notification full council 12th dec 2012

7/30/2019 Notification Full Council 12th Dec 2012

1/26

FROME TOWN COUNCILmaking Frome a better place

The next meeting of

FROME TOWN COUNCIL

Wednesday 12th December 2012 at 7.00pm

Frome Assembly Rooms, Christchurch Street West, BA11 1EB

Members of Frome Town Council are:Dave Anderson; Eve Berry; Carole Bullen; Graham Burgess; Adrian Dobinson; Toby Eliot;James Godman; Pippa Goldfinger; Tricia Golinski; Damon Hooton; Claire Hudson; PeterMacfadyen; Dickon Moore; Helen Sprawson-White; Helen Starkie; Mel Usher; Nick White

Due to the expected number of people wanting to comment on the Steiner SchoolPlanning application we request that a representative is nominated to present

similar views, where possible. We have allocated a maximum of 20 minutes for thispart of public participation. In order to record comments accurately we would

appreciate a written copy given to the Clerk.

AGENDA

1. Public Participation2. Apologies for Absence3. Declaration of Members Interest4. Minutes5. Announcements6. Public Participation7. For Decision Steiner School Planning Application8. For Decision Groundcare Contract9. For Information Frome Town Centre Remodelling Feasibility Study10. For Decision Evening Bus Services between Frome and Bath11. For Information Land Owned by Homes and Communities Agency, Garsdale

12. For Information FTC/MDC Overlap Paper13. Date of Next Meeting - Wednesday 30 January at 7.00pm

Yours sincerely

Paul WynneTown Clerk5 December 2012


2/26


1. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

To receive representations for general topics.

2. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCETo receive any apologies for absence

3. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS INTERESTSTo receive any declarations of Members Interests in any item on the agenda

4. MINUTESa. To consider and approve the minutes of the Council meeting held on 3 October

2012

b. To receive for information the minutes of the last Internal and External AffairsCommittee meetings.

5. ANNOUNCEMENTSTo receive verbal announcements from Town, District and County Councillors

6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATIONTo receive representations regarding the Steiner School planning application.

7. FOR DECISION STEINER SCHOOL PLANNING APPLICATIONAuthor - Planning and Development Officer

a) Purpose of the reportTo provide background information and officer comments on the planningapplication to develop a Steiner School at Park Road so that the Council can makerepresentations to the Local Planning Authority, Mendip District Council. The reportfocuses on the issues that the District Council can take into account whendetermining the planning application (material considerations see Appendix 1 fora list of material and non-material considerations). A copy of the application, plansand supporting documents will be made available at the meeting.

b) Application descriptionDemolition of the existing health centre and partial demolition of the existing VictoriaHospital, change of use of remaining buildings from Class C2 (residential institution:hospital/health centre) to Class D1 (non-residential institution: school), erection ofnew buildings comprising a new hall and kitchens, new two storey workshop andclassroom block, and two storey classroom extension to Victoria Hospital, andprovision of associated vehicular access, parking/servicing and landscaping.

c) Summary of key material considerationsAll the documents that accompany the application and the report on pre-applicationconsultation undertaken by the applicant have been studied. Below is a summary

of the key material considerations that have emerged.

d) Pre application consultation


3/26


Two reports were produced by the applicants setting out the responses from thetwo public consultation events. The following is an extract from the executive

summary of those reports.

Those who did not support the proposal to open the Academy just outweighedthose who do. Support for the school was focused around the need for moreeducational choice, and the sense that the Steiner approach provided a goodalternative within the existing Frome provision. Those who did not support theschool cited a range of issues, mainly centred on traffic concerns, worries about theimpact on other schools and lack of belief in the Steiner approach.

FTC Officer CommentThe pre-application planning consultation carried out by the applicant is a material

planning consideration and weight should be given to the fact that there were morepeople against the proposal than for.

e) Transport issues

A Transport Assessment has been produced by RPS Planning on behalf of theapplicant and assesses the impact that the development proposals may have onthe surrounding highway and transportation network. A Travel Plan has also beenprepared that sets out the schools policy on travel to school. These are importantconsiderations in the context of Policy Q3 of the adopted Mendip Local Plan whichstates that:

Development will only be permitted if it:1. makes satisfactory provision for access by all means of travel, particularly bymeans other than the private car, for servicing, and for parking of motor vehiclesand cycles;2. does not create traffic or environmental problems over the wider transportnetwork or require transport improvements which would harm the character of thelocality.

The parking standards policy is also relevant:

DP10 - Parking StandardsNew development will be supported where vehicle parking is proposed which isappropriate to the operational needs of the development. When assessing what isan appropriate level of parking provision in relation to a development proposal,regard will be had to: The objectives of reducing growth in the use of private vehicles and promotingalternative means of travel The need for on-site provision to prevent problems of highway safety, congestionor visual intrusion in the vicinity of the site

A variety of surveys were carried out by RPS Planning to establish the amount oftraffic generated by the existing use of the site. The following key data and statistics


4/26


given within the report was used to determine the likely amount of traffic that will begenerated by the site when at full capacity.

