Meeting documents

This meeting was held at the Winslow Church of England Combined School and prior to the commencement of the formal business, Cabinet offered all those present the opportunity to ask questions or seek clarification on any issue concerning Council services.  The following topics were raised:-

·         East-West Rail

One of the Winslow Ward Members expressed concern about the recent reports suggesting that the construction programme for East-West Rail could be delayed significantly, thereby having an adverse impact on local aspirations for the economic growth of the town (and the District).

The Cabinet Member for Growth Strategy indicated that, as the relevant portfolio holder, she had arranged for representations to be submitted to the appropriate Government Minister, and that consideration would be given to  further representations being submitted setting out the collective views of Cabinet.  The Leader of the Council mentioned that a meeting had been arranged with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to discuss issues affecting the Vale, at which the likely detrimental effects on sustainable growth any delay in the East-West Rail project would have on the District, would be raised.

Both the local Members of Parliament representing the Vale had been made aware of the Council’s concern.

The Cabinet Member for Growth Strategy was pleased to note that Winslow Town Council had also submitted representations to the Government on this subject.

·         Influence on Government Policy

In response to comments by a local resident, the Leader of the Council acknowledged the fact that although of the same political persuasion as the Council majority Group, he too was concerned about some of the policies being promoted by the Government which could have an adverse impact on the sustainable growth of the District.  He indicated by way of example, that the Council had from the very outset opposed the construction of HS2 given the detrimental environmental impacts of the scheme, but given the likelihood that the Government would proceed with the project, the Council was concentrating both individually and collectively with Parishes and other interested stakeholders, on ensuring that appropriate mitigation measures would be put in place to protect the special character of the Vale.

·         Aylesbury Visitor Information Centre (VIC)

One of the Aylesbury Ward Members felt that whilst the present location of the VIC was not ideal, he was of the opinion that some form of information centre should be retained, given that Aylesbury was the County town and a "gateway" to visitor attractions within the town’s hinterland.

The Cabinet Member for Leisure, Communities and Civic Amenities acknowledged the importance of Aylesbury as a retail and business hub, but  the Cabinet report demonstrated clearly that the current arrangement was commercially unviable, given the increasing preference for obtaining visitor information through digital media forms.  The statistical information accompanying the report bore this out.  The report on the Cabinet agenda concerning Waterside North demonstrated the Council’s commitment to regeneration and the development of a high standard of retail/entertainment offer.  It was felt that the funding for the VIC would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meetings held on 6 October 2015 and 15 October 2015 (copies attached).

RESOLVED –

That the Minutes of 6 and 15 October, 2015, be approved as correct records.

Councillor Mrs Paternoster

Cabinet Member for Growth Strategy

To consider the report attached as Appendix B.

Contact Officer: Anne Davies (01296) 585383

(a)       Decision(s)

(1)          That the responses to the consultations contained in Appendix 1 of the Cabinet report be noted.

(2)          That the Conservation Area boundary (Appendix 2 to the Cabinet report) and the Management Plan be adopted.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

The recommendations reflect the outcome of the review and the consultations undertaken in connection with the review.  The review accords with the Council’s responsibilities under Section 69(2) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act, 1990 and is an effective means of helping the Council to protect the District’s cultural heritage.  The Cabinet Member for Growth Strategy read out a letter from the Parish Council supporting the proposed revised Conservation Area and thanking the Council as a whole and the relevant officers in particular for the work undertaken.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

Not to approve any revision to the Conservation Area.  However the review identified the need to make a number alterations to the existing Conservation Area boundary in the interests of protecting the cultural and architectural heritage of the village.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Environment and Living.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

Quainton Parish Council had commissioned AVDC to undertake a review of the Quainton Conservation Area.  The Conservation Area at Quainton had initially been designated in 1972.  A detailed appraisal of Quainton had been undertaken to identify what was significant about the village and a number of alterations to the existing Conservation Area were proposed.  A map showing the revised Conservation Area boundary was submitted and copies of the draft appraisal document had been placed in the Members’ Lounge at the Gateway.  A copy could be supplied to individual Members on request.  By way of context, the Cabinet report summarised the legislative position in relation to Conservation Area designation.

