Meeting documents

115 WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

116 EMERGENCY EVACUATION PROCEDURE

The Chair(person) drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out on the Agenda.

117 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Paul Crossley declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest in item 13 as a member of the Regional Assembly.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest in item 16, as Chair of the Primary Care Trust.

118 TO ANNOUNCE ANY URGENT BUSINESS AGREED BY THE CHAIR(PERSON)

There were no items of urgent business.

119 QUESTIONS FROM PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS

There were 3 questions submitted. Andrew King had submitted 2 questions on behalf of the Governors of St John's Catholic Primary school. Reverend Alan Bain, Vicar of St Philips and St James Odd Down had submitted 1 question. Councillor Jonathan Gay responded. [Copies of the questions and responses will be placed on the website.]

120 STATEMENTS, DEPUTATIONS OR PETITIONS FROM PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS

Notice had been given before the meeting of 7 statements; 4 relating to the St John's school item and 3 relating to the Vision & Sub-Regional Spatial Planning Strategy. These are listed next to the relevant item below. [Copies of the responses, when provided, have been placed on the Minute book.]

121 MINUTES: WEDNESDAY 1ST DECEMBER 2004

On a motion from Councillor Francine Haeberling, seconded by Councillor Rosemary Todd, it was

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 1st December 2004 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair(person).

122 CONSIDERATION OF SINGLE MEMBER ITEMS NOW REQUISITIONED TO COUNCIL EXECUTIVE (Report 9).

There were no such items on this occasion.

123 CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS REFERRED BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY BODIES (Report 10).

There were no such items on this occasion.

124 THE REPLACEMENT OF ST JOHN'S CATHOLIC PRIMARY SCHOOL, BATH - CONSIDERATION OF THREE POSSIBLE SITES (Report 11).

Helen Woodley made a statement regarding protection of existing allotment sites and historic allotment lands, and provision of an allotment site should the Glasshouse site be selected.

Rob Lucas, Chair of the Odd Down Residents Action Group, made a statement setting out 10 reasons why the Odd Down Playing fields site should be rejected.

Reverend Alan Bain, Vicar of St Philips and St James Odd Down, made a statement in opposition to the choice of the Odd Down Playing fields site.

Bob Wilkins also made a statement against the use of the Odd Down Playing fields site.

Philip Pope, Headteacher of St Martin's Garden Primary school and Ian Russell, Headteacher of St Philip's C of E Primary both spoke of their concern regarding increasing surplus places in the area around their schools, amongst other concerns.

Councillor Jonathan Gay started by addressing some of the points that had been raised by the public speakers. He acknowledged that there would be difficulties associated with each site, but affirmed the Executive's commitment to finding a new site for St John's Catholic Primary School. Councillor Gay reminded those present that it had been a Discussion paper that had been sent out thus far and the next stage would be for consultation to take place to a wider area. With regard to the possibility of using a brownfield site, Councillor Gay explained the many other demands there were on such sites; including commercial, housing etc.

Councillor Jonathan Gay explained why he would be rejecting the Glasshouse site and recommending the other two sites to go to consultation. He ran through the planning, access and transport issues and quoted Planning Issues A, B and C from the relevent section of the Llewellyn Harker Architects report (page 7, Appendix 6 of the report). Councillor Gay explained that these issues would be a problem for each site, but, on balance, would have the most impact on the Glasshouse site, and for that reason, he was recommending it should not be considered as a potential site.

Councillor Colin Darracott explained the unique problems of Bath in having so few sites for any types of development.

Councillor Francine Haeberling regretted how long it had taken so far to find a site, thanked everybody who had written in and confirmed that she would be supporting the recommendations.

Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins stressed the need to reach a decision on a site swiftly so that it was not imposed upon the Council by the Department for Education and Skills. He also commented that the plans did not entail the use of the entirety of each site so that, hopefully, recreational use of a part of the sites would still be available.

Councillor Rosemary Todd acknowledged the difficulty associated with both of the sites proposed and hoped that investigations into the various issues related to each site would continue.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney highlighted the need to move forward quickly so that costs would remain as projected.

