Waverley Borough Council Home Page Waverley Borough Council Home Page

Waverley Borough Council Committee System - Committee Document

Meeting of the Executive held on 13/06/2006

Executive 29


(To be read in conjunction with the Agenda for the Meeting)
*Miss G B W Ferguson (Chairman)*Mr C H Mansell
*Mrs C E Savage (Vice-Chairman)*Mr K T Reed
*Mr S D Edge*Mr J E Robini
Mr B Grainger-Jones*Mr V K Scrivens
Mr P Haveron
* Present
Mr R J Gates and Mrs D M James were also in attendance
Mr and Mrs Slyfield attended the meeting for Agenda Item 19 relating to the Draft Surrey Minerals Plan and Mr Slyfield spoke on the item
Mr R J Gates spoke on Agenda Items 8, 9 and 10 (Minute Nos 37, 27 and 38 refer)

23. MINUTES (Agenda Item 1)

The Minutes of the Meeting of the Executive held on 16th May 2006 and of the Special Executive Meetings held on 17th May and 5th June 2006 were confirmed and signed.


Apologies for absence were received from Mr B Grainger-Jones and Mr P Haveron.


Mr V K Scrivens declared a personal interest in the Draft Surrey Minerals Plan (Agenda Item 19) as a member of Farnham Town Council where the matter had been discussed. Mr S D Edge declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 12 relating to the proposal for a future theatre in Farnham as the Waverley representative on the Farnham Maltings. Both remained in the meeting during consideration of the respective items. Mr Slyfield also disclosed a personal interest in the Draft Surrey Minerals Plan as a Member of Surrey County Council. The Director of Environment and Leisure declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Item 23, Godalming College Site.

26. QUESTIONS (Agenda Item 4)

In accordance with Procedure Rule 10, the following questions were asked by members of the public:-

i. from Mrs A Cooper of Farnham

"As a point of information, following the meeting of the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the 23rd May 2006, in response to a question from members, Officers stated that it would cost in the region of seven million pounds to restore the Redgrave Theatre.

May we have a breakdown of estimated costs to substantiate this sum?"

The Property and Development Manager replied as follows:-

ii. from Mr J Hyman of Farnham:-

"Regarding the 'SPA mitigation' miniplan,

The Leader of the Council answered as follows:-

iii. from Mrs A Thurston of Farnham:-

"Now that the Farnham Health Centre has been acquired by Waverley Borough Council, the matter can no longer be considered a commercially sensitive issue. How much did Waverley pay for the site, and more importantly, where did this money come from?"

The Executive Portfolio Holder for East Street replied:-

"You are correct that this is no longer a commercially sensitive issue once the deal is finalised. The cost of the site, including taxes and other expenses, was 1.075m. With regard to the cash, with the accounts of Waverley Borough Council, there are working balances which provide cash from which the money was drawn. These balances will be refunded from the capital receipt from the East Street development in due course. Further information on this will be included on the capital outturn report which is expected at the end of this month and which will, of course, be available to members of the public."


27.1 At the Council meeting on 26th April 2006, the Council resolved to continue on its process of restructuring the Council. At the present time the principal aim has been to address the role of senior management in setting up the interim arrangement for a Head of Paid Service from the current departmental directors. The Council recognised that further work would be done on progressing a deeper approach to the form and function of the organisation.

27.2 Whilst it is clear that there are a number of significant factors which could impinge upon any potential solution such as

The possibility of local government review
The local elections in May 2007
Potential staffing changes at senior management level
The benefits of partnership working
New formal funding structures (e.g. LAA)
The decision on the housing vote
Continuing restrictions on our resource levels
The ‘efficiency’ agenda including the potential contribution, which could be made by e-gov enabled transactions etc.

27.3 As well as taking account of the drivers, consideration needs to be given as to where the Council is currently positioned on its improvement journey and to putting current commitments in place to improve services and their delivery. In plotting the Council’s position and considering its future direction, there could be a role for external challenge in helping to clarify what is significant, what are critical values and what are essential factors in achieving the Council’s ultimate destination.

27.4 The departmental directors are proposing that it is important to begin this process by pointing in the right direction and, to that end, some care should be taken in establishing some well defined terms of reference for the restructuring process. We would expect these to cover a range of matters including:

What issues is Waverley trying to address?
What are the critical drivers which are influencing future direction?
Who are the stakeholders who need to be consulted on the process?
The definitive programme and the resource, including financial, implications of carrying out the review. 27.5 The proposed Terms of Reference are set out at Annexe 1 to this report.

