• You are here:  
  • Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Matlock, DE4 3NN. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services 

Media

Items
No. Item

83/22

Public Participation pdf icon PDF 515 KB

To enable members of the public to ask questions, express views or present petitions, IF NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN, (by telephone, in writing or by email) BY NO LATER THAN 12 NOON OF THE WORKING DAY PRECEDING THE MEETING. As per Procedural Rule 14.4 at any one meeting no person may submit more than 3 questions and no more than 1 such question may be asked on behalf of one organisation.

 

Minutes:

Note:

“Opinions expressed or statements made by individual persons during the public participation part of a Council or committee meeting are not the opinions or statements of Derbyshire Dales District Council. These comments are made by individuals who have exercised the provisions of the Council’s Constitution to address a specific meeting. The Council therefore accepts no liability for any defamatory remarks that are made during a meeting that are replicated on this document.”

 

ITEM 9 – PROPOSAL OF A NOTICE OF MOTION (RULE OF PROCEDURE 16)

 

In accordance with the procedure for public participation, Mr Rob Tamlyn (Grindleford Parish Council) and Mr John Davies (Grindleford Resident) made statements on Agenda Item 9 – Proposal of a Notice of Motion (Rule of Procedure 16).

 

The further following statements were submitted in writing:

 

STATEMENT from Mr Paul Thorpe and Ms Deborah Wright, Grindleford Local Resident

 

To The Leader of the Council,

 

We would like to whole heartedly support Councillor Peter O'Brien's motion as tabled above regarding the totally unacceptable noise nuisance from Grindleford station sidings by Network Rail at unsociable hours. The noises are sudden loud clunking sounds, presumably rails being dropped, which wake us up in the middle of the night, and loud reversing alarms which continue to keep us awake.

We have complained to Network Rail on numerous occasions to no effect.

We have also complained on numerous occasions to the Environmental health department and our MP.

Whilst we appreciate that Network Rail has to maintain the rail line, we do not accept that they have to make a terrible noise in the middle of the night at Grindleford station sidings for work that is being done up and down the Hope Valley line, not at Grindleford.

We would like to stress to the Leader of the Council that both the anticipation of the noise and the noise itself at unsociable hours is having a direct negative impact on the physical and mental health of the both of us.

 

STATEMENT from Mr Steve Burton, Upper Padley Local Resident

 

It is matter of record that Network Rail has never carried out a formal consultation with all the residents who have been impacted by the expansion, development and change of use of the Grindleford railway siding. I strongly support the motion and hope that it meets with the council's approval. However, if the council is unable to approve the motion then would the council be prepared to support and fund an independent consultation exercise that could provide a clearer understanding of the issues and make recommendations that might lead to more amicable arrangements between Network Rail and local residents.

 

STATEMENT from Mr and Mrs Slingsby, Upper Padley Local Residents

 

Dear Councillors,

 

With reference to Councillor Peter O’Brien’s motion regarding Grindleford Station Railway Sidings.

As residents of Upper Padley for 36 years we have seen a steady increase Year on Year to the usage of the Sidings. Resulting in more noise, light pollution and impact on the local area.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83/22

84/22

Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 217 KB

26 May 2022 (Annual Meeting)

 

Minutes:

It was moved by Councillor Helen Froggatt, seconded by Councillor Mark Wakeman and

 

RESOLVED (Unanimously)

 

That the minutes of the meeting of Council held 26 May 2022 be approved as a correct record.

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.

85/22

Interests

Members are required to declare the existence and nature of any interests they may have in subsequent agenda items in accordance with the District Council’s Code of Conduct. Those interests are matters that relate to money or that which can be valued in money, affecting the Member, her/his partner, extended family and close friends. Interests that become apparent at a later stage in the proceedings may be declared at the time.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

86/22

Leaders' Announcements

Announcements of the Leader of the Council.

