Agenda and minutes

The Chair was taken by Councillor Paul Crossley, Leader of the Council.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

The Chair announced his intention to hear the following items early in the agenda:

·  Agenda Item 22: Radstock Capital Funding

·  Agenda Item 26: Expansion of 6 schools

·  Agenda Item 23: Home To School Transport Review

·  Agenda Item 14: Bus Priority Measures

At this point in the meeting declarations of interest are received from Members in any of the agenda items under consideration at the meeting. Members are asked to indicate:

(a) The agenda item number in which they have an interest to declare.

(b) The nature of their interest.

(c) Whether their interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other interest,  (as defined in Part 2, A and B of the Code of Conduct and Rules for Registration of Interests)

Any Member who needs to clarify any matters relating to the declaration of interests is recommended to seek advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officer before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

Questions submitted before the deadline will receive a reply from an appropriate Cabinet member or a promise to respond within 5 days of the meeting.  Councillors may ask one supplementary question for each question they submitted, up to a maximum of two per Councillor.

There were 24 questions from the following Councillors: Anthony Clarke (2), Nigel Roberts, Eleanor Jackson, Brian Webber (4), Vic Pritchard (2), Tim Warren (5), Francine Haeberling, Geoff Ward (4), Charles Gerrish (2), Patrick Anketell-Jones (2).

There were 2 questions from the following members of the public: Alderman Terry Reakes, Anne Robbins.

[Copies of the questions and response, including supplementary questions and responses if any, have been placed on the Minute book as Appendix 1 and are available on the Council's website.]

Councillors and members of the public may register their intention to make a statement if they notify the subject matter of their statement before the deadline.  Statements are limited to 3 minutes each.  The speaker may then be asked by Cabinet members to answer factual questions arising out of their statement.

Councillor John Bull in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 2 and on the Council's website] appealed to the Cabinet to adopt the Living Wage as a minimum salary for Council employees in the Council budget for 2014/15.  He observed that the estimated cost to the Council would be about £160,000.

The Chair referred the statement to Councillor David Bellotti for a response in due course.

Gerald Chown in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 3 and on the Council's website] challenged the decision to exclude the top half of Widcombe Hill, from the consultation process on 20mph speed limits.  He presented a petition of 71 signatures.

The Chair referred the petition to Councillor Roger Symonds for a response in due course.

Rosie McKeown, Laura Harrison and Katie Purchase (student members of the Envision Project, Chew Valley School) together made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 4 and on the Council's website] in which they asked the Cabinet to take action on the high price of bus tickets for young people and the lack of regular routes from Chew Valley into the surrounding town areas.  They presented a petition of 104 signatures.

The Chair said that he and Councillor Roger Symonds would make arrangements to meet with the students and the project manager of the envision Project, to explore ways in which the Council could help.

Dan Farr (Make Fares Fair) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 5 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to support his e-petition about the reliability and cost of buses in the area, which had already attracted 4000 signatures.  He asked Cabinet to work with bus operators to reduce bus fares.

Karen Abolkheir (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 6 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to provide an update on the progress of the DPD and a definitive timetable for resolution of site provision so as to avoid a situation in which a possible planning appeal might rely on the lack of progress with the DPD.

Clarke Osborne (Stanton Wick Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 7 and on the Council's website] explained that he was not satisfied with the procurement process and the brief to the consultants engaged to produce the update of the needs assessment for pitches for gypsy and travellers.  He asked Cabinet to investigate the process of commissioning the report.

Paul Baxter in a statement reminded the Cabinet that the case for provision of pitches on the former colliery in Stanton Wick had never been made and asked why the application had been resubmitted.

On a motion from Councillor Paul Crossley, seconded by Councillor David Dixon, it was

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 13^th February 2013 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

This is a standard agenda item, to cover any reports originally placed on the Weekly list for single Member decision making, which have subsequently been the subject of a Cabinet Member requisition to the full Cabinet, under the Council’s procedural rules

This is a standing agenda item (Constitution rule 14, part 4D – Executive Procedure Rules) for matters referred by Policy Development and Scrutiny bodies.  The Chair of the relevant PDS Panel will have the right to attend and to introduce the Panel’s recommendations to Cabinet.

The Chair welcomed Councillor Sally Davis (Chair of the Early Years, Children and Youth PDS Panel) to the meeting.

