Agenda and minutes
PDF 21 KB| No. | Item | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST BELGRAVE BAHENO PEEPUL CENTRE - REQUEST FOR FUNDING
Minutes: BEST VALUE REVIEW OF PAYROLL
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LEADER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS BUDGET 2003/04 - COMBINED FIRE AUTHORITY
Minutes: Members were asked to declare any interests they had in the business to be discussed and/or indicate that Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applied to them.
The meeting was asked to note the general interests of Members as governors as follows:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING DRAFT SCHOOLS BUDGET 2003/04
Minutes: CLOSE OF MEETING
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MATTERS REFERRED FROM SCRUTINY COMMITTEES MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
Minutes: AGENDA
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO NOTE
Under the law, the Cabinet is entitled to consider certain items in private. Members of the public will be asked to leave the meeting when such items are discussed.
The Cabinet is recommended to consider the following reports in private on the grounds that they contain ‘exempt’ information as defined by the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, and consequently that the Cabinet makes the following resolution:-
“that the press and public be excluded during consideration of the following reports in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended, because they involve the likely disclosure of 'exempt' information, as defined in the Paragraphs detailed below of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.”
Paragraph 9 <p clas |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CITY CENTRE IMPROVEMENTS NOTICES OF MOTION †}
‡~ ˆ
‰€ Š
‹‚
Œƒ „
Ž… †
‡ ‘ˆ
’‰
“Š
”‹
•Œ –
—Ž ˜
™ š‘
›’
œ“ ”
ž•
Ÿ–
—
¡˜
¢™
£š
¤›
¥œ ¦
§ž
¨Ÿ
©
ª¡
«¢
£
¤
®¥
¯¦
°§
±¨
²©
³ª
´«
µ¬
Additional documents: Minutes: DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
WATERSIDE SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT Councillor Scuplak submits a report recommending a Supplementary Planning Document to the Local Plan, covering the proposed ‘Waterside’ district in the City.
A full copy of Appendix A to the report is attached for Members of the Cabinet only. Further copies are available from Committee Services on 0116 252 6028.
A full copy of the Supplementary Planning Document is available for Members in each of the Group Rooms. Copies of the document are also available on the website at www.leicester.gov.uk/waterside or by contacting Richard Riley, Urban Design on 252 7214. Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Scuplak submitted a report recommending a Supplementary Planning Document to the Local Plan, covering the proposed ‘Waterside’ district in the City.
RESOLVED: that the Waterside Supplementary Planning Document be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document to the City of Leicester Local Plan, subject to the amendments set out in Section 7 in the Supporting Information and subject to further work on the maximum height of buildings, any amendments delegated to the Corporate Director of Regeneration and Culture, in consultation with the Cabinet Lead Member for City Centre regeneration. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LIVING LANDMARKS LOTTERY BID - MARKET AND MARKET PLACE Councillor Mugglestone submits a report that seeks Cabinet support to submit a bid to the Living Landmarks Lottery Fund for the regeneration of Leicester Market and the Market Place. The Cabinet is recommended to approve the submission of a Living Landmarks Lottery bid and to authorise the Corporate Director, Regeneration and Culture to approve the final submission in consultation with the appropriate Cabinet Member. Minutes: Councillor Mugglestone submitted a report that sought Cabinet support for the submission of a bid to the Living Landmarks Lottery Fund for the regeneration of Leicester Market and the Market Place.
RESOLVED: that authority be delegated to the Corporate Director of Regeneration and Culture, in consultation with the Cabinet Lead and the Chief Finance officer, to submit a lottery bid providing there is satisfactory expectation (at this stage) that a successful scheme would be financially viable. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
THE INSTITUTE OF COMMUNITY COHESION AND LEICESTER CITY COUNCIL ='margin-left:.25in;text-indent:.25in'>Access Advisory Panel - Disability Access in City
Centre
Disability Access provision in new developments and the processes required to make them DDA compliant Planning Enforcement – <span style='mso-t |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NEIGHBOURHOOD ELEMENT OF THE SAFER STRONGER COMMUNITIES FUND ating to an individual, and taking all the circumstances into
account, it is considered that the public interest in maintaining
the information as exempt outweighs the public interest in
disclosing the information.”
