Agenda item
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS
To consider any questions submitted by Members of the Council, in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11 (b).
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 However, following publication of the Agenda, question (B) was withdrawn.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The Chair advised that this question had been withdrawn.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 However, following publication of the Agenda, question (B) had been withdrawn.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:
‘Could the portfolio holder explain why she thinks the previous market campaign failed to produce a lease? It was interesting to hear that you mentioned about lessons learned, so perhaps you could summarise those lessons learned and explain to us why the previous marketing campaign failed to produce a lease resulting in Charnwood House remaining vacant for the best part of 14 years.’
N.B. Councillor Emma Rowe returned to the Chamber at 20:50.
Councillor Tamsin Thomas responded:
‘It has not been vacant, it has been in use as a storage facility for much of that time. It's only since 2022 and the removal of the museum items that it has been vacant in that sense. I don’t want to comment on any individual bid as I don’t think that would be right but I will say that a general challenge has not been an absence of interested parties, nor has it been a lack of people who could really make that building thrive as a community centre. The challenge is one that many heritage buildings face in that they require the capacity to generate significant funding through grant applications and to have an estates management capability to maintain a heritage building. Even with preferential rent terms, that is quite challenging and that’s why we’ve partnered with BTG Eddison’s who have got expertise and a proven track record in this area.’
(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:
‘Could the Portfolio Holder for Enterprise please explain how much money has been spent on maintenance and security for Charnwood House, Hitchin and Thomas Bellamy House, Hitchin since they have been left vacant?’
Councillor Tamsin Thomas provided the following response:
‘I repeat that particularly in the case of Charnwood that the building has not been left vacant for much of that time, its recent asbestos has been cleared. So, the total costs for Thomas Bellamy House have been £85,000, and the total costs for Charnwood House have been £68,000. That includes within it, capital expenditure for Thomas Bellamy House of £60,0000 and Charnwood of £30,000. The holding costs for Thomas Bellamy House have been £25,000 and for Charnwood House, £38,000.’
Councillor Chris Lucas asked a supplementary question, as follows:
‘Does the Portfolio Holder for Enterprise think that this is a good use of public money give that both properties have been left dormant for such a ridiculous length of time or could both properties not have been used for better use by the public within Hitchin?’
Councillor Tamsin Thomas responded:
‘I hope that my initial remarks showed that through the entire period of vacancy, the Council has been engaged in an active process to resolve the long-standing use of Charnwood House, including ensuring it serves the public in some form through museum storage. No one in this Chamber needs me to talk about the challenges of museum storage for the residents of North Herts and why we need additional space. We are the custodians of those facilities and a quick route to resolving this would be disposal or would be to leverage options around a very loose understanding of community use to get someone in. I don’t think that’s the right approach, I think that the facilities are heritage buildings, listed buildings, and it is right that we take a measured approach to, one, ensuring that they don’t degrade, which they would if they were dormant, and they are being maintained, hence the cost. But also, that Officers are working as proactively as they can to ensure that they remain in the public realm and they remain in community use for many decades to come. It is incredibly frustrating, I share with Councillor Lucas’s concern about time, but I come to the point that you can get things cheap, you can get things fast, but you can’t get them done well if you’re aiming for that. So, I think that Officers have been taking an appropriate approach to ensuring that both buildings remain in good standing and that they are returned in as measured a pace as we can manage back into public use.’
(D) Impact of the Planning and Infrastructure Act on North Hertfordshire
Councillor Ralph Muncer to Councillor Val Bryant, Leader of the Council:
‘To ask the Leader of the Council what assessment has been made as to the impact of the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 on North Hertfordshire?’
Councillor Val Bryant provided the following response:
‘First of all, the background. The Government intends to play a key role in unlocking more housing and infrastructure across the country and supporting sustained economic growth. The act is being rolled out in stages via secondary legislation, such as the National Scheme of Delegation (NSD). There are five overarching objectives, delivering faster and more certain consenting processes for critical infrastructure. Two, introducing a more strategic approach to nature recovery. Three, improving certainty and decision making in the planning system. Four, unlocking land and securing public value for large scale investment, and five, introducing effective new mechanisms for cross-boundary strategic planning. The key operational and structural changes affecting North Hertfordshire, first of all, committee streamlining. The National Scheme of Delegation will encourage more delegated decision making with the aim of limiting committee involvement to the most significant developments that are of wide public interest, thereby freeing up resources, allowing committees to concentrate on those applications that have the greatest impact upon the residents and businesses within North Herts. This will be addressed through the constitutional review and the first sub stream meeting is scheduled for Friday 17 July. Any decisions that are made after 31 October and not in accordance with the NSD, which is the National Scheme of Delegation, will be susceptible to judicial review or complaints to the Local Government Ombudsman, so it is something that we’ve got to bring in. It is anticipated that it will result in a reduction in the number of Planning Control Committee meetings and/or the length of meetings. Mandatory training for Planning Control Committee Members. We already undertake mandatory Member training although this is a statutory requirement, and Members and will be required to successfully complete training to obtain a valid completion certificate, without which, they will not be able to sit on the Planning Control Committee. Planning Committees will be limited to no more than 13 Members. This will not affect North Herts as currently, the Planning Control Committee has 12 Members. Localised Planning Fees, North Herts will have great autonomy to set application fees. Currently, it is intended to liaise with other authorities on fees following the impending decision on Local Government Reorganisation (LGR). Strategic spatial planning reintroduces a requirement for North Herts to plan more strategically across wide regional areas with the aim of ensuring that housing growth aligns with infrastructure needs. Environmental delivery plans to change how developers protect and enhance our environment when building by financing habitat restoration and pollution reduction measures such as river cleanups. Finally, compulsory purchase order powers. North Herts will be able to assemble land quickly and cheaply for public interest projects. Hope value can be bypassed when acquiring land, and then there’s the question of compensation.’