Minutes:

Councillor Garry Purdy, Leader of the Council, made the following statement:

 

“Members, you may recall that I informed you in past meetings that Vision Derbyshire was formed about two years ago when All Derbyshire Local Authority Leaders and Chief Execs met at the invitation of Cllr Barry Lewis, Leader of Derbyshire County Council at J28 Hotel off the M1 in order to discuss the then proposals on Devolution by Government. Present at that meeting were representatives of Derby City Council.

 

A unanimous vote was made by all Derbyshire Local Authority Leaders and Chief Execs that:

 

1.    Vision Derbyshire should be formed

2.    That we did not want a Mayor or Mayoral Combined Authority.

3.    That regular meetings should take place with a view to engaging Consultants to help determine what kind of Authority Derbyshire wished to become.

 

Derby City representatives stated that whilst they acknowledged and respected the formation of Vision Derbyshire, they did not wish to join. They were informed at the meeting that the door would be left open for them to join at any time.

 

Price Waterhouse Cooper were subsequently engaged and a series of Workshops took place between Leaders and Chief Execs at Lea Hurst, Holloway which resulted in a number of ideas for future collaboration and Workstreams were raised in order to deal with the business of the Two-Tier Authorities.

 

It is important to note that this work resulted in Derbyshire being at the Head of the Nine County Deals announced a few months ago by Government. Invitations to All Councillors were sent out from time to time to enable an update on progress. It is also important to note that the work of Vision Derbyshire preceded the White Paper on Devolution. The delivery of the White Paper was frequently delayed and was finally produced in February 2022.

 

The content of the White Paper revealed amongst many other issues – 3 x Funding Streams:

 

Level 1 – Status quo – As we are now with limited and diminishing funding from Government and being very much reliant on income.

Level 2 – A Derbyshire Combined Authority – which would result in slightly more devolved powers and funding

Level 3 – A Mayoral Combined Authority which ticked every box regarding devolved powers and funding.

 

Following the delivery of the White Paper we were subsequently informed by Cllr Barry Lewis at a virtual Vision Derbyshire meeting that talks has been held between the 4 x Leaders of Derbyshire (Cllr Barry Lewis – Derby City (Cllr Chris Poulter) – Nottingham (Cllr David Mellen) and Nottinghamshire – (Cllr Ben Bradley) with a view to the formation of an East Midlands Mayoral Combined Authority.

 

Naturally this led to a lot of disquiet, unease and anger in some cases especially due to the fact contained in the White Paper was No Power of Veto by 2nd Tier Authorities such as Derbyshire Dales.

 

We are though assured through Cllr Barry Lewis, and I have been present at a meeting with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86/22

87/22

Chairman's Announcements

Announcements of the Civic Chairman.

Minutes:

Councillor Graham Elliott, Civic Chairman, made the following statement:

 

“The charity I have chosen to support this year has over 35000 members, 95% of which are volunteers and come from all walks of life. They rely on fund raising events and donations to keep them afloat.

 

I’m sure most have already seen the press statement Jim has released.

 

The charity is of course the RNLI. In my view the 4th emergency service. I’m under no illusion as to how difficult it is in this present climate to raise funds for any charity what with the cost of living as it is.

 

However I am remaining positive and hope we can do them justice in our efforts to support them. A just giving page has been set up on the website.

 

I’ve also attended a number events as civic chair.

 

The first being on the 17th June at Castle View Primary School in Matlock where the Lord Lieutenant planted an apple tree donated by the Lieutenancy. Part of the Queens Green Canopy programme. That was followed by a short tour of the school and light refreshments. An interesting and enjoyable morning for all concerned.

 

On the 22nd June I was invited to attend Wirksworth Memorial Hall for the AGM of the Derwent and Dove Scout Council.  I was amazed at the number of opportunities this hard working group of individuals provide for the scouting community. Much different to my day in the scouts. I was asked to pass on thanks to council for their support.

