Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 656 KBVenue: Guildford Borough Council
Contact: Carolyn Anderson Surrey County Council, Old Millmead House, Millmead, Guildford, GU2 4BB
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
To receive any Chairman’s announcements. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting. He reminded those present that the meeting was being webcast and of the protocols in place regarding any recording of the meeting as laid out in the agenda papers.
Members were asked to note that the new Wayfinding network of signposting had recently been installed in the town centre. The network had been agreed and approved by the committee last year. |
|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
To receive any apologies for absence and notices of substitutions from Borough members under Standing Order 39. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Borough Councillors David Wright, Monika Juneja and Zoe Franklin. Borough Councillor Caroline Reeves attended in place of Councillor Franklin. |
|
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
To approve the Minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record. Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held 26 November 2014 were confirmed as a true record. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest.
· Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests.
· Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register.
· Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest.
Additional documents: Minutes: There were no declarations of pecuniary interest. |
|
|
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
To receive any questions from Surrey County Council electors within the area in accordance with Standing Order 66. Please refer to the tabled paper that will accompany this item. Additional documents: Minutes: The written responses to the public questions received were tabled at the meeting and can be found at Annex 1 of these minutes.
With regards to the request to install railings on Egerton Road, Borough Councillor Adrian Chandler clarified that the request concerned the stretch of road from the hospital to the Holiday Inn and also along the centre of the road. This was noted by the Area highways Manager.
Ms Mullen was concerned that funding for any scheme to tackle traffic congestion on Mount Pleasant would not be available until 2016/17. County Councillor Goodwin said that he would use his members allocation funding should any interim measure be possible.
Both requests would be added to the agenda of the Transportation Task Group (TTG) to monitor with Highways on behalf of the committee.
|
|
|
MEMBER QUESTION TIME
To receive any written questions from Members under Standing Order 47. Please refer to the tabled paper that will accompany this item.
Additional documents: Minutes: The written response to the member question received was tabled at the meeting and can be found at Annex 1 of these minutes.
County Councillor Mrs Pauline Searle asked to be notified at the earliest opportunity when the schedule for resurfacing the final stretch of Stoughton Road was known.
|
|
|
NEW PETITIONS
To receive any petitions in accordance with Standing Order 65. An officer response will be provided to each petition. Please refer to the tabled paper that will accompany this item.
i. Crocknorth Road (A246) speed limit ii. Pedestrian crossing on Ash Hill opp. Victoria Memorial Hall
Additional documents: Minutes: The written responses to the petitions received were tabled at the meeting and can be found at Annex 1 of these minutes.
Petitioners requested the reduction of the speed limit on Crocknorth Road. The local member took the matter seriously and asked that it be addressed as quickly as possible. The Area Highways Manager reminded committee that the unlit road network defaults to 60the mph and it would require a Traffic Regulation Order by the Local Committee to make any change to the speed limit. The matter would be discussed by the Transportation Task Group at its autumn meeting.
There was no speaker present to introduce the petition requesting a pedestrian crossing on Ash Hill Road. The local members said the matter would be taken forward with the parish council and asked if the findings from any initial investigations conducted by Surrey Highways be shared. The matter would be discussed by the Transportation Task Group at its autumn meeting.
|
|
|
PUBLIC FOOTPATH No. 206, ALBURY DIVERSION APPLICATION (OTHER COUNTY COUNCIL FUNCTION)
This report seeks a decision to reject an application to divert Public Footpath No. 206 Albury, in light of the objections received.
Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
The application from the owners of ‘Mardons’ to divert Public Footpath No. 206, Albury as shown on Drg. No. 3/1/52/ H31a is refused.
Reasons Members agreed that the criteria for making a diversion order had not been met.
Minutes: The report was presented by the Senior Countryside Access Officer.
The application under consideration was to divert a Public Right of Way (PROW). The committee heard that the recommendation to refuse the application was based upon the argument that the diversion would be for the convenience of the landowner only and not in the interests of the rights of way network.
Mrs S Darling spoke in objection against the diversion. Mr A Wreford as applicant spoke in support.
