| Time: | 7.30 pm | Place: | Committee Room, Royston Town Hall, Melbourn Street, Royston |
| PRESENT: | Councillor Fiona Hill(Chairman), Councillor H.M. Marshall(Vice-Chairman), Councillor P.C.W. Burt, Councillor Bill Davidson, Councillor Paul Grimes, Councillor A.F. Hunter, Councillor R.E. Inwood |
| IN ATTENDANCE: | Louise Symes (Project Manager) David Hill (Planning Officer) Alan Fleck (Community Development Officer) Susanne Gow (Committee and Member Services Officer) |
| ALSO PRESENT: | 6 members of the public, including two Royston Town Councillors and the registered speakers. |
| Item | Description/Resolution | Status | Action | |
| PART I | ||||
| 29 |
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE No apologies for absence were received. |
Noted | ||
| 30 |
MINUTES Minutes RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Royston and District Committee Meeting held on 28 July 2010 be approved as a true record of the proceedings, and be signed by the Chairman. „X A reply was expected but had not been received from Herts Highways to the Committee¡¦s letter on re-routing the No 331 bus from Tannery Drift to Kneesworth Street. Contact was to be made to find out why there was no response; „X Newmarket Road ¡V response to request for 30mph speed limit sign; „X Dog fouling (see Minute 38 - Champion News). |
Agreed | ||
| 31 |
NOTIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS There was no notification of other business at this Committee Meeting. |
Noted | ||
| 32 |
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS The Chairman welcomed everybody to the meeting, including the public speakers under Public Participation, Royston Town Councillors Graham Palmer and F J Smith and members of the public. Members were reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda, should be declared as either a prejudicial or personal interest and are required to notify the Chairman of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda. Members declaring a prejudicial interest can speak on the item, but must leave the room before the debate and vote. |
Noted | ||
| 33 |
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 1) Mrs Sheila Hogan of the North Herts 50+ Forum addressed the Royston and District Committee. She explained that she and her husband Bill were members of the enthusiastic volunteer Executive of the Forum, which was run by people over the age of 50 for people aged 50 and above. Their aim was to give the 50+ age group a strong voice in North Herts and the Forum¡¦s mission was to change the general perception of older people. They hoped to enable such people to represent themselves, to be involved and to contribute to major decisions. Mrs Hogan explained that the Forum met every month, had a membership of 20 people plus two Associate Members and 50 more had expressed an interest. The meetings consisted of guest speakers followed by an Open Forum in which all views, concerns and needs could be expressed before being taken, if necessary, to the appropriate service providers by an action group or member of the Executive. She stated that the Forum enjoyed the ear of Hertfordshire County Council and North Herts District Council, but was independent of them. The Forum intended to develop similar relationships with public and private bodies that wished to ascertain feedback to existing or planned policies, and would take action through campaign groups. They were non-party political, but would address political issues. Mrs Hogan advised that the Forum was in the process of addressing: safe and caring neighbourhoods; digital exclusion; transportation and the planned withdrawal of bank cheques. The Committee were told that the Forum: was currently participating in Future East, the regional Forum for older people; had been invited by the clearing banks to participate in a bank cheque workshop; had recommended that the Local Strategic Partnership should adopt the principles of HM Government's National Commitment entitled "A Good Place to Grow Older"; and had asked the Government to take into account the views of the over 50s, the major users of the NHS and to do nothing about them without them, when implementing any plan to hand control of the NHS budgets to General Practitioners. The North Herts Over 50s Forum had adopted a written constitution, developed action plans, created budgets, demonstrated that they had a clear voice and marketed the Forum to North Herts by means of newsletter articles, invitations to associate (under 50s) groups and by commercial advertisements. Challenges had been identified, and initial funding received from the Primary Care Trust and Comic Relief. The District Council had provided venues free of charge and encouragement, but Mrs Hogan pointed out that events were costly to manage and run, and enabling funding was required to hold events and to publish a Forum newsletter. The Royston and District Committee had already given the Forum funds via a grant application in order to help with recruitment activities in Royston. They now needed a Royston Champion to set up a Royston Group under the North Herts Over 50s Forum umbrella. The next Executive Meeting was on Monday 4 October at 6pm at the North Herts District Council Offices in Gernon Road, Letchworth Garden City and Mrs Hogan invited questions from the Committee. The Chairman thanked Mrs Hogan for her presentation and Members held a brief discussion. It was suggested that it was more appropriate to involve the Royston Town Council when seeking a Royston Champion and that the Executive Committee should contact the Royston Town Clerk to see what she could do to help with this. 2) Mrs Sarah Wren thanked the Royston and District Committee for giving her the opportunity to address them concerning Hertfordshire Community Meals (HCM). She gave a presentation which consisted of: a brief background to the 'meals on wheels' framework and the development of Hertfordshire Community Meals; an explanation of the community benefit that HCM provides; and a brief review of progress throughout Hertfordshire, focusing on provision in North Herts and Royston. Mrs Wren explained that HCM was launched to provide a