 

On June 30th I attended the home of Libby Lane in Duffield for a community and Civic gathering followed by a buffet meal in the garden. About 30 people attended from various districts of the county.   Libby was installed as the Bishop of Derby at the Cathedral in 2019. Despite the pouring rain a pleasant evening was enjoyed by all.

 

With your permission chair I would like to call upon my deputy Cllr Atkin to comment on the events he attended in my absence”.

 

Councillor Jason Atkin, Deputy Civic Chairman, made the following statement:

 

“Thank you very much Chair and Councillor Elliott. I attended the handover of the together artwork in Hall Leys Park on the 30th June. I suggest if you haven’t gone and seen it, go and have a look, it’s a very good installation. On the 2nd July I attended the Buxton Tattoo in aid of the Royal British Legion which was a very lovely evening and raised lots of money. Thank you very much.”

88/22

Committees pdf icon PDF 705 KB

To receive the non-exempt Minutes of the Committees shown below:

 

Non-exempt Minutes to be received:

 

Council

Community and Environment Committee

Planning Committee

Council

Planning Committee

Council (Annual)

Planning Committee

Community and Environment Committee

Licensing and Appeals Committee

Planning Committee

Date:

 

24 March 2022

06 April 2022

12 April 2022

27 April 2022

10 May 2022

26 May 2022

14 June 2022

29 June 2022

30 June 2022

12 July 2022

 

Minute Book to follow.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

It was moved by Councillor Jason Atkin, seconded by Councillor Tom Donnelly and

 

RESOLVED (Unanimously)

 

That the non-exempt minutes of the Committees listed in the Minute book for the period 24th March 2022 to 12th July 2022 be received.

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.

 

89/22

Questions ( Rule of Procedure 15)

Questions, if any, from Members who have given notice.

Minutes:

Question from Councillor Peter Slack to Councillor Garry Purdy, Leader of the Council:

 

“Over the last number of years we have seen an increase in the Derbyshire Dales of small dwelling being acquired by people or companies that use as holiday lets and holiday Homes, which I believe fall into the category of second homes.

 

Also at the same time many local young people looking to acquire homes for the first time in their local area near to their families are being priced out of the market by people that are purchasing the dwellings as investment and also making a great deal of money out of continually letting property weekly at inflated rates well above normal rents.

 

Yes we do need tourists to visit to Derbyshire Dales and we have many good Hotels, B&B and Self Catering flats in the Derbyshire Dales.

 

But the great problems are that many young people have to move from the Derbyshire Dales to get onto the property ladder, in turn this leads to families being split and villages with less children to sustain schools and community spirt diminishing.

 

Recently in Whitby North Yorkshire, the council had a local referendum on this very issue of holiday homes and holiday lets, and the vote was overwhelming for controls to restrict holiday homes and lets.

 

Also I know that this is a problem in Wales, Cornwall and Devon and recently a national survey found in the last four years that holiday lets and second homes had increased by 40%.

 

Also, recently in the Queens speech at the opening of parliament there was references made about second homes and there use as holiday homes and lets, in regards to Council Tax to help control this issue.

 

Earlier in the year we did vote to use Council Tax to bring back Empty homes back into use again.

 

So would you agree with me on the need for controls on the second homes problem.

 

Councillor Purdy provided the following response:

 

The simple answer is that yes it would be good to see more controls to reduce the numbers of 2nd homes within the Dales and give local people more opportunity to buy such properties as their main home.

 

There are just under 1000 2nd homes in the Derbyshire Dales out of a total housing stock of approximately 34,000. The Derbyshire Dales has the 61st highest number of 2nd homes of all English local authorities.

 

There are very few controls available to councils to control the numbers of 2nd homes. The Government is currently taking the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Bill through Parliament and this includes provisions that both impact empty homes and 2nd homes. In relation to 2nd homes the Bill, it is likely any increase might only be in place by 2024-25. Any change in Council Tax policy would be subject to approval by Members, most likely in the next Council. 

