Meeting documents

Southern Rural Committee
Thursday, 25th November, 2010 7.30 pm

Time: 7.30 pm Place: Committee Room 1, Council Offices, Gernon Road, Letchworth Garden City
 PRESENT: Councillor D.J. Barnard (Chairman),Councillor A. Bardett (Vice-Chairman), Councillor John Bishop, Councillor Tom Brindley, Councillor Jane Gray, Councillor Sal Jarvis, Councillor D. Miller
 IN ATTENDANCE: Andrew Mills - Service Manager Grounds
Jim Brown - Policy and Scrutiny Manager
Claire Morgan - Community Development Officer
Nigel Schofield - Committee and Member Services Officer
 ALSO PRESENT:
Item Description/Resolution Status Action
PART I
34 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors: Tricia Cowley, Lee Downie and Mrs C.P.A. Strong. Apologies were also received from the Head of Community and Cultural Services and the Southern Rural Community Development Officer.
 Noted   
35 MINUTES
Minutes

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Meeting held on 30 September 2010 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chairman.
 Agreed   
36 NOTIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS

There was no other business.
 Noted   
37 CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS

(1)The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.
(2)The Chairman welcomed Claire Morgan (Community Development Officer for Letchworth) who would present Agenda Item 7 (Progress on Halls and Community Centres Strategy) and Agenda Item 9 (Champion News and Finance Report).
(3)The Chairman reminded Members 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 that they were required to notify the Chairman of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the item on the agenda.
Members declaring a prejudicial interest should leave the room and not seek to
influence the decision during that particular item.
 Noted   
38 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The Community Development Officer advised the Chairman that North Herts 50+ Forum were unable to attend the meeting.
 Noted   
39 REVISED RURAL STRATEGY AND PARISH CHARTER FOR NORTH HERTFORDSHIRE
Report
Appendix 1 - Draft Rural Strategy
Appendix 2 - Parish Charter

The Policy and Scrutiny Manager (PSM) reminded the Committee that the first NHDC Rural Strategy was produced in 2005 with a lifespan of five years and that a timetable for agreeing a new rural strategy was approved by Cabinet on 27 July 2010 (Minute 34 refers). The PSM confirmed that the Parish Charter was now combined with the Rural Strategy into one document and that NHDC needed a Rural Strategy to complement the Corporate Plan and Community Strategy.

The PSM referred the Committee to the draft Rural Strategy for 2010 to 2015 as presented at Appendix 1 and apologised that there was text missing that detailed Transport and noted the factual error of Best Kept Village which should be referred to as Village of the Year and that only two villages had entered so support was not in fact very good this year and it was agreed that this reference should be deleted. The PSM advised that current limited resources meant that not everything in the Strategy would be implemented quickly though it was an important statement of principles.

The Committee expressed concern about the considerable number of housing issues in the strategy, what were the outcomes of consultation at the parish conference and with other bodies. One Member considered that there were far too many key actions which were aspirational and not specific actions. Another Member opined that a strategy invariably had an Action Plan with SMART targets and the Committee were unanimous that this Rural Strategy had to make progress as soon as possible. Comment was made as to linkages with the Local Enterprise Partnership and Local Strategic Partnership and that action should be taken to increase the provision of affordable rural housing. Another comment concerned the withdrawal of bring banks from some rural locations and the PSM advised that a proposal had been made to move some of the collection points to supermarket car parks on the assumption that with appropriate publicity rural residents were likely to take recycling materials to bring banks on shopping trips which would relieve carbon footprints. Another Member questioned the omission of issues concerning planning applications in the Strategy as there was often need for extensive consultation with all parties. Comment was also made as to Parish Consultation and what were the key issues, Parishes had been very supportive of the Parish Charter with seven parishes responding with support for the Rural Strategy.

The Policy and Scrutiny Manager thanked the Committee for their constructive comments and observations which he would incorporate into the next draft of the Rural Strategy for presentation to Cabinet.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the Community and Policy teams be congratulated on the latest draft Rural Strategy (incorporating the Parish Charter);

(2)That the Policy and Scrutiny Manager be requested to take note of the comments, questions and observations made by the Committee and incorporate if appropriate into the next edition of the draft Rural Strategy which would be presented to Cabinet at the next meeting scheduled for 7 December 2010.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To facilitate effective consultation with Parish Councils, relevant agencies and rural communities during the development of a Rural Strategy for North Hertfordshire.
 Agreed  Head of Policy/Partnerships/Community Development, Policy Manager
40 PROGRESS ON HALLS AND COMMUNITY CENTRES STRATEGY
Report
Appendix 1.1
Appendix 1.2
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5

The Community Development Officer (CDO) presented the report of The Head of Community and Cultural Services which detailed the development and progress of a Centres and Halls Strategy for NHDC.