The Conservation Area Appraisal document for Quainton:-

·         Defined the special interest of the village.

·         Identified those features which make Quainton of sufficient interest to warrant designation.

·         Laid out some settlement specific management proposals for the preservation and enhancement of the Conservation Area.

The proposed Conservation Area boundary at Quainton had been drawn to include those elements and features which were considered to be of architectural or historic interest, or which positively contributed to the special character or appearance of the area as a whole.  The general principles used to define Conservation Area boundaries were laid out in the AVDC Conservation Area SPD (March, 2011).  The detailed reasoning for the proposed new boundary and the special interest of Quainton were laid out in the Quainton Conservation Area Appraisal Document.

Most of the proposed changes to the existing Conservation Area boundary related to minor alterations where the existing boundary cut through properties.  The most significant changes were summarised in the Cabinet report and related to the inclusion of Townsend, the eastern end of Church Street and the Pumping Station, the southern side of The Strand and 20 The Strand, 37,39,41 and 43 Lower Street, and 14, 15 and 17 Upper Street.

The Cabinet report also summarised the site specific issues raised during the public consultation period.  A summary of the consultation process was contained in the report and the report also contained a summary of officers’ responses to the comments made during the consultation process.  (The Cabinet report could be viewed in its entirety on the Council’s web site).

The Cabinet Member for Growth Strategy read out a letter from Quainton Parish Council emphasising the Parish Council’s support for the revised Conservation Area and thanking the Council as a whole and the Individual officers who led the review.

RESOLVED –

(1)          That the responses to the consultations referred to in Appendix 1 to the Cabinet report be noted.

(2)          That the Conservation Area boundary referred to in Appendix 2 to the Cabinet report and the Management Plan, be adopted.

Councillor Mrs Macpherson

Cabinet Member for Leisure, Community and Civic Amenities

To consider the report attached as Appendix C.

Contact Officer:  Teresa Lane (01296) 585006

(a)       Decision(s)

(1)          That the Aylesbury Visitor Information Centre (VIC) be closed from late March, 2016, and that the current budget be re-invested in more effective visitor economy support, (to be considered as part of the wider budget report later in the year).

(2)          That the Senior Communications and Marketing Officer, after consultation     with the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Communities and Civic Amenities be authorised to progress all necessary works to implement the closure.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

·                     The VIC is no longer meeting its primary purpose of serving visitors to the town and area.

·                     Visitors and residents are gaining information through other mediums, predominantly on-line, resulting in an on-going decrease in footfall.  The new "Visit Aylesbury" web site has just been launched and provides 24/7 information for visitors to the town centre.

·                     Relocating to a shared location would require additional short term investment and additional on-going staff resource, but the cost saving projections cannot be guaranteed.

·                      Improvements to information at "gateway points" (car parks, stations etc.), and signage would meet the needs of the majority of visitors to the town.

·                     The majority of services offered at the VIC are also provided by other outlets in the town.

·                     Transferring the VIC to another organisation, such as the Aylesbury Town Council, would not solve the issues and concerns listed in the Cabinet report.

·                     The current contract with Tourism South East ends on 31 March, 2016, with notice being required three months in advance, hence the need for a decision at this juncture by Cabinet.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

·                     To increase investment.

·                     Business as usual.

·                     Decrease investment.

·                     Cease investment.

The Cabinet report (posted on the Council’s web site) provides a commentary on each of the options.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

            Economy and Business Development.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

Cabinet considered a report produced as a result of significant changes to the structure of tourism support within AVDC, as well as external changes and the on-going declining footfall at the Visitor Information Centre (VIC), Aylesbury.  The report could be viewed in its entirety on the Council’s web site.