 

Question from Councillor Peter Slack to Councillor Garry Purdy, Leader  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89/22

90/22

PROPOSAL OF A NOTICE OF MOTION (RULE OF PROCEDURE 16)

The Council will debate the following Motion, submitted by Councillor Peter O’Brien, in accordance with Rule of Procedure 16.

 

“For over 10 years residents in the Upper and Nether Padley areas of Grindleford have suffered increasing disturbance and nuisance from the operations undertaken by Network Rail on the former sidings area at the train station. Network Rail use the site regularly as a base for 6 different engineering and maintenance teams, who work on the rail network between Totley and Hope and beyond. Virtually all operations take place at weekends throughout the nights.

Grindleford Station is within a natural amphitheatre such that any noise is amplified and transmitted significant distances away from its source. As well as being within the National Park, it is located in a Conservation Area.

Network Rail acknowledge the significant increase in their use of the area, and the fact that it causes disturbance. However they maintain that are unable to do anything further to mitigate this. They have confirmed that its use is planned to continue; in fact it may well increase following the upgrade of the Hope Valley line, with the additional track lengths and more frequent train services.

Numerous meetings have taken place over the years between residents and Network Rail, and with the current and previous MP's, but have resulted in no significant improvements to the situation. Network Rail also declined to take up an offer by the PDNPA to use their expertise to achieve a more appropriate layout and design of the operational area, including landscaping.

The Council's Environmental Health Service has also been involved over a long period of time, and continues to receive significant numbers of complaints; they acknowledge that the level of noise in particular is a cause for concern.

However Network Rail are exempt from the provisions of the Town and Country Planning legislation, and are not subject to the same controls as other businesses under Environmental Health related legislation. This severely limits the ability of the Council and other public authorities to impose condtions on their operations, or to take enforcement action similar to that which would apply in other circumstances.

The residents acknowledge that the station area should be used by Network Rail in genuine emergency situations, in particular with regard to the adjacent Totley Tunnel, but believe that the location is entirely inappropriate as a base for routine engineering and maintenance operations. They consider that there are other more suitable locations which Network Rail should be encouraged to explore.

 

I am therefore submitting the following motion to the Council:

 

1 a) “in view of the continued and increasing disturbance caused by the operations of Network Rail and its contractors to local residents in the environmentally sensitive and residential area in the vicinity of Grindleford Station, the Council uses its best efforts commensurate with resources available to secure the relocation of the engineering and maintenance facilty to a more appropriate location”.

 

1 b) “pending the relocation of the engineering and maintenance facility, the Council continues  ...  view the full agenda text for item 90/22

Minutes:

The Council considered a motion submitted by Councillor Peter O’Brien in accordance with Rule of Procedure 16.

 

At the meeting the motion was moved by Councillor Peter O’Brien and seconded by Councillor Garry Purdy as follows:

 

“For over 10 years residents in the Upper and Nether Padley areas of Grindleford have suffered increasing disturbance and nuisance from the operations undertaken by Network Rail on the former sidings area at the train station. Network Rail use the site regularly as a base for 6 different engineering and maintenance teams, who work on the rail network between Totley and Hope and beyond. Virtually all operations take place at weekends throughout the nights.

 

Grindleford Station is within a natural amphitheatre such that any noise is amplified and transmitted significant distances away from its source. As well as being within the National Park, it is located in a Conservation Area.

 

Network Rail acknowledge the significant increase in their use of the area, and the fact that it causes disturbance. However they maintain that are unable to do anything further to mitigate this. They have confirmed that its use is planned to continue; in fact it may well increase following the upgrade of the Hope Valley line, with the additional track lengths and more frequent train services.

 

Numerous meetings have taken place over the years between residents and Network Rail, and with the current and previous MP's, but have resulted in no significant improvements to the situation. Network Rail also declined to take up an offer by the PDNPA to use their expertise to achieve a more appropriate layout and design of the operational area, including landscaping.

