Agenda, decisions and draft minutes
PDF 216 KBVenue: Council Chamber - District Council Offices, Gernon Road, Letchworth, SG6 3JF. View directions
Contact: Email: Committee.Services@north-herts.gov.uk 01462 474655
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Decision: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Tina Bhartwas, Cathy Brownjohn, Sarah Lucas, Lisa Nash and Claire Winchester. Minutes: Audio recording – 04 minutes 19 seconds
N.B. Councillor Martin Prescott entered the Council Chamber at 19:33.
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Tina Bhartwas, Cathy Brownjohn, Sarah Lucas, Lisa Nash and Claire Winchester.
Councillor David Barnard was absent. |
|
|
MINUTES - 21 MAY 2026 To take as read and approve as a true record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on the 21 May 2026. Decision: RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting held on 21 May 2026 were approved as a true record and signed by the Chair. Minutes: Audio Recording – 04 minutes 37 seconds
Councillor Keith Hoskins, as Chair, proposed and Councillor Sean Prendergast seconded and, it was:
RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the meeting held on 21 May 2026 be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair. |
|
|
NOTIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS Members should notify the Chair of other business which they wish to be discussed at the end of either Part I or Part II business set out in the agenda. They must state the circumstances which they consider justify the business being considered as a matter of urgency.
The Chair will decide whether any item(s) raised will be considered. Decision: There was no other business notified. Minutes: Audio recording – 05 minutes 07 seconds
There was no other business notified. |
|
|
CHAIR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Climate Emergency
The Council has declared a climate emergency and is committed to achieving a target of zero carbon emissions by 2030 and helping local people and businesses to reduce their own carbon emissions.
A Cabinet Panel on the Environment has been established to engage with local people on matters relating to the climate emergency and advise the council on how to achieve these climate change objectives. A Climate Change Implementation group of councillors and council officers meets regularly to produce plans and monitor progress. Actions taken or currently underway include switching to green energy, incentives for low emission taxis, expanding tree planting and working to cut food waste.
In addition the council is a member of the Hertfordshire Climate Change and Sustainability Partnership, working with other councils across Hertfordshire to reduce the county’s carbon emissions and climate impact.
The Council’s dedicated webpage on Climate Change includes details of the council’s climate change strategy, the work of the Cabinet Panel on the Environment and a monthly briefing on progress.
Ecological Emergency
The Council has declared an ecological emergency and is committed to addressing the ecological emergency and nature recovery by identifying appropriate areas for habitat restoration and biodiversity net gain whilst ensuring that development limits impact on existing habitats in its process.
The Council has set out to do that by a) setting measurable targets and standards for biodiversity increase, in both species and quantities, seeking to increase community engagement, b) to work with our partners to establish a Local Nature Partnership for Hertfordshire and to develop Nature Recovery Networks and Nature Recovery Strategy for Hertfordshire and c) to investigate new approaches to nature recovery such as habitat banking that deliver biodiversity objectives and provide new investment opportunities.
Declarations of Interest
Members are reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda, should be declared as either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or Declarable Interest and are required to notify the Chair of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda. Members declaring a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest must withdraw from the meeting for the duration of the item. Members declaring a Declarable Interest, wishing to exercise a ‘Councillor Speaking Right’, must declare this at the same time as the interest, move to the public area before speaking to the item and then must leave the room before the debate and vote. Decision: (1) The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded.
(2) The Chair reminded Members that the Council had declared both a Climate Emergency and an Ecological Emergency. These were serious decisions, and meant that, as this was an emergency, everyone including Officers and Members had that in mind as they carried out their various roles and tasks for the benefit of the District.
(3) The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.
(4) The Chair advised that the normal procedure rules in respect of debate and times to speak would apply.
(5) The Chair advised that 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution did not apply to this meeting. A comfort break would be held at an appropriate time, should proceedings continue at length.