Councillor Paul Crossley explained that there was no clear front runner so the remaining two sites would be evaluated against full criteria. Councillor Crossley also mentioned that new housing in the Odd Down area would bring more children to the area. Councillor Crossley also gave a commitment to attend the public consultation meetings which would be taking place.

Rationale

The prolonged delay in progressing this scheme is creating additional problems for the school and adding to the uncertainty for children, parents / carers, staff and Governors and making longer term planning for all these stakeholders extremely difficult.

The costs of design work, purchase of any property (should this be necessary) and the undertaking of environmental impact assessments in order to facilitate the granting of planning permission are a small proportion of the costs that would be incurred were the Council implementing the scheme. The outcome will be the provision of high quality facilities for children in Bath & North East Somerset whom the Council is responsible for educating and will be a major improvement in the environment for learning, which is a key Council priority.

The legitimate concerns of residents surrounding the preferred site deserve close attention. The Council and elected Members are ideally placed to communicate with residents the substantial potential benefits of the provision of this new community resource in a particular area through the initiation of a full consultation exercise.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Jonathan Gay, seconded by Councillor Colin Darracott, it was

RESOLVED

(1) That the progression of this project is of critical importance to children, staff, parents/carers, Governors and the Council;

(2) That no further investigations are required regarding potential sites and a decision can now be taken;

(3) That 2 sites should now be selected for consultation (Odd Down playing field and Odd Down Park & Ride) and the Glasshouse site withdrawn for the reasons given. Officers to be instructed to initiate consultation with residents, businesses and other organisations in the area surrounding the preferred sites and to continue their investigations into these sites. Such an area to be determined by officers but to cover at least those homes, businesses and other organisations within a 250 metre radius of the sites;

(4) That the outcome of the consultation will be reported to the Executive at its meeting on 4^th May 2005;

(5) That all costs associated with the design of the school are met by the Council until such time as planning permission is received. This will cost approximately £200,000; and

(6) That the Executive reiterates its commitment to consider giving long term support for home to school transport for pupils at St John's Catholic Primary School following the review of the issue to be undertaken by the Education, Youth, Culture & Leisure Overview & Scrutiny Panel.

(The underlined wording in resolution (3) above was proposed by Councillor Rosemary Todd and accepted by Councillor Jonathan Gay.)

125 FINANCIAL PLANNING ISSUES - THE IMPLICATIONS OF MAJOR PROJECTS (Report 12).

Councillor Malcolm Hanney introduced this report and drew attention to the Update report which had been circulated regarding the Bath Western Riverside project.

Councillor Colin Darracott explained that, despite his initial reservations about considering this report prior to the financial planning process, he was now reassured by the recommendations that had been put forward.

Rationale

The Review has followed a structured methodology in accordance with its terms of reference. The conclusions arise from evidence regarding current project management arrangements when compared against a "best practice" standard, and from an assessment of the Council's capital resources, commitments and plans, and risks.

Other Options Considered

Contained within the body of the report.

On a motion from Councillor Malcolm Hanney, seconded by Councillor Colin Darracott, it was

RESOLVED

(1) General

(a) To advise Council of the significant progress made in improving the management of its major projects, as set out in para 7.2 of the report;

(b) To advise Council that, notwithstanding that significant progress, the scale of funding and funding exposure arising from its major projects is such that urgent action is needed to contain its funding exposure and reduce risk exposure;

(c) To advise Council that, if the recommendations in section 4 below are approved, a target capital contingency reserve of £20M should be set as a prudent level of reserve;

(d) To recommend Council to endorse the conclusion that, unless there are substantial changes to the financial plan, it is unlikely that significant Council capital funding will be available in the medium-term to develop any new projects;

(e) To recommend Council to adopt as a guiding principle that all major projects that are subject to high risk exposure MUST be reduced to a low risk position prior to significant expenditure being committed by the Council unless there is an adequate risk contingency in place;