Work on the Aylesbury Town Centre Improvement Plan was transforming the town.  A Marketing Aylesbury Group (MAG), led by AVDC had been established.  The MAG was working on a strategic marketing plan for the town aimed at both residents and visitors, which included a web site for the town centre, launched in October, 2015.  A signage audit and strategy had been completed.  This included wayfinding and interpretation information aimed at visitors to the town.  Funding for the implementation of this scheme however had yet to be secured.

The Senior Communications and Marketing Officer and the Communications and Marketing Officer for Leisure, who were responsible for tourism delivery, had been re-located to the Communications and Marketing Team in August, 2014, to take on a Council-wide remit.  As a result, the capacity within these roles to promote the VIC had reduced significantly.  The annual budget for the VIC was £63,000 and the Cabinet report contained a detailed breakdown.  Officer time amounted to £4,542 per annum.

AVDC currently provided the VIC in Aylesbury, based at The King’s Head.  The Council also used to run the Tourist Information Centre at Buckingham until 2010/2011, when it had been passed to the Town Council.  The Information Centre in Wendover had been closed in Autumn 2014 by Wendover Parish Council.  Tourism South East managed the VIC service on behalf of AVDC which helped keep costs and overheads relatively low.  The contract had recently been re-negotiated, with AVDC benefiting from a 40% profit share of sales, which had resulted in an approximate cash back saving of £2,000 per annum.  This represented just over 4% of the management costs.

The aim of the VIC was to enhance visitors’ experience, effectively up-selling opportunities and attractions in the area to them, thereby ensuring greater expenditure and investment in the local economy, which supported businesses and jobs.  Staff at the Aylesbury VIC supported the promotion of Aylesbury Vale, helped to engage with tourism businesses and supported visitors and residents who did not have access to on-line services or who might struggle to find information through the internet themselves.  The VIC supported the Aylesbury Town Centre Improvement Plan by helping to support the ambition of Aylesbury becoming an arts and entertainment town (as its unique selling proposition) by providing an outlet for local artists and craft makers to sell their work.

However the position had now changed significantly.  Footfall and enquiries at the VIC had been falling year on year since 2011.  The footfall for the first six months of the current financial year was slightly lower than the same period in 2014.  The figures were detailed in Appendix 2 to the Cabinet report.  This was due to a number of factors, including:-

·         The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Councillor Bowles

Cabinet Member for Economic Development Delivery

To consider the report attached as Appendix D.

Contact Officer:  Teresa Lane (01296) 585006

(a)       Decision(s)

(1)          That Council be recommended to appoint developer A referred to in the confidential part of the Cabinet agenda, as the Council’s preferred development partner.

(2)          That Council be recommended to approve the inclusion of £4.02m in the Capital Programme in order to acquire the commercial element of the development.

(3)          That Council be recommended to approve the inclusion of £3.3m in the Capital Programme for the public realm element of the scheme on the basis that this money was expected to be reimbursed by the South Midlands Local Enterprise Partnership.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

To facilitate the next phase of the regeneration of Aylesbury Town Centre, namely Waterside North (Phase 1).  The report recommended the appointment of a development partner in order to progress the scheme.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

The strategic business case for AVDC’s commitment to the delivery of Phase 1 of Waterside North was reported to Cabinet in September, 2014 and the Minutes are posted on the Council’s website.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Finance and Services.  That Committee will be receiving a similar report at its meeting on 16 November, 2015.  Any comments will be fed into the report to Council on 2 December.  As this matter will be considered by Council in December, Cabinet’s recommendations are not subject to call-in.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

In the last ten years, AVDC had been leading the redevelopment of Aylesbury Town Centre.  The Council’s record was impressive and had resulted in the delivery of major projects in the town centre such as the Waterside Theatre, Waitrose, Travelodge and, most recently, the University Campus Aylesbury Vale UCAV).

AVDC’s strategy on town centre redevelopment had three key aims, namely:-

·         To improve the attractiveness of the town centre through developments which acted as a catalyst for further investment by the private sector and other public sector partners for the overall benefit of the town and the local economy.  An example of this was the theatre which had attracted a range of new restaurants to the town and was underpinning interest in the Waterside North phase 1 development.