(6) The Chair announced that Karen Pullham, Accountancy Technician, had been working at North Hertfordshire for 30 years, and extended his gratitude to Karen for her services to the Council.
RESOLVED: That the Council placed on record its sincere thanks and appreciation to Karen Pullham for her long and valuable service to Local Government.
(7) The Chair announced that Jo Blake, Senior Officer (Council Tax), had been working at North Hertfordshire for 40 years, and extended his gratitude to Jo for her services to the Council.
RESOLVED: That the Council placed on record its sincere thanks and appreciation to Jo Blake for her long and valuable service to Local Government.
(8) The Chair advised that the IT Team had increased the level of security on incoming emails and that if Members would like their personal email address added to the safe sender list, they should contact IT or Committee Services with confirmation. The Chair also reminded Members that Council business should only be conducted through a North Herts Council email account. Minutes: Audio recording – 05 minutes 13 seconds
(1) The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council Policy, the meeting would be recorded.
(2) The Chair reminded Members that the Council had declared both a Climate Emergency and an Ecological Emergency. These are serious decisions, and mean that, as this was an emergency, everyone including Officers and Members had that in mind as they carried out their various roles and tasks for the benefit of our District.
(3) The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.
(4) The Chair advised that the normal procedure rules in respect of debate and times to speak would apply.
(5) The Chair advised that 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution did not apply to this meeting. A comfort break would be held at an appropriate time, should proceedings continue at length.
(6) The Chair announced that Karen Pullham, Accountancy Technician, had been working at North Hertfordshire for 30 years, and extended his gratitude to Karen for her services to the Council.
Councillor Keith Hoskins proposed and Councillor Sean Prendergast seconded and, following a vote, it was:
RESOLVED: That the Council placed on record its sincere thanks and appreciation to Karen Pullham for her long and valuable service to Local Government.
(7) The Chair announced that Jo Blake, Senior Officer (Council Tax), had been working at North Hertfordshire for 40 years, and extended his gratitude to Jo for her services to the Council.
Councillor Keith Hoskins proposed and Councillor Sean Prendergast seconded and, following a vote, it was:
RESOLVED: That the Council placed on record its sincere thanks and appreciation to Jo Blake for her long and valuable service to Local Government.
(8) The Chair advised that the IT Team had increased the level of security on incoming emails and that if Members would like their personal email address added to the safe sender list, they should contact IT or Committee Services with confirmation. The Chair also reminded Members that Council business should only be conducted through a North Herts Council email account. |
|
|
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION To receive petitions, comments and questions from the public. Decision: In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.10(c), one question was submitted by a member of the public by the required deadline date set out in the Constitution.
(A) Letchworth Lido Toilets for Norton Common Users
Jessica Crighton to Councillor Amy Allen, Executive Member for Environment.
As Ms Crighton was unable to attend the meeting, the Chair presented the question to the Executive Member for Environment in their absence. Minutes: Audio recording – 09 minutes 50 seconds
In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.10(c), one question was submitted by a member of the public by the required deadline date set out in the Constitution.
(A) Letchworth Lido Toilets for Norton Common Users
As Ms Crighton was unable to attend the meeting, the Chair presented the question to the Executive Member for Environment in their absence, as follows:
‘Given the importance of accessible toilet facilities for disabled people, older residents, and families, how does the Council justify the absence of publicly available toilets in the green spaces it manages? Will the Council consider opening up the toilets at Letchworth Lido free for use by Norton Common visitors?’
