Agenda, decisions and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the District Executive meeting held on 7^th April 2016.

The minutes of the District Executive meeting held on 7^th April 2016, copes of which had been circulated, were taken as read and, having been approved as a correct record, were signed by the Chairman.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Peter Gubbins and Vega Sturgess (Strategic Director).

In accordance with the Council's current Code of Conduct (adopted July 2012), which includes all the provisions relating to Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI), personal and prejudicial interests, Members are asked to declare any DPI and also any personal interests (and whether or not such personal interests are also "prejudicial") in relation to any matter on the Agenda for this meeting. A DPI is defined in The Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012 No. 1464) and Appendix 3 of the Council’s Code of Conduct. A personal interest is defined in paragraph 2.8 of the Code and a prejudicial interest is defined in paragraph 2.9.

Members are reminded that they need to declare the fact that they are also a member of a County, Town or Parish Council as a Personal Interest. As a result of the change made to the Code of Conduct by this Council at its meeting on 15th May 2014, where you are also a member of Somerset County Council and/or a Town or Parish Council within South Somerset you must declare a prejudicial interest in any business on the agenda where there is a financial benefit or gain or advantage to Somerset County Council and/or a Town or Parish Council which would be at the cost or to the financial disadvantage of South Somerset District Council.  If you have a prejudicial interest you must comply with paragraphs 2.9(b) and 2.9(c) of the Code.

Councillor Henry Hobhouse declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Agenda item 13; Removal of Restrictive Covenants, Dunster House, Castle Cary (Confidential), as the property was owned by a personal friend.  He confirmed that he would leave the room during discussion of this item.

Questions, statements or comments from members of the public are welcome at the beginning of each meeting of the Council. The total period allowed for public participation shall not exceed 15 minutes except with the consent of the Council and each individual speaker shall be restricted to a total of three minutes. Where there are a number of persons wishing to speak about the same matter, they should consider choosing one spokesperson to speak on their behalf where appropriate. If a member of the public wishes to speak they should advise the committee administrator and complete one of the public participation slips setting out their name and the matter they wish to speak about. The public will be invited to speak in the order determined by the Chairman. Answers to questions may be provided at the meeting itself or a written reply will be sent subsequently, as appropriate. Matters raised during the public question session will not be debated by the Council at that meeting.

Mr J Bennett of East Coker Parish Council spoke regarding Agenda item 8: Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – Draft Charging Schedule.  He said that the Parish Council did not believe that SSDC officers had correctly addressed the issues raised by the community in the Summary of Main Points and had failed to deal with the substantive issues of CIL within the Yeovil Urban Extensions. 

Miss M Smith of Pitney caravan site thanked the Council and particularly the Assistant Director (Environment) for their assistance since she had spoken at the Full Council meeting on 21^st April regarding living conditions at the site.  She said that although the Pitney site was not the same on paper as it was in practice, she had received a new heater and it was hoped that a hot water heater would follow shortly.  She also asked if she could have a Traveller Liaison Officer.

The Chairman referred to the shooting incident the previous week at the Ilton gypsy site.  He said the site was still in the control of the police and the thanked the Housing officers for temporarily re-homing the remaining residents of the site. 

Councillor David Recardo, as the SSDC representative appointed to Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, advised that the new hospital car park and the new access onto Kingston were progressing on schedule.

Members debated whether a short summary of the Governors meetings or the full minutes were more usefully published in the District Executive Agenda and it was left to the Portfolio Holders discretion in the future.

The Portfolio Holder for Property and Climate Change explained the proposal to install cameras with automatic number plate recognition technology in some SSDC owned car parks and new ticket machines which required car registration numbers to be entered.  He outlined the enhanced enforcement by ticket inspectors and also the new ‘auto-pay’ system where users could register their car details and pay via a recognised payment method. 

The Assistant Director (Environment) confirmed that the proposal was a two year trial to check it was suitable for SSDC.  Car parks would be surveyed to see if they were suitable for the trial.  He said the suppliers, Bemrose Booth, were confident that the tighter enforcement would bring an increased income. 

During discussion, the following points were made:-

·         Motorcycles currently parked free of charge in designated motor cycle parking areas. However if they parked in an ordinary parking bay they would have to pay.

·         The new ticket machines would be the latest technology for entering a car registration number.

·         Signs would be placed at the entrances to car parks advising motorists of the new arrangements and the need to enter their car registration number to purchase a ticket. 

