Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Joint ... · Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding...

1

Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Joint Committee

Annual Meeting

Monday 17th June 2013, 10:00am

Lichfield District Council Offices Frog Lane, Lichfield

A G E N D A

1. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman

The Cannock Chase AONB Partnership Agreement states that:- “At its annual meeting the Joint Committee shall determine from amongst its members a Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Joint Committee for the period from the commencement of that meeting of the Joint Committee up to the commencement of the next following annual meeting of the Joint Committee”. At the meeting of the Joint Committee on 18th June 2012, Cllr Frances Beatty was appointed Chairman and Cllr Mark Winnington Vice Chairman up to the annual meeting of the Joint Committee in 2013. 2. Apologies 3. Minutes of the meeting held on 28th March 2013

4. Matters Arising 5. Declaration of Interests

6. Management Plan Review Report of the AONB Officer 7. Any Planning Items that may require consideration Report of the AONB Officer 8. Action Plan Progress

Report of the Chairman of the Officers’ Working Group

9. Partners’ News Item for Members to update all from their own part of the AONB

10. Financial Update

Report of the Treasurer to the Joint Committee

2

11. Update on Governance Queries Report of the Chairman of Officers' Working Group and the Honorary

Secretary 12. Reports from Joint Committee Advisers

13. Any Other Business 14. Date, Time and Venue of Next Meeting

Part Two

Exclusion of the Public and Press

The Chairman to move: "That the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business which involve the likely disclosure of information as defined in the paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the local Government Act 1972 (as amended) indicated below"

3

Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Joint Committee

Thursday 28th March 2013, 10:00am

South Staffordshire Council, Wolverhampton Road, Codsall, WV8 1PX

M I N U T E S

Name

Representing

Members

Cllr Frances Beatty MBE Stafford Borough Council Cllr Bob McCardle South Staffordshire Council

Cllr Mark Winnington Staffordshire county Council

Officers

Hayden Baugh-Jones South Staffordshire Council Joy Currey Staffordshire County Council, Honorary Treasurer

Antony Lancaster Cannock Chase Council Noreen Moore Staffordshire County Council

Naomi Perry Stafford Borough Council John Smith Lichfield District Council

Anne Walker Cannock Chase AONB Unit, Clerk to the Joint Committee

Advisers

Ruth Hÿtch Cannock Chase AONB Officer June Jukes Chairman, Cannock Chase Advisory Partnership Invited Guest

Clive Keble Clive Keble Consulting Ltd Cllr Beatty welcomed all to the meeting and noted that this would be Naomi Perry’s last Joint Committee meeting before moving to a new job at East Staffordshire Council, all wished her well. There was a round of introductions for the benefit of Cllr McCardle, who was attending his first meeting as representative of South Staffordshire Council.

Apologies

286 Apologies were received from Cllr Val Richards (Lichfield District Council), Cllr Janos Toth (Cannock Chase Council), Hazel McDowall (Natural England), Jason Maclean (Forestry Commission) and John Rowe (Honorary Secretary)

4

Minutes of the meeting held on 17th December 2012

287 The minutes were accepted.

Matters Arising

288 There were no matters arising. Declaration of Interests

289 Ruth declared a personal interest relating to the proposed HS2 railway line.

Action Plan Progress Report of the Chairman of the Officers’ Working Group

290 A report was circulated prior to the meeting and outlined by Hayden, who thanked June for her presentation at the Conference, which was very helpful towards the review of the Management Plan.

5

Comment Response

Cllr Beatty – community involvement, how many young people are involved in AONB projects and are figures available for the number of young people who attend the outdoor education centre at Shugborough.

Ruth – projects supported by SDF included Young Carers, Walk to Win, Fire Project and Make, Do & Mend. Around 850 young people were involved in these projects.

Cllr Winnington – referred to Cannock Chase Visitor Centre (Marquis Drive) and the wider Country Park. An outline plan had been completed.

Cllr Beatty – it would be useful to convene a meeting around this plan. It is recognised that the AONB Unit needs a permanent base on the Chase.

Cllr Winnington – asked what would happen as a result of the horsiculture report being completed. Cllr Winnington – are some issues enforcement matters? Cllr McCardle – had spoken in favour of the planning application at the Trekking Centre, now wonders if this was appropriate. Is horsiculture a good thing?

Ruth – baseline data on fringe landscapes had been produced a few years ago. This report highlighted any changes that had occurred in the intervening years. Recommendations in the report included working with horse owners as well as the landowners. Proposals had been included in the grant bid for 2013-14. Some issues raised by local residents were outside the remit of planners. In most cases there needs to be encouragement to ‘do the right thing’. Ruth – comment is made when planning applications are submitted, in line with what is appropriate in the landscape, it’s a question of balance. Ruth offered to circulate the report with the minutes and noted that it would be available on the new website. Clive – recommendations to be pursued, including external grant scheme and possibly arranging a seminar on best practice. John – enforcement action can be taken in certain circumstances. Hayden – dealing with an issue outside of AONB, visual issue of sub-dividing fields, etc. It is sometimes a matter of engaging and encouraging landowners. Antony – in terms of planning policy, this will link to the evidence base and landscape issues through the Management Plan.

6

Governance Review Full discussion is set out at Appendix 1 and covered these main areas: 1. Potential to improve existing arrangements. 2. Potential to change arrangements for voting and delegation under the

current arrangements. Additionally, the legal view on the following was sought by members: - Can non-executive members of local authorities attend and vote at the

Joint Committee? - Can advisers to the Joint Committee vote (i.e., Chairman of Advisory

Partnership, Natural England, Forestry Commission and AONB Officer) Officers also sought clarification from members about the specific scope of the forthcoming governance review. Resolved

1 The Committee noted the progress made since the last meeting. 2 The Committee approved the recommendation at 3.7 to progress the review

of the governance structure. Financial Update Report of the Treasurer to the Joint Committee

291 A report was circulated prior to the meeting and outlined by Joy Currey. Subsequent to the report being circulated, an offer letter had been received for the amount applied for. Clarity had been sought over the amount stated in the letter attributed to core funding, this has now been cleared up and Defra are happy that the plans will be implemented as set out in the grant application. Ruth noted that on average the SDF projects had levered in 56% additional funding, slightly down on the previous years, but still a positive outcome. Comments/questions: Comment Response

Cllr Beatty – could the production of a briefing note for members be included as a communications budget item.

Ruth - that there is an allocation for PR & Events in the core budget, Defra may see this as double funding. The budget is used partly to fund the PR contract with Lichfield District Council, who prepare and distribute press releases and advise on PR matters.

Cllr Beatty – questioned the influence of press releases, what impact do they have?

June Jukes – many members of the local community get information and take note of what is happening in the

7

Comment Response

AONB from the local papers. Cllr Beatty – communications with local politicians is important also.

Ruth – Agreed but there is a staff time resource implication. Hayden – there will be an opportunity to speak to Members more widely at Management Plan meetings, there may be the opportunity to build on this.

Resolved

1a) Budget 2012/13 Progress on the spend for 2012/13 was noted. 1b) Budget 2013/14 and Defra Bid

The position on the budget for next year and the grant bid to Defra were noted. Conference and Management Plan Review Verbal report of the Chairman of the Joint Committee and the AONB Officer 292 Cllr Beatty noted that the conference was well received, June Jukes made a good presentation, as did Adrian McLaughlin representing the LEP, who may be able to assist in opening doors for contacts with businesses. Ruth informed the meeting that good feedback had been received on the Management Plan review from the conference and that it would be posted on the website in due course. The SEA scoping report had now been completed and forwarded to Natural England, Environment Agency and English Heritage. Meetings are to be pursued with a number of other organisations. As part of the formal public consultation, the questionnaire has been posted on the website. Following this consultation, what policies may need to be reviewed and re-written will be assessed. Ruth also noted that the Habitats Regulations Assessment process had also commenced. Cllr McCardle noted that the day had been thoroughly enjoyable and June’s presentation was spot on. The only problem with the venue had been the acoustics and the squeaky door. Ruth noted that these issues had been pursued by the owner, who will be addressing the problems. Sponsorship and funding Report by Clive Keble, Clive Keble Consulting 293 A report was circulated prior to the meeting and outlined by Clive Keble. There was a need to agree a set of priorities for the next few months of the contract. Since the report was written, the importance of contact with the LEP has increased. This is in relation to not only business sponsorship, but also sources of funding for projects out of the new management plan.