The local member agreed with the officer recommendation. It was observed that although both sides of the argument had been well presented, it would be likely that the objectors would appeal and that the use of public funds for this purpose would not be justified in the public interest.
There were 16 votes in favour of the recommendation not to allow the application and 1 abstention.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
The application from the owners of ‘Mardons’ to divert Public Footpath No. 206, Albury as shown on Drg. No. 3/1/52/ H31a is refused.
Reasons Members agreed that the criteria for making a diversion order had not been met.
|
|
The report presents the representation resulting of the formal advertisement of proposals associated with the Farnham Road Hospital redevelopment and recommends making an amendment to traffic regulation order to provide for revised access arrangements for the hospital.
Additional documents: Decision:
The Local Committee (Guildford)agreed:
(i) that a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) is made to accommodate the changes to the access arrangements associated with the Farnham Road Hospital redevelopment as shown in ANNEXE 1 of the committee report.
Reasons To facilitate the revised access arrangements at Farnham Road Hospital, and assist with safety, access, traffic movements, the availability of space and its prioritisation for various user-groups in the vicinity.
Minutes: Guildford Borough Council acts as agent on behalf of Surrey County Council with regard to on-street parking matters. The report was presented by Guildford Borough Council’s Parking Services Manager.
The committee had previously agreed to advertise the Traffic Regulation Order revising parking proposals associated with the redevelopment of the hospital site. The meeting heard that following public advertisement there had been just one formal representation of objection regarding hospital traffic on Ludlow Road. However, this matter had already been considered through the planning process. It was noted that the revisions to on-street parking in the local area would result in an increased number of bays for residents in the Controlled Parking Zone which was welcomed.
The Local Committee (Guildford)agreed:
(i) that a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) is made to accommodate the changes to the access arrangements associated with the Farnham Road Hospital redevelopment as shown in ANNEXE 1 of the committee report.
Reasons To facilitate the revised access arrangements at Farnham Road Hospital, and assist with safety, access, traffic movements, the availability of space and its prioritisation for various user-groups in the vicinity
|
|
|
ROAD SAFETY OUTSIDE OF SCHOOLS REPORT (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
Concern has been expressed over the safety of children arriving and leaving Boxgrove Primary, St Thomas of Canterbury Catholic Primary School and St Peter’s Catholic Secondary School. This report outlines investigations into the nature and extent of the concerns, and possible highway and road safety education improvements to reduce them. These have been developed in accordance with the county council’s Road Safety Outside Schools policy.
Additional documents: Decision:
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) The County Council’s Sustainable School Travel Team will work together with Boxgrove Primary School, St Thomas of Canterbury Catholic Primary School and St Peter’s Catholic Secondary School to assist the schools in providing additional school travel plan and road safety education activities as described within this report. (ii) Consultation will be undertaken with the school communities (teachers, parents, carers, students and local residents) regarding the proposed highways interventions contained within this report. Subject to feedback being positive, the highway interventions will be implemented and funded by £100,000 allocated by the Local Committee for this project. (iii) Approval to advertise any required statutory notices associated with these highway interventions, in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, and subject to no objections being upheld, the necessary Orders made. (iv) Approval for the Area Highways Manager, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Local Committee and the relevant divisional and borough councillors to consider and resolve any objections received in connection with the proposals or, if not resolved, to bring back a further report to the Local Committee.
Reasons The members agreed the recommended highway measures would help to reduce traffic speeds and reduce antisocial parking and so would reduce risk of collisions and improve the road environment to encourage more walking, scooting and cycling to school. A successful increase in these modes would contribute to fewer car journeys and less motor vehicle congestion. The recommended school travel plan and road safety education improvements would also help to improve road safety and reduce reliance on the car for the school journey. These measures also contribute towards the aims of the Guildford Town and Approaches Movement Study and Guildford Cycling Plan.
Minutes: The report was presented by the Road Safety Manager and the Schools Sustainable Transport Officer.
