Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Scaitcliffe House, Ormerod Street, Accrington. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services (01254) 380116/380109/380184
No. | Item | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apologies for Absence Minutes: Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Kimberley Whitehead.
|
|||||||||
Declarations of Interest and Dispensations Minutes: Councillor Scott Brerton declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 9 – Disposal of Land at Park Road/Balfour Street, Great Harwood, on the grounds that the land was close to his home and its future use could potentially have an effect on the value of his property.
There were no reported declarations of dispensations granted.
|
|||||||||
To approve the Minutes of the last meeting of Cabinet held on 30th October 2024. Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 30th October 2024 were submitted for approval as a correct record.
Councillor Khan raised some points in respect of Minute 208 – Reports of Cabinet Members as follows:
Regarding Litter and Fly Tipping, he commented that he had not yet received a list of the proposed dates for skip days and asked about the criteria for deployment. He also asked if these would replace the community beat sweep activities. Councillor Dad responded that the full list of dates had not yet been set, but he would ensure that these were sent to Cllr Khan.
In connection with the Retrofitting Hub, Councillor Khan asked if a response had been received from the relevant Ministers about the funding announcement.
In respect of Minute 209 – Prudential Indicators Monitoring and Treasury Management Strategy Update, Councillor Khan asked whether the impact of increased employers’ contributions for National Insurance was now known. David Welsby, Chief Executive responded that the Government had announced that it intended to compensate local authorities for the increased costs of employers NI contributions.
Resolved - That the Minutes be received and approved as a correct record.
|
|||||||||
Minutes of Boards, Panels and Working Groups To receive the minutes of the meetings of the following bodies:-
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting of the following body were provided:
Resolved - That the Minutes of the meeting of the above body be noted.
|
|||||||||
Reports of Cabinet Members To receive verbal reports from each of the Portfolio Holders, as appropriate. Minutes: Leader of the Council
Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, reported on the following:
Local Government Reorganisation
The White Paper on English Devolution, which proposed further local government reorganisation, was awaited. The Whte Paper would set out the framework for the reorganisation of local governemtn in Lancashire. The controlling administration would keep staff and residents informed as more information became available.
Accrington and Rossendale College
A letter was read out, which had been received from the Nelson and Colne College Group. The Group comprised the three merged colleges of Accrington and Rossendale College, Nelson and Colne College and Lancashire Adult Learning. The Group had undertaken a review of its structure and name and a clear route forward had emerged. The intention was to change the name of the overarching body to East Lancashire Learning Group. However, the individual college entities would retain their existing names.
Councillor Dad recounted his long association with Accrington and Rossendale College, moving from a student, to a tutor, then to a governor. The College did excellent work and the rebranding should be supported.
Community Action Fund
Grants had been awarded to five local organisations from the Cabinet Action Fund, which had been introduced earlier this year. These were as follows:
Councillor Aziz declared a personal interest in the announcement regarding funding for Masjid and Madrassa Islamia, as this was the mosque that he attended. However, he had no role there in any position of control.
Long Term Plan for Towns
Information had been received that the new Government intended to retain the Long Term Plan for Towns programme, as part of its wider regeneration proposals. The Borough would receive up to £20m over the next decade. The name of the programme was likely to change. Councils which had already been identified as receiving the award should not seek to undo what had already been planned. However, a revised prospectus would be issued in the New Year to include new strategic initiatives from the Government. The prospectus would be accompanied by a comprehensive technical note. It was intended that some additional capacity ... view the full minutes text for item 255. |
|||||||||
Houses in Multiple Occupation and Children's Care Homes Report attached. Additional documents:
Minutes: In accordance with Regulation 11 of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, approval had been given by Councillor Jodi Clements, Chair of the Communities and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, to the following decision being made by Cabinet on 4th December 2024, under the special urgency provisions for key decisions, on the grounds that the decision was urgent and could not reasonably be deferred.
Members considered a report of Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, Leader of the Council, about proposed changes to planning policies in relation to Houses in Multiple Occupation and Children’s Care Homes.
Councillor Dad provided a brief introduction to the report and thanked planning officers Simon Prideaux and Shanshan Chen, who had drafted the report and who were in attendance. The report presented the draft versions of:
Cabinet was being asked to agree to undertake the necessary consultations, as the first step towards the Council being more readily able to manage these types of developments in the Borough.
