Agenda item

Questions

To deal with questions under Council Procedure Rule number 14:

 

1.  Question from Councillor Boothby to the Executive member for Planning

 

“Will the Executive Member for Planning please confirm the following information regarding the Planning function as at 31 December 2021:-

 

a.  Spend YTD on Consultants and temporary staff cover

b.  Provide an update on recruitment for all vacant positions within Planning and Enforcement.

c.   Confirm the number of Planning Applications received awaiting verification.

d.  Confirm the number of Planning Applications awaiting Decision split between Minor and Major.

e.  Spend YTD on Planning Appeals.

f.    Confirm the number of Planning Applications approaching, at or pass their target Decision Date (ie at risk of Appeal for Non-Determination).

 

Will the Member undertake to provide a rolling monthly report on the above to Planning and Scrutiny Committee.”

 

Response from the Executive member:

 

“Councillor Boothby, thank you for your question. Local authorities up and down the country are facing the challenge of increasing workload and short supply of professional planners. Hinckley and Bosworth is no different. This leads to longer waiting times for applicants and increased costs for us. In answer to your specific questions, I can confirm as follows:

 

a.  The spend on consultants and temporary staff cover will be reported to Council and the Scrutiny Commission as part of the budget process

b.  With regards to recruitment for vacant positions, we have successfully recruited a new planning manager who starts on 14 February. We are currently carrying a further seven vacancies in the development management team. The closing date for applications for these roles was 9 January. Shortlisting has taken place and invites for interviews are going out shortly. In the enforcement team we have a new starter this week and have two further vacancies. Unfortunately no suitable candidates applied during the last recruitment process.

c.  The number of planning applications received awaiting verification is 139

d.  The number of major planning applications awaiting decision is 71, and 372 minor

e.  The spend on planning appeals up to the end of December is £155,300

f.   365 planning applications are approaching, at or passed their target decision date (ie at risk of appeal for non-determination).”

 

2.  Question from Councillor R Allen to the Executive member for Planning

 

“Will the Administration please provide an update on the progress of the Hinckley High Street Heritage Action Zone (HAZ), including details of the funding available and its source, a breakdown of the amounts spent to date, confirmation of who authorises payments for this project.

 

Given that HBBC Officers are involved and the significant sums available to this important project, will the Administration commit to bringing regular updates on plans, progress and expenditure to Council (Scrutiny Committee?)”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

‘I thank Councillor Allen for his question.

 

I am pleased to confirm that progress on the various projects within the Hinckley High Street Heritage Action Zone (HAZ) continues to be made which allows us to give much needed support to the town centre and its businesses. Briefly I will mention some key updates

 

·      On the public realm projects, following the consultation on three design options for the Church Walk car park a decision was taken not to reduce parking spaces on this key town centre carpark. A further design is therefore being finalised to reflect the feedback. This further option aims to maximise parking provision and promote a key route from Argents Mead to Castle Street via Church Walk. Additionally the details of the public realm proposals for the yards and jitties and for Castle Street are also being finalised with the physical works scheduled to commence later this year.

 

·      The council has secured additional funding from Historic England to develop a HAZ Hub which would become a focal point in the town centre for community engagement and give an opportunity for scheme partners and cultural consortium members to use. A number of locations have been considered and we’re proposing to utilise a dedicated space within the Atkins building to establish the HSHAZ Hub.

 

·      The Building Improvement Scheme offers grants for works of repair and restoration of significant historic features including shop fronts to targeted properties within the HAZ. The majority of restoration works are based on historic photographs and evidence available for each property. 17 expression of interest forms have been submitted with two schemes being completed and further schemes being drawn up. Officers are intending to continue targeted promotion on high priority properties.

 

·      A programme coordinator for the Cultural Programme is in post for October 21 to March 22 and has been working with English Heritage on developing and coordinating heritage and cultural events. Through a Cultural consortium of members and partners an initial programme of four potential projects is being finalised with the first event scheduled for early spring.

 

·      As part of the Community Engagement Programme, Hinckley Archaeology Society ran Medieval Hinckley Walking Tours with all the walks fully booked and the feedback has been really positive.

