Agenda and minutes

To receive as a correct record the minutes of Cabinet held on Tuesday 6 September, 2011 (previously circulated). 

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 6 September 2011 were approved as a correct record.

To consider any such items authorised by the Leader and to consider where in the agenda the item(s) are to be considered. 

The Chairman advised that there was one item of urgent business. This was an item regarding Climate Change Invest to Save Projects (Minute 45 refers).

To consider any such declarations. 

Councillor Hanson declared a personal interest with regard to the Festivals and Events Report, in view of its reference to and her being a member of Morecambe Town Council (Minute 47 refers).

To consider any such requests received in accordance with the approved procedure. 

Members were advised that there had been no requests to speak at the meeting in accordance with Cabinet’s agreed procedure.

The Chairman advised the meeting of a revision to the order of the agenda and Item 11, West End Local Centre Parking would be considered first.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Report of Head of Regeneration and Policy

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Regeneration and Policy to enable Members to consider the need for additional parking provision in the West End to serve the local centre’s retail businesses and the potential re-use of the former Parliament Street play area for car parking.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)

In accordance with Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the Chairman agreed to consider the report as an item of urgent business as a decision was required prior to November’s Cabinet meeting.

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Community Engagement to seek approval to the proposals set out in the report with regard to Climate Change Invest to Save Projects.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

Risks:  The Council has no expertise in solar technology. Whilst it is mainstream activity in many other authorities the Council would need to rely on independent expertise in this first phase.  It may be that it would not prove possible to invest the whole amount by 31 March 2012.

Option 3 was the officer preferred option.

Councillor Hamilton-Cox proposed, seconded by Councillor Hanson:-

“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”

Councillors then voted:-

Resolved unanimously:

(1)        That Cabinet approves the allocation of £750,000 from the General Fund’s Invest to Save Reserve to install solar photo voltaic (PV) panels on the Council’s municipal buildings.

(2)        That Cabinet approves the allocation of £1M of from the Housing Revenue Account’s Major Repairs Reserve to install solar photo voltaic (PV) panels on council housing communal buildings.

(3)        That a further report is brought back to Cabinet on developing the Councils wider approach to the use of renewable energy.

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

Head of Community Engagement

Head of Financial Services

Reasons for making the decision:

The decision supports the Economic priority in respect of ‘Energy Coast’ and Climate Change and the redefined priority around climate change: ‘prioritising reducing the council’s energy costs and increasing income’ as the focus of the City Council’s objective to ‘tackle the challenges of climate change.’   The new financial incentives for renewable energy generation can provide income streams over the long term and other significant opportunities.  In addition to the obvious benefits (free energy, cost savings and income generation) there are potentially wider benefits from our local communities, greater energy security, CO2 emissions reductions and a potential boost to the local economy).

Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Smith)

Report of the Head of Environmental Services

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Smith)

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Environmental Services which provided members with a number of proposals as to how some aspects of the District’s public realm could be best maintained.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

The outline report was provided to allow Cabinet to consider at an early stage what options existed with regard to maintaining the public realm. Cabinet were requested to consider each of the proposals and if required add further. This would provide officers with the direction required to develop the relevant parts of the corporate plan, for later consideration by Members.

For the purpose of the report ‘the public realm’ was defined as any publicly owned streets, pathways, parks, publicly accessible open spaces. The main activities that had an impact on the public realm for the purposes of this report were-

·         Street cleansing

·         Grounds maintenance

·         Planning

·         Street nameplate management

Street Cleansing / Grounds maintenance- Following an earlier organisational restructure and comprehensive review of service provision these two functional areas were delivered through the same line management structure. This merging of the functions had resulted in improved efficiency and had led to higher standards of service delivery.

Currently a situation existed in Williamson Park where some cleansing and grounds maintenance functions were provided directly by Environmental Services and some by Williamson Park staff. Greater efficiencies could potentially be generated through reviewing how maintenance in the park could be best delivered.

Working with other Partners- The overall appearance and perception of the public realm could clearly be improved by working closely with other partners.  The County Council has a huge impact on the management and maintenance of the District’s public realm and intend to use the proposed 3 Tier Forum as the main way of consulting with stakeholders and thus developing the commissioning plan.  From a City Council perspective feeding into the development of this plan provides a real opportunity to put forward public realm priorities within the District.

The Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee has been requested to consider the opportunities the commissioning approach provides and make recommendations to Cabinet in the future.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Sands)

Report of the Head of Community Engagement

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility CouncillorSands)

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Community Engagement to update members on the 2011 festivals and events programme, update on the income achieved and seek approval of plans for 2012.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

There was no Officer preferred option.

Councillor Sands proposed, seconded by Councillor Leytham:-

“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”

Resolved unanimously:

(1)        That Cabinet notes the update on the 2011 events programme.