27.6 The Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee discussed the report in detail at its meeting on 30th June 2006 and agreed that the restructuring needed to commence with leadership from the Executive. In so doing, it was recognised that the Executive must decide if the restructuring was purely a cost-cutting exercise and if so, it must identify areas of work which are no longer necessary, areas where greater efficiencies can be achieved, areas in which costs can be saved through partnership working and areas where the use of modern technology can help to create efficiency savings.

27.7 It was agreed that the review should not look at close detail and discuss the criteria too quickly, without looking first at the broader picture and ensuring that the main objective of any restructure was to create better value for the Council tax payers of Waverley. Members felt that by setting criteria for a preferred option at this stage it could constrain more imaginative options from being put forward. Whilst it was also recognised that an enhanced status quo was an option to be worked upon, it was considered to be important that the benefit to the community of other options, and possible risks associated with those, needed to be given consideration.

27.8 The Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee therefore passed the following observations to the Executive:-

e. that the Committee supported the important role of external challenge.

27.9 The Executive noted the comments of the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee and made a number of amendments to the Terms of Reference which are incorporated in the annexe. The Executive accordingly

Background Papers (HCMS)

[Wards Affected: All Farnham Wards]

28.1 The Executive, at its meeting of 6th January 2004, considered a report on the level and location of public parking provision proposed in the redevelopment taking into account:-

public need;
revenue ambitions;
retail and social vitality of the regenerated area;
local planning policy;
national and local policies on car use restraint;
traffic movement; and
the local environment.

28.2 The report set out the strategy for the accommodation of the parking capacity displaced by the regeneration both permanently and temporarily, during its construction. The amended recommendation agreed was:-

28.3 The recommendation was made in the knowledge of:-

28.4 The Revised Masterplan and the escalation in construction costs of the development have resulted in a reduced expectation of capital receipt. At the same time, the emergence of more prescriptive flood risk and pollution management regulations have escalated the costs of construction of the proposed car parking at Riverside.

28.5 The usage of the public car parks in the East Street catchment area; Dogflud, St James, Riverside 1 and Riverside 2, has declined significantly since 2004 to the extent that on average, over 200 vacant spaces are available on a typical day.

28.6 In light of the above, it is considered prudent to review the parking provision proposed in the 2004 report. The principal issue is the level of peak parking demand that a regenerated and revitalised East Street area can be expected to produce and whether that demand should be provided for in full. It is first necessary to determine if the current reduction in parking demand in the area is permanent or the result of circumstances that will change into the future. The fall in parking demand has followed:-

28.7 In relation to paragraph 28.6:-
28.8 The revised Masterplan includes 294 dwelling units with one dedicated parking space per unit. It can be anticipated that average car ownership could exceed one per unit. This number of dwelling units can also be anticipated to attract a significant number of visitor cars.

28.9 The Council plans to invest 1.8 million by 2008 on a major refurbishment of Farnham Sports Centre which is expected to re-vitalise the Centre and significantly increase the number of users, the majority of whom arrive by car. It is essential that these users are able to park at Riverside rather than the shoppers' car park in the development.

28.10 The Revised Masterplan also provides for 400 public parking spaces in one basement level car park within the developed footprint. The Waverley managed spaces lost to the development are:-

South Street Car Park 224
Dogflud 228
Total 452

28.11 An additional 75 spaces are currently provided by a private operator on the former cinema site. In common with the current decline in usage of the East Street area and Waverley car parks, the private car park has on average, 50 daily users. In order to replace the existing total off-street parking provision, therefore, 527 spaces would be required i.e. an additional 127 spaces off-site. If this is to be provided at Riverside, the permanent provision there would need to be 227 (the existing temporary car park at Riverside provides approximately 100 spaces).

28.12 The first phase of construction will require the closure of Dogflud Car Park with the loss of 228 spaces. If temporary provision is to be made on a ‘like for like’ basis, the provision at Riverside would need to equate to that requiring a total of 328 spaces (100 existing) on that site. Constraints of the site might limit the possible provision to 300.

28.13 The construction phase itself could lead to an additional parking demand by the expected hundreds of construction workers unless the developer makes its own provision on-site or off-site.

