Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor David Wildey (Children’s Social Care).

The record of the meeting held on 29 November 2011 was agreed and signed by the Leader as correct.

Councillor Jarrett declared a personal interest in agenda item 4 (Local Development Framework) because he was a member of two organisations (Kent Wildfowling and Conservation Association and the Wild Spaces Fund Ltd) which were landowners in connection to the estuary to which policy CS25 (the River Medway) applied. He retained his right to speak and vote on the item.

Councillor Jarrett also declared a personal interest in agenda item 5 (Lodge Hill Development Brief) because he was a member of two organisations (Kent Wildfowling and Conservation Association and the Wild Spaces Fund Ltd) which were landowners in connection to nearby Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Ramsar sites to which policy EN29 applied. He retained his right to speak and vote on the item.

Background:

This report provided details regarding the submission of a suite of documents, including the Medway Core Strategy and associated documents, which make up the Local Development Framework, to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government subject to Full Council approval on 12 January 2012.  

The Core Strategy established the overall development quantities and broad locations for development over a period of at least 15 years. It was a strategic document with associated detail being reserved for subsequent development plan documents, however, it would provide a framework for all major planning decisions.

The report set out a number of attachments including the Core Strategy (Attachment 1) and a schedule of changes proposed to the publication version approved by Cabinet in August 2011 (Attachment 2). Attachments 1-10 had been circulated separately to all Members for both the Cabinet meeting and Council on 12 January 2012.

The Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the report on 4 October 2011 and its comments were set out in Attachment 10 to the report.

An addendum report proposed some further limited additional changes to the Core Strategy.

A Diversity Impact Assessment had been included as Attachment 6 to the report. The Screening Form indicated that whilst it was not necessary to undertake a full assessment, there were actions around undertaking wider consultation and providing better quality information in terms of the breakdown of survey data.

Reasons:

To comply with the requirements of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended) and ensure that there is an up to date spatial planning framework for the area.

Background:

This report provided details of the outcome of consultation on the draft Development Brief for the Ministry of Defence (MOD) site at Lodge Hill, Chattenden. Policy CS33 of the Publication Draft Core Strategy made a strategic allocation of an area of land at Lodge Hill. This included up to 5,000 new dwellings, at least 43,000m² of employment floorspace, at least 5,000m² of retail floorspace and supporting infrastructure, community facilities and open space. If adopted, the Development Brief would become a material consideration in the determination of any planning applications for the Lodge Hill site.

Appendices 1 and 2 had been circulated to Cabinet Members and Ward Members separately.

The consultation process ran between August 2011 – October 2011 and the report set out a summary of the consultation responses. The full schedule of responses was set out in Appendix 1 to the report. The Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the report on 4 October 2011 and its comments were set out in Appendix 4 to the report.

A Diversity Impact Assessment was included at Appendix 3 to the report. The screening form indicated it was not necessary to undertake a full assessment.

Reasons:

A Development Brief for Lodge Hill will provide greater certainty for futuredevelopers andthe localcommunity and will assist in securing Medway’s regeneration and growth. 

Background:

This report provided details of three current proposals for International Airports in Medway and Kent. The report set out the proposal by Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, for an International Airport on reclaimed land in the Thames Estuary north east of Sheppey and Whitstable, the proposal from the architect Lord Foster for an International Airport on the Isle of Grain and partly on reclaimed land in the River Thames and the mouth of the River Medway and a proposal from ex Cathay Pacific Executive and previous Dan Air Head of Airline, John Olsen, for an International Airport at Cliffe costing £15billion, with 3 runways operating 24 hours a day and handling 100 million passengers a year.

The report provided details of the Council’s opposition to these proposals together with information relating to the Government’s position and the Local Enterprise Partnership which had agreed to commission a study into Airport Capacity in the Greater South East area of England.

The Leader reported that Kent County Council (KCC) had contacted him prior to the Cabinet meeting to confirm that KCC supported Medway Council in terms of its opposition to the current airport proposals and the approach as outlined by the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) to investigate the current collective capacity of the airports in the Greater South East and establish how they could be utilised more efficiently.

