Agenda, decisions and minutes
Venue: Via MS Teams Video Conference, available to the public at https://buckinghamshire.public-i.tv/core/portal/home
Contact: Catherine Mackenzie
Media
Webcast: View the webcast
No. | Item | |
---|---|---|
Apologies Additional documents: Minutes: There were no apologies. |
||
To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 5 January 2021. Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED: The minutes of the meeting, including the confidential minutes held on 5 January 2021 be agreed as an accurate record. |
||
Declarations of interest Additional documents: Minutes: Angela Macpherson, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, explained that she is a local member for the Grendon Underwood ward. John Chilver, Cabinet Member for Property and Assets, explained that he is also a local member for the Grendon Underwood ward. Furthermore, he has a daughter who works for the Ministry of Justice. |
||
Hot Topics Additional documents: Minutes:
|
||
Question Time The following question has been received and will either be responded to during the meeting or a written response will be included in the minutes:-
1. Question from Councillor Cameron Branston to Councillor Martin Tett
As a Councillor for the Grendon Underwood Ward, I am writing to put forward the views of residents in Edgcott and Grendon Underwood, the villages most affected by this proposed expansion.
Both villages are under significant strain managing traffic from HS2 and EWR projects, can the villages manage more traffic to the prison site? Once the prison is operational, traffic movements will continue. None of this is environmentally sustainable. As a Council, we have agreed to some significant targets in line with national carbon reduction targets by 2050. Daily movements from 500 - 600 coupled with visitors will only increase carbon footprint in Buckinghamshire. A brand-new bus stop will not encourage more people to use public transit.
The proposal will increase the prison population to 1,400, which is larger than both Grendon Underwood and Edgcott and several residents have argued that this development moves away from organic growth to a point of being intrusive even artificial given its location in the countryside. Moreover, it is difficult to understand how trees could camouflage four story buildings with jarring colours in the open countryside, nor does it seem possible that trees and shrubbery will contain light pollution emanating from these large edifices at night.
Several major infrastructure projects have been viewed with scepticism in part because they are deemed expensive and offer little value locally and instead are perceived to harm the countryside. Can Cabinet assure residents living in the countryside, especially those living in Edgcott and Grendon Underwood, that it will do all it can to protect the environment and the countryside allowing residents to enjoy the amenities in the countryside? Additional documents: Minutes: Question from Councillor Cameron Branston to the Leader
As a Councillor for the Grendon Underwood Ward, I am writing to put forward the views of residents in Edgcott and Grendon Underwood, the villages most affected by this proposed expansion.
Both villages are under significant strain managing traffic from HS2 and EWR projects, can the villages manage more traffic to the prison site? Once the prison is operational, traffic movements will continue. None of this is environmentally sustainable. As a Council, we have agreed to some significant targets in line with national carbon reduction targets by 2050. Daily movements from 500 - 600 coupled with visitors will only increase carbon footprint in Buckinghamshire. A brand-new bus stop will not encourage more people to use public transit.
The proposal will increase the prison population to 1,400, which is larger than both Grendon Underwood and Edgcott and several residents have argued that this development moves away from organic growth to a point of being intrusive even artificial given its location in the countryside. Moreover, it is difficult to understand how trees could camouflage four story buildings with jarring colours in the open countryside, nor does it seem possible that trees and shrubbery will contain light pollution emanating from these large edifices at night.
Several major infrastructure projects have been viewed with scepticism in part because they are deemed expensive and offer little value locally and instead are perceived to harm the countryside. Can Cabinet assure residents living in the countryside, especially those living in Edgcott and Grendon Underwood, that it will do all it can to protect the environment and the countryside allowing residents to enjoy the amenities in the countryside?
Reply given by Martin Tett, Leader of the Council
The Cabinet recognises the concerns of residents around the proposal of a new prison at the site on HMP Grendon/Springhill and believe that it is important that the Council responds to the public consultation. It is very helpful for us to hear your views as a local member, and those of residents who will be affected, so that we can take those into account as we consider the paper on our agenda today. During the discussion on this item, I will therefore ask Cabinet Members to satisfy themselves that the themes you identify are reflected in our final response. |
||
Forward Plan (28 Day Notice) PDF 618 KB Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED: Cabinet NOTED the Forward Plan. |
||
Additional documents:
Decision: Cabinet received a report on Buckinghamshire Council’s consultation response to the proposed new prison at Her Majesty’s Prison (HMP) Grendon/Springhill in Grendon Underwood.
On 2 December the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) launched a public consultation on ‘The New Prisons Programme’ which outlined their proposal to build a new prison to house up to up to 1680 additional prisoners in a category C resettlement environment in Buckinghamshire. Appendix 1 to the report set out the Council’s draft response to the consultation. This had been formulated by seeking input and views from relevant departments across the Council as well as local councillors. Feedback from local residents and key partners had also been taken into consideration.
Cabinet were in support of the draft response to the Government consultation, as set out in the Appendix 1, agreeing to enhance the section on the environmental impact and review the wording in the labour market and housing affordability section.
RESOLVED: That the draft response to the Government consultation, as set out in Appendix 1, be agreed and that responsibility for submission of the final response, incorporating any further changes after the Cabinet meeting, be delegated to the Corporate Director (DCE) in consultation with the Cabinet Member/Leader of the Council. Minutes: Cabinet received a report on Buckinghamshire Council’s consultation response to the proposed new prison at Her Majesty’s Prison (HMP) Grendon/Springhill in Grendon Underwood.
On 2 December the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) launched a public consultation on ‘The New Prisons Programme’ which outlined their proposal to build a new prison to house up to up to 1680 additional prisoners in a category C resettlement environment in Buckinghamshire. Appendix 1 to the report set out the Council’s draft response to the consultation. This had been formulated by seeking input and views from relevant departments across the Council as well as local councillors. Feedback from local residents and key partners had also been taken into consideration.
The Cabinet noted that a large number of objections had been received against this proposal including from the Parish council, local schools and neighbouring villages. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) have stated that they would consider the consultation responses before submitting a planning application. Concerns fell into two areas; the proposed location of the prison which was not appropriate and the impact on local residents and communities.
The proposed location of the prison:-
The impact of local residents and communities: -
|
||
Date of next meeting Tuesday 16 February 2021 at 10am. Additional documents: Minutes: Tuesday 2 March 2021 at 10.00am |