8

Although there had been limited tangible success from business sponsorship to date, there had been a number of contacts made to be pursued further. Good meetings had also taken place with staff from the Museum of Cannock Chase and the Forest of Mercia. In section 3.5, there is a need to identify who it is reasonable to contact and why, right time, right person. As local plans and developer related funding develops, there may be the opportunity to tap into this source of funding. It may also be possible to further promote the AONB as a healthy living resource.

9

Comment Response

Cllr Beatty – Adrian McLaughlin noted that his business is multi-national, however he relocated to this area because he liked the idea of his staff being able to walk out onto the Chase.

Clive – may be interesting to look at how businesses see the AONB as a resource for staff.

Cllr Winnington – interesting to see the mix of opportunities being looked at. Agrees that local shops, like farmers, would not be the right contacts to target at present. Perhaps look at what Forestry Commission’s vision is looking forward, looking after the landscape, provision for health and leisure. Had previously spoken to Steve Burgin (Alstom) about staff recruitment. They now concentrate their job adverts on what Staffordshire has to offer, including mountain biking on the Chase. In terms of the LEP, it is important that the AONB Partnership has contact going forward to ensure that any opportunity for European funding is not missed. Some of the district LAs may also have sources of funding available. For small projects, the local member initiative fund may be appropriate.

Clive – Lichfield District Council had been involved in the project with the Co-Op on Gentleshaw Common. Also looking at who attends the Advisory Partnership to see if there are any funding opportunities from businesses. June – one of the founding members of the Friends of Cannock Chase was keen on targeting honeypot areas. There is a need to get the balance right for visitors.

Clive – has completed a profile of Armitage Shanks and Alstom with the possibility of making an approach for a permanent base for the AONB Unit. There is a need to get in to see senior people to put forward a proposal for a physical development. Ruth – has anyone from the Joint Committee got the ability to make the introduction?

Cllr Beatty – an energy-related premises may appeal to Alstom, offered to make the approach. Hayden – this would be a long term project and will take a while to build relationships. It may be used as the basis to replace Defra funding. There is a need to ensure the emphasis on conserve and enhance in the management plan is taken into account.

Cllr Winnington – in terms of the approach to Alstom, would there be any mileage in relocating the AONB Unit to Marquis Drive?

Noreen – discussions ongoing about rehousing the AONB Unit along with own staff and possibly Forestry Commission staff to one base.

10

Comment Response

Cllr Beatty – AONB ‘office’ needs to be open and accessible to the public, would make an ideal base.

Clive – sees this as a long term objective, did a similar project at the National Forest. Has 21 days left of this contract and needs a clear steer about what priorities he should be focusing on.

Cllrs Beatty/Winnington & Noreen – discussion on previous approaches to businesses such as JLR, Rolls Royce. Potential role for Clive to be involved in.

Cllr Beatty – heritage may be an area of work. Clive – need a Heritage Management Plan to progress work. Ruth due to meet with English Heritage to discuss shortly. This could link to an application for HLF grant. Ruth – Advisory Partnership also bringing projects forward.

Clive – horsiculture report outlined some recommendations that could be followed up including awareness event and new leaflet. Possible link with feed companies, liveries, vets, etc. Also linking with Rodbaston.

11

Other areas highlighted: � Horsiculture – possible awareness raising event may attract sponsorship

from feed company, livery, vets, etc. May also link with Rodbaston on this. � Site based improvements at Gentleshaw Common and Shoal Hill Common. � Healthy living agenda – possible Chairman to Chairman discussion. � SAC – may be complex issues to be further discussed. � Mountain bikers – possibly target specialist outlets. Awareness raising about

the nature and geology of the AONB, ‘care’ leaflet. � Dog exercise parks – Forestry Commission have put in some of these in

other areas. (Rosemary Connolly promoting a scheme.) In the process of identifying a site on Forestry Commission land. Lichfield District Council looking at identifying a site in Burntwood to take the pressure from Gentleshaw Common.

� Support programmes – may look at focusing SDF funds on a particular project, possibly also to attract sponsorship. Suggested JCB as a contact, Cllr Beatty to assist with this.

Noreen noted that on the heritage work, individual partners are leading on the parts that are on their land. The Great War Hut is at Marquis Drive on Staffordshire County Council land, as is the Messines Model. Conclusion – priorities should be healthy living agenda and horsiculture. Clive – this has been useful, will now write a list of 5 things to concentrate on. Resolved 1. The Committee approved a targeted approach to external funding bids and

business sponsorship, focused on the projects listed in paragraph 7.1.

2. The Committee endorsed continued partnership working with Staffordshire County Council on a possible HLF bid, as outlined in section 9.

Cllr Winnington left the meeting at this point. Proposed Phase 2 of High Speed 2 Report of the Chairman of the Officers' Working Group 294 A report was circulated prior to the meeting and the recommendations were outlined by Cllr Beatty, who thought them to be sensible. Cllr McCardle queried if the remaining Joint Committee members would be able to ratify this decision as the meeting was no longer quorate. Cllr Winnington to be contacted to confirm his acceptance of the recommendations or if this is not forthcoming the item will need to be included on the June Agenda. Cllrs Beatty and McCardle were in favour of the recommendations being approved. Note by Clerk: Cllr Winnington agreed approval by email 3rd April 2013.

12

Resolved: 1 The Committee considered the report to notify the Department of Transport

that, whilst there is no objection to the proposed line of HS2 Phase 2, it is believed that, in order to protect the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB, the following principles should be adopted and followed before any commitment is made to the project:

a That the planning and design of HS2 will include a full assessment of the landscape impact of the line through the preparation of a landscape master plan for the land between the northern part of the AONB (including Satnall Hills and Etchinghill) and the proposed line.

b That (informed by A - above) a scheme of mitigation is drawn up, including adherence to the highest design standards and use of materials, the early implementation of off-site tree planting and landscaping and the management of existing woodlands.

Partners’ News Item for Members to update all from their own part of the AONB 294 The Joint Committee received the following reports: Stafford Borough Council

� Completed consultation on Local Plan, further consultation required on another site in Stafford not previously included. List of modification will be presented in due course.

� Colwich Parish Council had applied for Neighbourhood Area status and will now be working on a Neighbourhood Plan. A parish group had also been set up.

� A self-help group for Neighbourhood Plans had been established. South Staffordshire Council � An appeal against the Council’s refusal for planning permission to be

granted at Coppice Farm will be heard in June. There had been a number of applications on the site and there had been concern about the accumulative effect this was having, objections had been submitted on behalf of the AONB Partnership and Hayden as SSC’s Landscape Architect. The applications included field shelters, new buildings within the complex and the effect that this would have within the historic parkland landscape. As both Ruth and Clive Keble (Planning Advisor) were likely to be away on the date the appeal was due to be heard, the appropriate evidence will be tabled prior to the hearing.

� Howard Medlicott retires on 8th April, however he will continue management of Shoal Hill on behalf of Shoal Hill Joint Committee.

Lichfield District Council � Local Plan had been submitted to the Inspector.

13

� Working with Clive on the proposed funding from the Co-Op for improvements to access on Gentleshaw Common.

� Car park signs from the PMAS scheme had been installed. � Concern raised by members of the public about digging on footpaths for

cycling on Gentleshaw Common. Enforcement officers and PCSOs had also visited the site to try to put a stop to this activity.

Cannock Chase Council

� Consultation on Local Plan continuing, AONB comments received. They are hoping to submit to the inspector by 31st May 2013.

� Brereton & Ravenhill Parish Council are working on their Neighbourhood Plan. Cllr Beatty requested that the Partnership has the opportunity for input into these Plans.

