When the continuous alarm sounds you must evacuate the building by the nearest available fire exit. Members and visitors should proceed to the visitors’ car park at the front of the building and await further instructions (staff should proceed to their usual assembly point). Please do not re-enter the building unless instructed to do so.

In the event of a fire any person with a disability should be assisted in leaving the building.

12.1           The evacuation procedure, as noted on the Agenda, was taken as read.  

12.2           The Chairman welcomed Councillor P W Awford to the meeting and explained that he was in attendance, as Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, for Agenda Item 7 – Performance Management – Quarter Four 2014/15. Councillor Mrs J Greening was in attendance as an observer and the Chairman also welcomed her to the meeting.

13.1           The Committee’s attention was drawn to the Tewkesbury Borough Council Code of Conduct which was adopted by the Council on 26 June 2012 and took effect from 1 July 2012.

13.2           The following declarations were made:

13.3           There were no further declarations made on this occasion.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 10 June 2015.

14.1           The Minutes of the meeting held on 10 June 2015, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any questions, deputations or petitions submitted under Rule of Procedure 12.

(The deadline for public participation submissions for this meeting is 9 July 2015)

15.1           There were no items from members of the public on this occasion.  

To consider the Committee’s Forward Plan.  

That the Committee’s Forward Plan be NOTED.  

16.1           Attention was drawn to the Committee’s Forward Plan, circulated at Pages No.8-11. Members were asked to consider the Plan.

16.2           Accordingly, it was

To receive and respond to the findings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee‘s review of the Council Plan Performance Tracker, Local Performance Indicators and Financial Summary.

That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s comments on the Performance Management Report for Quarter Four of 2014/15 be NOTED.  

17.1           The report of the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, circulated at Pages No. 12-70, asked Members to review and, if appropriate, take action against the observations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee following its review of the 2014/15 quarter four performance management information.

17.2           The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee explained that this had been the first meeting of the new Committee and Members had asked a lot of questions which he felt was good news. In terms of the delivery of the Council Plan actions, the good progress which had been identified within the report had been noted. The specific questions that had arisen at the meeting had been in relation to the second floor accommodation in the Council Offices building and the plans, costs and loss of income thereof; the live date for the property search database; more information about the LEADER funding; the arrangements for the implementation of the Community Infrastructure Levy; fly-tipping and dog fouling; the value for money of the Anti-Social Behaviour Youth Diversion Worker; the levels of sickness absence; and planning performance and processing times. In terms of the financial summary information, Members had discussed the business rates revaluation in which it was agreed Members were well versed. Referring to the LEADER funding, the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee explained that Members had been encouraged to contact the Programme Manager to advise of any businesses that might benefit from the funding and, whilst it had not been raised at the meeting, the Chairman felt that, given the value of the funding, a presentation should be made to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in six months’ time so that Members could understand how the fund was progressing. There was some concern expressed about the Community Infrastructure Levy and whether or not Neighbourhood Plans were still relevant; particularly given the amount of work that some areas had already put into their Plans. In terms of dog fouling and flytipping, the Committee had raised genuine concerns about the level of enviro-crimes and had been advised that Environmental Health had recently gone through a structure review during which it had been necessary to recruit to some posts; the service would soon be fully staffed which would allow more community work to be undertaken. Surveillance cameras had recently been purchased, Brockworth Parish Council had bought glow in the dark signs and posters had been used to good effect in Shurdington and would also be used at The Vineyards in Tewkesbury.  Lastly, in respect of planning performance, Members had been informed of the forthcoming service review which would follow a similar process as the recent review of the Revenues and Benefits Service which had proven to be very successful. Planning performance was currently improving against a backdrop of an increase in applications which was pleasing. At the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee had reiterated that there were a number of large and complex applications being received and he  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

To note the general fund outturn for 2014/15, the financing of the capital programme and the annual treasury management report and performance; and to approve the transfers to and from earmarked reserves.