Total pupil numbers in 2026/2027: 624Total Staff numbers in 2026/2027: 70

Key statements within the Transport Assessment:

Section 3.2.1 states:-A total of 27 spaces are to be provided as part of the development proposals,including 5 disabled spaces. Forming the breakdown of these spaces, it is proposedthat 9 of the 27 spaces will be used for staff, with the remainder used forparent/pupil drop off and visitors.

Section 3.2.2 states:-Once the Academy expands to become a full all-through Academy, it is proposedthat the adjacent MUGA (Multi Use Games Area) will be used as an overflowparking area for further drop off spaces during the core arrival and departure timesonly. The facility will only be used for this purpose after secondary pupils are firstenrolled at the Academy.

Section 3.2.3 states:-Once the full staff numbers of 70 are realised, approximately 35 are expected totravel by car and these will be involved in car-sharing schemes of at least 2 staff per

car. 15 of the onsite parking spaces will be allocated to staff with the remaining 12designated spaces and MUGA overflow providing drop off facilities. Another schoolpolicy that will influence the role and use of parking facilities of the site is to limit carparking drop off for primary pupils, unless exceptional circumstances prevail. This issupported by measures within the accompanying School Travel Plan

Section 3.2.4 states (in part):-the school has predicted that in the region of 80% of pupils will be withinappropriate walking and cycling distance of the school and would not be required tocatch public transport services to reach the Academy. It is envisaged that a further

10% would utilise car sharing schemes and the remaining 10% will travel by motorvehicle.

Section 2.1.3 states (in part):-Park Road is a two-way cul-de sac road serving the existing Frome MedicalCentre, church, sheltered accommodation complex and the former Frome hospitalsite

Section 6.2.1 concludes that:-The proposed development is an appropriate scheme that technically should nothave a material negative impact on the surrounding highway and transportation

network and therefore RPS believes that the highways consultation should recordno objection. This Transport Assessment is hereby commended to SCC asaccompanying information to the planning application.


5/26


FTC Officer Comment

There is no evidence to back up the expected figures for pupils and stafftravelling to the site, either in the form of a model used at another Steiner Schoolor any other school. Therefore it is difficult to gauge the impact the developmentwill have on the surrounding network.

Park Road is a narrow cul-de-sac with no on street turning, which conflicts withthe description in the Transport Assessment.

There is an assumption that most pupils will live within walking and cycling

distance of the school: the maps showing the locations of existing pupils showthat a significant number of existing pupils already live outside Frome.

There is a danger that the MUGA could be lost permanently to car parking; anappropriate condition should be imposed to safeguard future use of the MUGAfor games purposes

f) Response from SCC Principal Planning Liaison Officer(concluding remarks a full copy of the response is attached as Appendix 2)

Given the weakness in the Transport Assessment in predicting the levels of trafficthat can be expected in Park Road each morning and the likelihood of many morecars than are predicted for the reasons outlined above, the Highway Authority isforced to conclude that the impact of the additional traffic from the development onPark Road will be unacceptable. There is no option but to recommend refusal ofthis application for the following reason:-

Park Road by reason of its restricted width, poor alignment and sub-standardjunction with Christchurch Street West is considered unsuitable to serve as ameans of access to the proposed development. The proposal is therefore contraryto Policy 49 of the Somerset and Exmoor National Park Joint Structure Plan Review

(adopted Apr 00) and Policy Q3 of the Mendip District Local Plan/Core Strategy(adopted Dec 02). The Transport Assessment is not of sufficient quality andaccuracy to enable the Local Planning Authority to make a full assessment of thetraffic impact of this proposal.

g) Design

The key local plan policy relating to design is Policy Q1 - Design Quality andProtection of Amenity:

Development will be permitted where its design relates satisfactorily to its

surroundings in terms of:1 the impact of the scheme on urban design;2 the impact of the scheme on the landscape;


6/26


3 the function of the open spaces around the development;4 the amenity of neighbouring buildings and land-uses; and

5 amenity provided to occupiers of the development.

Members should note that Victoria House and the adjoining Victoria Park are withinthe Frome Conservation Area (Character Area 9: Victoria Park) Policies EN19 EN22 of the adopted Mendip Local Plan deal with the requirements for newdevelopment, demolition and change of use within a Conservation Area.

The site is currently dominated by the presence of Victoria House (a former hospitalbuilding) and a series of mature trees around its boundary. Victoria House with theexception of some low quality extensions will be incorporated into the design. Theexisting Chantry House is located in the north east corner and is not visible from

Park Road. Some new buildings including extensions to Victoria House, a multi-purpose hall and the Craft Building are to be constructed. They are to beconstructed from solid laminated timber and clad in larch with the intention ofmaking them distinctly different to the existing buildings. They are intended toappear as lightweight garden buildings adjacent to the dominant masonry ofVictoria House.

A key feature of the landscape strategy is the interweaving and interlocking of thebuilt form of the new school into the landscape and the design seeks to achievethis principally through the retention of important landscape features (and habitats)such as the boundary hedgerows and larger trees along the Victoria Park boundary.

