Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Venue: The Guildhall, St Peter's Place, Canterbury

Contact: Maria Short  01227 862 009 Email: democracy@canterbury.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

364.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillors Caffery, I Stockley and J Stockley

365.

Substitute Councillors

Minutes:

Councillor Baldock was present as a substitute for Councillor Caffery and Councillor Cook as a substitute for Councillor I Stockley.

366.

Declaration of any interests

TO RECEIVE any declarations for the following in so far as they relate to the business for the meeting:-

 

a.       Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

b.       Other Significant Interests (what were previously thought of as non-pecuniary Prejudicial interests)

c.       Voluntary Announcements of Other Interests

 

Voluntary Announcements of Other Interests not required to be disclosed as DPI’s or OSI’s, ie announcements made for transparency reasons alone, such as:

         Membership of outside bodies that have made representations on agenda items, or

         Where a Councillor knows a person involved, but does not have a close association with that person, or

         Where an item would affect the well-being of a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc but not his/her financial position.

 

[Note: an effect on the financial position of a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc; OR an application made by a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc, would both probably constitute either an OSI or in some cases a DPI].

 

Minutes:

The following voluntary declarations were made:

·         Councillors Cook and I Thomas were Kent county councillors.

·         Councillors Glover, Harvey-Quirke, Spooner and I Thomas were on the Planning Committee.

 

367.

Public participation

Members of the public may speak on any item on the agenda, for a maximum of three minutes, provided that notification has been given to Democratic Services by 12.30pm on the working day before the meeting.

Minutes:

There were two public speakers for the meeting they were heard prior to the Canterbury forum request item.

368.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 73 KB

TO CONFIRM as a true record the minutes of the meeting held on 27 June 2019.

Minutes:

The minutes were agreed as a true record.

369.

Request from Canterbury Forum for Transport Hub workshop with stakeholders pdf icon PDF 86 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Transportation Team Leader.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Head of Transportation and Environment introduced the report which set out a recommendation from the Canterbury Forum to hold a stakeholder event to discuss an

integrated transport hub for Canterbury. 

 

There was concern about having a stakeholder event at this time as it would raise expectations while there was still uncertainty around the rail franchise and the review of the Local Plan. The report set out how a more wide ranging transportation conference might be achieved. 

 

The alternative option set out in the report were:

 

(a) Prepare for a transportation conference to run in parallel with the timetable for

the local plan.

(b) Hold a separate transport hub conference to discuss the integrated transport

hub at Canterbury West station as soon as the new franchisee is appointed.

(c) Any other option that the committee considers is required.

 

The Committee considered the matters and the Chief Executive and Head of Transportation and Environment gave points of clarification. Matters including the following were discussed:

 

  1. An integrated transport hub was an opportunity to contribute to the 2030 target and that need not be in the Canterbury West Station.

 

2.            The decision regarding the rail franchise could be a number of years away.

 

3.            It was proposed and seconded and when put to vote agreed that the wording of the recommendation be altered to remove reference to the rail franchise.

 

Record of the vote

For the proposal: Councillors Baldock, Carnac, Cook, Gower, Ricketts, Sole, Spooner, Watkins and Wilson (9)

Against the proposal: 

Abstaining from the proposal: Councillors Glover, Harvey-Quirke and I.Thomas (3).

 

4.            It was proposed, seconded and when put to the vote agreed to remove wording relating to a conference and prior to the local plan. 

 

Record of the vote

For the proposal: Councillors Baldock, Cook, Glover, Gower, Harvey-Quirke, Ricketts, Sole, Spooner, Thomas, Watkins and Wilson (11)

Against the proposal: Councillor Carnac (1)

Abstaining from the proposal: None

 

5.            The Committee were advised that if their intention was to stipulate how an element of the Local Plan consultation was undertaken this would need to be considered by the Policy and Resources Committee, it would also need to be agreed with the county council since the Transportation Strategy (which formed a part of the Local Plan) was their document.

 

6.            A more complete review of the potential for a transport hub should be aligned with the Local plan.

 

7.            There was a need to consider new climate change objectives.

 

The amended proposal was put to a vote and the following was agreed - 

 

RECOMMENDED (to the Policy and Resources Committee): That there be a Canterbury district transportation stakeholder event with independent facilitation to consider all options available for an integrated transport hub to serve Canterbury prior to the review of the Local Plan.

 

Reasons for the decision: This maximises the outputs by gathering stakeholders and ensures that the matters arising can be used to inform a future revised transportation strategy which would be part of the review of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 369.

370.

Reference from the Canterbury Forum pdf icon PDF 88 KB

The draft minute is as follows:

 

"Richard Norman addressed the Forum and asked councillors if they could seek answers to the following questions:

 

1.    The planning application to extend the Wincheap Park and Rise claims that an additional 300 parking spaces were needed in that location, what is the calculation based on?  Was it based on future trends and does it take any account of the need to reduce car use?

2.    How was the decision made to submit the current planning application?  Who made the decision and by what basis were the consultants instructed, reports prepared and the application submitted?

