Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Municipal Offices

Contact: Rosalind Reeves, Democratic Services Manager 

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies

Minutes:

Apologies had been received from Councillor Andrew Lansley, Councillor David Prince and Councillor Max Wilkinson and Councillor Klara Sudbury had indicated she would be arriving late and subsequently arrived at 3:30 p.m.

 

2.

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

Councillor Smith declared an interest in agenda item 10 as a board member of Cheltenham Borough Homes and announced his intention to leave the chamber for that item.

 

As members had indicated to him that they wished to discuss the exempt information circulated for agenda item 10, he advised that he would take that item as agenda item 16 in exempt session and the deputy Mayor would take the chair.

 

Councillors Chard and Regan declared an interest in agenda item 15 as members of Leckhampton and Warden Hill Parish council. Councillor Nelson also declared an interest in this item.

3.

Minutes of the last meeting pdf icon PDF 136 KB

Minutes of the meeting held on 22 June 2015

Minutes:

The minutes of the last meeting held on 22 June 2015 were signed and approved as a correct record.

 

4.

Communications by the Mayor

Minutes:

The Mayor announced the sad news of the death of Pat Freeman, the wife of the late Les Freeman and an ex Mayoress of the borough and their thoughts were with their family.

 

He advised that John Rees the manager of parks and gardens was retiring from Ubico and a collection and retirement card was circulating.

 

The Mayor updated members on his recent Mayoral engagements.

 

He advised that the Mayor’s PA had not heard back from many members on whether they would be attending the VJ day on Saturday 15 August and asked members to confirm their attendance or otherwise. As a general point he urged members to respond promptly to any such invitations from his PA as otherwise this made it very difficult to finalise arrangements for any event. The next event was Battle of Britain on 20 September.

5.

Communications by the Leader of the Council

Minutes:

The Leader advised that Councillor Clucas would be stepping down from Planning Committee and would now be a reserve and similarly Councillor Wheeler, currently a reserve on the committee, would become a full member.

 

He advised that the local plan consultation was ongoing and a consultation on the options for the cemetery and crematorium was now online and in the reception area.

 

Leadership Gloucestershire had announced their intention to put a bid to central government regarding devolution. At this stage this would take the form of an expression of interest. The original intention had been that this would be a simple letter but this had now been extended to a 15 page brochure, a draft of which had been circulated to members for comment before the meeting. The aim of the motion to be debated later in the meeting was to gauge members support for devolution and to get comments on the document circulated.

6.

Public Questions pdf icon PDF 53 KB

These must be received no later than 12 noon on the fourth working day before the date of the meeting

Minutes:

1.

Question from Peter Sayers to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Steve Jordan

 

 Why, in the rules pertaining to the calling of an Extraordinary Meeting

2015_07_02_CWG_Appendix_5_Committee_Rules , item 11.  PDF 52 KB (https://democracy.cheltenham.gov.uk/documents/s16083/2015_07_02_CWG_Appendix_5_Committee_Rules.pdf) are the following not enshrined: the time when information is made available; the methods by which it made public; the time period for consideration; the deadline for responses; a statutory obligation to respond to such comments/questions etc.. ? It may be that there is a document somewhere that covers all this. My question is why is this document not referred to in these rules?

 

 

Response from Cabinet Member

 

The Council’s Constitution covers the processes for public engagement in decision making by the Authority and the constituent parts of the Constitution should be read together. The Appendix 5 referred to in the question includes the rules for the order of business for an Extraordinary Meeting and these should be read in conjunction with the Access to Information Rules. Rule 5 of those Rules sets out when and how agendas and reports will be made available.

 

The rules for dealing with public and member questions for an Extraordinary Meeting are set out in Council and Committee Procedure Rules. Rules 2.13 (c) and 5.3 (c) state that the questions must relate to the nature of the business for which the Meeting was convened. Responses to any public/member questions will be made available on the day of the meeting and responses will be given at the Meeting with the option to ask a supplementary question if present at the Meeting.

 

The Authority may undertake specific public consultation before a report is brought to Council, Cabinet or Committee and the nature of the consultation and the results will be detailed in that report. In some cases the Authority has a statutory duty to consult on certain matters and more details about these and any other consultations can be found on the council’s website: Consultations - Cheltenham Borough Council.

