Agenda, decisions and minutes

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 (during office hours staff should proceed to their usual assembly point; outside of office hours proceed to the visitors’ car park). 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.  

27.1          The evacuation procedure, as noted on the Agenda, was advised to those present.

28.1          Apologies for absence were received from Councillors G F Blackwell, M A Gore, D J Harwood and M G Sztymiak. Councillor P N Workman would be acting as a substitute for the meeting.

29.1          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.

29.2          There were no declarations of interest made on this occasion.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 7 July 2021.

30.1          The Minutes of the meeting held on 7 July 2021, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.  

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

(The deadline for public participation submissions for this meeting is 25 August 2021)

31.1          There were no items from members of the public.  

To consider the Committee’s Forward Plan.  

That the Committee’s Forward Plan be NOTED.  

32.1          Attention was drawn to the Committee’s Forward Plan, circulated at Pages No. 10-17. Members were asked to consider the Plan.

32.2          Accordingly, it was

To consider the quarterly budget position. 

That the financial performance information for the first quarter of 2021/22 be NOTED.  

33.1          The report of the Head of Finance and Asset Management, circulated at Pages No. 18-28, provided the first quarterly monitoring report of the Council’s financial performance for the year. Members were asked to consider the information provided.

33.2          The Head of Finance and Asset Management explained that the report highlighted a projected outturn surplus based on the quarter one position of £22,382 on the revenue budget and detailed the expenditure to date against both the capital programme and the approved reserves. In terms of service expenditure, the quarter one full year projection highlighted a full year cost of service provision totalling £13.266 million which would result in a deficit against the approved budget of £849,177. In respect of employees, the full year projection highlighted a potential gross surplus of £377,508; however, it should be noted that within the Council’s corporate expenditure there was a target to save £155,000 from employment costs across the Council, therefore, the net position was a surplus against target of £222,508. Payments to third parties highlighted a small projected overspend of £75,005 which included additional costs relating to an increased amount of burials at cemeteries, the costs of a Domestic Homicide Review and a forecast overspend on the Ubico contract sum in relation to extra payments being made in order to attract and retain drivers for the Council’s services - a national shortage of drivers, estimated to be around 70,000, had resulted in an impact on many forms of business with local authority waste collection services not immune to that impact. There had been a growing number of examples of authorities having to suspend collections as a result of driver shortages. To help mitigate the problem on the Tewkesbury contract, an increased market supplement had been agreed whilst the driver training for loaders continued – the rest of the contract sum was on target.

33.3          COVID-19 costs were continuing with the full year cost estimated at £415,094 which included the continued work of the business cell, additional costs for the provision of waste and recycling services and the continued support to Tewkesbury Leisure Centre. Those costs would be met from the additional COVID-19 grant funding provided by the government and new burdens funding for the business cell work. Income levels were down but many areas of Council activity had recovered well from the impact of COVID-19 with several income streams either back on budget or delivering a small surplus. Some areas continued to be affected by the pandemic with reductions in income levels from car parks during the first quarter, an expectation that the Tewkesbury Leisure Centre contract fee would not be provided during the year, and current vacancies for the units within the Council Offices. In addition, One Legal income remained below target; although this was offset to an extent by the savings on employee costs.

33.4          The expenditure associated with corporate activities, as well as the financing of the Council, highlighted an estimated surplus of £871,559 for the financial year. Treasury activities were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

To recommend to Council the adoption of the of the Council Plan and COVID-19 Recovery Plan refresh.  

That the Council Plan refresh and the COVID-19 Corporate Recovery Plan refresh be RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL for ADOPTION.  

34.1          The report of the Head of Corporate Services, circulated at Pages No. 29-67, provided the Council Plan refresh and COVID-19 Corporate Recovery Plan refresh which Members were asked to consider and recommend to Council for adoption.

34.2          The Chief Executive explained that this was an annual refresh of the Council Plan and a refresh of the relatively recently adopted COVID Recovery Plan. The actions which had changed in both plans reflected where they had been completed or moved into another phase with various examples provided within the body of the report. It was proposed that the COVID-19 Recovery Plan would be retained separately until the end of the Municipal Year and then, going forward, would be merged into the Council Plan.

34.3          Accordingly, it was

To approve the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Policy. 

1.           That the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Policy, as attached to the report at Appendix 1, be APPROVED.

2.           That authority be delegated to the Head of Finance and Asset Management, in consultation with the Counter Fraud Unit Manager, One Legal and the Lead Member for Corporate Governance, to approve future minor amendments to the policy.

35.1          The report of the Counter Fraud Unit Manager, circulated at Pages No. 68-78, presented the Committee with an updated Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Policy for approval. 

35.2          The Counter Fraud Unit Manager explained that the Policy defined a best practice approach to dealing with money laundering obligations and suspicious activity reports. It sought to enable the identification of suspicious transactions and was something the Council had to have in place due to its dealings with legal and property transactions. The Policy enabled Officers to address the way the Council, its employees and Members formally discharged their obligations

35.3          Accordingly, it was

To approve the Use of the Internet and Social Media in Investigations and Enforcement Policy. 

1.           That the Use of Internet and Social Media in Investigations and Enforcement Policy, as attached to the report at Appendix 1, be APPROVED.

2.           That authority be delegated to the Borough Solicitor, in consultation with the Counter Fraud Unit Manager and the Lead Member for Corporate Governance, to approve future minor amendments to the policy.  

36.1          The report of the Counter Fraud Unit Manager, circulated at Pages No. 79-86, presented the Committee with an updated and revised Use of the Internet and Social Media in Investigations and Enforcement Policy for approval.

