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.  

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

93.2          In accordance with Procedure Rule 1.2 of the Council’s Constitution, the Chair indicated that he intended to exercise his discretion to vary the order of business so that Agenda Item 14 – Financial Write-Off Report and Agenda Item 15 – Section 106 Indexation Write-Off would be taken after Agenda Item 11 – Executive Committee Forward Plan in open business.  The Monitoring Officer advised that both reports had been checked by the Council’s Information Governance Officer who was satisfied there were no issues with either report being taken in public session.  With regard to Agenda Item 14, concerns were raised by Members regarding the potential identification of individuals and that the report had not been made available to the public ahead of the meeting, as such, it was agreed this item would be deferred to the meeting on 5 June 2024 when it could be published with the Agenda for that meeting in open business.

94.1          Apologies for absence were received from Councillors C M Cody, D W Gray and J K Smith.  Councillors H J Bowman and M A Gore would be substitutes for the meeting.

Pursuant to the adoption by the Council on 24 January 2023 of the Tewkesbury Borough Council Code of Conduct, effective from 1 February 2023, as set out in Minute No. CL.72, Members are invited to declare any interest they may have in the business set out on the Agenda to which the approved Code applies.

95.1          The Committee’s attention was drawn to the Tewkesbury Borough Code of Conduct which was adopted by the Council on 24 January 2023 and took effect on 1 February 2023. 

95.2          The following declarations were made:

95.3          There were no further declarations made on this occasion.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 7 February 2024.

96.1          The Minutes of the meeting held on 7 February 2024, 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 Thursday 14 March 2024.)

97.1          There were no items from members of the public. 

To receive and respond to the findings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s review of the quarter three performance management information. 

That the findings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s review of the quarter three 2023/24 performance management information be NOTED.     

98.1          Attention was drawn to the report from the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, circulated separately, which outlined the findings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in relation to the Council Plan Performance Tracker Quarter Three 2023/24 which had been considered at its meeting on 13 February 2024.

98.2          The Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee drew particular attention to Paragraph 7c of the report in relation to economic growth and advised that the Committee had taken a keen interest in youth unemployment which it hoped to see addressed in the upcoming Economic Development and Tourism Strategy.  In terms of Paragraph 8b of the report, the Committee was grateful to the Associate Director: Planning for the Member briefing on planning performance, including planning appeals, and the Committee looked forward to working with the Associate Director and the Lead Member for Built Environment to ensure the Council continued to improve and meet the government target in that regard.  As set out at Paragraphs 8c and 8d of the report, the detail presented in the tracker was not particularly helpful in terms of being able to understand how the Council was supporting infrastructure and facilities development and meeting targets in relation to housing development and homelessness.   The Chief Executive had come up with excellent suggestions as to how that might be addressed and it was important that improvements were made within the new Council Plan to better measure and monitor outcomes.  He advised that he had written to relevant Lead Members in relation to the issues identified by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and was awaiting responses.

98.3          The Chair found it was concerning to hear there was lack of clarity around the figures in relation to housing and homelessness.  In terms of his response to the Communications Strategy, he confirmed this was being worked on by the Communications team and a revised strategy would be taken to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in due course.  A Member questioned whether there was a timescale for improved dates and targets in respect of housing development and the Director: Corporate Governance advised that the new Council Plan was due to be approved by Council on 16 April 2024 with the intention of developing the performance tracker document, informed by service plans, within the next one to two months.  The Chief Executive advised that all services were currently in the process of completing a detailed template, looking at priorities and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to ensure they reflected the High Performing Organisation (HPO) approach; the KPIs in the current tracker were broad brush and did not always align with what was most important for communities. 

98.4          It was

To consider the quarterly budget position.

That the financial performance information for the third quarter of 2023/24 be NOTED. 

99.1          The report of the Associate Director: Finance, circulated at Pages No. 15-46, outlined the financial performance information for the third quarter of 2023/24.  Members were asked to consider the report.