 

In a supplementary question, Mr Sayers considered he had asked a very simple question and had expected a simple yes or no answer.  He asked again whether there was a document which makes it clear that there are certain rules of procedure to be followed for an Extraordinary Meeting.

 

The Leader advised that in his response he had directed the questionner to the appropriate part of the Constitution which answered his question. The Constitution was available online on the council's website and Democratic Services would be available to give guidance to any member of the public who contacted them.

 

2.

Question from Peter Sayers to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Steve Jordan

 

 Are there other documents that refer to members or citizen communication and response requests that also do not refer to a central document? If so, what is being done to ensure consistency?

 

 

Response from Cabinet Member

 

In addition to the Constitutional provisions referenced in the response to Question 1, the Authority is committed to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Member Questions pdf icon PDF 56 KB

Minutes:

1.

Question from Councillor Tim Harman to Cabinet Member Finance, Councillor John Rawson

 

During the debate on the Council’s budget earlier this year the cabinet member agreed to look at the issues raised by my group in relation to the employment of additional apprentices and the need to enhance enforcement in the fields of planning and Public Safety. Can he please update the Council on progress?

 

Response from Cabinet Member

 

In respect of apprenticeships, the Council has been employing apprentices for 6 years. We currently employ 7 apprentices in CBC and our partner organisations working in Democratic Services, GOSS and Ubico.

 

In line with the People & Organisational Deverlopment strategy, managers are encouraged to consider apprenticeships as part of a process of sucession planning and talent management.

 

Since the budget meeting, GOSS have prepared guidance to be issued to managers to reinvigorate the use of apprenticeships across the Council.Managers will be asked to identify if there are any administration or customer service elements in the professional roles that could be undertaken by an apprentice. Ubico and GOSS are currently actively looking to make appointments.

 

In respect of regulatory and enforcement work, the REST programme is designed among its other objectives to create a more seamless, efficient and joined-up enforcement service for the Council. Systems Thinking is being used to reshape the way the service is provided and a number of reforms identified by this process are now being trialled, under the supervision of a member working group. The increased use of technology to increase the efficiency and mobility of staff is also part of a process of making better use of the resources we have. 

 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Harman asked the Cabinet Member whether he would agree to taking back these important issues to Cabinet so members could have a full report on both apprentices and enforcement resources. He had raised this at the budget meeting in February and the response appeared to be an obviscation of responsibilities.

 

In response the Cabinet Member reminded members that the recommendations in the budget had been supported by members across the chamber.  Considerable progress had been made in the resources now available and it was certainly not a case of obviscation. The issues would be looked at again as part of the budget process for the coming financial year which had already started.

 

2.

Question from Councillor Louis Savage to Cabinet Member Finance, Councillor John Rawson

 

Flying the Union flag allows the Council to show its support for patriotism, civic pride and community cohesion. It also provides the opportunity to officially recognise worthy causes, recently demonstrated by flying the Armed Forces Day flag. Can members be assured that this important aspect of our town's civic tradition will continue in our new premises?

 

Response from Cabinet Member

 

I do not believe that Delta Place has a flagpole but it would be well within the Council's capabilities to erect one in time for the relocation of the council offices.  

I would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

Restructure of Environmental and Regulatory Services Division pdf icon PDF 391 KB

Report of the Chief Executive

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chief Executive introduced the report and explained that the REST (Regulatory and Environmental Services Transformation) project envisaged that a restructuring of the Environmental and Regulatory Services Division would be necessary to achieve its aims of providing more of a customer focus, drive efficiency and create a more commercial focus to drive economic development in the town. Many elements of the restructuring were within the authority delegated to the Chief Executive (as Head of Paid Service), but where director level posts were affected by any proposed changes, the authority to approve these rested with the Appointments and Remuneration Committee. The Chief Executive went on to report that the Committee had now endorsed the Chief Executive’s proposals for a new divisional triumvirate structure and Council approval was now requested to approve the structure proposals and agree their financing in view of the fact that the intended structure was initially more expensive than the current one. However he explained that the intention was that any additional cost in 2015/16 and 2016/17 would be funded from other budgets and in subsequent years the aim would be to recoup any additional costs by organisational changes elsewhere in the division as a Phase 2 restructure. The proposal was therefore for one off investment over two financial years with no overall increase in ongoing revenue costs; the objective being to create senior capacity to achieve better, more focussed and more efficient services in the longer term. The Chief Executive explained that the Budget Scrutiny Working Group had also considered the proposals and added value to the report which had changed considerably as a result. It was proposed that BSWG continue to be involved in a monitoring role.

