Key Issues Sample Clauses
Key Issues. 3.1 Following the introduction of a ‘National Model for School Improvement’, a series of proposed changes to the original agreement between the five LAs in the SEWC have been outlined in the updated agreement including changes to: Governance arrangements that ensure the LAs and the EAS are complying with requirements of the National Model for Regional Working. The way grants can be dealt with by the EAS is changed – the first change being that all grants will now be channelled through the Directors group in the first instance. There is a detailed process that explains how this will work in practice. The EAS will report on this regularly to both the directors/heads of education and the Executive Members for Education in each of the LAs. The EAS ability to provide services to other customers other than the SEWC LAs for a fee and subject to scrutiny and approval from the Joint Executive Group. The EAS may proceed with such a commission without prior JEG consent when: o the contract is valued at up to £50k but carries no risk/will have no impact on agreed delivery outcomes o the contract is valued up to £15k and may/will have an impact on agreed delivery outcomes o The EAS has taken appropriate advice on any VAT liabilities that entering into such a contract may give rise to and these are factored into the detail of the contract. o The EAS has taken appropriate legal advice in drawing up the contract. o The EAS will inform the next JEG meeting of all new contracts that exceed £10,000 over a financial year. In the event the EAS core service costs more than predicted, in line with prior JEG approval, each LA will pay its proportional share on this overspend. However, the EAS in negotiation with the LAs will repay this “loan” over an agreed period through reducing the core service charge each LA pays for an agreed period.
3.2 There are a number of risks associated with the proposed changes:
Key Issues. 3.1 The value of the contract that PHA has with Fermanagh and Omagh District Council for the current 2016/17 financial year is £107,852.75
3.2 Under the terms of the SLA between Fermanagh and Omagh District Council (FODC) and Derry City and Strabane District Council, FODC retains an administration fee amounting to 7.5% of the total budget, equivalent to £8,088.95
3.3 The remainder of the budget is split equally between both Councils, so that we will receive £49, 881.90
3.4 Receipt of the funding, which will be drawn down on a quarterly basis, is dependent on satisfactory progress against the PHA's targets, contained within the SLA, as evidenced by a quarterly performance monitoring report that must be submitted to FODC.
3.5 In addition to covering the salary and mileage costs associated with the TCO's work activities, the funds can be used for other tobacco control related expenditure, subject to prior approval by the PHA.
Key Issues. The QRC Working Group was concerned that the liability arrangements in the PMA in the December 2012 Suite were not commercially balanced. Following discussions of this concern, Aurizon Network and the QRC Working Group agreed that two modifications of the liability arrangements, as detailed below, achieve an appropriate commercial balance.
Key Issues. 3.1 Since 2009, the Authority has benefitted from a collaborative maintenance framework with Torfaen County Council and Gwent Police which covered urgent and reactive repairs, planned, cyclical duty of care inspection and maintenance and project works. The framework was renewed in 2013 and expired on 31st January 2018.
3.2 In June 2017 an Officer led working group was established to review the options available and determine the preferred method of procuring maintenance services following the expiry of the framework agreement. This group comprised the Heads of Procurement and Property Lead from each council with officers, with specific expertise, providing support as required. The group was expanded to include Blaenau Gwent who were keen to share in the benefits that the collaborative approach could deliver.
3.3 The review concluded that some maintenance regimes e.g. mechanical services, were now better provided through the National Procurement Service, but there were no maintenance frameworks in place, therefore a further collaborative framework would need to be established.
3.4 The group were keen to maximize the benefits of the framework to SME’s and sought advice from Business Wales on how to ensure this was done in a compliant manner. Two meet the Supplier days were held to support prospective tenderers and it was agreed to sub-divide the work into region lots and specialisms to maximize opportunities and avoid excluding companies that were unable to support the wider resource requirements.
3.5 The group also engaged with specialist sustainability advisors, Xxxxxxx, who are funded by Welsh Government. They provided guidance on ensuring that the tender process considered the implications of the Well-being of Future Generations Act and their advice was built into the process.
3.6 Following a tender exercise using the Sell2Wales website, 28 tenders were received across the 6 lots. An evaluation exercise was undertaking using a weighted matrix where price was equal to 70% of the score and quality 30% together with an interview process. The outcome resulted in a reduction in the new rates, in comparison to the previous framework, of 6.6% on general maintenance and 26% on the electrical lots. The reasons for this saving can be attributed to the addition of the Blaenau Gwent work and the lotting process that enabled SME’s to successfully bid.
