be disclosed at this meeting:- a) if they were not disclosed at previous meetings, the minutes of which were to be considered at this meeting or b) in respect of any other or new item on the Agenda.

The following disclosures were made:

1 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

Councillor Agenda Issue Interest Item G.R. Arckless 10a) Local Government Reorganisation Personal & Update prejudicial Mrs S.E. Bolam 10a) Local Government Reorganisation Personal & Update prejudicial E.M. Blakey 101 Planning Enforcement Personal & prejudicial E.M. Blakey 134 Capital Programme Personal & prejudicial G. Castle 10a) Local Government Reorganisation Personal & Update prejudicial K. Gray 133 Local Authority Business Growth Personal & Incentive prejudicial K. Gray 134 Capital Programme Personal & prejudicial K. Gray 140 Land at St. Georges Crescent, Personal & prejudicial I. Hinson 18a) Trade Waste Investigation Working Personal & Group prejudicial H.W. Philipson 10a) Local Government Reorganisation Personal & Update prejudicial J.A. Taylor 10a) Local Government Reorganisation Personal & Update prejudicial T.N. Thorne 10a) Local Government Reorganisation Personal & Update prejudicial J.G. Watson 10a) Local Government Reorganisation Personal & Update prejudicial J.G. Watson 18a) Trade Waste Investigation Working Personal & Group prejudicial

190. PRESENTATION

The Chairman was pleased to welcome Rothbury and Coquetdale Youth Project who wished to explain what activities the youth project had been involved in over the last few years. Representatives present included Tony Sandford, Graham Lockwood, Stuart Athey and students.

The Rothbury and Coquetdale Youth Project were thankful for the opportunity to address the Council and showed a video which explained the history of the project. Activities included a gliding residential, trips to the Theatre Royal in Newcastle, Alnwick Playhouse and local productions in Rothbury, one to one sessions to assist with further education, finding jobs and personal problems.

Mr. Athey explained that the gliding residential had been a one-off opportunity which had been enjoyed immensely by the students. It took time to build

2 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

relationships with the young people and relationships were the key to good youth work.

Councillor Bridgett explained that he had been involved in the project for a number of years and thanked all those involved which had helped him to develop to the position he now held. The funding from Council helped build a future for young people.

In answer to a question, it was confirmed that the young people participated in community activities such as litter picks and the cleaning of telephone boxes.

The students had particularly enjoyed the gliding activity but were also grateful for the opportunity to meet several times a week.

The Chairman thanked those present for attending and was happy to see what could be done.

191. ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL AND THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

The Chairman reported that:- • He had attended various functions including: greeting new students from St. Cloud University; a preview of the Alnwick Music festival; Battle of Britain service; meetings with various Town and Parish Councils, presentation of Regimental Colours to the Queen’s Own Yeomanry at . • A trophy had been received for the work at The Park at the Northumbria in Bloom awards at Alnwick Garden. An award had also been given to Bill Pringle, the Council’s Environmental Services Supervisor in recognition of his outstanding contribution to Northumbria in Bloom. • A Remembrance Service was to be held on Sunday 11th November and was open to all Members who were able to attend.

The Chairman of the Council referred to the recent tragedy on the A1 and suggested that a meeting should be arranged with representatives from the Highways Authority and Northumbria Police. Action to address the problem was long overdue and had been highlighted in a study by Arup four years ago.

Several of the Members commented on the unsatisfactory crossings on the A1 and were in support of a meeting with the relevant authorities to progress the matter. It was noted that there were a larger number of speed cameras on the A1 and A697 north of the border. Problems also arose in Newton on the Moor which was not equipped for diversions when the A1 was shut.

RESOLVED: that the Chairman of the Council arrange a meeting with the Highways Authority and Northumbria Police to address the problems on the A1.

3 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

192. MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETINGS

The minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on the 17th July, 2007 and the Special Meeting of the Council held on 14th August, 2007, insofar as they were open to the public, were presented for confirmation.

RESOLVED: that the minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 17th July, 2007 and the Special Meeting of the Council held on 14th August, 2007, insofar as they were open to the public, be confirmed as a true and correct record.

193. MINUTES OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS

The minutes of the meetings of the following Committees, insofar as they were open to the public, were presented for confirmation.