Staffordshire County Council � Completed woodland work and spraying for Phytophthora. � The annual deer census is due to take place on 15th April. � Funding for environmental volunteers had been secured through the public

health programme. Advisory Partnership – report from meeting held 31st January 2013

� Discussed local heritage proposals. � Heathland management projects including Connecting Cannock Chase

project, which Friends of Cannock Chase had also helped with. � Community work had included woodland management at Norton Bog and

Fixed Point Photography (most points are now covered). � WW1 commemorations – members of the Advisory Partnership and the

Secretary of Friends of Cannock Chase had attended the conference in October.

� Undergrounding in Brocton was noted. � Orienteering in a number of areas had been planned away from the sites

affected by Phytophthora. � A new cycling business had been established at the Enterprise Centre, the

biking representative on the Advisory Partnership had offered to make contact with the owners.

� Forestry Commission reported on the issues of the diseases that are affecting their plantations and alternative species being trialled.

� Staffordshire Wildlife Trust’s Wolseley Centre is celebrating its 10th Anniversary.

� The proposed gating order at Spring Slade was also discussed.

Planning Matters

Report of the AONB Officer 295 A report was circulated prior to the meeting and outlined by Ruth. The applications at Oakedge Shooting School were referred to and Cllr Beatty requested that Naomi relays the concerns of the Partnership to SBC Planning.

14

Ruth noted that there is a need to meet with the planners to discuss the strategic issues on the site. Clive noted that activities on the site including a farm equipment sale and proposed game fair would not be subject to planning legislation. Ruth noted that she was hopeful that as most of the Local Plans were close to being submitted to the Inspector, the time spent on planning would be reduced, however, this was dependent on how many development control work applications were submitted. The meeting discussed the positive impact that the Local Plans may have in future relating to planning applications in the AONB. Following annual meetings of each of the LAs, there may be changes to planning committees, this may provide the opportunity to have AONB issues included in training for members. 12. Any Other Business There was no other business. 13. Date, Time and Venue of Next Meeting

The next meeting is scheduled to take place on Monday 17th June, 10:00am at Lichfield District Council offices. Cllr Beatty thanked all for attending and wished Naomi all the best in her new job and wished all a Happy Easter.

Part Two

Exclusion of the Public and Press

The Chairman to move: "That the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business which involve the likely disclosure of information as defined in the paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the local Government Act 1972 (as amended) indicated below" None.

15

Appendix 1 – Governance Review Discussion

Comment Response

Cllr Winnington – good to see that the Joint Committee is member-led, it is the right way around. Also pleased to see that there was a period of review built in to see if the amended model worked.

Hayden – confirmed that this is how the Joint Committee works now. The report suggests that a further governance review is undertaken after the Management Plan has been published in 2014.

Cllr Beatty – concerned about the potential cost of external legal advice, with the limited resources of the AONB. If it considered that a different governance structure is more appropriate, then it should be completed as required.

Hayden – the already agreed priorities for work are Management Plan, staff review, then governance.

Cllr Winnington – asked if work was being undertaken similarly at a national level with Defra, Conservation Boards and National Parks through the National Association for AONBs. Cllr Beatty – if others are reviewing, can we look at their models.

Ruth – it was determined at the outset that it should be a local decision for how each partnership arranges itself. At the time, in 2002-3, the model that this AONB adopted was seen to be the most appropriate. Other AONBs have looked at our model recently and chosen to set up a similar partnership, i.e., Clwydian Range & Dee Valley AONB.

Cllr McCardle – understands that there have been times when meetings have not been quorate and this is an issue. Concerned that this matter is being put off and that it is down to members to attend the three meeting per year. Cllr Winnington – there is a buy in from members on strategic issues, but these are at different times and organisations such as SCC and Forestry Commission work in different ways. Management of the area also changes. Is the AONB Unit doing what it should be doing under the current arrangements?

John – capacity is an issue, the Management Plan is the priority. To do that and the governance review now would need to buy in resources and it is not clear where this could be sourced. Hayden – specific legal advice would be needed.

Cllr Beatty – One way is to work harder with the Local Authorities and encourage them to understand the work of the Joint Committee and report back to their

June – is an advocate of the Advisory Partnership and saw the benefits when it was first set up. It brought together those organisations that had interest in the

16

Comment Response

relevant committees. Has concerns that there is disconnect between the Joint Committee, Officers Working Group and the Advisory Partnership. As the group with technical and local knowledge, the Advisory Partnership should be part of the process. Is there mileage in both meeting on the same day? The issue with the Joint Committee is that there are only 5 voting members. Work needs to be done before the governance review commences to improve existing arrangements.

Chase, there is a need to get this across from the Advisory Partnership. Although it is not perfect, it is the right way forward.

Cllr Beatty – the conference was a good mechanism for all meeting together and perhaps a shared meeting once a year would be beneficial.

Ruth/Hayden – refer back to the Memorandum of Agreement. This was signed by partners with minimum effort, in Shropshire Hills and other AONBs who have JACs, this is not the case. This Partnership’s governance reviewed well in the national perspective. Defra is happy with our set up. It has no concerns about our governance and is content for us to continue with the same arrangements as they view it as a local matter. The governance arrangements should support delivery of the aims and objectives of the Management Plan, which is currently mainly the case. Other AONBs have to go back to individual organisations for approvals. This system of governance was set up for ease of business. John – there is the possibility of looking at methods of communication, not just engagement. The December meetings involving local volunteers’ presentations have worked well.

Cllr Winnington – proposed that the Officers Working Group looks at membership of the Joint Committee, including voting, possibly that the Advisory Partnership has a vote.

Hayden – who would vote from the Advisory Partnership, is this something solely for the Chairman? Ruth – will seek the advice of the Honorary Secretary.

17

Comment Response

Cllr Winnington – times have changed, could Sara Eccles from Defra advise?

Ruth – ask the question, but it is likely that they would say it is a local matter, as this is previously advice offered.

Cllr McCardle – should have an idea of what we want locally. There is a need to focus on getting a solution. It is unfair to expect officers to do all of this. Members should put forward solutions that can be costed and guide what they wish to be researched.

John – what do members want officers to explore, is it to try to reduce costs, direction is needed from members.

Cllr Beatty – concerned that there appears to be a dysfunction with the 3 arms of the organisation, business is done by the Officers Working Group with the Joint Committee only coming together 3 times a year. There seems to be little connection with what is going on, no representative at the Advisory Partnership. Appears to be outnumbered by officers and not driving the business. Would be alarmed if this was a board of directors dominated by officers. Need to be comfortable with carrying forward in this way. Is there a need for an informal solution? Some members may not attend because they do not feel it is relevant. Cllr McCardle – may be to do with working arrangements.

Ruth – there is provision for substitutes to be nominated if a member is unable to attend. This arrangement is bought to members’ attention often. Hayden – for South Staffs the substitute has been the Leader (the substitute should also be a member of the Executive/Cabinet). Whatever is taken forward, there is a need to ensure we meet legal requirements. John – in his authority, it was recognised that there are too many reports going to Cabinet, briefing notes are circulated instead. This could be replicated for Joint Committee. It could also be suggested that Joint Committee papers are sent to the Advisory Partnership members. Items can also be added to the Joint Committee by members. Ruth – the formal structure includes advisors to the Joint Committee, from Forestry Commission, Natural England and the Chairman of the Advisory Partnership. Whilst the structure states that only members have a vote, Natural England and Defra see communication as a key element. The AONB Officer is also an advisor, this is recognised in the Memorandum of Agreement with Defra. Perhaps there is a need to use advisors

18

Comment Response

better, eg, involving the Natural England representative in a better way.

Cllr Beatty – local members are the enthusiasts encouraging others. Cllr McCardle – involve legal changes?

Ruth – the local authority partners delegate authority to the Joint Committee. This was set up under the Local Government Act to ensure that business was done quickly and efficiently.

Cllr Winnington – as the last review was 7 years ago, is it possible to look at a separate member being delegated who is not a member of the executive/cabinet?

Hayden/John et al – no it is illegal under the Local Government Act. Ruth – in Shropshire Hills there are 38 stakeholders and a decision is required from each organisation. This AONB Partnership can manage business much more efficiently because it is smaller and it has the Joint Committee set up.