(2)        That Cabinet agrees the revenue budget be updated to reflect the additional income and expenditure for the 2011 festivals and events programme.

(3)        Cabinet approves the planned approach for 2012 and 2013, unless the Council’s financial position and changing priorities warrants a review for the 2013/14 budget, and further agrees that the revenue budget be updated to reflect any additional income received to support the festivals and events in those years, to supplement the Council’s investment in the programme, rather than taking any savings.

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

Head of Community Engagement

Head of Financial Services

Reasons for making the decision:

The decision supports the Corporate Plan priorities relating to Economic Regeneration – Visitor Economy and Partnership Working and Community Leadership.  Festivals and events have a direct impact, attracting more visitors to a destination, raising the profile of a place, creating a sense of wellbeing, providing a platform to raise awareness and communicate positive  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

(Cabinet Members with Special Responsibility Councillors Hanson and Leytham)

Joint Report of the Head of Regeneration & Policy and Head of Health and Housing

(Cabinet Members with Special Responsibility Councillors Hanson and Leytham)

Cabinet received a joint report from the Head of Regeneration and Policy and the Head of Health and Housing which sought approval for the preferred direction for strategic housing and regeneration priorities in light of the current financial climate, existing housing regeneration commitments and the introduction of self financing for council housing.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

The council potentially had two main options to consider in the current circumstances, although should new funding become available in the future it could revise its options. 

Option 1: To do nothing and rely on the private sector to engage in housing supply. As a result to dispose of the properties already bought (within Chatsworth Gardens and Bold Street/Marlborough Road) and undertake no regeneration. 

This option would mean that the council would seek to minimise its risk by avoiding engaging in further regeneration work.  It has acquired 56 properties using external funding and would seek to dispose of them on the open market to remove liabilities amounting to just over £100,000 per annum which arise from securing and maintaining the properties.  It would be highly unlikely that any element of profits from sales would be achieved, and more likely that sales would result in a notional financial loss. The only level of affordable housing provision the council would then influence would be through restrictions on planning decisions requiring private sector provision.

Advantages:  Removal of liabilities from continuing to own the properties, and avoiding the need to spend further monies to undertake refurbishment as part of a regeneration programme. 

Disadvantages:  The council would not be engaging in housing regeneration.  It would be placing a further burden on the local housing stock by adding a significant number of unfit properties onto the market and it would fail to add value to the money already spent by public funding to make greater use of the existing housing stock to provide good quality new homes.

Option 2:  To work up a means of engaging in housing provision targeted towards affordable housing using a variety of methods.

This will consist of  a variety of means including: a) allocating land in the Local Development Framework and securing contributions from Section 106 agreements and eventually through Community Infrastructure levy, b) opportunities arising from the self financed Housing Revenue Account coming into effect from April 2012, c) examining options for the completion of outstanding housing regeneration projects at Chatsworth Gardens and Marlborough Road/ Bold Street and d) the provision of the Lend a Hand mortgage support scheme.  If as indicative figures show, the HRA business plan can viably support and contribute to the regeneration and provision of additional council homes, it may also be worth considering it as an alternative solution to finance the refurbishment of the empty properties in current regeneration schemes, bringing other empty properties back into use, and to construct  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Report of the Head of Regeneration and Policy

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Regeneration and Policy which proposed a further initiative to improve main streets and spaces in and around Morecambe’s established centre as part of work to support delivery of the emerging Morecambe Area Action Plan.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

Option 1 – To rely on the private sector for any investment to improve New Town Square and Euston Road in line with the emerging Morecambe Area Action Plan.

This option would mean that the council would not take a lead in effecting improvements in with and to support delivery of the emerging Morecambe Area Action Plan.It would mean not undertaking outline design work and preparing budget estimates and not seeking to bring forward considered proposals via appropriate community engagement. It would not necessarily mean that nothing happens but the council would be entirely reliant on the private sector to achieve improvements. Recent history evidences relatively low levels of private sector investment in Morecambe centre but the recent Travellodge development shows that it can be instrumental in effecting improvements to public realm. In addition the option would still permit the council to directly bring forward improvements to public realm as possible as part of “A View for Eric”, the second Morecambe Townscape Heritage Initiative (THI) 2. These must be within the area of the THI and will likely be focused on Victoria Street and Market Street.

The advantages are that the option will lead to no additional demands on the General Capital Fund and reliance on the private sector to fund extra investment and improvements is in principle appropriate in circumstances where the public sector cannot afford to commit resources.

The disadvantages are that given national and local economic circumstances and that Morecambe evidences generally limited levels of private sector investment no assurance can be given that New Town Square and Euston Road can be improved within any timescale.

The risks are that without a delivery lead from the council the private sector will not fill the gap and improvements cannot be achieved within at least the short to medium term meaning the town centre is not positioned well and competitively for the future. In this event this option would not support the trajectory of the emerging Morecambe Area Action Plan.

