Agenda item

Report No: COU/SE/16/002

 

Referrals from Cabinet: 9 February 2016
1.	Annual Treasury Management and Investment Strategy Statements 2016/2017
	Portfolio Holder: Cllr Ian Houlder
2.	Budget and Council Tax Setting 2016/2017 and Medium Term Financial Strategy
	Portfolio Holder: Cllr Ian Houlder   This item will be considered separately under Agenda Item 9 below.
3.	Enterprise Zones: Update
	Portfolio Holder: Cllr Alaric Pugh
4.	Third Generation Artificial Pitch Provision in Haverhill
	Portfolio Holder: Cllr Joanna Rayner
5.	Park Farm, Ingham: Adoption of Concept Statement:
	Portfolio Holder: Cllr Alaric Pugh
6.	Tayfen Road Development Area, Bury St Edmunds: Masterplan
	Portfolio Holder: Cllr Alaric Pugh
Referral from Democratic Renewal Working Party: 4 February 2016
1.	Freedom of the Borough: Protocol
	Chairman of the Working Party: Cllr Patsy Warby

 

 

Council considered the Referrals report of Recommendations from Cabinet and Democratic Renewal Working Party contained within Report No: COU/SE/16/002.

 

(A)    Referrals from Cabinet: 9 February 2016

 

1.       Annual Treasury Management and Investment Strategy Statements 2016/2017

 

Approval was sought for the Annual Treasury Management and Investment Strategy Statements 2016/2017.

 

Councillor Ian Houlder, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Performance drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s (CIPFA) Code of Practice on Treasury Management required that, prior to the start of the financial year Council should formally approve an Annual Treasury Management and Investment Strategy, setting out the Council’s treasury management policy and strategy statements for the forthcoming year.

 

Members were informed that no major changes had been made to the Strategy or Code of Practice since they were last approved by Council in February 2015.

 

On the motion of Councillor Ian Houlder, seconded by Councillor Sara Mildmay-White, and duly carried it was

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)     the Annual Treasury Management and Investment Strategy Statements 2016/2017, as contained in Appendix 1 to Report No: TMS/SE/16/002, be adopted; and 

 

(2)     the Treasury Management Code of Practice 2016/2017, as contained in Appendix 2 to Report No: TMS/SE/16/002, be approved.

 

2.       Budget and Council Tax Setting 2016/2017 and Medium Term Financial Strategy

 

The recommendations arising from this report were considered separately under Agenda Item 9 (Minute 132 refers).

 

3.       Enterprise Zones: Update

 

Approval was sought for a number of recommendations associated with accepting the allocation of Enterprise Zones at Haverhill Research Park and 14 hectares of land at Suffolk Business Park, Bury St Edmunds.

 

Councillor Alaric Pugh, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that the Enterprise Zone (EZ) bids made by the New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership (which included 14 hectares of Land at Suffolk Business Park) and the Greater Cambridge Greater Peterborough Local Enterprise Partnership (which included Haverhill Research Park) had been successful.  The Cabinet report (CAB/SE/16/006 refers) provided details of the demonstrable benefits of this status; however, there remained a number of financial implications that needed to be worked through, particularly in respect of associated prospective business rates income and business rates retention. As the exact position regarding these matters was at present unclear from Government, delegated authority was being sought by Council for Cabinet to manage specific details to support the development of the EZs.

 

Whilst support was generally shown for the allocation of EZ status for the two sites, some reservation was expressed regarding the lack of clarity from Government on funding for the schemes, including the role of the Local Enterprise Partnerships in the allocation of future business rates income, and whether any subsidy to businesses located in the EZs would be expected of the taxpayer in the future. It was also felt that consideration should also be given to enabling a level of Member scrutiny on the proposed business cases before decisions on these were taken by Cabinet. 

 

In response, Councillor Pugh acknowledged that insufficient detail from Government was forthcoming at the present time, and given this and the tight timescale in which to make a decision on whether to accept the EZ allocations, appropriate delegations were being sought to pursue matters in accordance with Council’s original in principle decision taken in November 2015.