Councillor Davis in a statement [a copy of which is attached to these minutes as appendix 8 and on the Council’s website] said that the Panel had felt that the cost neutral figures would favour recommendation 2.3c but she now believed that the facts did not support that recommendation.

The Chair observed that this issue would be considered in an item later in the agenda.

Report 11(a) lists the Cabinet Single Member decisions taken and published since the last Cabinet meeting.

Report 11(b) lists the decisions taken under Special Urgency provisions in the previous year.

The Chair referred to the two reports.  He observed that in addition to the Single Member Decisions listed, Councillor Cherry Beath had recently responded to the River Corridor Report of the Economic and Community Development PDS Panel and the response had been published in the Weekly List on 5^th April.

The Chair welcomed Councillor Robin Moss (Chair of the Panel) to the meeting and invited him to speak.  Councillor Moss asked the Cabinet to give serious consideration to how it would administer replacing cash payments with a voucher scheme.

The Cabinet agreed to note the two reports.

The Radstock Capital Funding project has a capital budget allowance of £500,000. £160,000 of this fund has full approval to be spent on Victoria Hall, leaving £340,000 to be allocated between other uses. Community consultation has now been undertaken around the allocation of these funds and suggestions received and reviewed. This report presents the suggested allocations between Economic Development, Community facilities and Streets, Highways and Public Realm and seeks Cabinet approval for the allocations.

Councillor Eleanor Jackson in a statement expressed some concerns about the delays and uncertainty about deciding and announcing how the £500K would be used.  She was unhappy that the Economic Forum had many members who were not from the area and who might not have the best interests of the area in mind.

Amanda Leon (Radstock Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 9 and on the Council's website] congratulated the Council on identifying key works which required urgent attention in Radstock.  She emphasised the importance of the proposed public realm improvements and stressed the need for ongoing maintenance of the fabric of the town.  She expressed reservations about the unaccountable nature of the Economic Forum.

George Bailey (Radstock Action Group) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 10 and on the Council's website] asked for an explanation for the decrease in the published allocation for Frome Road improvements; and the increase in the published allocation for the Economic Forum.  He said that the Forum was undemocratic and that no list of members existed.  He observed that the widening of Morley Terrace and the Haydon 20mph speed limit both appeared to have been forgotten.

Lesley Mansell (Chair, Radstock Town Council) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 11 and on the Council's website] welcomed the Capital Funding and asked for more partnership working between B&NES and the town Council to ensure that local people would have a real say in the changes.

Councillor Peter Edwards in an ad hoc statement said that he was intrigued by the order in which the matter had been progressed; he felt that the needs should be identified first, then the funds should be allocated later to meet those needs.

Councillor Robin Moss in an ad hoc statement said that he was dissatisfied that local traders, manufacturers and local people had not been adequately consulted.

Councillor Cherry Beath in proposing the item, said that the funds had been allocated in the previous year’s budget, including funding for Victoria Hall.  The consultation feedback from the community had been given full consideration.  One suggestion from the community had been additional heritage signage, which had been included in the plans.  The Economic Forum had held some lively debates and it was anticipated that the Forum would help in the administration of the funding.  Councillor Beath was delighted that the plans would bring regeneration to Radstock and one of the first indications of that would be the public realm improvements.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He was pleased to see the plans for regeneration of the town and refurbishment of Victoria Hall.  He thanked the local community for their contribution to the debate.  In response to George Bailey he explained that the earlier figures had been estimates which had been firmed up by later thinking.  He emphasised that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 176.

Following the decision by Cabinet to publish statutory notices proposing the expansion of Bathampton Primary, Castle Primary, Paulton Infant, Paulton Junior, Peasedown St. John Primary and Weston All Saints C of E Primary schools to create additional pupil places, to consider the responses submitted during the statutory notice representation period and to determine the statutory notices for these expansions.

Councillor Liz Hardman in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 12 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to ensure that full consideration would be given to the 34 respondents, 93 e-petitioners and 102 leaflets delivered to Council officers about this issue.  She acknowledged that additional places would be needed for the new school year and supported the principle that all Paulton children should have the choice of attending a primary school in the town if they wish.  She agreed with the majority of respondents who were very concerned about the road safety and increased traffic problems if the expansion of the infant school.  She felt that only if new school travel plans were in place could any expansion take place.  She noted that the Governing Bodies of the two Paulton schools were supportive of the proposals, subject to a robust solution to the highways issue, and she supported their position.

