Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies.

In accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct, Members are requested to declare any interests orally at the start of the meeting and again immediately before consideration of the matter. Members are reminded to specify the agenda item number to which it refers and whether the interest is of a personal or prejudicial nature.

Members are also reminded of the requirements of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 that they should declare and not vote on specified matters if they are two months or more in arrears with their Council Tax payments.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider and approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 September 2010 attached.

The minutes of the meeting held on 6 September 2010 be received and approved and the Chairman be authorised to sign them.

There were no representations by members of the public.

There were no matters raised by executive members.

There were no matters raised by non-executive members.

There were no matters referred to the executive for reconsideration.

There were no reports from overview and scrutiny committees.

Update on the Efficiency Challenge Update.

Cabinet received a report which provided an update on the Efficiency Challenge.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the proposals for the web management structure and the customer contact improvement programme as set in paragraphs 3.13.1 and 3.13.2 in the report and the associated Channel Strategy in Appendix One be agreed.

2. the establishment of the teams necessary to carry out the customer contact improvement programme at a one off total cost of £350k as set out in paragraph 3.16 of the report be agreed.

3. the use of £200k for external procurement support as set out in paragraph 3.23 in the report be agreed.

4. the scale of the savings arising from the Efficiency Challenge programmes to date and how these relate to those emerging from the Zero Based Budget exercise reported elsewhere on the agenda be noted.

5. the new proposed governance proposals for all of the Council’s efficiency work moving forward as set out in section four of the report be noted.

This report covers the initial outcome of the Budget Review exercise undertaken by

Leading Members during the Summer 2010.

Cabinet heard representations from Councillor Brian Miller which included the following points:

-          that there were concerns about the proposal to close Heathfield Library.

-          that there were concerns about the proposal to close Tangley Hall.

-          that there were concerns about the reduction of £24,000 to the Schools Uniform Grants (which would have a detrimental effect upon families who could not afford school uniforms).

-          that the definition of “vulnerable” had still not been provided.

-          that there were concerns about the reductions in expenditure which would affect residents who were already on the poverty line.

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources thanked  Councillor Miller for his contributions to the Overview & Scrutiny and Cabinet Committee discussions and stated that:

-          there would be a consultation period with regard to the proposal not to reopen Heathfield Library.

-          Heathfield Library was situated in the Whitton area which had a fully functional and well stocked library. 

-          Borough day centres were substantially underused overall.

-          if Tangley Hall was to close, residents would still receive key front line high quality services and efforts would be made to retain Tangley Hall as a community asset. This was subject to consultation.

-          Cabinet was confident that schools would be able to assist families which experienced difficulties in purchasing school uniforms (e.g., via uniform banks).

-          there would not be the reduction in the frequency of street cleaning services within the borough that had been proposed by the previous administration.

-          there would not be a reduction in the Music Trust grant and the reduction in funding for Dramatic Edge (a theatre project for local youth) would also be reversed and the service would be refined.

The Leader of the Council advised that the current financial position of the UK has meant that both national and local expenditure levels must be revised. Consequently, the Council would have to review all budgets and decide how services could and would be provided. Moreover, the corporate budget review project was an ongoing process which would be revisited by the Council after the Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review scheduled for 20 October 2010. There was therefore scope for revision after the consultation process.

It was RESOLVED that:

1.      Cabinet considered all feedback from Overview and

      Scrutiny Committees which have received budget review

      reports to date.

2.   the attached list of proposals for further detailed development and consultation where appropriate be agreed.

For Cabinet to recommend that the revised version of the Development Management DPD is published after Full Council and submitted following consultation.

Cabinet heard representations from Councillor Martin Elengorn, which included the following points (concerned in particular with pages 72 & 73 of the report):

-          that any proposed LDF Development Management DPD document must also be drafted in accordance with the Mayor’s Plan.

-          that any proposed document should be evidence based.

-          that the figures contained in the original document, under the previous administration, which had been gathered as a result of sustainability exercises, had been changed.

-          that it was inappropriate to request that ‘maximum parking standards’ be used to set ‘minimum standards parking standards’.

-          noted that the indicative parking standards were lower than those standards outlined in the report.

-          that there was a misapplication of the current Control Policy concerning housing.

Cabinet heard representations from Councillor John Coombs which included the following points:

-          that there were two distinct housing sectors within the borough namely social housing and the private sector.