The Mendip District Council Conservation Officer has indicated that they have noreal concerns with the application. They think that a reasonably conservative andsensitive approach is being taken towards the historic building on the site. Thecontemporary approach to the new build is encouraged. However, they would liketo see a better assessment of the impact on the views of the site from theConservation Area especially from the north.

FTC Officer Comment

The applicant promotes a contemporary and high quality design that makes a cleardistinction between the existing and new buildings on site. Attention has been paidto the relationship between the development and surrounding landscape and overallit is not considered that it will have a detrimental impact on the amenity ofsurrounding buildings or land uses. However, an assessment of the impact onviews from the north of the site would be welcomed.

h) Waste Management

A site waste management plan has been prepared by KIER Construction setting outthe proposals for the site. It takes into account all of the required legislative

requirements. Kier procedures are committed to the halving waste to landfillinitiative. Materials will be reused on site where possible with the rest recycledwhere possible.


7/26


i) Flood Risk Assessment

A Food Risk Assessment has been prepared by Integral Engineering Design.The assessment identifies that the site is within Flood Zone 1 which is a Lowprobability of flooding, less than 1 in 1000 annual probability of flooding (associatedwith river or sea flooding) in any one year. For surface water, an attenuation pondwill be provided. The flood risk assessment has been produced in accordance withthe National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) section 10 and is supported bytechnical data. It demonstrates that the site is suitable for development without floodrisk and without causing an increase in flood risk to others.

j) Noise

An Acoustic Assessment Report has been prepared by RPS Planning. It assessesthe suitability of the site for development in line with the requirements of BuildingBulletin 93, which sets out the constructional standards for acoustics for new schoolbuildings. The report provides details of external and internal noise levels.

With regard to noise from site generated traffic, the report concludes thatnoise levels from traffic generated by the site are expected to be similar to thosecurrently experienced for the sites use as a health centre. Therefore it is notconsidered that noise from traffic to and from the school will have any significanteffect. On sports areas and playgrounds, the report concludes that noise from

sports areas and playgrounds should be considered in the design. To minimise thedisturbance to neighbouring Noise Sensitive Receptors (NSRs) it is recommendedthat sports areas and playgrounds are not positioned in locations directly adjoiningthe gardens of properties on Weymouth Road or directly opposite from LongleatCourt.

FTC Officer CommentGiven the weaknesses in the Transport Assessment in terms of predicting futuretraffic levels, it is difficult to assess the impact of site generated traffic on noiselevels in the area. Whilst the Design and Access statement states that the main

sports facility will be located next to the churchyard to minimise the noise impact onthe surrounding area, it does not detail how the other areas, shown as outdoorareas will be used or give any indication as to the possible noise levels.

k) Ecology

An Ecological Appraisal has been produced by RPS Planning. The purpose of theecological survey was to identify the habitats present within and around the site andthe potential for the site and adjoining habitats to be used by species that receivelegal protection.

Section 6.1.1 of the report it recommends that many of the established boundaryhabitats have biodiversity value and should be retained in the re-development of thesite. Retention and enhancement of parts of the Chantry House garden would also


8/26


help conserve existing features of higher value. The mature field maple has natureconservation value in the context of the site and field maples of this size are not

common. The age and dieback will provide habitat for invertebrates, although thisecological value may be classified as poor arboriculture condition. Section 6.2.1 ofthe document states that the demolition of the south-eastern section of VictoriaHospital will result in the loss of a transitional bat roost and, to comply withlegislation, would need to be undertaken under a Natural England EuropeanProtected Species (EPS) mitigation licence.

l) National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

Paragraph 72 of the NPPF specifically deals with the development of schools. TheNPPF advises that the government attaches great importance to ensuring that a

sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and newcommunities. It goes on to say that Local Planning Authorities should take aproactive, positive, collaborative approach to meeting this requirement and todevelopments that will widen the choice in education. The development of aSteiner School will certainly broaden choice in education in Frome.

m) Conclusions

Positive points to emerge include:

The Steiner School will broaden choice in education in Frome, an objectivepromoted by the NPPF

The applicant promotes an innovative and high quality design that makes a cleardistinction between the existing and new buildings on site. Attention has beenpaid to the relationship between the development and surrounding landscapeand the need to protect habitats of biodiversity value

The need for proper waste management is addressed by the proposal

The site is suitable for development without flood risk and without causing anincrease in flood risk to others.