1. APPEAL AGAINST DISMISSAL<span lang=EN-GB style='q-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;mso-fareast-lan Minutes: PRIVATE SESSION
AGENDA
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO NOTE
Under the law, the Committee is entitled to consider certain items in private. Members of the public will be asked to leave the meeting when such item |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PLAY AREAS - HOUSING SITES The meeting closed at 8.50pm. Minutes: The Service Director (Environmental Services) submitted a report that required Members to determine an application for a variation of an existing premises licence for Mandarin Lounge, Cherub Building, 128 Charles Street, Leicester LE1 1LB.
The meeting heard that an agreement had been reached between the applicant and the Noise Team, who had made representation, which meant that Members were requested to agree that a Hearing would not be necessary.
RESOLVED: that it be agreed that a Hearing would not be necessary for Mandarin Lounge, Cherub Building, 128 Charles Street, Leicester, subject to the removal of following condition from the operating schedule, as detailed in the report in the agenda:
1) the licence holder will ensure that there is a minimum of 3 authorised door staff present at any one time.
and the addition of the following conditions to the operating schedule:
1) <span |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
SUPPORTING PEOPLE PROGRAMME - MAJOR PROJECTS Councillor Gill submits a report that outlines the main features of two major projects which are currently being undertaken in the Supporting People Programme. The Programme is organised within the policy and funding framework set for it by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Cabinet is recommended to note the requirement to undertake the review and consider the financial implications of any changes to the Council’s services as part of the budget preparation process for 2006 – 08. Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Gill submitted a report outlining the main features of 2 major projects which were currently being undertaken in the Supporting People Programme.
RESOLVED: that the requirement to undertake the review as detailed in the report be noted and the financial implications of any changes to the Council’s services be considered as part of the budget preparation process for 2006 - 08. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
LONG SERVICE AWARDS AND RETIREMENT GIFTS $$INFORMATION SHARING – ‘CAROUSEL’ SESSION The
following information ... 2 001h °‚.
°ÆA!° "° # $Z%°°Å°Z
Ä/01h °‚.
°ÆA!° "° # $ %°°Å°Å
Ä2 001h °‚.
°ÆA!° "° # $ %°°Å°Å
Ä/ 01h °‚.
°ÆA!° "° # $ %°
Minutes: The following questions were submitted on question forms during the meeting. Discussions that took place about these questions are outlined below. It was explained that any questions that could not be answered in full at the meeting would be submitted to the relevant departments for response at the next meeting of the Committee.
35) When can we expect Customer Service Centres in our Wards. What makes the Braunstone, Saffron and New Parks areas so special that they have Customer Service Centres?
36) I would like to know when the footpath is going to become safe, the steps removed, and a slope installed at Bessingham Close, behind Tesco’s at Hamilton?
Response given at the meeting Councillor Scuplak stated that the steps/slope referred to was actually on Tesco’s land. The City Council had put pressure on Tesco’s to do something but had been unsuccessful. The City Council had regularly cleared rubbish from the area in the past and would continue to do so for the time being. Bessingham Close was a street that had not yet been adopted by the City Council and was under the ownership of the Housing Association, and was therefore still private land. The police were aware of the issues regarding youths and were keeping the situation under observation.
37)What date will Humberstone and Netherhall libraries be closing?
Can we have the Zodiac Boys Club open more nights a week. The Club only opens on Monday night at the present time?
38) In the light of provision of sports facilities, the state of the tennis courts in Monks Rest leaves something to ponder. There are no nets or net supports for the three remaining courts. Perhaps we have a reason for this and rectification possibly, because according to the Information Board, tennis is provided for on s |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS REPORT OF THE TOWN CLERK
Additional documents:
Minutes: COMMITTEES 1( 2)
3* 4+
5, 6-
7. 8/
90 :1
;2 <3
=4 >5
?6 @7
A8 B9
C: D;
E< F=
G> H?