3.    Was the application discussed with councillors at any stage.

4.    Have there been any discussions regarding possible alternative sites for the extension of the Park and Ride?

 

Tricia Marshall, Deputy Chief Executive advised councillors that discussions surrounding a current planning application were outside the terms of reference of the Forum and should not be discussed.

 

A number of councillors expressed concern that the item was not being fully discussed by committee before a planning application was made and it was agreed that the questions asked by Mr Norman should be referred to the Regeneration and Property Committee for discussion."

 

In response to these questions the Head of Transportation and Environment has prepared the following statement.

Decision:

RESOLVED: That a report be considered by the council which set out what the alternative sites for the expanded park and ride provision were and included evidence of the benefits of the park and ride service.

 

Reasons for the decision: It was important to understand whether alternative options to the proposed site and whether an expanded service was still desirable as the proposal would result in the permanent loss of habitat.

Minutes:

(Councillors Glover, Harvey-Quirke, Spooner and I Thomas were on the Planning Committee.)

 

(Two members of the public, Richard Norman and Sian Pettman, spoke prior to the consideration of the item.)

 

The Canterbury Forum had asked a series of questions about the decisions made in regard to the proposed relocation and expansion of the WIncheap Park and Ride site to an area of previously undeveloped land. The proposal was subject to a planning application that would be considered by the Planning Committee. 

 

The Committee were being asked to note the responses to these questions given in the agenda.

 

The Head of Transportation and Environment responded to the points made by the public speakers including the following points:

 

  1. The park and ride provision was an important part of the transport strategy, the bus and train network was too fragmented to rely on for many people in the district, particularly for those who lived rurally.

 

2.            Park and ride was more important than two or three years ago when the decision to expand the park and ride site was originally taken as the effect of park and ride was to  reduce the number of cars going into the city centre and, since the decision on the park and ride site had been taken, air quality and other environmental concerns had become even more important.

 

3.            The location of the park and ride site was important. The further that people had to drive into the Wincheap estate the less desirable the service became and the more likely it was that people would drive on into the central car parks.

 

4.            In the past many sites to absorb traffic from the north west into the city had been considered and rejected. Once the Harbledown site was set aside, the proposed site had been agreed by the council as the only appropriate site in the Wincheap and Thanington area.

 

5.            The proposed site boundary was clearly identified in the Local Plan which was extensively consulted on.

 

6.            The Local Plan did leave open the option for a multistorey option open. This would reduce the footprint but was more likely to be more visually intrusive, and was considerably more expensive.

 

The Committee considered the matters and the Chief Executive and Head of Transportation and Environment gave points of clarification. Matters including the following were discussed:

 

7.            The Serco site in Wincheap would become available in 2021 and could deliver some of the spaces needed. However, at this time it was assumed that once the council began delivering the waste contract it would need to use the Serco site for this purpose.

 

8.            The Serco site had not been previously considered as it was not available but in addition it would not be as suitable for a number of reasons including splitting the provision across two sites which could result in increased traffic circulation as one site became full and people were required to move on, and making a right turn on to the A28 rather than  ...  view the full minutes text for item 370.

371.

Proposal to dispose of Old Dover Road Hostels pdf icon PDF 114 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Head of Housing.

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED: To authorise the Head of Property and Regeneration to dispose of the Old Dover Road hostels on the open market, at best consideration and in the most advantageous way for the council.

 

Reasons for the decision: The council is in the process of acquiring other temporary accommodation which is of better quality and is within the district. Refurbishment options do not represent good value for money to the Housing Revenue Account, which is also facing other significant financial pressures.

Minutes:

 

The Head of Housing and Community introduced the report. At its meeting on the 26 June 2019, the Community Committee agreed to decommission both of the Old Dover Road hostels. The report sought permission to dispose of these assets, and to return the capital realised through the sale to the Housing Revenue Account.

 

The alternative options set out in the report were as follows:

 

I. To agree to dispose of both Old Dover Road hostels

Ii. To refurbish existing units to make them fully self contained.

Iii. To reconfigure both buildings to make the units larger and to make them fully self contained.

 

The recommendations in the report were proposed, seconded and when put to a vote agreed.

 

RESOLVED: To authorise the Head of Property and Regeneration to dispose of the Old Dover Road hostels on the open market, at best consideration and in the most advantageous way for the council.

 

Reasons for the decision: The council is in the process of acquiring other temporary accommodation which is of better quality and is within the district. Refurbishment options do not represent good value for money to the Housing Revenue Account, which is also facing other significant financial pressures.

 

Record of the vote

For the proposal: Councillors Baldock, Carnac, Cook, Glover, Gower, Harvey-Quirke, Ricketts, Sole, Spooner, I. Thomas, Watkins and Wilson (12)

Against the proposal: None

Abstaining from the proposal: None

 

372.

Lease of former Homebase building, Wincheap Industrial Estate, Canterbury pdf icon PDF 83 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Head of Property and Regeneration.