 

The Chief Executive explained that the current structure of the division was not fit for purpose with the existing Director having nine direct reports. The REST programme was based on continued direct council provision of services commissioned against clear outcomes with customer focus, efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery and financial savings achieved through a systems thinking approach. The other key influence on the proposal was the urgent need to create senior level capacity to improve Cheltenham’s economic performance in the light of the Athey Consulting report. It emphasised the need for collaboration with Cheltenham Development Task Force, GFirst LEP, government agencies and local businesses.  He highlighted that Government policy continued to promote economic growth and reward local authorities who were successful in this objective through the business rates retention scheme and via New Homes Bonus. The Chief Executive emphasised that REST was crucial to shaping the council response to the need for economic growth in that it embraced the land use and infrastructure planning functions which were crucial to unlocking growth potential by facilitating the growth in existing business.

 

In terms of the financial implications of the proposals the Chief Executive reiterated that the cost arising from the structure would for a full year be approx. £157k. The full cost would not fall on this current financial year  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Financial Outturn 2014/15 and Budget Monitoring to June 2015 pdf icon PDF 124 KB

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Cabinet Member Finance introduced the report which highlighted the Council’s financial performance for the previous year which set out the General Fund and Housing Revenue Account (HRA) revenue and capital outturn position for 2014/15. The information contained within the report had been used to prepare the Council’s Statement of Accounts for 2014/15.

 

The Cabinet Member said that 2014/15 had been a particularly difficult year for balancing the books. In January 2015 it had been forecast that there would have been a possible overspend of £178,000.  There were at that time particular concerns regarding shortfalls in parking income and crematorium income, although both these items had recovered. He reported however, that another problem had hit the council completely from left field and this related to the impact on the Gloucestershire business rates pool of a successful major re-evaluation appeal by Virgin Media in Tewkesbury Borough. This has led to a far bigger reduction in rateable value than was expected.  He explained that this had hit Tewkesbury the worst but because all the councils in the Pool share the risk, it has left the Pool in deficit and the council has had to contribute £285,000 as its share of the deficit. The Cabinet Member stressed however that he did not believe that this problem outweighed the benefit of being in the business rates pool. That said councils across the country were being hit by valuation appeals and the LGA were pressing Government to provide them with a degree of protection of sudden losses against valuation appeals.

 

The Cabinet Member reported that despite the business rates problem the council finished the financial year within budget, with a very small underspend of just over £9,000. He paid tribute to the very good financial management within the council by officers. He said that across the authority officers and its partner organisations worked hard to find savings, cut costs and generate income wherever they could. He welcomed the fact that Ubico had delivered an overall net surplus of £370,000 for the Council.

 

The Cabinet Member then went on to explain that as always a certain amount of revenue expenditure had been carried forward subject to Council approval. This included £23 000 to commission a new tourism and marketing strategy for the town, £40,000 to the planning appeals reserve and £40 000 for costs related to the JCS which would be matched by Tewkesbury and Gloucester councils.

 

The Cabinet Member also referred to major proposals in the report regarding accelerating capital investment in ICT.  It involved reshaping the existing five-year ICT investment programme, switching some expenditure within the ICT capital budget, bringing some investment forward into 2015 to 2016, and adding a further allocation from unapplied capital resources.  He explained that the effect of this accelerated investment would be to make CBS’s ICT fully fit for purpose and aligned with other councils in the 2020 Vision programme. It would give the council among other things better data recovery in the event of a disaster, better storage  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Constitution pdf icon PDF 86 KB

i) Report of the Constitution Working Group to be presented by the chair Councillor Colin Hay regarding revisions to the Constitution in relation to new regulations.

 

ii) Report of the Standards Committee to be presented by the chair Councillor Fisher regarding a revised Planning Code.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The chair of the Constitution Working Group, Councillor Colin Hay, introduced the review of the Constitution report which detailed the recent work of the group and set out their recommendations.