I@ JA
KB LC
MD NE
OF PG
QH RI
SJ TK
UL VM
WN XO
YP ZQ
[R \S
]T ^U
_V `W
aX bY
cZ d[
e\ f]
g^ h_
i` ja
kb lc
md ne
of pg
qh ri
sj tk
ul vm
wn xo
yp zq
{r |s
}t ~u
v €w
x ‚y
ƒz „{
…| †}
‡~ ˆ
‰€ Š
‹‚
Œƒ „
Ž… †
‡ ‘ˆ
’‰
“Š
”‹
•Œ –
—Ž ˜
™ š‘
›’
œ“ ”
ž•
Ÿ–
—
¡˜
¢™
£š
¤›
¥œ ¦
§ž
¨Ÿ
©
ª¡
«¢
£
¤
®¥
¯¦
°§
±¨
²©
³ª
´«
µ¬
¶
·®
¸¯
¹°
º±
»²
¼³
½´
¾µ
¿¶
À·
Á¸
¹
ú
Ä»
ż Æ
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS OF LEICESTER - APPLICATION FOR FOUNDATION STATUS The Service Director (Environmental Services) submits a report.<span l Minutes: PRIVATE SESSION
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HIGHFIELDS CENTRE - COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE UPDATE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
Minutes: :p>
The Sub-Committee received legal advice from the solicitor to the Sub-Committee in the presence of Mr Limalia.
The Solicitor to the Sub-Committee, Team Manager (Licensing) and appellant then withdrew from the meeting.
The Sub-Committee, having regard to the guidelines adopted on 1 April 2002 and Section 60 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, gave the application full and detailed consideration.
The Solicitor to the Sub Committee, Team Manager (Licensing) and appellant then returned to the meeting.
RESOLVED: that Mr Limalia’s Hackney Carriage and |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PRIVATE SESSION ÐÏࡱá>þÿ
02þÿÿÿ/ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿì¥Áq
¿j1bjbjt+t+
"LAA<--ÿÿÿÿÿÿ]¦¦¦¦¦¦¦&&&&8^r<&2Êà"ÆÈÈÈÈÈÈ$3ô'<ì¦ìF¦¦ÊFFF¦¦Æº6ð6¦¦¦¦ÆFðF6
n’¦¦º
® àû—"KÀ&&4š
EMBED Word.Picture.6 WARDS AFFECTED: ALL WARDS
(CORPORATE ISSUE) FINANCE , RESOURCES, AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES
SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 21st November 2000 1. Title of Report Best Value
Review Process – Year 1 : PROCUREMENT 2. Name of Lead
Director Mr Mike Forrester , Director of Housing 3. Purpose of
Report To seek Member consideration and approval of the
implementation of the City Council’s Best Value Review
Process to date in respect of the Procurement Best Value review .
The report and supporting documentation will also enable awareness
of the emerging issues and anticipated improvement options, prior
to decisions of Cabinet . 4. Summary Reports to Scrutiny in August
of this year noted the role of Committees in ensuring the rigour of
the Best Value Review Process. This report presents information on
the progress to date and process issues that have arisen, how they
have been managed , and any implications there may be in respect of
the review outcomes. The initial findings of the Review are that
there are several different practices both within and between
Departments for the purchase of goods, works, and services . A
procurement survey has been carried out as part of the Review.
