Agenda and minutes

Under the terms of reference for the Licensing Committee each Sub-Committee is required to elect a Chairman on an ad hoc basis for the duration of the meeting.

In the absence of the Chairman, nominations were invited from the Cabinet Committee for the appointment of a Chairman for the duration of the meeting.

RESOLVED:

(1)        That Councillor R Bassett be appointed Chairman for the duration of the meeting.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To declare interests in any item on the agenda.

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

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Cabinet Committee (previously circulated).

Although the minutes of the previous meeting had been published as part of a Supplementary Agenda for the Cabinet Meeting scheduled for 19 July 2010, Members of the Cabinet Committee had not had enough time to consider them and they were deferred until the next meeting for agreement.

RESOLVED:

(1)        That the minutes of the last meeting held on 17 June 2010 be deferred until the next meeting for agreement.

To note the Terms of reference for the Cabinet Committee, as agreed by the Council on 17 February 2009; minute 113(a) refers.

(1)        That a Local Development Framework Cabinet Committee be appointed with the following terms of reference:

(a)        To oversee and submit recommendations to the Cabinet as appropriate on:

(i)         the preparation of the Local Development Framework (LDF);

(ii)        the preparation of the Core Strategy including agreement of consultation stages and documentation, and the responses that should be made to any representations received;

(iii)       the preparation of other Development Plan Documents including agreement of consultation stages and documentation, and the responses that should be made to any representations received;

(iv)       the preparation of Supplementary Planning Documents including agreement of consultation stages and documentation, and the responses that should be made to any representations received; and

(v)        the revision of the Local Development Scheme and monitoring the achievement of milestones;

(b)        To consider and provide input to consultants’ reports which contribute to the establishment of an up-to-date evidence base to influence preparation of the LDF;

(c)        To consider options for joint or coordinated working with other councils, which best meet the needs of this District, as required by the East of England Plan and (where relevant) the London Plan and to make recommendations to the Cabinet thereon;

(d)        To consider the comprehensive review of the East of England Plan, and make recommendations to the Cabinet on any responses to be made;

(e)        To liaise with the Planning Services Scrutiny Standing Panel as appropriate; and

(f)         To work within the budgetary provision for the LDF, as approved by the Cabinet and the Council.

The Cabinet Committee noted its Terms of Reference as agreed by the Council on 17 February 2009 (minute 113(a) refers).

Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs (6) and (24) of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution requires that the permission of the Chairman be obtained, after prior notice to the Chief Executive, before urgent business not specified in the agenda (including a supplementary agenda of which the statutory period of notice has been given) may be transacted.

In accordance with Operational Standing Order (6) (non-executive bodies), any item raised by a non-member shall require the support of a member of the Cabinet Committee and the Chairman of the Cabinet Committee. Two weeks’ notice of non-urgent items is required.

It was noted that there was no other urgent business for consideration by the Cabinet Committee.

(Director of Planning & Economic Development) To provide a verbal update on any information received from the Government at the meeting.

The Assistant Director (Policy & Conservation) presented a verbal update on changes to the current planning system proposed by the new coalition Government.

The Assistant Director advised the Cabinet Committee that a letter had been received from the Minister for Decentralisation revoking the Direction to prepare a separate Gypsy & Traveller Development Plan Document. A report would be considered by both the Cabinet and Council before the end of the month, and would recommend the cessation of further work on the Development Plan Document as well as notification to all land owners and interested groups.

The Assistant Director further advised the Cabinet Committee of a letter from the Chief Planner at the Department of Communities & Local Government announcing the revocation of all Regional Strategies with immediate effect, although the requirement to produce a Local Development Framework still remained. A further letter from the Minister for Housing had set out some of the principles that the Coalition Government wished to see incorporated within the plan-making process. A statement of how the Council would secure real local and community engagement had also been requested.

The Assistant Director also informed the Cabinet Committee that Regional Development Agencies would be replaced with Local Enterprise Partnerships, which would be business orientated. There was the possibility of four such agencies for Essex, with the District most likely in the M11/West Essex Partnership.

The Cabinet Committee welcomed the revocation of the Gypsy & Traveller Development Plan Document Direction, and supported the reports being considered at the Cabinet and Council meetings in July. Local residents had waited more than two years for the Direction to be rescinded and it was felt that the news would be welcomed throughout the District.

RESOLVED:

(1)        That the verbal update on the proposed changes to the planning system by the Assistant Director (Policy & Conservation) be noted.

(Director of Planning & Economic Development) To consider the attached report (LDF-005-2010/11).