-          that 12% of the borough’s housing stock was social housing dwellings.

-          that the residents of the borough also required small dwelling units.

-          that the Council and the Planning Inspector had identified the private sector as the larger of the two sectors and that there should be by 2016 a 40% increase in smaller units and by 2026 a 44% rise in smaller units.

-          that the borough required a well balanced mix of residential property for all its residents.

The Strategic Cabinet Member for Environment & Planning thanked Councillors Elengorn and Coombs for their contributions to this matter and advised that:

-          the maximum parking levels & London Plan addressed the concerns of Councillors Elengorn and Coombs.

-          There was evidence to suggest that the borough needed larger family friendly affordable housing units and not small units as previously built.

-          that over the last five years 60% of new build dwellings had been small units which had created problems associated with over development.

-          the proposed development plan gave the Council and developers flexibility with regards dwellings which could meet residents’ needs.

The Cabinet Member for Performance welcomed the fact that the Mayor was setting minimum size standards for new housing. Moreover, new buildings were placed “where appropriate” and all development policies within this borough would be implemented fairly and with sensitivity.

The Cabinet Member for Traffic commented that all development, where reasonably practicable, should provide parking facilities for residents.

The Leader of the Council thanked all parties for assisting with this project and advised Cabinet that the matter would be submitted to Council (19 October 2010) for final determination.

He noted that the DPD proposals represented a very different view from the previous administration in areas such as car-free developments, parking standards, garden grabbing, preferred property sizes, tall buildings and the so-called ‘linked site strategy’ and commented that the haste with which the LDF had been presented meant that it had been influenced by the need to comply with the policies of Mayor Livingstone and the Labour government. Cabinet would continue to work  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

For Cabinet to agree the final version of the Twickenham Station and Surroundings Design Standards as a supplementary planning document (SPD) following formal public consultation.

Cabinet heard representations from Councillor Scott Naylor, which included the following points:

-          he was very happy that the subject of Surrounding Design Standards (SDP) had been brought forward in the Cabinet’s business agenda.

-          he wholeheartedly supported the proposed policy and that he had the support of the Rt Honourable Vince Cable MP.

-          He had obtained in excess of 150 community responses supporting the prohibition of high rise buildings within central Twickenham which had been encouraged by the previous administration.

-          that Regal House was an experimental building from the 1960s which should not be replicated around the area.

The Strategic Cabinet Member for Environment & Planning stated that:

-          Regal House would not be the benchmark for future building within the borough.

-          the overall approach of the proposed SDP was to promote a vision for this area, namely that of a suburban centre where very tall buildings are considered inappropriate.

The Strategic Cabinet Member for Environment & Planning proposed that the addendum document to item 12 of the agenda (distributed to Cabinet Members prior to the meeting, which included changes to the SDP document) be agreed.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. The Twickenham Station and Surroundings Design Standards be adopted and used as a supplementary Planning Document be agreed.

2. The addendum document to item 12 of the agenda, distributed to Cabinet Members prior to the meeting, be agreed.

The Leader of the Council advised that a meeting on 30 October 2010 at the RFU would be discussing future developments within the town.

To review the support for retail and business centres in the Borough.

Cabinet received a report on the support for retail and business centres in the borough.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the proposed approach to supporting retail and business centres as indicated in paragraphs 3.12 and 3.17 of the report be agreed.

2. amendments to the criteria for the Town Centres Opportunities Fund (Appendix 1 of the report) be agreed.

3. that a consistent approach across centres in relation to charging and income and that a policy statement be agreed by the Director of Environment and Director of Finance & Corporate Services in consultation with relevant Cabinet members (as outlined in paragraph 3.17 of the report) be agreed.

4. the establishment and funding of a new full time Retail / Business

      Champion (as outlined in paragraph 3.13 and 5.2 of the report) be

      agreed.

This report considers the procurement route and process of acceptance of a tender

for over £500,000 to appoint the building contractor(s) to undertake building works for

the delivery of the expansion of Chase Bridge and Stanley Primary Schools.

Cabinet received a report which considered the procurement route and process of acceptance of a tender for over £500,000 to appoint the building contractor(s) to undertake building works for the delivery of the expansion of Chase Bridge and Stanley Primary Schools.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the use of the restricted tendering method for the procurement of the single stage design and build construction contract(s) be approved.