(f) To emphasise the need for continued close monitoring of funding and risk exposure via the Projects Programme Board, Council Executive and relevant Overview & Scrutiny Panels

(2) For finalisation of the draft financial plan, to be presented to Council for approval in February;

(a) A further check to be undertaken to ensure that all project costs and funding have been profiled realistically, and that costs are appropriately charged to capital/revenue; and

(b) all Council-funded capital programmes be reviewed to identify any options to reduce costs or reprofiling in order to reduce the peak borrowing in 2005/06

(3) Specifically;

(a) To require investigation by the Resources Director and Head of Property and Legal Services to identify opportunities for additional capital receipts in 2005/06 or beyond (together with a costing for progressing potential developments);

(b) To require a review by the Major Projects Director of his directorate and project budgets to seek opportunities to rationalise spending needs, notably on use of consultants, while not compromising the principles of effective project management;

(c) To require all projects, as part of their cost and risk management to put in place an effective strategy for resolving claims and minimising the project's cost to the Council;

(d) Recognising the severe strain on the revenue budget resulting from the capital programme, to advise Council that the Executive accepts the need either to make substantial reductions to the Council's revenue spending in the short and medium-term or to generate substantial additional capital receipts, and that the Executive will work to develop proposals for achieving an affordable revenue budget;

(4) In respect of individual projects;

(a) Potential transportation schemes (as described in para 5.2 of the report) - to plan on the basis of no additional Council capital investment beyond that currently planned (unless there is a proven invest-to-save case);

(b) Bath Western Riverside - to fund to the stage of completion of the draft Development Agreement without funding commitment beyond the Council's planned £5M contribution; and to require a project strategy and plan to be prepared on the following basis:

(if approved, Council should note that this would require cA31.5M draft financial plan funding (see Appendix 3) to be brought forward from 2006/07 - 2008/09 to 2005/06); and

To ask Council to note the projected cost of a further cA31M to progress the project from draft development agreement to an unconditional agreement and first stage implementation; and advise Council that it would prudent to include this sum within the draft financial plan for 2006/07 - 2007/08 as a mix of revenue and capital funding and, in the absence of other funding sources, provisionally funded from revenue balances and the capital contingency

(d) Waste Strategy- to require the development of a business case for the Council's waste strategy which includes consideration of Keynsham Environment Park as a possible solution towards meeting longer-term financial liabilities; freezing the £800,000 2005/06 PSA capital programme item in the meantime;

(e) Schools - to require the development of a capital funding strategy for schools that takes account of the new financial regime effective from 2006/07 and reduces the need for ongoing Council investment; and to cap the projects' costs and require contingency plans to be put in place to ensure that any unforeseen cost increase on existing or potential schools project does not result in a call for additional Council capital investment;

(f) EPHs - to cap the project cost and require contingency plans to be put in place to ensure that any unforeseen cost increase do not result in a call for additional Council capital investment;

(g) NRR - to maintain the current strategy of limiting direct Council capital investment in the project with any investment beyond April 2005 to be on a strict repayment basis;

(h) Southgate - to ensure that the costs and disruption of the project are minimised relative to the risks;

(i) To ask Council to consider the specific issues relating to the Spa and Stone Mines projects using the further information to be presented to Council on each of those projects.

126 VISION & SUB-REGIONAL SPATIAL PLANNING STRATEGY FOR THE WEST OF ENGLAND (Report 13).

Helen Woodley read a statement submitted by Chris Benson, Bath Friends of the Earth (a copy has been placed on the Minute book).

Bob Wilkins made a statement referring to the difficulty in making a comprehensive response.

Councillor Rosemary Todd introduced this report, explaining that this was an obligatory process with a timescale outside the Council's control. Councillor Todd explained that the Vision sought to secure the future for the West of England and she saw a key theme as being `wellbeing'. Councillor Todd made reference to the draft response that had been developed, with the basic premise that the economy was the main driver for growth. An integrated approach was needed and Councillor Todd regretted that the Transport work was not currently available.