Following concern for pedestrian safety, local congestion and anti-social parking in the Boxgrove area resulting from school traffic the committee commissioned a review under the Road Safety Outside of Schools policy launched by the County Council last year. The committee had agreed to allocate funding from the Highways 2015/16 budget in preparation the findings. This report presented the full findings and recommendations for agreement by the committee. The report proposed a full range of measures to include physical traffic management interventions, training for school staff, a review of the school travel plan and engagement with local residents, parents and members.
Members of the committee praised the report and suggested it should be a model approach for tackling similar problems both in the borough and countywide.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) The County Council’s Sustainable School Travel Team will work together with Boxgrove Primary School, St Thomas of Canterbury Catholic Primary School and St Peter’s Catholic Secondary School to assist the schools in providing additional school travel plan and road safety education activities as described within this report. (ii) Consultation will be undertaken with the school communities (teachers, parents, carers, students and local residents) regarding the proposed highways interventions contained within this report. Subject to feedback being positive, the highway interventions will be implemented and funded by £100,000 allocated by the Local Committee for this project. (iii) Approval to advertise any required statutory notices associated with these highway interventions, in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, and subject to no objections being upheld, the necessary Orders made. (iv) Approval for the Area Highways Manager, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Local Committee and the relevant divisional and borough councillors to consider and resolve any objections received in connection with the proposals or, if not resolved, to bring back a further report to the Local Committee.
Reasons The members agreed the recommended highway measures would help to reduce traffic speeds and reduce antisocial parking and so would reduce risk of collisions and improve the road environment to encourage more walking, scooting and cycling to school. A successful increase in these modes would contribute to fewer car journeys and less motor vehicle congestion. The recommended school travel plan and road safety education improvements would also help to improve road safety and reduce reliance on the car for the school journey. These measures also contribute towards the aims of the Guildford Town and Approaches Movement Study and Guildford Cycling Plan.
|
|
|
GUILDFORD LOCAL CYCLING PLAN (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
As part of the Surrey Transport Plan, the Surrey Cycling Strategy was approved by Cabinet in December 2013. The Strategy set out a role for Local Committees to oversee the development of Local Cycling Plans. This report sets out progress to date and asks members to approve the timetable for wider consultation and approval for the Guildford Local Cycling Plan.
Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) to the principles for cycle route design and implementation outlined in sections 2.4 and 2.7 of this report which will form part of Guildford’s Local Cycling Plan. (ii) to the timetable for consultation and approval for the Guildford Local Cycling Plan.
Reasons The members agreed that cycling is an increasingly popular choice of transport for residents for reasons of health, recreation and travel. It is important that local decision-makers have a clear understanding of all modes and transportation in the borough and how cycling fits into local planning and provision for safe movement. Minutes: The report was presented by the Sustainable Transport Manager.
The Surrey Cycling strategy was approved by the County Council in 2013 with the recommendation that local committees oversee the development of local cycling plans that would be supportive and responsive to local infrastructure needs.
The members approved the initiative and the intention to see a joined up network of sustainable cycling routes both across Guildford town centre and borough-wide. It was observed that the plan would be a good piece of joint working between both councils. There were specific requests for the plan to seek to support volunteers and to build on the achievements of the Travel Smart funding.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) to the principles for cycle route design and implementation outlined in sections 2.4 and 2.7 of this report which will form part of Guildford’s Local Cycling Plan. (ii) to the timetable for consultation and approval for the Guildford Local Cycling Plan.
Reasons The members agreed that cycling is an increasingly popular choice of transport for residents for reasons of health, recreation and travel. It is important that local decision-makers have a clear understanding of all modes and transportation in the borough and how cycling fits into local planning and provision for safe movement.
|
|
|
SHERE AREA RURAL HEAVY GOODS VEHICLE REVIEW (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
It is proposed to carry out a review of HGV activity in the rural area around the Parish of Shere seeking to address long standing concerns of residents on the impact of perceived inappropriate HGVs journeys through this area. It is proposed to follow a model recently carried out in the Tandridge District which identified HGV related issues and potential solutions through discussions with individual Parish Councils.
Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) To endorse the study approach; and (ii)To support the proposed project to review and address HGV issues within the Shere Parish area
Reasons The members agreed a certain level of HGV activity on this area’s rural road network is inevitable due to agricultural, local business activity, and the need for local deliveries. However, it is perceived that many HGV movements through this area are unnecessary and having a detrimental impact on the safety and character of rural lanes. It is expected that some problems on minor lanes can be eased by a combination of low cost measures identified through discussions with Parish Councils.
Minutes: The report was presented by the Highways Engineer.
Members of the committee representing rural areas of the borough had requested the committee review the impact of Heavy Goods Vehicles on rural roads and communities. This initial report proposed that a pilot study be undertaken as a first step approach to consider the Shere Area. Members welcomed the report, particularly it was hoped that a body of knowledge and effective approaches to the issues could be developed and implemented not only in Shere but other areas. It was requested that the next area for review be the Woplesdon/Pirbright/Normandy area.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) To endorse the study approach; and (ii)To support the proposed project to review and address HGV issues within the Shere Parish area
Reasons The members agreed a certain level of HGV activity on this area’s rural road network is inevitable due to agricultural, local business activity, and the need for local deliveries. However, it is perceived that many HGV movements through this area are unnecessary and having a detrimental impact on the safety and character of rural lanes. It is expected that some problems on minor lanes can be eased by a combination of low cost measures identified through discussions with Parish Councils.
|
|
|
GUILDFORD HIGH STREET SETTS (FOR INFORMATION)
Subject to tender costs and a satisfactory resolution for the Thames Water main, work on relaying the granite setts in Guildford High Street is planned to start in August, continuing a period of around twelve months with a break for Christmas. This report provides details of the planned works.
REFER TO SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA
Additional documents: Minutes: The report was presented by the Area Highways Manager.
In June 2013 the committee agreed that there should be a plan in place to re-lay the granite setts on Guildford High Street. Both councils had reserved funding to cover the indicative costs, including a proportion of the committee’s Highways budget. This report put forward the schedule for works to commence August 2015.
Members expressed concern that the actual costs of the work may exceed the indicative costs. The committee heard that there would be a reinstatement requirement and standard against future utilities work. It was noted that the redevelopment of Tunsgate which already had received planning permission could also require the lifting of the setts and this should be confirmed. It was proposed that consultation work with local business should commence as soon as possible.
It was further noted that interim remedial works may be required in order to make secure the setts in advance of the Armed Forces Day event in June.
The Local Committee (Guildford) noted the report. |
|
|
HIGHWAYS UPDATE (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
This report provides an update on the 2014/15 and 2015/16 programmes of minor highway works funded by this committee. Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) To note progress of the 2014/15 programme of highway works funded by this committee and described at Annex 1. (ii) to defer the proposed signal controlled pedestrian crossing on the A320 Woking Road near Weyfield Academy to 2016/17. (iii) to provide £35,000 funding in 2015/16 towards the Clusters Group initiative from the highways maintenance budget. (iv) to advertise a traffic regulation order for the closure of the central reservation gap on the A31 Hogs Back at East Flexford Lane. (v)
to fund or part fund the 2015/16 Lengthsman (Localism) Scheme (vi) Note the Project Horizon resurfacing programme for 2015/16 set out at Annex 2. .
Reasons The committee agreed the recommendations would progress the programmes of highway works for 2014/15 and 2015/16.
Minutes: The report was presented by the Area Highways Manager.
The quarterly update reported on the 2014/15 programme and confirmation of the budget for 2015/16.
It was noted that 25% of the 2015/16 capital budget must be spent on drainage/flood prevention work. This was met with approval by some members who thought that much of the deterioration of the road surface could be due to poor drainage.
The committee agreed that it would be good value for money to use a proportion of the Highways budget locally through the Cluster initiative. The Cluster fund was matched by Guildford Borough Council which therefore doubled the contribution available.
It was anticipated that the proposed closure of the A31 central reservation at East Flexford Lane would attract some objection and would most likely be bought back to the committee at a later date.
It was agreed that recommendation (v) be amended to exclude the list of schemes as the reference to Western Parishes Cluster in the committee report could not be explained.