2. subject to such delegation being required, authority to award the building contract for Chase Bridge and Stanley Primary Schools be

      delegated to the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and

      Resources, provided that the recommended contract value is within

      10% of the pre-tender estimate be approved.

This report considers the procurement route and process of acceptance of a tender

for over £500,000 to appoint the building contractor(s) to undertake building works for

the delivery of the improvement projects at Christ’s School, Orleans Park School,

Grey Court School and Waldegrave School for Girls in accordance with clause 9.9 of

Contract Standing Orders.

Cabinet received a report which considered the procurement route and process of acceptance of a tender for over £500,000 to appoint the building contractor(s) to undertake building works for the delivery of the improvement projects at Christ’s School, Orleans Park School, Grey Court School and Waldegrave School for Girls in accordance with clause 9.9 of Contract Standing Orders.

It was RESOLVED that:

Authority to award the building contract for the SEN and 14 – 19 projects be delegated to the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, provided that the recommended contract value is within 10% of the pre-tender estimate be approved.

This report considers the procurement route and process of acceptance of a tender

for over £500,000 to appoint the building contractor(s) to undertake building works for

the delivery of the improvement projects at Darell School, Heathfield School and

Sheen Mount School.

Cabinet received a report which considered the procurement route and process of acceptance of a tender for over £500,000 to appoint the building contractor(s) to undertake building works for the delivery of the improvement projects at Darell School, Heathfield School and Sheen Mount School.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the use of the Council’s select list of contractors as the tendering method for the procurement of the main contracts be approved.

2. authority to award the building contracts for Darell, Heathfield and Sheen Mount projects be delegated to the Deputy Leader and Cabinet

      Member for Finance and Resources, provided that the recommended

      contract value is within 10% of the pre-tender estimate be approved.

Report to follow.

The Leader of the Council advised that Mr S Shah, General Counsel of NSL Limited, had withdrawn his application to submit representations to Cabinet (11.10.10) and that members would not hear any public representations associated with this item.

The Leader of the Council also noted the intention of the Council to move to fairer and more humane standards of enforcement.

Cabinet received a report to seek approval to appoint the successful bidder from the recent procurement exercise for parking enforcement and to advise of other matters arising from that process.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. subject to the outcome of the value for money review process that is described in paragraphs 5.9 – 5.11 of the report, to accept the tender submitted by Vinci Park and award that company a new parking enforcement contract on a five year basis with an extension, subject to further Cabinet decision, of up to three years after the fifth year be agreed.

2. that once the value for money review process is complete, the decision on whether or not the conditionality at (point 1 above), can be released

      is delegated to the Director of Environment and Director of Finance and

      Corporate Services in consultation with the Head of Legal Services,

      Cabinet Member for Traffic, Cabinet Member for Efficiency and Leader

      of the Council be agreed.

3. that final decisions on the detailed terms of the new contract (within the constraints of compliance with the Public Procurement Regulations) be delegated to the Director of Environment in consultation with the Head of Legal Services, Cabinet Member for Traffic and Leader of the Council.

4. that these detailed terms must include requirement on the contractor and the Civil Enforcement Officers (CEOs) employed through the contract to adopt a humane approach to enforcement, to provide an enhanced level of customer care services for parking and to provide customer and “report-it” style services beyond just parking issues be agreed.

5. that the detailed final decisions on the uniform to be worn by the CEOs and other practical matters of this type be delegated to the Director of Environment in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Traffic and

      Leader of the Council be agreed.

6. Cabinet agreed that a further report be received by the November or December 2010 Cabinet Meeting that reviews options for adjusting the scale of the Council’s parking enforcement operation as a whole, including options that explore decreasing the numbers of CEOs deployed and the scale of the in-house team that is involved in both contract management and the processing of penalty notices and appeals.

To report on the transport related Local Implementation Plan (LIP) funding programme for 2011/12.

Cabinet received a report on the transport related Local Implementation Plan (LIP) funding programme for 2011/12.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the LIP funding application to TfL for 2011/12 onwards (as detailed in Appendix A of the report) be agreed.

2. any subsequent changes to the programme resulting from a reduction

      in funding from TfL or in management of programmes and schemes be

      approved by the Cabinet Member for Transport.

To seek Cabinet approval for the revised adult social care Resource Allocation

System (RAS) and associated RAS Policy.

Cabinet received a report to seek approval for the revised adult social care Resource Allocation System (RAS) and associated RAS Policy.