Councillor Harman welcomed the recommendations on behalf of his group and suggested that consideration should be given to combining the Annual Council meeting with the inauguration of the Mayor ceremony, although he acknowledged that Annual Council was combined with Selection Council in election years. Councillor Hay suggested it was a matter for Group Leaders to discuss.

 

A member asked about the cost of drafting the social media protocol. In response Councillor Hay advised members that there were a number of councillors in other councils who had had to resign because of their inappropriate use of social media and therefore he considered it perfectly reasonable for this council to invest a limited amount of time to produce some short guidance for its members.

 

Upon a unanimous vote it was

RESOLVED THAT

1.    The following be approved

Access to Information Rules – Appendix 2

Employment Rules – Appendix 3

Rule 2.13 Council Procedure Rules – Appendix 4

Rules 5.3 and 15.3 Committee Procedure Rules and Overview   & Scrutiny Rules – Appendix 5

2.    The two independent persons on Standards Committee be appointed to the Disciplinary Committee for such term as is necessary for the purpose of making recommendations to Council on disciplinary action against a statutory officer and, in the event of one or both of those persons not being available, to authorise Disciplinary Committee to appoint for the same term and purpose an independent person or persons from another local authority’s Standards Committee

3.    The Committee Procedure Rule 3 (Substitute Members) be amended as proposed in paragraph 5 of this report

4.    The miscellaneous changes set out in Appendix 6 be approved

5.    The inclusion as appendices to the Constitution of the documents in Appendix 7-9 be agreed

6.    Authority be delegated to the Borough Solicitor to make any textual or other amendments which are necessary to ensure accuracy, consistency and legality of the Constitution when incorporating the revisions authorised by Council.

 

The chair of the Standards Committee, Councillor Fisher, introduced the report on the Planning Code of Conduct. The report explained that the Planning Code of Conduct which was adopted by the Council in October 2006 had been reviewed and amended by a Working Group of Members and approved by the Standards Committee for adoption by the Council.   The draft revised Planning Code of Conduct reflected changes to legislation, the Code of Members’ Conduct and best practice which had taken place since 2006.  The Council was asked to adopt the revised Planning Code of Conduct for inclusion as Part 5D of the Constitution.   

 

A member asked for an explanation of the apparent anomaly that a member of the Planning Committee could declare an interest in an item and be required to leave the room once public speaking had been completed but a ward member who was not a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

11.

Annual Performance Report pdf icon PDF 161 KB

Report of the Cabinet Member Corporate Services

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chief Executive indicated that a number of members had questioned why this document was coming to Council as it had already been discussed at a meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee and subsequently endorsed by Cabinet at its meeting on 14 July 2015. He explained that previously the annual performance report had been a regular item for the Cabinet and the Council agenda but it had been acknowledged that Council would have little to add given that it had been through the scrutiny process. This year the item had been recorded on the forward plan for both Cabinet and Council and this had not been picked up when the forward plan had been published or when the draft agenda for Council had been circulated. As the item had been included on the published agenda, it had been necessary to include it for debate today.

 

The Cabinet Member Corporate Services introduced the performance report for the end of the financial year 2014-15.  He explained that the covering report summarised how the council had performed in regard to milestones and measures set out in the 2014-15 action plan.  84 milestones had been identified in the 2014-15 action plan and of these 67 (80%) were complete.  The 2014-15 action plan identified 59 key indicators which were used to track progress; of which the council was directly accountable for 42 and 7 of which were community-based indicators, where no targets had been set.  Of the 42 CBC indicators, 11 targets had been missed. 

 

Overall he considered the report represented a commendable level of achievement in difficult financial circumstances. He highlighted that the figures in the report represented the position as at the end of March 2015 and he invited the Strategy and Engagement Manager to update members on the position as at the end of June 2015.

 

The Strategy and Engagement Manager, Richard Gibson, updated members on the latest situation with regard to the Red and Amber milestones and the Red Indicators.  This indicated a good progress was being made on all these milestones. In particular he referred to the car parking strategy, the production of which was included in this year's corporate strategy and it would be reported to Cabinet in March 2016. He also updated members on a recent clear out week where staff had attempted to reduce the documentation held by their service area. Progress would continue to be monitored by the information management group.