 

On the motion of Councillor Alaric Pugh, seconded by Councillor Terry Clements, and duly carried it was

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)     the allocation of the Enterprise Zones be accepted for  implementation in April 2016 and delegated authority be given to Cabinet to negotiate and agree the details and precise terms of the Enterprise Zones (including entering into any legal agreements), subject to inclusion of a clause that requires  discussions and, if necessary, renegotiation of the terms around the possible changes that come with Business Rates Retention in 2020;

 

(2)     subject to (1) above, delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning and Growth in consultation with the s151 Officer to work with the Local Enterprise Partnerships and other bodies to promote the two Enterprise Zones;

 

(3)     delegated authority also be given to Cabinet to approve business cases for investment in on-site infrastructure to support the development of the EZs as and when these come forward and before any works can commence; and 

 

(4)     the discretionary business rates discount for new businesses locating within the EZs as explained in paragraph 4.7 of Report No: CAB/SE/16/006, be approved.

 

4.       Third Generation Artificial Pitch Provision in Haverhill

 

Approval was sought for a loan request submitted by the Haverhill Community Sports Association (HCSA).

 

As stated in Minute 126 above, an addendum to this report was tabled, which together with additional narrative, set out an amendment to Cabinet’s original Recommendation 2(b).

 

At this point, the Mayor adjourned the meeting for a few minutes to give Members sufficient time to read the content of the addendum.  The meeting resumed at 7.52pm

 

Councillor Joanna Rayner, Portfolio Holder for Leisure and Culture drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that HCSA had been successful in obtaining a time limited grant offer of £300,000 from the Football Foundation to create a third generation (3g) football pitch on the New Croft site at Chalkstone Way, Haverhill.

 

The Council’s West Suffolk Playing Pitch Assessment had identified a need for a 3g pitch in Haverhill to meet current and future growth in demand, and the New Croft site was a logical location to place such a facility. The new facility was estimated to cost £600,000 and the HCSA currently had a shortfall of £300,000. HCSA had therefore approached the Council for a loan of a further £300,000, on a bridging loan basis ahead of other third party developer funding, to enable the HCSA to accept the grant offer and to commence on site prior to next football season.

 

Attention was then drawn to the addendum.  In respect of recommendation 2(b), the developer had clarified that, while it was supportive of the scheme in principle, it had not been its intention to make a unilateral agreement to repay the Council’s bridging loan, as understood by the HCSA (and reflected in the Cabinet report).   Instead it would prefer for any developer contribution to this, and any other off and onsite facilities, to be addressed through the planning process, in the normal manner.   Nonetheless, it was still acknowledged that any development in Haverhill would create an increased demand for 3g pitch capacity in the town, and this scheme was a good way in which to meet that requirement, funded proportionately through developer contributions at the appropriate time.   Such developer contributions were subject to the outcome of the planning applications which were yet to be determined and, it was noted that for absolute clarity, the Council’s decision regarding this offer of a bridging loan would not affect the determination of those planning/s106 processes by the local planning authority.

 

In addition, it had also been suggested that the loan term be extended to a period of up to ten years to give the HCSA maximum scope to secure the match-funding in full.

 

The original Recommendation 2(b) approved by Cabinet on 9 February 2016 was therefore proposed by Councillor Rayner to be deleted and as an amendment to Cabinet’s referral, that it be replaced with:

 

“The ‘Financial Considerations’ (section 3) and ‘Conditions specific to the HCSA request’ (Appendix 1) set out in CAB/SE/16/007 being amended to allow for a loan period of up to 10 years and to clarify that the loan will be repaid to the Council once it has received the full monies or upon the expiry of 10 years, whichever is the sooner (the issue of developer contributions being a matter for separate agreement between housing developers and the Council as part of the normal planning process).”

 

Should the loan be supported there would be a series of safeguards placed in the loan agreement to protect the Council’s interest, in accordance with the Council’s existing loans policy. Proposed conditions of the loan were contained in Appendix 1 attached to the Cabinet report (CAB/SE/16/007 refers), as amended to accord with the proposal set out in the revised Recommendation 2(b) above.

 

Council expressed full support for the proposal and the revised recommendations.  Recognition was expressed to the officers, HCSA and other interested parties involved for the substantial amount of work put into achieving a pragmatic resolution to enable this project to come to fruition.  The provision of a 3g pitch at the New Croft facility was a significant achievement for Haverhill. 

 

On the motion of Councillor Joanna Rayner, seconded by Councillor Clive Springett, and duly carried it was

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)     the bridging loan request received from Haverhill Community Sports Association for up to £300,000 to enable it to progress the building of a third generation (3g) football pitch facility at the New Croft site in Chalkstone Way, Haverhill be approved; and

 

(2)     the Head of Operations, in consultation with the Services Manager (Legal), be authorised to prepare the necessary legal agreements to support the issue of the loan, in accordance with the terms set out in Report No: CAB/SE/16/007, subject to:

 

(a)         the Haverhill Community Sports Association confirming acceptance of the loan agreement conditions; and

 

(b)     the ‘Financial Considerations’ (section 3) and ‘Conditions specific to the HCSA request’ (Appendix 1) set out in CAB/SE/16/007 being amended to allow for a loan period of up to 10 years and to clarify that the loan will be repaid to the Council once it has received the full monies or upon the expiry of 10 years, whichever is the sooner (the issue of developer contributions being a matter for separate agreement between housing developers and the Council as part of the normal planning process).