Cllr Winnington – is there a process of delegated decisions and can this be done? It could also free up other members to attend the meetings. Cllr Beatty – concern that the Joint Committee is asked to make decisions without debate. Also has concerns about the disconnect between the Advisory Partnership, perhaps a mechanism to give them a vote should be looked at. Cllr Winnington/Beatty – perhaps involve local MPs to intervene to push the localism element.

Ruth – the Joint Committee delegates comments on planning matters to the AONB Officer. There is also the mechanism to agree decisions inter-meeting by email correspondence. Ruth – under current legal arrangements the Chairman of the Advisory Partnership can only be an advisor. The question can be asked again of the legal advisors.

19

Cannock Chase AONB Joint Committee – 17 June 2013 Report of the AONB Officer

Agenda Item 6

Management Plan Review – Up-date

1. Recommendations

1.1 The Committee notes the progress made on the Management Plan review.

2. Background

2.1 At previous meetings, the Committee formally appointed the AONB Unit to undertake the Management Plan Review and agreed the focus of the “light touch” review.

2.2 This paper up-dates Members on progress to date.

3. Consultations

3.1 The focus to date has been on gathering partners’ views and researching the progress and need to revise. Following the completion of the open consultation period on 14 June, this will then move to a focus on producing first draft revisions for discussions with the formal consultees (Defra, Environment Agency, English Heritage and Natural England).

3.2 All aspects of the review are being recorded. These working sheets are “live” documents. Some examples are attached at Appendix 1 for information. However it should be noted that these change as more of the review and consultation responses are received.

3.3 The annual conference held on 20 March supplied a considerable amount of feedback from Partners who are already actively delivering and supporting the Management Plan. This has now all been fed into the review process.

3.4 The public consultation via the website and use of questionnaires at other public events closed on 14 June, although dialogue with specific agencies and partners is being continued.

3.5 Direct mailings offering the opportunity to interested organisations have been sent offering the opportunity to comment and take part in the review. This is in addition to the active members of the Partnership being encouraged to comment.

3.6 Further targeted consultation has taken place via: - AONB Officer presentation to the full council at South Staffordshire Council - AONB Officer presentation to the Rights of Way Panel

20

- presentation scheduled for 16 July with the Joint Local Access Forum - preparation of Members’ briefing notes for Cannock Chase Council and Lichfield District Council - AONB Officer attendance at a public consultation day for Forestry Commission Forest Design Plan - direct meetings with County heritage, landscape and biodiversity experts - direct meeting with English Heritage - direct correspondence with Environment Agency and Highways Authority - Forest of Mercia delivering work to address young people - continued liaison with the SAC (Special Area of Conservation) partnership - continued liaison with Staffordshire County Council District Commissioning Leads.

4 Strategic considerations 4.1 The consideration of the links to other strategies suggests more changes to

policy than at first thought.

4.2 Most matters relating to strategic context have now been addressed.

4.3 Planning will now be considered as a separate discrete item to ensure the Management Plan is brought up to a par where it can link to the National Planning Policy Framework, Local and Neighbourhood Plans.

4.4 Landscape character descriptions will need to be amended to acknowledge the National Character Assessment (NCA) but localised descriptions won’t be up-dated until the next Management Plan period, as the data is only now being collated.

4.5 The SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) scoping report consultation period has ended and the resultant comments from Natural England and English Heritage have been incorporated.

5 Conclusion and next steps 5.1 Good progress has been made with consulting the statutory and other consultees. Data is being used to inform the review. 5.2 Dialogue will continue with specific agencies about the technical content of proposed revisions and their acceptability. A sub group of the Officers' Working Group has been formed to begin to proof and oversee proposed revisions. Once initial drafting is under way, face to face meetings are planned with formal consultees to test the content, prior to the proposals being set before the wider Partnership. 5.3 Continued review and revisions are planned until the end of the calendar year, with the expectation that all matters will be resolved in order to

21

enable time for formal assessments of the draft, such as the SEA to take place, prior to presenting the proposed 2014-19 Management Plan to the Partnership for approval. The target date for publication of the new Plan is April 2014.

of 53

Appendix 1 – Sample Log Sheets

Log sheet – Vision & High Level Objectives Item Reviewed? Implications Consultation

responses Comments

Vision Change – to accommodate 20 year vision & NEWP.

HLO1 Minor change may be worthwhile.

Could delete “the sense of”

HLO2 Revise wording to reflect cohesive land management, regardless of designation and connectivity/buffer zones with other areas. Reflect Lawton/NEWP/Biodiversity 2020 provisions & recommendations. Change.

HLO3 No change. HLO4 No change. HLO5 Change to accommodate need

to reflect nature conservation clearly under IUCN Category V.

Already a good reflection of NEWP.

HLO6 Change to: Maintain ecosystems to allow a place of enjoyment for everyone, providing opportunities for quiet recreation, that can contribute positively to physical and mental well being.

To redress the balance needed, bearing in mind findings of the visitors’ survey reports.

HLO6 No change.

of 53

Log sheet – Community Involvement Item Reviewed? Implications Consultation responses Comments

Key Issues

KI23 Change to reflect progress made since last plan.

• Awareness – some people don’t know who the AONB are especially young people.

KI26 Change to reflect progress made since last plan.

KI32 Remains valid. KI42 Remains valid. KI46 Remains valid. KI48 Remains valid. High Level Objectives

HLO3 Remains valid. Policies

PP4 Remains valid. EP2 Remains valid. EP3 Remains valid. SP1 Remains valid. SP10 Remains valid. Actions

PA5 Change to reflect progress made since last plan.

• Increased awareness of AONB in Stafford. It’s a place in the community and the work done. Now that the Unit is based more centrally in Stafford, could this be more utilised.

• Create opportunities to communicate key environmental messages which impact on ecology of AONB; importance of headwaters for wildlife, water

of 53

Item Reviewed? Implications Consultation responses Comments

quality, flood protection, biosecurity for white clawed crayfish, reduce risk of plague through access restrictions to key watercourses? Invasive species awareness action.

• Ensure that all current community involvement (not just AONB led) is fully recognised. EG Chase Trails Volunteers, Staffordshire County Council volunteers etc.

• The AONB being used to host a variety of organisations delivering training and qualifications and at the same time helping the AONB to deliver its other core objectives.

• To raise the profile and awareness of the AONB in the community.

• Increase awareness of AONB membership.

• Stress benefits of volunteering in AONB.

• Use local community groups and visitor centres to promote volunteering.

• Better – more eye catching publicity of community input.

• List achievements of volunteers. • Advertise community

of 53


involvement via website. • Calculate the no of volunteer hours and estimate its financial value.

• Publicise existing activity – which community groups already active?

• CASS did a family day DO MORE Getting children involved – volunteers enjoy showing children round.

• Activities Surveys Guide dogs Look after places Monitoring Waymarking Litter picks Photography • Volunteers like: Feedback & to see the end result e.g. reports etc. is nice • AONB Good at retaining volunteers. Feel they get a lot back from the AONB i.e. social/courses

• Staffs WT good at providing volunteering opportunities e.g. canal trips

PA6 Remains valid but could be merged with PA7.

• The skills to take forward community projects currently under discussion.

of 53


• Provide work experience Qualifications & training Can be part of bids tools, materials, training & act as match funding for bids Intergrational potential. More experienced volunteers with younger work experience/interns etc. • Volunteer coordinators are vital. • Charities e.g. MIND – look at sites to do work

• Work and get a treat - Beaudesert does it.

• Help yourself days e.g. woodchip, venison, compost.

• Social Enterprises. • Make employment measures on qualifications & training.

• Can help to reach long term unemployed.

• More of the same – community involvement…..

PA7 Remains valid but could be merged with PA6.

• Involving the community is hard but necessary.

• Increasing volunteering activity should be a key target.

• Encourage volunteers. Could there be a membership drive at the volunteer centres?

