Agenda, decisions and minutes

No apologies for absence were received.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 9 February 2016 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 9 February 2016 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

At each Cabinet meeting, up to 15 minutes shall be allocated for questions from and discussion with, non-Cabinet members.  Members wishing to speak during this session should if possible, give notice in advance.  Who speaks and for how long will be at the complete discretion of the person presiding.

No non-Cabinet Members in attendance wished to speak under this item.

Members of the public who live or work in the Borough are invited to put one question or statement of not more than three minutes duration relating to items to be discussed in Part 1 of the agenda only. If a question is asked and answered within three minutes, the person who asked the question may ask a supplementary question that arises from the reply.

A person who wishes to speak must register at least 15 minutes before the time the meeting is scheduled to start. 

There is an overall time limit of 15 minutes for public speaking, which may be extended at the Chairman’s discretion.

No members of the public in attendance had registered to speak under this item.

Report No:   CAB/SE/16/013

Chairman: Diane Hind                   Lead Officer: Christine Brain

The Cabinet received and noted Report No: CAB/SE/16/013, which informed the Cabinet of the following items discussed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 9 March 2016:

(1)     Presentation by the Police and Crime

          Commissioner and the Chief Constable on the Suffolk Local Policing Review;

(2)     Presentation by the Portfolio Holder for Resources and Performance;

(3)     West Suffolk Housing Strategy: Progress Report against Action Points;

(4)     Decisions Plan – March to May 2016; and

(5)     Work Programme Update. 

Councillor Diane Hind, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, drew relevant issues to the attention of the Cabinet, including that  thorough discussions had been held following the presentations received on the Suffolk Policing Review and from the Portfolio Holder for Resources and Performance. 

In response to a question, the Cabinet was informed that discussion had been held with the Police and Crime Commissioner regarding the potential decriminalisation of parking and the response had been that work was underway with district, borough and county councils to transfer responsibility for parking enforcement to the local authority.  It was unclear how long this process might take; the potential costs involved and whether, or by how much, the Police would financially contribute to the proposed changes.   

Portfolio Holder: Peter Stevens                Lead Officer: Mark Walsh

Summary and Reason for Recommendation:

Purchase of 5 No. Terberg OmniDEL refuse bin lifters

Section 4.3 of the West Suffolk Contract Procedure Rules state that: Between £50,001 and the EU Threshold any exemption must be approved by the Officer and Head of Service in consultation with the Head of Resources and Performance. The Officer must produce evidence to support the request for any exemption and the Head of Service shall prepare a report for the next Cabinet to support the action taken, hence this agenda item.

The exemption, which was exercised on 26 February 2016, the reason for it (together with support evidence) has been be forwarded to the Head of Resources and Performance for approval.

The Terberg OmniDEL lift is the standardised fitment to the St Edmundsbury refuse vehicle fleet.  The lifters are capitalised separately to their host vehicle on the basis that, experience has proven they do not last as long as the vehicles (6 years +/-1 for the lifts compared to 8 years +/-2 for the vehicles).

The lifts are all identical in terms of mounting and installation thereby enabling these lifts to be swapped around as and when required and one is kept spare which enables a vehicle, after suffering damage or failure to the lift, to be placed back into service with the spare fitted within a few hours.  Consequently, to ensure commonality and standardisation of the lifts it is not possible to obtain competitive tenders.

TerbergMatec have offered new lifts with a part exchange value of £750 per old lift, therefore the unit price equates to £15,800 minus £750 (£15,050).  The new lifts will be a straight swap the old units.  No other supplier can offer that ‘straight swap’ or the part exchange discount.  It is therefore considered that in addition to the need for retaining a standardised kit for across the fleet the reasons given above, best value has also been achieved. 

The estimated total value of the exemption is £75,250 and was made under the following exemption criteria, as stated in Section 4.5 of the Contract Procedure Rules:

Recommendation:

The Cabinet is requested to NOTE this exemption to the West Suffolk Contract Procedure Rules, as contained in the Constitution.

