Agenda and minutes

(Head of Research and Democratic Services)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

No substitute Members were reported.  

(Head of Research and Democratic Services). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

No declarations of interests were reported.

Noted.

(Chairman/Lead Officer) The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference of this Panel and associated Work Programme. This is attached. The Panel are asked at each meeting to review both documents.

The Panel heard that a focus day had been arranged for 7 March 2007 to explore traffic issues in the rural areas. An item would be placed in the bulletin to publicise the arrangements. The Panel noted government thinking on traveller issues and stressed the need for action to deal with the current pressures from central government in this area.

Recommendation:

To consider and comment on the attached position statement

(Head of Planning and Economic Development). Members will be aware that on 19 December 2006, the Government published its proposed changes to the draft East of England Plan with a deadline for responses of 9 March 2007.

Officers are currently drafting a report to assist the formulation of the Councils response and are seeking the views of the Panel over the issues that need to be raised. The Panel are therefore asked to consider the attached summary and provide comments for inclusion in the report to be circulated on 9 February 2007 for the Member Briefing on 17 February 2007 and the Cabinet on 19 February 2007 which will provide further opportunities to shape the proposals.

Officers will be present to report the current position.

The Panel considered a summary of the key points of the Secretary of State’s Proposed changed to the Draft East of England Plan.

The Head of Planning and Economic Development reported on ways Members could respond to the recommendations. He reported the timescale for the consultation to involve a briefing for all Members of the Council and local members on 17 February and a special Cabinet on 19 February 2007. The deadline for the response was 9 March 2007.

1)                  Harlow as a major regional housing growth point with urban extensions

It was noted that in terms of the recommendations, Harlow’s housing target had been increased by 2,500 to 16,000.  The proposals for North Weald had been deleted and North Harlow was now seen as a major development point suitable for at least 10,000 extra dwellings. The District was to provide 3,500 additional new homes by 2021. There was potential for this to be revised upwards in the event that North Harlow was not able to accommodate the 10,000 target by 2021.

The Panel expressed concern over the condition of the minor roads in the areas identified.   There were no decent routes to the main strategic network and employment sites.  A substantial amount of work would need to be carried out to bring them up to standard. In the South East, this might mean a considerable programme of highway work should an East West bypass not be built. In relation to the North/ East, they stressed the need for the construction of a North bypass to facilitate sustainable development in that area and the provision of a further junction at the Hastingwood Roundabout for the M11.

2)         Green Belt Review

It was noted that the Green Belt was to be reviewed to accommodate the proposed urban extensions The review should include a compensating strategic extension of the Green Belt to the North of Harlow. This review would be subject to a separate review following this review and involve members

3)            Employment number proposed

The Panel noted the indicative employment target for the London Arc – Essex Epping Forest and/Brentwood of 14,000. The target for Central and North Essex was 17,000.

The Panel thought that the targets were unrealistic. They questioned the logic behind the figures. No plausible reasons had been forwarded to justify them. The proposals were likely to lead to more out commuting and car usage rather than new jobs given the lack of viable transport links between the proposed settlements and the employment settlements. They questioned the reasons for linking Epping Forest to Brentwood in view of the likelihood that this would increase car usage and saw logic in linking the District with Harlow for the purposes of facilitating the employment targets in the plan.

4)            Transport

The recommendations stressed that traffic congestion should be address without encouraging car use. They also stated that access was to be enhanced between Harlow and London and Stansted and Cambridge. It was stated that access from the strategic network needed to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

To consider which reports are ready to be submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting.

Chairman to report to OSC on 1 February on Panel discussions and response to Draft East of England Plan , current position for Travellers Issues and details of focus day for problems in rural areas as highlighted in tonight’s discussions.

26 February, 26 April 2007 – 7.30pm CR1

26 February, 26 April 2007 – 7.30pm CR1 – 26 April 7.30 pm CR1