Councillor Amy Allen provided the following response:
‘I completely recognise the importance of having available facilities for people to use, especially those that are disabled, elderly, and in need. There used to be public toilets in Norton Common a very long time ago. They were inappropriately used and resulted in a lot of issues, including vandalism, and they had to be constantly repaired, closed and many years ago, there a simple discussion amongst the Safety Audit, the Police, etcetera, that the best thing we could do would be to close it because unfortunately, they were a magnet for inappropriate behaviour. As I understand it, there is not scope at the moment to in any way rebuild, reopen, or include new toilets there because of exactly how I’ve just explained it. As for the toilet at the Lido, it is a paid entry place. It would be incredibly difficult to safeguard and monitor members of the public just wandering in and out of it. The whole point of it set up the way it is, is to monitor the numbers, to monitor safety, and to look after the patrons that are there. So, I cannot see in any way that we would be able to open them up to become effectively public toilets. There are other public toilets in town and in the area, but regrettably we don’t have any in the Common as we aren’t able to provide that. I will be putting together a further, more detailed full answer to Ms Crighton upon further investigation but that is the answer.’ |
|
|
ITEMS REFERRED FROM OTHER COMMITTEES To consider items referred from other Committees:
6A) Cabinet – Revenue Budget Outturn 2025/26 – to be considered as a referral only.
6B) Cabinet – Treasury Management End of Year Review 2025/26 – to be considered as a referral only.
6C) Cabinet – Year End Report of Risk Management Governance – to be considered as a referral only.
6D) Finance, Audit and Risk Committee – Finance, Audit and Risk Annual Report – to be considered with Agenda Item 7.
6E) Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025/26 – to be considered with Agenda Item 8.
6F) Cabinet – Churchgate Regeneration Project Update & Next Steps – Part 2 – to be considered with Agenda Item 11.
6G) Cabinet – Churchgate Regeneration Project Update & Next Steps – Part 1 – to be considered with Agenda Item 12. Additional documents:
Decision: The Chair advised that Referrals 6D, 6E, 6F and 6G referred from the Cabinet, Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and Finance, Audit and Risk Committee would be taken with the respective items on the Agenda, and that Referrals 6A, 6B and 6C from Cabinet would be considered as standalone items.
6A) Cabinet – Revenue Budget Outturn 2025/26 (Final)
RESOLVED: That Council approved the net transfer from earmarked reserved, as identified in table 9, of £4.925 million.
REASONS FOR DECISION:
(1) Members are able to monitor, make adjustments within the overall budgetary framework and request appropriate action of Services who do not meet the budget targets set as part of the Corporate Business Planning process.
(2) Changes to the Council’s balances are monitored and approved.
6B) Cabinet – Treasury Management End of Year 2025/26
RESOLVED: That Council:
(1) Approved the actual 2025/26 prudential and treasury indicators as detailed in Appendix B.
(2) Noted the annual Treasury Management Review for 2025/26 (Appendix B).
REASON FOR DECISIONS: To ensure the Council’s continued compliance with CIPFA’s code of practice on Treasury Management and the Local Government Act 2003 and that the Council manages its exposure to interest and capital risk.
6C) 2025-26 Year End Report of Risk Management Governance
RESOLVED: That Council noted the report.
REASON FOR DECISION: To provide assurance that the Council is effectively managing risk. The Council’s Risk Management Strategy details that this annual review should be presented to Council. Cabinet have responsibility for the management of risk. Minutes: Audio recording – 12 minutes 23 seconds
The Chair advised that Referrals 6D, 6E, 6F and 6G referred from Cabinet, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee would be taken with the respective items on the Agenda, and that Referrals 6A, 6B and 6C from Cabinet would be considered as standalone items.
6A) Cabinet – Revenue Budget Outturn 2025/26 (Final)
Councillor Ian Albert, as Executive Member for Resources, presented Referral 6A and advised that:
· The report, which set out the end of year, healthy position in terms of the General Fund and the main financial indicators and variances, was debated and scrutinised at both the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee and Cabinet. · They were asking Council to approve the net transfer of £4.925M from earmarked reserves, as set out in Table 9 of the report. · Those reserves were made up of the planned use of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government Business Rates Reserve to support general funding, the Waste Reserve for waste contractor implementation costs, and the Waste Vehicle Reserve for new vehicles, including electric vehicles under 3.5 tonnes.