• What consideration is being given to attract more volunteers to the

Some consultation responses suggest change emphasis to add action to target specifically skills for jobs. To date, efforts have related to AONB-specific aims and skills have been an area

of 53


AONB as Shugborough had open recruitment days, so should AONB.

• Co-ordinate community & volunteer activity around a series of themes – too many separate often uncoordinated activity.

• Develop strong more co-ordinated links with wide range of existing community groups.

• New audiences to engage with: health agenda; Business Timebank; corporate social responsibility; schools 6th Form.

• New ways of communicating –social media.

• What volunteering options exist? – Marketing angle – what skills do we need? (Not just within AONB).

• Recruit whilst they are visiting. • Ambassadors/advocates. • County Council would like to work with all outdoor volunteer organisations to find synergies. Get more good stuff done at a high level.

• Use volunteers to put on more awareness activities for the public.

• Make economic impact explicit. As per CRI EIA and include in the

covered by others, particularly local authorities – should there be a change? If so, AONB-specific targets would have to be re-defined.

of 53


Management Plan. • AONB has Membership scheme for corporates in return for training or staff CSR - started but build on it.

PA8 Remains valid. • Discuss community involvement (and other issues) with similar AONBs.

EA4 Remains valid. EA6 Remains valid. SA16 Remains valid. Monitoring PM3 PM4 PM5 RM2

of 53

Cannock Chase AONB Joint Committee 17 June 2013

Agenda Item 7 - Planning Issues for period since last Joint Committee

Planning Applications

Local Authority Application / Location

Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

South Staffordshire Council

Demolish and rebuild existing sheds, Springslade Lodge, Broadhurst Green, Cannock, WS12 4PT Ref: 13/00165/FUL

3/4/13 The issues arising for the AONB from the proposed development are: - The scale of development. - Any potential increase in activity on the site

resulting from the development. - The appearance and potential visual impact of the

proposed development. The increase in scale is not seen as having an adverse impact on the AONB. It is noted that the development concerns the operation and management of the existing business and is not intended to increase or intensify activity on the site. There is no impact of the AONB in this respect. The appearance of the proposed new building will be a significant improvement on the existing structure. The colour and texture of the roof tiles will be an important element in ensuring that the building has a rural appearance. The AONB Joint Committee raises no objection to the proposed development. It is important that the appearance is in keeping with the rural location of the site, the choice of materials and finishes will be important and it is requested that planning conditions are applied to any permission for to the finish for the timber doors, colour and texture of the roofing tiles.

of 53


Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

Cannock Chase Council Park Gate Inn – Change of use to touring caravan site for up to 6 caravans (sui generis) with ancillary landscaping works Ref: CH/12/0106

17/4/13 Based on the AONB Management Plan, the Joint Committee acknowledges the importance of rural tourism and business to the local economy. Alternative forms of traditionally constructed development could result in some or all of these economic impacts to a greater or lesser extent. The key issue for the AONB is the impact of the proposed development on the landscape, scenic beauty and quiet enjoyment in relation to the NPPF, the Local Plan(s) and the AONB Management Plan. There is a balance to be achieved between economically beneficial development and the need to protect the special character and landscape of the AONB. The specific concerns for the AONB in this instance are: Removal of the hedgerow, creation of an access, hard surfacing, erection of the timber fence and planting of the ornamental laurel hedge having an adverse impact on the rural character of Holly Hill Road. The impact of traffic, in particular of towing vehicles with large caravans (and motor homes) on the peace and quiet enjoyment of the AONB, within the setting of Castle Ring, a Scheduled Ancient Monument. The visual impact of up to six caravans and towing vehicles and associated camping paraphernalia including awnings, gazebos, chairs table and games. The potential noise impact of activity on the site. For these reasons, whilst acknowledging the local economic benefits of the proposed development, I can confirm, that the AONB Joint Committee objects to the proposed development in the current form. There is potential to reduce the impact on the AONB

of 53


Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

through consideration of the following. Reducing the number of pitches, creating a natural landscape setting for the units and re-instating a native hedgerow along the Holly Hill Road frontage. An alternative vehicular access to the site from the existing PH car park, enabling the Holly Hill Road frontage to be returned to a natural state. Should these suggestions be taken up, it would be possible to reconsider the above objection. Should the current application be approved please consider planning conditions to secure more extensive and natural landscaping on the site to reduce the visual impact of the caravans and motor homes in this part of the AONB. Application subsequently withdrawn.

Staffordshire County Council

Application to replace extant planning permission (SS.08/25/613 W) - Construction of a renewable energy facility, Cocksparrow Lane, Huntington, Cannock Ref: SS.13/03/613 W

29/4/13 This site is outside, but within the setting of, the AONB. Comments that were submitted in 2009/10 on the original application by the AONB Joint Committee, the principles of which still apply to consideration of the recent application. As noted in the letter on the previous application, the view of the AONB Joint Committee remains that consideration should be given to the impact upon the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB of this development, in terms of views into and from the AONB and (possibly) traffic generation. The AONB Joint Committee remains concerned about the impact of the proposal but it is acknowledged that the Waste Planning Authority may not be able to reconsider the previous decision. Should the current application be approved, it is requested that the Waste Planning Authority careful

of 53


Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

consider the time limit of any permission taking into account the impact of long term uncertainty on the AONB and the local community. It is desirable for the condition relating to materials, the colour of the flue, hours of operation and deliveries are retained and/or strengthened so as to minimise any adverse environmental and landscape impact.


Erection of Remote Post Sign at the Shoal Hill Tavern - 13-00306-ADV

8/5/13 The proposed new signs, taking into account their size, colour and position will not have an adverse impact on the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB. There is no objection from the AONB Joint Committee to this application. There is a concern however with the proliferation of signs and other paraphernalia in this “Gateway” location on the edge of the AONB. Perhaps the Council, separately to the determination of the current application, would consider a joint assessment of the situation? This would involve the County Council, the Parish council and the brewery (Thwaites), to assess the need for all of the signs and structures and to remove any which are deemed unnecessary, repair those which are in poor condition and relocate any which are in inappropriate locations.


Proposed extension and alterations including raising the roof pitch and living accommodation in the roof space - Chaseside Farm Bednall Stafford ST17 0SG Ref: 13/00359/FUL

29/5/13 The issues arising for the AONB from the proposed development are: The scale of development related to existing buildings and structures. The appearance and visual impact of the proposed development. The site is not directly visible from the A34 or from the ridge of the AONB at Ansons Bank because of the extensive woodland in the area. In addition, the site

of 53


Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

is not visible, by virtue of topography and existing trees, hedges and woodland, from the nearby footpaths/bridleways at Spring Slade and Dark Slade. Therefore, the location and scale of the proposed development, noting that it is extending an existing building, will not have an adverse impact on the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB. Therefore, the AONB Joint Committee raises no objection to the proposed development. However, because it is important that the appearance of the extended building, if permitted, is in keeping with the rural location of the site, the choice of materials and finishes will be important and it is requested that planning conditions are applied to any permission, relating to bricks and the roof tiles.

Lichfield District Council Extension to existing hay barn and infilling of the open sides - Beaudesert Park Farm, Horsey Lane Upper Longdon, WS15 4LN Ref: 13/00461/FUL

29/5/13 Overall, the proposed development does not have any adverse impact on the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB or the quiet enjoyment of the area. There is, therefore, is no objection to the proposal from the AONB Joint Committee.

Local Plans


Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

Cannock Chase Council Cannock Chase Local Plan

27/3/13 AONB Joint Committee does not wish to make any formal submission on the Local Plan at this stage. We are very impressed with and grateful for the extent of

of 53


Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

the recognition of the importance of the AONB which is manifested at various points throughout the Local Plan. There was one slight concern over the precise wording of the second main clause of Policy CP14, noting that there may be some ambiguity over the treatment of minor developments, which although small in scale, can potentially have adverse impacts on the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB, with reference to the provisions of the NPPF. As a result of explanation provided, we are content that there are sufficient other references to the need to protect/conserve/enhance the AONB in the Vision and Objectives and other Policy sections (e.g. Vision – People will lead Greener…., Objective 7 Well Managed Environments…and Policy CP1 – Strategy), to provide the requisite level of protection and to show that the Local Plan is in accordance with the NPPF. Whilst we would not wish to submit a formal comment at present, it may be helpful if you could introduce a short section of explanatory text at the appropriate point in the Local Plan, as a point of clarification on how the needs of the AONB are being met by a linked approach to objectives and policies. It is understood that this point would be at your discretion and that of the Inspector, when appointed.