Councillors Aziz, Walsh, Parkins, Fisher and Khan spoke in favour of the proposals. Councillor Khan queried whether the choice of wards might appear to be politically motivated and whether it might have been more advantageous to apply the Article 4 Direction across the whole Borough. Councillor Dad responded that the choice of wards was purely evidence based. Officers responded that the proposed changes were being consulted upon and that the evidence report was a live document. The wards covered and the relevant polices could be reviewed and adjusted as necessary after a period of time to reflect any change in circumstances. The approval of the Secretary of State was required for the proposed Article 4 Direction and this was unlikely to be granted for the whole Borough on the current evidence.
Approval of the report was deemed a key decision.
Reasons for Decision
Over the past 18 months the Council had seen a significant increase in the number of planning applications for Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO’s) and for Children’s Care Homes. These applications had given rise to objections from neighbouring residents and concerns about the impact that large numbers of care homes and children’s homes would have on an area.
One of the shared aims of the Corporate Strategy (2023-2028) and the adopted Hyndburn Core Strategy was to provide for a greater choice and quality of housing in the Borough. To help deliver this objective the Core Strategy set out a number of key priorities:
|
|||||||||
Garage Plot Rental Charge 1st April 2025 Report attached. Minutes: Members considered a joint report of Councillor Noordad Aziz, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Transformation, Education and Skills, and Councillor Vanessa Alexander, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Council Operations, seeking approval for increased garage plot rents from 1st April 2025.
Councillor Aziz provided a brief introduction to the report. The proposals would see an increase in rental from £102 per annum to £110 across the Borough’s 184 garage plots. The rental cost was comparable to that in neighbouring East Lancashire authorities.
Approval of the report was not considered to be a key decision.
Reasons for Decision
The Council completed a garage rent review every 3 years, with the aim of ensuring that the garage plot rents kept pace with inflation. It was reasonable for the Council to increase the garage plot rents having taken into consideration the annual rate of inflation and rents charged by neighbouring local authorities.
The Council had last increased the annual garage plot rent on the 1st April 2022.
Allowing for the annual rate of inflation from 2022, and rent comparisons charged by neighbouring local authorities, it was recommended that the annual rent be increased to £110.00 from 1st April 2025.
The term “garage plot”, for the purpose of the report, meant an area of land owned by the Council roughly equal in size to that which permitted the erection of a 3m x 6m single garage, together with a narrow strip of land around the plot thereby permitting vehicle access and garage maintenance.
Garage plots were rented to members of the public (the tenants) who might, at their own expense, erect a garage which could be used for parking a domestic motor vehicle. Some plots were used for parking cars or caravan storage without a garage building. It was a condition of the agreement that the garage plots were not used for commercial purposes and that the garage itself and the plot were maintained by the tenant.
The Council had 184 garage plots, all of which were tenanted at the time of writing.
The Council’s proposed annual rent of £110.00 was comparable with neighbouring local authorities, as indicated below:-
In reaching the recommended rent, consideration had been given to the annual rate of inflation since 2022 and that predicted from 2025 onwards, which ranged by year from 2.0% to 4.0%. The recommended garage plot rent increase was 2.5% (year on year from 2022), which was comparable to the national rate of annual inflation.
Alternative Options considered and Reasons for Rejection
No change and continue to charge rents at the existing amount - This option was not recommended as it was likely to mean that a larger rent increase would be required at a future date. It was reasonable for the Council to review the rents charged every 3 years to ensure that increases were gradual and that tenants did not face ... view the full minutes text for item 257. |
|||||||||
Arts, Culture and Heritage - Portfolio Report Report attached. Minutes: The Cabinet considered a report of Councillor Kimberley Whitehead, Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Arts, which provided an overview of the current and planned activities around arts, heritage, and culture in Hyndburn, in particular those supported by Hyndburn Borough Council. The report also:
In the absence of Councillor Whitehead, Councillor Vanessa Alexander introduced the report, as follows:
Culture and heritage was a new portfolio area in May, brought in by the current Cabinet to reflect the importance it could play in shaping the future of the Borough, helping people to thrive and express themselves. The report showed how the work aligned with Council’s broader priorities, such as town centre regeneration and community engagement. It provided an overview of the different and extensive areas of work which, taken in combination, supported arts, culture, and heritage in Hyndburn, including the wide-ranging cultural and economic contribution that the Haworth Art Gallery made.
The report outlined the wide-ranging events programme and included some data on spend and attendance for Council-funded events, offering a clearer picture of their reach and impact. Officers were being requested to continue to improve how this could be measured, to help the Council to make informed decisions about future investment.
The report also updated Cabinet on the development of the Council’s draft Culture and Heritage Strategy. This strategy would be a vital step in shaping how the Council enhanced cultural participation, developed local talent, and made heritage relevant and accessible to all residents.
