(KEY DECISION)

 

Report No. 134/2018 was received from the Interim Director of Places.

 

Mr G Brown, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Planning, Environment, Property and Finance introduced the report, the purpose of which was to seek approval from Cabinet for further specific consultation to be undertaken with respect to the formulation of the new Rutland Local Plan. This consultation was being undertaken in order to fully consider the implications of incorporating the potential development of St. George’s Barracks into the Local Plan.

 

Mr Brown provided a summary of the purpose of the report as follows:

 

The purpose of this report is to seek approval of Cabinet for a specific consultation to consider modifications to the emerging new Local Plan for Rutland and seek the views of the residents of the County on the attached documents. Those views will be considered by Cabinet and Council as part of their consideration of the developing Local Plan later this year.

 

This will allow full consideration of the implications of incorporating the potential development of the brownfield site at St George’s Barracks into the Local Plan.

 

The incorporation of the development provides an opportunity to reduce the scale of housing allocations in other locations across the County from those previously proposed in the Draft Plan in July 2017.

 

First of all St George’s. As you will recall the Council reached an agreement with the MOD through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in the autumn of 2017 after the Draft Local Plan had been published. This was to examine the scope for the development on this brownfield site planned for closure in 2021. A high level MasterPlan providing “initial concepts” was produced and has been the subject of considerable public consultation which was reported upon last week.

 

During the early part of 2017, when the Local Plan was being produced in its draft form, there was no robust evidence to enable detailed consideration of St George’s for its inclusion in the Plan. A number of responses to that consultation specifically highlighted that it would be desirable if the Local Plan could articulate the potential re-use of this site.

 

The MoU proposes a garden village of between 1500 to 3000 homes together with new employment, shops, education, health and community facilities.

 

Within the paper to Cabinet and the consultation document an attempt has been made to explain what a garden village means in a Rutland context although this will be further developed with the Advisory Group and the Project Board and ultimately for approval by Cabinet and Council later this year.

 

There are a number of key issues which impact the scope of the development which need to be addressed

 

• The location of the minerals
• The feasibility and demand for the scale of development which will ultimately be proposed
• The listed buildings and their setting
• Transport infrastructure
• Landscape appraisals
• Ecological appraisals including a Habitat Regulation Assessment in respect of the Rutland Water Special Protection Area and the RAMSAR site

 

All these issues will need to be fully addressed in advance of the Pre-Submission version of the new Local Plan which is currently scheduled for public consultation in early 2019. The Council will ensure that the MOD and future developers of the site appropriately resolve these matters.

 

Within the appendices to the report there are a number of important documents which I don’t plan to go through in detail but will be happy to answer any questions on, however the key elements are:-

 

Spatial Strategy

 

The Spatial Strategy (Page 24) confirms the need through the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) for an Objectively Assessed Need of a minimum of 160 homes per year to be developed in Rutland over the next 20 years, this is down from the 171 homes identified in the previous version of the SHMA.

 

The Government has recently introduced a different method of calculating need which is based on the ratio of average income to average house prices multiplied by a factor. This is a very crude instrument and does not take into account the specific demographic issues which we face, namely a larger older population and significantly lower representation in the 25 to 44 age range

 

Since we have specifically calculated a ‘Rutland’ Objectively Assessed Housing Need taking into account our specific demographics, it is proposed that we use that number rather than the formulaic approach. This would be acceptable to the Planning Inspector at examination. In fact we would probably struggle to justify otherwise given the evidence that is available.

 

Over the next 20 years we need to deliver a minimum of 160 homes per year a total of 3200 and as you can see in the table 2 (Page 9) with the inclusion of about 1200 homes from St George’s, this will result in 400 less homes needing to be allocated in Oakham, 181 in Uppingham and 367 in the Smaller Service Centres and no requirement to justify Windfall sites in the other villages. This approach will give us much more flexibility to our local approach to managing our future growth needs.

 

Settlement Hierarchy

 

The Settlement Hierarchy (Page 25) now proposes to include the St George’s site and Policy RLP3 (Page 27) defines the way in which development should take place within Rutland. You will note para 4 relating to the Quarry Farm development as part of South Kesteven’s housing need.

 

Policy for St George’s Development

 

A new Policy is proposed (Page 33) and it lays out the basis for the development on the site using a Rutland definition of the garden village and the key elements which the development must ensure are provided (Page 34). In addition, any development proposals will also have to demonstrate how they avoid, minimise, mitigate or compensate for any adverse environmental impacts and meet all the criteria in paras A to G (Page 35).

 

Additional Sites

 

Since the Draft Plan was published in July 2017, a number of new sites have been presented to the Council and a couple have been removed by their owners. It was decided that these new sites should be consulted upon to ensure appropriate and timely community engagement prior to the writing of the Pre-Submission Plan.

 

A review of all the sites which are available will be assessed for consideration within the Local Plan taking into account all aspects of sustainability and resident’s comments both in 2017 and from this consultation.

 

In summary these documents provide a clear explanation of the Spatial Strategy for development in Rutland

 

I therefore propose that Cabinet approves the attached documents for the purpose of public consultation with respect to the preparation of the Rutland Local Plan 2016 -2036.