socially-minded enterprise that helped to meet the nutritional and social needs of elderly, sick, disabled and other vulnerable people throughout Hertfordshire. This venture had been successful and had developed to serve eight of Hertfordshire's 10 districts ensuring that there was a strong political will to support the service and ensure its long term success. This served to: lessen inequality by reducing social exclusion through daily contact; improve health by providing good value, affordable meals, with choice and an increased interest in food; increase independence through provision of social interaction via lunch clubs and support for people to stay in their own homes while providing security for those living alone; benefit the wider community by giving carers some freedom, providing support for elderly people with displaced families; and provide employment opportunities for local people at a variety of skill levels, with opportunities for part time, flexible working. Mrs Wren then gave the Committee a progress review, giving numbers or meals provided in each district (at present 3,700 per month in North Herts) and declared that a team of 12 local volunteers delivered 280 of these meals in Royston. Client numbers were stable and it was hoped to rise to a full 365 day service during the next year. However, during July Royston clients received a five-day service and Kelshall, Therfield and Reed had just a three-day service, with just nine clients in Royston receiving the full seven-day service during the full month. Client satisfaction was high, with 91% clients saying that the service was excellent, 75% saying the delivery time was 'just right' and 90% stating that they would recommend the service to their friends. Members were informed that a tea time service was shortly to be piloted in the Hemel Hempstead area who want it; monthly campaigns are in progress to help clients with issues such as good hydration and nutrition, distraction burglary, garden and home maintenance concerns, etc. Extra checks that could be done by the delivery staff to support client health and wellbeing were under consideration, extra advice to lunch clubs on how to support clients¡¦ welfare needs was being provided and a full range of fun activities to help with clients¡¦ social needs was being launched at the day centre in St Albans. The Committee had a number of issues put before them with which they could help to provide support for the HCM service in North Herts. These were reinstating a subsidy for the meals for clients, assisting with support for CRB renewal and referring vulnerable people who were currently not using the service to take up the offer of HCM meals. Members were requested to refer any elderly or vulnerable people who may need the service, the HCM, who would then contact them. The Chairman thanked Mrs Wren for her presentation and suggested that those Royston Town Councillors who were present also take the message to the Town Council to ensure a wider spread of the message throughout Royston and the surrounding villages. 3) Mrs Jayne Bratton introduced herself to the Royston and District Committee and thanked them for giving her the opportunity to address them on behalf of the North Royston Action Group (NRAG). She gave the background of the Group, which had been set up to deliver projects for north Royston and had already stopped plans submitted by Fairview to build 250 houses. She explained that the NRAG was run purely by volunteers who had a broad range of skills and operated without payment of any kind. Membership currently stood at 146 households, was free and they had submitted a grant application for the first time to the Royston and District Committee, to support a large exhibition on 23 October 2010 at the Coombes Community Centre in order to give local groups, charities and out-reach organisations an opportunity to showcase themselves. Mrs Bratton explained that they hoped to set up a Neighbourhood Watch Scheme and combine the launch with an annual event such as the exhibition. To date around 90 'not for profit' groups had been contacted with a view to joining, and many had confirmed their intention to join NRAG. No local businesses of any size were included and the groups ranged from Home-Start to the Writers¡¦ Circle, from Freecycle to the Royston Museum. Activities on offer at the exhibition on 23 October would include face-painting, bike stamping, story time and refreshments, all of which was free. Mrs Bratton declared that each exhibitor had been asked to provide a £10 deposit - which would be completely refunded once they turned up on the day - as a way of showing their commitment. The grant application was submitted to help with the cost of room hire, publicity for the event (printing consumables and banners) and exhibitors' badges, and the whole event was to be opened by the Royston Town Mayor, Councillor Martin Beaver. Literature had been gone out to the whole town and with the help of the Town Centre Manager, it would be an even bigger event next year. The Chairman thanked Mrs Bratton for her presentation and explained that as the grant application was a late one, some further information may be requested before consideration was given to granting the application submitted. |
Noted | ||
| 34 |
FISH HILL SQUARE ENHANCEMENT SCHEME: CONSULTATION ON PROPOSED MASTERPLAN Report Appendix 1 Appendix 2 |
Agreed | ||
| 35 |
