09 06 2003

 

 

Apologies for inability to attend the meeting were received on behalf of Councillors Mrs Angus, Mrs Cully and Mrs Elshaw.

 

 

 

 

(i)    The Chairman welcomed Councillor Bone's return to the Board following several weeks of ill-health.

 

 

(ii)   The Chairman referred to the BAA Youth Games that had been held recently in Aldershot where a number of local schools had participated.  Although not winning any individual accolades, Gosport schools did win the overall competition for the 'Fair Play' award and were presented with a trophy to mark their success. Congratulations were extended to all those involved with the event.

 

 

 

 

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meetings of the Board held on 3 March and 15 May 2003 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record.

 

RECOMMENDED: That The Mayor (Councillor Mrs Binfield), Councillors Edgar and M Russell be appointed as the Council's representatives to serve on the LRT Development Panel for the Municipal Year 2003-2004.

 

 

The Regulatory Services Manager submitted a report seeking the Board's approval of amenity lighting schemes in Gosport to be match funded and recommended for promotion in the Hampshire County Council community safety lighting programme.

 

The Regulatory Services Manager outlined the design and maintenance issues together with the duties and powers of the County Council and Borough Council in respect of lighting provision.  Members were reminded of the criteria and weighting factors that had been previously approved, attached at Appendix 1 to the report, to assist in the prioritisation of potential amenity lighting schemes within the Borough.

 

Details of various requests for lighting, that the Council had received or that had been identified by officers and Members, were also appended to the report and subdivided into public and private areas.  The criteria and weighting assessment had been applied to each to determine a priority, together with its estimated cost.  It was recommended that lighting of private areas should only be considered a priority in exceptional circumstances where a wider public benefit was afforded because of the concerns of setting an unsustainable precedent and the implications of ongoing maintenance costs.

 

The County Council had a street lighting Community Safety Initiative that sought to improve street lighting in partnership with District Councils.  Subject to the provision of match funding by the District Council, the County Council would fund half of the cost of a lighting scheme, or schemes, up to a maximum of £5,000 per annum.

 

The Borough Council had allocated £2,000 match funding in the 2003/2004 budget and the Regulatory Services Manager had identified schemes that might be promoted with that funding. Given the limitation of the £4,000 budget, not all schemes would be deliverable.

 

As the Amenity Lighting Schemes for Pettycot Crescent and the Dolphin Crescent Garage Area were the only public areas that could be implemented within the budget available, it was suggested that those schemes should be recommended for promotion in the County Council Community Safety Lighting programme.

 

However, Members expressed the view that schemes should be implemented in the priority order identified in Appendix 2 to the report and that a means of funding the works should be sought, such as carrying over funds from the current financial year to the next financial year or, if possible, implementing the works over two financial years.

 

RESOLVED:  That

 

(a)  the Amenity Lighting Schemes for  public areas be promoted with Hampshire County Council in the priority order indicated as set out in Appendix 2 of the Regulatory Services Manager's report.

 

 

The Director of Development and Environment submitted a report seeking the Board's approval to a programme of Traffic Regulation Orders to be implemented in 2003-2004 with Hampshire County Council funding.

 

The Traffic Section identified the need for Traffic Regulation Orders mostly through correspondence with the public and Members and also where identified by the Police and officers. A need might also arise through new development or highway works although in those cases additional external funding was often available.

 

At present the Traffic Section had a list of fifty-six potential traffic regulation schemes requiring funding from the County Council budget, which had all been the subject of preliminary assessment and had been approved in principle by the Police who were responsible for enforcement.

 

Having regard to the budget and estimated costs, ten schemes were proposed for the 2003-2004 programme, as listed in Appendix A to the report, two of which were carried over from the 2002/2003 programme.

 

A substitute list of a further ten schemes was identified in Appendix B to the report.  It was proposed that those schemes could be progressed should additional funding become available or if any of the priority schemes failed to proceed beyond detailed investigation or consultation.  The remaining thirty-six schemes were shown in Appendix C to the report.

 

The Director of Development and Environment further reported on revisions to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002, whereby bus stop clearways prohibiting parking no longer required a Traffic Regulation Order and the associated formal statutory consultation.  It was proposed that in future those schemes would be assessed and implemented by officers in consultation with Ward Councillors and would be the subject of informal public consultation where appropriate.

 

The Regulations now had no requirement for the provisions of signs in support of double yellow lines to indicate a prohibition of waiting at any time.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(a)  the proposed Traffic Regulation Orders as set out in Appendix A to the report be fully investigated and implemented, where appropriate;

 

(b)  the Traffic Regulation Orders as set out in Appendix B to the report be progresses should further funding become available or other schemes fail to proceed; and

 

(c)  Members note that the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 removes the need for traffic regulation orders for bus clearways and that future schemes should be assessed by officers in consultation with Ward Councillors.

 

 

The Project Integra Partnership was acknowledged by the DETR as an example of best practice in waste management.  To ensure that the partnership and its resources were properly prioritised, planned and managed, an Annual Business Plan was formulated each year and approved by the Integra Management Board and each of the fourteen individual district, unitary and county councils.  Gosport Borough Council had full membership representation of that Board.

 

The Business Plan for 2003/2004 had been agreed by the Project Integra Management Board at its meeting on 3 April 2003. As it was a requirement of the Project Integra Constitution for the Annual Business Plan to be adopted by the relevant Council Board of each local authority within the partnership, Members were requested to approve the Annual Business Plan for 2003/2004 as submitted.

 

RESOLVED:  That the Project Integra Annual Business Plan for 2003-2004 be approved.