Councillor John Bull in a statement welcomed the acceptance of the Governors of both Paulton schools for the proposals but he asked for more thought to be given to finding a solution of the traffic problems.  He asked the Cabinet to agree to take over the funding of the 20mph scheme for the town, so that the Town Council could then reallocate the funds to resolve the road safety issues arising if the schools were expanded.

Kirsty Withyman in a statement made on behalf of Paulton Schools Expansion Action Group [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 13 and on the Council's website] made a number of points about the proposals, particularly about play area space, accessibility, road safety, school ethos and school resources.  She urged the Cabinet to consider more progressive solutions and asked them not to shoe horn more pupils into the existing space.

The Chair welcomed to the meeting Gary Yoxall (Chair of Governors, Paulton Infants) and Jim Crouch (Chair of Governors, Paulton Junior).

Gary Yoxall said that the school recognised the increased local demand for places at the school and that the Governors were in principle supportive of expansion, subject to planning and with detailed consideration of the road safety issues and if updated travel plans were in place.  He agreed with the points made by Councillor John Bull.

Jim Crouch emphasised that the road safety issues were the major concern and that a holistic approach was required to ensure these problems were dealt with before the schools were expanded.

Lisa Loverage, a parent of a child at Weston All Saints School, reminded Cabinet that without an updated Travel Plan the expansion of the school should not be considered.

Eliza Grey reminded Cabinet that Paulton was almost as big as Radstock, and should be given the same consideration.

Councillor Dine Romero moved the proposals which she said were to accommodate existing growth, not hypothetical growth.  All the Governing Bodies have indicated support.  She fully acknowledged that the road  ...  view the full minutes text for item 177.

To consider recommendations from the Early Years, Children and Youth Policy Development and Scrutiny Panel Transport Review

Raymond Friel (Executive Headteacher, St Gregory’s and St Marks) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 14 and on the Council's website] said that the proposals before Cabinet would save very little and might prove costly in other ways.  He urged the Cabinet to follow the recommendation of the PDS Panel which was that the subsidy should be retained.

Councillor Sarah Bevan in a statement declared that she was a parent of a child at a faith school, but that her interest was not pecuniary.  She felt that the impact of the proposals would be critical for some families and reminded Cabinet that faith based schools were a central hub for many minority families.

Councillor Liz Hardman in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 15 and on the Council's website] said that she was a member of the PDS Panel whose recommendations had been to retain the subsidy but to find some ways of reducing the cost to the Council budget.  She observed that some of the advertised savings would not be realised because some children would still qualify for subsidised travel to the schools to which they moved.  Many of the affected families lived outside the city of Bath and the proposals could be represented as Bath centred.  She asked Cabinet to adopt the recommendation of the Panel.

Brendon Rouse (Chair of pastoral council, St Mary's) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 16 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to continue the subsidy for home to school transport and explained some of the consequences he believed would follow if the subsidy were removed.

Councillor Gabriel Batt in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 17 and on the Council's website] explained that the catchment area for St Gregory’s School was very wide, extending way outside the authority’s boundaries.  It was never intended to be a local school.  He felt that if the subsidy were removed, then Catholic families who live more than 3 miles away would struggle to get their child to the first school of their choice.

Cindy Stockting (Acting Head, St Benedict’s Catholic School, Midsomer Norton) in an ad hoc statement reminded Cabinet that for her pupils, it was a natural progression to go on to St Gregory’s School but that if the subsidy were removed that would become too difficult for many parents to afford.

Councillor Tony Clarke in an ad hoc statement said that for many people, denominational school transport was a front-line service.  He felt that savings could be made by looking carefully at the providers of the service and by making it more efficient.

Councillor Eleanor Jackson in an ad hoc statement was concerned that if the number of Christian children at these schools was reduced, the ethos of the schools would be lost.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 178.

Congestion in Manvers Street and Dorchester Street creates pollution and delays for buses in the vicinity of the bus station at peak times and the aspiration for the Public Realm and Movement Strategy is to create a more pedestrian and cycle friendly environment in Dorchester Street, Manvers Street and Pierrepont St by removing private and commercial motor vehicles from Dorchester St.