28.14 Under the Agreement, the developer is required to pay the Council a specified fee to compensate for loss of parking revenue during the construction phase. However, if no additional permanent off-site parking provision is made, the potential on-going year-on-year loss of parking income from the 52 lost spaces will equate, at current premium car parking rates, to 65,000.

28.15 If, however, those spaces are relocated to Riverside, the remoteness of that site from the centre of the retail and social activity will require that the tariffs are more modest. Estimated income from that number of spaces at Riverside would be approximately 35,000, reducing the potential income loss to 30,000.

28.16 Possible risks have been identified as:-

28.17 At it meeting on 6th December 2005, the Executive considered and endorsed the Farnham Urban Safety Management Study. This followed an earlier consideration by the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The study takes a wide view of transport and public domain issues in the town. Its proposals and options covered:

Traffic management

1. Set up a Farnham Development Group, to include Farnham Town Council, Surrey County Council and Waverley Borough.

II. Introduce a 20 mph speed limit in the centre of the town.

III. Manage the access of HGVs.

IV. Reduce The Borough to one lane.

V. Reduce the land width of Castle Street.

VI. Make South Street two way to the junction with The Borough.

VII. Make sure that physical measures are not intrusive in the street scene.

VIII. Where narrowing of the carriageway takes place, reallocate the space to pedestrians.

IX. Look at the best location for bus stops.

X. Improve the crossings at the bottom of Castle Street; South Street/Union Road; Union Road/Longbridge/Downing Street; West Street/Downing Street/The Borough. This could be done by removing some of the barriers and improving the space around the crossing for pedestrians.

XI. Improve cycling facilities in line with the Cycling Strategy.

XII. Carry out monitoring of the initiatives.


I. Set up a sub working group for community transport.

II. Consider “Park and Stride” using existing car parks at the Hart, Wagon Yard, Dogflud Way (or its replacement) and a new car park at the junction of Castle Street and Park Lane.

III. Develop a Parking Management Strategy.

Streetscape enhancement

I. Define an Historic Core Zone.

II. Consider ‘gateway’ treatments on all main roads into the town.

III. Develop policies for all aspects of the enhancement scheme, such as paving, signage and street furniture.

IV. The number of street signs should be reduced.

V. Consider a sympathetic lighting scheme.

28.18 There is clearly an overlap between this study and the East Street scheme. In the specific context of this report, the Study proposes the concept of a “Park and Stride” strategy. In practice this would mean the establishment of peripheral car parks on the main routes in to the town centre, that would attempt to intercept traffic and provide parking facilities in locations that do not encourage traffic movements around the town centre gyratory system.

28.19 The establishment of an appropriately sized car park at the Riverside location, with complementary pricing regime could be seen as a step in delivering the above strategy. This needs to be borne in mind when looking at parking provision in this area.

28.20 It is concluded that the under-demand for parking space in the East Street area of influence is not indicative of the situation that will obtain post-development. If the Council expects a regenerated and revitalised East Street area to generate additional parking demand and the Council wishes to provide for that demand, it will be necessary to supply the maximum permanent parking provision at Riverside. If the Council also wishes to provide ‘like for like’ parking provision to replace that lost during the construction phase, it will also need to make the maximum alternative parking provision at Riverside. The provision of the maximum permanent parking capacity at the outset would be the most economical and least disruptive option.

28.21 The Executive confirmed that the present parking in the development would be designed to the community safety secured by design standards.

28.22 The Executive accordingly


13. 300 car parking spaces be constructed at Riverside for temporary and permanent parking needs generated by the East Street Regeneration Scheme; and

14. officers be required to report back to members for final authorisation after the scheme has been worked up and after planning processes, to assess the affordability against the overall East Street Regeneration Scheme.

Background Papers (DoEL)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

[Wards Affected: All]
29.1 In October 2005, the European Court of Justice ruled that Appropriate Assessments (AA) had to be carried out on Plans. This was to ensure that such Plans would not have an adverse impact on Special Protection Areas and Special Areas of Conservation. In Britain, this means AAs have to be made on Local Development Frameworks and on Regional Plans (Regional Spatial Strategies). Most Local Authorities did not become fully aware of the implications of this ruling until the end of 2005. At that point, Waverley Borough Council was about to submit the Core Strategy to the Secretary of State, having gone through the whole process of producing it.