99.2           The Lead Member for Finance and Asset Management advised that the report contained significant detail and he intended to give a general overview of some key elements.  He explained that the overall position on the revenue budget position was a surplus of £201,522, as outlined in the table linked to Page No. 16, Paragraph 2.1 of the report; however, this was showing the forecast position for year end, as opposed to the current actual situation.  As such, this would no doubt be different by the end of the year, albeit the Council was in a good position at this point of the financial year.  As had been the case throughout the year so far, some areas were predicting an overspend against budget, whilst there were some corresponding higher levels of income than expected elsewhere.  ‘Services’ was in surplus by £28,500 with the main reason being the cost of employees which was £264,000 under budget, however, it should be noted that, within the Council’s corporate expenditure, there was a target to save £209,000 from employment costs across the Council so this reduced the predicted underspend to £55,000. Payments to third parties was showing a £227,000 overspend, which included an additional £234,000 for the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) gate fee due to a significant increase in the gate fee from £38 per tonne to £69 per tonne as a result of the declining value of materials and increase in energy prices.  This was partially offset through less than expected fees towards the Swindon Road Depot – a saving of £108,000; emergency homeless accommodation costs were £151,000 over budget due to high needs and therefore increased costs for temporary accommodation; corporate expenditure was on track to be underspent by £549,000 with an additional £235,000 of treasury investment income compared to budget as a result of the high interest rates - borrowing costs included an allowance for temporary borrowing in the budget but the Council only had the fixed Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) loans at present and expected not to borrow any more during the remainder of the year leading to a £206,000 saving, plus business rates were currently anticipated to bring in an additional £123,000.  The capital budget and reserves position were included in the report at Appendices C and D respectively and showed spending was broadly in line with the approved budgets.  It was worth noting that the capital spend was £232,000 due to longer than expected lead times for new vehicles but was expected to be spent in line with the budget by year end.  Throughout this year the Key Performance Indicators (KPI) set out at Appendix E to the report gave further context to the financial performance, and the recent requirement from the revised Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Prudential and Treasury Codes meant  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

To approve the Strategic Asset Management Plan 2024-2029. 

That the Strategic Asset Management Plan 2024-2029 be APPROVED. 

100.1        The report of the Head of Service: Asset Management, circulated at Pages No. 47-68, set out the updated Strategic Asset Management Plan 2024-2029.  Members were asked to approve the plan.

100.2        The Lead Member for Finance and Asset Management advised that the document outlined the approach that should be taken by the Council with regards to the proactive management of its property assets in order to maximise the return from its estate.  The current portfolio comprised a mixture of ‘operational and community assets’, such as the Roses Theatre, Tewkesbury Leisure Centre, various parks, car parks, and homeless properties; and ‘investment assets’, such as a number of retail and office units, as well as Cleeve Hill Golf Club - these were listed at Appendix 1 to the report.  The estate had a value of approximately £86m, bringing in rental income of nearly £5m during the last financial year.  As such it was key that the Council had a strategic approach to management of its property assets in order to maximise income to enhance its financial position; support its ambition to tackle the climate emergency; and help to support local communities and the development of ‘place’.  The plan outlined a number of themes: asset acquisition; a delivery framework across three key workstreams; processes linked to taking decisions about current and potential assets; and approaches to ensure successful implementation.  He very much welcomed this plan, which he believed should be viewed as a partner document to the emerging Council Plan in that, through its implementation, it clearly supported ambitions to care for and develop a sense of place; helped to implement actions that would support work to tackle the climate emergency; and, aided ambitions to manage finances effectively.  He was very grateful to Officers for developing this document across recent months, notably to the Head of Service: Asset Management and his team.  He recognised that the document had been on a journey to make it as ‘readable’ as possible for all stakeholders which he believed was a significant improvement on the previous plan.

100.3        A Member asked if Appendix 1 to the report was a complete list of assets as he was aware of some things which were not included, such as the pedestrian bridge crossing Carrant Brook at Mitton.  He noted that assets had been categorised within the document so it appeared a process had been undertaken to establish where each one stood and to identify those which were surplus to requirements so he asked how Members would debate and discuss that categorisation.  In response, the Head of Service: Asset Management advised that it had been necessary to draw a line in the sand and Appendix 1 had been discussed with the Lead Member.  The Council was taking on assets, such as those within Cooper’s Edge, some elements of which had been taken on during the drafting of the plan.  Land ownership had to be publicised on a annual basis and that would be done in March - work was being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 100.

To approve the proposed administration charges as set out at Paragraph 3.3 of the report effective from 1 May 2024 and to delegate authority to the Executive Director: Place to set the level of invalid charges annually in line with service costs. 

1.     That the proposed administration charges, as set out at Paragraph 3.3 of the report, be APPROVED effective from 1 May 2024. 

2.     That authority be delegated to the Executive Director: Place to set the level of invalid charges annually in line with service costs.

101.1        The report of the Associate Director: Planning, circulated at Pages No. 69-74, asked Members to approve the proposed administration charges as set out in Paragraph 3.3 of the report, effective from 1 May 2024, and to delegate authority to the Executive Director: Place to set the level of invalid charges annually in line with service costs.