ROYSTON CROSS DEVELOPMENT BRIEF Report Appendix 1 The Planning Officer introduced the Report which contained the Royston Cross Development Brief at Appendix 1. He explained that he was seeking the Royston and District¡¦s Committee¡¦s approval to put the enhancement plans for the Royston Cross area out to public consultation the period chosen being four weeks in November 2010. He explained the three options put forward: „X Whether or not formal development should take on the northern area of the Cross, allowing a continuous frontage along Melbourn Street and respecting the historic character of the surrounding buildings; „X Whether environmental and public realm enhancements were appropriate, which enhancements could be taken forward and how far they should go to increase pedestrian importance in the area; „X To do nothing and leave the Cross as it is at the current time. On the first option, he commented that design appeared to be a key issue, possibly creating a landmark in Royston town centre. On the second option, suggestions were made to raise the carriageway and widen the footpath in Kneesworth Street, to manage what had become a rat run. The Committee discussed the Development Brief and agreed with the recommendation. They stated that they would like some guidance on what was possible in this area. The Projects Manager explained that the Royston Cross Development Brief was a guidance document for what North Herts District Council would like to see in this area. The Brief would then be amended in accordance with the outcome of the consultation in January 2011 and be recommended to Cabinet on 25 January 2011. The document could then be used as a tool for seeking additional funding and would link in with the Royston Urban Transport Plan to be used for the future. The Chairman thanked the Planning Officer for his presentation of the report and the Royston Cross Development Brief and moved to the recommendation, which was agreed by the Committee. RESOLVED: That the Royston and District Committee agree the Royston Cross Development Brief at Appendix 1 of the report, for public consultation. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION: To enable North Herts District Council to consult the general public on potential options for the Royston Cross Development Brief, delivering a project as set out in the Royston Action Plan and in accordance with the adopted Royston Town Centre Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. |
Agreed | ||
| 36 |
LICENSING POLICY CONSULTATION Licensing Policy Consultation The Community Development Officer introduced the report of the Head of Policy, Partnerships and Community Development, in order to offer the Committee another opportunity to comment on licensing issues. He stated that the Chairman of the Royston and District Committee had already taken part in the consultation, and outlined the points she had raised. He then opened the subject to Members¡¦ comments. A Member observed that a commonsense attitude needed to be taken for small organisations trying to raise funds for good causes and another explained the particulars of the 10-day consultation period necessary for an application to be considered. He declared that if there was a genuine reason for rejecting an application for a licence in 10 days, this could bring it down. An emergency exemption would be suggested and the applicant informed that they should not do it again. This was one way of making organisations aware of the law. The law must be applied and applicants educated. NHDC Licensing officers would be requested to assist by giving advice. The Chairman proposed that a letter be sent from the Royston and District Committee to Oliver Heald MP asking for his help with a change in the law. RESOLVED: 1) That Members comments be recorded and forwarded on to the appropriate officer as part of the consultation process; 2) That it is vital not to use an over-zealous attitude, as most small charities and organisations are trying hard to comply with bureaucratic legislation; 3) That the Royston and District Committee send a letter to Oliver Heald MP asking that he helps to bring about a change in the law. |
Agreed | ||
| 37 |
HIGHWAYS ISSUES Highways Issues The Community Development Officer (CDO) presented the report of the Head of Policy, Partnerships and Community Development, the purpose of which was to clarify issues around the completed and proposed works on the A10/South of Royston Speed Issue Scheme. The CDO explained that it would help matters if a proposed modification to the South of Royston Gateway feature was set aside in the first instance, as it was just a proposal and had not been formally considered by the Committee. He took Members through the cost of the A10/South of Royston Speed Issue Scheme, which resulted in a shortfall of £3,100 to the match-funding required by Hertfordshire Highways for this Scheme and proposed that this should now be paid. The Chairman declared that the gateway feature could be improved and proposed that the Committee agree this project in principle but set it aside until funds were available at a future date. RESOLVED: 1) That the Royston and District Committee agree to contribute £3,100 to Hertfordshire Highways, as their part of the match-funding for completion of the A10/South of Royston Speed Issue Scheme; 2) That Members agree the proposed gateway feature for the A10/South of Royston in principle, but that consideration of financial issues around the project be deferred until a subsequent meeting when the budgetary position for the next financial year is clearer. REASON FOR DECISIONS: To enable the formal conclusion of the project. |
Agreed | ||
| 38 |
CHAMPION NEWS Champion News Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I - additional grant application |
Agreed | ||
| 39 |
OUTSIDE ORGANISATIONS - MEMBERS' REPORTS Chamber of Commerce The Chairman reported that the Chamber of Commerce continued to carry out very positive work for the town. Sports Council Councillor Burt reported that they had had a very positive meeting. There was to be an away-day for trainers, gathering information and offering advice. Royston Day Centre Councillor Davidson reported that the Day Centre was functioning well. Royston Town Twinning Councillor Grimes reported that this organisation was going well and that there was a real possibility of twinning with a Spanish town. |
Noted | ||
| 40 |
ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEM Following the conclusion of the Members¡¦ Reports on Outside Organisations, the Chairman raised the subject of an informal workshop on the Section 106 Agreement for which volunteers had been requested and which would be run by the Development and Conservation Manager. Four Members of the Royston and District Committee had volunteered to attend this but all Committee Members requested the dates of the workshop, together with updates on the outcomes, if they were unable to attend. |
Noted | ||