Councillor Colin Darracott confirmed that it was vital to secure the resources and powers necessary and hoped that sustainability and greenhouse gas emissions would be robustly addressed.

Councillor Paul Crossley stressed the need to engage robustly with the Government from a sub-regional perspective and highlighted the transport infrastructure deficit.

Councillor Rosemary Todd, in summing up the debate, mentioned the strategic sustainability tool which she hoped would be able to be used imaginatively and iteratively.

Rationale

The rationale is set out in the main body of the report.

Other Options Considered

The report is commenting on a Vision for the West of England and possible sub-regional spatial planning strategy scenarios produced by the West of England Partnership. The studies necessary to inform the Council's view of the strategies are incomplete. There will be further opportunities to reconsider this as the studies progress.

Scenarios in Bath & North East Somerset focus on urban areas. A possible alternative is more development in rural areas. This would be likely to result in unsustainable travel patterns and adverse environmental impacts.

On a motion from Councillor Rosemary Todd, seconded by Councillor Sir Elgar Jenkins, it was

RESOLVED to recommend the following text as Bath & North East Somerset Council's response to the consultation documents "2026 - The Vision for the West of England in 2026 and Delivery Priorities" and "Your Area: Your Vision";

"Bath and North East Somerset Council welcomes the opportunity to comment on the West of England vision and the Sub-Regional Spatial Strategy consultation document.

The statement of the Partnership's Vision is warmly supported. In Bath and North East Somerset, the need for overall growth over the next 20 yrs is modest, and the environmental constraints on development substantial. However, there are unmet needs locally - for affordable housing in Bath, for jobs in Norton Radstock, for better amenities in Keynsham/Saltford, to name but a few. And in many areas of Bath and North East Somerset there is a shortfall in transport options which will be exacerbated by any growth.

This Council welcomes the opportunity through the West of England partnership to exert a greater influence on the future of the sub-region through collaborative strategic planning, to stimulate growth selectively and to secure the investment from the public and private sector necessary to promote sustainable and balanced communities.

Before this Council can make final recommendations on the issues involved it will need the results of a number of studies currently being undertaken. These include:

More detailed comments are given below, with the caveat that they be regarded as provisional until this further work is done.

The Vision

This Council congratulates the Partnership on a Vision which is wide-ranging in scope, specific in its objectives and clear in its function. This Council supports the partnership's aim of improved wellbeing - health, prosperity and capacity - through growth, especially in areas of disadvantage. The Vision correctly recognises that the drive for growth must be counterbalanced by the protection of those distinctive features of city, town and rural living which give the sub-region its identity. Sustainability of existing and future communities needs to be a guiding principle throughout the lifetime of the Vision.

The strength of the partnership will need to be realised through the benefits of coordinated working within the subregion, and through the enhanced influence which the subregion can exercise to attract investment to meet its existing and future needs.

This Council supports the principal themes of the Vision: quality of life, connectivity and accessibility, and the economy, as the important aspects of future well-being, but would wish to see a sharper focus to statements on the value of transport improvements. Investment in infrastructure is regarded as not simply `assisting' or `reinforcing' positive change, but as an enabling pre-condition.

Within Bath and North East Somerset, the need for regeneration is less acute than elsewhere in the subregion, but the district has a substantial need for more affordable housing, and a predicted need for a larger pool of vocational skills.

The Vision is largely compatible with Bath and North East Somerset's Community Strategy. The Local Strategic Partnership's shared ambitions: sustainable, distinctive, creative, inclusive and safe, require that an imaginative and joined-up approach to building successful and sustainable communities be pursued from the start. The West of England Partnership's Vision will be a positive factor in enabling the integration of health, education, community and other social amenities with plans for transport and housing.

The district is already a major tourist and cultural destination nationally and internationally, and is well-placed to engage with the rest of the Partnership in developing further this vital strand to the sub-regional economy.