RESOLVED: that the minutes of the following Committees, insofar as they were open to the public, be confirmed as a true and correct record, subject to the above amendment:-

Development Control Committee 24th July, 2007 Licensing Sub Committee (2) 25th July, 2007 Development Control Committee 28th August, 2007 Licensing Committee 11th September, 2007 Operations Executive Committee 11th September, 2007 Licensing Sub-Committee 18th September, 2007 Policy Executive Committee 18th September, 2007 Special Meeting of the Policy 24th September, 2007 Scrutiny and Overview Committee Development Control Committee 25th September, 2007 Operations Scrutiny and 2nd October, 2007 Overview Committee Policy Scrutiny and 9th October, 2007 Overview Committee

194. DECISIONS NOT SUBJECT TO THE CALL-IN PROCEDURES

In accordance with paragraph 13.9 of Part 4 of the Constitution, it was reported that the following decisions had been made since the last meeting of the Council, which had not been subject to the Call-In Procedure due to the fact that they were urgent, namely:-

Minute No./ Item Reason Committee 121/07-08 Regional Spatial Strategy Comments had been submitted – Comments on in advance of the deadline of 6th Operations Proposed Changes May August, 2007 prior to Executive 2007 consideration of the item by the Committee.

4 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

122/07-08 Briefing on Comments had been submitted County in advance of the deadline of Operations Council’s Minerals and 10th August, 2007 prior to Executive Wastes Development consideration of the item by the Framework preferred Committee. options for the Core Strategy, Site Specific Allocations and Policies and the Development Control Framework

195. LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANISATION UPDATE

At the Special Meeting of the Council on 14th August, 2007 it had been agreed that a Local Government Reorganisation Working Group be established. The first meeting of the working group had been held on 26th September, 2007 when consideration was given to the terms of reference. The proposed terms of reference were presented to Members of the Council for approval.

The Chief Executive reported that concern had been expressed by the Chairman of the Policy Scrutiny and Overview Committee regarding the lack of accountability and scrutiny and depending on what was agreed by Members, it might be necessary to amend the fourth term of reference regarding delegation of authority to the Chief Executive in the event that an urgent decision was required.

Members had been sent a copy of the judgement for the Borough Council High Court judicial review. The Chief Executive understood that an appeal against the decision was likely to be made to the Court of Appeal. He advised that the joint Northumberland judicial review action by Alnwick, Berwick, and was ‘stayed’ awaiting the outcome of the Shrewsbury and Atcham case and neither side would incur any further costs until the earlier case was settled.

It was suggested that members might wish to add a further recommendation giving delegated authority to the Chief Executive following consultation with the Leader of the Council to withdraw the legal challenge if this was considered appropriate in light of on-going discussions.

The Leader of the Council stated that in some circumstances it would be necessary for the working group to respond quickly and it had therefore been decided that it should comprise of a small carefully balanced number of Members although all Members were invited to attend and take part in meetings and several had participated at the first meeting. Decisions were being made by the Chief Executive and / or Leader at some Councils although there had been a conscious decision to broaden the decision making process and make it more democratic in Alnwick. He advised that there would be occasions when decisions would need to be made quickly although he agreed that there should be arrangements to scrutinise decisions and proposed that this should be carried out by the Policy Scrutiny and Overview Committee. Members made the following comments:

5 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

• It would be simpler to make use of existing scrutiny arrangements but the Chief Executive should have the facility to exclude issues from the call-in procedure. • Concern was expressed regarding the size of the working group which consisted of 8 Members as 10 Members were required for Meetings of the Council to be quorate. • Councillors who were not members of the Local Government Reorganisation Working Group had been given the same opportunity to speak at the first meeting. Implementation of formal scrutiny arrangements would exclude the ‘scrutiny’ Members from being able to participate in these discussions and the flexibility of the current provisions would be removed. • It was noted that since the introduction of the Constitution in 2002 there had been relatively few call-ins. • Whilst all Members were able to attend and participate in discussions at working group meetings only members of the working group would be able to vote. • Some decisions or responses to consultation papers needed to be made quickly and it would be impractical to arrange a meeting for the Council in a couple of days. The working group was comprised of 8 members which was felt to be more manageable particularly as substitution was allowed. • Urgent decisions or executive committee reports not subject to call-in were used sparingly and with good reason. • The guidance referred to a geographical or political balance ‘wherever possible’. • The issue of scrutiny was recognised as an important part of the process as was the need for the Council to respond urgently. It was suggested that some dispensation must be allowed for the leadership of the Council to respond quickly otherwise they would be put in an impossible situation.