Although ESPO ( Eastern Shires Purchasing Organisation ) is the
Council’s agreed purchasing body for a catalogue of goods it
is not used consistently. The concentration of expertise for the
purchase of types of goods, and to a lesser extent works and
services , is both duplicated and diffuse. 5. Issues for
Consideration 5.1 Process: For the first time all Departments have
been brought together to consider the procurement process,
including the draft Procurement Strategy. Whilst this should be
viewed as a major positive, in that the review has been
cross-cutting and encompassed a wide range of (sometimes
conflicting) views, there are a number of issues that may need to
be considered further, in order to refine and improve the Best
Value Review process in the future: 5.1.1 Timescales : The Review
has been carried out within a very short timescale, resulting in a
feeling by many core group members that a large number of issues
needed to be considered in much more depth, before improvement
options can be finally agreed and acted upon. In addition, the
short timescale has meant that it has not been possible to fully
consult with stakeholders, or to obtain their representative views
in relation to the procurement process. However, the Review has led
to an improved dialogue between key stakeholders and there would
appear to be a commitment to sharing best practice in the future.
5.1.2 Performance Information: The Review has clearly highlighted
the paucity of performance information (e.g. unit costs) and the
need to provide clear guidance to staff as to the balance between
price and quality. In essence, because of this lack of information,
it may not always be clear to staff or Departments when or how they
should decide when there is a case for externalising the
procurement of goods, works or services, or when these should be
kept in-house. There is an urgent need to provide appropriate
guidance and to develop key performance information, including unit
costs. 5.1.3 Capacity to undertake the Review: It has become
apparent that the capacity of the City Council to undertake such a
review has been stretched to the limit. Indeed, many core group
members have commented that they have not had the time to fully
participate in the process and that they have been overwhelmed by
the need to complete the Best Value forms and associated
documentation. 5.1.4 Budget: Because of the complexity of this
Review, it is imperative that a budget is identified to secure the
provision of appropriate legal advice and to secure the services of
an independent consultant. In addition, the Review has been
undertaken without appropriate levels of administrative and
clerical support. 6. Improvement Options Whilst it has not been
possible, in the time available, to develop a clear list of
improvement options, the following major issues have emerged on
which improvement planning should be based in the future: 6.1
Consultation : The need for effective consultation was identified
as a key issue throughout the Review. Whilst a number of outside
agencies were of the opinion that the Council was extremely good at
consultation, there were concerns that there appeared to be no
outcome to the process or, if there was, it was not appropriately
shared with stakeholders. Such a view would appear to concur with
the general view of the Distric
Minutes: AGENDA
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO NOTE <p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;tab-stops:36.0pt 72.0pt right 450.0pt; mso-layout-grid-align:none;punctuation-wrap:simple;tex |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
FORMER JOHN ELLIS COLLEGE - PROPOSED LEICESTER SCIENCE PARK (PHASE 1) Councillor Coley submits a report. Minutes: Councillor Coley submitted a report on the progress with the disposal of the former John Ellis College and the proposed Leicester Science Park. Members confirmed their commitment to this scheme and noted the capital programme implications of failure to secure adequate grant.
RESOLVED: (1)that the progress of the proposed Leicester Science Park, be noted.
(2)that the proposed delivery mechanism for the disposal of the former John Ellis site including the commencement of the second stage developer selection process, be approved.
(3)that the Director of Resources, Access and Diversity be authorised, in consultation with the Cabinet Lead Member for Resources, Access and Diversity, to agree expenditure in excess of the figure in paragraph 4.2 of the report, subject to such expenditure being covered by EMDA grant funding.
(4)That the Head of Legal Services be authorised to enter into all necessary contracts and agreements in respect of the remediation and infrastructure works.
(5)that the Director of Resources, Access and Diversity be authorised, in consultation with the Cabinet Lead for the Resources, Access & Diversity Department, to agree the detailed terms for the disposal of the property, subject to a further report once a preferred developer has been identified; and
(6)that officers prepare contingency arrangements, in the event of any shortfall in grant funding. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
INTERMEDIATE CARE CAPITAL BID PROJECT APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF A HACKNEY CARRIAGE AND PRIVATE HIRE
VEHICLE DRIVERS LICENCE
Minutes: The Service Director (Environmental Services) submits a report. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CLOSE OF MEETING PETITIONS
Minutes: MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
|