The key issue is the apparent weakness in the Transport Assessment in predicting

the levels of traffic that can be expected in Park Road. This is a sensitive issue byvirtue of the fact that Park Road is narrow, is poorly aligned and is served by a sub-standard junction with Christchurch Street West. An accurate assessment of trafficimpact will also inform the assessment of noise generated by on-site traffic.

n) Recommendations

It is recommended that the following representations are made to Mendip DistrictCouncil:

That the Council requests an update of the Transport Assessment so that the

impact of traffic can be more robustly assessed


9/26


That the Council requests that the Travel Plan is updated to ensure that betterprovision is made for sustainable transport and safe routes to school that

minimise car movements That the MUGA should remain available for games use and not to be turned into

a permanent car park; an appropriate condition should be imposed

That an assessment be required of the impact of the development on views fromthe north of the site

Appendix 1 Material & non-material considerations

Material Planning Considerations - examples

Local, strategic, national planning policies and policies in the local plan

Emerging new plans which have already been through at least one stage ofpublic consultation

Pre-application planning consultation carried out by, or on behalf of, theapplicant

Government and Planning Inspectorate requirements - circulars, orders,statutory instruments, guidance and advice

Previous appeal decisions and planning Inquiry reports Principles of Case Law held through the Courts Loss of sunlight (based on Building Research Establishment guidance) Overshadowing/loss of outlook to the detriment of residential amenity

(though not loss of view as such) Overlooking and loss of privacy Highway issues: traffic generation, vehicular access, highway safety Noise or disturbance resulting from use, including proposed hours of

operation Smells and fumes Capacity of physical infrastructure, e.g. in the public drainage or water

systems Deficiencies in social facilities, e.g. spaces in schools Storage & handling of hazardous materials and development of

contaminated land

Loss or effect on trees Adverse impact on nature conservation interests & biodiversity opportunities Effect on listed buildings and conservation areas Incompatible or unacceptable uses Local financial considerations offered as a contribution or grant Layout and density of building design, visual appearance and finishing

materials Inadequate or inappropriate landscaping or means of enclosure

Matt Williams the Senior Planning Officer who is dealing with the application hasadvised that he does not believe that the impact this application may have on other

school places within Frome, is a material planning consideration.


10/26


Non-Material Planning Considerations - examples

Matters controlled under building regulations or other non-planninglegislation e.g. structural stability, drainage details, fire precautions, matterscovered by licences etc.

Private issues between neighbours e.g. land/boundary disputes, damage toproperty, private rights of access, covenants, ancient and other rights to lightetc.

Problems arising from the construction period of any works, e.g. noise, dust,construction vehicles, hours of working (covered by Control of Pollution

Acts). Opposition to the principle of development when this has been settled by an

outline planning permission or appeal Applicants personal circumstances (unless exceptionally and clearly

relevant, e.g. provision of facilities for someone with a physical disability) Previously made objections/representations regarding another site or

application Factual misrepresentation of the proposal Opposition to business competition Loss of property value Loss of view


11/26


8. FOR DECISION MDC CORE SERVICES CONTRACT

Presentation from MDC and The Landscape Group

Author of paper Town Clerk

a) Summary

The Landscape Group and MDC will be making a presentation on the new contract.

This paper provides a background to Cllrs on the main content of the contract andrecommends that FTC open discussions with The Landscape Group to exploreenhancing the service in Frome.

b) Background

MDC has now let their core services contract to The Landscape Group. The areasof work covered by the contract comprise grounds maintenance, facilitiesmanagement, civil engineering works, street cleansing and toilets. Parts of thecontract, grounds maintenance, for example, started on 1 November while streetcleansing starts on 1 July 2013. The contract covers a 10 year period and the wholeof Mendip district. A more detailed summary of the contract content provided byMDC is at appendix 1.

c) MDC thinking behind the contract

There are below a series of passages taken from a paper presented to MDCCabinet on 24 September. They provide a reasonable summary of MDC thinking.

Combining a range of services under one contract and management customers willexperience increased efficiencies and synergies, e.g. between grass cutting andstreet cleaning; which will lead to a better outcome in terms of cleaner streets.

(The new contract) presents opportunities for flexibility and incorporation of serviceenhancements by working with local parishes and community action groups.

The Contract Management Team and the new Contractor will form a robustworking partnership with clear governance and monitoring to ensure project deliveryfocuses on delivering a high quality service to a programmed plan. This will besupported by public engagement that will endeavour to foster strong communitylines through a variety of forms including open dialogue with town and parishcouncils.

apprenticeship proposals forming part of the contract contribute to

the.opportunities for employed and unemployed to improve their basic andvocational skills.


12/26


It is worth exploring with MDC and The Landscape Group how FTC can collaboratewith them to deliver these objectives.

Other than the references to parishes above, there is no mention in the paper of thedesire for MDC to embrace or consider the localism agenda and Governmententhusiasm for devolving public services to the local level. Indeed, rightly or wronglythe scope of the contract covers a wide range of services over the whole of thedistrict over a very long contract period which may preclude many of the moreinteresting aspects of the localism agenda.

Indeed the paper presented to Cabinet confirmed that:

the main aims of the Core Services Contract project was (sic) to achieve value for

money and savings in the cost of delivering a range of core, predominately publicfacing, services.

the combined contract will deliver the same range of services for less than 1,500kper annum representing significant savings estimated to be in excess of 350k perannum.

d) Discussion

Many Cllrs have been concerned for some time about street cleansing in the towncentre and in the last few months FTC has employed a lengthsman to give the towncentre a daily deeper clean with a response time to solve problems within six hours.This service covers all parts of the town, not just FTC land. We have, therefore,been reacting to and dealing with increasing complaints from residents on matterswhich are strictly not our responsibility. Our philosophy, however, is; if its aproblem the resident is not concerned who is responsible, they just want action.