36.2          The Counter Fraud Unit Manager advised that the Use of the Internet and Social Media in Investigations and Enforcement Policy completed the policy suite regarding the Council’s surveillance activity with this particular policy about monitoring social media accounts etc. The policy sought to ensure staff were undertaking the processes correctly and not straying into surveillance without the proper consideration. It was not possible for the Council to invade someone’s privacy without good reason and, whilst some social media would be open to the public, some would be private and the Counter Fraud Unit Manager provided the example that it would not be acceptable to create an account to befriend someone to gain access to private information.

36.3          Accordingly, it was

To approve the draft Heritage Strategy for consultation purposes.  

1.           That the draft Tewkesbury Borough Heritage Strategy be APPROVED FOR CONSULTATION PURPOSES.

2.           That authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services to make any necessary minor amendments, as considered appropriate, to the draft strategy prior to consultation.   

37.1          The report of the Planning Policy Manager, circulated at Pages No. 87-104, set out the general heritage considerations within the Borough along with the statutory duties and obligations of Tewkesbury Borough Council as a planning authority. It also included an analysis of heritage protection within the Borough and an action plan showing how the aims and objectives of the strategy would be implemented. Members were asked to approve the draft document for consultation and to delegate authority to the Head of Development Services to make any necessary minor amendments to the draft document prior to consultation.

37.2          Members were advised that Council’s Heritage Strategy was being brought forward as part of the development of the Tewkesbury Borough Plan in line with best practice. It was felt the strategy was especially important given the nature of Tewkesbury Borough and its variety of heritage assets. Referring to Page No. 102, a Member questioned whether the scheduled monument list was scheduled ancient monuments. In response, the Conservation Officer indicated that they were now referred to as scheduled monuments. The Member advised that there was land in Winchcombe – between the Redrow site off Gretton Road and Greet Road – which should be on the list due to Roman artefacts being found there. The Conservation Officer undertook to check that and add it to the list if appropriate. During the discussion which ensued, a Member requested that the reference to ‘Article 4’ be explained within the document, and the Head of Development Services undertook to add that explanation. Referring to Page No. 93, a Member asked that references to the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Conservation Board be amended to reflect its new name of Cotswolds National Landscape. Another Member referred to amendments required at Paragraphs 1.12 and 1.15 and the Head of Development Services agreed that she would make those amendments and ensure any other necessary minor amendments would be made before it was circulated for consultation. A Member questioned whether the moated site and fishpond at Urrist Barn was still there as he was not sure that it was; he understood the Gwynett family had lived there, one of whom had signed the American Declaration of Independence, and he felt this was something the Borough did not make enough of. In response, the Conservation Officer indicated that scheduled monuments were administered by Historic England through its inspectorate so he did not know what the condition of the monuments was. A lot of them were not as much about what could be seen as what the archaeological potential could be; however, he would draw the Councillor’s comments to the attention of Historic England so they could decide if they needed to visit the site.

37.3          There was a discussion about ensuring unauthorised works were not being undertaken to listed buildings, that appropriate shopfronts and signage were being installed as well as trying to draw more businesses into the High Streets and ensuring the strategy was not a barrier to that. The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

To consider the Supplementary Planning Document - Shopfronts, Shutters and Signage: Design Guidance for Tewkesbury and recommend it for the purposes of public consultation.  

1.           That the draft Shopfronts, Shutters and Signage Design Guidance for Tewkesbury Borough Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) be APPROVED FOR CONSULTATION PURPOSES.

2.           That authority be delegated to the Head of Development Services to make any necessary minor amendments, as considered appropriate, to the draft strategy prior to consultation.  

38.1          The report of the Head of Development Services, circulated at Pages No. 105-120, attached a Shopfront, Shutters and Signage Design Guidance for Tewkesbury Supplementary Planning Document. Members were asked to approve the draft document and to delegate authority to the Head of Development Services to make any necessary minor amendments as considered appropriate prior to consultation.

38.2          The Head of Development Services explained that, in response to the changing nature of shopping habits in the surrounding populations, the Borough’s historic retail areas were having to adapt and play to their strengths by maintaining and enhancing themselves as a distinctive and culturally rich shopping and leisure experience. It was recognised that the appearance of the Borough’s historic retail areas could be negatively impacted by unattractive and inappropriate shopfronts and associated signage and the purpose of the guide was to promote shopfront and signage design within the historic areas of the Borough as well as offering guidance to designers and applicants in submitting planning proposals. The intention was to promote good design practice without stifling planning innovation yet respecting the historic character of buildings and the areas.

38.3          A Member questioned whether the document could be applied retrospectively where the owner of a property was not respecting what the Council wanted.  In response, the Head of Development Services advised that this was where the design guide was really helpful as it ensured the Council’s own policies were not being undermined. The Member noted that, where people had aluminium shopfronts, the cost of changing them could be quite substantial so she questioned whether there would be grants or match funding available to help. The Head of Development Services indicated that a grant scheme would be launched shortly and there was a need to ensure interest was monitored so the grant funding was spread as widely as possible; however, there would be a requirement for shop owners to invest money as well. There may be some key shopfronts which could be given more funding to make a bigger impact but this needed to be considered. In September there would be an Officer at the ‘Regenerate the High Street’ event which was taking place at the Anglo-American Gardens in Tewkesbury town and it was intended that the Supplementary Planning Document - Shopfronts, Shutters and Signage: Design Guidance for Tewkesbury would be launched there; it would also be used in enforcement work in the High Streets, there would be additional publicity and it would be circulated through the Council’s Growth Hub contacts with businesses to help get the message out.

38.4          Accordingly, it was