101.2        In proposing the report recommendation, the Lead Member for Built Environment advised that it had been recognised that approximately 44% of planning applications submitted were invalid on receipt which impacted on processing timescales and added pressure to staff.  Furthermore, it imposed a cost on the Council not covered by statutory planning application fees set by the government.  As such, it was proposed to introduce a new discretionary administration charge, set at a level to cover costs of dealing with invalid planning applications which had to be returned to the applicant.  By introducing this, the Planning department aimed to improve the quality of submissions and reduce the number of invalid applications.  A benchmarking exercise had been undertaken looking at Councils which had introduced this scheme, as set out at Page No. 72, Paragraph 3.1 of the report, and a time and cost analysis had also been carried out, as set out at Page No. 73, Paragraph 3.3 of the report, which had informed the proposal. The proposed rates would be: householder and other development types - £45; minor developments - £75; and major developments - £150.  These rates would be applied to applications where a satisfactory response to the invalid letter was not received in a 28 day period in which case applications would be returned to the applicant and the invalid fee deducted from the refund.  If the Committee approved the proposal, frequent users of the service would be notified accordingly.  It was also intended to circulate a support guide highlighting common invalid reasons and how to overcome them.  This proposal was duly seconded.

101.3        A Member sought clarification as to who was being targeted and asked how many of the 44% were individual applicants; a lot of work had been done to assist applicants who applied directly and she raised concern this would be targeting those with no expertise or knowledge of how to apply - she would rather see a higher rate charged for major developments.  The Chief Executive advised that the Plan X system, which supported applicants directly, would have a much greater benefit to people who did not know the system in terms of reducing the possibility of an invalid application being submitted so measures were being put in place to support genuine people navigating their way through the system.  The Associate Director: Planning advised that the charges were based on the work involved in returning applications with the associated Officer costs and he stressed it was primarily about targeting those applications which were never made valid.  As set out at Page No. 73, Paragraph 3.4 of the report, if a satisfactory response was received to the invalid  ...  view the full minutes text for item 101.

To approve the lease of the land and facilities on the plan appended to the report to the preferred bidder and agree that the management contract be coterminous with the lease agreement, subject to an independent valuer agreeing the tender represents best value. 

1.     That lease of the land and facilities on the plan appended to the report to the preferred bidder be APPROVED.

2.     That it be AGREED that the management contract be coterminous with the lease agreement, subject to an independent valuer agreeing the tender represents best practice. 

102.1        Attention was drawn to the report of the Interim Head of Service: Asset Management, circulated at Pages No. 75-82, in relation to the lease of the playing pitches and changing facilities at Cooper’s Edge, Brockworth.  Members were asked to approve the lease of the land and facilities on the plan appended to the report to the preferred bidder and to agree that the management contract be coterminous with the lease agreement, subject to an independent valuer agreeing the tender represented best practice. 

102.2        In proposing the report recommendation, the Lead Member for Finance and Asset Management advised that the report outlined the Council’s approach to lease the recently adopted playing pitches, Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) courts, changing facilities and car parking to a local club or community group for a 25 year period.  He explained that a tender exercise has been undertaken and the contract and lease has been awarded to Barnwood United AFC.  Officers were available should Members have any detailed queries, but he felt this was a very positive proposal which would enable a local club to operate the facilities for the real benefit of its local community.  The proposal was duly seconded.

102.3        A Member asked who would be responsible for maintaining the play equipment and was informed there were no actual playing parks included in the lease but the responsibility would lie with the leaseholder to maintain the facilities and any equipment provided.  Another Member asked why Barnwood United AFC had been awarded the lease, given it was based in Gloucester City, and was advised that a tender process had been carried out, with bids being evaluated and scored, and Barnwood United AFC had been deemed the best operator for that site, mainly based on the community value and community uses of the site as well as its own sporting ambitions.  With regard to Page No. 77, Paragraph 2.2 of the report, a Member raised concern that 25 years was a long time but the figures did not account for inflation.  In response, the Interim Head of Service: Asset Management advised that the figures were to demonstrate the facility would be better operated in the community than in-house but she took this point on board.  Another Member noted that net expenditure was approximately £17,000 per year and he asked if enough money had been requested for maintenance in the Section 106 Agreement.  The Associate Director: Planning acknowledged that the Council needed to review the approach to Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to secure adequate contributions towards the infrastructure required to support developments; however, there was a limit as to what was reasonable for a developer to pay on an ongoing basis – in terms of the viability of a facility being provided in the long-term, the reality was there would be a point where the developer would say it was not their problem.  In terms of CIL, the rate set by Cheltenham Borough, Gloucester City and Tewkesbury Borough Councils was very low  ...  view the full minutes text for item 102.