Councillor Ian Albert proposed and Councillor Val Bryant seconded and, following a vote, it was:
RESOLVED: That Council approved the net transfer from earmarked reserves, as identified in table 9, of £4.925 million.
REASONS FOR DECISION:
(1) Members are able to monitor, make adjustments within the overall budgetary framework and request appropriate action of Services who do not meet the budget targets set as part of the Corporate Business Planning process.
(2) Changes to the Council’s balances are monitored and approved.
6B) Cabinet – Treasury Management End of Year Review 2025/26
N.B. Councillor Paul Ward left the Chamber at 19:46.
Councillor Ian Albert, as Executive Member for Resources, presented Referral 6B and advised that:
· Discussions by the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee and Cabinet were detailed within the referral. · The Chair of the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee and its Members were thanked for their work and scrutiny. · A good return on investments had been seen recently, but this could not be guaranteed in the long-term. · Return on investments had been investigated carefully, and implementation of the new Ethical Investment Policy had begun. · Actions were in place to ensure that the single breach of the strategy earlier in the year did not happen again.
Councillor Matt Barnes informed the Chair that Councillor Paul Ward had left the Chamber due to an interest on this item related to his employment.
Councillor Ian Albert proposed and Councillor Val Bryant seconded and, following a vote, it was:
RESOLVED: That Council:
(1) Approved the actual 2025/26 prudential and treasury indicators as detailed in Appendix B.
(2) Noted the annual Treasury Management Review for 2025/26 (Appendix B).
REASON FOR DECISIONS: To ensure the Council’s continued compliance with CIPFA’s code of practice on Treasury Management and the Local Government Act 2003 and that the Council manages its exposure to interest and capital risk.
N.B. Councillor Paul Ward returned to ... view the full minutes text for item 22. |
|
|
FINANCE, AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – RESOURCES
The Annual Report (attached at Appendix A) details the work undertaken by the Finance, Audit and Risk (FAR) Committee over the last year (25/26) and describes the planned work for the coming year (26/27). Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED: That Council noted the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee Annual Report.
REASON FOR DECISION: To provide Council with assurance as to the effectiveness of the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee. Minutes: Audio recording – 20 minutes 13 seconds
N.B. Councillor Dominic Griffiths entered the Chamber at 19:51.
Councillor Vijaiya Poopalasingham, as Chair of the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee, presented Referral 6D and the report entitled ‘Finance, Audit and Risk Committee Annual Report’ and advised that:
· It was important to recognise that there had been a period of transition for the Committee following his appointment as Chair and new Members joining the Committee in the new Civic Year, but the Committee had maintained a strong focus on its core responsibilities. · Thanks were put on record to Councillor Sean Nolan for chairing the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee until January this year. · This report provided an overview of the work undertaken in the previous Civic Year reflecting on their effectiveness and setting out priorities for the year ahead. · Assurance was given to the Council that effective processes were in place. · The Committee had overseen a wide range of important matters and timelines for those were outlined on the grid at page 48 of the Agenda Reports Pack. · Significant corporate risks like Local Government Reorganisation and corporate capacity had continued to be monitored, and focus had been given to manage and identify risks like these. · Discussion at the Committee had been constructive over the year, and Members had challenged and sought clarification appropriately while working together. · The Work Programme remained comprehensive, and they would continue to oversee the audit process and monitor financial resilience and procurement arrangements when needed. · Members would continue to receive appropriate training to strengthen their understanding of financial governance. · It was hoped that Members from all political groups would attend Committee meetings this Civic Year as the Committee was stronger when every group was present. · The Independent Member, Director – Resources, Shared Anti-Fraud Service, KPMG, Executive Member for Resources and Officers were thanked for their support. · New Members and previous Members of the Committee were also thanked for their approach to matters.
Councillor Vijaiya Poopalasingham proposed the recommendation in the report, and this was seconded by Councillor Val Bryant.
As part of the debate, Councillor Paul Ward put on record his thanks to the Independent Member for their thorough work at Committee meetings.