Lichfield District Council Proposed Neighbourhood Plan Area for Longdon Parish

29/4/13 Any Neighbourhood Plans including land within the AONB or adjoining it and having a potential impact, will need to recognise the importance of protecting the landscape and scenic beauty of Cannock Chase AONB. It is noted that Longdon Parish Council wishes to produce a Neighbourhood plan covering the whole of

of 53


Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

the Parish and that this includes a substantial area of the AONB, including Beaudesert Old Park, Brereton Hayes Wood and the AONB boundary along Bardey Lane and Horsey Lane. Subject to approval of the proposed plan area and the continued intent of the Parish Council to produce a Neighbourhood Plan, we look forward to future opportunities to comment on the policies and proposals for the area which are concerned with and impact on the AONB. Please confirm this interest to the Parish Council and request that the AONB Joint Committee is listed as a formal consultee on the intended plan.

Colwich Parish Council Neighbourhood Plan

Meeting conducted to discuss the Plan with the council on 11 June.

Other

Local Authority Application / Location Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

Planning Inspectorate / South Staffordshire Council

Written submission – planning appeal Coppice Farm

17/4/13 The AONB Joint Committee remains of the opinion that the number, scale and intensity of operations and uses carried out at Coppice Farm/The Buxtons remains a material consideration in terms of their impact upon the landscape and scenic beauty of the AONB and its immediate setting, in accordance with the policies of the (now adopted) Core Strategy for South Staffordshire and the provisions of the NPPF (especially paragraph 115).

of 53

Local Authority Application / Location Comments submitted

Summary of Comments

The AONB Joint Committee is, therefore, supportive of the decisions taken by South Staffordshire District Council in rejecting the four planning applications, including reference to AONB concerns with respect to the application for mobile field shelters (00377). However, should the Inspectorate suggest that the District Council engage in discussions with the applicant about all four applications (and any other currently unresolved matter on the site), such that an agreed strategic approach to all of the uses currently on the site emerges, the AONB Joint Committee would like to have the opportunity to consider any fresh applications or proposals.

of 53

Cannock Chase AONB Joint Committee – 17 June 2013

Report of the Chairman of the Officers' Working Group Agenda Item 8

Management Plan Delivery Progress

1 Recommendations

1.1 The Committee notes the progress made since the last meeting. 2 Progress Activity Outcome Comments

Strategic Delivery

2.1 Management Plan review • Considerable effort continues and progress is the subject of a separate paper.

2.2 Core funding • The grant application submitted to Defra has been awarded in full and formally accepted.

• The end of year claim has been submitted.

Programme delivery

2.3 Project delivery • Development of a range of projects in line with priorities agreed at the last Joint Committee meeting has commenced, including: -horsiculture literature and events -site based improvements including a healthy activity trail near the Cannock Chase visitor centre

of 53

Activity Outcome Comments

-dog exercise areas and advice. • On-going development has taken

place to access grant funding for a project at Gentleshaw, led by the Forest of Mercia and the local primary school.

• A project in conjunction with the Museum of Cannock Chase via the Sustainable Development Fund is being developed to increase young people’s interest and understanding of the AONB landscapes.

• Further work to develop relationships with other organisations has taken place (see 2.5).

• Further partnership working is

being discussed.

2.4 Visitor management • Liaison has continued with the SAC Partnership to develop the necessary implementation plan for mitigation in relation to the outcome of the in-combination Habitat Regulations Assessment. This is focusing on the integration of AONB-wide and SAC-specific actions in the plan.

2.5 Maximising resources • The Assistant AONB Officer has completed and passed a course to become a walk leader.

• The project sponsored by the Police Mutual Assurance Society (PMAS) to place refreshed crime/security signage was

• Further discussions are taking

place with PMAS about the potential for future projects involving their employees.

of 53


formally launched on 10 May with resulting press coverage. The project represents good partnership working across the AONB to achieve a consistent site management approach.

• A proposed joint event is being discussed between the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), the Chamber of Commerce and the AONB.

• Steve Burgin from Alstom has been contacted with a view to further discussions.

• A meeting has been held with Adrian McLaughlin about the future involvement with the LEP.

• South Staffordshire Water has expressed interest in becoming involved in another employee day.

• The Forestry Commission is considering a range of project ideas for development.

• The Dicky Bag company and K9 Training Services supported an on-site awareness event (see 2.7).

Awareness raising and community involvement

2.6 Volunteering activity • A total of 29 volunteers have supported work at 4 sessions and for 4 projects since last meeting.

• Milford hut reopened at Easter,

of 53


however opening days have been reduced due to various reasons including poor weather conditions.

2.7 Awareness raising • A return visit took place to the Clwydian Range & Dee Valley AONB by local volunteers to look at walking projects in another AONB.

• Members’ event Make, Do & Mend with Jennifer Collier took place creating artwork linked to items from Cannock Chase.

• Dog “Pit Stop” at Seven Springs – joint event with AONB Unit staff, Staffordshire County Council and Forestry Commission Rangers targeting dog owners.

• Future events planned include Himalayan balsam and bracken removal, creating invertebrate scrapes and heathland management. A timetable of scheduled events is attached at Appendix 1 and Members are encouraged to take part in some.

2.8 PR and communications The file showing the press coverage received since the last meeting will be available for Members to view at the meeting. Up-dates are also posted on the blog, Facebook and Twitter sites. A separate file shows thank yous and member comments.

of 53

Appendix 1

Calendar of Volunteering and Awareness days 2013

Month Date Times Location Tasks Volunteer Leader

June 06.06.13 10am – 12

Mill Green, Cannock Himalayan Balsam pull and litter pick

Simon Siddle Cannock Chase Council

27.06.13 10am – 2pm

The Museum of Cannock Chase

Creating invertebrate scrapes on Hednesford Hills


July 09.07.13 10am – 2pm

Meet at the Whitehouse car park

Bracken pulling and cutting on Forestry Commission land

Bernadette Noake Staffordshire Wildlife Trust Connecting Cannock Chase Project

25.07.13 10am – 2pm


Bracken pulling and cutting Simon Siddle Cannock Chase Council

August 07.08.13 10am – 2pm

TBC TBC Steve Archer Staffordshire County Council

20.08.13 10am – 2pm

Ironstone Heath Cutting and collecting grassland areas

Chris Walsh Lichfield District Council

September 05.09.13 10am – 2pm


Heathland management on Hednesford Hills


20.09.13 10am – 2pm

Shoal Hill Common Heathland management Bob Collett

October 08.10.13 10am – 2pm


Scrub control on Forestry Commission land


17.10.13 10am – 2pm

Gentleshaw Common Scrub and woodland clearance followed by a bonfire


November 07.11.13 10am – 2pm


Spreading heather seeds Simon Siddle Cannock Chase Council

20.11.13 10am – 2pm


Heather spreading on Forestry Commission land


28.11.13 10am – 2pm

Meet at the Steam Railway café, North shore

Cattle field preparation (fence repair, drainage, scrub


of 53

Month Date Times Location Tasks Volunteer Leader

Chasewater clearance) December 03.12.13 10am –

2pm Meet at the Whitehouse car park

Scrub control on Forestry Commission land


14.12.13 10am – 2pm

Hednesford Hills or Hazelslade

Woodland management Simon Siddle Cannock Chase Council

of 53

Item No. 10 on Agenda Local Members

Interest N/A

Cannock Chase AONB Joint Committee- 17 June 2013

Financial Update Final Outturn 2012-13 and Budget 2013-14

Report of the Treasurer to the Joint Committee and the AONB Officer

Recommendations 1. That the Joint Committee approves the final outturn position for 2012/13 and confirms the

budget for 2013/14 for the Core and Project Costs and the Sustainable Development Fund 2. That the minutes of this meeting should be agreed by correspondence immediately after the

meeting to facilitate the external audit arrangements of the partnership.