Councillor Brian Webber in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 18 and on the Council's website] said that the rationale for the partial closure of Dorchester Street was baffling.  He observed that the proposal would leave the road fully open to traffic during the morning and evening rush hours.  He appealed to Cabinet to take no action until proper figures were obtained to bear out the assumptions in the report.

David Redgewell (South West Transport Network) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 19 and on the Council's website] fully supported the proposed closure.  He pointed out however that the existing bus shelter was in the wrong place and must be moved if serious accidents involving pedestrians were to be avoided.

Brook Whelan in an ad hoc statement warned the Cabinet that if the proposals went ahead hundreds more cars would be forced into Widcombe and the A36.  He urged Cabinet to take no action until a prediction of traffic impacts had been conducted.

Councillor Ben Stevens in an ad hoc statement said he was pleased that the Cabinet was about to take this brave step but he was very concerned about the possible impact on traffic volumes in  Widcombe and was disappointed that this was being tackled before the Rochester Road scheme was in place.

Councillor Tim Warren in an ad hoc statement observed that the proposals would not affect peak time traffic but it would affect tourist traffic.  He felt that it would not make a good pedestrian scheme.

Councillor Roger Symonds introduced the item.  He emphasised that the proposals would improve bus punctuality and congestion.  He reminded Cabinet of their priorities for transport: foot, bike, bus, car.  The proposals were fully in line with these priorities.  He referred to the statement made by Councillor Ben Stevens by saying that he was unable to give absolute assurances about the impact on traffic flows in Widcombe and elsewhere in the city, but he promised that the proposals would be reversed if the impact proved to be unacceptable.  He assured Councillor Stevens that he was determined that the Rochester Road scheme would be completed.  He agreed with David Redgewell and confirmed that the bus shelter was in the process of being moved to a safer location.

Councillor Symonds explained that the proposal he would move would be different from the recommendations as printed in the report; in recommendation (1) the prohibition would be in place from 10am to 6pm, not 4pm as printed.  He moved the amended recommendations.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal which he said would bring great benefit to the city and to the transport interchange.  The bus interchange in particularly would become one of the best in the country.  He explained that it was not yet possible to include the West Way traffic in the proposals because that would be vulnerable to criticism that it was entrapment.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 179.

The Placemaking Plan is a necessary complement to the Core Strategy in order to assist bringing forward the brownfield sites for development in the most effective way, to  provide the necessary detail on the planning requirements for the locations identified for development in the Core Strategy and to update other Local Plan policies.

Peter Duppa-Miller (Secretary of the Town and Parish Councils Association and Clerk to Combe Hay Parish Council) in an ad hoc statement assured Cabinet that the Parish Councils were extremely eager to support the proposals in a practical way.

Councillor Tim Ball in proposing the item explained that this paper was a progress report and would lead up to the launch of the Plan at the May Cabinet.  The Council was working closely with Town and Parish Councils nd with local communities.  He thanked Peter Duppa-Miller for his warm endorsement of the proposals.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposals which he felt would facilitate development of key areas and would safeguard the ethos of the area.

Councillor Cherry Beath welcomed the proposals which she said would draw on the progress made by the Council under the Localism Act, and would involve communities and Parish Councils.  There had been a real need for the proposals.

On a motion from Councillor Tim Ball, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To NOTE that the preparation of the Placemaking Plan will be formally launched in May 2013 with the publication of the Launch Document.

The Council is a statutory consultee for Local Plan consultations and is a Minerals Planning Authority.  In view of continuing concerns over exploration and extraction of energy minerals and any potential impact on the Bath Hot Springs, it is considered a formal response to this consultation is necessary to ensure the interests are properly reflected and addressed in the Somerset Minerals Plan.

Councillor David Martin in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 20 and on the Council's website] welcomed the Cabinet’s response to the Somerset consultation.  He expressed unease about unproven and potentially high risk processes, and the potential for damage to the deep water sources supplying the hot springs in Bath.

George Bailey had registered to speak but had not been able to stay for the item.  He had however submitted his statement.  The Chair instructed that the submission be treated as having been tabled at the meeting [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 24 and on the Council's website].

Councillor Charles Gerrish in an ad hoc statement said that he too was concerned about the impact of the Somerset proposals.  He felt that the onus should be on the applicant to prove that there would be no impact on the hot springs before being allowed to proceed.  He agreed wholeheartedly with the proposed response.