Having been proposed and seconded and, following a vote, it was:
RESOLVED: That Council noted the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee Annual Report.
REASON FOR DECISION: To provide Council with assurance as to the effectiveness of the Finance, Audit and Risk Committee. |
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT OF THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 2025/26 REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – GOVERNANCE
To consider the Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the 2025/2026 Civic Year. Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED: That Council noted the Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny 2025/26, attached as Appendix 1.
REASON FOR DECISION: To enable Council to consider and comment on the report of the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the work of the Committee in the 2025/2026 Civic Year. Minutes: Audio recording – 25 minutes 31 seconds
Councillor Jon Clayden, as Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, presented Referral 6E and the report entitled ‘Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee 2025/26’ and advised that:
· 30 items had been considered by the Committee during the Civic Year. · There had been good online engagement with 750 views of the committee meetings throughout the year on the YouTube channel. · Thanks were put on record to the Chair and Members of the S106 Task and Finish Group for their investigations on S106 contributions, and 8 recommendations had been made by the group to Cabinet for their consideration. · Thanks were also put on record to Councillor Claire Winchester as the Chair of the Committee in the previous Civic Year, the Scrutiny Officer for their support, Members of the Committee for their apolitical scrutiny on a wide view of Council functions, and Officers for their attendance and contributions at Committee meetings. · It was hoped that the Committee would continue to provide effective scrutiny at the right time.
Councillor Claire Strong advised that her name was spelt incorrectly on page 64 of the Agenda Reports Pack and asked for this to be corrected.
Councillor Jon Clayden proposed the recommendation in the report, and this was seconded by Councillor Ralph Muncer.
As part of the debate, Councillor Ralph Muncer highlighted that:
· The quality of scrutiny had improved over recent years and would continue to improve through the new Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. · Thanks were put on record to the Scrutiny Officer for facilitating good quality scrutiny since they had joined the Council. · The S106 Task and Finish Group should be proud of the work they had carried out, and they looked forward to the possibility of empowering communities in the planning process and seeing how the recommendations from the group would be taken forward.
Having been proposed and seconded and, following a vote, it was:
RESOLVED: That Council noted the Annual Report of the Overview and Scrutiny 2025/26, attached as Appendix 1.
REASON FOR DECISION: To enable Council to consider and comment on the report of the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the work of the Committee in the 2025/2026 Civic Year. |
|
|
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC To consider passing the following resolution: That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting on the grounds that the following report will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended). Decision: RESOLVED: That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public were excluded from the meeting on the grounds that the following report will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended). Minutes: Councillor Keith Hoskins proposed and Councillor Sean Prendergast seconded and, it was:
RESOLVED: That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public were excluded from the meeting on the grounds that the following report will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the said Act (as amended). |
|
|
PART 2 MINUTES - 21 MAY 2026 To take as read and approve as a true record the Part 2 minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on the 21 May 2026. Decision: RESOLVED: That the Part 2 Minutes of the meeting held on 21 May 2026 were approved as a true record and signed by the Chair. Minutes: Councillor Keith Hoskins, as Chair, proposed and Councillor Sean Prendergast seconded and, it was:
RESOLVED: That the Part 2 Minutes of the meeting held on 21 May 2026 were approved as a true record and signed by the Chair. |
|
|
CHURCHGATE REGENERATION PROJECT UPDATE & NEXT STEPS - PART 2
REPORT OF DIRECTOR – ENTERPRISE
Since the previous update to Members, further work has been undertaken to assess the viability, deliverability and regeneration potential of the Churchgate site. This report provides an update on that work and seeks approval for the additional funding required to support the next phase of the project. Decision: RESOLVED: That Council approved the additional revenue funding referred to in section 10 of the report to support the next steps of the project, as set out in the Part 1 report.