The Cabinet agreed to accept this matter as urgent to enable its views to be included in the report to Council on 12 January 2012.

Background:

This report provided details of proposals regarding the future of the delivery of services for adults who were vulnerable because of their mental health needs, currently provided by Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust (KMPT). The report stated that given that KMPT had not delivered adequate social care outcomes, notice had been served on the Trust and that the current contract would end on 1 February 2012.

The report set out three short-term options available to the Council together with an analysis of those options. It was noted that option 2 (to bring the service into Council management until long-term future arrangements were determined) was the preferred option.

The Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered this report on 15 December 2011 and its views were set out in an addendum report.

A Diversity Impact Assessment was included at Appendix 1 to the report. The Diversity Impact Assessment indicated that it was not necessary to proceed to a full impact assessment.

Reasons:

The recommended interim option provides the arrangements necessary to introduce social care leadership and start the process of reforming mental health social care services, so that it is aligned to the current and emerging needs of the communities of Medway.

This recommended interim option provides the Council with the time necessary to properly consult with users and their representatives, carers, families, staff, organisational partners and other key stakeholders over its long-term strategy in regard to achieving excellent mental health social care outcomes for Medway.

Background:

This report provided details of the consultation process regarding the future of the service at Shalder House and the future of the site. Shalder House was currently used as a rehabilitation facility for people that had complex issues that primarily related to vulnerabilities in terms of complex social or housing needs rather than social care needs.

The report provided details of the consultation responses received before the publication of the Cabinet agenda on 12 December 2011. An addendum report was published on 19 December 2011 which provided details of the final consultation responses received by 15 December 2011 (the deadline for consultation responses). The addendum report also included the comments of the Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee which considered this issue on 15 December 2011.

A Diversity Impact Assessment was included in Appendix 1 to the addendum report. The Diversity Impact Assessment indicated that it was not necessary to proceed to a full impact assessment.

Reasons:

Officers consider that the proposals are desirable because of the reasons set out in the advice and analysis section.  Shalder House is a service that supports people that have complex and challenging social and housing needs.  The building is not fit for purpose as a sheltered housing scheme and therefore the decommissioning of the service will enable innovative and more cost effective approaches to delivering tailored support to individuals.

During the service’s last inspection by the Care Quality Commission, the service was considered to provide very good care however the fabric of the building was criticised.

Whilst the care is good, it is not cost effective to employ 13 members of staff to support a maximum of 11 service users at any one time.  During a period of 52 weeks, 38 people benefited from the service, which indicates that the service operates at an average capacity of about 51%.

The building cannot be made fit for purpose without a substantial investment of capital.

Currently, up to eleven service users can benefit from a site that could accommodate approximately 30 units of accommodation or be redeveloped for other purposes that could benefit the whole local community.

The proposed alternative approach to supporting people into appropriate accommodation and reintegrating into the community can be delivered in a more person centred way by using units within sheltered housing across Medway.

Consultation has confirmed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Background:

This report provided Cabinet with details of the provisional Local Government settlement announced by Government on 8 December 2011, with consultation undertaken by central government until 16 January 2012. The report set out the impact of the settlement on Medway’s formula grant, the figure for 2012/2013 which was £80.743m. This represented a reduction of 8.3% against 2011/2012 on a like-for-like basis.

The report stated that the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) funding was expected to remain the same for 2012/2013 at £4,953 per pupil.  

The report provided details of the capital settlement with regard to the Department for Transport and Department for Health, however, figures had yet to be provided by Communities and Local Government and the Department for Education.

Reasons:

These provisional levels of grant form a fundamental component of the 2012/2013 budget and their announcement is a further stage in the process of preparing a balanced budget.