Members debated how scrutiny arrangements could be implemented for the working group yet retaining the ability to make urgent decisions.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services stated that if the existing rules for scrutiny were strictly applied to the Local Government Reorganisation Working Group, the facility for urgency dispensation would conflict with the fourth term of reference in paragraph 2.4. This proposed that full delegated authority be given to the Chief Executive following consultation with the Chairman of the Local Government Reorganisation Working Group and the Leader of the main opposition group, in the event that an urgent decision was required. The existing urgency arrangements for dispensation of call-in required the agreement of the Chief Executive and the Chairman of the appropriate Scrutiny and Overview Committee. He clarified that if the fourth term of reference was approved and the decisions of the working group were subject to scrutiny then the normal urgency dispensation with call-in would not be able to be applied.

He also advised that three Members of the Local Government Reorganisation Working Group were also Members of the Policy Scrutiny and Overview Committee and would need to be replaced if a decision were called in. In

6 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

answer to a question it was confirmed that scrutiny members would be able to attend but not participate in meetings.

Councillor Mrs. Haddow confirmed that the provision for urgency decisions had meant that she and her Vice-Chairman would be consulted regarding reports not being subject to call-in. She felt that if a similar practice was adhered to it would not impede the business of the council.

The Leader of the Council advised that a requirement to seek the agreement of the Chairman of the Policy Scrutiny and Overview Committee may prevent him and the Chief Executive being able to make decisions during the course of external meetings.

The Chief Executive explained that there were two types of urgency decision, namely: • A small number that were taken by the Chief Executive following consultation with the relevant Chairman of Committee and ward Councillors, as appropriate. These were reported on a regular basis in the Information Pack. • Those decisions on an executive or working group agenda where there was an imminent deadline within a few days of the meeting which meant that it would be impractical to allow call-in.

It was confirmed that the Chairman of the Policy Scrutiny and Overview did not want to be included as a consultee in the fourth term of reference which made provision for the Chief Executive to be able to make urgent decisions.

In answer to a question, the Leader of the Council confirmed that all of the District Councils had expressed concern over the proposals for the composition of the Joint Committee, which did not reflect a geographical or political balance recommended in the guidance. It was hoped that Northumberland County Council would respond positively to the comments that had been made. Whilst the Local Government Association had offered to arbitrate, decisions on disputes would ultimately be made by the Department of Communities and Local Government.

RESOLVED that:

1. The draft terms of reference of the Working Group as outlined in section 2.4 of the report, be approved. 2. The decisions of the Working Group be subject to scrutiny by the Policy Scrutiny and Overview Committee working under the normal Scrutiny and Overview Procedure Rules contained in the Council’s Constitution (but not the Urgency Dispensation with Call-In Rule), subject to adaptation as appropriate. 3. To avoid conflicts of interest, the 3 members of the Policy Scrutiny and Overview Committee who are also members of the Local Government Reorganisation Working Group (i.e. Councillors P. Dawson, D.J.C. Rixon and T.N. Thorne) be replaced on the Policy Scrutiny and Overview Committee 7 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

only for these purposes by 3 other Members of the Council agreed and nominated to the Chief Executive by the relevant Group Leaders. 4. Delegated authority be given to the Chief Executive. following consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Group Leaders, to withdraw the High Court Judicial Review action if considered appropriate in the light of on- going discussions.

196. BOUNDARIES OF THE CHARACTERISTIC COMMUNITIES

A report was submitted which contained details of the consultation process into the boundaries of ‘Characteristic Communities’. Characteristic Communities formed part of the structure of the recently approved Sustainable Community Strategy for Northumberland and were part of the single unitary proposals.

It was proposed that each Characteristic Community would have its own: • Regulatory Committee covering planning, development control and licensing • Scrutiny Committee • Area Partnership

The Chief Executive explained that the three characteristic communities were broadly defined as: • North Northumberland (broadly equivalent to the districts of Alnwick and Berwick-upon-Tweed) • West Northumberland (broadly equivalent to the districts of Castle Morpeth and ) • Southeast Northumberland (broadly equivalent to the districts of Blyth Valley and )

It was currently proposed that the ‘Belonging Community’, which comprised of Amble, Hauxley and Togston, would be placed in the South East Northumberland Characteristic Community to allow a more integrated and strategic approach to be taken for the regeneration of former coalfield areas.