1.      That the general fund outturn for 2014/15, the financing of the capital programme and the annual treasury management report and performance be NOTED.

2.      That the transfers to and from earmarked reserves be APPROVED.  

18.1           The report of the Finance and Asset Management Group Manager, circulated at Pages No. 71-93, highlighted the Council’s financial performance for the previous year, setting out the general fund and capital outturn positions, as well as providing detail on both the positive and negative variances against the budget. Members were asked to note the general fund outturn for 2014/15; the financing of the capital programme and the annual treasury management report and performance; and to approve the transfers to and from earmarked reserves.

18.2           Members were advised that the report was brought to the Committee in recognition that the Executive Committee had not previously received a comprehensive report like this which provided an overview of performance against the general fund revenue budget for 2014/15 with an explanation of the significant variances. The report also addressed the movement on reserves and requested Member approval for the creation of new reserves or additions to existing reserves that fell outside of a previously approved sum. It also sought to confirm the full year progress against the capital programme and the sources, if finance was used in delivering that programme, as well as reporting the performance in 2014/15 of the treasury management function in line with the requirements of the Code of Practice. All of the information contained within the report would be included in the Council’s Statement of Accounts which would be approved by the Audit Committee at its meeting on 30 September 2015.

18.3           The Finance and Asset Management Group Manager explained that the general fund revenue outturn position for the full year could now be reported at a surplus of £207,742 which represented a positive variance of 2.4% and was within the tolerance of the Medium Term Financial Strategy. It was pleasing to report a surplus for the Council within the financial year; particularly given the financial climate for local government and the squeeze on service budgets. The surplus would now be utilised to finance the reserve and carry forward requests of the Council. The outturn position was mainly attributable to major items such as the development management income exceeding target by over £152,000 as a result of planning and land charges income; other income targets exceeding expectation, in particular trade and garden waste and car parking; and expenditure on employee costs being in excess of the budgeted position as the use of agency staff to cover both vacancies and sickness absence had a substantial impact. In addition, vacant posts were being filled quicker than in previous years which prevented any savings accruing from vacant posts. Pages No. 80 and 81 set out the notes to explain the variances and also identified the responsible Group Managers for Members’ information. In contrast to the excellent position reported for the general fund, the financing of the fund had been substantially impacted by the performance of the retained business rates scheme in 2014/15. The scheme allowed the Council to retain a percentage of the growth in the local business rate base above a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

To consider land and property assets that are surplus to service requirements and to ask Officers to investigate the potential for disposing of the assets or retaining them to provide an ongoing revenue return.

That it be AGREED that the following land and property assets are surplus to service requirements and that Officers investigate the potential for disposing of the assets or retaining them to provide an ongoing return:

·         MAFF Site, Tewkesbury.

·         Land off Evesham Road, Bishop’s Cleeve.

·         Land at Uckington.

·         All remaining retained garage sites managed by Severn Vale Housing Society.

19.1           The report of the Finance and Asset Management Group Manager, circulated at Pages No. 94-99, introduced a new framework for the Council to consider the use of its assets and Members were asked to consider whether or not the assets listed in the report were required for continued or future service use.

19.2           Members were advised that the Council held a limited portfolio of land and property assets of any commercial value but nevertheless retained a number of assets that were not required for current or future service use and did not provide a substantial community amenity. Councils were required to assess their assets to gain the optimal value and return either in terms of service delivery, financial return or reduced ongoing liability. The Committee was asked to consider a number of sites which included the MAFF site, Tewkesbury; land off Evesham Road, Bishop’s Cleeve; Land at Uckington; and all remaining retained garage sites managed by Severn Vale Housing Society. Any assets agreed for disposal would be dealt with in line with the Council’s Constitution and, where required, reports would be submitted to the Executive Committee for further consideration. The report currently before Members was intended as the first step in formalising the process for declaring any land and property asset owned by the Council surplus to requirements and would provide a formal and public declaration by the Council rather than maintaining the current ad-hoc arrangements for the disposal of individual assets. Previous reports on asset disposal had often included elements of a commercially sensitive nature, such as bid prices, and this had prevented the full report being aired in open business. Having declared a property surplus to requirements, the Asset Management Team would consider a number of options on whether the Council should retain the asset as part of the investment portfolio for letting purposes; retain the asset for redevelopment; or dispose of the asset and generate a capital receipt. By following the process outlined within the report, it was hoped that the Council would establish a robust and transparent position on each asset which would allow an early dialogue with both the community and potential bidders, whilst providing proper authority and disposal parameters from which the Asset Management Team could take forward the Council’s property ambitions.

