Agenda and minutes

Up to 15 minutes are allowed for public participation.  Participants are restricted to 3 minutes each.

The Governance and Civic Officer advised the Committee that one person had registered to address the Committee, regarding Agenda item 6 (a) (Update and Comments from the Public on the Implementation of Parking Charges in Market Rasen). 

The Chairman then welcomed Mr Adrian Campbell to the meeting and invited him to address the Committee. 

Mr Campbell then stated that he had intended to be present at the Council meeting on 4 July, however on being told that the meeting had been cancelled he had telephoned a large number of people to tell them not to attend, had this not been the case, many more people would have been present.

Mr Campbell asserted that further research was required to establish facts and accurate data.  At the last meeting of the Prosperous Communities Committee the lead officer had stated that not much data was available, so accurate predictions were not possible.

Mr Campbell then highlighted errors in the report – the risk assessment did not consider the impact on businesses, just budgets; the consultation section stated that there were no objections from statutory consultees, this was not true as the objection from the local disabled group was not reported; and the assessment of Louth was not a like for like comparison as Louth was closer to Gainsborough on size.

The tenders for re-lining the car parks were not adequately researched as it would be possible to get more spaces in.  Businesses were being unfairly treated, and there was no equality across West Lindsey, Gainsborough was improving whereas Market Rasen was declining.  There would be no cost to undertaking the research as there was a sum of money remaining in the Portas Pilot pot.  Mr Campbell then requested that the consultation be undertaken again for the promised 12 weeks.  To impose the parking charges now would be the wrong thing to do.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting on 7 June 2016 (Previously Circulated)

(a)          Meeting of the Prosperous Communities Committee – 7 June 2016.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Meeting of the Prosperous Communities Committee held on 7 June 2016 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

Setting out current position of previously agreed actions as at 11 July 2016

Members gave consideration to the Matters Arising Schedule which set out the current position of all previously agreed actions as at 7 July 2016.

Councillor Smith noted that he had not been provided with the requested information on complaints regarding Permitted Development Rights.  The Chief Operating Officer resolved to do so.

RESOLVED that progress on the Matters Arising Schedule, as set out in report PRCC.13 16/17be received and noted.

Members may make any declarations of interest at this point but may also make them at any time during the course of the meeting.

Councillor Malcolm Parish declared a personal non-pecuniary interest in Item 3 (Update and Comments from the Public on the Implementation of Parking Charges in Market Rasen) as he was a good friend of the Mayor of Market Rasen, so would not take part in the deliberation, or vote on the item.

Councillor Tom Smith declared a personal non-pecuniary interest in item 3 (Update and Comments from the Public on the Implementation of Parking Charges in Market Rasen) as being the Ward Member, a member of the Town Council and a signatory of the petition.

Councillor Smith also declared a personal interest in Item 4 (Carbon Management Plan) as a close family friend worked in the renewable energy industry.

The Commercial Director introduced the report which sought to provide an update on progress and implementation costs, and an overview of the public feedback on the implementation notice. It was stated that the implementation of parking charges in Market Rasen had been agreed as part of the overall Car Parking Strategy and also as part of the Council’s budget setting in March.  Three principles to be adhered to through the process were: full cost recovery; equity of approach across the district; and support for businesses with an element of free parking.

The recommendations for implementation were set out in the report, and it was noted that due to delays the lining and resurfacing of the car parks was yet to be commissioned, therefore the charges were unlikely to be implemented before October.

The Chairman pointed out that the issue had been considered by several committees and meetings, and Members’ workshops, and many ideas, opinions, feedback, and the petition had all been given consideration.  The report now before the Committee brought all the issues together, and the recommendations were to implement the charges and to request a further report after six months to review the impact.

Councillor Rollings expressed concerns regarding the implementation of charges and felt that there would be harm to local businesses and that Market Rasen was not a comparable size against Gainsborough.

Councillor Smith then proposed an amended recommendation that “the request in the petition be granted and the Market Rasen Town Centre partnership be given time to undertake research to better inform a new car parking strategy at no cost to this authority as the current scheme as I have outlined simply does not stand up to scrutiny.”

Councillor Smith’s proposal was seconded by Councillor Rollings, and on being voted upon the motion fell.

The recommendations as set out in the report were then moved, seconded and voted upon.  It was then

RESOLVED that:

a)  the implementation of current charging proposals in Market Rasen be progressed; and

b)  a further report be requested after six months after charging is implemented to review the impact.

