PDF 115 KBVenue: Committee Suite 1 & 2, Westfields, Middlewich Road, Sandbach CW11 1HZ. View directions
Contact: Paul Mountford Democratic Services Officer
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Declarations of Interest To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any personal and/or prejudicial interests in any item on the agenda. Minutes: No interests were declared. |
|
|
Public Speaking Time/Open Session In accordance with Procedure Rules Nos.11 and 35 a period of 10 minutes is allocated for members of the public to address the meeting on any matter relevant to the work of the meeting. Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes but the Chairman or person presiding will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned where there are a number of speakers. Members of the public are not required to give notice to use this facility. However, as a matter of courtesy, a period of 24 hours’ notice is encouraged.
Members of the public wishing to ask a question at the meeting should provide at least three clear working days’ notice in writing and should include the question with that notice. This will enable an informed answer to be given.
Minutes: Mr Peter Barnard of the Crewe Heritage Trust made the following statement:
“My name is Peter Barnard, I am a Trustee of Crewe Heritage Trust.
As you will know after reading the various background documents , the Heritage centre started to be re-vitalised after appointing a new manager in 2007.
These improvements started to be hampered in 2009 when Mr. Waterman’s Company took possession of further parts of the site and Main Exhibition hall without the permission of the Trustees although their staff repeatedly said that “the Council has given us permission.”
Cheshire East Officers have consistently denied encouraging LNWHR Ltd to encroach and have confirmed this in writing.
The Trust has recently given notice to LNWHR Ltd to give up the land and building spaces they took over in 2009. To our dismay their Solicitors (Messrs Russells ) in a very recent letter dated only 10 days ago (12th August ) state that “ Our Client’s occupation of the disputed areas arose at the behest of the owners on the freehold of the site, Cheshire East Council”. Whether they will use this information in any future Court proceedings I do not know.
I ask if a copy of the statement I have just made be minuted in the record of this meeting.”
|
|
|
Crewe Heritage Centre The Cabinet Member for Prosperity to give further consideration to a proposal to declare the site of the Crewe Heritage Centre surplus to the requirements of the Council and to offer a 125 year lease for sale on the open market with a restrictive covenant which will preserve the site for the rail heritage of Crewe.
The Cabinet Member for Prosperity, at a meeting held on 27th June 2011, considered the report attached as Appendix 1. Having considered the report, and a letter from the Chairman of Crewe Heritage Trust dated 21st June 2011which was read at the meeting, the Cabinet Member resolved as follows:
“That the Cabinet Member for Prosperity agrees that the site of the Crewe Heritage Centre be declared surplus to the requirements of Cheshire East Council and that a 125 year lease be offered for sale on the open market with a restrictive covenant to preserve the site for the rail heritage of Crewe, the lease to be subject to such terms and conditions as are determined by the Assets Manager, Borough Solicitor and Head of Regeneration.”
The Cabinet Member’s decision was subsequently called in by eight Members, as provided by the Scrutiny Procedure Rules, and was considered at a meeting of the Environment and Prosperity Scrutiny Committee on 25th July 2011. Having considered the matter, the Scrutiny Committee decided to offer advice to the Cabinet Member. The Scrutiny Committee’s minutes are attached as Appendix 2.
RECOMMENDED
That the Cabinet Member for Prosperity give further consideration to this matter in light of the call-in and the advice offered by the Environment and Prosperity Scrutiny Committee. Additional documents: Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Prosperity gave further consideration to a proposal to declare the site of the Crewe Heritage Centre surplus to the requirements of the Council and to offer a 125 year lease for sale on the open market with a restrictive covenant which will preserve the site for the rail heritage of Crewe.
The Cabinet Member had originally considered the matter at a meeting held on 27th June 2011. Having considered the Officers’ report, and a letter from the Chairman of Crewe Heritage Trust dated 21st June 2011 which was read at the meeting, the Cabinet Member had resolved as follows:
“That the Cabinet Member for Prosperity agrees that the site of the Crewe Heritage Centre be declared surplus to the requirements of Cheshire East Council and that a 125 year lease be offered for sale on the open market with a restrictive covenant to preserve the site for the rail heritage of Crewe, the lease to be subject to such terms and conditions as are determined by the Assets Manager, Borough Solicitor and Head of Regeneration.”
The Cabinet Member’s decision was subsequently called in by eight Members, as provided by the Scrutiny Procedure Rules, and was considered at a meeting of the Environment and Prosperity Scrutiny Committee on 25th July 2011. Having considered the matter, the Scrutiny Committee had decided to offer advice to the Cabinet Member. The Scrutiny Committee’s minutes had been circulated with the agenda for this meeting.
Having given further consideration to the matter in the light of the advice of the Environment and Prosperity Scrutiny Committee, the Cabinet Member made the following statement at the meeting:
“I would like to firstly thank my colleagues on the Environment Scrutiny Committee for their considered comments and advice with respect to my decision on the way forward for Crewe Heritage Centre.
I acknowledge the importance of the decision, particularly for Crewe local members, and the longstanding ambitions for a first class rail heritage visitor attraction in the heart of the town.
However, I must stress again that this is not what we have currently on the site and I would like to explain more fully my original rationale for taking the action to market a head lease for the site.
The current visitor offer at the Crewe Rail Heritage Centre is poor and does not reflect the wider ambitions of the town nor adequately represent the proud industrial rail heritage that we know was the foundation of Crewe’s economic success.
The current management arrangements have failed, in my opinion, to deliver the original concept and ambitions, and we are now in a particularly difficult position where there are a number of irregularities with regards to our lease arrangements which must be addressed as part of our role as a landlord as well as to provide a sustainable future for the site.
|