29.2 Therefore, it has been necessary to delay submission while the Appropriate Assessment has been prepared. This process has itself been delayed because English Nature has only just produced the final draft of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Delivery Plan, which sets out part of the context for the AA, and gives mitigation criteria that apply to the Farnham area.

29.3 Plan 1 of Annexe 2 shows the location of the Special Protection Areas and the Special Area of Conservation in West Surrey, called Natura 2000 sites. It is evident that there are extensive areas in the Borough. These are:

Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area
Wealden Heaths 1 and 2 Special Protection Areas
The Thursley, Ash Pirbright and Chobham Special Area of Conservation

29.4 The Special Protection Areas have been designated to protect the nightjar, Dartford warbler and woodlark, and the Special Area of Conservation protects the heathland habitat. At present English Nature has only produced a Delivery Plan for the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area. It puts restraints on housing development within 5km of the boundary of the site. This covers the whole of Farnham. No similar constraints apply to the Wealden Heaths Special Protection Area or the Special Area of Conservation as yet.

29.5 The Appropriate Assessment document is attached at Annexe 2. It sets out the reasons for the Assessment and the available guidance and then explains that there are four stages in the process of producing the AA.

Stage 1 screening for the likely impacts;

Stage 2 if there is a significant effect, carry out an Appropriate Assessment;

Stage 3 if there is a significant effect, consider alternatives in the Plan;

Stage 4 if there is a significant effect, consider whether there is an overriding public interest.

29.6 Minute No. 30 sets out the Miniplan. This is an interim approach to providing mitigation land in the Farnham 5km zone of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area. Table 1 on Page 2 of the Miniplan document, shows the amount of mitigation land that is required by English Nature for development. The intention is that by providing additional open space for dog walking and walking new residents will be attracted to the mitigation sites and not to the protected areas. It shows that despite the problem of constraint on development in Farnham, it will, in fact, be possible to provide enough mitigation up to 2018 through the enhancement of Farnham Park.

29.7 The Appropriate Assessment shows that the Core Strategy may have a significant effect on the Special Protection Areas and the Special Area of Conservation and in particular will have a significant effect on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area, but it will be possible to provide mitigation for the Farnham area.

29.8 The Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered this report at its meeting on 23rd May 2006. The Committee supported the need for an Appropriate Assessment to move beyond the current impasse.

29.9 The Executive therefore


Background Papers (DoPD)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

30. THAMES BASIN MINIPLAN (Agenda Item 21; Appendix P)
[Wards Affected: All]

30.1 The Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area is a wildlife site of European importance for woodlark, Dartford Warbler and nightjar. English Nature has produced a Delivery Plan for the site. This requires that development can only be permitted when mitigation open space is provided to counteract the additional population using the Special Protection Area for walking and dog walking.

30.2 The part of the Special Protection Area in Waverley is an area of 80 ha to the north of Farnham. English Nature has defined three zones: from the Special Protection Area boundary to 400m; 400m to 2km; and 2km to 5km. In these zones English Nature has identified different levels of mitigation open space that will be required. (See the Table on Page 2 of the Miniplan, attached at Annexe 3).

30.3 The Miniplan sets out how developers could provide mitigation space in the short term. Currently it is anticipated that the District Councils directly and indirectly affected by the Special Protection Area (15 in all) will produce Supplementary Planning Documents that will be based on the English Nature Delivery Plan and set out how the mitigation requirements will be met. This may take several years to complete. Until that time, it is necessary to have a Plan to show how the open space could be provided, otherwise all the housing applications in the three zones will have to be refused. This would seriously affect the Borough’s ability to meet its housing requirements.

30.4 There are three ways developers could meet the mitigation requirements:

provide new land themselves;

buy into provision of new land assembled by the local authority;

buy into the upgrading of an existing site owned by the local authority.

30.5 The first approach is an unknown. The second approach could only be a long term option, but the third way: buying into the upgrading of an existing site owned by the Borough, is a feasible option, because of the scope offered by Farnham Park.

30.6 The Miniplan at Annexe 4 sets out how the Park could provide mitigation land for a period of years. Developers would make a contribution to the enhancement of the Park in lieu of providing mitigation land themselves.