·         To use its own developments to directly generate new jobs and new wealth in the local economy (Waitrose and Travelodge had collectively delivered 200 new jobs).

·         To create a revenue stream for the Council from the rental generated by tenants of the buildings constructed by AVDC.

AVDC was committed to the successful delivery of the Waterside North Masterplan, shown at Appendix 1 to the Cabinet report, as the next development to help meet the above aims.  The Masterplan had been worked up in consultation with a number of stakeholders, including Buckinghamshire County Council which owned land adjacent to the current temporary Exchange Street Car Park, (owned by AVDC).  The Plan had received widespread public endorsement through a public consultation exercise undertaken in May, 2014.

The context for the development and delivery of the Masterplan was the Aylesbury Town Centre Plan which had been approved in 2013.  The Plan set out the vision for the town centre, the guiding principles for future development and a series of actions for improving different parts of the centre. Waterside North was one of the major actions in the Plan.

The Masterplan was capable of phased and independent development of the areas of land in different ownerships.  This was an important factor given the volatility of the retail market in particular, and as part of the public consultation on the Masterplan, an outline scheme for bringing forward at this stage the first phase  had been presented.

For phase 1 the County Council was initially focussed on rearranging its former offices in Walton Street for residential led mixed use and the creation of a temporary surface car park which would help offset the parking spaces lost by the development on the (AVDC owned) Exchange Street Car Park.  The County scheme required the demolition of a number of buildings, including the rear of the old County offices and the former police station building which had been vacant for a long time.  The new car park was due to open this month.

The AVDC element of phase 1 had focussed on delivering a mixed use scheme of up to five new café/restaurant units on the ground floor, with apartment accommodation on three levels above.  The site was in the heart of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Councillor Mordue

Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources and Compliance

To consider the report attached as Appendix E

Contact Officer:  Andrew Small (01296) 585507

(a)       Decision(s)

That Council be recommended to approve the updated Capital Programme for 2016/17 onwards, as set out in Appendix A of the Cabinet report (which incorporates the Provisions referred to above in relation to Waterside North – Phase 1).

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

The Council is required to set a capital budget for the coming financial year, and prudent financial management requires taking a longer term view of capital activity.  Regular review and updating of capital resource availability and capital investment plans is essential, especially when a number of capital projects are running in parallel.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

None as such.  The proposed capital Programme represents the allocation of anticipated resources in accordance with corporate priorities.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Finance and Services.  That Committee will be receiving a similar report at its meeting on 16 November, 2015.  Any comments will be fed into the report to Council on 2 December.  As this matter will be considered by Council in December, Cabinet’s recommendations are not subject to call-in.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

Cabinet reviewed the Capital Programme for the current year and for the plan period up to 2019/20.  A similar report would be considered by the Finance and Services Scrutiny Committee on 16 November, 2015, prior to submission of the Programme to full Council on 2 December.

The Council maintained an integrated strategic Capital Programme, divided into three sections:-

·         Major Projects - These being the largest and highest profile.

·         Housing Schemes - These being the housing enabling and housing grant based schemes.

·         Other Projects - Being all other schemes included within the Capital Programme.

The programme was reviewed annually having regard to forecast receipts and capital priorities.

The economy was continuing to grow despite the wider European problems.  This in turn had had a positive impact on the construction industry, particularly housing, resulting in increased demand for land and increases in land values.

The housing market also continued to grow, with house prices showing an 8.6% increase compared to last year.  This had had an impact on the appetite for home ownership from former Council tenants.  Consequently, income from the "Right to Buy", which was one of the Council’s major sources of capital income, was likely to be less than that received over the last couple of years.  Since April, 2012, when the Government had increased the available discount for tenants from £38,000 to £75,000, the number of house sale completions had risen over the subsequent two years to 47 in 2013/24 and 40 in 2014/15.  However, the Vale of Aylesbury Housing Trust (VAHT) was anticipating sales completions to be only 20 in the current year, which would result in a decrease in the level of capital receipts AVDC could expect to receive.