The Cabinet received and noted a narrative item which provided an exemption to the West Suffolk Contract Procedure Rules of the Constitution, relating to the procurement of five refuse bin lifters, which were a standardised fitment to the St Edmundsbury refuse vehicle fleet.

Councillor Peter Stevens, Portfolio Holder for Operations, drew relevant issues to the attention of the Cabinet.

The exemption, as set out in the agenda, was duly noted by the Cabinet.

To consider the most recently published version of the Cabinet’s Decisions Plan

Report No:   CAB/SE/16/014

Portfolio Holder: John Griffiths        Lead Officer: Ian Gallin

The Cabinet considered Report No: CAB/SE/16/014, which was the Cabinet Decisions Plan covering the period March 2016 to May 2016.

Members took the opportunity to review the intended forthcoming decisions of the Cabinet; however, no further information or amendments were requested on this occasion.

Report No:   CAB/SE/16/015

Portfolio Holder: Ian HoulderLead Officer: Rachael Mann

RESOLVED:

That the write-off of the amounts detailed in the exempt appendices to Report No: CAB/SE/16/015 be approved, as follows:

(1)     Exempt Appendix 1: Council Tax totalling £14,777.26

(2)     Exempt Appendix 2:  Housing Benefit overpayments £10,584.56

The Cabinet considered Report No: CAB/SE/16/015, which provided the collection data in respect of Council Tax and National Non-Domestic Rates and sought approval for the write-off of debts as contained in the Exempt Appendices.

Councillor Ian Houlder, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Performance, drew relevant issues to the attention of the Cabinet, including the current collection performance, as set out in Section 3 of the report.

RESOLVED:

That the write-off of the amounts detailed in the exempt appendices to Report No: CAB/SE/16/015 be approved, as follows:

(1)     Exempt Appendix 1: Council Tax totalling £14,777.26

(2)     Exempt Appendix 2:  Housing Benefit overpayments £10,584.56

Report No:   CAB/SE/16/016 TO FOLLOW

Portfolio Holder: Alaric Pugh           Lead Officer: Steven Wood

The Cabinet considered Report No: CAB/SE/16/016, which presented the recommendations of the Sustainable Development Working Party emanating from its meeting 17 March 2016.

On 17 March 2016, the Sustainable Development Working Party considered the following substantive items of business:

(1)     West Suffolk Community Energy Plan - Update

(2)     Western Way, Bury St Edmunds Masterplan (Revised)

Councillor Alaric Pugh, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, drew relevant issues to the attention of the Cabinet, including that thorough consideration had been given to the two items outlined above at the meeting of the Sustainable Development Working Party.

In respect of the revised Western Way Masterplan, the Working Party had been fully supportive of the document; however, emphasis had been placed on ensuring issues of potential increased traffic generation and the provision of adequate transport infrastructure were suitably addressed at the appropriate time.

Councillor Peter Stevens added that a positive debate had been held by the Working Party and despite the low number of responses received during the public consultation, the comments had been particularly informative and constructive, and indicated an appreciation of the vision for the site.

RESOLVED:

That the capital allocation approved for the development of a rent-a-roof solar scheme for business, as agreed by the Council (Report No: CAB/SE/14/009 dated 2 December 2014 refers), be extended to support such investment schemes as set out in Section 1.3 of Report No: SDW/SE/16/004, based on renewable power, heat and energy efficiency financing.

RESOLVED:

That the capital allocation approved for the development of a rent-a-roof solar scheme for business, as agreed by the Council (Report No: CAB/SE/14/009 dated 2 December 2014 refers), be extended to support such investment schemes as set out in Section 1.3 of Report No: SDW/SE/16/004, based on renewable power, heat and energy efficiency financing.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL (Extraordinary Council 19 April 2016):

That the Masterplan for Western Way, Bury St Edmunds as set out in Appendix A to Report No: SDW/SE/16/003, be adopted as non-statutory planning guidance.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

That the Masterplan for Western Way, Bury St Edmunds as set out in Appendix A to Report No: SDW/SE/16/003, be adopted as non-statutory planning guidance.

