Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the February meeting of the Scrutiny Board (City Development).

To identify items which have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.

(The special circumstance shall be specified in the minutes.)

The Chair agreed to accept a copy of a supplementary report submitted by  the witness, Councillor George Hall, Barwick-in-Elmet and Scholes Parish Council relating to the inquiry to review the method by which planning applications are publicised and community involvement takes place (Agenda Item 7) (Minute 94 refers). The document was not available at the time of the agenda despatch, but had been circulated by emails to all interested parties on 3^rd February 2010.

There were no declarations of personal or prejudicial interests made under this item.

An apology for absence was received on behalf of Councillor G Wilkinson.

To receive and approve the minutes of the last meeting held on 12^th January 2009.

RESOLVED – That, subject to a number of minor changes required by the Chair, the minutes of the previous meeting held on 12^th January 2010 be approved as a correct record.

To consider a report  of the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development regarding the second session of Board’s Inquiry to review the method by which Planning Applications are Publicised and Community Involvement takes place.

Referring to Minute 83 of the meeting held on 12^th January 2010, the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development submitted a report in relation to  Session 2 of the Board's inquiry to review the method by which planning applications were publicised and community involvement takes place.

The purpose of this session was to :-

·  receive any information requested from the last session

·  consider evidence of examples of good practice in other local planning authorities concerning the publicity and notification given to planning applications and the methods used

·  consider some Case Studies involving selected residents groups, developers  and Area Managers suggesting improvements to the current arrangements for publicising and involving people on planning applications , given the constraints identified in paragraph 1.4 of the terms of reference

·  identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current arrangements and opportunities and barriers for improvement

·  consider how this fits with current corporate consultation policy, processes and arrangements to facilitate more effective community consultation in neighbourhoods with regard to statutory requirements for timescale and scope

Appended to the report were copies of the following documents for the information/comment of the meeting:-

a)  Terms of reference - Inquiry to review the method by which planning 

  applications are publicised and community involvement takes place

b)   Report of the Chief Planning Officer –Inquiry to review the method by 

  which planning applications are publicised and community involvement

  takes place

In addition to the above documents, a copy of a supplementary report produced by Councillor George Hall, a witness at today’s meeting, was circulated for the information/comment of the Board.

The following representatives were in attendance and responded to Members’ queries and comments:-

• Phil Crabtree, Chief Planning Officer, City Development
• Martin Sellens, Head of Planning Services, City Development
• Helen Cerroti, Development Project Manager, City Development
• Mr Keith Collridge, Kirkstall resident and involved with the Kirkstall forge redevelopment
• Councillor George Hall,  Barwick-in-Elmet and Scholes Parish Council
• Ms Freda Matthews, resident and Chair of Little Woodhouse Community Association

The Chair invited the Chief Planning Officer to report on the following three specific issues which had some relevance to the Board's inquiry:-

• new legislation strengthening guidance on  "garden grabbing" and in-appropriate development in gardens
• new regulations covering houses in multiple occupation where planning permission was now required where three people reside (formally six people)
• the recent introduction of a new Online Public Access System which would include all planning applications and comments that were received. The Board was advised that all Members of Council would be given an opportunity to receive practical instruction to use this new system, but much of it was intuitive and could be used straight away

  Following this, the Chair then allowed a short presentation from each witness on their personal experiences of the processes and what they regarded as the main advantages and disadvantages of the present system and how it could be approved.

  Councillor George Hall

  Councillor Hall referred to his supplementary report and briefly highlighted the main issues relevant to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

To consider a report of the Chief Economic Development Officer regarding the ‘Agenda for Improved Economic Performance’.

The Chief Economic Development Officer submitted a report regarding the ‘Agenda for Improved Economic Performance’.

Appended to the report were copies of the following documents for the information/comment of the meeting:-

a)  Leeds Agenda for Improved Economic Performance – Executive 

Summary

b)  List of Consulted Organisations

c)  The Agenda for Improved Economic Performance - Future Structure

The following representatives were in attendance:-

Paul Stephens, Chief Economic Development Manager, City Development

Tom Holvey, Economic Policy Manager, City Development

In summary, specific reference was to the following issues:-

• support for the main approach of the document around a common message, leadership and buy in of partners
• support for the themes of the document through the Golden Thread and the three objectives of Great Place, Skilled People and Copetitive Businesses

• concern expressed that EASEL had been omitted from the document
• the need for clarity of the relationship between Leeds and the city region
• the fact that this document should have been reviewed in 2004

• the need for positive elements to be included within the document with the aim of addressing inequalities in the area
• clarification of the principle aims of the document around growth and business diversity and whether the ‘Leeds Initiative Leeds Economy Partnership’ document published in 1999 had  influenced these areas
• the reasons why the document was not to be  incorporated within the new ‘Vision for Leeds 2011-2030 and the costs involved in developing this separate publication
• reference to a separate policy regeneration document on worklessness which had been produced by the Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods
• the concern expressed that the document would not have an impact as it would be viewed as just another ‘glossy’ document produced by the Council
• support for a shorter and more succinct style of publication
• the need to identify more of the unique components of the Leeds economy
• support for the proposal that future opportunities need to be made clearer and that linkages be improved particularly with other strategies and  the different sections of the document
• support for the proposal that the document  be reversed so that the actions and "what are we going to do" was at the front followed by the context
• clarification of which organisations and businesses had been consulted
• the need for the document to include political aspirations which cannot be done by officers to promote major schemes and initiatives in Leeds
• the need for a ‘Plan B’ to be written into the document i.e. Next Generation Transport, what if scenario
• the need for the document to focus on joined up thinking with a dialogue with ‘real people’ and avoid having too structured approach

The Chair then invited the Chief Economic Development Officer and the Economic Policy Manager to respond to the various comments made.

In summary specific reference was made to the following issues:-

• details of the cross section consultation process which had included such companies as ASDA and IBM in Thorp Arch
• the view expressed that the document would focus too much on the economic performance of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95.

To consider a report of the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development regarding the Board’s work programme, together with a copy of the Forward Plan of Key Decisions pertaining to this Board’s Terms of Reference and the latest Executive Board minutes.

The Head of Scrutiny and Member Development submitted a report providing Members with a copy of the Board’s current Work Programme.  The Forward Plan of Key Decisions for the period 1^st February 2010 to 31^st May 2010 and the Executive Board Minutes of 6^th January 2010 were also attached to the report.

RESOLVED –

a)  That the contents of the report and appendices be noted.

b)  That the Executive Board minutes of 6^th January 2010 and the Forward Plan of Key Decisions for the period 1^st February 2010 to 31^st May 2010 be noted.

c)  That the Board’s Principal Scrutiny Adviser be requested to update the work programme to incorporate those updates requested at today’s meeting.

d)  That the following specific items be also added to the work programme:-

·  a request for scrutiny received from Councillor B Cleabsy in relation to the loss of land allocated for employment in Horsforth (March 2010)

·  to discuss with the Chief Highways Officer actions that have or can be taken to reduce highway "Pinch Points", in the city  (March 2010) 

Tuesday 9^th March 2010 at 10.00am (Pre-meeting for Board Members at 9.30am)

Tuesday 9^th March 2010 at 10.00am (Pre meeting for Board Members at 9.30am)

(The meeting concluded at 12.10pm)