Background:

This report provided details on the changes to equality legislation together with the Council’s response. The Equality Act 2010 required Local Authorities to take specific actions from January 2012 to ensure that legal obligations were met. The report set out a number of proposed equality objectives which had been developed drawing on the Council’s current priorities, combined with an analysis of the equality data.  The Council’s proposed document, Delivering Fair and Responsive Services, was set out in Appendix 1 to the report. The Council’s Fair Access, Diversity and Inclusion Policy, which would replace the current Equal Opportunities Policy, was set out in Appendix 2 to the report.

Reasons:

To ensure that appropriate measures are in place to meet the equality commitments and obligations of the Council and provide accessible, value for money services for all residents. 

Background:

This report provided details of the annual review of the Council’s Risk Management Strategy and the six monthly review of the Corporate Risk Register, in accordance with paragraph 4.1 of the Risk Management Strategy. Proposed amendments to the Corporate Risk Register were set out in paragraph 4 and Appendix C to the report.

The Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered this report on 1 December 2011 and its comments were set out in paragraph 6 of the report.

Reasons:

The establishment of a corporate framework for risk management is recommended by CIPFA and SOLACE and will complement and support the work already being carried out within each directorate to manage risks. 

Background:

This report provided details of the outcomes of the consultation on the Council’s proposals to extend the age range, increase the categories of special educational needs and to increase the numbers able to attend Bradfields Community Special School, by way of statutory prescribed alterations. The consultation took place over a seven week period during September – November 2011 and the results of the consultation were set out in paragraphs 4-6 of the report.

The Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the report on 6 December 2011 and its comments were set out in paragraph 9 of the report.

A Diversity Impact Assessment was included at Appendix 2 to the report. The Diversity Impact Assessment indicated that it was not necessary to proceed to a full impact assessment.

Reasons:

To ensure that the Council’s commitment to an all age range autism unit (as set out in section 2.4 of the report) can be fulfilled.

To provide for pupils currently placed in out of area or inappropriate provision, within a setting that offers the best education possible for autistic pupils with severe learning difficulties.

To enable the council to make the financial savings as set out in the tables in paragraph 14.4 of the report, which could be reinvested back into Medway’s special educational provision to further improve the quality of learning to enable the council to offer a wider range of appropriate SEN provision across Medway, which will improve the outcomes for vulnerable children according to their individual needs.

Background:

This report provided details of the Council’s Annual Monitoring Report on progress against a range of indicators associated with the adopted Development Plan and the emerging Local Development Framework, in accordance with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The report set out the main findings, including the level of house building, the stock of employment land available, renewable energy proposals and socio-economic data.

The Annual Monitoring Report (Appendix 1 to the report) was circulated separately to Cabinet Members.

Reasons:

To report on development progress in Medway and comply with the Council’s legal duty.

Background:

This report provided details of the mid year review of the Council’s Treasury Management strategy and performance. This included an overview of the global economy and UK economy together with an analysis of the Council’s performance in respect of borrowing activity, investment, debt rescheduling and compliance with treasury and prudential limits. 

The Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered this report on 1 December 2011 and its views were set out in paragraph 9 of the report.

Reasons:

The Treasury Management Strategy requires that Cabinet receives and considers a mid year review of treasury management strategy and performance. 

Background:

This report provided details of proposals to declare four properties surplus so that the properties could be disposed of. The report set out the background to each of the properties and with regard to 54 Northcote Road, Strood, it was noted that Network Rail was proposing to replace the Darnley Road railway bridge and that this would represent an opportunity for the Council to improve facilities for pedestrians.

Reasons:

Cabinet is requested to declare the properties surplus in order to reduce revenue costs, realise capital receipts and gain investment in the Medway area.

Background:

This report presented information on vacancies that officers had requested approval to commence recruitment for, following the process agreed by Cabinet on 7 January 2003 (decision number 9/2003).

Appendix 1 to the report provided details of the posts.

Reasons:

The posts presented to Cabinet will support the efficient running of the Council.