The CDO reminded the Committee that the need for such a strategy was identified in April 2009 that would support the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance should evidence be required in support of any S 106 payment or other such developer contributions. The CDO also confirmed that there had been a need to define the Council's position in support of Village and other Community Halls in light of the recent £1.2M investment in the Parish Amenity Capital Improvement Scheme (PACIF) which was in its final year.

The Committee noted that there had been a comprehensive survey of all centres and halls and physical condition, which was funded through the NHDC Strategic Priority Fund in 2009 - 2010. The Committee noted that results of the survey were available at Appendices 1.1 (Great Ashby Community Centre) , 1.2 (17 village halls) and Appendix 2 which detailed the urban community facilities. These three Appendices highlighted in both rural and urban areas that a considerable investment was likely to be required if the halls were to continue to serve the local community in the next five years, however the figures given were for full compliance with modern standards. The CDO advised that all centres and halls had been located and shown on the map in relation to local population density at Appendix 4.

The CDO advised the Committee that many of the original leases on the halls and centres were due soon for renewal and there was considerable investment required to maintain these facilities and provide support to the local population. The Committee noted that NHDC had no obligation to support these facilities but had made matched funding for rural halls through PACIF (see above) and that there was no funding beyond 2010-2011.

The CDO concluded with confirmation that there was no specific resource identified for the refurbishment of NHDC Halls and Community Centres, however it was noted that Section 106 monies might be available to secure re-investment in local community facilities.

The Committee were concerned at the high levels of costs indicated at Appendices 1.1 and 1.2 and whether the Parish Councils and Village Hall Management Committees were aware of such costs. The CDO advised that she was unable to answer this enquiry and accordingly the Committee agreed that this information on the site condition survey should be distributed to the appropriate bodies as soon as possible.

The Committee agreed that a Centres and Hall Strategy was a step in the right direction but that the estimated costs for refurbishment was a cause for concern even if much less cost was needed in the first instance. With regard to funding such works (or a proportion) it was suggested that with the closure of PACIF funding at the close of this financial year Parishes might be able to raise the sums listed at Appendix A.2 through an increased precept.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the need for a Centres and Halls Strategy be noted;

(2)That the Committee gave its support to the development and implementation of a Centres and Halls Strategy providing such work could be done within existing resources and budgets;

(3)That the extent of the urban facilities surveyed in 2007-2008 as detailed at Appendix 2 be noted;

(4)That Members be requested to provide to the Communities Facilities Manager any comments on the village halls in the Southern Rural Area as presented at Appendix 1.2;

(5)That the Community Facilities Manager be requested to send a copy of the condition site survey on the village halls in the Southern Rural Area to each respective Parish Council and each respective village hall Management Committee.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To enable the establishment of a strategic position to provide best value for facilities for the community in North Hertfordshire.

 Agreed  Head of Community and Cultural Services
41 CEMETERY CAPACITY IN NORTH HERTS
Report

The Service Manager Grounds (SM) presented the report of the Head of Leisure and Environmental Services and reminded Members that the District Council had a statutory duty under section 214 of the Local Government Act 1974 to provide facilities for the burial of dead on behalf of the Community it served and that Area Committees were invited to provide local input into centrally determined specifications for all services.

The SM advised the Committee that since the approval of the Greenspace Strategy there had been an assessment of when the District Council managed cemeteries in Baldock, Royston and Hitchin would be at 100 per cent capacity, which was in 10 years and 6 years respectively, although some extra space for approximately 84 plots could be provided at Hitchin if a line of cedar trees were removed. The Committee noted that Wilbury Hills Cemetery in Letchworth had enough capacity for all of the District for more than 100 years. The SM referred the Committee to Appendix 1 which included findings of the survey. The SM reminded the Committee that there were no open cemeteries managed by NHDC in the Southern Rural Area which however was well served by parish churchyards.

The SM confirmed that officers had found no obvious alternative sites had been found in Baldock or Hitchin but in Royston there was one possible site of poorly maintained land adjacent to the Melbourn Road East that could be used as an extension. The SM advised that even if sites for expansion were found there would be little or no opportunity to use capital and revenue investment in the current economic climate.

The SM next described the three policies as presented at Paragraph 4.5 viz. Land allocation for NHDC Cemeteries, Improve the longevity of the other NHDC open cemeteries and Concessionary Charges. Incorporation of these policies would provide no extra land for open burials, and provide full burials at Wilbury Hills only, provide a differential charging policy to encourage greater use of Wilbury Hills and the introduction of a 50 per cent fee for full burials of under 18 (no charge at the moment). The SM concluded by confirming that the current policy of charging double fees for residents outside North Hertfordshire would remain.

The Chairman thanked the SM for the updating on the capacity of open cemeteries in North Hertfordshire and invited comments from the Committee.