In discussing the proposals, the following comments were made by Members: • There was no need for new boundaries. • A line on a map did not make a community. • The role of Parish Councillors was unclear. • Some Members were of the view that Amble had never been classed as a mining town unlike although many miners may have resided there. It was the shipping of coal that was responsible for growth in Amble and the connection with the harbour. • The proposal would divide communities as the postal addresses for Mariners View and Gloster Hill in Amble formed part of the Warkworth parish. Arbitrary lines caused problems. • The findings of the boundary review were not due until 2010 and until these were known there was no case for any changes. 8 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

• There had been insufficient direct consultation with residents about the proposals. An article within the county magazine was inadequate. Leaflets should have been delivered to every house in Amble, Hauxley and Togston or there should have been a referendum. • Councillors reported that the residents who had contacted them were of the opinion that Amble should remain linked with the rest of the Alnwick District. • The actual boundaries to be used have not been clarified however the map indicates it is parish boundaries and should refer to Amble, Hauxley and Togston. • The Wansbeck and Blyth areas had operated successful partnerships for a number of years and Amble did not want to be on the fringe of another community. • The geographical splitting of the county into three areas was in complete contrast to the idea of a unitary authority and appeared to be recreating districts. • There was concern regarding the allocation of housing. • With the limited amount of information currently available, Amble Town Council wished to remain with the Alnwick area and be placed in the North Northumberland Characteristic Community. • Amble’s heritage was difficult to define although it was considered by some Members to have links with coal mining and the rural coalfield areas. Links to south east Northumberland should be considered as there were some shared problems. • There was consensus that the town of Amble should not be split and the views of the community should be considered. • 88% of residents who had responded to Councillor I. Hinson’s survey were in support of Amble being placed in the North Northumberland Characteristic Community. • This had been a desktop exercise without consultation with residents. It was considered that locating Amble with the coalfield community would be financially beneficial but this was yet to be proved. • The proposals would split Amble down the middle in terms of transport and education. • It was suggested that the Northumberland Gazette should ask residents for their views and that it was the views of Amble Members speaking on behalf of their electorate that should guide the response made by Alnwick District Council. • It was hoped that this was a real consultation exercise and that the decision as to which Characteristic Community Amble should be placed in had not already been decided. • It was felt that it would be more advantageous in terms of investment in the town if Amble was linked with the north.

It was proposed that Amble should remain with the rest of the Alnwick District and be located within the North Northumberland Characteristic Community.

RESOLVED that:

1. This Council, supported by Amble Town Council, were strongly of the view that the Amble Belonging Community

9 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

should be placed in the North Northumberland Characteristic Community. 2. The starting point for any boundary review should be the existing parish and district boundaries as the rationale for new boundaries was not persuasive.

197. REVIEW OF POLLING PLACES AND POLLING DISTRICTS

The Chief Executive advised that the Electoral Administration Act 2006 required all Councils to undertake a full review of all polling districts and all polling places by 31st December, 2007 and then on a four yearly basis.

It was explained that: • A polling district is the geographical sub-division of an electoral area (ward, county, parliamentary, etc.). • A polling place is the area within the polling district in which the polling station is located. • The polling station is the room or part of a building where voting takes place.

The review process commenced on 17th August, 2007 with the publication of the notice of review and press release and in addition letters were issued to District Councillors, Parish Councils, the local MP, local political party representatives and Force 4 Disability, in view of their expertise in relation to accessibility of premises. 8 responses were received.

The main objective of the review was to ensure the provision of voting arrangements that were as convenient as possible for local residents and to designate polling places that were accessible to all electors. The choice of a polling place was often balanced between the quality of a building and the distances for residents compared to the other options for polling places. Polling places should be within the polling district unless it was not possible to find a suitable place within the area and, in line with government guidance, the Council tried to ensure that polling places/stations were not located in schools.