Report No:   CAB/SE/16/017 TO FOLLOW

Portfolio Holder: Alaric Pugh           Lead Officer: Steven Wood

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL (Extraordinary Council 19 April 2016):

That the following be approved:

(1)     the proposals the Council should pursue are the options that deliver a comprehensive development of the site identified by the adopted revised Western Way, Bury St Edmunds Masterplan which includes the DHL/NHS distribution centre and the Council-owned land;

(2)     a budget of up to £100,000, to be funded from the Council’s strategic priorities and medium term financial strategy reserve, is allocated to progress the proposal that best achieves the Council’s objectives for the site to deliverability and design stage to enable a preferred option to be formulated and presented to Cabinet, as set out in Section 4 of Report No: CAB/SE/16/017; and

(3)     following the Cabinet consideration of the preferred proposal a report be prepared outlining Cabinet’s recommended development scheme for Council to give final approval for the delivery of phase II of the Western Way Development site.  

The Cabinet considered Report No: CAB/SE/16/017, which sought approval for an allocation of a budget of up to £100,000 to enable work to continue to progress the option that best achieved the Council’s objectives for the Western Way development site to the ‘delivery and design’ stage.  This would subsequently enable a preferred option to be formulated and presented to a future meeting of Cabinet.

Councillor Alaric Pugh, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, drew relevant issues to the  attention of the Cabinet, including that the original Public Service Village concept (now to be known as Western Way Development site) was approved and adopted by the Council in 2006. West Suffolk House was built as part of Phase 1.

On 16 December 2014, the Council had agreed to undertake initial work to formulate Phase II of the Public Service Village project.  Funding was approved for the appointment of consultants to:

(a)     assist with the review of the adopted Masterplan;

(b)     provide project management support; and

(c)     provide legal and property advice.

As part of this initial stage, the commercial considerations were examined to establish whether the proposals contained in the revised Masterplan for this project were financially feasible.

The initial appraisal concluded that the most financially prudent option, if the project was progressed, was for the Council to effectively become the developer of the site.  This then presented a number of development options taking account of the interests being expressed and land ownership requirements.

The Development Options for the Council were analysed over a 30-year period, giving a net present value of net levels of deficit (D) and surplus (S) (owing to commercial sensitivities, the actual amounts for each option, the methodology and assumptions were detailed in Exempt Appendix 1 attached to the report).  Three of the options outlined below gave the Council a surplus:

1.   Do nothing – cost of maintaining the site (D)

2.   Simply sell the land for private development (S)

3a.          Develop and include DHL land  (S)

3b.          Develop and exclude DHL land (S)                         

The Borough Council had been clear from the outset, and particularly when agreeing the 2006 Masterplan, that the preferred option and ultimate aim for the site would be for a comprehensive development of the whole site including the DHL/NHS logistical building. The revised Masterplan (see Minute 193 above) addressed this aim.

The Cabinet expressed enthusiasm for this project and agreed that based on the information received to date, Option 3a would best achieve the Council’s objectives.  This was subsequently recommended  to Council that this option be progressed to the delivery and design stage.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

That the following be approved:

(1)    the proposals the Council should pursue are the options that deliver a comprehensive development of the site identified by the adopted revised Western Way, Bury St Edmunds Masterplan which includes the DHL/NHS distribution centre and the Council-owned land;

(2)    a budget of up to £100,000, to be funded from the Council’s strategic priorities and medium term financial strategy reserve, is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 194.

To consider whether the press and public should be excluded during the consideration of the following items because it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during the items, there would be disclosure to them of exempt categories of information as prescribed in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, and indicated against each item and, in all circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

See minute 196 below.

Exempt Appendix 1 to Report No: CAB/SE/16/017 TO FOLLOW

The Cabinet considered Exempt Appendix 1 to Report No: CAB/SE/16/017 under Agenda Item 10, however no reference was made to specific detail and therefore this item was not held in private session.

Exempt Appendices 1 and 2 to Report No:    CAB/SE/16/015

Portfolio Holder: Ian HoulderLead Officer: Rachael Mann

The Cabinet considered Exempt Appendices 1 and 2 to Report No: CAB/SE/16/015 under Agenda Item 8, however no reference was made to specific detail and therefore this item was not held in private session.