Part A Why is it coming here – what decision(s) are required? 3. The Joint Committee in its role under the Partnership Agreement is responsible for:-

• Approving the final accounts for the year as soon as possible after the year has ended and this report sets out the accounts for consideration.

• The approval of budget provision for the year ahead. This report sets out the budgets for next year which have been submitted to Defra and approved by them

Reasons for Recommendations: 4. The recommendations represent an effective way to continue to carry forward the

implementation of the Management Plan for the Cannock Chase AONB Partnership.

Part B Background:

5. Final Outturn 2012/13

The detailed outturn for 2012/13 for the Core and Action Projects Budget is set out in Appendix 1 and is compared with the latest approved budget for the year. The overall expenditure of £169,491 is very much in line with the approved budget of £169,500. Through careful management of the activities and the budget of the AONB, it has been possible to make full use of all grant aid that was available in 2012-13. Savings from maternity leave arrangements accrued during the year and this was taken up by introducing additional works and projects as well as bringing forward certain other activities. The final grant claim for the year has now been completed and forwarded to Defra.

of 53

Income from the Defra grant and local authority contributions totalled £168,959 for the year and therefore £532 was needed from the reserve to cover this minor shortfall. Income from donations, sales and Sustainable Development Fund administration fees totalled £3,606 and therefore a net total of £3,073 was transferred to the reserve at the end of the year.

The individual projects which were supported from the Sustainable Development Fund

(SDF) are set out in Appendix 2 and cover a range of activities and providers. The total spend on the SDF was £32,834.

6. Budgets 2013/14

The bid to Defra for grant funding for 2013/14 was submitted in January and was based on the assumption that there would be a reduction in Defra grant similar to that experienced in 2012/13 and that local authority contributions would remain the same. The budget was also prepared on the assumption that existing Single Pot funding arrangements would be continued. On this basis, the anticipated level of grant was £150,109 and it was agreed that this reduction would be taken from the SDF funding. Defra have now confirmed an overall grant approval of £150,109 with £24,588 allocated to the Sustainable Development Fund. The proposed budget for 2013/14, which has previously been approved by the Joint Committee, is therefore now confirmed. The budget for 2013/14 is set out in Appendix 3 and generally reflects an annual inflationary rise of 1% on salaries and 0% rise on non-pay items. The rate of employer’s superannuation contributions has also risen to 18.6%. The budget for the Core and Project costs for 2013/14 remains at the original level of £167,361 of which £125,521 will be funded by Defra. The total SDF funding for 2013/14 will therefore be £24,588. A summary of the amount spent or committed to the end of May 2013 is also included in the appendix.

7. Audit Commission The annual requirement by the Audit Commission to complete an annual return has been

adhered to and the detailed information passed to internal audit as part of the audit process. An advert has been placed showing the dates for inspection of the accounts.

8. Reserve The reserve stood at £57,001 at the start of 2012/13. The balance at the end of the financial year

2012/13 is now £60,269 after the net transfer of funds of £3,073 as set out above and the accrual of interest for the year of £195. A detailed statement of how the reserve has accumulated since 2007-08 is set out in Appendix 4.

It has previously been recommended that the priorities for the use of the reserve funds should

be as follows:

• Income from sales, donations and consultancy work should be available to supplement the delivery of projects within the Annual Action Plans and to provide matched funding for any major grant applications (now approximately £32,000) and

• The remaining funds should be earmarked to enable the AONB unit to respond to the implications of any future reductions in funding (now approximately £28,000).

These priorities need to be reviewed annually in conjunction with the annual update of the Risk

Register.

of 53

9. Equalities Implications

This report has been prepared in accordance with the equal opportunities policies of the County Council.

10. Legal Implications

Actions recommended in this report are in accordance with the provisions of the Cannock Chase AONB Partnership Agreement.

11. Resource and Value for Money Implications This report recommends actions to ensure the continued efficient delivery of the Cannock Chase

AONB Management Plan. The matched funding requirements to make up the 25% of contributions towards the core activity are set out in the Partnership Agreement. The SDF is a funding “pot” to be administered to partners who are able to provide the necessary matched funding for their Management Plan project proposals.

12. Risk Implications

If continuity of funding and spend are not continued as recommended to the Joint Committee, then the five authorities involved in the partnership will need to seek other methods of fulfilling their statutory obligations for the AONB under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Report authors: Authors Names: Joy Currey Place Finance Unit 01785 276548 Ruth Hÿtch AONB Unit 01785 619184

of 53

APPENDIX 1

Actuals Actuals Actuals Approved Final

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Budget Outturn Variation

AONB Core Budget £ £ £ £

Staff Salaries and Associated costs 105,285 116,670 117,222 117,510 117,365 -145

Accommodation /Office Equipment 13,779 11,414 11,656 8,300 8,649 349

Transport 4,997 4,756 3,773 4,660 4,655 -5

Partnership budget for PR events 6,304 2,733 2,114 2,500 3,246 746

Partnership running costs (In kind) 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 6,600 0

136,965 142,172 141,365 139,570 140,515 945

Core Action Projects

AONB Website 150 160 160 1,610 1,610 0

Community Involvement and Awareness

Events 3,500 3,372 -128

Management Plan 2,406 0 50 4,400 3,425 -975

AONB Annual Review 450 448 -2

Monitoring Projects (SAONB, visitors,

peace & tranquility) 0 5,170 15,466 4,000 3,167 -833

Planning Adviser Project 0 6,435 6,353 6,150 6,804 654

Maximising Income 0 0 4,078 5,900 5,905 5

Conference 2,150 1,125 -1,025

Gateway Signs 1,770 3,120 1,350

Annual Action Plan 1,033 0 0 0

AONB Partner Awareness raising events 2,123 871 1,853 0

AONB Newsletters 784 2,479 0 0

Interpretation strategy 2,901 3,378 0 0

Annual Report 2,324 482 429 0

Annual Conference 2,083 1,240 0 0

Peace & Tranquility 7,569 0 0 0

Implement Signs Program 4,000 0 0 0

Dog Projects 1,772 3,942 0 0

State of AONB Report 6,690 0 0 0

Walkers Project 0 0 729 0

AONB Membership Project 0 3,729 0 0

33,835 27,885 29,119 29,930 28,976 -954

TOTAL BUDGET 170,800 170,057 170,484 169,500 169,491 -9

FUNDED BY:

Natural England 128,809 126,800 0 0 0 0

Defra 0 0 0 125,520 127,119 1,599

Lichfield District Council 2,092 2,092 2,092 2,092 2,092 0

South Staffordshire District Council 2,092 2,092 2,092 2,092 2,092 0

Cannock Chase District Council 8,368 8,368 8,368 8,368 8,368 0

Stafford Borough Council 8,368 8,368 8,368 8,368 8,368 0

Staffordshire County Council 20,700 21,212 20,920 20,920 20,920 0

168,959

Income Generation 1,326 10,662 21,990 0 3,606 3,606

Funding from/to reserve -955 -9,539 -18,865 0 -3,073 -3,073

170,800 170,056 44,965 167,360 169,491 2,131

CANNOCK CHASE AONB JOINT COMMITTEE

Final Outturn 2012/13

Cannock Chase AONB Core and Project Costs

of 53

APPENDIX 2

Final

Outturn

2012/13

£

AONB SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FUND

Approved Projects

AONB Mustelid Project 471

Walk to Win, Cannock Chase Council 4,750

As Special as the AONB, Young Carers 3,870

Activity Barn, Beaudesert Trust 5,000

Youth Led AONB Heathland Fire Awareness

Project, Staffordshire Fire Service 4,500

Veteran tree project, Staffordshire CC 240

Jenny Collier Art project, Unit 12 1,475

Management plan photography, Fixed Point

Photography Group 1,319

AONB Passport project, Young Enterprise 4,000

Ramblers walking project, Walsall Ramblers 2,850

Crime Prevention Signs for car parks 1,141

Administration Fees 3,218

TOTAL PROPOSED/APPROVED 32,834


Final Outturn 2012/13

Sustainable Development Fund

of 53

APPENDIX 3

Approved

Budget

£ £

AONB Core Budget

Staff Salaries and Associated costs 117,477 16,698

Accommodation /Office Equipment 8,624 123

Transport 5,100 12

Partnership budget for PR events 3,000 0

Partnership running costs (In kind) 6,600 0

140,801 16,833

Core Action Projects

AONB Website 160 0

AONB Annual Review 500 0

Horsiculture 4,000 0

Management Plan Review 5,000 3,100

Community Involvement and Awareness Events 2,500 692

Visitor Survey - Management Proposals 1,000 0

Planning Support Project 6,000 6,000

Maximising Income 3,500 3,419

Heritage Projects 3,900 0

26,560 13,211

TOTAL BUDGET 167,361 30,044

FUNDED BY:

