Author: John Brace

New media journalist from Birkenhead, England who writes about Wirral Council. Published and promoted by John Brace, 134 Boundary Road, Bidston, CH43 7PH. Printed by UK Webhosting Ltd t/a Tsohost, 113-114 Buckingham Avenue, Slough, Berkshire, England, SL1 4PF.

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 15/11/11 Part 3 Applicant/agent Planning Application APP/10/01105

*** This starts part way through*** *** refers to points on the tape where what is said is inaudible It relates to Planning Application APP/10/01105. Applicant or agent: I do have some paperwork that I’ve already ***. Can I pass it around Chair? Chair Cllr David Elderton: Pass it around if you want please. Applicant … Continue reading “Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 15/11/11 Part 3 Applicant/agent Planning Application APP/10/01105”

*** This starts part way through***

*** refers to points on the tape where what is said is inaudible

It relates to Planning Application APP/10/01105.

Applicant or agent: I do have some paperwork that I’ve already ***. Can I pass it around Chair?

Chair Cllr David Elderton: Pass it around if you want please.

Applicant or agent: Thank you. It’s just two sides of paper Chairman. In main it’s photographs, they’re just a few brief little notes.

The first page I’d like to draw the Planning Committee to is the matter of an aerial photograph of the site. The site border is in white here. The reason why I’ve included this photograph is that it shows that the site was a depot owned by the Trust since its conception in 1999.

It was based at the time at Continental Landscapes until January 2006. The original site is pictured here to 2005. A white line showing the area in which planning permission is sought. The first application submitted for this site potentially in 2002, application 02/06035 on the 20th *** .

Port Sunlight Village Trust has been a seeking a planning solution since then. At the bottom of the page, you’ll see sites A and B on the plan ***. Site B *** consent for forty-eight apartments at appeal in 2005. The Trust allowed the permission gained to lapse and never sought to have it reconfirmed.

The Trust has over the years carefully reconsidered what would be appropriate for this *** part of the village *** site B shown at the bottom, will now remain a light commercial site *** new *** store ***.

This constitutes *** forty-eight residential units *** then reduced to twelve units from the twenty originally conceived in 2002. My point Chair is the trustees have therefore listened and responded to the various issues facing this part of the village. They’ve done so over a very long period of time.

This planning application is ***. On the reverse page as already stated ***. This is looking across from *** Road. *** depot and in fact *** although on the elevations is seen *** Conservation Area *** .

I ask the committee to note *** already improved *** see the great *** of the nursing home *** adjacent to the proposed *** proposal *** no greater than the established two storey houses. Due to their elevated position the eaves line proposed is actually lower ***.

Finally Chair *** point out someone from the Port Sunlight Village Trust *** three-storey development is permitted within a Conservation boundary, as adopted by Council in March of this year. I quote, “Buildings should pre-dominantly be domestic in size and scale; of two storeys with any third floors within attic type roofs.” *** Thank you very much.

Corporate Governance Committee 16/11/2011 (Wirral Council) Part 3 Work Program, Progress and Associated Issues

Cllr Steve Foulkes said that the terms of reference for [this] committee were clear and he would like to “make progress” and move onto item 3.

Jim Wilkie, Chief Executive referred to the ten key lines of enquiry (KLOE) as well as further discussion on the involvement of councillors. He said the report sets out who the lead officers are. He said he would pause to check the names of the officers were in line with the committee’s wishes.

Cllr Jeff Green said he was “surprised”. He referred to an email and said that the briefing looked like predetermination. He said the changes to the procurement rules were “not fantastic” and that he had had no time to read them. He continued by saying that Conservative Party councillors had spoken to him with suggestions and that he was not clear about the role of Lead Members. Cllr Green went into detail explaining his views on what Lead Members should be. He also said that the briefing was “not well handled”.

Cllr Steve Foulkes said that this had stemmed from a criticism that councillor involvement had not been enough, so key members had been established at the briefing. He said these lead members would be the conduit or champion and that it was the job of these to reflect views back. He explained that it wouldn’t be anything more than that. On accountability, he said councillors say it’s officer’s job, “just letting officers do it”, however he wanted to “get councillors involved at every level”. He appealed to councillors and referred to a letter from Cllr Phil Gilchrist about scrutiny.

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) 15/11/11 Part 2 Petition against APP/10/01105

This is what a petitioner against Planning Application APP/10/01105 had to say on Tuesday evening. This is the first three minutes whole five (and a bit minutes) .

The missing bits are either gaps in the audio record or personal information (as it’s a member of the public) that have been removed at the request of the Chair of the Planning Committee, editor, our legal department etc..

Petitioner: “I live at *** and I’m representing not only *** of the *** but also ***. Errm, I’d just like to take this opportunity to say you have before you a booklet errm promoting the *** but also to work to some contextual framework of the *** and the **** we’re talking about. There is also a *** so that you can orientate yourselves to the wider issue of the ***.

Errm, I’d first like to say that we feel as *** that this does not meet the HS4 err criteria for new housing developments in *** , and therefore we’d like to say that we feel if this was to be approved, that it would be a signficant and *** change to the character of the ***, *** in policy terms is not our *** . As *** we feel the appearance and amenities in the area will be significantly affected.

If you did come to the Site Visit yesterday, you’ll have noticed we did mention the 48 apartments which are approved to be on the right-hand side of this property, *** dwellings. We did say that those 48 ***, sorry flats are going to be three storey big, houses that are *** are three storey and to the left of the site apartments are three storey. This will be signficantly unusual for this errm, cluster of three storey properties if you will in that *** of ***. ***properties but not all in the little cul-de sac as we would errm see it and as it’s been referenced in the council’s documents as well.

