Issue - meetings

To update Cabinet on the March Future High Street Fund (FHSF) project and to provide members with the information required to make a decision on the location of the March Fountain following consideration of a petition at Full Council.

Appendix 11 to this report comprises exempt information – to exclude the public (including the press) from a meeting of a committee it is necessary for the following proposition to be moved and adopted: “that the public be excluded from the meeting for Items which would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraphs 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) as indicated.”

Members considered the options for relocation for the fountain following the petition presented to Full Council presented by Councillor Seaton.

Councillor Seaton stated concentration would be on the alternative site options that have been investigated as an alternative to the approved and present location. He recognised and acknowledged the letter received by all Cabinet members from Lindsey Betts and Gary Richmond.

Councillor Seaton stated that it was organised for Cabinet members to be given a guided tour around the alternative site locations within the past week, which was to enable an informed decision to be reached by looking at the sites and not based solely on the written report. He stated that it was investigated moving the fountain position slightly closer to the road but this was rejected due to safety reasons and referred to each of the alternative sites, with their associated risks as detailed in the report.

Councillor Seaton stated that these options have been extensively investigated and based on the difficulties that each of the option sites have produced he proposes that the present location which has been approved should be progressed as planned.

Members made comments, asked questions and received responses as follows:

·       Councillor Tierney stated that on lots of the options it was said that it was unlikely that they would be supported, which he presumes means by Historic England, but he would like to understand what their power is, are they advising or must the Council do as it says. Councillor Seaton responded that they are a statutory body but they are an advisory body, which means they possibly would not block a different option, however, it could challenge to the Secretary of State if it did not approve where the fountain was going to be moved to.

·       Councillor Tierney expressed the view that these issues are very personal to towns and as a Wisbech councillor he is always uncomfortable on making a judgement on something that is so personal to a different town but members are in the situation they are in and have to try and make the best decision. He feels it is good that so many options have been investigated and it is unfortunate that the view is taken that Historic England would say no to so many but he would like going forward to speak to them and ask what leeway there is in these matters as this is not going to be the last time this happens and he would like to understand what their appetite is for other suggestions rather than assuming they are going to say no to everything.

·       Councillor Murphy stated that he walked around all the sites and considered all the information provided and, in his opinion, the land outside Iceland is too far out of the centre of March and is already a busy area with existing businesses too close and would be vulnerable to vandalism; outside the Library again this is too far outside the centre, would be hidden and vulnerable to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19