Councillor Tim Ball thanked the previous contributors for their support.  He confirmed that Cabinet would strongly resist the Somerset proposals.  The hot springs were the economic life blood of the city and must be protected.  He moved the recommendations as published.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He welcomed the cautious approach being taken and shared the continuing concern expressed by many.

Councillor Cherry Beath agreed with the points made by the previous contributors and emphasised the protecting the hot springs was critical for the economic wellbeing of the whole area.

On a motion from Councillor Tim Ball, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To AGREE that the assessment forms the basis of the response to the consultation on the Minerals Plan Preferred Options Paper to be forwarded to Somerset County Council to inform the preparation of Somerset County Council’s Pre-submission Minerals Plan.

This report sets out the details of the proposed Highway Structural Maintenance Programme 2013/14 for approval.  The programme follows the policies of both the Joint Local Transports and Joint Local Asset Management Plans for Bath & North East Somerset in accordance with Government guidelines.

Peter Duppa-Miller (Secretary of the Town and Parish Councils Association) in an ad hoc statement welcomed the list of 72 proposed works.  He asked the Cabinet to agree the proposals.

Councillor Roger Symonds gave credit to the highways officers who were the key players in maintaining this key asset over the years.  He moved the proposals.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He observed that the proactive approach avoids having to make reactive repairs which would cost more in the long run.  It also protected riders from injury and damage to their bikes and cars.  He was delighted to note that pothole complaints had reduced by 90%.

On a motion from Councillor Roger Symonds, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To AGREE the Highway Structural Maintenance Programme for 2013/14; and

(2) To DELEGATE authority to the Divisional Director, Environmental Services and the Service Manager, Highways to alter the programme, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport, as may prove necessary during 2013/14 within the overall budget allocation.

Approval is sought for expenditure of £124,000 identified in the Integrated Transport Block capital programme approved by Council on 19th February 2013.  The funding is for the development of the Metro West (formerly the Greater Bristol Metro) project which will provide enhanced rail services for Keynsham, Oldfield Park and Bath Spa.

Duncan Hounsell (Saltford Station Campaign) in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 21 and on the Council's website] said that the Campaign group was delighted to hear that the Council was imminently about to commission the High Level Output Assessment funded by Cabinet at its June 2012 meeting.  He asked for his group to be kept informed of progress.  The group was also delighted that Cabinet was about to agree funding of £124K towards the Metro West project, which would include half-hourly services for Keynsham, Oldfield Park and Bath Spa and which would be a pre-cursor for these same services for Saltford.

David Redgewell in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 19 and on the Council's website] expressed concern.  He felt that the legal mechanisms and the timescales were out of synchronisation.  The report should therefore be updated.

Councillor Roger Symonds in proposing the item, observed that the proposals were specifically about Metro West and did not refer to specific stations.  However, the intention was to build or improve stations all along the line.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal by observing that the proposals were an opportunity to improve services from Bristol.  He acknowledged that there were risks involved, but felt that they were worth taking in order to achieve the partnership working which was essential to the project.

Councillor David Dixon welcomed the potential impact on Keynsham and Oldfield Park.  It was essential to provide alternatives to the car.  He had himself been occasionally frustrated by the long wait for trains between Keynsham and Bath.

On a motion from Councillor Roger Symonds, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To APPROVE the capital expenditure of £124,000 in 2013/14 as this authority’s contribution to the preparation costs for this financial year for the rail improvements promoted by the West of England Metro West Rail Project (subsequent contributions will be subject to further approvals);

(2) To DELEGATE authority to the Divisional Director for Planning & Transport Development in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport to finalise the Joint Working Agreement to cover this project; and

(3) To DELEGATE authority to the Divisional Director for Legal and Democratic Services to enter into the Joint Working Agreement on behalf of the Council.

In September last year a conference was held in recognition of the need for a Bath Transport Strategy to support the Core Strategy and the Council’s economic development strategy.  The report outlines the work to date and the scope and timetable of the work for the strategy.

David Redgewell in a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 19 and on the Council's website] asked the Cabinet to ensure adequate consultation about the proposals.  Although he supported the proposals, he reminded Cabinet that bus usage was increasing and that more passengers were disabled.  He also wished to highlight the issue of high fares.