 

Over the life of the HAZ  which is until 31 March 2024, the total funding is £1.85m. The budget has already been approved by members through the budget process and is included in current budgets. There have subsequently been opportunities to bid for further funding for a HAZ hub and the Cultural programme which the council have successfully secured and these additional sums are managed separately and not included in the initial allocation. The £1.85m is made up of grants from Historic England and from the LLEP and a contribution from HBBC

 

Up to the end of Quarter 2 in 2021/22 £140,000 had been spent and officers are currently just updating the spend profile for the last quarter. The authorisation for expenditure is covered under the Council’s scheme of delegation with regular quarterly monitoring from Historic England as well as the council’s financial oversight through its own budget monitoring.

 

Officers will circulate regular updates to all Members as the schemes progress and more formal updates will be programmed for Scrutiny Commission on this exciting project over the next two years.”

 

3.  Question from Councillor O’Shea to the Executive member for Planning

 

“Can the Executive member please confirm that a detailed survey of brown field sites that are available across the Borough has been undertaken and make that report available to members?

 

Utilizing more brown field sites, would protect more of our precious green countryside.”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“Thank you Councillor O’Shea for your question. I can confirm that the council has produced a Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA) which assesses the deliverability of all land across the borough including brownfield land. This is available on our website. The council also produces a brownfield land register which is also available on our website.”

 

4.  Question from Councillor C Allen to the Leader of Council

 

“Will the Leader of the Council please explain why so many Executive Meetings have been cancelled under his Administration and reassure residents that all matters and decisions relating to this Council have been given full and appropriate consideration by the Executive.”

 

Response from the Leader

 

“As I have sought to do effectively in this and previous Lib Dem run administrations of this council, I aim to ensure decision making is timely, transparent and democratic. As those members who have sat on the Executive will know, any reports coming forward will be presented to the responsible executive member by the relevant senior officer and then to the executive informally. At this point it can either go for decision to Executive or to full council depending on the legal requirements, usually via Scrutiny.

 

Unlike other authorities, some of which members will be all too familiar with, Hinckley and Bosworth takes a lot of these reports directly to full Council where the law allows, where members of all parties and representatives of all our communities can have their input. We believe this to be more open and democratic.”

 

5.  Question from Councillor O’Shea to the Executive member for Streetscene Services

 

“Last February at full council, I asked for a detailed report on the actual cost of the Brown Bin service. The question was simple - what does it cost the council to break even on this service, compared to the amount of revenue that it brings in from council tax payers?

 

Please could the executive member provide members with that information.”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“Councillor O’Shea, thank you for your question. The garden waste service costs the Council £466,000 to run – that is the net cost and accounts for the income from the subscription”.

 

6.  Question from Councillor Morrell to the Executive member for Finance

 

“Would the Executive member as a matter of urgency, commission specialist consultants to examine the problems faced on the crematorium site and report back with mitigation measures and costings to Members as soon as possible?
This would assist Members and Officers to make a fully informed decision as to whether to proceed, or scrap the project due to viability concerns?

 

Waiting and monitoring the site given that the problem is sub-ground conditions is a waste of time.

 

The solution may be to pile the heavily trafficked areas and the site of the crematorium, as was the solution for the new leisure centre.”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“I think Councillor Morrell for his question and note his comments and suggestions of the solution to the problem. Bearing in mind that more than one proposal for a scheme of works has been proposed by specialists and have failed, I understand and share his frustration.

 

However, we as a council must rely upon the advice of experts in this field and seek to ensure that responsibility for such advice and any proposals resulting from it rests with those who we retain for that purpose.

 

A specialist consultant will be employed by the contractor as part of the monitoring works and a report will be issued to HBBC. At the end of this monitoring period, a suitable design solution can be produced to deal with the specific site conditions and at that point the council can decide whether to progress depending upon costs and whether the scheme is still deemed commercially viable. Whatever the outcome, any further for the site will need to be informed by the additional monitoring work.