These factors had a bearing on the available resources for the Capital Programme.  Any decrease in anticipated resources effectively reduced the level of resources available to fund new schemes and so increase the possibility of borrowing, and this needed to be factored into the Programme.  The changes in anticipated resources which needed to be factored into the Programme were as follows:-

·         Share of house sales receipts from VAHT - These flowed from the stock transfer agreement and ran for 25 years from the transfer date.  The number of sales had been forecast to be 20 for 2015/16, with the same number being forecast for 2016/17.

·         Asset sales - These were sums released from the disposal of Council owned assets, mainly land and property.  The majority of these disposals were for housing development schemes.  Existing assumptions around timing and values had been reviewed on the basis of the current state of the housing market.

·         Capital contribution - This related to the contribution from the New Homes Bonus reserve allocated to capital schemes by the Council.

·         Revenue contributions - These included New Homes Bonus and the use of repairs reserves.

·         Government Grant - Specifically in support of the Waterside North scheme.

The following table set out the available resources at the beginning of 2015/16 and projected resources at the end  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Councillor Mordue

Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources and Compliance

To consider the report attached as Appendix F.

Contact Officer: Andrew Small (01296 585507

(a)       Decision(s)

That the approach outlined in the Cabinet report for the development of the budget for 2016/17 and for the Medium Term Financial Plan be endorsed.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

The Council is required to set a budget annually.  This process requires consideration of a number of factors and the Cabinet report sets the scene for budget planning.  The Cabinet report merely at this stage outlines the proposed process.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

None as such.  There are no options to consider at this stage of the process.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Finance and Services.  That Committee will be receiving a similar report at its meeting on 16 November, 2015.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

Cabinet received a report setting out the high level issues facing the Council in developing budget proposals for 2016/2017 and updating the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP).

The current MTFP for 2016/2017 had been agreed by Council in February, 2015.  The predicted need to identify £700,000 of savings in order to balance the budget for 2016/2017 had been based upon the information available at that time and a set of assumptions around key variables within the budget.  It had been appreciated that these key assumptions would need to be revisited and reviewed as part of the budget planning process for 2016/2017 and for the subsequent four years, which made up the MTFP period.

The previous 5 years had been categorised by the Government’s balancing of the private sector funding equation, and for local government this had meant dealing with large reductions in funding support, whilst managing the expectations of the Vale’s residents.  In terms of the Government’s financial agenda, most of this period had been framed within two significant spending review periods.

Post the General Election in May, the country was now waiting on the Government to produce a new spending review in order to give direction and shape the funding landscape over the next 5 year Parliamentary term.  Even without this however, there was clarity over the fact that the Government was still committed to its objective of balancing the budget within this 5 year planning period.  It was anticipated that the focus would remain on efficiency, income generation and further reductions in local government support.

It was expected that the results of the Chancellor’s funding review would be announced on 25 November, 2015.  This would provide the headline numbers for each Government department.  It was expected that the grant figures for local government would not be known until late December.  Given that this was a pivotal point for the Government in determining its policy for the next 5 years, much would depend on the outcome.  Not only would the spending review be relevant for the grant allocation, but it would also determine the Government’s policy intention towards other areas such as housing, welfare and council tax, which in turn might well have significant implications for the way in which the Council organised itself and the way in which it allocated resources.

Government Grant

The Government had been dealing with the inherited public sector deficit since the banking sector collapse in 2009/10.  The Government’s objective had been to return the economy from an annual deficit to a surplus.  The scale of this challenge was vast and the impact on public spending, far reaching.  Since 2010/2011 the Council had seen its Government grant reduced from an equivalent £13m to £6m in 2015/2016.  Given that in 2010/2011 Government grant had funded 58% of services residents enjoyed, the impact of this reduction had been far reaching for the Council.