 

 

The Board considered a report submitted by Councillor Langdon, together with a resident's letter, highlighting the problems that had arisen from the use of the new games area at Priddy's Hard.

 

The new play areas within the Priddy's Hard estate had been negotiated and agreed by Barratt Homes and the Council, as part of planning procedures and, as a result, the responsibility for the facility lay with Barratts until such time as it was adopted by the Council.  The games area was very close to residential properties and local councillors had received several individual complaints and a residents' petition seeking a remedy to the problems of vandalism, anti-social behaviour and sources of unacceptable activities taking place in the vicinity.

 

The Leisure and Amenities Manager highlighted other facilities planned in close proximity to Priddy's Hard as part of the overall development and it was envisaged that those facilities should result in reduced usage of the multi games areas in the future.

 

However in view of the ongoing problems and concerns, following discussions between Barratt Homes and Council officers, it had been decided to close the games area on 2 May 2003, in order to provide time to consider the best course of action for the site and the provision of recreational facilities in the area.

 

Councillor Langdon proposed various suggestions to remedy the situation and sought the Board's support for further action to be taken to deal with the problems encountered. It was suggested that officers explore, with Barratt Homes, options that would meet the concerns of the local residents whilst at the same time meeting the recreational needs of the local community.

 

Members acknowledged that the Council had a moral obligation to seek a solution to the problems and the Board were anxious that discussions with the developer should be instigated immediately. The planning condition for an 'open space' facility would still apply but it was felt that consideration should be given to enhancing the area, possibly by sensitive landscaping, or to relocating the open space elsewhere in the development, for the enjoyment of the residents and local community.

 

Councillor Langdon was thanked for his report and for bringing to the Board's attention the concerns of the community.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(a)   Councillor Langdon's report be noted and the options and recommendations therein supported; and

 

(b)   based on the recommendations in the report, Council Officers, together with the Chairman of the Board and Ward Councillors, enter into negotiations with Barratt Homes with some urgency to seek a solution to the problems in respect of the multi games facility at Priddy's Hard.

 

 

The Leisure and Amenities Manager presented for the Board's approval the Alver Valley Master Plan, following its consideration by, and recommendation of, the Alver Valley Steering Group.

 

The proposals contained in the Plan were the result of extensive preparatory work that had been undertaken both by Groundwork Solent and Council officers and had been subject to varied consultation processes with a range of community organisations and other agencies.

 

As the land had been subject to landfill in the past, the Leisure and Amenities Manager reported that further environmental investigation might be necessary in certain areas and, to that end, a meeting had been arranged with the Environment Agency to seek their advice and explore ways to address any problems.  Advice would also be sought in respect of concerns relating to major flooding problems by Apple Dumpling Bridge.  Members were also informed that a northern access to the site had yet to be resolved.

 

The Leisure and Amenities Manager reported that, whilst officers were recommending progression of the Plan, at the same time, they wished to ensure that there were no additional liabilities for the Council.  Approval of the Plan would enable the Council to begin the implementation of various elements of the Park, subject to appropriate funding being available.

 

Future management options and results of environmental studies would be considered by the Steering Group and subsequently submitted to the Board for approval.

 

The Board extended thanks to all who had been involved in the production of the Plan which Members considered to be an excellent and exciting scheme.

 

RESOLVED That the Alver Valley Master Plan be confirmed as satisfactorily meeting the requirements of the Council for the provision of the Alver Valley Park and that approval be given for its implementation.

 

 

RESOLVED:  That under Section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the under-mentioned items of business on the grounds that they involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 8 and 9 of Part 1 of Schedule 12 A of the Act.

 

 

Consideration was given to an exempt report by the Leisure and Amenities Manager seeking approval for the transfer of land from the ownership of Persimmon Homes to the Borough Council.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(a)  approval be given in principle to the transfer of land from Persimmon Homes to Gosport Borough Council and that authorisation be sought from the Policy and Organisation Board to this recommendation;

 

(b)  the commuted sum be approved; and

 

(c)  the additional sum to cover remedial works be approved.

 

 

Consideration was given to an exempt report by the Leisure and Amenities Manager seeking the Board's approval for the select list of contractors whom it was intended to invite to tender for the Grounds Maintenance, Arboriculture and Cleaning Services Contracts.  Approval was also sought to the revised timetable and evaluation criteria for the procurement of those contracts.

RESOLVED:  That

 

(a)  the select list of contractors, as amended, be invited to tender for the Grounds Maintenance/ Arboriculture and/or Cleansing Services Contracts;

 

(b)  the evaluation criteria and revised timetable for the procurement of the contracts be approved; and

 

(c)   the evaluation of the tender submissions be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

 

 

 

 

Consideration was given to an exempt report by the Leisure and Amenities Manager seeking the Board's approval into an agreement for the Stokes Bay and Lee-on-the-Solent ice cream concessions.

 

RESOLVED: That the Board authorises the Borough Solicitor to enter into such legal documentation as is necessary to effect the decision for ice cream concessions at Stokes Bay and Lee-on-the-Solent for the period 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2007

 

 

By reason of special circumstances, the Chairman determined that this item be considered at this meeting notwithstanding the fact that the item had not been available for public inspection in accordance with the provisions of Section 100B(4)(a) of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985. 

 

The special circumstances were created by the urgent need to respond to the late withdrawal of the originally selected operator for the concessions to provide café and bistro facilities in the new Pavilion.  As the construction of the building was progressing rapidly to meet an opening date in September 2003, it was important that tenders were invited as a matter of urgency to secure a replacement operator.

 

RESOLVED: That officers be authorised to invite tenders for the café/bistro at the Walpole Park Pavilion and that the tenders be evaluated by officers, together with the Chairman and three Members of the Board.