30.7 The Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered this report at its meeting on 23rd May and wished to make the following observations to the Executive:-

30.8 In conclusion, the Miniplan shows that the Park could provide mitigation for new housing development in Farnham to 2018. The Executive


16. the Miniplan be approved and submitted to the Secretary of State with the Appropriate Assessment and the Core Strategy, subject to Officers exploring the possibility of adding Monkton Lane, Farnham as a potential mitigation space.

Background Papers (DoPD)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

[Ward Affected: Godalming Holloway]

[Note pursuant to Section 100B(5) of the Local Government Act 1972: this item contains exempt information by virtue of which the public is likely to be excluded. The information is as specified in paragraph 3 of the revised Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, namely:-

Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).]

31.1 Waverley Borough Council owns 1,113 homes in Godalming (including Farncombe) with Registered Social Landlords managing an additional 284 homes.

31.2 Applications held on the Council’s Housing Needs Register demonstrate a significant need for affordable housing in the Godalming area. According to the Council’s Housing Need Register (April 2006), 2,286 households are waiting for accommodation, 1,041 of whom have indicated Godalming as one of their preferred areas for rehousing.

31.3 Fifty-three households were re-housed in Council accommodation in Godalming and Farncombe during 2005-06. This report recommends using commuted sums held by the Council to support the development of 20 affordable homes at Godalming College. The scheme represents an important opportunity to help meet the housing needs of local people.

31.4 Mount Green Housing Association has been working with the developer of the Godalming College site to secure an affordable housing scheme. In order to do so, the Association requires a capital contribution of 700,000 to provide 12 shared-ownership and 8 homes for rent. This can be found from resources available to the Council namely: a commuted sum of 195,000 and the balance of 505,000 – from the Council’s affordable homes capital programme.

31.5 Government Guidance contained in Circular 6/98, recommends that sites should incorporate a mix of affordable housing types wherever possible, including family housing, as well as homes for smaller households. This is echoed in Planning Policy Guidance Note 3, which advocates the creation of mixed and balanced communities. It has been the practice of the Council to strongly favour affordable housing that is provided on the site of new developments which are over the threshold, whereby 25%-30% of the development has to be affordable.

31.6 However, in exceptional circumstances, Policy H5 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 makes provision to allow a commuted sum to be offered to support development of affordable housing on an alternative site(s). In such cases, the applicant will be required to demonstrate why it has not been possible or desirable to provide the affordable housing on site. The applicant also needs to show that other options, such as cross-subsidy between rented and shared ownership units and providing the affordable housing on another site have been considered and why they were discounted.

31.7 Some time ago, a commuted sum of 195,000 was paid to the Council in lieu of affordable housing in respect of a site called Mockbeggar, Mark Way, Godalming. This had been agreed by a Planning Inspector at Appeal. The Council needs to expend this sum of money to provide affordable housing through either purchase of existing properties or new build within the lifetime of the planning permission (i.e. 5 years).

31.8 A site at Godalming College is being developed by Michael Shanley Homes Ltd, with affordable units to be provided by Mount Green Housing Association. (Map attached as Annexe 4). This scheme was granted outline planning permission by the Planning Inspectorate at Appeal. 40% of the homes on this site are to be in the form of affordable homes. An application for detailed planning permission was agreed in April 2006. It is anticipated that acquisition would be made in the spring of 2006, and completion is estimated for July 2007.

31.9 Overall, the development will provide forty-nine units of housing, twenty of which will be affordable. These will be in the form of eight homes for rent:
6 x 2 bed houses
2 x 3 bed houses; and 6 x 1 bed flats
6 x 2 bed flats

31.10 This tenure mix and breakdown of bed sizes incorporates recommendations from the Housing Department, according to the needs of households on the housing register. The shared ownership flats will be marketed at 165,000 for one-bed flats and 224,000 for two bed flats. Purchasers can buy a 50% share and will pay 2.95% rent on the remaining equity. Rent charged on the two and three bedroom properties will be within the Housing Corporation’s Target Rent Levels.

31.11 The scheme is compliant with the Housing Corporation’s Scheme Development Standards and follows “designing out crime” principles and will have a “very good” eco-homes rating. The Godalming College site is a mixed tenure Section 106 scheme, which contributes towards creating mixed communities.

31.12 Mount Green Housing Association will be using private finance and shared ownership receipts to help fund the development but requires 700,000 of subsidy to find the balance of the scheme (see (Exempt) Annexe 5). A bid to the Housing Corporation was made for the remaining monies, but this was not successful. Mount Green has approached the Council for a grant of 700,000 in order to make this scheme financially viable. This works out at a subsidy of 25,000 per shared ownership unit and 50,000 per rented unit, which is comparable to sums being awarded by the Housing Corporation.