 

A member asked about the reference to document management and why this was relevant to the move to Delta House when this could be at least eight years away. Was it 8 years or 3 years?

 

In response the Chief Executive said that the organisation currently had lots of paper and although retention strategies were in place, there was a real need to start managing the organisations paper storage. The ultimate aim was not to move lots of paper when the council occupies its new offices but this would take some time to achieve.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

12.

Notices of Motion

Proposed by Councillor Steve Jordan

 

Seconded by Councillor Bernie Fisher :

 

This Council:-

·         believes that decisions taken locally are likely to be better informed than those taken centrally and so welcomes discussion with government about further devolved powers.

·         believes that funding must follow any devolved powers giving the opportunity to redesign services locally to make them more efficient and effective for local people.

·         any process of devolution must also involve discussion on how decisions already taken within Gloucestershire can be made more effective (eg road schemes in Cheltenham).

·         endorses the letter to be sent to the Secretary of State of behalf of Leadership Gloucestershire.     

 

Minutes:

The Leader proposed the following motion which was seconded by Councillor Fisher.

 

This Council:-

  • believes that decisions taken locally are likely to be better informed than those taken centrally and so welcomes discussion with government about further  devolved powers
  • believes that funding must follow any devolved powers giving the opportunity to redesign services locally to make them more efficient and effective for local people
  • any process of devolution must also involve discussion on how decisions already taken within Gloucestershire can be made more effective (e.g. road schemes in Cheltenham)
  • recognises the important role of District and Parish Councils in democratic government and the immediate recourse that Parish and District Councils give to citizens
  • comments on the draft document to be sent to the Secretary of State on behalf of Leadership Gloucestershire.

 

In proposing the motion, the Leader said this was an opportunity for the council to debate devolution and on balance he believed that decisions taken locally would achieve better results for local people.

 

Councillor Harman, as leader of the Conservative group, indicated their support for the expression of interest although he personally favoured a unitary approach. He welcomed the reference to Parish Councils and the potential opportunity to review responsibilities for issues such as road schemes and car parking.

 

A member referred to the recent members’ seminar where a target date of the end of July had been given for submission of an expression of interest and asked whether this bid was too late.

 

Other members felt it was important that once the letter of interest had been sent, all members participated fully in the debates that would need to follow in what would be a major political reform.  This would include discussions on governance issues and appropriate arrangements for scrutiny of any joint boards and committees.  This would ensure the right structure for Cheltenham as well as the county council. Another member thought that Gloucestershire should be putting forward a comprehensive proposal for the offer that they wanted rather than wait for central government to advise what they would be prepared to give. The local authorities in Gloucestershire needed to work together to make it happen.  It would be essential that any devolved powers from government were supported by the appropriate level of funding.

 

A member expressed concern that there were previous examples of signing up to county council initiatives with words that promised joint delivery but in reality retained funding at county level with decisions being made by the county council Cabinet. They questioned how this council could sign up to this document without firm agreements with the county council regarding governance and funding.

 

A member asked how the proposals for devolution fitted in with the 2020 vision programme.

 

The Chief Executive advised that the fundamental principle of 2020 Vision was that the council would should remain autonomous and retain decision-making on what services should be provided in Cheltenham. How those services are delivered is then an issue which would be resolved in partnership.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

13.

To receive petitions

Minutes:

None.

 

14.

Any other item the Mayor determines as urgent and which requires a decision pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Leckhampton and Warden Hill Local Development Area Application-Report of the Leader

 

 

Minutes:

The Mayor had determined that this late report, which had been circulated the previous week, should be considered to ensure that the Authority processed the matter in a timely manner and in the public interest.

 

The Leader introduced the report which asked Council to publicise and publish the application for designation of a neighbourhood area for the parished area of Leckhampton with Warden Hill for a period of four weeks.

 

The Town and Country Planning Neighbourhood Plan (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended) requires local authorities to publicise and publish a neighbourhood area application for public consultation, prior to formal designation. It is only following the successful completion of this stage that the parish council can formally progress with the preparation of their neighbourhood plan. The report sets out an outline of the required steps to designate a neighbourhood area and details the next stages in the process for the parish council.