Note: Councillors Smith and Rollings voted against the recommendations

The Energy and Climate Change Officer introduced the updated Carbon Management Plan for approval.  The Carbon Management Plan set out strategically how the Council could reduce its Carbon Dioxide emissions over the next five years and embed carbon management across the Council. The plan had been reviewed and updated but would still require further updates in due course.  There were a number of references to EU policies which would need to be assessed, however there was still a commitment to the Climate Change Agreement.

The emission reduction target of 25% had not yet been reached, although 18% had been achieved.  Some measurements had been difficult to quantify and assess, however the target of 35% by 2021, reduction from the baseline of 2008/09 was still in place.

Cost savings were dependent upon the energy market and fluctuating energy prices.  Further work was required on the estimated revenue savings as set out in the table on page 5 of the report.

Members discussed the report and agreed that the management of emissions was the right thing to do.  Given the high running costs of the Trinity Arts Centre and the Leisure Centre the achieved 18% saving was commendable. 

Discussion ensued on the 48% of emissions assigned as ‘transport’.  It was verified that this was primarily fleet vehicles and only a minor part of that was due to Member and Officer travelling.  As fleet vehicles were gradually replaced more energy efficient models would be purchased.

Members’ paperless working was acknowledged as a contribution, and it was stated that further ways to save should be encouraged, with greater use of IT for meetings and training.

It was noted that there should be no detrimental impact on disabled persons whose carbon footprint was often necessarily greater.

The recommendation in the report was moved, seconded and voted upon.

RESOLVED that:

a)     West Lindsey’s Carbon Management Plan be agreed and endorsed; and

b)     it be recommended to Corporate Policy and Resources for the release of the appropriate capital budget from ear marked reserves to be approved.

The Strategic Lead – Economic Development and Neighbourhoods set out the proposals for the Riverside Gateway Local Development Order (LDO).  The Riverside Gateway site was the first of the Housing Zone strategic sites to be brought forward using the LDO mechanism.  The report sought endorsement for the LDO for adoption and to be sent to Secretary of State.

The Council had been awarded Housing Zone status in 2015 for Greater Gainsborough and the Riverside Gateway site at Carr Lane was the first of the strategic sites to be brought forward.  The site was located on Carr Lane/ Lea Road and was one of the most visible derelict sites on a main route into Gainsborough.  Consultation for the proposal was carried out between 15 February 2016 and 13 March 2016, following responses received, it was proposed that a Local Development Order be made to grant Outline Planning Permission to the site for housing led redevelopment of up to 245 dwellings.  Local Development Order was a new mechanism promoted by the Government to encourage development by simplifying and de-risking the planning process to incentivise landowners and developers to bring forward development at an accelerated pace.

Consultation had taken place and a number of public responses received, which were set out in the report along with those of statutory consultees.  On request, parking had been given further consideration and also the preservation of the Marshall’s Power Station as requested by Historic England, due to the building’s positive contribution to the Conservation Area.

A number of objections related to the aspiration for a second Trent Bridge crossing on site.  Whilst the need for a second Trent Bridge had never been identified in any of Lincolnshire County Council’s study and it had been assessed that the proposed LDO would not prejudice a proposed traffic alleviation scheme for this area of Gainsborough.

Kerry’s Foods had expressed concerns about the proximity of residential development adjacent their early morning vehicle movements however the proposed design had now taken account of this and it was hoped that the potential marina would act as a buffer.

The LDO and Major Projects Officer then showed slides depicting aerial views of the site and the proposed boundary and the future potential residential, retail and open space designations.  A further slide depicted the site constraints.

Members agreed the project offered exciting prospects and would help to create a ‘sense of place’ and regenerate a derelict area of the town.  The passion and commitment of officers was commended.

The reduced density of the number of dwellings was commented on, along with the provision of car parking spaces.  It was felt important to make provision that ‘planning for health’ be built in, with cycleways and footpaths.  The revised report circulated to Members addressed these matters.

The recommendations in the report were then moved, seconded and voted upon.

RESOLVED that:

a)    the Riverside Gateway Local Development Order be endorsed for adoption; and

b)    a copy of the Local Development Order be sent to the Secretary of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

The Home Choices Team Manager introduced the revised policy for Members of the Committee.  The Council had a statutory duty to protect its communities, and the Safeguarding Policy had been reviewed by the Corporate Safeguarding Group in response to a number of legislative changes. The changes also reflected recommendations made in the ‘Vulnerable People Audit’ (Internal Audit, 2015).