 

In relation to the Quarry Farm Development Mr Brown confirmed:

 

Why has the Rutland part of Quarry Farm/North Stamford not been included in the allocated houses for the Rutland Local Plan?

 

Local planning authorities must demonstrate how they have complied with the statutory “Duty to Co-operate” at the independent examination of their Local Plans. If a local planning authority cannot demonstrate that it has complied with the duty, then the Local Plan will not be able to proceed further in examination and is likely to be found unsound.

 

Local planning authorities will need to bear in mind that the cooperation should produce effective and deliverable policies on strategic cross boundary matters.

 

Because the strategy for the future growth of Stamford has been/is being considered in its entirety it is unlikely that the portion of Quarry Farm within Rutland could be put forward as an allocated site in its own right. It is only coming forward because South Kesteven District Council see the development on both sides of the County boundary as meeting their needs as a single sustainable master planned coordinated development.

 

This is the basis of our Duty to Co-operate.

 

We will retain the numbers within Rutland as meeting our 5 year housing supply as well as receiving the Council Tax, New Homes Bonus and CIL. It does not form part of our plan for allocations.

 

During discussion the following points were raised:

 

1. Mr Walters requested clarification as to how the issues highlighted at 1.17 of Appendix 1 to the report would be resolved and how and by whom would decisions in relation to these resolutions be approved. Mr Ingram, Interim Strategic Director for Places, confirmed that all decisions would be subject to Cabinet and/or Council approval and, following approval as part of the Local Plan, any sites would subsequently be subject to the planning decision making process;
2. Mr Brown confirmed that although the MoU proposed a garden village of between 1500 to 3000 homes, there was no agreed definitive figure and comments were still being sought with regard to the number of houses and the infrastructure requirements;
3. Mr Wilby highlighted the importance of assessing the impact of both the St Georges Site and the Quarry Farm Site on existing infrastructure and made particular reference to the impact on schools and the A1 junction.  The views of local people living near the developments should also be considered.  Mr Foster added that timing was also key in relation to infrastructure and that improvements should be made, where possible, before work on building projects commenced;
4. Members felt that the report and appendices had been written in a plain English, understandable and accessible format.

 

DECISION

 

That Cabinet APPROVED the documents attached to Report No. 134/2018 for the purposes of public consultation with respect to the preparation of the Rutland Local Plan 2016-36.

 

Reason for Decision

1. This report sets out proposals for:

• Public consultation regarding the incorporation of redevelopment of the St.George’s Barracks site into the Local Plan;
• Public consultation on additional sites promoted for development by landowners and/or potential developers;
• how comments made during about these documents will help shape the form and content of the new Local Plan.

 

2. The next stage in the process of preparing the Local Plan will be the publication of Pre-Submission Local Plan. This is currently scheduled to come to Cabinet for consideration by October this year for approval by full Council In November. A further period of public consultation at the start of 2019 will follow once the Pre-Submission Local Plan is approved by Council, prior to submission to the Secretary of State.

 

 

Report No. 133/2018 was received from the Chief Executive.

 

Mr O Hemsley, Leader of the Council, introduced the report, the purpose of which was to provide a background to the creation of the 2017/18 Rutland County Council Annual Report and information on how it would be used and distributed to highlight the impact the Council is making.

 

During discussion the following points were raised:

 

1. Cabinet commented that the report provided performance data in a logical, easy to understand format and highlighted the many areas where the Council is performing well;
2. The report was available online and a small number of printed copies would be distributed to partner organisations and would be available at the Councils Customer Services and Libraries.  Should Parishes wish to make hard copies available for those who were not able to access electronic copies, these could be provided at the Parishes cost.

 

DECISIONS

 

1)     Cabinet considered the 2017/18 Annual Report (Appendix 1 of Report No. 133/2018) and provided feedback;

2)     Cabinet RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL the APPROVAL of the Annual Report (Appendix 1 of Report No. 133/2018).

 

Reason for Decision

To provide feedback and approve the trial of this alternative style of communicating performance data.

 

Report No. 126/2018 was received from the Head of Internal Audit, the purpose of which was to provide the Committee with the Head of Internal Audit’s Assurance Opinion for 2017/18 and the Annual Report detailing the basis for this opinion, for review and approval.

 

During discussion the following points were noted:

 

1. Members asked for clarification on the contrasting opinions with regard to the design control environment and the compliance with controls in tables 1 and 2 under section 2 of the report.  Miss Ashley-Caunt clarified that the rating of substantial was the highest that could be given and it was positive that 66% had reached this standard.  However, when the controls were tested some did not operate consistently due to the need to embed or refine the processes around them, which is why they had been given a lower rating in this area.  This did not cause concern.

 

RESOLVED

 

To APPROVE the Annual Internal Audit Report and Assurance Opinion for 2017/18.

 

--o0o--

Mr Norman and Mr Crawley left the meeting and did not return.