The new contract will not cover anything that is not MDC responsibility andtherefore will exclude all private land and town council land. These anomalies andthe incomprehensibility (to the community) of several public sector organisationsmaintaining land and street furniture will remain. The classic example is the river

frontage in the town centre with parts owned by FTC, Mendip , the County, theEnvironment Agency or indeed apparently nobody.

A joined up service that the town requires will not occur unless agreements aremade with the contractor. It is worth exploring, therefore, whether FTC could deliversome of the contract in the town on behalf of The Landscape Group in order toprovide a more comprehensive service that reflects community wishes.

It may also worth exploring whether it is feasible for The Landscape Group to takeon some of the FTC responsibilities. It might be more appropriate, for example, forthe contractor to mow our bigger sites such Weylands, Victoria Park and Mary Baily

Playing Field while we concentrate on smaller sites.


13/26


It should be noted that informal but positive get to know you discussions havealready taken place between Simon Woollen and the local contract manager for

The Landscape Group.

e) Recommendations

That discussions are held with The Landscape Group and MDC to explore localadditions, anomalies, omissions and amendments to the contract and with FTC.

That the Town Clerk brings a review of the situation back to the Council in sixmonths time.


14/26


9. FOR DECISION FROME TOWN CENTRE RE-MODELLING FEASIBILITY STUDYAuthor - Economic Development and Regeneration Manager.

a) Purposes and scope of the report

This is an interim report to summarise progress on the feasibility study into the re-modelling of Frome Town Centre and recommend next steps. A more detailedpresentation will be delivered at the meeting by consultants, Landscape Projects.This will include detailed sketch plans.

b) BackgroundMembers will be aware that the Town Council commissioned consultants,Landscape Projects, to undertake a feasibility study to examine the potential for

remodelling the public realm of the town centre of Frome. The aim is to make amore welcoming, people-friendly place, and to reinforce the economic, cultural andsocial vitality of the town. The study was designed to help answer two keyquestions:

Is there value in remodelling the town centre?

What are the range of options that would deliver a more vibrant town centre?The commission grew out of the Vision 4 Frome Community Plan, which recognisedthat the town centre is dominated by traffic which adversely affects peoplesperceptions of the town as a place to shop and visit and their ability to move acrossthe town centre.The study, carried out by Landscape Projects in summer/ autumn 2012, examinedthe potential for a wide range of improvements across the town centre with aspecial but not exclusive focus on the Market Place.An evidence-base of data describing the public realm of the town centre wasassembled through desktop study, archive research, site observations, stakeholderworkshops and interviews.The project as a whole has been guided by a steering group comprisingrepresentatives from Frome Town Council, Somerset County Council, MendipDistrict Council, Frome Civic Society, Frome Chamber of Commerce and otherparts of the community. Technical stakeholder meetings were held with CountyCouncil and District Council officers.

Town centre stakeholder meetings were held on 12 and 24 September at TrinityChurch Hall and an open public meeting was held on 2 October at the FromeCheese & Grain followed by a public exhibition at the same venue between 2 and 7October. People were also able to make their representations online through theTown Council website and Facebook page. The public consultation exercise wentwell and, despite some initial scepticism, the majority of respondents wanted to seesome improvement with most preferring Option 3 (see paragraph 4.0 below).

c) General findings

Landscape Projects findings show that:

Fromes public realm has been shaped by its topography. The steep slopingstreets to the south and west of the town centre contrast with the relatively open,level spaces of the riverside and Market Place.


15/26


Frome town centre is generally easily accessible from conveniently placed carparks in the lower part of town.

Vehicles dominate the town centre streets particularly the Market Place, BathStreet and The Bridge. This severely affects people movement and adverselyaffects footfall.

Activity in the public realm is primarily associated with shopping; there are fewplaces to stay, linger or appreciate the townscape.

Evening and night time activity is low; people seem reluctant to make use of thetown centre, perhaps due to lingering perceptions of anti-social behaviour.

Landscape Projects concluded that, there was value in remodelling the towncentre.

d) Preferred option

Landscape Projects examined the feasibility of a range of options for the wider towncentre but with a focus on the Market Place. Those options were:

Option 1 Signal controlled crossing to link Stony Street with the Market Place

Option 2a Super Crossing a signalised super crossing where all traffic stopswhile pedestrians walk across Bath Street and Market Place to Stony Street andCork Street

Option 2b - Zebra crossing a combination of three zebra crossings allowingpedestrians to cross while all traffic stops across Bath Street and Market Place toStony Street and Cork Street

Option 3 This option completely transforms the Market Place by resurfacing andrealigning kerbs, widening footways and providing courtesy crossings which markcrossing points. Drivers will drive more slowly due to the design of the carriagewaymaking it easier for pedestrians to cross. The core scheme would include not onlyimprovements to the Market Place but also advanced traffic calming from Butts Hillto Welshmill Road.