 

I can, however, also confirm it is also our intention to directly employ our own specialist to assist us in validating this work and to help inform future options.”

 

7.  Question from Councillor Ladkin to the Executive member for Finance

 

“At the Council Meeting of February 23rd 2021 it was resolved that MTFS 2.4 that there would be “no recurring supplementary requests for the period of the MTFS”.

 

Can the Executive Member for Finance please confirm that since that meeting, have there been any “recurring supplementary requests“ and If there have been any please list the items and amounts.”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“I would like to thank Councillor Ladkin for the question which gives us the opportunity to demonstrate the minimal amount of recurring supplementary requests. In fact, the only recurring supplementary request is in relation to additional salary costs within the refuse & recycling service. The issues of driver shortages in this area was the subject of a report to Council in November 2021 which was unanimously supported. The ongoing net impact for this recurring supplementary is expected to be £22,000.”

 

8.  Question from Councillor Roberts to the Executive member for Planning

 

“Will the Administration please explain what happened to the Council email over the Christmas and New Year period, where residents received bounce back emails from the Planning inbox in particular stating that it was full?

 

Can the administration also confirm that action has now been taken to rectify the problem, the number of emails in the Planning inbox that resulted in a “Mailbox Full” message and reassure residents that everyone who emails the Council will receive a full and prompt response?

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“Councillor Roberts, thank you for your question. I understand that rather than the generic planning inbox being full, customers received “mailbox full” messages where they had copied in a particular officer. This can happen when large files are received, particularly over time when the council is shut such as weekends or over Christmas. I can reassure you that any emails sent to the generic inbox will have been received and passed onto the relevant officer.”

Minutes:

To deal with questions under Council Procedure Rule number 14:

 

1.  Question from Councillor Boothby to the Executive member for Planning

 

“Will the Executive Member for Planning please confirm the following information regarding the Planning function as at 31 December 2021:-

 

a.  Spend YTD on Consultants and temporary staff cover

b.  Provide an update on recruitment for all vacant positions within Planning and Enforcement.

c.   Confirm the number of Planning Applications received awaiting verification.

d.  Confirm the number of Planning Applications awaiting Decision split between Minor and Major.

e.  Spend YTD on Planning Appeals.

f.    Confirm the number of Planning Applications approaching, at or pass their target Decision Date (ie at risk of Appeal for Non-Determination).

 

Will the Member undertake to provide a rolling monthly report on the above to Planning and Scrutiny Committee.”

 

Response from the Executive member:

 

“Councillor Boothby, thank you for your question. Local authorities up and down the country are facing the challenge of increasing workload and short supply of professional planners. Hinckley and Bosworth is no different. This leads to longer waiting times for applicants and increased costs for us. In answer to your specific questions, I can confirm as follows:

 

a.  The spend on consultants and temporary staff cover will be reported to Council and the Scrutiny Commission as part of the budget process

b.  With regards to recruitment for vacant positions, we have successfully recruited a new planning manager who starts on 14 February. We are currently carrying a further seven vacancies in the development management team. The closing date for applications for these roles was 9 January. Shortlisting has taken place and invites for interviews are going out shortly. In the enforcement team we have a new starter this week and have two further vacancies. Unfortunately no suitable candidates applied during the last recruitment process.

c.  The number of planning applications received awaiting verification is 139

d.  The number of major planning applications awaiting decision is 71, and 372 minor

e.  The spend on planning appeals up to the end of December is £155,300

f.   365 planning applications are approaching, at or passed their target decision date (ie at risk of appeal for non-determination).”

 

By way of supplementary question, Councillor Boothby reiterated his request for a monthly report to Planning Committee or Scrutiny Commission. Councillor Bill acknowledged the concern of members and agreed to keep them up to date.

 

2.  Question from Councillor R Allen to the Executive member for Planning

 

“Will the Administration please provide an update on the progress of the Hinckley High Street Heritage Action Zone (HAZ), including details of the funding available and its source, a breakdown of the amounts spent to date, confirmation of who authorises payments for this project.