The Sub-Regional Spatial Strategy

Bath and North East Somerset Council welcomes the balance struck throughout the consultation document between the need for change, renewal and development, and the need to protect and enhance the distinctive features of city, town and village life which express the identity of the sub-region. This balance should be reflected in the relationship between the economy and the special qualities of the natural and built environment, and spatial planning will need to be informed by the recently published SW Environment Strategy, the SW Biodiversity Implementation Plan and Conservation Strategy.

Wherever development is located, a prime concern must be the creation of balanced communities. New housing should be matched by local services and facilities and accessible jobs. Research by UWE (ref) has given some indication of the facilities which can be supported by settlement populations of various sizes. In some areas, these facilities may already be available, with capacity for new residents. In others, urban extensions may generate the increased demand which justifies the inclusion of new facilities. In both cases, it is essential that such issues are considered to ensure that new communities are well served, and served locally.

A Strategic Sustainability Appraisal should be used iteratively during the evolution of a spatial strategy with full engagement of all four authorities.

Bath and North East Somerset Council recognises that the preferred areas for development will also depend heavily on the improvements to the transport infrastructure which can be secured. It is recommended that the spatial strategy incorporate a phasing mechanism to ensure that new homes are not built in advance of the construction/provision of enabling transport links to resolve existing deficits and allow for enhanced travel needs.

This Council notes with some concern the predicted rate of job creation for the West of England mentioned in the consultation document. The uncertainty associated with such a prediction must throw doubt on the predicted number of new homes required.

Turning to the implications for Bath and North East Somerset of the Spatial Strategy document, it is recognised that some extension to Bath into greenfield areas should be explored, if the city's needs for affordable housing and employment sites cannot be met by brownfield re-development. Growth in Bath city will need to be stimulated if Bath is to retain its role vis a vis Bristol and Swindon; the Partnership will provide the collaborative impetus to enable this growth. At the same time, growth will need to be tempered to avoid damage to its environs and jeopardising its World Heritage status. The areas proposed in the consultation leaflet are important to the setting of the World Heritage site. Development at Odd Down would have an adverse impact on the Cotswold Area of Outstanding natural Beauty, while topography argues against building in the Englishcombe area.

The eastern part of the district is heavily interconnected with Wiltshire and the north east of Somerset, and the present and future relationship is the subject of a separate study.

The West of England Vision favours develop to aid regeneration in south Bristol together with infrastructure improvements. The Whitchurch area could contribute to the development of a south Bristol orbital route linking the Avon Ring Road at Hick's Gate with the A37 and Bristol Airport on the A38. Environmental studies have indicated some scope for growth at Whitchurch (provided that Stockwood Vale, an important landscape feature, is retained) because of its relative proximity to facilities in Bristol . However, new opportunities for employment would need to be encouraged, as would the additional amenities to ensure that Whitchurch remained a viable community.

If a south Bristol orbital route is developed, together with improvements to the A37, it could enable access to the motorway system from Norton Radstock. This could enhance the economic prospects and, in the longer term, allow further housing. But such housing would need to be limited to the south of Midsomer Norton and the town's capacity is unlikely to be as large as suggested in the consultation leaflet.

Some development at Hicks Gate would be compatible with the regeneration of south Bristol with improved transport infrastructure. Attention would need to be given to traffic congestion problems on this part of the A4, however, and to the erosion of the Green Belt separation of Keynsham and Bristol.

This separation must be maintained in the current review of the Green Belt, but, with this proviso, limited expansion in the Keynsham/Saltford area could be considered. The level of development suggested would need to be accompanied by substantial investment to help correct the imbalance between homes and jobs, but there could be an opportunity to improve local facilities and services to support an enlarged community. A key issue is the impact on the principles of the Green Belt in the area of enlargement or possible coalescence of settlements."

(The underlined wording in the final paragraph was proposed by Councillor Francine Haeberling and accepted by Councillor Rosemary Todd).

Councillor Colin Darracott introduced this report and explained that this was a Government led approach to encourage factors other than just price to be taken into consideration, whilst achieving efficiency in procurement. He acknowledged the need to take on board sustainability issues raised by Councillor Rosemary Todd. Councillor Darracott urged his Executive colleagues to ensure their individual service departments adhered to the principles of the Strategy.