Option 2 – The Head of Regeneration and Policy work up outline proposals and cost estimates to improve New Town Square and Euston Road and, as part of preparing its budget recommendations, Cabinet uses these as a basis to consider whether appropriate budget provision be included in its draft General Fund Capital Programme for 2012/13.

This option would mean the council takes a lead to vision what improvements may be possible. At minimum it would make for preparation of outline proposals that should fit to the emerging Morecambe Area Action Plan and might set a template for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Report of the Head of Regeneration and Policy

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Regeneration and Policy to update on this initiative and to propose how the Council might continue to support implementation including making available additional resources via a capital growth proposal in the forthcoming budget.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

In the context of previous decisions by Cabinet authorising the Lancaster Square Routes initiative the report set out options for continuing delivery of the programme of work required.

Option 1 -  As per the established project priority for Lancaster Square Routes to reserve the balance of funding likely remaining in the investment fund after Market Square phase 1 towards a second phase of work in Market Square and in addition, in preparing its General Capital Fund budget proposals for 2012/13,  Cabinet to consider recommending an additional £220k contribution to the Fund.

This option has the advantages of positioning the council to undertake a second phase of works to Market Square if it wishes to achieve the Square Routes design vision and also does not preclude the council securing further private contributions to Lancaster Square Routes and actually might assist this by adding further credibility as to delivery.

The main disadvantages are that the balance of funding likely to be remaining in the investment fund after completing a first phase of works to Market Square is of itself insufficient to fund a worthwhile second phase and insufficient to complete works to the Square. Also that this option does not position the council to be able to enhance the specification of highway works to Penny Street and Horseshoe Corner in a way consistent with the Square Routes design visions.

The option presents no real risks.

Option 2- After completing the first phase of works to Market Square, reserving the balance of council funding likely remaining in the Investment Fund for Lancaster Square Routes fund to enhance the specification of any highway works to Penny Street and Horseshoe Corner and, in preparing its General Capital Fund budget proposals for 2012/13, Cabinet considers including an additional contribution estimated at £300k to the fund in order to facilitate  a second phase of works to Market Square.

This option has the advantages of both positioning the council to undertake a second phase of works to Market Square to achieve the Square Routes and permitting  the council to take an opportunity to secure improvements to Penny Street and Horseshoe Corner consistent with the design visions for Lancaster Square Routes. Further, it both does not preclude the council securing further private contributions to Lancaster Square Routes and actually might assist this by adding further credibility as to delivery.

The only disadvantage is that reserving the balance of approved funding for Penny Street / Horseshoe Corner means that should Cabinet wish to recommend to council as part of the budget process that it should allocate additional funding to undertake a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Blamire)

Report of the Chief Executive  (Appendix to follow)

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Blamire)

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Executive to report on the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between the City Council and Lancashire County Council setting out the intention to work together in partnership with OneConnect Limited, the strategic partnership established between Lancashire County Council and BT.

Cabinet were requested to note the progress being made in respect of service areas identified in the Memorandum of Understanding and to receive reports back as appropriate to meet any decision-making deadlines and to ensure that any service improvements and efficiencies were considered as part of the budget exercise.

Councillor Leytham proposed, seconded by Councillor Hanson:-

“That the recommendation, as set out in the report, be approved.”

Resolved unanimously:

(1)        That Cabinet notes the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between the City Council and Lancashire County Council as a commitment between the two Authorities to work towards a partnership to deliver the shared services as identified in the Memorandum of Understanding

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

Chief Executive

Reasons for making the decision:

The efficiencies delivered from developing a shared service programme will greatly assist in achieving the outcomes of the council’s savings and efficiency programme and targets included in the Medium Term Financial Strategy.  The decision also supports the council’s Corporate Plan priorities for working closely with other partner organisations to deliver improved benefits for the Lancaster district community.

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility)

Report of the Chief Executive

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Blamire)

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Executive to establish a Shared Services Cabinet Liaison Group with appropriate terms of reference as requested by Cabinet at its meeting on 26 July 2011.

Councillor Blamire proposed, seconded by Councillor Leytham:-

“That rather than establishing a Cabinet Liaison Group, arrangements be made for a Council Briefing Meeting on Shared Services and that all members be invited to this evening briefing.“

Councillors then voted:-

Resolved unanimously:

(1)        Not to establish a Shared Services Cabinet Liaison Group.

(2)        That arrangements be made for a Council Briefing Meeting on Shared Services and that all members be invited to this evening briefing.

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

Chief Executive

Head of Governance

Reasons for making the decision:

The decision will enable all members to get more involved in the details in respect of delivering the Council’s Shared Services Programme.  The efficiencies delivered from developing a shared service programme will greatly assist in achieving the outcomes of the council’s savings and efficiency programme and targets included in the Medium Term Financial Strategy.