Hart Borough Council Cabinet Meeting

The minutes of 1 February 2024 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

Proposed by Cllr Neighbour; Seconded by Cllr Oliver

Unanimously agreed by those present at the February meeting

Apologies had been received from Cllr Collins.

Cllr Radley was attending virtually and therefore was not entitled to participate in any vote being taken.

No declarations of interest were made.

The Chairman announced that it was proposed to reorder the agenda to bring item 10 forward until just after Agenda Item 5.  This was agreed by those present.

There was no public participation items.  Representatives of Crookham Village Parish Council were in attendance and had indicated a wish to speak a few words at the beginning of the agenda item on the Crookham Village Conservation Area Appraisal.

The purpose of this report was to adopt the Crondall Conservation Area Appraisal.  The Portfolio Holder for Planning Policy and Place introduced both of the Conservation Area Appraisal items as one. 

Members noted:

·       This appraisal document was a refresh of the existing one which had been previously adopted in 2016

·       That a conservation area would not necessarily change its boundaries if settlement boundaries were changed in a local plan

·       There were two large fields being extended into the conservation area, which had been included with a detailed explanation and significant evidence provided by the Consultants used

Proposed by:  Cllr Cockarill; Seconded by:  Cllr Neighbour

Members agreed that the recommendation be amended to add into the final bullet point that any changes made to the document were made in consultation with the Parish Council.  Both the proposer and seconder confirmed this was acceptable to them.

Decision

Cabinet:

·       Approved the boundary changes to the Crondall Conservation Area

·       Adopted the Crondall Conservation Area Appraisal, attached at Appendix of the document, for planning and development management purposes

·       Agreed that the Crondall Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Proposals (December 2016) were no longer adopted by the Council

·       Authorised the Executive Director – Place to undertake the administrative tasks associated with the boundary changes to the Crondall Conservation Area

Authorised the Executive Director – Place, in consultation with Crondall Parish Council, to make minor alterations and typographical corrections to the appraisal prior to being published.

The purpose of this report was to adopt the Crookham Village Conservation Area Appraisal.

Members noted:

·       This appraisal document was a refresh of the existing one which had previously been adopted in 1992

·       Very little had changed in the interim period

·       There had been feedback received from both the Parish Council and some local residents

A proposal was made to change the recommendation in line with the previous item, in that any minor corrections would be made in consultation with Crookham Village Parish Council.  This was agreed by all and it was confirmed that the motion would be proposed and seconded as amended.

A representative from Crookham Village Parish Council spoke a few words to Cabinet members in relation to the proposal.

Proposed by:  Cllr Cockarill; Seconded by:  Cllr Neighbour

Decision

Cabinet:

·       Adopted the Crookham Village Conservation Appraisal, as attached at Appendix 1 of the Report, for planning and development management purposes

·       Agreed that the Crookham Village Conservation Area Character Proposal Statement (September 1992) was no longer adopted by the Council

Authorised the Executive Director – Place, in consultation with Crookham Village Parish Council, to make minor alterations and typographical corrections to the appraisal before it is published.

This report was to recommend the adoption of a Local Enforcement Plan following its consideration by the Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

Members heard:

·       This was a refresh and updating of existing plans and brought enforcement activities into one document, which agreed common principles

·       It would help to ensure that the Council’s approach to different types of enforcement was consistent

·       The document helped to clarify what and how we would investigate complaints, and what wouldn’t be investigated and why

·       The document had been discussed at Overview and Scrutiny and their comments had led to the original document being amended

Members discussed:

·       Whether there should be mention of expected response times so that residents were aware of how long they may have to wait

·       How a key point was that those who raised a complaint were kept informed of what was happening

·       That there should be some form of cross-referencing in the document to other strategy documents (such as fly tipping strategy) so that complainants are aware of the Council’s other documentation.

Members noted:

·       That within the appendices there was a list of categories and details of how long it might take to investigate and collect evidence

·       That the timescales outlined in the document for a response were just for the initial response and that there was scope for ensuring a regular update

The Executive Director – Place confirmed that he would speak with both Portfolio Holders involved and ensure that suitable reference was made to ensuring that regular updates were made to complainants.  As these documents would also be put onto the Council website, it would be possible to add hyperlinks to other documents that would help with their understanding.

It was agreed to amend the recommendation to say that any amendments would be made in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holders. 

Proposed by:  Cllr Oliver; Seconded by:  Cllr Neighbour as amended

Decision

Cabinet:

·       Adopted the Local Enforcement Plan

Authorised the Executive Director – Place to make minor alterations in consultation with the Portfolio Holders, and typographical corrections to the plan before it was published.

This report was to adopt the Hart district Local Cycling & Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP).

Members heard:

·       The LCWIP had been put to O&S in November, at which time several issues had been raised with the draft plan.  A number of areas had subsequently been redrafted

·       This was a high level document to allow Hampshire County Council (HCC) and Hart District Council (HDC) to bid for future funding

·       The report did include some indicative projects which the contractors, Sustrans, felt might be useful.  However these were not to be seen as agreed projects that would definitely go ahead to the detriment of any others, which may well be better

·       For any scheme being brought forward for consideration a full feasibility study would need to be carried out and considered

·       Blackwater Valley Friends of the Earth had put forward two good points prior to the meeting, although they were incorrect in their presumption that any improvements not included in the report would not be implemented

·       The report was part of HDC’s commitment to tackling climate change and promoted safe and secure alternatives to using vehicles.

A proposal was put forward that the recommendation be amended to read that the Executive Director – Place would only make minor alterations in consultation with the Portfolio Holder.   This was unanimously agreed on the basis that due diligence checks were undertaken. 

Proposed by:  Cllr Cockarill; Seconded by Cllr Neighbour as amended.

Members debated:

·       That this would be a good starting point for discussions with Hampshire Highways around cycle routes etc

·       The document would be a good evidence base to allow discussions with other outside agencies and organisations

·       The need to look at routes that transverse the district boundaries and how ward councillors and parishes are becoming involved in those discussions.

Decision

Cabinet

·       Adopted the Hart District Local Cycling & Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP)

Authorised the Executive Director – Place, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning Policy and Place, to make minor alterations, typographical and accessibility (formatting) related corrections to the document before it is published.

This report sought approval to use New Burden's funding to match fund a Hampshire County Council (HCC) grant to enable the Council to provide a dedicated outreach and advocacy service to survivors of domestic abuse

Members noted:

·       That use of the funding would be matched funded by HCC, which had its own fund, as long as Hart could provide a service in conjunction with  another local authority

·       The Executive Director – Communities and her team had been talking with Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council about the potential for employing a specialist Domestic Abuse worker to work between the two Councils

·       This worker would be employed by the YouTrust, who work with survivors of domestic abuse and would join the housing team at Hart

·       There would be no additional cost to the Council, and this would allow a fuller service to be provided

·       The service would be for a 2 year fixed term

Members queried what would happen to the role at the end of the 2 year term, and noted that if additional funding was available and the project was successful, then there could be the potential to extend.

Proposed by Cllr Bailey; Seconded by Cllr Neighbour

Decision

Cabinet approved the use of the domestic abuse new burdens funding, totalling £36,606 to fund the proposed outreach and advocacy service.

The Cabinet work programme was considered and amended as follows;

·       The report from the fly tipping task and finish group, would come to the meeting on 4 April (members of the task and finish group have been invited to present their report at the meeting)

·       An item on capital carry forward requests would come to the meeting on 4 April

The item on the Capita contract needed to be renamed “Update on the Capita 5Cs contract”