Decisions made

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report.

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option considered is not to pay the Grant. Without this grant, the impact of opening the business will be less due to the fact that the signage won’t be as prominent and funds which were planned on internal furnishings will have to be used elsewhere.

Report noted.

Permission in principle refused.

Permission in principle refused.

Permission in principle refused.

This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

Planning permission granted, subject to conditions and a S106 legal agreement.

Outline planning permission granted, subject to conditions and a S106 agreement.

Planning permission refused.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option is not to pay the Grant. Without the funding, the work will not be able to take place, and it would cause a six month delay whilst the applicant accrues funds in order to pay for the work. This would have a knock-on effect and could affect the long-term future of the Business.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendations

To ensure the essential refurbishment works are completed as soon as possible so that the property can be occupied for residential supported housing for the Council.

Other options considered and rejected

Do nothing – rejected as the current costs incurred for the office building being vacant are.

a)           Vacant Property Inspections

b)           Utilities Standing Charges

c)            Business Rates

d)           Insurance costs

The above costs would be avoided should the property occupied as residential supported housing.

Sale of the property on the open market – rejected as it was felt the value would be low due to its current condition.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

A successful tender exercise has been completed in compliance with procurement rules.

The successful bid provides the best value option for the council.

The successful bid are a leading supplier of waste collection vehicles and there is confidence in their product and service.

Other options considered and rejected

To not procure food waste vehicles would place the council in a non-compliant position with regards to the introduction of food waste collections which is mandatory under new waste collection legislation and statutory guidance.

Contract hire option instead of purchase was not considered since Government New Burdens funding has been provided specifically for capital expenditure on food waste vehicles. 

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Local authorities are required to maintain a List of Assets of Community Value pursuant to Part 5 of the Localism Act 2011 (the Act).

Under S88 of the Act an asset of community value means buildings or land where, in the opinion of the authority, the current use or use in the recent past furthers the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community, and it is realistic to think that there can continue to be use of the buildings or land which will further the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community within the next five years.

The Property is located within the Council’s boundary.

The nominating party is the Parish Council, a qualifying community body within Regulation 5(1) of the Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012 (The Regulations)

 The Property is not within the categories excluded from listing within the Regulations.

It is reasonable to conclude that the evidence submitted sufficiently demonstrates that the site is used or has recently been used in a manner which furthers the social well-being or social interests of the local community, and it is realistic to think it could continue to do so within the next five years.

Other options considered and rejected

Not to add the Property to the Council’s List of Assets of Community Value.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option considered is not to pay the Grant. Without the grant, the project would face significant delays or proceed at a reduced scale, limiting the ability to address peak-time demand and employment opportunities. This would hinder the local economy and reduce the project’s community benefits

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option considered is not to pay the Grant. Without this, the project will still go ahead but on a much smaller scale and much slower pace as they would need to generate income from sales. It would also reduce job opportunities as opening times would not be as planned; therefore, income would be reduced.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

To implement the council’s decision to purchase properties in line with the delivery of the Local Authority Housing Grant – Round 3 Funding. The Council has secured funding to purchase 3 residential properties on the open market for the Afghanistan Refugee Resettlement Programme.

To purchase properties for Afghanistan Refugee Resettlement Programme for Family Homes close to local amenities.

To enable Chorley Council to work alongside Lancashire County Council in supporting the resettlement and integration of Afghanistan refugees into the borough, by providing high quality homes.

Other options considered and rejected

To source properties from the private rented sector and develop five-year legal agreements negating the need for Chorley Council to procure any additional properties. This was previously rejected due to insecure tenancies, possible poor-quality housing provision and to enable a manageable programme, which will be delivered over a 12-month period in line with funding requirements.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Pulsar Laser Studio are applying for the Shop Front Improvement Grant to fund work for a new Shop Front at 2 Pilkington Court, George Street, Chorley.

The work involved in the project includes the old sign to be removed, replaced with side and front board & a sign by front door, removal of last tenants frosting & replace front and side windows, the exterior wall requires painting and refurbishing.

