Hounslow Council


Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: The Terrace Room, The Small Mansion, Gunnersbury Park

Contact: Carol Stiles Tel: 020 8583 2066 or email:  carol.stiles@hounslow.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

73.

Apologies for absence, declarations of interest or any other communications from Members

Decision:

Apologies had been received from Councillor Bassam Mahfouz, Councillor Matt Harmer and Councillor Colin Ellar.

 

The meeting was quorate with three members present – two from LB Ealing and one from LB Hounslow.

 

The Chair advised her intention to move the exclusion of press and public at the end of the published agenda as there was an item, exempt from publication, which the Panel wished to discuss.

 

 

Minutes:

Apologies had been received from Councillor Bassam Mahfouz, Councillor Matt Harmer and Councillor Colin Ellar.

 

The meeting was quorate with three members present – two from LB Ealing and one from LB Hounslow.

 

The Chair advised her intention to move the exclusion of press and public at the end of the published agenda as there was an item, exempt from publication, which the Panel wished to discuss.

 

 

74.

Minutes of the meeting held on 24 January 2014 and any Matters Arising from the minutes pdf icon PDF 103 KB

Decision:

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 January 2014 were confirmed with one amendment. Item 70, page 6, paragraph 2, third sentence – Panel discussion – Events – Councillor Collins had said that ‘the estate was a valuable asset which had been exploited for decades.’ Add that ‘Councillor Johnson replied that, no, the estate had been neglected, not exploited.’

 

 

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 January 2014 were confirmed with one amendment.

 

Item 70, page 6, paragraph 2, third sentence – Panel discussion – Events – Councillor Collins had said that ‘the estate was a valuable asset which had been exploited for decades.’ Add that ‘Councillor Johnson replied that, no, the estate had been neglected, not exploited.’

 

 

75.

Update on the Heritage Lottery Fund Parks Project - presentation pdf icon PDF 6 MB

Decision:

  1. The Panel noted the presentation and the late written report.
  2. It was agreed that the presentation should be circulated to all members by email and posted on the website.
  3. In respect of the Business Plan, the Panel recommended to officers that there should be two rates for school visits – a rate for all schools within LB Ealing and LB Hounslow and a higher rate for schools in other boroughs.
  4. The Panel also approved the current scheme for allowing a window of opportunity for state schools to book visits in advance of the independent schools, given that more efficient booking by independent schools could exclude access for state schools.
  5. In respect of the carriage display building, members suggested that the option of having a further glass window at the south side of the building to provide more open view of the display on approach would be welcomed. Officers agreed to feed back to the architects to see what might be done, bearing in mind the need to protect the carriages from direct sunlight.
  6. It was agreed that the Project team needed to look at ensuring that there would be sufficient capacity in the café kitchen to cater for both the café and external events.
  7. Members noted that LB Ealing had made a Capital funding commitment towards funding of the Sports Hub and asked that they were notified of the link to this commitment on the Ealing website.
  8. It was agreed that members of the Panel should be sent an organogram showing who was who of the different consultants working on the Project.

Minutes:

Bridget Gregory, LB Ealing; Jonathan Kirby, LB Ealing and Richard Gill, LB Hounslow gave a presentation to update on the Heritage Lottery Fund Parks Project (Agenda Item 3), the Heritage Lottery Fund Museum Project (Agenda Item 4), including an update on the café proposals and the Business Plan, and an update on the Stables repairs (Agenda Item 5).

 

A late written report had also been produced and circulated to support the presentation on these items.

 

Consultation and Activity Plan

 

Bridget Gregory, LB Ealing, opened the presentation and gave details of the consultations undertaken as part of the project. Eleven thousand had taken part in consultations. There had been considerable consultation before the Round 1 bid was submitted and subsequent events, questionnaires and focus groups. The aim was to engage a new audience, drawing in, for example, young people and those from ethnic minorities. A pop up museum programme had proved very successful in this respect attracting two thirds from ethnic minorities. The project team had also worked with a range of partnership and community groups.

 

An Activity Plan had been developed in support of the second round application to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) and part of it focused on those people who were not visiting the park currently. Training and learning was built into the project. For example, the architects’ contract included the expectation for them to deliver 5 half day learning sessions for volunteers and community groups. They would also use heritage horticulture as a tool for community development. The aim was to improve learning.

 

A presentation slide showed the visitor numbers now and the target for the future to increase from around 600,000 to a million. It was also the aim to double the number of school visits and increase the number of volunteers. This would also involve increasing the staff structure.

 

Councillor Collins noted the reference to apprentices and asked how many apprenticeships were anticipated and where they would be located. Bridget Gregory replied that there would be 8 apprentices.

 

The Chair asked that the presentation should be circulated to all members and available on the website.

 

Ms Gregory continued the presentation to explain the intention to target a range of people in the park and museum. They particularly wished to attract more adults and people with disabilities and to increase the visits by secondary schools and young people in general.

 

Councillor Collins asked whether, in targeting secondary schools, Free Schools would be targeted as well. The Chair suggested that it would be more appropriate to refer to targeting schools, to include all types of school. She suggested that there should be two rates for schools visits – a rate for any schools in LB Ealing and LB Hounslow and a higher rate for schools outside the borough. This seemed a fair approach as the boroughs contributed to the park. The Chair recommended that this was done and it was agreed that the project team would take this back to look at as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

76.