It was RESOLVED that:

The Resources Allocation System and the associated Policy, as set out in Appendix 1 of the report, be approved.

To obtain authority for the compulsory purchase of the derelict properties details of

 which are set out in paragraph 11 of this report.

The Leader of the Council advised Members that Mr R Newman (owner of 85 Whitton Road, Twickenham – one of the property against which a Compulsory Purchase Order was being considered) wished to submit representations to Cabinet, although he had missed the deadline. The Leader of the Council proposed that Mr R Newman be given an opportunity to address Cabinet on matters concerning his property.

Cabinet heard representations from Mr R Newman, which included the following points:

-          he had not received any official notice from the Council that his property was to be considered under CPO provisions and would be considered by Cabinet in a meeting to be held on Monday 11 October 2010.

-          he had learned about the proposed CPO application against his property from his local newspaper (10.10.10).

-          the Cabinet report had misrepresented his attitude towards selling his property; there were several errors and exaggerations contained within the report.

-          he had not received any offers of sale for his property and thus had not turned down any offers submitted from developers.

-          he agreed and accepted that he had to sell his property (which had been agreed with a Council property officer on 27 September 2010).

-          he confirmed that he had obtained a valuation report for the property (at the cost of £2,000).

-          he acknowledged that it was necessary to hold a pre-application meeting with the council (which had been arranged for w/c 18 October 2010) and had submitted his pre-application cheque for this process.

The Leader of the Council stated that it was regrettable that Mr R Newman had not been informed of the Cabinet Meeting in which the said property and CPO provisions were to be discussed. Furthermore, the Leader of the Council thanked Mr R Newman for attending the meeting and submitting representations to Cabinet.

However, The Leader of the Council did underline the importance of addressing the blight caused by the presence of buildings abandoned for long periods and reaffirmed the Council’s willingness to use its CPO powers.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the CPO report concerned with the property 85 Whitton Road, Twickenham would be deferred to a Cabinet Meeting to be held on 8 November 2010 so that a progress report could be compiled and submitted to Cabinet for consideration and determination.

1. the CPO report concerned with the following three properties be deferred to a Cabinet Meeting to be held on 8 November 2010 for consideration and determination. In the interim, Council officers were to

      formally notify all property owners of the proposed CPO applications

      against their properties and that matters would be discussed and

      decided upon at a Cabinet Meeting to be held on Monday 8 November

      2010 at 19.30pm (Salon, York House, Twickenham). The three

      properties concerned were:

1. 17 Chelwood Gardens, Richmond TW9 4JG.
2. 67 Manor Road, Richmond.

      c.  183 Castelnau Barnes.

This report contains the Treasury Management Annual Report for 2009/10 and the actual performance against the Prudential Indicators for 2009/10. It also includes updated information about Treasury Management activities and investment criteria.

Cabinet received a report on the annual performance of the Treasury Management function (in accordance with the CIPFA Code of Practice for Treasury Management).

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the Treasury Management Annual Report and Prudential Indicators in Appendix A of the report for 2009/10 of the report be noted and that the recommendation to Council to approve the Treasury Management Annual Report and Prudential Indicators be agreed.

2. that the recommendation to Council to approve the revised Investment Criteria in Appendix B of the report be agreed.

To consider a new levy mechanism for the disposal of residual and other waste and a

strategy for trading of Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS).

Cabinet received a report to consider a new levy mechanism for the disposal of residual and other waste and a strategy for trading of Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS).

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the new “pay as you throw” levy mechanism as agreed by WLWA on 21 July 2010 be agreed.

2. that the LATS Trading Policy 2010 – 2015 as agreed by WLWA on 21 July 2010 be agreed.

To update Members on the tendering and appointment of a contractor for the

borough’s Term Contract for Civil Engineering Works.

Cabinet received a report on the tendering and appointment of a contractor for the borough’s Term Contract for Civil Engineering Works.

It was RESOLVED that:

The existing Term Contract for Civil Engineering Works with VolkerHighways is extended until 31 March 2011 or until the tender process is completed.

To decide having regard to the particular nature of the business to be transacted, whether or not to exclude the Press and Public during consideration of the following items on the grounds that they were likely to disclose exempt information by virtue of Paragraphs 3  of schedule 12 A (as amended) to the Local Government Act 1972.

Report to follow.

It was RESOLVED that:

The report be noted.