It was requested that a member of the Guildford Borough Transportation Planning section be invited to sit on the Road Safety Working Group.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) To note progress of the 2014/15 programme of highway works funded by this committee and described at Annex 1. (ii) to defer the proposed signal controlled pedestrian crossing on the A320 Woking Road near Weyfield Academy to 2016/17. (iii) to provide £35,000 funding in 2015/16 towards the Clusters Group initiative from the highways maintenance budget. (iv) to advertise a traffic regulation order for the closure of the central reservation gap on the A31 Hogs Back at East Flexford Lane. (v)
to fund or part fund the 2015/16 Lengthsman (Localism) Scheme (vi) Note the Project Horizon resurfacing programme for 2015/16 set out at Annex 2. .
Reasons The committee agreed the recommendations would progress the programmes of highway works for 2014/15 and 2015/16.
|
|
|
TRANSPORTATION TASK GROUP REPORT (FOR INFORMATION)
The Local Committee for Guildford considers a broad range of highways and transportation matters. In order to progress the committee’s transportation work programme a task group has been created. The purpose of the task group is to consider local transportation business on a more frequent and flexible basis than the schedule of the formal full committee may allow and thereafter to act in an informed and advisory capacity to the full committee. The Transportation Task Group (TTG) membership is made up of nominated members from the full committee. All formal decisions are undertaken by the full committee. This report is for the information of the full committee. The intention is to provide an update of the TTG work programme and a schedule.
Additional documents: Minutes: The report was presented by the Area Highways Manager.
The Transportation Task Group (TTG) comprised of six members of the Local Committee which convened to look at local transportation issues in greater detail than it permitted by the agenda of the committee as a whole. Members to the TTG are nominated on an annual basis.
A work programme for the TTG was submitted for the committee to note.
The Local Committee (Guildford) noted the report.
|
|
|
LOCAL PREVENTION YOUTH TASK GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
The Local Committee is responsible for commissioning Local Prevention services to prevent young people becoming Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET) within their local area. The Local Committee Youth Task Group has recently met and received presentations from a range of potential providers. This papers sets out their recommendation for awarding Local Prevention.
Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
1) To approve the Guildford Local Committee’s Youth Task Group recommendation to award a contract for a 36 month period for One-to-One Early Help from 01 September 2015 to Step by Step for the value of £55,000 per annum (subject to future changes in SYP budgets). Within the contract there is the opportunity to extend the service for further two years, subject to budget changes, provider performance and any changes in the needs of young people.
2) To approve the Youth Task Group recommendation to award a grant for a 36 month period for neighbourhood work from 01 September 2015 to Lifetrain for the value of £54,400 per annum (subject to future changes in SYP budgets). Within this grant agreement there is the opportunity to extend the service for further two years, subject to budget changes, provider performance and any changes in the needs of young people.
Reasons The members agreed the recommendations will support the council’s priority to ensure that all young people in Surrey are employable.
Minutes: The report was presented by the Lead Youth Officer (West).
Services for Young People Local Prevention programme has been operating in Guildford since April 2012. The funding allocation to the Local Committee is to prevent or reduce the number of young people in the borough who are Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET). As the delegated commissioning body the Local Committee established a Youth Task Group to provide local guidance and support to the process. The membership of the Youth Task Group is agreed annually by the committee at the first meeting of the municipal year. In addition to members and officers from both councils membership includes Surrey Police.
For the commissioning period 2015-2020 Local Prevention had been split into two parts : Neighbourhood Prevention and One-to One Early Help. The budget allocation available for award by committee was calculated by the number of NEET young people in the borough. At this meeting the award was for the period September 2015 – August 2016. There had been a 20% reduction in the Neighbourhood allocation and the recommendation to committee was amended accordingly.
The Chairman of the Youth Task Group praised the work of officers and members in arriving at the recommendations before committee.
It was noted that there would be a new community youth work team in place from 1 April. A revision of the countywide budget had resulted in an overall increase of the budget available for service delivery in Guildford of 25%. This was met with approval by the members.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
1) To approve the Guildford Local Committee’s Youth Task Group recommendation to award a contract for a 36 month period for One-to-One Early Help from 01 September 2015 to Step by Step for the value of £55,000 per annum (subject to future changes in SYP budgets). Within the contract there is the opportunity to extend the service for further two years, subject to budget changes, provider performance and any changes in the needs of young people.