·         The ‘auto-pay’ system was one new option for motorists and would not be replacing the ticket system.

·         The arrangements for disabled motorists remained unchanged.

·         A minimum stay time would be set to allow pick up and drop off of passengers.

·         Existing parking arrangements in Castle Cary and Wincanton would not be affected. 

·         This would not affect the current pass arrangements at the Brympton Way car park.

·         Other parking payment and enforcement arrangements may be considered as a result of carrying out the trial, and would be subject to a further report to District Executive and in agreement with the service provider.

At the conclusion of the debate, Members requested that a monitoring report be presented in 12 months time and were content to confirm the recommendations of the report.

The Committee were first addressed by two members of the public:

Mrs L Whitsun-Jones, a resident of East Coker, said that evidence put forward by consultees had been largely ignored.  She said the infrastructure proposed for the Keyford site had not been revised since the number of houses had been reduced from 2,500 down to 1,600 and that infrastructure requirement made both the Yeovil Sustainable Urban Extensions (SUE’s) virtually unviable.  She also referred to the independent inspection where the public could only speak regarding the main modifications and there would be no opportunity to put forward additional information.  She concluded that East Coker Parish Council would have no benefit from the houses and she urged the Committee to reconsider the zero rating of SUE’s. 

Mr A Burrows said he was a specialist in economics and planning and he had been engaged by Mudford Parish Council to advise them.  He said there had been a serious procedural issue as a development viability appraisal of the 800 houses dated 30^th March 2016 was after the public consultation had taken place. 

The Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning (Place Making) said the proposed modifications to the draft charging schedule for Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) were the result of public consultation and she expressed disappointment that the public did not feel the process was open and transparent.  She said the proposed changes were evidenced and the next step was confirmation by Council before submission to the Examiner. 

The Principal Spatial Planner, in response to the public comments, clarified that CIL was not intended for community benefit but was to pay for infrastructure that was necessary for development.  He did not accept that there had been any procedural issues as all the statutory processes had been completed and all information was publically available.  He noted that Mudford Parish Council had not sought to be represented at the Planning Inspection. 

The Principal Spatial Planner then outlined the 4 main issues which had been raised in the consultation process which had led to the two proposed modifications.  One modification to remove reference to C2 uses in the charging schedule and, a second modification to remove retail (A1-A5 uses) in town centres and primary shopping areas from the charging schedule.  It was explained that supplementary evidence on a development typology of 800 dwellings in Yeovil would be submitted to the Examiner.  Also, that the concept of delivering additional cemetery space around Yeovil was to be added to the draft Regulation 123 List.  He then explained that the next step was to advertise the modifications prior to submitting the charging schedule to the Examiner, and that anyone wishing to speak on the modifications would be able to request to be heard, but only in relation to the modifications.

In response to questions from Members, the Principal Spatial Planner advised:-

·         C2a use as well as C2 was excluded as the current viability evidence showed it could not be tolerated.

·         Retail property converted into a new dwelling would be subject to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 178.

Members were content to note the monthly news snapshot information.

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee expressed their concern that some reports were being presented to Full Council with no opportunity for Scrutiny Committee to comment upon them first.  She also asked that monthly updates on the recruitment of the new Chief Executive Officer be made at District Executive.

The Chairman acknowledged that there had been need to bring reports to Council at short notice and he offered to hold Members Workshops in the future to address this. 

Members noted that the next scheduled meeting of the District Executive would take place on Thursday, 2^nd June 2016 in the Main Committee Room, Council Offices, Brympton Way, Yeovil commencing at 9.30 a.m.

It was subsequently agreed to hold a Special District Executive meeting on Thursday 26^th May at 2.00pm to agree the final details of the lease of the Westland Leisure Complex.  This meeting will be held in confidential session. 

(Councillor Henry Hobhouse, having earlier declared a personal and prejudicial interest, left the room during consideration of this item).

The Assistant Director (Finance and Corporate Services) advised that the local Ward Members had been consulted and no issues had been raised.

At the conclusion of a short debate, Members were content to agree the removal of the restrictive covenants. 

(Voting: 8 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)

The Portfolio Holder for Property and Climate Change explained the history of the contract for bus shelters in Yeovil and the proposed future maintenance and refurbishment of them. 

During discussion, varying views were expressed and at the conclusion of the debate, the majority of Members confirmed the amended recommendations.

(Voting: 7 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)