It became clear from the consultation exercise that the most popular of the optionwas Option 3. Like Option 2b, this option would improve the appearance andcharacter of the public realm. Investment required to provide crossing facilitieswould be less than for a signal controlled junction. However overall, Option 3 is themost expensive option. Overall public realm improvements and traffic calmingwould improve pedestrian safety by reducing vehicle speeds and increasing driverawareness. The preferred option should have less impact than a signalisedcrossing on vehicular flows. In designing such a scheme, attention would need tobe given to visually impaired pedestrians who may find it difficult to negotiate acourtesy crossing and the drainage issues associated with providing raised tables.

Many of the respondents would like to see parking removed from Boyle Cross aspart of this option and considered that the introduction of free short term parkingelsewhere would address concerns about the loss of parking in this location.


16/26


Somerset County Council have made it clear that traffic modelling will be needed to

take account of the impact of development on traffic and that the implementation ofany scheme is subject to the County Councils approval, detailed design (includingsafety audit) and further public consultation

e) Landscape Projects recommendations

Landscape Projects recommend that:

traffic is slowed throughout the town centre by means of traffic calmingmeasures between Butts Hill and Welshmill Road which include entrancegateways, streetscape design, surfacing, narrowing and carriageway tables.

drivers are made aware, through street design measures including paving and

lowered kerbs, that they are driving within a pedestrian priority area as theyenter Market Place.

car parking, street furniture and other obstacles to pedestrian movement withinthe Market Place are removed, allowing pedestrians more freedom to cross inplaces which suit them.

public realm improvements, including the provision of seats, shelters and otherfeatures, reinforce the perception that Market Place is a pedestrian priority area.The partners in any future scheme have the option to pursue a core schemewhich focuses on the Market Place and traffic calming measures between ButtsHill and Welshmill Road or pursue a wider scheme incorporating improvements

to the wider town centre including works to Palmer Street, Stony Street, ChurchSteps, river ramp, river walkway and tree planting in car parks.

f) Estimated costsIn setting out an estimate of the costs of recommended re-modelling of the towncentre, it is important to note that the estimates are very preliminary and are subjectto confirmation following impact assessments, further site investigation and detaileddesign. However, Landscape Projects have made allowances for likely servicediversions, below ground conditions, VAT, contingency and design fees.Their estimates are as follows:Core scheme: Option 3 provide traffic calming and courtesy crossings with York

stone paving and resin bonded gravel: 1mCore scheme: as above but with high quality concrete paving and coloured bitmacwearing course: 794kCore scheme + wider town centre improvements including works to Palmer Street,Stony Street, Church Steps, river ramp, river walkway and tree planting in carparks: 1.5mIt was not part of the study remit to identify sources of funding but it is essential thatthe Council has an indication of costs in order to source funding. Exploringpotential sources of funding is an important next step for the Council and itspartners to pursue.

g) Conclusions

The feasibility study established that the re-modelling of the town centre would:


17/26


improve pedestrian safety

enhance the historic assets and places of the town centre make a more distinctive and integrated lower town centre

make better connections between lower and upper town centre areas, byreducing the severing effect of the road through traffic calming, which will resultin increased footfall.

make more attractive places for staying, with increased seating and shelter

create a greener and more sustainable town centre through tree planting anduse of robust, sustainable materials.

support activity into the evening through lighting improvements.

The recommendations put forward by Landscape Projects should be seen in thecontext of the wider work that the Town Council is pursuing that is trying to improvethe vitality of Frome Town Centre e.g. the marketing of the town, the developmentof the towns markets and the regeneration of the adjoining Saxonvale site.Pursuing the remodelling of Frome Town Centre would be a significant step indeveloping a distinctive place that people are attracted to and would help the TownCouncil to realise its ambitions for the sustainable economic development of Frome.

h) Next steps

Any development is subject to Somerset County Council approval, policy, detaileddesign (including safety audit) and further public consultation. The first steptowards approval would be an assessment of the traffic impact of any re-modellingexercise focusing on the recommended core scheme and the core scheme + widertown centre improvements. A development brief is currently being prepared whichif implemented would result in a report on the likely impact of the recommendedimprovements on other routes with a particular focus on Rodden Road New Road Wallbridge Locks Hill.This assessment would be commissioned by Somerset County Council but the costwould have to be financed by Frome Town Council. A verbal update will beprovided on the cost at the meeting.

In due course and subject to the outcome of the assessment of traffic impact, therewould also need to be an assessment of the impact on air quality. Although Fromeis not currently an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), it is understood that it isclose to meeting the criteria for designation as an AQMA.Another crucial consideration is how the recommended improvements could befinanced. Possibilities include New Homes Bonus, Community Infrastructure Levy,Reserves and Lottery funding.

i) Recommendations

That the Economic Development & Regeneration Manager be authorised to

progress this project to the next stage with Somerset County Council i.e. tocommission an assessment of the traffic impact of the recommended improvements


18/26


to the town centre and report the results back to members as soon as the work iscompleted.