--o0o--

 

Report No. 131/2018 was received from the Director for Resources, the purpose of which was for the external auditors to report to those charged with governance and inform the Committee on matters arising from the audit of the financial statements and the results of the work undertaken to assess the Council’s arrangements to secure value for money in its use of resources.

 

Mr Norman, KPMG LLP, introduced the Report to those Charged with Governance (ISA 260) and confirmed that subject to completion of the remaining work and outstanding queries being resolved they anticipated issuing an unqualified audit opinion of the Authorities financial statements and value for money opinion before the deadline of 31 July 2018.

 

Mr Della Rocca confirmed that this would be the last year working with KPMG LLP on the external audit due to organisational change.  KPMG LLP and RCC Officers and members acknowledged the positive working relationship they had developed over the years.

 

RESOLVED

 

1)     The Committee received the External Auditors Report and considered any issues arising;

2)     The Committee APPROVED the letter of representation in Appendix 1 of Report No. 131/2018 for signing by the Vice-Chair of the Committee (Mr J Lammie) and the S.151 Officer (Mr S Della Rocca); and

3)     The Committee AGREED that the right of referral under Procedure Rule 110 was removed due to the urgency of the decision in relation to the deadline for approval of the Statement of Accounts by 31 July 2018 under the Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2015.

 

Report No. 129/2018 was received from the Director for Resources, the purpose of which was to provide an overview of any fraud related activity which has affected the Council during 2017/18; provide assurance regarding the Council’s resilience against the risk of fraud; and present an updated Fraud Strategy for comment prior to submission to Council.

 

 During discussion the following points were noted:

 

1. Benefit related fraud does occur in Rutland.  Claimants do sometimes fail to update the Council when there is a change in circumstances and therefore continue to receive benefit for which they were no longer entitled.  This was not always classed as fraud as there were circumstances where this could be attributable to genuine oversight, rather than an intention to claim benefits fraudulently.  Nationally there was a 25% recovery rate for benefit overpayment  and Rutland’s recovery figures were consistent  with this national average;
2. The Council approach to Blue Badge misuse was to rely on spot checks, referrals from members of the public and data matching.  This would be monitored and should the occurrence of misuse of blue badges increase, the approach and processes for dealing with this type of fraud would be reviewed;
3. The log of IT Assets was out of date, however further investigation highlighted that devices had been assigned to different users but records had not been updated.  Most of the devices were now accounted for; and
4. Rutland County Council maintains a Fraud Risk Register to ensure that areas where the Council may be vulnerable to fraud are monitored closely.

 

RESOLVED

 

1)     The Committee ENDORSED the content of the Annual Fraud Report; and

2)     The Committee REVIEWED the draft Fraud Strategy (Appendix A of Report No. 129/2018), no amendments were advised.

 

Report No. 127/2018 was received from the Director for Resources.  The purpose of the report was to present the statutory Statement of Accounts (SoA) 2017/18 (Appendix A of Report No. 127/2018) in the form prescribed by regulations to meet the statutory requirement for the Council to approve and publish its annual statement of accounts by 30 July 2018.

 

Mr Della Rocca provided a brief introduction acknowledging the work that had gone in to adhering to the shorter timescales in producing the SoA this year following changes to the statutory deadlines.  The RCC SoA was not overly complex and the main areas highlighted were the pension fund deficit which was subject to fluctuations as detailed in the cover report.  The RCC pension liability was consistent with that of other Local Authorities.  The other issue highlighted was the provision for liability created by business rates appeals.  The SoA included the Annual Governance Statement which demonstrates the Council’s compliance with the governance framework and Appendix B provided further clarification of the key statements.

 

During discussion the following points were noted:

 

1. Mr Conde requested information on whether it was possible to impose on Parish Councils a more consistent approach to setting precepts.  Mr Della Rocca confirmed that the Council was not able to impose such conditions on Parishes and that Parishes were free to set their own budgets and manage their financial affairs as they see fit;
2. Adult Social Care debt represented one of our key debtor streams.This debt accrued against a legal charge on property so would eventually be repaid;
3. The external auditors would highlight if there was a material concern regarding the level of debt and provide advice on ways in which the risk may be mitigated.  No such concerns had been highlighted;
4. Officers confirmed that there had been no requests from members of the public to view or comment on the accounts; and
5. Mr Lammie highlighted the growing financial gap referenced in Section 3 of the SoA and the necessity to rely on reserves asking whether this could ultimately lead to a similar situation as faced by Northamptonshire.  Mr Della Rocca confirmed that all Local Authorities were facing the same challenges and must address the issue of depleting reserves.  The Council acknowledged this challenge and was looking to address the situation.  Mr Conde asked whether the Council was reliant on commercial income as others are.  Mr Della Rocca indicated this was not the case and the Council’s commercial approach was proportionate and limited.  The Growth, Infrastructure and Resources Scrutiny Panel meeting in September would focus on the financial position of the Council.  It was important to learn from other authorities to see what had worked and what had not, but also to recognise that each authority would have its own unique characteristics and challenges.

 

RESOLVED

 

To APPROVE the Statement of Accounts for 2017/18 at Appendix A of Report No. 127/2018 including the Annual Governance Statement.