The Senior Planning Officer introduced a report upon the Town Centres Study for the District, which had provided the first comprehensive assessment of retail and leisure provision across the District’s main centres, as well as an assessment of future retail and leisure need in terms of both quantity of floor space and the quality of provision. This assessment of future need would help to guide decision making on policies in the Core Strategy for each of the District’s main centres.

The Cabinet Committee was reminded that Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 4 – Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth – required local planning authorities to prepare an evidence base to plan for town centres in the future. Roger Tym & Partners had been appointed to undertake the study in March 2009. The study provided information on the six main centres defined by the current Local Plan and an assessment of the current policy to retain a percentage of retail frontage within them. The Consultants undertook a household telephone survey, a visitor survey across the six centres, as well as a stakeholder consultation with Town Councils and Town Centre Partnerships.

The Cabinet Committee was informed of the key findings from the Study. Some parts of the District had excellent public transport links to London, whilst there was also a number of higher order centres located a short distance outside the District. The six centres within the District were all of a lower order and provided services that reflected their size. The national trend was for people to spend more in larger centres, as well as a rise in alternative forms of shopping such as the internet. The future development of the six centres was examined in terms of comparison retailing (clothing, furniture, electricals)  and convenience retailing (food, drink, newspapers), as well as leisure uses (bars, cafes, cinemas), over five, ten and twenty-one year periods. In all cases, the study recommended a growth in retail capacity over the periods, using an increased market share scenario to increase the retail spending of residents within the District. The aim was to change shopping patterns through the development of new retail floorspace within the District.

The Senior Planning Officer stated that the study had concluded there were high levels of expenditure leakage from the District for both comparison and convenience goods. There was scope to improve the convenience retail on offer within the District, which would also increase choice and competition. There was also scope to accommodate national brand stores to satisfy local needs and provide a balance between independent traders and larger operators. Requirements for floorspace indicated there was still demand for space in the District’s larger centres. There was still potential to improve the local commercial leisure provision and to encourage a small art house cinema within the District to provide an alternative to the nearby multiplex centres. Finally, the retail frontages policy was generally thought to be performing well as there were no major gaps currently, although it might be necessary to separate primary and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

(Director of Planning & Economic Development) To consider the attached report (LDF-006-2010/11).

The Senior Planning & Consultation Officer introduced a report regarding an Engagement Strategy for the Local Development Framework, which outlined an approach to engaging with key stakeholders, interested parties and the community in the early stages of the forthcoming Local Development Framework (LDF). The Council was committed to providing the local community with opportunities to shape the place in which they lived and had developed an approach to engagement designed to make this achievable.

The Senior Planning & Consultation Officer advised that positive and effective communication was essential to engage with the public successfully on spatial planning. The proposed Engagement Strategy would assist in the development of the Statement of Community Involvement and was designed to be compatible with the current Corporate Consultation Strategy. A number of methods had been proposed for consideration: development of a LDF brand to attract attention from the public; development of a set of principles of engagement to ensure that a consistent approach would be adopted and the Council would meet its statutory requirements; alternative consultation methods such as the use of social media and dedicated websites to engage with a wider section of the community; and partnership working with other Directorates to link in with other consultation activities.

The Senior Planning & Consultation Officer added that engaging with the public in the preparation and evidence gathering stage was the first phase of consultation in producing a Core Strategy. Government guidance had identified four main groups of consultees - statutory consultees, general consultees, other interested parties and the general public – and  the Strategy had suggested a variety of methods for each group at this stage. The recent change in Government had created some uncertainty about the future direction of the planning system; therefore the proposed Engagement Strategy was designed to be flexible and focused on engagement at the Evidence Base stage. The aim had been to produce an Engagement Strategy that used both tested and innovative methods; provided an adopted format for Officers and the community to work with; and was cost effective.

The Assistant Director (Policy & Conservation) added that no timetable for the consultation periods had been implemented due to the changes in Planning Policies recently announced by the new Government. The Council would need to consult upon the Evidence Base and then the Issues & Options document to ascertain the Key Options for the District. It was confirmed that an allocation from the LDF budget had been made for the various consultations. The Evidence Base approach was still the preferred method for generating the LDF and this contained a statutory requirement to consult.

The Portfolio Holder for Legal & Estates expressed a number of concerns with the report:

(i)         the strategy appeared to utilise a top-down approach rather than a bottom-up approach;

(ii)        there should be a single named contact, not a generic email or telephone number;

(iii)       the Council should look to hold a number of public debates; and

(iv)       the hard-to reach groups should also include those people who feel they can’t make a difference.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.