A strapline (‘safeguarding is everyone’s business’) and logo had been developed to give the corporate safeguarding work a greater identity.  The Corporate Safeguarding Group was requesting that a West Lindsey Councillor be nominated to join the Group.  Given that Councillor Bardsley was the Council’s Safeguarding Champion it would be an appropriate appointment.

Members requested that although training had been undertaken during the induction process, further sessions would be welcomed.  It was affirmed that this was in hand and that an accessible online version would be rolled out shortly, as it was important that all Members undertake this.

The recommendations as set out in the report were moved for approval, and on being seconded and voted upon it was:

RESOLVED that:

a)    the Safeguarding, Support & Promoting Wellbeing Policy 2016 – 2019 as the Council’s framework for safeguarding communities in West Lindsey be formally adopted;

b)    delegated authority be granted to the Director of Resources to make minor housekeeping amendments to the policy in future, in consultation with the chairman of the Prosperous Communities Committee and chairman of JSCC

c)    Councillor Gillian Bardsley be nominated to sit on the Corporate Safeguarding Group.

The Chief Operating Officer summarised the Progress and Delivery report for period 1.  The report dealt with the progress and delivery of projects which were aimed at the delivery of the corporate plan. This report highlighted those projects that had entered the delivery stage and were either off track or at risk of not delivering.  The report also dealt with the progress and delivery of the services the council provided. It was an “exceptions” report and dealt with those services which were either performing above the required level or were below the target set for them. The report would also provide Members with a summary of activity across services.

Members agreed that the revised format of the report made for a clearer understanding which required little discussion or subsequent questions.

Note was made however of the number of complaints and the target failure.  The Chief Operating Officer clarified that an analysis would differentiate between the differing reasons for complaints, such as in Planning where there were differences between the public not being happy with a decision, or the way the application was handled.  Any decision in Planning would make someone unhappy, so it would be useful to rationalise the nature of the complaints.

It was noted that public expectations were occasionally unrealistic based on a lack of understanding of how processes worked.

RESOLVED that having reviewed the Progress and Delivery report Members were satisfied with the responses to the performance.

The Leisure and Cultural Services Team Manager set out the reason for the report as being the Council’s current leisure contract with Everyone Active (previously SLM Ltd) was due to expire on 31 May 2018.  The current contract included West Lindsey Leisure Centre in Gainsborough, and two chance to share facilities at De Aston School and Caistor Yarborough School.

The Council wished to take this opportunity of the impending contract end to assess future leisure provision within the District and identify a value for money solution to secure the leisure service going forward.

The background information to the existing contract was set out in the report and details of the good record of saving achieved, along with a high level of customer satisfaction.

A thorough options appraisal had been conducted seeking to identify the best value for money solution for leisure provision post the end of the current contract.  As a result the recommended option was that the Council should re?procure its leisure contract but seek to do this with a surplus being provided, or at an absolute minimum that the contract should be at zero cost.  Members of Prosperous Communities Committee agreed this course of action in December 2015 and supported Officers to commence a procurement exercise.  The principles to form the basis of the exercise of the re-procurement contract were set out in the report at paragraph 3.2.

Following on from a strategic assessment of leisure need within the District linked to the development of the Local Plan, it had been concluded that there may be a commercial opportunity to develop a dry leisure facility in Market Rasen subject to a further business case and feasibility study.  It is therefore the Council’s intention to test the market to see what could be provided in Market Rasen with the proviso that this be cost neutral to the Council or generates a surplus.

The schools in Market Rasen and Caistor provided little commercial opportunity, with low usage and increasing costs and provided limited opportunity to develop and maximise income as they were only available outside of school use.  It was proposed that these two facilities be removed from the future contract as they did not support the Council’s aspiration to receive a positive income from the leisure service.

Members of the Committee debated the content of the report.  Assurance was sought that liaison would be undertaken with the two schools, and also town and parish councils, as to the best way forward.  It noted that it would be possible for the schools to run the venues themselves commercially without active Council involvement.

Councillor McNeill proposed an additional recommendation that the two schools be the subject of a further separate report to the committee at a future date.

Note Councillor Smith declared a personal interest as being the Ward Member and Town Councillor for the De Aston school.

Councillor Smith also requested that the Commercial Director, at her earliest convenience, give written assurance, if the Council were to remove  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31a

Members gave consideration to the Committee work plan and it was agreed that the revised work plan which had been compiled with the Chief Executive and the Committee Chairman would be incorporated for the next meeting.

RESOLVED that the Work Plan as set out in report PRCC.20 16/17 be received and noted.