Errm, we would like to take up errm the part as of *** of the design. The errm, you know we feel that English Heritage are saying they have *** the recommendations. They literally for us have been ***ed. Yes they’ve dropped the chimneys and they’ve added a few things like a gable end at the fork of this twenty metres. I’m sorry that they errm we did meet with the council officer and show a *** observation with a ruler and it’s 20.5 at that point. So I think there’s some discrepancy that needs to be a bit of, bit of investigation there. When we talk about the *** in terms of metres, the mean average of a separation window to window is 25 metres.

The mean average of what we’re effectively saying this cul-de-sac is if we’re going to errm as *** has said is twenty to twenty-one metres. Errm, the fact that the shortest in the village is 21.127 *** metres which is in *** Errm, if anyone would want to take me up on that. So this development will be very top-heavy. It’s three stories and it’s also to **** a care home that’s built *** same time. That care home together with the Gardener’s errm Lodge if you look at the detail of the design again it’s very much a concern of *** that *** know.
Today’s people have invested their money their hard earned money buying properties. *** keep those properties within the **** to scratch all the *** industry. I’d just like to draw your attention to a the map on one of the pages there as ** the aerial view *** and see how much density is in that area. So we’ve got a care home which is spread out over two floors. In actual total that means a lot of people from the *** living there however we’ve got 21 apartments as I’ve said and I know I’m going to repeat myself here. I’ve got this 48 apartments which you’ve all just agreed in this year to amend five years plans. So those plans are still in existence for four to five years. So it becomes densely populated as I’ve said.

To go with we’re really concerned about that the architectural features that are left. I think that once that they’re there, what are the two most *** buildings *** never came to fruition ** particular care home ** slate tiles. I do accept as *** we need to move to to the 21st century ** 22 homes per a hectare *** significantly appropriate for a *****…

Cllr David Elderton: Can I ask you to try and bring your comments to a conclusion? You’re way over five minutes at the moment.

Petitioner: Yes Chair, just quick as a quick, I talked about need to *** I’d also like to say about the alien aspect of three of the houses looking into backs of other houses which is alien. We did have an alternative second to last page of your document. To reiterate really and summarise. That we feel as *** and ***, this will break rules of CH2, CH9 , ??15 *** damage and approval of this application furthermore damage the special *** of ***, an historic *** resulting in irrational failure of the local planning authority’s statutory duty to pay special attention to the exercise of its planning functions. You have all agreed and adopted as a Council the Unitary Development Plan. If this was to be agreed that would be contravening your own UDP and would potentially result in further action being taken. Thank you Chair for allowing me to ***.

Cllr David Elderton: That’s ok, thank you very much.

Council Excellence Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Wirral Council) 17th November 2011 Early Voluntary Retirement/Voluntary Severance and Organisational Change Part 3

Chris Hyams continued by saying that the restructures had gone to the Employment & Appointments Committee and in the Finance department there had been a number of new posts since the Early Voluntary Redundancy program started.

She referred councillors to paragraph 7.1 as there was an error in the number given for new posts. Chris Hyams said the report states 100, but it should be 104 due to the 4 posts in the Law, Human Resources and Asset Management department.

Another error was also highlighted by Chris Hyams as a 3 should read 7. She did point out that some new posts are not related to Early Voluntary Redundancy/Voluntary Severance and out of the 104 new posts, 81 were related to the Early Voluntary Redundancy/Voluntary Severance program.

Chris Hyams said that the posts had been advertised internally, with “strict vacancy controls”. Once they had tried internal recruitment, then they would go externally. The Finance Department had a mix of internal and external advertising as there were risks in failure to appointing to positions such as service provision being put at risk. There was a process of remodelling which explains why posts had been vacated, but then filled.

Cllr Phil Gilchrist asked about Metro, referred to in 6.2 (paragraph 2) and a meeting in September. He said he’d also like a response to further questions, an update over the deleted posts and why some people had left when they oughtn’t to while their job was still there?

Chris Hyams said yes the post was required, but they were let go at their request. Metro provided a service to schools and worked differently. There had been a review of the service and requirements which had led to employees being replaced and less temporary staff.

Council Excellence Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Wirral Council) 17th November 2011 Early Voluntary Retirement/Voluntary Severance and Organisational Change Part 2

Chris Hyams introduced the report (agenda item 16) on Early Voluntary Retirement/Voluntary Redundancy and Organisational Change.

She talked about the changes and remodelling as well as the Early Voluntary Retirement/Voluntary Severance process. Chris Hyams referred to the savings and number of employees as well as the £2 million for remodelling. She said that the £2 million was to support management and remodelling of services delivered. She said that departments made bids to the Strategic Change Programme Board for new posts or to add money to existing posts (such as changing them to a higher grade post).

Cllr Alan Brighouse (Vice-Chair) arrives.

Chris Hyams referred to paragraph 5 and the issue of people on part-time hours or subject to a job share. She said they had deleted 719 FTE equivalent posts, which equated to 765 FTE posts deleted. Chris Hyams said it was a “work in progress”, as the information had to go on the system and be signed off.

She said paragraph 6 dealt with refilled posts, where people had been moved into a post. This had been part of the decision-making where people had been allowed to leave. If they had a person they couldn’t lose, another person would be “bumped” into a post. This didn’t lead to a 100% saving, but could be 80% or 70% as the person moving posts led to a saving in the post they left behind. She said this was complicated and referred to the 104 new posts. People had been asked to leave because of the restructure, but there was a “one bump rule” which allowed another post to be saved. The bumps exception was Metro in the Children and Young People’s Department.