Rationale

In order to inform the recommendations, the options were prioritised by stakeholders according to their impact on the following three criteria;

o Contribution to achievement of Corporate Plan

o Fit with Community Strategy and other approved Council strategies

o Capacity to meet the recommended milestones of the National Strategy

Other Options Considered

Through consultation with relevant stakeholders, a comprehensive list of options was drawn up to address the issues identified. Options that did not fit the above criteria were rejected.

On a motion from Councillor Colin Darracott, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED

(1) To approve the revised Corporate Procurement Strategy; and

(2) To approve the Action Plan to implement the Strategy.

128 IMPLEMENTING ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT (IEG) STATEMENT 4 (Report 15).

Councillor Paul Crossley introduced the report, outlining its rationale and highlighting the benefits to the Council if the Statement is approved by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Rationale

The information within the pro forma has been compiled by the E-Government Co-ordinator, and has been a collaborative effort with key staff across the Council and within HBS. It makes reference to Council policies and the Customer Access Programme, and outlines the Council's development plans within the framework given.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Paul Crossley, seconded by Councillor Francine Haeberling, it was

RESOLVED to approve the Implementing Electronic Government Statement as part of the Council's Policy and Budget Framework for recommendation to Council.

129 THE LOCAL PREVENTATIVE STRATEGY FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE (Report 16).

Councillor Jonathan Gay introduced the report.

Councillor Francine Haeberling mentioned the Children and Young People's Plan which together with this Strategy form a framework for future delivery of childrens' services.

Councillor Colin Darracott sought and received confirmation that Youth Services were part of this process via the Children and Young People's Strategic Partnership.

Rationale

The Local Preventative Strategy for Bath and North East Somerset has been developed over the past eighteen months and has taken into account the key national developments - The Green Paper: Every Child Matters, The Children Act, the NSF for Children - whilst focussing upon the need of the children, young people, parents and carers across the Authority. It is an ambitious and long-term project and will provide the framework for the implementation of the Children Act 2004 in Bath and North East Somerset.

Other Options Considered

The development of a Local Preventative Strategy has demonstrated the Council's commitment to working in partnership to promote the health and well-being of its children and young people, and represents good practice. The Council has fulfilled the Government's expectation that it take a lead in ensuring that this strategy is developed.

The Local Preventative Strategy will provide the framework for the implementation of The Children Act 2004 in Bath and North East Somerset. The Commission for Social Care Inspection has identified this as a strength within its review of the Council's Social Services performance.

The development of a Local Preventative Strategy will form the basis of the Children and Young People's Plan, which the Council and partners will need to develop in 2005 and publish in April 2006.

The Council could have considered not developing the Local Preventative Strategy, but the benefits outlined above would not have been achieved.

On a motion from Councillor Jonathan Gay, seconded by Councillor Francine Haeberling, it was

RESOLVED to approve the Local Preventative Strategy as a step towards implementing the Children Act in Bath & North East Somerset.

130 COUNCIL PERFORMANCE REPORT (Report 17).

Rationale

In January 2003, the Resources and Customer Services Overview & Scrutiny Panel requested that the Executive set out what actions it proposes taking to address performance that was not meeting targets.

The Panel also asked the Executive to highlight which indicators were more important (or `key').

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Rosemary Todd, seconded by Councillor Francine Haeberling, it was

RESOLVED to note the report.

131 PSA 4 MONTHLY PERFORMANCE REPORT (Report 18).

Rationale

The PSA is an important source of extra funding for the Council and the regular reporting of progress allows the early identification of areas of concern.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Rosemary Todd, seconded by Councillor Francine Haeberling, it was

RESOLVED to note the report.

132 EDUCATION 4 MONTHLY PERFORMANCE REPORT (Report 19).

Rationale

This report to the Executive forms part of the Council's performance management system.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Rosemary Todd, seconded by Councillor Francine Haeberling, it was

RESOLVED to note the report.

The meeting ended at 12.20pm

Chair(person)

Date Confirmed and Signed