2) To approve the Youth Task Group recommendation to award a grant for a 36 month period for neighbourhood work from 01 September 2015 to Lifetrain for the value of £54,400 per annum (subject to future changes in SYP budgets). Within this grant agreement there is the opportunity to extend the service for further two years, subject to budget changes, provider performance and any changes in the needs of young people.
Reasons The members agreed the recommendations will support the council’s priority to ensure that all young people in Surrey are employable.
|
|
|
LOCAL COMMITTEE (GUILDFORD) CLUSTERS - END OF YEAR REPORT 2014-15 (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
In March 2014 Guildford Local Committee agreed to create a new Cluster initiative to apply a greater local focus to community engagement as part of wider moves to strengthen and extend the remit of the existing Local Committee arrangements between Surrey County Council (SCC) and Guildford Borough Council (GBC). In support of this initiative for 2014/15 a new Cluster Fund of £70,000 was established to support projects identified by local communities.
This report is to notify the ways in which the councillors spent the Cluster Fund during the financial year 2014-15 and to consider if there should be a Cluster Fund for the next financial year 2015-16.
Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) To note the activities undertaken by the Clusters in the first year of operation (ii) To note the projects at Annexe 2 supported by the Cluster Fund in 2014-15. (iii) that the Cluster initiative should continue in operation in the next municipal year and request that Guildford Borough Council nominate members to the relevant Cluster Fund Steering Groups for 2015-16 at the first full Council meeting of the municipal year (iv) that, subject to committee approval of the recommendations set out within the Highways Update report 25 March 2015, Highways funding may only be spent against highways projects. (v) that the guidelines and criteria at Annexe 3 can be applied to the Guildford Borough Council funds during 2015-16. (vi) that any Cluster Fund for 2015-16 be administered by the Surrey County Council Community Partnerships Manager.
Reasons The members agreed the recommendations support both councils duty to be fully accountable regarding the expenditure of public funding. In addition, supporting the members to fully evaluate both the value to local communities and value for money of the Cluster Fund approach.
Minutes: The report was presented by the Community Partnerships Manager.
The Cluster initiative was part of a drive towards closer joint working by both councils in order to come together in public engagement to greater understand local priorities and issues. The Cluster funding was a joint fund with which members could seek to address local issues at an early stage. The Cluster initiative ran for the first time during 2014-15 and this report was providing feedback and seeking a decision on a way forward for 2015-16.
The members had agreed under item 66/14 to allocate a proportion of the Highways budge 2015-16 to the cluster initiative in order to proceed for another year. Match funding by Guildford Borough Council had already been agreed.
Members wished to see greater detail in the feedback report, especially with regard to funded Highways/flood prevention work.
Members concurred that the administration of the Clusters could be improved for the coming year.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) To note the activities undertaken by the Clusters in the first year of operation (ii) To note the projects at Annexe 2 supported by the Cluster Fund in 2014-15. (iii) that the Cluster initiative should continue in operation in the next municipal year and request that Guildford Borough Council nominate members to the relevant Cluster Fund Steering Groups for 2015-16 at the first full Council meeting of the municipal year (iv) that, subject to committee approval of the recommendations set out within the Highways Update report 25 March 2015, Highways funding may only be spent against highways projects. (v) that the guidelines and criteria at Annexe 3 can be applied to the Guildford Borough Council funds during 2015-16. (vi) that any Cluster Fund for 2015-16 be administered by the Surrey County Council Community Partnerships Manager.
Reasons The members agreed the recommendations support both councils duty to be fully accountable regarding the expenditure of public funding. In addition, supporting the members to fully evaluate both the value to local communities and value for money of the Cluster Fund approach.
|
|
|
FORWARD PROGRAMME (FOR INFORMATION)
To receive the forward programme for the committee.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Local Committee (Guildford) noted the report. |