Agenda and minutes
PDF 235 KBVenue: Morecambe Town Hall
Contact: Liz Bateson, Democratic Services - telephone (01524) 582047 or email ebateson@lancaster.gov.uk
| No. | Item | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
The Chairman on behalf of Cabinet expressed her deepest sympathy at the sad passing away of Councillor Chris Leadbetter |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Minutes To receive as a correct record the minutes of Cabinet held on Tuesday, 1st September, 2015 (previously circulated). Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 1st September 2015 were approved as a correct record.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Items of Urgent Business Authorised by the Leader To consider any such items authorised by the Leader and to consider where in the agenda the item(s) are to be considered. Minutes: The Chairman advised that there were no items of urgent business.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Declarations of Interest To receive declarations by Members of interests in respect of items on this Agenda. Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Localism Act 2011, they are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which have not already been declared in the Council’s Register of Interests. (It is a criminal offence not to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest either in the Register or at the meeting). Whilst not a legal requirement, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10 and in the interests of clarity and transparency, Members should declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which they have already declared in the Register, at this point in the meeting. In accordance with Part B Section 2 of the Code Of Conduct, Members are required to declare the existence and nature of any other interests as defined in paragraphs 8(1) or 9(2) of the Code of Conduct.
Minutes: No declarations were made at this point.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Public Speaking To consider any such requests received in accordance with the approved procedure.
Minutes: Members were advised that there had been no requests to speak at the meeting in accordance with Cabinet’s agreed procedure.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cable Street Lease Termination – Relocation of Council Housing Offices (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Bryning)
Joint Report of Chief Officer (Resources) & Chief Officer (Health & Housing) Minutes: (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Bryning)
Cabinet received a joint report from the Chief Officer (Resources) and Chief Officer (Health & Housing) to advise members of the relocation of Council Housing Services away from Cable Street into Lancaster Town Hall, given the forthcoming early termination of the lease, and as part of the rationalisation of accommodation to deliver efficiencies.
No options were presented for Cabinet’s consideration; this report was for information only. Officers had accepted terms for the termination of the lease under delegated powers, on the basis that there was no case for not doing so. Furthermore, as there was sufficient space within Lancaster Town Hall to accommodate staff and services, no alternative options were presented in that regard.
Councillor Bryning proposed, seconded by Councillor Leytham:-
“That the recommendation, as set out in the report, be approved.”
Councillors then voted:-
Resolved unanimously:
(1) That the arrangements for relocating Council Housing Services currently provided from Cable Street, Lancaster, into Lancaster Town Hall, in view of the early termination of the lease be noted.
Officers responsible for effecting the decision:
Chief Officer (Resources) Chief Officer (Health & Housing)
Reasons for making the decision:
The decision is consistent with current corporate aims regarding property rationalisation and securing value for money. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Storey - Tasting Garden (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)
Report of Chief Officer (Environment) Minutes: (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)
Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Environment) which sought a decision on the future of the Tasting Garden.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
OPTION 1- Consider that restoration of the artwork is a priority for the Council and that in its role as a steward the Council should properly lead on it.
In order to arrive at this option Cabinet would need to consider the following-
· What actual evidence is there that this is generally what our citizens want? · How would the restoration be funded? If the Council was to allocate resources for the Garden, in effect they would need to be redirected from another initiative or activity. Realistically, the Council does not have the resources to directly fund restoration and if so, external funds would need to be raised. We have been told that there are likely to be funds available out there. Experience tells us that obtaining external funding is a complicated and time consuming exercise and match funding may well be required. · How would the project be resourced? As stated above just raising the funds is likely to be time consuming and complicated. Due to the need to prioritise and focus on core activities the Council does not currently have available officer time or expertise that could be allocated to this, if such a route was chosen. Therefore, in theory Cabinet would need to consider this as an area for growth. In practice budget reductions from central government mean that ‘growth’ is not an option that can be realistically considered, so Cabinet would have to consider redirection of resource. · How would the restored project be maintained? The ongoing maintenance of the artwork would be intensive and would again require ongoing growth – this need is a very real difficulty given the financial outlook and the same point referred to above would apply. · Even if external funds are available obtaining them could take a number of years, depending on the route chosen, and in any event the timescales would not fit with the review of the Storey operation, required by 2017/18. What does the Council do with the garden in the interim and how will that support the Storey business plan? What about the future? What would need to change?
OPTION 2- Consider that restoration of the artwork is a priority for the Council, but only on the firm basis that it was resource- and risk- free for the authority, and so could only take place if full responsibility could be transferred, in some way, to a third party.
There are some examples of this type of model that work well within the District (e.g. Fairfield). Typically land is leased to a community group for a specific purpose, with strict stipulations. However, the examples we have are ones where the risks are much less than this and the projects are of much lower profile. ... view the full minutes text for item 37. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Voluntary, Community and Faith Sector - Future Commissioning Arrangements (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Pattison)
Report of Chief Officer (Governance) Minutes: (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Pattison)
Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Governance) to outline options with regard to the future provision of support to the Voluntary, Community and Faith Sector beyond current commissioning contracts which expire in March 2016.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Canal Corridor North Development (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)
Report of Chief Executive (Report to follow) Additional documents:
Minutes: (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)
Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning) to update Cabinet on the latest position with regard to legal advice on the options available to the Council under the Canal Corridor North Development Agreement.
The Leader advised the meeting that Group Leaders had been briefed with regard to the confidential legal advice provided by Eversheds. It was anticipated that updated advice from White Young Green on the need for further retail capacity in Lancaster District in the post-recession economic climate would be available in late December.
Councillor Blamire proposed, seconded by Councillor Hanson:-
“That the Canal Corridor North Development Agreement with British Land has reached the stage where it should be reviewed. It is proposed that the range of options available and the implications for each one be reported to the December meeting of Full Council. The Canal Corridor North site is if strategic importance to the District and decisions about its future need careful consideration.”
Councillors then voted:-
Resolved unanimously:
(1) That the Canal Corridor North Development Agreement with British Land has reached the stage where it should be reviewed. It is proposed that the range of options available and the implications for each one be reported to the December meeting of Full Council. The Canal Corridor North site is of strategic importance to the District and decisions about its future need careful consideration.
Officers responsible for effecting the decision:
Chief Executive Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning)
Reasons for making the decision:
The Canal Corridor Development has been pursued as a regeneration priority by the City Council since 2004 and remains a key project in the Local Development Framework, supported by the Corporate Plan priority for economic growth. The decision enables full Council to decide on the most appropriate way forward to secure a viable regeneration of the site.
|