Agenda and minutes

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

It was noted that Councillors K Angold-Stephens, A Boyce and Mrs M Sartin were substituting for Councillors J Markham, Mrs S Jones and Mrs A Grigg respectively.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To declare interests in any items of the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview and Scrutiny members are asked to 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 Overview and Scrutiny 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 Overview and Scrutiny meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such  a matter.

There were no declarations of interest made pursuant to the Member’s Code of Conduct.

The Terms of Reference are attached.

The Panel was informed that officers were working on a re-draft of the Terms of Reference. It was noted that the current Terms of Reference contained the name of Councillor Mrs L Wagland, and not the current panel Chairman, Councillor J Philip.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) The internet link below takes you to the East Hertfordshire District Council Core Strategy Issues and Options Consultation Document. Officer are preparing a report that will be circulated next week.

http://www.eastherts.gov.uk/index.jsp?articleid=13688)

The District Council had received a consultation document from East Hertfordshire District Council regarding its Core Strategy Issues and Options. Ms S King, Information and Technical Officer, presented the consultation to the Panel. The East Hertfordshire District Council had amassed a detailed evidence base for their Local Development Framework, including technical studies on topics like:

• Transport
• Employment
• Climate Change
• Landscape; and
• Housing

They had also conducted community stakeholder sessions, gathering local opinion on future planning policy. This groundwork had led to the preparation of an Issues and Options Stage Consultation document for its future Core Strategy.

As an adjacent local authority Epping Forest District Council could be affected by decisions made in the East Herts Core Strategy.

The consultation document addressed the proposed growth of housing and jobs in East Herts District and in and around Harlow, particularly the proposed development north of Harlow, and urban extension to the east, south and west of Harlow. The consultation was based on targets set by the East of England Plan (EEP), although this was in the process of being abolished.

Response to Consultation Questions:

Question 1:    Sustainability Appraisal. Do you have any comments on the Core Strategy Sustainability Appraisal?

Response:     The Sustainability Appraisal appeared detailed and to assess the appropriate topics. There was concern regarding the severe additional stress o water resources in the local area, especially on the River Stort, and significant impacts on road and passenger rail capacity. The Council felt that a discussion of possible freight transport via waterways should be explored, as this would help to alleviate congestion and would be a sustainable form of transport.

Question 2:    Habitats regulations Assessment. Do you have any comments on the Core Strategy Habitats regulations Assessment?

Response:     The Habitats regulation Assessment appeared to be detailed, and to assess the appropriate topics.

The District Council was pleased that existing problems regarding the high level of NOx in and around the special area of conservation has been recognised. It was assumed that the potential impacts of increased traffic caused by large scale development in and around Harlow, would be carefully considered in future iterations of the Core Strategy. However there was concern about development to the north of Harlow, it was likely that large scale development within the district was more likely to affect the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation. It was also felt that water sustainability was a concern.

Theme 1: East Herts Energy and Climate Change

Question 3:    Theme 1: LDF Strategic Objectives. Have we got the LDF strategic objectives for Theme 1 correct?

Response:     This seemed appropriate, but should be more explicit in encouraging renewable energy generation.

Question 4:    Theme 1: Policy Options. Is our approach to dealing with the policy options for Theme 1 correct?

Response:     This seemed appropriate.

Theme 2: East Herts People and Community Safety

Question 5:    Theme 2: LDF Strategic Objectives. Have we got the LDF strategic objectives for Theme 2 correct?

Response:     These seemed appropriate.

Question 6:    Theme 2: Policy Options.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) The internet link below takes you to the Broxbourne Borough Council Pre-Submission Core Strategy Officers are preparing a report that will be circulated next week.

http://www.broxbourne.gov.uk/environment_and_planning/planning_policy.aspx)

The Panel received a report regarding the Broxbourne Borough Council Pre-Submission Core Strategy.

The Core Strategy was a planning document covering the period 2010-2026 setting out a vision for the future of Broxbourne Borough as a prosperous and sustainable community. The strategy explained the unique features of the borough identifying the main challenges and key drivers of change for the next 15 years.

In the short term, the strategy looked for development to focus on suitable urban sites making best use of land and helping achieve neighbourhoods regeneration. The Council would make use of the presence and legacy of the 2012 Olympic Games, raising prosperity in Waltham Cross and elsewhere. In addition, the development of Greater Brookfield was intended to provide high quality shopping and leisure facilities and housing development.

In the medium and long term, Broxbourne Borough Council’s strategy was to complement suitable urban sites with Green Belt ones, with a focus on delivering more larger family and large homes. Regarding future employment, Broxbourne Borough Council stated that there were no specific job targets for the borough. Land would therefore be released at West of Hoddesdon, Goff’s Oak, Bury Green and/or Albury Farm East for new housing, at Park Plaza West and/or Maxwells Farm West, for new employment opportunities depending on future requirements.

Having gathered together a robust evidence base and consulted with local people and interested parties to identify the most important planning related issues from the area, Broxbourne Borough Council set out a vision for the borough and consulted on the alternative ways of addressing the issues and achieving the vision in their Strategy Document (May 2007). After taking account of the responses, a preferred option was chosen by the Council, and following further consultation with the public, another strategy document was published in November 2008.

Following on from this, Broxbourne Council prepared a finalised Core Strategy which was subject of a final six week consultation period giving local people and other interested parties a final opportunity for comment. This pre-submission publication stage ran from 29 August – 15 October 2010.

Following analysis and discussion with members, the response to this consultation was as follows:

1.         The consultation document key diagram on page 19 with respect to areas of Green Belt, were difficult to distinguish from other areas labelled as suitable for development. Clearer distinctions were needed of which areas would be developed and which were being preserved.

2.         Broxbourne Borough Council was working with an individual to locate a suitable site for travelling show people. The document stated that “all new plots that may be needed during the plan period will be assessed using broadly the same search criteria as those set out for Gypsies and Travellers with new provision being made through the determination of development proposals or allocated in a Site Allocation DPD.” However, the District Council viewed this as a vague summary of how Broxbourne Borough intended to address the issue.

3.         Given that there were currently 110 authorised Gypsy and traveller pitches  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

Councillor A Watts requested that the issue of Parish and Town Councils not objecting to a planning application, but that same planning application being allowed to go before a planning sub-committee, should be discussed fully at the Panel. The item was being discussed at the forthcoming Local Council’s Liaison Committee in November 2010. Members requested that the minutes from that meeting should be forwarded to this Panel.

RESOLVED:

(1)        That Parish and Town Councils not objecting to a planning application, but that same planning application being allowed to go before a planning sub-committee, be scheduled into the Panel’s Work Programme for a discussion; and

(2)        That the minutes of the Local Council’s Liaison Committee for November 2010 be forwarded to the Planning services Scrutiny Standing Panel.

The next programmed meeting of the Panel is on Thursday 2 December 2010 at 7.30p.m. in Committee Room 1 and thereafter on:

Thursday 3 March 2011

The next meeting of the Panel was scheduled for 2 December 2010 at 7.30p.m.