REASON FOR DECISION: To proceed with the Procurement stage referenced in Part 1 of this report, the Council requires additional funding to support this work. These funds were not originally set out in the budget, as the need has been identified since the original budgets were set. The funds will be enough to cover the required package of work with the selected developer for the next phase and continue to support the regeneration project in progress to delivery. Minutes: N.B. This item was considered in restricted session and therefore no recording was available.
Councillor Tamsin Thomas, as Executive Member for Enterprise, presented Referral 6F and the report entitled ‘Churchgate Regeneration Project Update & Next Steps – Part 2’.
Councillor Tamsin Thomas proposed and Councillor Val Bryant seconded and, following a vote, it was:
RESOLVED: That Council approved the additional revenue funding referred to in section 10 of the report to support the next steps of the project, as set out in the Part 1 report.
REASON FOR DECISION: to proceed with the Procurement stage referenced in Part 1 of this report, the Council requires additional funding to support this work. These funds were not originally set out in the budget, as the need has been identified since the original budgets were set. The funds will be enough to cover the required package of work with the selected developer for the next phase and continue to support the regeneration project in progress to delivery. |
|
|
CHURCHGATE REGENERATION PROJECT UPDATE & NEXT STEPS - PART 1 REPORT OF DIRECTOR – ENTERPRISE
Since the previous update to Members, further work has been undertaken to assess the viability, deliverability and regeneration potential of the Churchgate site. This report provides an update on that work and seeks approval for the additional funding required to support the next phase of the project. Decision: RESOLVED: That Council approved the additional capital/revenue funding set out in the Part 2 report to support the single competitive procurement, comprising of two phases of a partner to assist the Council with the next stage of the Churchgate Regeneration Project.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION:
(1) The Council has undertaken significant technical work, specialist studies and preliminary market engagement to inform the next stage of the Churchgate Regeneration Project.
(2) The findings indicate that further feasibility, viability and delivery planning work is required before future decisions can be taken regarding the preferred delivery model and implementation of the regeneration proposals.
(3) Approval is therefore sought for the additional funding required to undertake this next phase of work, enabling future decisions to be informed by robust technical, commercial and financial evidence. Minutes: Audio recording – 55 minutes 08 seconds
Councillor Tamsin Thomas, as Executive Member for Enterprise, presented Referral 6G and the report entitled ‘Churchgate Regeneration Project Update & Next Steps – Part 1’ and advised that:
· The project would deliver a redeveloped shopping centre and market, revitalised public spaces around the River Hiz, and vital footfall and housing to the area. · Thanks were put on record to the Churchgate Project Board, Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet for their input on this stage. · Full Council were being asked to approve funding to procure regeneration expertise to undertake detailed analysis for the project in this phase. · Work undertaken in the last 12 months had put the project into a fundamentally more stable position as a financial and technical evidence base had been produced and a greater insight into other factors had been achieved. · Churchgate was close to full occupancy for the first time in a while, which mirrored the strong developer confidence shown in soft market testing, but it was also recognised that it was a complex and finely balanced scheme where specialist regeneration expertise would be needed to derisk the project and remove cost elements while maintaining overall control. · A masterplan would be formulated in this phase from the completed feasibility study, which would allow them to progress the project in a measured and controlled way while further testing viability and deliverability. · Any uncertainty of deliverability would be decreased through this phase before a long-term decision on the project was taken. · The ambition to deliver a high-quality regeneration scheme that secured the long-term success of Hitchin Town Centre remained unchanged.
Councillor Tamsin Thomas proposed the recommendation in the report, and this was seconded by Councillor Val Bryant.
