Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Crooks.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 25 March 2021.

It was moved by Councillor Sheppard-Bools, seconded by Councillor Williams and

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 25 March be confirmed as a correct record.

Councillor Ladkin, Lay, Sheppard-Bools and Williams declared personal interests in item 8 as parish councillors.

Councillor Collett declared that he had supported Stoke Golding’s application for a grant via the Parish & Community Initiative Fund but had no interest in any item on the agenda.

Councillor Morrell declared that he was treasurer of Sheepy Memorial Hall but had no interest in any item on the agenda.

To seek endorsement of the enhancement schemes for 2021/22.

Consideration was given to the Environmental Improvement Programme for 2021/22. There was discussion on blue plaques and heritage trails and it was suggested that they should be publicised on the council’s website to encourage tourism. In response it was stated that there was a rural and an urban blue plaque trail published on the council’s website which provided information on the plaques and their recipients. It was suggested that a feature be included in the Borough Bulletin to raise awareness of that information and that the tourism partnership be recommended to include this information to promote thematic walks in the borough.

RESOLVED –

(i)            An article about the blue plaque and heritage information on the council’s website be included in the Borough Bulletin;

(ii)          The tourism partnership be recommended to promote thematic walks in the borough.

To notify members of the housing delivery test results and seek endorsement of the action plan.

Members received notification of the government’s 2020 housing delivery test which showed that the council had delivered 92% of its required housing target over the last three years and was now required to publish an action plan. It was noted that the test covered the period to March 2020. It was acknowledged that the council had little control over the figures as it depended on developers to complete builds. The overall national challenge over non-delivery of housing was referenced, indicating over the last ten years of planning permissions granted that 1.1million homes were still not built.

During discussion, the following matters were raised:

·         The Local Plan – the draft version of which would be out for consultation in June 2021

·         Neighbourhood Plans which were encouraged and supported but needed to accommodate for housing growth

·         The sustainable urban extensions (SUEs) and problems caused by the housing not yet being delivered

·         The delays caused by the highways authority, particularly in relation to the Barwell SUE and the need for political intervention to draw this to a conclusion

·         The likely impact of covid on the 2021 figures

·         Current delays in delivery of housing due to lack of materials

·         The need for more reporting of progress to meeting targets over the next 12-18 months

·         Lessons that may be learned from North West Leicestershire District which had a 12.5 year housing land supply.

RESOLVED –

(i)            The position be updated regularly over the next 12-18 months;

(ii)          Support for realistic neighbourhood plans be continued;

(iii)         The report be acknowledged.

To endorse the recommended allocation of the Parish & Community Initiative Fund and the Hinckley Community Initiative Fund for 2021/22.

The Scrutiny Commission considered the recommended funding allocations under the Parish and Community Initiative Fund and the Hinckley Community Initiative Fund. It was noted that 31 applications were recommended for funding. It was stated that the Rural Community Council had provided support for those parishes making applications over the last year which was particularly beneficial to smaller parishes with fewer staff. Members were reminded that schemes had to score more than 50 points to be considered.

Members stated that they did not support changing the name of the scheme as it was important to distinguish the support being provided to parishes.

RESOLVED –

(i)            The funding allocations of £141,664 for 31 schemes be endorsed;

(ii)          The applications detailed as not meeting the criteria be rejected;

(iii)         The carrying forward of £72,117 be endorsed to allow previous schemes to be completed;

(iv)         The name of the scheme be RECOMMENDED to remain the same.