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED: 

  1. To authorise the Head of Property & Regeneration to conclude negotiations on the potential lease
  2. To authorise the Head of Legal Services to enter any legal documentation necessary to complete the transaction

 

Reasons for the decision: Agreeing a lease on this site as swiftly would be advantageous financially and would bring a large unit back into use which would improve the look and feel of the area.

Minutes:

The Head of Property and Regeneration introduced the report which set out the steps necessary to grant a lease of the currently vacant unit formerly occupied by Homebase on Wincheap Estate.

 

The alternative options set out in the report were as follows:

 

a) give delegated authority to officers to proceed with lease negotiation and completion

b) withhold authority and look at other uses or occupiers for the site.

 

Councillors were given assurances by the Head of Business and Regeneration that the potential lessee was suitable and that the lease would not restrict future plans for the Wincheap estate

 

The recommendations in the report were proposed, seconded and when put to a vote agreed.

 

RESOLVED: 

  1. To authorise the Head of Property & Regeneration to conclude negotiations on the potential lease
  2. To authorise the Head of Legal Services to enter any legal documentation necessary to complete the transaction

 

Reasons for the decision: Agreeing a lease on this site as swiftly would be advantageous financially and would bring a large unit back into use which would improve the look and feel of the area.

 

Record of the vote

For the proposal: Councillors Baldock, Carnac, Cook, Glover, Gower, Harvey-Quirke, Ricketts, Sole, Spooner, I. Thomas, Watkins and Wilson (12)

Against the proposal: None

Abstaining from the proposal: None

 

373.

Proposed lease of the unused Herne Bay BMX Park pdf icon PDF 94 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Head of Property and Regeneration.

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED: To grant Ryse Hydrogen Ltd a lease of the former BMX park to enable them to develop a facility for making hydrogen for use as an alternative to fossil fuel, initially for London buses, but potentially for a local market in the longer term.

 

Reasons for the decision: The land currently had limited options. This action provided an opportunity for the company to develop an alternative to fossil fuels, with potential environmental and employment benefits.

Minutes:

The Head of Property and Regeneration introduced the report and explained that the decision for committee was around the granting of the lease not around the planning considerations which would come later to the planning committee. 

 

The Committee made comments and asked questions and the Head of Business and Regeneration gave points of clarification. The following matters were covered:

 

  1. It had been many years since the site was used for BMX activities and alternative provision was now with in the district.

 

2.            Unemployment was a problem in Herne Bay so the potential for permanent jobs was welcome.

 

3.            The potential environmental benefits for hydrogen production were welcome.

 

4.            A full environmental appraisal would need to be carried out before any planning permission was sought.

 

The recommendations in the report were proposed, seconded and when put to a vote agreed.

 

RESOLVED: To grant Ryse Hydrogen Ltd a lease of the former BMX park to enable them to develop a facility for making hydrogen for use as an alternative to fossil fuel, initially for London buses, but potentially for a local market in the longer term.

 

Reasons for the decision: The land currently had limited options. This action provided an opportunity for the company to develop an alternative to fossil fuels, with potential environmental and employment benefits.

 

Record of the vote: unanimous.

For the proposal: Councillors Baldock, Carnac, Cook, Glover, Gower, Harvey-Quirke, Ricketts, Sole, Spooner, I. Thomas, Watkins and Wilson (12)

Against the proposal: None

Abstaining from the proposal: None

 

374.

Date of next meeting

7pm on Thursday 28 November 2019.

Minutes:

7pm on Thursday 28 November 2019 in The Guildhall, St Peter’s Place, Canterbury, CT1 2DB

 

375.

Any urgent business to be dealt with in public

Minutes:

There was no urgent business discussed at the meeting.

376.

Exclusion of the press and public

TO RESOLVE – That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act or the Freedom of Information Act or both.

 

Minutes:

It was not necessary for the press and public to be excluded.

377.

Proposal to dispose of Old Dover Road Hostels - Confidential Annex

(This report contains information the disclosure of which is likely

to prejudice the commercial interest of both the Council and

other bodies (section 43 Freedom of Information Act 2000). The

Council considers that at present the public interest in

maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in

disclosing it. Paragraph 3 of schedule 12A of the Local

Government Act 1972 also applies.)

 

TO CONSIDER

Minutes:

The information contained in this annex was born in mind when the Committee took their decision at minute number 373.

 

378.

Proposed lease of the unused Herne Bay BMX Park - Confidential Annex

(This report contains information the disclosure of which is likely

to prejudice the commercial interest of both the Council and

other bodies (section 43 Freedom of Information Act 2000). The

Council considers that at present the public interest in

maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in

disclosing it. Paragraph 3 of schedule 12A of the Local

Government Act 1972 also applies.)

 

TO CONSIDER

Minutes:

The information contained in this annex was born in mind when the Committee took their decision at minute number 375.

379.

Any other urgent business which falls under the exempt provisions of the Local Government Act 1972 or the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or both

Minutes:

There was no urgent business discussed at the meeting.