An assessment of each polling place/station had been carried out based on the electoral team’s knowledge informed by feedback from presiding officers and inspecting officers in the May 2007 elections and the responses that had been received. The majority of polling places/stations were considered to be suitable although it was noted that: • A number of premises be kept under review in the event that a better alternative became available. • Alnwick Hotspur - temporary accommodation (portacabin) recommended off Swansfield Park Road for improved access. • Amble West – extra signage from High Street. • No major changes to polling districts were proposed under this review. It was however proposed that the Rothbury polling district (BRO) be split into two (BRO1 and BRO2) with 846 and 647 electors respectively. This split was for administrative reasons only and would assist with the annual

10 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

canvass and electoral administration. No change in polling station would result.

The following comments were made by Members: • Disabled access was to be improved at Denwick Village Hall within the next few months. • The Willowburn Sports Centre was not centrally located within the Alnwick Castle Ward and meant a longer distance for some electors. Access was now shared with the recently opened retail units. The Chief Executive advised that the facilities and access at the venue were very good, no complaints had been received and turnout was above average. It had been concluded that the venue was suitable but would be kept under review. • A request was made to revert back to the previous arrangements at Embleton Terrace for Rothley and Hollinghill. The Chief Executive advised that recent advice was that polling stations should be located in the polling district unless special circumstances applied. Postal votes could be used as an alternative but the venue would be kept under review. • Alternative buildings such as the Co-op, Lindisfarne Annex, Territorial and Masons buildings were suggested for Alnwick Hostpur. The Chief Executive advised that alternative buildings had been considered but that a portacabin would provide better disabled access in a more central location. • Dolphin Court was located near the ward boundary in Amble, which meant a long walk for elderly residents and access was restricted. A further access point was suggested to the Polling Station, this was seen as beneficial. It was advantageous to locate two polling stations in one venue. Changes to polling stations often resulted in complaints and the benefit to electors had to be considered. • Alternative arrangements sometimes had to be made when venues had prior bookings.

RESOLVED that:

1. The polling districts and polling places/stations as set out in the Annex to the report, be agreed. 2. The Returning Officer be authorised to designate, as and when identified, any improved polling places/stations.

198. LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK CORE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT – INSPECTOR’S REPORT AND ADOPTION

A report was submitted which sought adoption of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document which had been assessed as ‘sound’ by the Planning Inspector, subject to a number of minor changes.

The Core Strategy was the first part of the Local Development Framework and set out the Council’s vision, objectives and spatial policies for the district during the period 2004 – 2021. The Core Strategy had been through three rounds of public consultation, Issues and Options (February 2003), Preferred 11 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

Options (August 2005) and Submission Stage (December 2006). A public examination had been held in July 2007 by an independent Inspector into the representations received to the submission document.

Some concern was expressed regarding the future viability of the smaller villages as development had been restricted due to the reduced housing allocation. It was felt that this would make it even more difficult for younger generations to be able to reside in these locations.

The Director of Environment and Regeneration explained that Officers had taken the opportunity to seek clarification of 7 points in the Inspector’s report to ‘fact check’. If the Council wished to proceed to adopt the Core Strategy, the Inspector’s recommendations were binding.

Members congratulated the Head of Planning and Building Control and Senior Forward Planner for the tremendous amount of work that had been involved and the complimentary report received which recommended only minor changes.

RESOLVED: that the Core Strategy Development Plan Document, as amended by the Inspector’s binding report, be adopted.

199. *EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC AND PRESS

RESOLVED: that pursuant to Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business, on the grounds that if members of the public were present during consideration of these items there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in Section 100 I and paragraphs 1 to 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

12 APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 1

PUBLIC SUMMARY

200. MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETING

The minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 17th July, 2007, insofar as the public were excluded, were confirmed as a true and correct record.

201. MINUTES OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS

The minutes of the meetings of the following Committees, insofar as the public were excluded, were confirmed as a true and correct record-

Development Control Committee 24th July, 2007 Development Control Committee 28th August, 2007 Licensing Committee 11th September, 2007 Policy Executive Committee 18th September, 2007 Local Government Reorganisation Working Group 26th September, 2007 Operations Scrutiny and Overview Committee 2nd October, 2007 Policy Scrutiny and Overview Committee 9th October, 2007

202. DECISION NOT SUBJECT TO THE CALL-IN PROCEDURES

A report in connection with the above was noted.

203. DURATION OF MEETING

Members agreed to extend the Meeting beyond 9.30 p.m. in order to complete the agenda.

204. TRADE WASTE INVESTIGATION WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS

A report was considered in connection with the above.

The meeting ended at 10.33 p.m.

Chairman.

12 (a)