Update on the Heritage Lottery Fund Museum Project - presentation

Update includes:

 

  • Update on Café proposals
  • Business Plan

Decision:

See Item 3.

Minutes:

See Minute 75.  

77.

Update on Stables repairs - presentation

Decision:

See Item 3.

Minutes:

See Minute 75.  

78.

Update on the Revenue Budget for 2013/14

Decision:

The report was noted.

Minutes:

 

See the late report by Richard Gill - Agenda Item 6 and 6 a.

 

The Chair advised that she had discussed with Richard Gill the need for the hole in the perimeter fence to be fixed. Richard Gill explained that there was a gap in the railings near New Lodge. The railings would be replaced as part of the Heritage Lottery Fund project but meanwhile repairs to the fence had been ordered.

 

The Chair referred members to the late report circulated to members which included information on the budget. She invited questions.

 

Members questioned how the figures for the financial contribution of each authority were included in the itemised budget. Chris Bunting, LB Ealing, confirmed that the contribution for the current financial year from each borough was the same as the previous financial year. However, members queried this as the figures appeared to show £10k more for each borough.

 

Richard Gill confirmed that the planned expenditure from each authority was £355k. However, there had been slightly less income generated this financial year because of decanting the flats in the Mansions. Chris Bunting clarified that this meant that the spend in the financial year would be £365k, so £10k more had been committed this financial year. Next financial year 2014/15, the figure would revert to £355k.

 

Councillor Dabrowska explored what the projected outturn figure would be for actuals. The report stated a figure for the profile at 31 March 2014. She asked what the difference was between profile and projected outturn. Was the profile figure to the end of March less the projected figure to the end of February?

 

Richard Gill clarified that the figure to the end of February (which should read 28 February 2014) showed the figure at month 11 and so was 11/12ths of the projected figure. Councillor Dabrowska wished to be clear that the profile figure was to the end of February. It was confirmed that the top bar of the chart should read – profile to 28 February 2014 and actuals to 28 February 2014.

 

The Chair understood that showing the figures to the end of February indicated that money had not been spent which she assumed would be spent in March. However, the figures as shown did not quite add up so she suggested that there needed to be an asterisk to a footnote to explain the variance.

 

James Wisdom was surprised that there appeared to be under-spend for responsive maintenance, but Chris Bunting clarified that this was not under-spend. The projected spend was 100% with £20k spent in one month in March. Richard Gill further explained that the actual spend had been made more effectively on budget because of the expenditure on the Stables. Whilst most of the repair work on the Stables had been met from the capital budget, the balance from the revenue budget had been put to the Stables work to enhance the capital. So the spend was exact.

 

Councillor Dabrowska referred to the vacant flats and asked whether a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78.

79.

Update report on the above items - written report pdf icon PDF 1 MB

This is a late report covering agenda items 3-6.

Additional documents:

Decision:

The report was noted.

Minutes:

The report was noted. Discussion of the items included was included in the discussion of the presentation. See Minute 75.

80.

Dates of future meetings

The Panel had suggested setting up a programme of dates for the new Municipal Year. It would be helpful to have some agreed dates post election for the benefit of newly appointed members.

 

Given the usual pattern of meetings in January, April, July and October I would suggest the following Fridays (with possible alternatives).

 

It would be helpful to have members’ input as to which date in each case might be preferable. These dates can then be confirmed with the new membership from June 2014 :

 

       Friday, 4 July 2014             or Friday, 11 July 2014

 

       Friday, 10 October 2014    or Friday, 17 October 2014

 

       Friday, 23 January 2015    or Friday, 30 January 2015

 

       Friday, 10 April 2015          or Friday, 17 April 2015   (Easter is Friday, 3 -              Monday, 6 April 2015)

 

Decision:

  1. Members agreed the pattern of meetings as July, October, January and April.
  2. it was agreed that the exact dates should be confirmed with the new membership of the Panel post election.
  3. It was also proposed to consider whether an earlier start time might be possible post election.

Minutes:

Members considered the proposed dates and options set out in the agenda. They asked whether there would be a preferred date in July in respect of information on the project being made available to the Panel. IT was explained that information about the success of the bid would be embargoed through July so either date would be suitable.

 

Rather than discuss individual preferred dates at this juncture, the Panel agreed the pattern of meetings proposed, acknowledged that Fridays remained the most suitable day and agreed to confirm exact dates post election when the new membership was known. The Chair suggested that an earlier start time might be considered at that point, if possible for the members required to attend.

 

Resolved:

 

  1. Members agreed the pattern of meetings as July, October, January and April.
  2. it was agreed that the exact dates should be confirmed with the new membership of the Panel post election.
  3. It was also proposed to consider whether an earlier start time might be possible post election.

81.

Urgent Business

Any business which the Chair agrees to accept on grounds of urgency.

Decision:

The main agenda was concluded at 7.45 p.m. The Panel agreed that the press and public should be excluded at that point to allow consideration of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Minutes:

The main agenda was concluded at 7.45 p.m. The Panel agreed that the press and public should be excluded at that point to allow consideration of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

 

Following the exclusion of press and public, the Panel discussed aspects of security within the park and museum, some concerns and possible options. A preferred option for members would be to have one or more of the lodges tenanted with staff responsible for the site. It was also confirmed that matters of secure access and Secure by Design strategies were included in the planning documents.