 

5.       Park Farm, Ingham: Adoption of Concept Statement

 

Approval was sought for the Concept Statement for Park Farm, Ingham.

 

Councillor Alaric Pugh, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that thorough consideration had been given to this item by the Sustainable Development Working Party and Cabinet, both of which were satisfied that the Concept Statement had been prepared in accordance with the Vision 2031 Development Plan document and the Council’s Protocol for Preparing Concept Statements.

 

On the motion of Councillor Alaric Pugh, seconded by Councillor Jim Thorndyke, and duly carried it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Concept Statement for Park Farm, Ingham, as contained in Appendix A to Report No: SDW/SE/16/001, be adopted as informal planning guidance.

 

6.       Tayfen Road Development Area, Bury St Edmunds: Masterplan

 

Approval was sought for the Masterplan for the Tayfen Road Development Area, Bury St Edmunds.

 

Councillor Alaric Pugh, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that the complex detail of this masterplan had been thoroughly considered by the Sustainable Development Working Party and Cabinet, and provided an exciting and important development to this part of Bury St Edmunds.

 

Concern was expressed regarding potential infrastructure problems as any potential to widen carriageways along Parkway and through to Tayfen Road would be lost should the aspirations provided in the masterplan be realised.

 

Councillor David Nettleton, one of the Ward Members for Risbygate, welcomed the masterplan and was pleased to support an increase in housing in this location, but expressed concern regarding the potential increase in traffic generation.  He considered that roads should not be widened in the centre of town; however working with the Highway Authority, action needed to be taken to alleviate potential problems leading from Tayfen Road to and including the Out Northgate roundabout. Councillor Nettleton also offered a potential solution for making better pedestrian and cycle links from the railway station to West Suffolk College, whilst avoiding travelling along Tayfen Road altogether.  He also made reference to the affordable housing element of the scheme, the current 10% provision of which, was a concern previously been expressed by the Cabinet.

 

Councillor Pugh supported Councillor Nettleton’s comments regarding the promotion of better pedestrian and cycle links for this part of town.  He added that during the pre-application and planning application stages discussions would be required to establish that a planning application would need to be accompanied by a Transport Assessment which would assess the traffic impacts of the application(s) and proposals would need to be made to mitigate these. Suffolk County Council’s Bury St Edmunds Transport Strategy 2011-2031 had identified that there needed to be improvements to junctions along Tayfen Road but emphasis was placed on the wider considerations regarding the need for highway improvements in connection with the re-development of this area of the town and the town centre generally.  Such improvements also needed to sit comfortably with the emerging Bury St Edmunds Town Centre Masterplan.

 

On the motion of Councillor Alaric Pugh, seconded by Councillor Ian Houlder, and duly carried it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Masterplan for the Tayfen Road Development Area, Bury St Edmunds, as contained in Appendix A, as amended by the changes included in Appendix D, to Report No: SDW/SE/16/002, be adopted as non-statutory planning guidance.

 

(B)    Referrals from Democratic Renewal Working Party:

4 February 2016

 

1.       Freedom of the Borough Protocol

 

Approval was sought for a new Freedom of the Borough protocol, which would form part of the Council’s Constitution.

 

Councillor Patsy Warby, Chairman of the Democratic Renewal Working Party drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including that if approved, the protocol provided a formally agreed process by which nominations should be assessed for persons (or organisations) considered for the honour of Freedom of the Borough.  This ensured transparency and reflected best practice in other local authorities.

 

Councillor Warby explained how the process of assessing nominations would work in practice and that the Working Party had recommended amendments to the draft protocol originally presented to it on 4 February 2016. The amended draft was attached as Appendix 1 to Report No: COU/SE/16/002 for approval.

 

A number of typographical errors were identified in Appendix 1 and these would be rectified under existing officer delegated authority.

 

On the motion of Councillor Patsy Warby, seconded by Councillor Terry Buckle, and duly carried it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Freedom of the Borough Protocol, attached as Appendix 1 to Report No: COU/SE/16/002, be approved.