Given that the next meeting of Council is 19th October 2015, it also recommended that Council authorises Cabinet to determine the area application so as to comply with regulations that require Cheltenham Borough Council to determine the application within eight weeks of the application being publicised

 

In response to a question, the Leader said that he hoped that the final plan would come back to Council at a later date for approval.

 

The Head of Law advised that Council was responsible for the policy framework and as such approval of this neighbourhood plan was a Council responsibility. In this case Council was being asked to authorise Cabinet to undertake the next stages in the process.  As to whether the final plan could be referred to Council advice was needed from planning officers on how this might affect timescales. He therefore suggested that Council could request Cabinet to, subject to not prejudicing timescales for progression of the plan, bring back the final plan to Council for approval.

 

Upon a vote (with one abstention from a member who was absent for the debate) it was

 

RESOLVED THAT

1.    That the commencement of the consultation process on the application for the neighbourhood area be arranged by immediate publication of the application on the website and other forms of communication deemed appropriate for the minimum period of four weeks.

2.    That Cabinet be authorised to determine the area application and to determine all subsequent stages in the processing of the Leckhampton and Warden Local Development Plan.

3.    That, provided it will not prejudice timely progression of the Plan, Cabinet be requested to bring back the final Plan to Council for approval.

 

15.

Local Government Act 1972

Minutes:

The Mayor left the chamber at this point and handed over the chair to the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ryder.  Councillor Williams also left the room and did not participate in the debate.

 

Upon a vote it was

 

RESOLVED (unanimously)
 

That in accordance with Section 100A(4) Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the remaining agenda items as it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, if members of the public are present there will be disclosed to them exempt information as defined in paragraph 3, Part (1) Schedule (12A) Local Government Act 1972, namely:

 

Paragraph 3; Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

16.

Housing Revenue Account New Build pdf icon PDF 163 KB

Report of the Cabinet Member Housing

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Cabinet Member Housing introduced the report and explained that in March 2015 Cabinet resolved that the Authority should seek bids from contractors to build new homes across Cheltenham on a number of garage sites. He stated that following a recent procurement exercise this report sought approval to enter into a JCT Design and Build Contract with J Harper and Sons with Total Scheme Costs not to exceed £1,684,800.  He reported that the scheme would deliver up to ten new homes on four HRA garage sites, representing the first Council owned stock built since the late 1980’s. The Cabinet Member wished to put on record his thanks to officers both at the council and CBH for their hard work. These were complex redevelopments and Cheltenham was now leading the south west in the provision of affordable homes.

 

The Cabinet Member drew Members’ attention to section 6 of the report. He explained that the majority of the dwellings CBC proposed to build would be at 80% of market rent, however there was a risk that if the proposed 4 bedroom dwelling was set at the 80% level, then this would be unaffordable for larger households on low incomes. It was therefore proposed that this be set at 70 % of market rent.

 

Members supported the proposals. They congratulated CBH in what they had achieved to date and it was hoped that there would be more new build going forward as this was desperately needed in the town. Some Members commented on the high standard of the developments to date. It was suggested that in the future CBH should look at its own in house team to develop “shared equity”. A member also mentioned “sweat equity” whereby tenants or part owners provided labour for their share of the housing equity. CBH should also be encouraged to look at ever greener houses and showcase what they are able to achieve and push harder to be even better and more innovative in its approach. CBH was commended for its record for taking on apprentices in the repairs team.

 

The Cabinet Member Housing informed Council that CBH was envied across ALMOs for its achievements in the regeneration of St Pauls. He reported that in the light of the recent budget announcement there would be a refresh of the HRA business plan later in the year in order to determine innovative ways to progress.

 

 

RESOLVED (unanimously) THAT

                                                          

  1. the allocation of up to £1,684,000 be authorised for the construction of up to ten new dwellings on the garage sites listed in section 2 of this report.

 

  1. It be noted that the total scheme costs of £1,684,800 (broken down in further detail in exempt appendix 3) will be funded by circa £500k of RTB receipts with the balance funded by the most appropriate combination of the other funding streams noted within the report – this decision being delegated to the Section 151 Officer in accordance with Financial Rules B7 and B8.

 

  1. the Authority be approved to source  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.