Councillor Ralph Muncer asked a supplementary question, as follows:
‘Who does she think is best suited to take decisions as to the future of our communities? Is it the locally elected representatives in this Chamber or is it the faceless bureaucrats in Whitehall?’
Councillor Val Bryant responded:
‘I'm on the Planning Committee, I've been on the Planning Committee for many years and I think that many of the applications that we look at are very worthy, and others you sit there and think ‘What are we doing here looking at these?’, and I do think that there needs to be a new look at what comes to planning and if you look at the details of the legislation, it is in fact not as clear cut as you’re talking about with bureaucrats, etcetera. But hopefully, there will be a more common-sense approach and I think it will shake down and give it a chance, and I think you’ll find it will work well.’
(E) Approach to Active Travel
Councillor Ralph Muncer to Councillor Donna Wright, Executive Member for Place:
‘To ask the Executive Member for Place to set out the Administration’s approach to Active Travel policy ahead of the Local Plan Review and the upcoming consultation on Hertfordshire County Council’s Local Transport Plan 5?’
Councillor Donna Wright provided the following response:
‘I think firstly, I do have to admit that I haven’t yet read the County Local Transport Plan 5. I’ve been on holiday and it was only circulated to district councils a couple of weeks ago, so I haven’t had a chance to look at it. But obviously, it’s on my list and we will, as a Council, be responding to the consultation in September when the final draft has been produced. In terms of our approach to active travel, the Labour Party strongly supports active travel as part of its wider goals on public health, economic growth, cleaner air, decarbonisation, and sustainable transport. The Government’s Active Travel Strategy, anchored by the third Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy and led by Transport Secretary, Heidi Alexandr features a £4.5bn investment over five years to build 5,000 new routes and 10,000 safer crossings. Our approach tends to focus more on active travel being integrated with other modes of transport rather than replacing them entirely, recognising that many journeys involve a combination of walking, cycling, bus and rail. So, this is where we might differ from some other parties. In practice, this mean prioritising infrastructure and planning that make active travel safe, convenient, and attractive whilst ensuring it is integrated with wider transport networks. People should have more transport choices, but we also recognise that cars will continue to be necessary for many journeys, particularly in rural areas and for people with mobility needs, etcetera. This is reflected in Labour’s broader transport policy, which continues to invest in roads alongside public and active transport. So, in summary, we aim for a balanced, integrated approach with strong support for active travel, where appropriate.’
Councillor Ralph Muncer asked a supplementary question, as follows:
‘Could I ask the Executive Member, will she commit to advocating for and enshrining within the next iteration of the Local Plan, a more pragmatic and realistic approach to active travel policy implementation in regard to planning applications proposed within our rural communities here in North Hertfordshire?’
Councillor Donna Wright responded:
‘I think in answer to the previous question, I’ve already outlined our approach, and we will take a balanced approach, and we do recognise that cars are still needed for many journeys, particularly in rural areas. So, we will take a balanced, integrated approach.’
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:
‘Last weekend’s Iron Maiden concert at Knebworth House caused unusual levels of widespread congestion in the main Knebworth village, other nearby villages and Stevenage. There were several issues with traffic management, with reports of residents stuck for hours and ticket holders abandoning their journeys.
Can the Portfolio Holder for Regulatory please explain what action is being taken to learn lessons from this to make future events safe and successful?’
Councillor Mick Debenham provided the following response:
‘The Iron Maiden concert at Knebworth was a major event that attracted many thousands of visitors to North Hertfordshire. While many people enjoyed the concert, I recognise that some residents, businesses and attendees experienced significant disruption, particularly due to traffic congestion and extended journey times. I would like to reassure Members that North Hertfordshire Council, working with the event organisers, Knebworth Estate, emergency services, highway authorities and other partner agencies, is already undertaking a formal post-event review through the Safety Advisory Group (SAG) process. This review will examine all aspects of the event, including traffic management, transport planning, vehicle and pedestrian movements, communications and the wider impact on local communities. The SAG met several times before the event and carried out a site visit shortly beforehand. During the concert itself, the Council and partner agencies also took part in operational planning and event control arrangements. Prior to the event, all relevant organisations were satisfied that the plans submitted met the required standards and appropriately addressed the risks identified at the time. However, a key purpose of the SAG process is to learn from experience. We are therefore gathering feedback from residents, attendees, councillors, partner organisations and event staff. This is being considered alongside information provided by the organisers and emergency services, as well as commentary shared on social media. We have already received a wide range of comments and suggestions relating to traffic management, pedestrian safety, communications and routing arrangements. These will all be considered as part of the review. It would not be appropriate to pre-empt the findings before all the evidence has been assessed. However, I can assure Members that any lessons identified will be discussed with organisers and partner agencies and will help shape planning for future events at Knebworth. Our shared objective is clear, to ensure that future events are safe, well managed and successful whilst minimising disruption to local residents and communities.’
Councillor Paul Ward asked a supplementary question, as follows:
‘Can Councillor Debenham confirm he’s willing to work with the organisers, the Officers and the SAG to update the Council with an appropriate summary of the improvements once those investigations are concluded, noting that some of the details have to remain confidential for security reasons?’
Councillor Mick Debenham responded:
‘Yes.’
N.B. Following the conclusion of the item, there was a break in proceedings at 21:08 and the meeting reconvened at 21:19. During the break, Councillors Ruth Clifton and Dominic Griffiths left the Chamber and did not return.
Supporting documents:
PDF 56 KB