Defra 125,521 0

Lichfield District Council 2,092 2,092

South Staffordshire District Council 2,092 2,092

Cannock Chase District Council 8,368 8,368

Stafford Borough Council 8,368 8,368

Staffordshire County Council 20,920 20,920

167,361 41,840

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FUND 24,588 0

Budget 2013/14


Spent/Committed

to May

Cannock Chase AONB Core and Project Costs and Sustainable Development Fund

of 53

APPENDIX 4

Financial Opening Income/ Visitor Survey Admin Transfer from Closing

Year Balance Donations Work Fees Reserve Interest Balance

£ £ £ £ £ £ £

2007-08 10,214 0 0 0 -1,766 8,448

2008-09 8,448 572 0 9,303 -1,590 16,733

2009-10 16,733 1,326 0 6,166 -371 23,854

2010-11 23,854 896 9,563 4,744 -921 38,136

2011-12 38,136 1,240 17,845 3,983 -4,203 57,001

2012-13 57,001 387 0 3,218 -532 195 60,269

4,421 27,408 27,414 -9,383 195

CANNOCK CHASE AONB RESERVE

of 53

Cannock Chase AONB Joint Committee – 17 June 2013

Report of the Chairman of Officers' Working Group and the Honorary Secretary

Agenda Item 11

Governance Review Up-date

1. Recommendations

3. There should be a standard Joint Committee agenda item specifically for Advisers to share their views with the Joint Committee.

4. Members specify to the Officers' Working Group the scope of the governance review planned for 2014-15.

2. Background 2.1 At the last Joint Committee meeting the content for the governance review

planned for 2014-15 was discussed by Members. This raised some issues of immediate concern and some queries to be addressed.

2.2 Members required confirmation from the Honorary Secretary about whether: • non-executive members of the local authorities can attend and vote at

the Joint Committee • advisers to the Joint Committee can vote on business (i.e. Chairman of

the Advisory Partnership, Forestry Commission, Natural England, AONB Officer).

2.3 Members also noted that prior to any governance changes being considered, improvements could be made, in particular, communications within the Partnership between the Joint Committee and the Advisory Partnership, as well as both their links to the Officers' Working Group. All Members and Advisers agreed this.

3. Up-date 3.1 Legal advice from the Honorary Secretary has been circulated and is

attached at Appendix 1 since the meeting and concludes that neither non-executive members of local authorities nor advisers can vote on business. Substitute members are currently permitted but to vote they must also be executive members of their Authority. To change this each Authority would first have to approve variations to the Partnership Agreement and the Standing Orders for the Joint Committee. Non-executive members of local authorities can currently attend and speak at the invitation of the Joint Committee.

of 53

3.2 The Advisory Partnership also considered the issue and will be reporting its

views at this meeting. 3.3 An agenda item has been included at this meeting for advisers’ reports. It is

proposed that this becomes a standard agenda item for all meetings. 4. Forward Progress

4.1 The Officers' Working Group has revisited the issue and has established that the initial proposal to undertake a full assessment of a range of governance models to make the Partnership fit for the future has raised some immediate questions from the Joint Committee. (Set out in section 2).

4.2 Whilst the immediate short term issues are being addressed as set out in

section 3, there remains the need to address whether the current governance model continues to be the most practicable one for the Partnership beyond 2015. Wider legal issues such as how the local Partnership Agreement relates to the Memorandum of Agreement with Defra will need to be revisited prior to any variation of the current Partnership Agreement or change in governance model.

4.3 The Officers' Working Group therefore requests Members to confirm the

specific scope of this work currently planned for 2014-15.

of 53

Appendix 1

Email Correspondence from John Rowe to Ruth Hÿtch

Ruth Following our meeting on 12 April and Anne's email of 18 March (the relevant section set out below) I would advise as follows. • Can non-executive members of the local authorities attend and vote at the

Joint Committee? • Can advisors to the Joint Committee vote (ie, Forestry Commission, Natural

England, Chairman of the Advisory Partnership, AONB Officer)? The answer to these questions is no (although non-executive members of the local authorities could attend and speak by specific invitation of the Joint

Committee), under the current Partnership Agreement(PA). The relevant sections of the PA are:

2.3 The Joint Committee shall comprise the following membership:

2.3.1 The Lead Authority will appoint one member being a County Councillor who is a member of the Lead Authority’s Executive.

2.3.2 Each Authority other than the Lead Authority will appoint one member being a Councillor of that Authority who is (from the date on which that Authority begin to operate Executive arrangements under the Local Government Act 2000) a member of that Authority’s Executive.

2.3.3 Each Authority may nominate to the Secretary to the Joint Committee a substitute for the Councillor appointed under paragraph 2.3.1 or 2.3.2 (as the case may be). Each such substitute must be a Councillor who is eligible to be a voting member of the Joint Committee. Such substitute may also attend meetings of the Joint Committee as observer in a non-voting capacity.

4.3 Each officer nominated under paragraph 4.1 shall be entitled to attend, but

not to vote at, meetings of the Joint Committee.

5.5 (Standing Orders)The Joint Committee for the time being shall co-opt as advisers to the Joint Committee the Chairman of the AONB Advisory Partnership, the AONB Officer, a representative of the Agency, two representatives of the Forestry Commission and a representative of English Nature to attend and speak (but not vote) at meetings of the Joint Committee and may from time to time co-opt one or more other advisers to attend such meeting or meetings of the Joint Committee as the Joint Committee may specify having regard to the knowledge or skill of the co-opted adviser, and the contribution he may make to the business of the Joint Committee at that meeting or those meetings. Such other co-opted adviser(s) shall be entitled to speak but not to vote.

of 53

To change this would have to be authorised as follows under the Partnership

Agreement: 13. VARIATION OF AGREEMENT 13.1 This Agreement may be varied at any time upon such terms as the

Authorities after consultation with the Joint Committee may agree.

16. Variation and Revocation of Standing Orders

16.1 Any addition, variation or revocation of these Standing Orders shall when

proposed and seconded stand adjourned without discussion to the next ordinary meeting of the Joint Committee, provided that this standing order shall not apply to any review of standing orders at the annual meetings of the Joint Committee. Any such addition, variation or revocation shall be first referred to each Authority for their approval.

The County Council would not have to amend it's constitution to appoint non - executive members because the Cabinet may appoint non - Cabinet members to the joint Committee as the Joint Committee has functions for only part of the area of the authority and that area is smaller than two-fifths of the authority by area or population. In such cases, the Cabinet may appoint to the Joint Committee any Councillor who is a member for an electoral division which is wholly or partly contained within the area. I am not aware of the position in any of the Districts so they may need to amend their constitutions to allow non - executive members onto the Joint Committee. Regarding other bodies/advisers being appointed to the joint committee, s102 of the Local Government Act 1972 provides that such a committee may include persons who are not members of the appointing authority or authorities so it appears if the authorities so wish those other bodies could be given voting rights.

Is this sufficient for current purposes or if you need any thing further or would

like to discuss, please let me know. Regards John Rowe Senior Solicitor

Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Joint ... · Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding...

Documents

Transcript of Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Joint ... · Cannock Chase Area of Outstanding...