Agenda and minutes

All items were considered in public.

DRAFT

Councillors John Morgan and Andrew Retter attended the meeting as Ward Councillors and Councillor Retter spoke at the meeting.

Concerns and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

The points raised by Petitioners were:

• The Petition objected to the potential closure of the Northwood Hills Library annexe which had been used by the Rainbow Health Centre (RHC) since 1987.
• The RHC was a voluntary organisation which provided counselling and alternative faith healing and helped people suffering from mild to chronic illnesses.
• The RHC was used by clients from across Hillingdon as well as from outside the Borough
• The RHC provided refreshments free of charge and was a venue for users to make friends.
• The RHC provided two year professional courses for complementary therapy and approximately 25 students graduated from the course last year.
• If the library annexe was unavailable, RHC enquired about what other options there were and whether the Council could suggest alternative premises.

A Ward Councillor addressed the meeting and the following points were made:

• There was great sympathy with the petitioners’ desire to remain in the library.
• The refurbishment of the Northwood Hill library annexe was part of the refit programme to all 17 of Hillingdon’s libraries for the benefit of the whole community.
• A number of alternative venues were suggested and included:

1.      Emmanuel Church, Northwood

2.      Fairfield Church

3.      United Reform Church, Joel Street

4.      St Edmunds Church

Other speakers – Andrew Riley (Chairman of Northwood Hills Residents Association)

·        The Chairman of Northwood Hills Residents Association offered to assist RHC find alternative premises and offered to host an article in the Residents magazine

Councillor Jonathan Bianco listened to the concerns of the petitioners and responded to the points raised. 

• With regards to the service provided by RHC, it was acknowledged that this was a useful and sought after practice and no one wished it to disappear.
• At the other end of the spectrum, it must be recognised that Hillingdon was bucking the trend and investing in local libraries r rather than close then like they had been in a number of Local Authorities.
• Refurbishments had been very successful and a considerable number of residents used library resources including the computer terminals.
• There was no provision made to accommodate RHC in the refurbished library.
• With regards to relocation, it was hoped that the Council could assist RHC to find alternative premises. It was acknowledged that the Council owned relatively few facilities in the area but a number of alternative sites were suggested. These included:
•  The Cabinet Member the In regard to the practical implications of the management of the number of children on the existing site.  There was a complicated set of guidelines as to what was enough space.  It had been agreed in principle to look at practical ways of providing a temporary or permanent solution required to deliver the school places needed.

• Reference had been made to the preference for a two storey building this would be looked at again and a detailed response on the reasons why this was not a possible solution.

• An example had been given to where an expansion had worked well.  There was no clear link between school size and school standards.  The additional school places bought with it additional resources and this may help a school to do better.

• A concern had been raised about the ethos of the schools being lost if expansion was to go ahead.  It was clear there was a good ethos at the Schools with individual identity of the children known to all staff, further comment and advice would be sought on this.

• In relation to concerns raised in regard to travelling distances to the school, it was clear that neighbouring primary areas were in a similar position to the Whitehall Schools.  The objective was to provide sufficient school places in order to prevent an increase in the distance travelled.

• In regard to the predicted demand for schools in the south of the borough.  This had been recognised from the birth rates south of the A40, assessment from the number of children registered with General Practitioners in the borough and future predictions made were supported by data from GLA and ONS.

• The new homes proposed for RAF Uxbridge would increase the pressure on school places within primary planning area 6.   It was hoped that a new three form entry school would be secured as part of the proposed planning application.  There was no guarantee of when the development would be built and school places needed to be provided in the next school year.

• It had been stated that alternative options should be considered the following options had been considered.

Concerns had been raised about the confined play space and what would remain if the proposal went ahead.  A MUGA (All Weather Multi Use Games Area) was to be provided as part of the proposal, an off site playing field was also being considered.  Officers advised that where a MUGA was provided this would count as twice the area it took up. 

The petitioners present advised the Cabinet Member that they were not aware of the proposals for an off site playing field. 

The Cabinet Member concluded the meeting by informing the meeting that

The new Government had taken back the funding for those Children’s Centres that authority’s had not committed to.  There was therefore an urgent need to proceed with the expansions or the funding may be lost.

This was not the end of the process if the expansion was agreed by the Cabinet there would be an opportunity for more specific concerns to be put forward s part of the planning process. 

DECISION

That the Cabinet Member:

1. Noted the views of the petitioners.

2. Advised the petitioners that:

(a)       the council would  progress with the library refurbishment and instruct officers to work with The Rainbow Healing Centre to try and find alternative premises.

REASON FOR DECISION

To investigate further details of the petitioners.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

None.