 

The Council's Environmental Health Service has also been involved over a long period of time, and continues to receive significant numbers of complaints; they acknowledge that the level of noise in particular is a cause for concern.

 

However Network Rail are exempt from the provisions of the Town and Country Planning legislation, and are not subject to the same controls as other businesses under Environmental Health related legislation. This severely limits the ability of the Council and other public authorities to impose conditions on their operations, or to take enforcement action similar to that which would apply in other circumstances.

 

The residents acknowledge that the station area should be used by Network Rail in genuine emergency situations, in particular with regard to the adjacent Totley Tunnel, but believe that the location is entirely inappropriate as a base for routine engineering and maintenance operations. They consider that there are other more suitable locations which Network Rail should be encouraged to explore.

 

I am therefore submitting the following motion to the Council:

 

1 a) "in view of the continued and increasing disturbance caused by the operations of Network Rail and its contractors to local residents in the environmentally sensitive and residential area in the vicinity of Grindleford Station, the Council uses its best efforts commensurate with resources available to secure the relocation of the engineering and maintenance facility to a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90/22

91/22

Provisional Revenue Outturn 2021/22 pdf icon PDF 232 KB

This report provides details of the provisional financial outturn for the District Council’s Revenue spending for the year ended 31st March 2022 and significant variations form the revised budget.

Minutes:

The Director of Resources introduced a report which provided details of the provisional financial outturn for the District Council’s Revenue spending for the year ended 31st March 2022 and significant variations from the revised budget.

 

The report informed Members of the role that the Council’s Revenue Budget plays in assisting in delivering the priorities and targets within the Corporate Plan, by allocating budgets to specific projects. The Revenue Budget specifically addresses the following priority area: “People: Achieve a sustainable financial position by prudent management of resources and reviewing services”.

 

The report also detailed how the provisional financial position as at 31st March 2022 would be reflected in an updated Medium-Term Financial Plan which would be presented in the Autumn.

 

Members were informed that the provisional outturn on the revenue account for 2021/22 was a surplus of £732,113 against revised estimates. Key reasons for the surplus were detailed in the report. Subject to the approval of the Officer recommendations included in the report, the provisional outturn was that Council increased its general fund balances from £1,999,839 to £2,423,560 at 31 March 2022 and reduced the earmarked reserves from £20,970,179 to £17,664,545 for the same period.

 

It was moved by Councillor Garry Purdy, seconded by Councillor Mike Ratcliffe and

 

RESOLVED (Unanimously)

 

1.    That the following transfers to reserves for 2021/22 be approved:

 

1.    A budgeted transfer of £30,000 to the Elections Reserve.

 

2.    A budgeted transfer of £50,000 to the Local Plan Reserve.

 

3.    A budgeted transfer of £150,000 to the Vehicle Renewals Reserve.

 

4.    A budgeted transfer of £142,000 to the Waste Vehicle Reserve.

 

5.    A transfer of £4,129,0790 of Revenue Grants received in the year to Revenue Grants Unapplied Reserve.

 

6.    A transfer of £604,625 Capital Receipts received during the year to Capital Receipts Reserve.

 

7.    A transfer of £1,224,185 Capital Grants Received during the year to Capital Grants Unapplied Reserve.

 

8.    A transfer of £8,613,380 from Reserves to cover Revenue expenditure within the year.

 

9.    A transfer of £2,340,689 from Reserves to cover Capital expenditure within the year.

 

10. The surplus of £732,113 be transferred to Reserves as follows:

 

(i)            A transfer of £200,161 to General Reserve to top-up this reserve to £1.2m.

(ii)          A transfer of £108,392 to Committed Expenditure Reserve.

(iii)         A transfer of £200,000 to Customer Innovation Reserve.

(iv)         A transfer of £223,560 to General Reserve to fund inflationary pressures in 2022/23 onwards.

 

2.    That it be noted that the revenue account for 2021/22 is balanced.

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.