3.7 The top 5 tenderers in each lot have been selected with the top contractor being appointed as the preferred bidde...
Key Issues. The authority to authorise the entering into of a Deed of Variation rests with the Planning Committee. The current Section 106 agreement requires a reappraisal to be undertaken upon substantial commencement where such substantial commencement is not achieved by the 23rd June 2018 but the developer has instead asked the authority to agree to a further 12 month period within which substantial commencement can commence with no contributions. This is considered a reasonable request as it provides some certainty for the developer which would not otherwise exist. The Authority has again sought independent advice from the District Valuer (DVS) who still conclude, as they did in 3 January 2017 (the date of the original financially viability report), that the approved development is still not viable with a policy compliant financial contribution towards public open space and on site affordable housing provision, if any level of contribution or affordable housing is required. The new NPPF marks a significant change in the approach to be adopted to viability. It indicates that where up-to-date policies have set out the contributions expected from the development, planning applications that comply with them should be assumed to be viable, and it is up to the applicant to demonstrate whether particular circumstances justify the need for a viability assessment at the application stage. Policies about contributions and the level of affordable housing need however to be realistic and not undermine the deliverability of the Plan. However in the Borough it is not presently the case that up-to-date development plan policies, which have been subject of a viability appraisal at plan-making stage, have set out the contributions expected from development, so the presumption against viability appraisals at application stage does not apply. That will not be the case until the Joint Local Plan is finalised. A further factor to take into account here is that this is not a “new application”. The scheme is still considered to represent a highly sustainable form of development that would contribute to the delivery of housing supply in the Borough. The site has been vacant for a number of years which does little to enhance the appearance of the area and its redevelopment will be beneficial to the area. On this basis, and given the advice of the District Valuer, it is recommended that a Deed of Variation be secured to allow a further 12 months for the development to substantially commenc...
Key Issues. 4.1 Discussions to date have also highlighted a number of concerns that will need to be considered as we move on to the next stages in this process. The task groups have raised the following: • For some themes, the 198 national indicators do not provide a comprehensive list of measures to target things that are important in Cambridgeshire. This is the case for growth in particular, where the national PIs do not appear to include direct measurements on urban design, public open spaces, use of energy efficient technologies / renewables, etc. In these instances, partners will need to consider what other local measures could complement the 35 and support the achievement of outcomes. • The 35 targets will be focused on areas needing improvement and should demonstrate a stretch in performance. Therefore indicators where current performance is high may not be suitable for inclusion in the LAA unless we can demonstrate that maintaining current levels of performance is sufficiently stretching. • Once the 35 indicators have been chosen the delivery of these needs to be feed into the review of LAA partnerships and governance arrangements to ensure the latter are fit for purpose.
3.6 There are a large number of stakeholder organisations and partnerships that should be aware of and involved in this process. This will require effective communication mechanisms to be in place with individual representatives in the LAA task groups, LAARG and LAA Board taking a principal role in facilitating wider Member and officer engagement, and providing the link to key strategic partnerships and LSPs.
Key Issues. ▪ to undertake joint consideration of future employment development for the sub-region in response to the strong links between the FCAs in terms of travel to work patterns and employment; ▪ To work together to agree the sub-regional employment land requirement; ▪ To work together to agree the strategic priorities for land around junction 4 of the M55 – Fylde/Blackpool boundary with the aim of attracting major new economic development to help strengthen the Fylde Coast economy; ▪ To work together to promote the sustainable development of the following key strategic sites/corridors: Blackpool Airport corridor – Blackpool/Fylde boundary; The Enterprise Zone at BAE Systems – Warton – Fylde; Land at Xxxxxxxx – Cleveleys (Xxxxxxxxx) – Wyre; Central Business District – Blackpool Town Centre; Whyndyke Farm – Fylde/Blackpool boundaryA6 Corridor/Garstang – Wyre Retail
Key Issues. The QRC Working Group was concerned that optimisation risk could be transferred to the trustee in situations where Aurizon Network had, without reference to the trustee, decided on the treatment of the project delivery issues that gave rise to that optimisation risk. Following discussions of this concern, Aurizon Network and the QRC Working Group have agreed that a clarification of the allocation of optimisation risk, as detailed below, provides greater clarity and achieves an appropriate commercial position.
Key Issues. 4.3.1 The key issue is whether the development would be acceptable in principle, particularly whether it would comply with Policy 29 - Rural Housing Needs, effect on neighbouring residential amenity, the visual amenities of the locality, and highway/ parking matters.
Key Issues. 4.1 Deloitte LLP is the appointed administrator, who in turn has employed the services of Camland Developments to assist in resolving outstanding Cofton matters.
4.2 An original offer was made in July 2009 of £10,000 and this was subsequently revised after communication between both parties.
4.3 The offer from Cofton Ltd is a one off full and final payment of £31,821 which is dependent upon the Council taking a transfer of all the area designated as Public Open Space and the Nature Reserve Land. All obligations would also have to be removed from both Cofton Ltd and all successors in title, which would include the obligation to provide a play area.
4.4 Officers have been advised that this is a full and final offer of payment. If WFDC does not take on this land it will fall to the Crown who will have no obligation to maintain the land. This would have massive implications for the residents of this area.
4.5 The amount of money being offered by Coftons is equivalent to that detailed in the Section 106 agreement to maintain the land. The main variation to the existing agreement will be that there would be no play area. However, residents did not want the play area to be in the location set out in the s106 agreement in any event (the revised position was to be on Clensmore playing field).
4.6 The Council has recently carried out a one off without prejudice maintenance of the open space area adjacent to Ox Bow Way.