By securing the Shop Front Improvement Grant, Pulsar Laser Studio will be able to invest in advanced equipment, increase its offerings and potentially hire more specialized staff. Besides growth in the Clinic, this will support the local economy by creating three new jobs and bringing in clients from surrounding areas.

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option considered is to not pay the grant. Without this grant, the pace of growth would be significantly reduced. The business would still need to purchase materials for a new Shop frontage, but this could be delayed and stop them purchasing specific equipment in order to grow the Business.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The Alternative option is not to pay the Grant. Without the grant funding, the applicant will not be in a position where she is able to purchase this much needed equipment as she does not have the available cash flow to do so. This could set the Business back and stop them building on what they have already achieved.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option is not to pay the Grant. As the applicant does not have the available cash flow to purchase new signage, it would mean that the current signage, which is damaged, rotten and only half of it in place would remain there and have a detrimental effect of the look of the Town Centre

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option is not to pay the Grant. Without this Grant the business does not have the cash flow to purchase the aforementioned items so would not be in a position to approach the companies in order to sell their products.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

As outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option is not to pay the Grant. As the applicant does not have the available cash flow, the proposed work would not take place and Business could stagnate or even worsen due to current trading conditions.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option is not to pay the Grant. Without this grant funding, the owner does not have the available cash flow so would be unable to replace the existing door. This could result in loss of trade and increase utility bills at the premises.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

As outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option is not to pay the Grant. Without this Grant, the Business would keep the existing signage and will be unable to give it a fresh new look to help improve trade. He would still need to purchase the CCTV cameras as security is paramount as is the safety of the staff in the shop.

Recommendation approved

Reason for recommendation

The Holiday Activity and Food (HAF) programme seeks to mitigate the impacts of food poverty and particularly holiday hunger by providing access to a nutritious meal alongside quality physical activity provision.

Other options considered and rejected

To not deliver the Holiday Activity and Food Programme in 2025/26 in Chorley would put children at risk of holiday hunger and food poverty.

Recommendation approved

Reasons for recommendation

Outlined within the report

Other options considered and rejected

The alternative option is not to pay the Grant. The applicant will still have to move as the existing property is simply not fit for purpose. Without the grant money, the move will still take place, but it could delay the re-opening of the shop which could have a detrimental effect to the long future of the business.

To approve an extension of three months for Councillor Martin to allow them to ontinue to serve as an elected member on Chorley Council whilst recovering from a period of ill health.

Approved.

1.             Note the likely process for the development of proposals for local government reorganisation.

2.             Support in principle the four unitary model, including a unitary council covering the boroughs of Chorley, South Ribble and West Lancashire, as its initial preferred structure for local government in Lancashire.

3.             Delegate to the Executive Leader the authority to agree the council’s position in relation to the initial plan prior to its submission in March 2025.

Approved.

a) Approve the budget and proposals set out in this report, including the level of Council Tax as set out in the Formal Council Tax Resolution for 2025/26, including Special Expenses & Parish Precepts, at Appendix A;

b) Note the advice of the Chief Finance Officer in relation to the robustness of the estimates within the overall budget, including the risks contained within it and the adequacy of the proposed level of financial reserves, as set out in the Statutory Report at Appendices B1 – B3;

c) Approve the council’s Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) at Appendix C;

d) Note the council’s forecast Cumulative Budget Deficit and Budget Strategy 2025/26 to 2027/28 at Appendix D, including the analysis of the movement in the 2025/26 Budget from the position approved by Council in February 2024;

e) Note the analysis of Budgets for 2025/26, by expense type, at Appendix E;

f) Approve the capital programme for 2025/26 to 2027/28 (Appendices F1, F2 & F3);

g) Approve the Capital Strategy at Appendix G;

h) Approve the Treasury Management Strategy at Appendix H1 and note the advice of the treasury management consultants at Appendix H2;

i) Approve the council’s Pay Policy at Appendix I for publication on the council’s website from April 2025 (including Appendix I (I – iv) detailing the senior structure, officers pay and pay spines)

j) Note the Budget Consultation 2025/26 Report at Appendix J;

k) Note the Impact Assessment of the Budget Proposals for 2025/26 at Appendix K.