That the Council retains the services of Landscape Projects on a day rate basis tohelp review the outcomes of the assessment and comment as appropriate

The cost of the above work to be financed from within the existing EconomicDevelopment & Marketing budget

That the Economic Development & Regeneration Manager further investigateshow the recommended improvements could be financed and report the results backto members.


19/26


10. FOR DECISION - EVENING BUS SERVICES BETWEEN FROME AND BATHAuthor Cllr Golinski

a) SummaryThere is concern about the possible loss of the popular evening bus services betweenFrome and Bath from March 2013. This service is not considered to be commerciallyviable without financial support from the local transport authority. Bath & North EastSomerset Council (B&NES) is consulting on whether to continue subsidising theservice for 2013/14.

This paper recommends that FTC urges B&NES not to withdraw and urges SCC to re-instate their subsidy for the evening 267 bus service between Frome and Bath.

b) BackgroundSomerset County Council (SCC) and B&NES as the local transport authorities have aduty to secure the provision of such public transport services as the council consider itappropriate to secure to meet any public transport requirements within the countywhich would not in their view be met apart from any action taken by them for thatpurpose (as defined in the Transport Act 1985).

Up to the end of March 2011 the majority of the service subsidy was provided by SCC,but this support (11,423 in 2010/11) was withdrawn following a review of priorities forsupported services. The full cost of the subsidy is therefore now carried by B&NESCouncil.

c) DiscussionB&NES is consulting on their bus revenue support for 2013/14, and among theservices under threat is the First 267 evening service (Bath - Frome). B&NES areconsidering, and consulting on, whether their financial support should be provided toretain this service.

Three evening journeys (Monday Saturday) from:Bath at 19:15hrs, 21:15hrs and 23:15hrsFrome at 18:16hrs, 20:10hrs and 22:10hrs

Recent surveys showed that nearly 90% of the passengers on the service weretravelling to or from destinations in Somerset (mostly Frome).

Of most concern is that this service, which is most of benefit to Frome residents, maybe lost. It seems that it should be subsidised by Somerset, but has not been sinceMarch 2011, and Somerset do not appear to be considering reinstating their subsidy.

Somerset County Councillor Maggy Daniell, while agreeing that this service isimportant to Frome residents, has stated that, with savings of 30 million needing to bemade this coming year, and now with extensive flood damage to roads etc as well, that

in her opinion there is no chance of a previous saving being reversed.


20/26


d) Recommendations:1. That Frome Town Council makes a representation to Bath & North East

Somerset Council urging them not to withdraw their subsidy for the evening 267bus service between Frome and Bath. It should be noted that B&NES have notinvited comments from towns and villages outside of B&NES.

2. That Frome Town Council makes a representation to Somerset County Councilurging them to review their subsidy for the evening 267 bus service betweenFrome and Bath, and liaise with Bath & North East Somerset Council to ensurethis service continues.

3. That FTC considers providing a financial contribution to this service.


21/26


11. FOR DECISON LAND OWNED BY HOMES & COMMUNITIES AGENCYGARSDALE

Author Economic Development and Regeneration Manager.

a) Purposes and scope of the report

To brief members on progress in purchasing the freehold of land owned by theHomes & Communities Agency at Garsdale, to identify the options open to theCouncil in terms of the future use of the industrial building and recommend nextsteps.

b) Background

At the Council meeting on 22 August 2012, members received a confidential reporton a proposal to acquire 0.56 ha. (1.39 acres) of land which is currently owned bythe Homes & Communities Agency (HCA) at Garsdale. It was resolved that anapplication be made to the Department for Communities & Local Government(DCLG) and subsequently the Public Works Loan Board for loan capital to enablethe purchase of the freehold interest in the HCA owned land at Garsdale subject tocontract.

Members will be aware that the main purpose of the acquisition is to safeguard thetraining, advice and guidance operations currently within the Saxonvale Centre onthe site whilst a longer term property solution is found in negotiation with a futuredeveloper of the wider Saxonvale regeneration area.

The site includes an industrial building extending to 810.7 sq. m. (8726 sq. ft.) whichis currently vacant. The site also includes a series of Elliott style portable buildingsoccupied by Somerset Skills & Learning and subject to a ground lease at apeppercorn rent which is due to expire on 31 March 2013.

c) Progress

Written approval to borrow has now been received from DCLG. Any application to

the Public Works Loan Board will await the completion of contract discussions withHCA.

Further informal advice has been obtained regarding residential land value shouldplanning permission be obtained and up to 1 million could be secured.

A series of investigations have been undertaken. These include:

A building survey

A geo-environmental survey to determine whether there are any environmental

liabilities associated with the purchase An inspection of the electrical installation within the industrial building

An asbestos survey


22/26


An assessment of the cost of demolition of the industrial building should thisprove to be necessary

Obtaining advice regarding VAT

The key findings are as follows:

The survey of the temporary buildings occupied by Somerset Skills & Learningdemonstrated that the buildings are in good order

The industrial building is in a dilapidated condition having been subject tovandalism and theft. The disrepair is apparent both to the fabric of the buildingand the internal services and finishes. The cost of bringing the building backinto a standard of repair that would enable future occupation would depend onthe use to which it is put. However, a conservative estimate of the minimuminvestment to bring forward the use of the building would be in the region of50,000 + VAT.