The following Members took part in the debate:
· Councillor Sam Collins · Councillor Ralph Muncer · Councillor Val Bryant · Councillor Ian Albert · Councillor Claire Strong · Councillor Tim Johnson · Councillor Matt Barnes
The following points were made as part of the debate:
· Hitchin residents were fed up with the amount of time that had been spent on project planning and consultancy. · The final part of the project was the riskiest, and they should not lose sight of what was right for the district and its residents in their approach. · There had been a £200K overspend on consultants for the project and the administration was seeking to request substantial funding for this phase. · The Council was fast approaching a tipping point where any future spending would be absorbed, regardless of the financial burden. · All options including site disposal or no affordable housing provision as part of the regeneration would need to be considered to reduce the cost to the taxpayer. · Residents of other towns and villages would be questioning whether their communities would receive a multi-million investment in a project in their area as well. · It was desired for the project to succeed, but not at any cost. · The project had shown transparency as there was a project board, Hitchin residents had been consulted, and 3 member briefing ... view the full minutes text for item 28. |
|
|
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS To consider any questions submitted by Members of the Council, in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11 (b). Additional documents: Decision: In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11(b), five questions had been submitted by the required deadline set out in the Constitution. However, following publication of the Agenda, question (B) was withdrawn.
(A) Charnwood House, Hitchin Vacancy Period
Councillor Chris Lucas to Councillor Tamsin Thomas, Executive Member for Enterprise.
(B) Thomas Bellamy House, Hitchin Vacancy Period
The Chair advised that this question had been withdrawn.
(C) Charnwood House and Thomas Bellamy House, Hitchin Maintenance and Security Costs
Councillor Chris Lucas to Councillor Tamsin Thomas, Executive Member for Enterprise.
(D) Impact of the Planning and Infrastructure Act on North Hertfordshire
Councillor Ralph Muncer to Councillor Val Bryant, Leader of the Council.
(E) Approach to Active Travel
Councillor Ralph Muncer to Councillor Donna Wright, Executive Member for Place.
In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11(d)(ii), one urgent question had been submitted and accepted by the Chair.
(A) Widespread Disruption from Iron Maiden concert at Knebworth House
Councillor Paul Ward to Councillor Mick Debenham, Executive Member for Regulatory. Minutes: Audio recording – 01 hours 15 minutes 58 seconds
In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11, five questions had been submitted by the required deadline set out in the Constitution. However, following publication of the Agenda, question (B) had been withdrawn.
(A) Charnwood House, Hitchin Vacancy Period
Councillor Chris Lucas to Councillor Tamsin Thomas, Executive Member for Enterprise:
‘In the Members Information Service (MIS) bulletin released on 3rd July, I read with interest that BTG Eddison’s have been appointed to undertake a new market campaign for Charnwood House, Hitchin this summer.’
Can the Portfolio Holder for Enterprise explain how long the property has been vacant?’
Councillor Tamsin Thomas provided the following response:
‘For the benefit of colleagues who may not know the building's history, Charnwood House was generously donated to the community by a local family in 1937 and it served us incredibly well as the home of the Hitchin Museum until those services were relocated to our modern facility on Brand Street. The doors closed to the public in 2012 for the decade that followed but the building served as an additional storage area for the Museum's collection while we worked on a long-term plan to bring it back into active use. Following the election of the joint administration, the Cabinet formally decided to retain Charnwood House rather than dispose of it in 2020 and set aside £400,000 to help achieve this. To prepare the building for its next chapter, in 2022, Officers successfully relocated the stored museum artifacts and items and carried out essential safety works, which included asbestos removal and weather proofing etc. We then ran two separate efforts under the joint administration to find a community occupier. While we had interested parties, neither round ultimately resulted in a successful tenancy. When our new Estates Lead joined the Council, as the Executive Member, I asked for a clear lessons learned review on those previous rounds so we could understand what held those bids back, and this led to an options paper in 2025 focused entirely on delivering on that 2020 promise of community use. As a direct result, we have appointed BTG Eddison’s as the marketing agent due to their track record in marketing community and heritage assets, something we think was part of the gap on past efforts to help us finally secure the right future for Charnwood House. I think everyone in this Chamber would have liked to have seen this resolved much sooner but heritage buildings are notoriously difficult to bring back into use. Everyone wants projects to be delivered fast, well and cheaply and my experience is that you can often manage just two of those, but never all three. We must demonstrate value for our taxpayers, and we must deliver a high-quality result for our residents. Doing both of those things well means unfortunately that it is taking us time to get it right.’