 

Given that HBBC Officers are involved and the significant sums available to this important project, will the Administration commit to bringing regular updates on plans, progress and expenditure to Council (Scrutiny Committee?)”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

‘I thank Councillor Allen for his question.

 

I am pleased to confirm that progress on the various projects within the Hinckley High Street Heritage Action Zone (HAZ) continues to be made which allows us to give much needed support to the town centre and its businesses. Briefly I will mention some key updates

 

·      On the public realm projects, following the consultation on three design options for the Church Walk car park a decision was taken not to reduce parking spaces on this key town centre carpark. A further design is therefore being finalised to reflect the feedback. This further option aims to maximise parking provision and promote a key route from Argents Mead to Castle Street via Church Walk. Additionally the details of the public realm proposals for the yards and jitties and for Castle Street are also being finalised with the physical works scheduled to commence later this year.

 

·      The council has secured additional funding from Historic England to develop a HAZ Hub which would become a focal point in the town centre for community engagement and give an opportunity for scheme partners and cultural consortium members to use. A number of locations have been considered and we’re proposing to utilise a dedicated space within the Atkins building to establish the HSHAZ Hub.

 

·      The Building Improvement Scheme offers grants for works of repair and restoration of significant historic features including shop fronts to targeted properties within the HAZ. The majority of restoration works are based on historic photographs and evidence available for each property. 17 expression of interest forms have been submitted with two schemes being completed and further schemes being drawn up. Officers are intending to continue targeted promotion on high priority properties.

 

·      A programme coordinator for the Cultural Programme is in post for October 21 to March 22 and has been working with English Heritage on developing and coordinating heritage and cultural events. Through a Cultural consortium of members and partners an initial programme of four potential projects is being finalised with the first event scheduled for early spring.

 

·      As part of the Community Engagement Programme, Hinckley Archaeology Society ran Medieval Hinckley Walking Tours with all the walks fully booked and the feedback has been really positive.

 

Over the life of the HAZ  which is until 31 March 2024, the total funding is £1.85m. The budget has already been approved by members through the budget process and is included in current budgets. There have subsequently been opportunities to bid for further funding for a HAZ hub and the Cultural programme which the council have successfully secured and these additional sums are managed separately and not included in the initial allocation. The £1.85m is made up of grants from Historic England and from the LLEP and a contribution from HBBC

 

Up to the end of Quarter 2 in 2021/22 £140,000 had been spent and officers are currently just updating the spend profile for the last quarter. The authorisation for expenditure is covered under the Council’s scheme of delegation with regular quarterly monitoring from Historic England as well as the council’s financial oversight through its own budget monitoring.

 

Officers will circulate regular updates to all Members as the schemes progress and more formal updates will be programmed for Scrutiny Commission on this exciting project over the next two years.”

 

3.  Question from Councillor O’Shea to the Executive member for Planning

 

“Can the Executive member please confirm that a detailed survey of brown field sites that are available across the Borough has been undertaken and make that report available to members?

 

Utilizing more brown field sites, would protect more of our precious green countryside.”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“Thank you Councillor O’Shea for your question. I can confirm that the council has produced a Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA) which assesses the deliverability of all land across the borough including brownfield land. This is available on our website. The council also produces a brownfield land register which is also available on our website.”

 

4.  Question from Councillor C Allen to the Leader of Council

 

“Will the Leader of the Council please explain why so many Executive Meetings have been cancelled under his Administration and reassure residents that all matters and decisions relating to this Council have been given full and appropriate consideration by the Executive.”

 

Response from the Leader

 

“As I have sought to do effectively in this and previous Lib Dem run administrations of this council, I aim to ensure decision making is timely, transparent and democratic. As those members who have sat on the Executive will know, any reports coming forward will be presented to the responsible executive member by the relevant senior officer and then to the executive informally. At this point it can either go for decision to Executive or to full council depending on the legal requirements, usually via Scrutiny.

 

Unlike other authorities, some of which members will be all too familiar with, Hinckley and Bosworth takes a lot of these reports directly to full Council where the law allows, where members of all parties and representatives of all our communities can have their input. We believe this to be more open and democratic.”