The geo-environmental survey showed that concentrations of potentialcontaminants are low and below the levels that would be considered a concernfor future residential or commercial uses. The consultants recommend someground gas monitoring given the potential future use of the site for residentialpurposes.

Quotes have been obtained from three demolition contractors to identify the costof demolishing the industrial building complete to the top of the ground slabcutting off any protruding steelwork and removing all materials from the site for

appropriate disposal. The cheapest quote was 6,500 + VAT and this absorbsthe cost of disposing of the floor tiles with asbestos content. There would be anadditional cost of 70 for planning permission to demolish.

Advice has been obtained regarding VAT. The best way to protect VATrecovery, as far as possible, is for the Council to opt to tax the land andbuildings. This means that any rental charges will be subject to VAT excludingany peppercorn agreements. Making an option to tax means the Council hasthe intention to make taxable supplies from the outset and therefore VATincurred on the purchase will be recoverable.

d) Options for the use of the industrial building

On the assumption that the purchase proceeds, there would appear to be threeoptions for the Council to consider in dealing with the industrial building.

Option 1 - Do nothing

Option 2 - Let the industrial building on a temporary basis

Option 3 - Demolish the industrial building

The implications of each of these options are explored below.

Option 1 - Do nothing

There are outstanding appeals lodged by the HCA with the Valuation Office Agencywith a view to getting the property de-rated on the basis of dereliction and a


23/26


response is awaited. However, as things stand, empty property rates (currently24,961p.a.) would continue to be payable as long as the property remains empty

and there is no intention to repair the building. The property would also need to beinsured at an estimated annual cost of 374 (inclusive of tax) and made secure withfencing at an estimated cost of 1300 + VAT.

Option 2 - Let the industrial building on a temporary basis

The Council has recently engaged PJK Chartered Surveyors to undertake anemployment land study for the purposes of informing work on the NeighbourhoodPlan. Part of the brief was to advise on demand for industrial premises in Frome.According to PJK, about 4% of the total business premises stock is currentlyavailable which amounts to 4,946 sq. m. and with annual take up at around 5,125

sq. m., there is a possibility that we may find an occupier. We are also aware of agrowing demand for start-up space and have received a speculative approach fromEdventure Frome who are interested in using the building to support the start-up ofsome new social enterprises including a wood recycling business.

However, one of the terms of the agreement with the HCA is that the Council woulddispose of the property for redevelopment as soon as possible. In thosecircumstances, it would not be in the Councils interest to let the building for alengthy term. This has implications for obligations that we may wish to impose onany occupier of the building. In general, if the term is short, they are likely to bereluctant to make any significant investment in the building and would probably lookto the Council to make the building habitable.

The level of repairs required would depend on the use to which the building is put.For example, if the ground floor only is let for storage purposes, the main concernwould be ensuring that the building is secure and weather tight. However, a moreintensive use of the building would necessitate a higher level of investment by theCouncil. Overall, the viability of this scheme would depend on raising either grantor loan funding to finance the necessary repairs.

Option 3 Demolish the industrial building

This would be the cheapest option at 6570 + VAT, with no continuing liability formaintenance, insurance, securing the site or paying business rates. The cost couldbe financed from current budgets. It would also send a clear message that theCouncil is serious about bringing the land forward for redevelopment. The Councilcould still secure an income in the short term through the letting of the space foropen storage. For example, enabling containers to be stored on site might be oneway of supporting business incubation.

e) Recommendations

That the Council opts to tax the land and buildings shown in Appendix 1 and appliesto HMRC for this purpose


24/26


That the Economic Development & Regeneration Manager be authorised to:

arrange some ground gas monitoring ahead of completion of the purchase

make preparations for the industrial building to be demolished as soon aspossession is secured

bring forward proposals in terms of how the land will be used followingdemolition


25/26


12. FOR INFORMATION FTC/MDC OVERLAP PAPERAuthor Town Clerk

1 Summary

At the last meeting of FTC and MDC on 23 October 2012, there was a usefuldiscussion on how to work towards meeting each Councils objectives. It was agreedthat both Councils would draft a paper on the areas of overlap between the corporateobjectives of the two organisations. The reasoning was that if an asset transfer, forexample, could be seen to meet the objectives of both organisations then there was agreater chance of it happening.

We have completed and sent our paper to MDC which ia attached at appendix 1 for

information. At the time of writing (4 December) no paper has been received from MDCalthough there is a further meeting arranged for 6 December and a verbal update willbe provided.

We have also not received a response to the paper tabled at the last Council meetingregarding the establishment of a Frome Assembly and Forum.

13. DATE OF NEXT MEETING

Wednesday 30th January at 7.00pm at the Frome Assembly Rooms


26/26


notification full council 12th dec 2012

Documents