To consider the Committee’s Forward Plan.  

That the Executive Committee Forward Plan be NOTED.  

103.1        Attention was drawn to the Executive Committee Forward Plan, circulated at Pages No. 83-96, which Members were asked to consider.

103.2        A Member raised concern that the revised Economic Development and Tourism Strategy had been delayed a number of times and the Overview and Scrutiny Committee was now due to consider a draft in June, which would be well into the tourist season, so he asked if there was any possibility of bringing it forward.  In response, the Executive Director: Place explained that, whilst tourism was part of the strategy, the main changes were in relation to the economic development aspect and aligning that to the Gloucestershire Economic Development Strategy.  He was happy to take away an action to update Members on the tourism element and what those recommendations would be in the eventual strategy.  A Member sought clarification as to the reason the strategy had not been updated since 2021, given the previous strategy was for 2017-2021, and the Chief Executive explained that a draft revised strategy had been prepared since he had been in post but it was felt this was inadequate in terms of a deliverable strategy and had been passed back to Officers to redo then had subsequently been delayed due to the County Council strategy.

103.3        It was

To approve the Section 106 indexation write-off.

That the write-off of DEBT109301 for £74,694.95, DEBT109302 for £44,533.22 and DEBT109303 for £39,491.73 be APPROVED. 

104.1         Attention was drawn to the report of the Associate Director: Planning, circulated at Pages No. 107-120, which asked Members to approve the write-off of DEBT109301 for £74,694.95, DEBT109302 for £44,533.22 and DEBT109303 for £39,491.73.

104.2         The Lead Member for Built Environment explained that the report recommended the write-off of bad debt associated with Section 106 agreements tied to planning application 12/01256/OUT Land at Perrybrook.  It was important to recognise that where obligations were paid over the duration of a development’s build out, or not collected in full at the commencement of development, there was a system of indexation for financial contributions to ensure the sums ultimately collected reflected inflation.  In this instance, a mistake had been made and incorrect indexation had been applied to the sums calculated; whilst payment had been made, this was not the correct amount.  The mistake was historic and had only come to light in 2022.  Since that time, attempts had been made to recover the remaining amount from the developer but it was unrealistic to take the claim for the outstanding debt any further and it was therefore recommended they be written-off as set out in the report.  Whilst this was a totally unsatisfactory situation, she felt it was one which needed to be brought to a close.

104.3         The Chair felt this was a troubling situation but one which was no reflection on existing Officers who had been able to unpick what had happened and provide assurance there were no other examples of this type of situation so he was assured that it would not happen again.  The Lead Member stressed that the Associate Director: Planning was committed to reforming the whole system and there was a workstream within the Development Management Improvement Programme specifically in relation to Section 106.  She had sympathy with the Ward Members for Brockworth and felt that lessons needed to be learnt so it did not happen again.  A Member raised concern that Brockworth had an established need for this money and she asked where that would now come from.  In response, the Executive Director: Place explained that the Section 106 process allocated funds for specific projects; there was an evidenced need for the infrastructure improvements and that would continue to be sought from any future development.  In this particular case, it was about how the sum which had already been collected could be best used to create those facilities.  The Member questioned how Officers could be sure no other errors had been made in relation to other applications and questioned where the failure lay given that Planning, Finance and One Legal would all have been involved in the process.  In response, the Chief Executive advised that his understanding of the failure was that the Officer who had recognised the mistake had failed to progress it and had instructed the Finance team not to continue to issue creditor reminders.  By the time this had become apparent, that member of staff had left the authority.  The Executive Director: Resources  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104.

The Chair will move the adoption of the following resolution:

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

105.1        The Chair 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. 

(Exempt –Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 –Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information))

To approve the write-off.

106.1        As set out at Minute No. EX.93.2 it was agreed this item be DEFERRED to the meeting on 5 June 2024 in order for the report to be published in open business with the Agenda for that meeting.

(Exempt –Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 –Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information))

To approve the grant of an easement subject to conditions.

107.1         Members approved the grant of an easement on land known as The Slinget subject to approval of location plans of all infrastructure to be sited within The Slinget; a water sampling point being located within Lincoln Green Farmhouse’s curtilage to mitigate the risk of any contaminated fluid entering The Slinget; an annual inspection of the small sewage treatment plant, with additional sampling in the first year, conducted by a professionally recognised drainage company, being commissioned by the owners of Lincoln Green Farmhouse with the results of these inspections to be reported to the Council on request and any failure of the system, or risk of contamination, to be reported to the Council immediately; and, conditions absolving the Council of any liability for the repair and maintenance to the installed pipework.