In accordance with paragraph 3.33 of the Cabinet Procedure Rules, 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 Cabinet. 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:
Ted Wall referred to the recent flooding in the area of Poynton, Bollington and Macclesfield. He paid tribute to Council staff and the emergency services and in particular to those local residents who had helped those affected by the flooding.
The Portfolio Holder for Environment and Regeneration echoed Mr Wall’s remarks and advised that the incident was now in the recovery stage and that a full debriefing involving all relevant agencies and local residents would be held to consider the learning from the incident and what preventative measures could be taken for the future.
Sarah Anderson, on behalf of the Alsager Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, asked what was the national policy or guidance which was making Cheshire East Council reduce the area covered by the town centre boundaries against the wishes of local communities, and why did the Council persist in determining its town centre boundaries by reference to retail outlets, and insist on having a primary shopping area within the town centre against recognised trends.
The Portfolio Holder for Planning replied that the Council’s approach to town centre boundaries was derived from guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework which highlighted the need to define primary shopping areas reflecting where retail development was concentrated and town centre boundaries which should include the primary shopping area and areas predominantly occupied by main town centre uses within or adjacent to the primary shopping area. The forthcoming consultation afforded the opportunity to make further comments on the town centre boundary should that be necessary.
Danielle Bassi, on behalf of Keyworker Homes, stated that the settlement boundary of Shavington should revert to its previous boundary and she asked why the Council would discount the opportunity to bring forward affordable housing. (Further details of this matter had previously been emailed to members of the Cabinet on behalf of Keyworker Homes.)
The Portfolio Holder for Planning undertook to provide a written reply.
Sue Helliwell referred to the fact that the membership of the Cabinet had increased from eight to ten and asked if there had been any increase in allowances paid to councillors who sat on Cabinet.
The Leader responded that the allowance per Cabinet member had not increased but the number of Cabinet members had increased to ten. He had also noted that some outside organisations paid remuneration to the Council representatives on those bodies and he had asked for the details to be made available along with the allowances paid to Directors of the Council’s ASDVs so that the full picture could be made publicly available. The Deputy Leader added that in addition to being a Cabinet member he was also Chairman of the Northern Planning Committee and Leader of the Independent Group, both of which positions, under the Council’s scheme of member allowances, attracted a special responsibility allowance. However, the Council’s scheme provided that no member may receive more than one special responsibility allowance. Therefore, if the allowances paid to those other positions were offset, the actual cost of the Deputy Leader of the Council was currently £3,523, rather than £16,792 as it had been in the past. In addition, the Portfolio Holder for Finance, ICT and Communication was also the Independent Group administrator, which attracted an allowance, but under the Council’s scheme she could not claim both allowances, and therefore, discounting the allowance paid to Group administrators, the cost of that Cabinet member was also less than it would otherwise have been.
Jeremy Herbert, speaking on behalf of Nantwich Mill Hydro Electric Generation Company, a not-for-profit company aimed at delivering electricity from a water turbine slotted into the weir on the River Weaver in Nantwich town centre, asked for the Council’s support for the scheme as the owner of the site in question.
The Leader indicated that the Council was developing an Environmental Strategy for the Borough which would be submitted to the Cabinet’s next meeting in September. The Portfolio Holder for Environment and Regeneration asked Mr Herbert to provide a summary of the scheme, following which he would provide a written response.
Rachel Wright, representing the Friends of Barony Park, referred to a number of recent encampments at the Park and sought assurances that the Council would have an enforcement order in place by the weekend. She also asked why the Council was not seeking an injunction to address the issue as had been done by Thurrock and Reigate Councils.
The Leader replied that the best long term solution would be for the Council to provide a transit site in the Borough. He also asked for details of the Thurrock and Reigate injunctions and said that the Council would consider target hardening. The Portfolio Holder for Communities added that he was working with the police behind the scenes and that a summons would be served tomorrow morning.
Ken Edwards expressed concern that the Site Allocations and Development Policies Document to be considered later in the meeting required green belt to be taken out of Bollington for housing provision. He outlined four grounds on which the proposal was flawed.
The Portfolio Holder for Planning acknowledged that this was a contentious issue and noted that Mr Edwards was to have a further meeting with officers to discuss the matter. She urged him to submit representations during the consultation.