19.3           In respect of the remaining retained garage sites, the Finance and Asset Management Group Manager advised that all of the sites were of a similar construction and age and ranged in size from 94m² up to 811m². The units were manufactured from a concrete frame and asbestos roof and were suffering from age. They were considered to be uneconomical to repair and maintain given the type of construction and the rental income from the units with no value in replacing them. In addition, many of the sites had suffered from various types of anti-social behaviour over the years. In terms of garage unit lets, around 20% of units were currently let to tenants of Severn Vale Housing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

To agree the Council’s consultation response to the Cheltenham Plan Part 1: Issues and Options Consultation.

That the Council’s response to the Cheltenham Plan Part 1: Issues and Options Consultation, as set out at Appendix 5 to the report, be AGREED subject to the inclusion of a sentence to state that ‘Tewkesbury Borough Council will object to any proposal which will undermine the integrity of the Joint Core Strategy’.

20.1           The report of the Development Services Group Manager, circulated at Pages No. 100-166, attached, for Members information, the Cheltenham Borough Plan Part 1 – Issues and Options consultation document and asked the Committee to agree the Council’s response to the document.

20.2           The Development Services Group Manager explained that that the Cheltenham Borough Plan provided the District-level planning framework that sat underneath the strategic-level Joint Core Strategy. Together the two Plans provided the Development Plan for Cheltenham Borough up to 2031, along with the Gloucestershire Minerals and Waste Plans and any Neighbourhood Plans. Cheltenham Borough Council was now consulting on its draft Plan and that consultation period was ongoing until 3 August 2015. It was important that Tewkesbury Borough Council provided representations on the Cheltenham Plan due to the collaborative working on the higher-level Joint Core Strategy and the cross-boundary issues that were present. It was also important that the Cheltenham Plan sufficiently provided the appropriate sites and policies to deliver the growth identified in the Joint Core Strategy and in line with the spatial strategy it set out.

20.3           Members were advised that the key points to consider were local green space, housing allocations and employment allocations. In terms of local green space there were cross boundary issues as some of the areas were within the emerging strategic allocations. In recognition of the potential conflicts, the Joint Core Strategy inspector would be considering the local green space submissions as part of the examination. In addition, no indication was provided within the document as to whether there were an adequate number of suitable, achievable and deliverable sites to meet the development needs as set out in the Joint Core Strategy and it was also noted that none of the sites being consulted upon that were in the Green Belt or the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty were considered to be suitable development which could present a problem when looking for sufficient sites to meet the need identified for development. The consultation document did not make it clear how the Council would find the residual number and it was felt that this needed to be questioned. It was also unclear how it would address the Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople allocation and whether there were adequate sites to meet development needs. Appendix 5 set out Tewkesbury Borough Council’s proposed response to the consultation document.

20.4           A number of Members questioned whether the response was robust enough, particularly in terms of the whole concept of local green space. The Development Services Group Manager felt that the response was appropriate at the current stage of the process. Cheltenham Borough Council would be looking at all of the responses received and would take them forward to the next stage of the process. She felt that Members should take reassurance from the fact that the Joint Core Strategy inspector had already expressed an interest in the deliverability of the strategic sites and that Tewkesbury Borough Council would object to anything that undermined the Joint  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

To approve the Policy which sets out the guiding principles by which legislation will be enforced by the Council to protect public health, safety, amenity and the environment within the Borough.