 

5.  Question from Councillor O’Shea to the Executive member for Streetscene Services

 

“Last February at full council, I asked for a detailed report on the actual cost of the Brown Bin service. The question was simple - what does it cost the council to break even on this service, compared to the amount of revenue that it brings in from council tax payers?

 

Please could the executive member provide members with that information.”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“Councillor O’Shea, thank you for your question. The garden waste service costs the Council £466,000 to run – that is the net cost and accounts for the income from the subscription”.

 

By way of supplementary question, Councillor O’Shea asked for the figure received from the annual charge for garden waste collections. Councillor Crooks responded by explaining that the stated £466,000 was the cost to the Council of running the service after taking into account the income from subscriptions of £990,000 and that the overall cost of providing the service was £1.4m.

 

6.  Question from Councillor Morrell to the Executive member for Finance

 

“Would the Executive member as a matter of urgency, commission specialist consultants to examine the problems faced on the crematorium site and report back with mitigation measures and costings to Members as soon as possible?
This would assist Members and Officers to make a fully informed decision as to whether to proceed, or scrap the project due to viability concerns?

 

Waiting and monitoring the site given that the problem is sub-ground conditions is a waste of time.

 

The solution may be to pile the heavily trafficked areas and the site of the crematorium, as was the solution for the new leisure centre.”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“I thank Councillor Morrell for his question and note his comments and suggestions of the solution to the problem. Bearing in mind that more than one proposal for a scheme of works has been proposed by specialists and have failed, I understand and share his frustration.

 

However, we as a council must rely upon the advice of experts in this field and seek to ensure that responsibility for such advice and any proposals resulting from it rests with those who we retain for that purpose.

 

A specialist consultant will be employed by the contractor as part of the monitoring works and a report will be issued to HBBC. At the end of this monitoring period, a suitable design solution can be produced to deal with the specific site conditions and at that point the council can decide whether to progress depending upon costs and whether the scheme is still deemed commercially viable. Whatever the outcome, any further decision for the site will need to be informed by the additional monitoring work.

 

I can, however, also confirm it is also our intention to directly employ our own specialist to assist us in validating this work and to help inform future options.”

 

By way of supplementary question, Councillor Morrell asked if it would be possible to receive a timetable for a report on the works to come to Council. In response, Councillor Lynch stated he was unable to give a timetable at this time, but would do so as soon as he was able.

 

7.  Question from Councillor Ladkin to the Executive member for Finance

 

“At the Council Meeting of February 23rd 2021 it was resolved that MTFS 2.4 that there would be “no recurring supplementary requests for the period of the MTFS”.

 

Can the Executive Member for Finance please confirm that since that meeting, have there been any “recurring supplementary requests” and If there have been any please list the items and amounts.”

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“I would like to thank Councillor Ladkin for the question which gives us the opportunity to demonstrate the minimal amount of recurring supplementary requests. In fact, the only recurring supplementary request is in relation to additional salary costs within the refuse & recycling service. The issues of driver shortages in this area was the subject of a report to Council in November 2021 which was unanimously supported. The ongoing net impact for this recurring supplementary is expected to be £22,000.”

 

8.  Question from Councillor Roberts to the Executive member for Planning

 

Councillor Roberts had requested that the question be put in his absence.

 

“Will the Administration please explain what happened to the Council email over the Christmas and New Year period, where residents received bounce back emails from the Planning inbox in particular stating that it was full?

 

Can the administration also confirm that action has now been taken to rectify the problem, the number of emails in the Planning inbox that resulted in a “Mailbox Full” message and reassure residents that everyone who emails the Council will receive a full and prompt response?

 

Response from the Executive member

 

“Councillor Roberts, thank you for your question. I understand that rather than the generic planning inbox being full, customers received “mailbox full” messages where they had copied in a particular officer. This can happen when large files are received, particularly over time when the council is shut such as weekends or over Christmas. I can reassure you that any emails sent to the generic inbox will have been received and passed onto the relevant officer.”