92/22

Capital Programme Out-Turn 2021-22 & Revised Capital Programme 2022-23 to 2024-25 pdf icon PDF 122 KB

This report outlines the out-turn position for 2021/22 and the revised Capital Programme for 2022/23 to 2024/25. A number of new projects are proposed for inclusion, subject to successful funding bids.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Director of Resources introduced a report outlining the out-turn position for 2021/22 and the revised Capital Programme for 2022/23 to 2024/25. A number of new projects were proposed for inclusion, subject to successful funding bids.

 

At a Meeting of Council on 25th March 2022, a revised capital budget of £5,167,703 was approved. During April 2022, delegated approval was given by the Chair of Community and Environment to add a project for the inclusion in the 2021/22 Capital Programme. This project was to complete an Energy Efficiency Upgrade to social and private housing. The project bought the Revised Capital Programme for 2021/22 value to £5,937,504.

 

The report informed Members that the total spend for 2021/22 was £4,451,000 therefore there was an overall underspend of £1,486,504. Generally, where projects were still continuing budget underspends have been carried forward and added to Original 2022/23 capital budget.

 

The additional requests and changes for Inclusion in the Capital Programme were also detailed in the report for Members information.

 

It was noted that there was considerable change to Capital Programme as the Council had been successful in obtaining further funding from a variety of sources to commence new projects. The proposed Capital Programme for 2022/23 to 2024/25 was shown in Appendix B.

 

It was moved by Councillor Tom Donnelly, seconded by Councillor Mark Wakeman and

 

RESOLVED (Unanimously)

 

1.    That the provisional Capital Out-turn, as detailed in Appendix A, and financing arrangements for 2021/22, in the sum of £4,451,000 be approved.

 

2.    That the explanations regarding significant variances in planned and actual capital expenditure for 2021/22 be noted.

 

3.    That the revised Capital Programme as detailed in Appendix B and financing arrangements for 2022/23 to 2024/25, in the sum of £12,578,885 be approved, including new projects totalling £1,515,668 as outlined at paragraph 1.7 plus additional allocations for future year Disabled Facilities totalling £1,203,472.

 

4.    That in respect of the UK Shared Growth Prosperity Fund, delegated authority be given to the Director Of Regeneration in consultation with the Director of Resources to revise Revenue and Capital allocations and the budget each year, subject to meeting the government funding conditions.

 

5.    That the balance of funds available over the 3-year programme, shown in Appendix C, be noted.

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.

93/22

Financial Management System pdf icon PDF 127 KB

This report seeks approval for a supplementary revenue budget of £39,778 a year from 2022/23 to allow for the increased annual costs for the Council’s Financial Management System.

Minutes:

The Director of Resources introduced a report seeking approval for a supplementary revenue budget of £39,778 a year from 2022/23 to allow for the increased annual costs for the Council’s Financial Management System.

 

The report addressed that the Council uses Unit‘s “Agresso Business World” as its corporate Financial Management System. The servers that host Agresso use SQL 2012 as an operating system. The report informed Members that the Council had been notified that the support agreement for SQL 2012 would expire in July 2022. It was noted that arrangements were being made to extend this, but it could only be achieved for a temporary period. Members were informed that the running of an unsupported system was a risk.

 

As well as providing management information, such as for budget monitoring, Agresso is used to pay suppliers, to raise invoices for trade waste, rents and other fees and charges and account for VAT. If the service was not available, such transactions would be delayed resulting in service disruption for our suppliers and customers: there would also be the risk of a financial penalty for late submission of VAT claims.

 

The report noted that moving to a cloud-based version seemed inevitable, therefore it would be inefficient to upgrade on premise at present time and have to upgrade to the cloud later.

 

Based on a 3 year contract, the cost of the recommended option was £19,733 more than the annualised current cost and £39,778 above the amount included in the 2022/23 revenue budget.