Background:

This report provided details of a proposed project in respect of the building works for Bradfields Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Unit. The proposed works would provide seven classrooms, a therapy room, two sensory rooms, staff and office spaces, one to one rooms and calming and ancillary spaces. Externally there would be sensory gardens and a semi-enclosed walkway between the Upper and Lower Bradfields School buildings.

The Cabinet considered and approved the outline business case for this project on 4 October 2011.

The Strategic Procurement Board considered this report on 30 November 2011 and recommended approval to the Cabinet.

An exempt appendix provided details of finance and whole-life costings for the project.

Reasons:

The project will support the delivery of additional Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) pupil places within Medway, thereby contributing to a reduction in overall revenue cost of provision of ASD places for Medway as well as improved quality of ASD services for those pupils requiring them.

Background:

This report provided details of the outcome of the tender process for the award of a contract for building works at Twydall Primary School, Gillingham.

It was noted that the key aims for this project wereto join the previous Infant and Junior Schools with a fully enclosed linking corridor, as well as a new building incorporating staff and administration accommodation and a combined entrance for the newly amalgamated Primary School. Some of the vacated accommodation in the old Junior building, plus areas identified in the old Infant building and Nursery, would be developed to create a specialist unit for children with hearing impairments and cochlear implants. Work to deliver this specialist provision would be undertaken as a separate project using funding allocated by the council to provide additional special education needs provision.

The Strategic Procurement Board had approved this Procurement Gateway 3 Report on 30 November 2011 for submission to Cabinet.

An exempt appendix contained key information on finance and whole-life costings and detailed procurement process tender evaluation information.

Reasons:

The procurement will deliver the objectives outlined in the business case and summarised in Section 4.1, to provide accommodation to enable the school to offer a much improved teaching and learning environment to the children at the school.

Background:

This report reviewed progress with the School Meal Contract, which had been classified as high risk under the Council’s contract procedure rules, and recommended the award of a two year extension to the contract in accordance with the conditions of the contract.

Chartwells (Compass Group) provided this contract and responsibility and budget provision for the school meal service was delegated to Medway schools. Schools had the options to buy into the corporately let contract, or contract out to an alternative provider (either individually or as part of a cluster of schools), or provide their own catering service.

This Procurement Gateway 5 report had been approved for submission to the Cabinet after review and discussion at the Strategic Procurement Board on 30 November 2011.

An exempt appendix provided key information on finance and whole-life costings.

Reasons:

The contract is performing to agreed outcomes.

Background:

This report provided details of the proposal to develop a University Technical College (UTC) in Medway. University Technical Colleges (UTCs) were all-ability and mixed gender state funded schools, independent of Local Authorities.  They were new 14-19 Academies, typically with 500-800 pupils, specialising in subjects needing modern, technical, industry-standard equipment, such as engineering and construction.  These specialisms were taught alongside a broad, general education, including business skills, in a timetable that replicated that of the workplace.

The second round of applications for University Technical Colleges was announced by the Department for Education (DfE) on 16 November 2011, with a closing date of 17 January 2012.  The Council was working in partnership with the University of Greenwich and Mid Kent College on the application for a Medway UTC.  In this round the DfE was seeking applications offering an opening date during 2013.

The Cabinet agreed that the decisions set out below were urgent and should therefore not be subject to call-in. In line with rule 16.11 of Chapter 4, Part 5 of the Constitution, call-in could be waived where any delay likely to be caused by the call-in process would seriously prejudice the Council’s or the Public’s interests. It was considered that a call-in of the decisions set out below would weaken the proposal for a UTC, because the University of Greenwich, Mid Kent College and its partners would need to submit the application to the DfE without the explicit support of Medway Council. In addition, the application needed to be made to the DfE by 17 January 2012.

The Chairman of the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee had agreed that the decisions proposed were reasonable in all the circumstances and to them being treated as a matter of urgency and to waive call-in.

Additionally, and in line with Rule 16 (Special Urgency) of the Access to Information Rules (Part 2 of Chapter 4 in the Constitution), it was noted that the Chairman of the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee had agreed that the taking of these decisions could not be reasonably deferred.