The Committee were in agreement with the proposed policies 1 and 2 but did not approve Policy 3 as it was considered to be inappropriate to make a charge for burials of individuals under 18.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the information provided on the cemetery capacity in North Hertfordshire and the proposed increased fees be noted;

(2)That the Service Manager Grounds be requested to forward to the next meeting of Cabinet to be held on 7 December 2010 the following comments raised by the Committee:
a. That the proposed Policy 3 which would introduce a 50 per cent charge for under 18 burials did not have the support of the Southern Rural Committee;
b. That Policy 1 - Land Allocations for NHDC Cemeteries had the support of the Southern Rural Committee;
c. That Policy 2 - Improve the longevity of the existing open cemeteries had the support of the Southern Rural Committee;

(3)That every effort should be made to maximise the use and amenity of current open cemeteries in North Hertfordshire.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure that a consistent and highly valued burial service is delivered to the residents in North Hertfordshire.
 Agreed  Service Manager - Grounds Maintenance
42 CHAMPION NEWS AND FINANCE REPORT
Report
Appendix 1 - Budget Sheet
Appendix 2 - Highways Work Programme
Appendix 3 - Committee Work Programme
Appendix 4 - Village of the Year Survey
Appendix 5 - Highways Response - Whitehorse Lane

The Community Development Officer (CDO) presented the report of the Head of Policy, Partnerships and Community Development which inter alia covered activities since the last meeting held on 30 September 2010. The Committee noted the following: The Second Networking Meeting for Parish Councils was held on 25 October 2010, the Rural Grants Fund Panel will meet towards the end of January 2011, that the request for anti fly-tipping magnetic signs would be considered by the Project Board in December 2010, and that the fourth Annual Community Conference had been held on 11 October 2010.

The CDO next invited Members to put forward highway schemes and projects that could be considered by the Joint Member Panel at its next meeting to be held on 31 January 2011. The Chairman requested that all Members should advise the Committee and Member Services Officer as soon as possible of any additional schemes (see (4) below). Members proposed the following schemes and projects for consideration by the Joint Member Panel:
1.That the provision of salt bins and procurement of a regular supply of rock salt to the villages be a priority;
2.That a 20 m.p.h. speed limit be introduced as soon as possible in Whitehorse Lane in the vicinity of Round Diamond School;
3.That improvements to drainage on rural roads (locations to be advised) be a priority;
4.That funding be sought for School Crossing Patrols at locations where HCC are going to remove at light controlled crossings;

The CDO referred the Committee to Appendix 4 which gave details of the survey conducted by the CPRE on the Hertfordshire Village of the Year Competition 2010 and the Committee expressed some concern that only two villages from North Hertfordshire entered this competition in 2010. The responses to Questions 1 and 2 in part reflected the views of some Members, that a lot of work was needed by Parish Councils, a poor expectation of winning, lack of enthusiasm, that villages had nothing new to add, lack of success in previous years and that arranging visits by judges was too complex.

The Committee thought that there was merit in the competition but that financial support would be difficult as the allocation of grant funding in 2011-2012 was likely to be reduced and it was also questioned why villages had to apply to enter. However, it was suggested that Ward Members should encourage participation in the 2011 competition.

The CDO next referred the Committee to Appendix 1 - Budgets and it was immediately agreed that not all grant wards by this Committee should only support the three main Council Priorities as suggested at Paragraph 5.1 to the report. A Member sought clarification why there was no Memorandum of Understanding for the Village of the Year Competition and the CDO agreed to respond to this enquiry. Another Member sought clarification as to why there was no reference to the absence of ‘Youth Activities at Great Ashby' under the Development Budgets section and the CDO agreed to respond to this enquiry as well.

RESOLVED:

(1)That the Community Development Officer be thanked for the excellent work in furthering Community Development in the Southern Rural Area;

(2)That the budgetary expenditure, balances and carry forwards from the Development Budgets and the Visioning Budgets be noted;

(3)That the updated Annual Grant and Development Discretionary Budget as presented at Appendix 1 be noted;

(4)That the highway schemes listed above be forwarded to the NHDC Transport Policy Officer for consideration as potential schemes in 2011-2012;

(5)That the Community Development Officer be requested to research the costs of a School Crossing Patrol and report back to the next meeting of the Southern Rural Committee to be held on 17 January 2011;

(6)That all Members of the Southern Rural Committee be requested to advise the Committee and Member Services Officer as soon as possible of any additional highway schemes and projects for consideration by the Joint Member Panel.

REASON FOR DECISION:
To ensure that the Committee are kept informed of the work of the Community Development Officer, acknowledge the status of budgets and in the interests of road safety in the Southern Rural Area.
 Agreed  Community Development Officer - CM