 

It was moved by Councillor Chris Furness, seconded by Councillor David Chapman and

 

RESOLVED (Unanimously)

 

That approval be given to a supplementary revenue budget of £39,778 a year from 2022/23 to allow for increased annual costs for the Council’s Financial Management System (Agresso Business World), to be financed from the General Reserve.

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.

 

The meeting was briefly adjourned from 7:41pm to 7:50pm.

94/22

Duration of Meetings (motion to continue)

Minutes:

At 8.25pm, during the discussion of Item 13 – Gypsies and Travellers – Provision of Temporary Sites.

 

It was moved by Councillor Jason Atkin, seconded by Councillor Stuart Lees and

 

RESOLVED

 

That, in accordance with Rule of Procedure 13, the meeting continue beyond 2 hours 30 minutes to enable the business on the agenda to be concluded.

 

Voting

 

25 For

1 Against

1 Abstentions

 

95/22

Gypsies And Travellers - Provision Of Temporary Sites pdf icon PDF 94 KB

To formally identify one or more sites within the District Council’s control as suitable temporary Traveller sites for occupation by members of two Gypsy and Traveller families who have presented themselves as homeless.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Director of Regulatory Services introduced a report to formally identify one or more sites within the District Council’s control as suitable temporary Traveller sites for occupation by members of two Gypsy and Traveller families who had presented themselves as homeless.

 

The report detailed that it was the latest in a series that had been brought before Members since September 2016, in which the Council had recognised and accepted its duties towards Gypsies and Travellers under housing and planning legislation. It was noted that in particular the Council had specifically recognised its Homelessness duties towards two specific Traveller families who had been residents within the district for many years, on no less than seven occasions since September 2016. It was recognised that to date, those Traveller families to whom the Council owes a legal duty, had no temporary or permanent site on which they could legally place their caravans.

 

Members were informed that the Council had recognised that it had a duty to provide one or more permanent sites for these specific Traveller families and that it had a duty to provide on or more suitable temporary sites for the families whilst so ever a permanent site was not available for occupation.

 

The report highlighted that at the present time Officers had no delegated authority to direct members of the two specific families to suitable temporary sites, which prevents them from being able to take action to evict them if they should set up an encampment on an unsuitable site. It was noted that this was not a sustainable position for the Council to be in.

 

In considering the report and appendices, the Chairman invited those Members present to provide their own commentary in relation to Council owned land detailed in Appendix 1 and their view on its suitability for use as potential temporary sites for Gypsies and Travellers.

 

An amendment was proposed by Councillor Clare Gamble and seconded by Councillor David Hughes. This amendment was put to the vote

 

1.    That the Council reiterates its commitment to identifying suitable sites for use as Gypsy and Traveller sites by those families to whom the authority has a homelessness duty.

 

2.    That, in doing so, a working group comprising of one Member from each political group be established to work with officers to investigate the most appropriate options with the District for development as a temporary tolerated site(s) or a permanent site(s) for use by Gypsies and Travellers, according to the following approach:

 

(A) Determine a criteria for the assessment of potential sites, which would include consideration of:

·         The viability of Council owned assets; privately owned sites volunteered by individuals or organisations; and privately owned sites that could be selected for compulsory purchase – including the development of site services and facilities.

·         The needs and wishes of the Gypsy and Traveller families in respect of potential site location.

·         The proximity, relationship to existing land use and impact upon amenities and settled communities of any potential site locations.

 

3.    That the working  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95/22

96/22

Sealing of Documents

To authorise that the Common Seal of the Council be affixed to those documents, if any, required in completing transactions undertaken by Committees or by way of delegated authority to others, since the last meeting of Council.

Minutes:

It was moved by Councillor Jason Atkin, seconded by Councillor Tom Donnelly

 

RESOLVED (Unanimously)

 

That the common seal of the Council be affixed to those documents, if any required to complete transactions undertaken by committees or by way of delegated authority to officers since the last meeting of the Council.

 

The Chairman declared the motion CARRIED.