That the draft Interim Health Enforcement Policy be APPROVED.  

21.1           The report of the Environmental and Housing Services Group Manager, circulated at Pages No. 167-187, set out how the Council’s Environmental Health and Licensing services responded to regulatory non-compliance. The Committee was asked to consider and approve the interim Policy, as set out at Appendix B to the report.

21.2           Members were advised that this was a very high level document which looked at the way that enforcement was undertaken in the Environmental Health and Licensing services. There was currently a policy in place but recently there had been specific changes in legislation which provided a principles-based framework for how regulators should engage with those that they regulated. The new Regulators Code covered specific Local Authority services which included food safety, environmental protection, health and safety, private sector housing, public health, trading standards, waste and licensing. It did not cover planning, building control and parking services enforcement. The reason that the proposed policy was an interim policy was that, in the long term, Officers would like to look at other areas of the Council’s regulatory work, i.e. planning, to see if there was scope to introduce a common corporate approach to enforcement. This may or may not be possible but it was felt that there was an opportunity to investigate this which should not be lost.

21.3           Members felt that the interim policy was sensible and that it would be helpful to investigate the possibilities of a corporate approach. Accordingly, it was

To note the action taken in accordance with the Urgency Procedure. 

That the action taken in accordance with the Urgency Procedure be NOTED.  

22.1           The report of the Finance and Asset Management Group Manager, circulated at Pages No. 188-191, advised the Committee of action taken under the Urgency Procedure in respect of the Roses Theatre refurbishment project. Members were asked to note the action taken.

22.2           Members were advised that under the terms of the lease on the Roses Theatre, the Council had the responsibility for the roof of the Theatre which, following an inspection, had been identified as being in need of urgent and substantial repair and replacement. To address the issues, and to work alongside the Roses Theatre Trust with its plans to refurbish the interior of the building, the Council had approved an injection of funding of £150,000.The tenders received for the work on the roof had been much higher than expected due, in part, to the demand for roofing contractors during the summer months, and partly due to the fact that the development industry overall was in greater demand than it had been previously. In terms of the timing of the works, Members were advised that the refurbishment would take place over the summer months as that was the Theatre’s quietest performance period and, since the Theatre needed to be closed for the duration of the works, this was the option that made the most business sense. The newly refurbished building would open in late September to allow for the autumn and Christmas performance schedules which were obviously much busier.

22.3           To enable acceptance of the roofing tender, the appropriate budgetary provision had to be in place and, in light of this, an urgent decision request had been made to the Deputy Chief Executive, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Executive Committee and the decision had been taken to allow the virement of £100,000 to support the required work at the Theatre. There would, in the longer term, be a cost benefit to the Council as the overall improvements would benefit the Council as the owner of the building.

22.4           In response to a query regarding the reason for the increase in costs, the Deputy Chief Executive advised that, in addition to the reasons already noted, when the work on the roof had begun the contractors had found asbestos that had not been identified within the condition survey. Members questioned why this had been the case and in response, the Deputy Chief Executive was unsure how this had occurred and assured Members that she would investigate. She did, however, reiterate that the additional £100,000 was not required purely due to the asbestos in the roof, although that had increased the costs slightly. In terms of maintenance, the Deputy Chief Executive confirmed that the Roses Theatre was no different to any of the Council’s other assets in that it needed to be maintained to ensure its future going forward; it would otherwise become a burden to the Council that it could not afford. The Theatre was extremely well thought of by the Arts Council which perceived it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

23.1           The Chairman proposed, and it was 

                  RESOLVED          That, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act                               1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following                              items on the grounds that they involve the likely discussion of                                     exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the                               Act.

To approve the separate Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 10 June 2015.

24.1           The separate Minutes of the meeting held on 10 June 2015, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.