31.13 The Council is holding 195,000 of useable commuted sums, in lieu of providing affordable housing in respect of a site in Godalming. Allocating this money to invest in the affordable housing at Godalming College site would enable the monies to stay within the local area and ensure the money is drawn down within the required time period.

31.14 The balance of 505,000 can be met from capital provision held by the Council for supporting new affordable housing. Historically, Waverley Borough Council had made available Local Authority Social Housing Grant and was reimbursed by the Housing Corporation for these grant payments to RSLs. The Local Government Act 2003 abolished this mechanism of reimbursement although under the Local Government Act 1988 Section 25 Local Authorities can continue to give Social Housing Grant to Registered Social Landlords to achieve affordable housing provision.

31.15 The Community Overview and Scrutiny Committee supported the scheme.

31.16 The Executive accordingly


Background Papers (DoH)

Correspondence from Mount Green Housing Association dated 28.03.06.

[Wards Affected: All]

32.1 In order to be rated as an ‘excellent’ Local Authority during Comprehensive Performance Assessment, Waverley Borough Council needs to have developed a Housing Strategy which has been assessed as achieving ‘Fit for Purpose’ status by the Government Office for the South East (GOSE).

32.2 Officers have been working on a new draft of the Housing Strategy since December 2004. The strategy is currently subject to a final assessment by GOSE as to whether the Fit for Purpose standard has been achieved. Fit for Purpose status has been developed by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. A copy of the draft Housing Strategy is attached at Annexe 6. It should be noted that this is still in draft form and some final revisions/ amendments are yet to be made, particularly in relation to end of year statistics for 2006/07.

32.3 Various mapping exercises have been carried out in order to assess need, demand and supply for housing in Waverley to inform the Housing Strategy. This has included a 2005 update to the Housing Needs Survey, which estimated an annual shortfall of 622 affordable homes each year. Other data sources used include the Council’s Housing Needs Register, lettings and vacancy information and information collected from local housing associations who hold stock in the borough.

32.4 Consultation has been carried out through a range of forums. A copy of the draft Housing Strategy and feedback form has been available on the Council’s website, www.waverley.gov.uk with alternative formats available on request. The Council held a one day Housing Strategy Conference on 16th September 2005 to which stakeholders and partners were invited. The conference was attended by 40 delegates from agencies including local Banks, Parish Council members, representatives from Citizens Advice Bureaux, Housing Associations, Waverley Borough Councillors, Tenants’ Panel members, Town Councillors, Adults and Community Care Team and developers..

32.5 As a result of the conference:
32.6 As Waverley is an area of high house prices, with first time buyer accommodation and affordable housing in short supply, facilitating the provision of affordable housing is the strategy’s number one priority. Waverley is also committed to ensuring all residents have a good quality home to live in, through working to meet the Government’s Decent Homes targets, as well as improving energy efficiency.

32.7 The aims of the Strategy are wider reaching than simply bricks and mortar, with commitments to enhance the local environment, improve community safety and protect the disadvantaged and vulnerable through better use of housing. The action plan encompasses the work of officers in Housing, Planning, Finance and Environment and Leisure.

32.8 The Strategy sets out a plan for action for the duration of the strategy, which shows how each action will contribute towards corporate, housing and service priorities. Each item demonstrates resource implications, how progress against the action will be monitored, shows progress made, nominates a lead officer and designates a timescale. The action plan feeds directly into individual service plans and the Corporate Plan.

32.9 At its meeting on 22nd May, the Community Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered and agreed the draft of the Waverley Borough Council Housing Strategy, subject to minor typographical changes being made.

32.10 The Executive also supported the Strategy and


18. the Housing Strategy 2005-2010 be approved and adopted.

Background Papers (DoH)

Background Papers

The background papers relating to the following items in Parts II and III are as specified in the agenda for the meeting of the Executive.

Part II – Matters Reported in Detail for the Information of the Council

33. DRAFT SURREY MINERALS PLAN (Agenda Item 19; Appendix N)

[With the agreement of the Executive, the Leader of the Council reordered the agenda and took this item as the first item of business due to the large number of members of the public present at the meeting].