Councillor Roger Symonds observed that the thinking for this item had begun with a conference the previous September.  Although there had been limited stakeholder presence, the debate had been started.  The strategy was not about a few isolated streets, but was an integrated approach.  In moving the proposals, he observed that he was happy to support the commitment to approximately £140K of work in due course.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He welcomed the clear, deliverable strategy.

On a motion from Councillor Roger Symonds, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To SUPPORT the need for a Bath Transport Strategy as set out in the report; and

(2) To APPROVE funds of approximately £140,000 to complete this work in due course.

The Council spends around £190M each year commissioning goods, works and services. Significant changes to the regulated environment and the likelihood of increased financial pressures means now is the time for the Council to focus on how its procurement activities can make a positive improvement in supporting the local economy.

Councillor David Bellotti introduced the item by pointing out to Cabinet that the proposals were hugely different from the existing strategy.  He was determined to ensure that the community received best value.  He quoted as an example the Keynsham Regeneration project, for which the Cabinet had insisted on selecting a company with green credentials, which would engage with local businesses when sourcing its own purchases.  This had brought money into the local economy.  The basic principle he was proposing was that for any purchase under £25K, local businesses must be given the first opportunity to quote.  The principles were explained in paragraph 5 of the report.  He moved the proposals.

Councillor Paul Crossley in seconding the proposal welcomed the exciting change to procurement principles which he felt would set an example to authorities all over the country.  He congratulated Jeff Wring (Divisional Director, Risk & Assurance) for devising the new approach.

Other Cabinet members expressed their keen support for the new strategy because of its benefits to the local economy and the example it would set to other businesses.

On a motion from Councillor David Bellotti, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To ADOPT the Procurement Strategy for the period 2013 – 2017;

(2) To AGREE that the five key principles laid out in the strategy should guide all procurement activities over this timeframe; and

(3) To AGREE that the actions outlined in the strategy are to be implemented with effect from April 2013 and updates on progress will form part of the corporate performance management arrangements and also be subject to Cabinet review.

In December 2011, Cabinet approved plans for events and projects to take place in 2012 to mark the Olympics year.  This report reviews and evaluates the 12 months of activity and assesses its impact on our communities.  An estimated 449,000 people participated in 140 events and projects during 2012.  The success of cross-Council working, and the high standards of safe event management, throughout the year is noted in the annual Safety Advisory Group for Events [SAGE] report

Councillor David Dixon introduced the item by showing part of a 10-minute DVD [a copy of which can be seen on the Council’s website as a link from the minutes] to which he provided a brief commentary.  He explained that all the activities which took place over the whole period had cost only £1 per participant.  The events had been a great source of pride for the whole area.  He moved the recommendations.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He thanked the teams all across the Council who had worked together with communities to celebrate the Olympics, Paralympics and Jubilee.

Councillor Cherry Beath said that the celebrations had been a tremendous occasion.  She was pleased that during that 2-week period, the drop in tourism had been relatively small.

On a motion from Councillor David Dixon, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To AGREE that the achievements of the Council and its partners and communities should be acknowledged and celebrated; and

(2) To ENCOURAGE Officers to build on the achievements of 2012, improving cross-departmental working on events and using the success of 2012 projects to strengthen work with local communities.

The Heritage Services Business Plan 2013-2018 has been prepared following the annual in-depth review of business activity and includes an analysis of the risk involved.

Councillor Cherry Beath introduced the report which showed how the service would generate more income with reduced costs.  It was a cohesive strategy for improvement.  She drew attention to the plans for the Roman Baths Learning Centre; a Visitor Management System; and the Assembly Rooms dilapidation project.  She moved the proposals to note the report and to approve the capital budgets for the 3 projects.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He fully supported protecting the heritage assets of the area.

On a motion from Councillor Cherry Beath, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To APPROVE the Heritage Services Business Plan 2013-2018; and

(2) To APPROVE the capital budgets for the Visitor Management System, Roman Baths infrastructure and Assembly Rooms dilapidations projects in the Council’s Capital Programme for 2013/14 and 2014/15.

The Cabinet is asked to consider entering into contracts with the LEP for RIF funding agreements, including drawdown and repayment schedules subject to the Council’s Capital Governance approval process for the first 3 priority scheme bids

Councillor Charles Gerrish in an ad hoc statement welcomed the opportunity for the Council to maximise its income.  He observed however that only £5.1Mhad been identified for flood mitigation, and this did not include any consideration of the effects down-stream in places such as Keynsham, where the flood plain there could be very adversely affected if the water flow was speeded up by the Bath flood mitigation.