The Council had reacted through increased efficiency, higher charges in some areas, new money making initiatives and through the reduction or ending of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Councillor Mrs J Blake

Cabinet Member for Business Transformation

To consider the report attached as Appendix G.

Contact Officer:  Evelyn Kaluza (01296) 585549

(a)       Decision(s)

That Council be recommended to:

(1)  Approve the business case as set out in the body of the Cabinet report and the creation and incorporation of a wholly owned Local Authority Trading Company as set out in option 1 of the Cabinet report.

(2)  Give delegated authority to the Chief Executive, after consultation with the Leader and the Cabinet Member for Business Transformation, to decide on the final company name and the date and details of incorporation of the trading company.

(3)  Give delegated authority to the Chief Executive, after consultation with the Leader and the Cabinet Member for Business Transformation, to determine the number and appointment of directors to the trading company.

(4)  Give delegated authority to the Chief Executive after consultation with the Leader and the Cabinet Member for Business Transformation, to agree and sign a shareholder agreement, Articles of Association and a service level agreement between the Council and the company.

(5)  Approve a loan of up to £50k on commercial terms as working capital for the company from General Working Balances and to give authority to the Director with responsibility for finance to agree the loan payment stages and repayment terms.

(6)  Agree to indemnify the company directors against personal liability while acting for the company through appropriate Directors Liability Insurance.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

To provide the Council with another route to generate a significant income stream to protect Council services in the future, given the likely reductions in Governmnet Core Grant.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

·                     Company limited by shares.

·                     Company limited by guarantee.

·                     A "Teckal" company.

·                     Registered  society.

The Cabinet report (posted on the Council’s website) contains a commentary on each of these options.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Finance and Services.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

Consideration was given to a report concerning the formation of a local authority trading company as a vehicle for the Council to generate new income streams over and above current and proposed initiatives.  As a distinct commercial entity the company would have the essential commercial flexibility to respond to customer needs and have greater flexibility to engage with partners to help fulfil those needs.  The company would be 100% owned by the Authority and would have no private shareholders.  All profits generated by the company would be re-invested back to the company or the Council.

Faced with rapidly decreasing resources from Government and with on-going pressure on councils not to increase taxation, together with new financial burdens placed on local government, the financial outlook for councils remained extremely challenging.  The Council had responded over the years with a range of initiatives, particularly through the New Business Model programme which had contributed to the delivery of over £11m savings/additional income since 2011.

However in order to achieve a secure financial future, the Council needed to not only reduce costs but also look to more secure additional income streams, and be more commercially minded in the way in which it carried out its business.  This had been reflected in the Council’s approach to developing the Medium Term Financial Plan (as referred to elsewhere in these Minutes).

Over the past few years the Council had used the flexibility created by the Localism Act, 2011, to explore ways to generate new income through trading.  The Council now had a number of trading companies already which included Aylesbury Vale Estates, Novae Consulting Ltd. and Aylesbury Vale Broadband Ltd.  It was essential if the Council was to meet the financial challenges ahead for it to progress with the trading element of its income generating work in order to:-

·                     Maintain front line services over the long term through re-investment of trading profits.

·                     Develop commercial acumen in tandem with transformation programme efficiencies.  This would help staff to develop new skills and abilities and enable them to apply a more commercial approach to their areas of work.

·                     Ensure a culture of self-reliance which would send a positive message around the potential for growth of Council services.

·                     Ensure that the Council was best placed to identify and pursue any potential opportunities.

Over the last few months officers had been working with external consultants with particular expertise in the delivery of rapid growth results for companies and transforming business models.  Working together they had identified areas which had the potential to generate significant revenue streams for the Council in the future.  The key assets the Council had for this commercial venture to succeed were the customer relationships it had developed through existing service provision and trading areas.  Using this trusted relationship and through expanding customer base, the Council was in a strong market position to create value added services and products for customers.

The company would have the potential to grow rapidly.  The goal would be to generate increasing continuity of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.