33.1 The Executive received a report setting out the proposals in the Draft Surrey Minerals Plan 2006 with particular reference to how they affect Waverley. A number of residents had asked informal questions before the meeting expressing their strong opposition to the proposal.

33.2 In addition to the detailed objections and views set out below, a number of additional comments were made by the Executive in their discussion which amplified their opposition to the proposal, and it was agreed should also be passed to the County Council to be taken into account:

a) The Council objects strongly to the Eashing Farm site on the grounds that there would be a serious impact from traffic on local Waverley roads – traffic would need to be physically excluded from local Waverley roads, and the Executive had doubts that this could be achieved. b) That Waverley should work closely with Guildford Borough Council and keep Shackleford Parish Council informed c) The need for Bargate stone with its more substantial extraction methods is of concern and is questioned.
33.3 The Executive

RESOLVED that the County Council be advised of the following objections and views of the Borough Council:

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

Part III – Brief Summaries of Other Matters Dealt With

RESOLVED that the four-month rolling programme of key decisions for Waverley Borough Council be adopted.

35. TREASURY MANAGEMENT (Agenda Item 6; Appendix B)

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

36. STATEMENT ON INTERNAL CONTROL (Agenda Item 7; Appendix C)

3. the corporate group of senior officers, referred to in the report, be requested to review the Council's internal control arrangements as appropriate and oversee the implementation of the agreed action plan.


RESOLVED that the Local Authority Business Growth Incentive Grant for 2005/2006 be kept in the Revenue Reserve Fund, to be considered further as part of the 2007-2008 budget process.


3. the proposed protocol for the suggested partnership grouping of Waverley, Woking and Guildford be referred to the Local Government Reform SIG.


RESOLVED that a Special Interest Group of six members be established to progress the Charter for Member Development and Training and the Managing Director be authorised to agree appointments to this from the groups in the ratio - 3 Liberal Democrats, 2 Conservatives and 1 Independent Members.


RESOLVED that the Executive supported the conclusions of the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee and asked the officers to report to a future meeting on what elements of the Farnham Theatre Association consultant report could be used to develop the performing arts in Farnham, and particularly at the Maltings, within the Council's existing arts development policy.

41. BRIGHTWELLS BOWLS CLUB, FARNHAM – OPTIONS (Agenda item 14; Appendix I)

RESOLVED that, having considered the options set out in the report, options 4 and 5 be identified as the preferences the Executive wished for officers to investigate further and report back on in July, together with the opportunities to use the proposed bowls pavilion building for community uses, such as a nursery, and alternative uses for the bowls green.


RESOLVED that the planned replacement programme be approved, as set out in Annexe 1 to the report and an additional report be presented to a future meeting on implementation and timescales of the programme.

43. CORPORATE PLAN (Agenda Item 16; Appendix K)

RESOLVED that the plan be referred to the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee, subject to detailed amendments, before being considered again at the July meeting of the Executive.


In accordance with Procedure Rule 9, at 9.36 p.m. the Executive agreed to continue the meeting until the business on the agenda had been transacted.


RESOLVED that the report be noted and the 'Use of Resource Analysis' be added to the Rolling Programme for September 2006.


[The observations of the Best Value and Local Performance Indicators Sub-Committee which had met earlier on 13th June were tabled at the meeting, along with a revised Annexe 1.]


1. the data pertaining to 2005/06 performance outturn, and the comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees be noted;

2. the officer recommendations and observations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees in respect of the setting of Best Value Performance Plan targets be updated to reflect the detailed observations made by Members and be submitted to the meeting on 27th June; and

3. if Portfolio Holders have further detailed observations, they should contact the Officers as soon as possible so that any adjustments can be incorporated.

47. RYLE ROAD GARAGES (Agenda Item 22; Appendix Q)


3. the capital receipt from the sale of the land be applied towards achieving the Decent Homes Standard in the Council’s remaining housing stock.


Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).]

RESOLVED that the proposed lessee be offered a lease of the site at Kings Road Industrial Estate, Haslemere, on the terms and conditions set out in the (Exempt) Annexe to the report, other terms and conditions to be negotiated by the Property and Development Manager.


RESOLVED that Mr J E Robini be appointed as an observer to the new Waverley Citizens' Advice Bureau Management Committee for 2006/2007.
The meeting commenced at 7.06 p.m. and concluded at 10.24 p.m.