One recommendation was to acknowledge the need for a robust business plan to be developed as part of the Market Chambers development stage, and for additional funding bids to be explored to support the running of the venue in its early years. This would reduce the need for any future reliance on Council funding once the venue was operational.
A number of officers across the Council were involved in this work, and the authority also benefitted from external expertise on the Culture and Heritage Investment Panel, including people who voluntarily gave their time to steer this work. On behalf of the Portfolio Holder, Councillor Alexander acknowledged those efforts and thanked all concerned. In particular, she thanked Kirsten Burnett, Head of Policy and Organisational Development who was present at the meeting today.
Councillor Aziz noted that the draft Strategy recognised diversity and the different cultures which prevailed across the Borough. Councillor Khan asked a number of questions which are summarised below, together with any responses provided:
|
|||||||||
Public Space Protection Order relating to Dog Control Report attached. Additional documents:
Minutes: In accordance with Regulation 11 of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, approval had been given by Councillor Jodi Clements, Chair of the Communities and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, to the following decision being made by Cabinet on 4th December 2024, under the special urgency provisions for key decisions, on the grounds that the decision was urgent and could not reasonably be deferred.
Members considered joint report of Councillor Stewart Eaves, Portfolio Holder forEnvironmental Services and Councillor Kimberley Whitehead, Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Arts, requesting Cabinet to consider extending and varying a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) called the Borough Council of Hyndburn (Control of Dogs) Public Spaces Protection Order (Number 1 of 2021) pursuant to sections 60 and 61 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (“The Act”) relating to dog control within the Borough of Hyndburn.
Councillor Eaves provided a brief introduction to the report. He referred to an additional recommendation which was being proposed in the light of responses provided in the comments section of the PSPO consultation and discussions with the Friends of Memorial Park, Great Harwood. Mr Welsby, Chief Executive, clarified that the new recommendation was in addition to those already set out in the report.
Councillor Dad commented that he had previously had some concerns about dogs in cemeteries, in the light of complaints he had received 3 or 4 years ago from the families of the deceased. However, while attending a burial at Burnley Road Cemetery in Accrington, at the weekend he had observed around 10 dog owners, all of whom had their pets on a lead. He had been reassured that, in general, owners who exercised their dogs in cemeteries were responsible and that there was no issue with dogs being in cemeteries per se. Irresponsible owners could be dealt with via the PSPO and enforcement.
Approval of the report was deemed a key decision.
Reasons for Decision
Legislation relating to Dog Control changed in 2014 with the introduction of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. The Act had superseded The Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 in relation to dog control.
The Act required local authorities to use PSPOs instead of dog control orders. To make a PSPO a local authority had to be satisfied that activities carried on in a public place had or were likely to have a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality (s 59 (2) of the Act) and that those activities were unreasonable, likely to persist or continue and justified the making of the PSPO.
Section 60 (2) of the Act permitted local authorities to extend the period during which an existing PSPO had effect if it was satisfied on reasonable grounds that the restrictions in that PSPO were still required.
PSPOs were live for a maximum of three years and at that point could be extended and varied if ... view the full minutes text for item 259. |
|||||||||
Exclusion of the Public Recommended That, in accordance with Regulation 4(2)(b) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, the public be excluded from the meeting during the following items, when it is likely, in view of the nature of the proceedings that there will otherwise be disclosure of exempt information within the Paragraphs of Schedule 12A of the Act specified at the items.
Details of any representations received by the Executive about why the following report should be considered in public – none received.
Statement in response to any representations – not required.
Minutes: Resolved - That, in accordance with Regulation 4(2)(b) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, the public be excluded from the meeting during the following item, when it was likely, in view of the nature of the proceedings that there would otherwise be disclosure of exempt information within the Paragraph at Schedule 12A of the Act specified at the item
Councillor Scott Brerton, having previously declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in the following item, left the meeting and took no part in the debate or vote on the matter.
|
|||||||||
Disposal of Land at Park Road / Balfour Street, Great Harwood Exempt information by virtue of Paragraph 3 - Relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).
Report attached. Minutes: Exempt information by virtue of Paragraph 3 - Relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)
Councillor Kate Walsh, Portfolio Holder for Sustainability and Families gave a brief introduction to the report. Councillor Noordad Aziz noted that the sale would support local business and would generate a capital receipt that would help to ensure that the Council’s capital programme was fully funded.
Approval of the report was not considered to be a key decision.
Reasons for Decision
The reasons for the decision were set out in the exempt report.
Alternative Options Considered and Reasons for Rejection
The alternative options considered and reasons for rejection were set out in the exempt report.
Resolved - That the recommendations as set out in the exempt report be approved.
|