N.B. Councillor Emma Rowe left the Chamber at 20:49.
Councillor Chris Lucas asked a supplementary question, as follows: ... view the full minutes text for item 29. |
|
|
To consider any motions, due notice of which have been given in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.12. Additional documents:
Decision: In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.12, three motions had been submitted by the required deadline set out in the Constitution.
(A) Objection to the National Scheme of Delegation for Planning Applications
RESOLVED: That Council instructed the Leader of the Council to write to all North Herts MPs setting out the views in the motion.
(B) Mimram Valley Local Landscape Designation Project
RESOLVED: That Council:
(1) Expressed its support for the Mimram Valley being granted Local Landscape Designation status.
(2) Instructed Officers to engage in discussions with the Mimram Valley Local Landscape Designation Project Steering Group in order to progress the ambition of the Mimram Valley being granted Local Landscape Designation status in the upcoming revision of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan.
(3) Instructed the Leader of the Council to write to the Leaders of Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council and East Hertfordshire District Council calling on their respective Councils to support the Mimram Valley being granted Local Landscape Designation status within their Local Development Plans.
(C) Future of Land Holdings South of the A505, Royston
RESOLVED: That the motion, as amended, was LOST. Minutes: Audio recording – 01 hours 50 minutes 07 seconds
There were three motions submitted in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.12.
(A) Objection to the National Scheme of Delegation for Planning Applications
Councillor Steve Jarvis proposed the motion as follows:
‘Council regrets the decision of the Government to introduce a "National Scheme of Delegation" for planning applications.
It believes that: a) Planning decisions should continue to be made by locally elected councillors rather than being increasingly determined by officers under national rules. b) the Secretary of State is being given excessive power to dictate council constitutions and planning procedures.
Council resolves:
To instruct the Leader of the Council to write to all North Herts MPs setting out these views.’
Councillor Ruth Brown seconded the motion.
The following Members took part in the debate:
· Councillor Donna Wright · Councillor Tom Tyson · Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason · Councillor Paul Ward · Councillor Daniel Allen · Councillor Ruth Brown · Councillor Ralph Muncer · Councillor Elizabeth Dennis · Councillor Martin Prescott · Councillor Tim Johnson · Councillor Nigel Mason · Councillor Matt Barnes
The following points were made as part of the debate:
· Concerns from Members were understood, but they must acknowledge that the current arrangements were deeply flawed and inconsistent between authorities and did not serve residents or applicants well, and the new scheme was designed to improve this. · Planning Control Committees would continue to have an important role as large applications would be considered by them. · Some Planning Control Committees were politically charged under the current setup, which meant that some applications were not decided on their merits. · The Council should be able to trust Planning Officers with professional expertise to make independent, evidence-based judgements. · Reform to the scheme would help Members to focus on other areas where they added the most value such as setting visions and establishing policy frameworks. · The country faced a housing crisis and a critical need for new infrastructure, and growth in the economy was also needed, which a fair planning system would address. · The scheme would take away community voices and the democratic oversight that members of the public gave on decisions taken by Planning Control Committees. · The perception that the Government imposed development on residents without accounting for local concerns would be reinforced, and public trust in the planning system would be eroded. · Shifting the responsibility of decision-making onto Officers was undemocratic. · Service delivery for homes had experienced a fundamental failure in recent years, which North Herts district had been part of as their share of national housing delivery had declined by a third in the last 25 years. · The Government were trying to correct decades of service failure and under delivery in an area of great importance, and those who were in desperate need of housing, including those on the housing register and in temporary accommodation deserved this response. · These reforms would place an onus on the limited number of Planning Officers. · Members would have a vote on this scheme at the next Full Council meeting, so the motion was pointless. · Neither the broken planning ... view the full minutes text for item 30. |