David Redgewell in a statement welcomed the proposals which he said had been 10 years in preparation.  He felt the proposals would enable another key part of the river regeneration.  He was however disappointed that transport, equalities, housing and employment issues had not been mentioned at all in the report.

Councillor Cherry Beath thanked the previous speakers for their contributions.  She observed that the flood mitigation measures would support local jobs, encourage the economy and provide affordable housing.  She reassured Councillor Gerrish that measures for flood mitigation in Keynsham were being considered.  She moved the proposals which would enable the first phase of the regeneration of the sites.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He said that the points raised by Councillor Gerrish would receive a response and assured him that the present proposals would not impact negatively on Keynsham.  The use of this funding would enable the Council to bring forward its regeneration of the river corridor and the public walkways would totally revolutionise the area.

Councillor David Bellotti said that the visual improvement of the area would be evident very quickly and welcomed the use of the fund to achieve this.

Councillor Tim Ball said in response to Councillor Gerrish’s concerns that the Environment Agency had been involved in the plans from the very start and would ensure that there were no negative impacts down river.  He was delighted by the prospect that the gas tower would at last be removed.

On a motion from Councillor Cherry Beath, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To AUTHORISE the Strategic Director for Place in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Sustainable Development and Strategic Director for Resources to enter into contracts with the LEP for RIF funding agreements (including drawdown and repayment schedules subject to the Council’s Capital Governance approval process for the first 3 priority scheme bids):

(a)  Decommissioning and decontamination of the Windsor Gas Station:  to enable removal of the HSE restriction on development at Bath Western Riverside and other sites in the Windsor Bridge area.

(b) The construction of a new road and pedestrian bridge to replace the Destructor Bridge at BWR: to provide access to the BWR western site.

(c) The provision of flood mitigation works for the enterprise area, comprising river and landscape works between Churchill Bridge and Midland Bridge.

(2) To AUTHORISE the Strategic Director for Place in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Sustainable Development and Strategic Director for Resources to enter into Contract with Crest (by extending the current Corporate Agreement) to use RIF for decommissioning of the Gas Holder on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 188.

This report asks the Cabinet to agree the School Term and Holiday dates for the academic year 2014-15

Councillor Dine Romero explained that it was a statutory responsibility for the Council to decide and publish its term dates.  There would be 190 school days plus 5 inset days, in terms of more equal lengths.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.

On a motion from Councillor Dine Romero, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To ADOPT the School Term and Holiday dates for the 2014-15 academic year;

(2) To ACKNOWLEDGE that good school attendance and the link with good outcomes for children and young people; and

(3) To SUPPORT schools in encouraging parents to take holidays out of term time.

This report asks the Cabinet to agree the primary school admission criteria for the academic year 2014-15

Councillor Dine Romero explained that it was a statutory responsibility for the authority to publish the criteria and operate them consistently across the authority.  She explained the principles involved and moved the adoption of the criteria.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.

On a motion from Councillor Dine Romero, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To ADOPT the primary admission criteria for the 2014-15 academic year.

To seek approval for capital schemes at primary schools for inclusion in the 2013/14 schools capital programme

Councillor Dine Romero explained the 3 projects which it was intended to support with capital funding.  She moved the recommendations as printed in the report.

Councillor David Bellotti seconded the proposal.

Councillor Paul Crossley welcomed the range of schools into which the capital funds would be invested.

Councillor Tim Ball was particularly pleased to note the funding for St Michael’s School special needs facility and appealed to Cabinet to bear in mind that children with special needs must not be excluded from the benefits enjoyed by other children.

On a motion from Councillor Dine Romero, seconded by Councillor David Bellotti, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To AGREE that the projects put forward for approval are in line with Children’s Services capital programme priorities; and

(2) To APPROVE Capital allocations for inclusion in the Capital Programme 2013/14 for projects at the following schools:

·  Chew Magna Primary School

£208,000 – Replacement of temporary classrooms

·  Bathampton Primary School

£30,000 – Land purchase

·  St Michaels C of E Junior School

£143,000 – Remodelling of special needs facility