Agenda and minutes

(Enclosure)

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 July 2011 were approved as a correct record of the decisions taken.

No declarations of interest were made.

Report PLA905 from Economic Development Portfolio Holder.

(Enclosure)

Decision:

Cabinet approves the revised schedule of charges set out in the financial statement produced in accordance with Regulation 9 of the Local Authorities (England) (Charges for Property Searches) Regulations 2008 reproduced at Appendix A to report PLA905 to come into effect on 1 September 2011.

Considerations/reasons for decision:

1)   Report PLA905 by the Economic Development Portfolio Holder and appendices to the report.

2)   The Local Authorities (England) (Charges for Property Searches) Regulations 2008 required local authorities to publish annually a financial statement relating to maintaining and accessing unrefined property data held by the authority.

3)   To ensure the authority can meet the costs of delivering the service and make a contribution to the service.

4)   To mitigate the risk of not reconciling deficit or profit year on year and failing to meet statutory duties. The proposed charges would make good against a deficit from the previous two years.

Other options considered:

No alternatives were considered, as this was a statutory requirement for the Council.

Report PLA899 from Economic Development Portfolio Holder

(Enclosure)

Please note that due to the size of this report’s appendices they are available electronically via the Council’s website at www.southkesteven.gov.uk – click the ‘Your Council and Democracy’ link, then ‘Agendas, Minutes and Reports’.

Decision:

The Cabinet:

1.   Notes the comments and issues raised by the representations made to the Site Consultation (October 2009) and Additional Site consultation (August 2010), as set out in Appendix 1 to report number PLA899

2.   Notes the site assessment summaries included at Appendix 2 to report PLA899

3.   Allocate those sites recommended throughout report number PLA899 and listed in appendix 4, subject to the following amendments:

·         Page 9 paragraph 6.12 delete bullet point 4 relating to site ADD41 

·         In relation to the recommendation in paragraph 7.6 bullet point 3 on page 10 of the report (to allocate site ref ADD44) the proposed policy DE3 in Appendix 5 should be amended to clarify the access requirements for the development of the site. Therefore the first bullet point of the policy which establishes the requirements of development should be amended to read:

“Provides appropriate access the site from Peterborough Road and/or Towngate East as required by a detailed Traffic Assessment, and makes appropriate arrangements to increase the capacity of the A15/A16 Roundabout” 

For housing, employment and mixed use development in the Site Allocation and Policies Development Plan Document

4.   Approve the proposed draft Policies as set out in Appendix 5 to report PLA899, for inclusion in the submission version of the Site Allocation and Policies Development Plan document

Considerations/Reasons for decision:

1)   Report number PLA889 by the Economic Development Portfolio Holder and appendices to the report.

2)   Comments made about suggested development sites during public consultation.

3)   Development needs of the district established in the adopted Core Strategy.

4)   Background evidence and reports gathered to support the preparation of the Local Development Framework (LDF).

5)   The Inspector finding that the Development Plan Document did not meet the sustainability requirements would render the plan ‘unsound’.

6)   Comments from English Heritage who confirmed that the site ADD41 was still a scheduled Monument and there had been no application to de-schedule this site. There was also concern about the impact of development on the setting of the Scheduled Monument and the Listed buildings in this location.

7)   Clarifications to recommendations made at the meeting.

Other options considered:

The Adopted Core Strategy provides the overarching policy framework which requires sites to be identified and allocated for development. The Core Strategy specifically sets out that sites will be allocated in the Site Allocations and Policies DPD to meet the housing and employment needs of the district. If it does not do this it will not be in conformity with the Core Strategy and could fail to be found sound at examination. More importantly, however if insufficient appropriate, suitable and deliverable sites are allocated to meet the development needs identified in the Core Strategy, there is a high risk that inappropriate sites and forms of development will be permitted via planning application and appeal. This will be costly and time consuming to the council and does not give any measure of certainty to the general public, developers and organisations about where or how the district should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Report PLA901 from Economic Development Portfolio Holder

(Enclosure)

Please note that due to the size of this report’s appendices they are available electronically via the Council’s website at www.southkesteven.gov.uk – click the ‘Your Council and Democracy’ link, then ‘Agendas, Minutes and Reports’.

Decision:

The Cabinet approves the draft Greyfriars and Wharf Place Development Briefs for the purposes of public consultation.

Considerations/Reasons for decision:

1)   Report number PLA901 by the Economic Development Holder and the report’s appendices, including the draft development briefs.

2)   Greyfriars and Wharf Place were identified for development as part of Grantham Town Centre Issues and Options. This provided the overall concept but did not define details.

3)   The outcome of informal public consultation on the development briefs.

4)   The cost of consultation could be accommodated within existing budgets.

Other options considered:

1)   Do not proceed with preparation of development briefs – the alternative would be to rely on a prospective developer to submit a planning application and hopefully engage in pre-application and post-application negotiations. The preparation of a brief is more positive in that it provides a planning framework to promote interest in the site and guide and encourage the co-ordinated redevelopment of the site in accordance with the Council’s policies. It also offers some degree of certainty that a planning application would be more likely to obtain approval subject to detail.

2)   Do not undertake consultation – this is not a viable option. The Council is bound not only by its adopted SCI to undertake consultation on planning policy documents prior to their adoption but also by statutory regulations.

Report PLA898 from Economic Development Portfolio Holder.

(Enclosure)

Please note that due to the size of this report’s appendices they are available electronically via the Council’s website at www.southkesteven.gov.uk – click the ‘Your Council and Democracy’ link, then ‘Agendas, Minutes and Reports’.

Decision:

The Cabinet:

1)  Notes the issues raised in the representations in respect of the housing policies set out in Appendix 1 of report PLA898

2)  Approves the proposed changes to the draft housing policies as set out in Appendix 2 to report PLA898 and for these to be included in the submission version of the Grantham Area Action Plan Development Plan Document for consideration by Council on 8 September 2011

Considerations/reason for decision:

1)   Report number PLA898 by the Economic Development Portfolio Holder and appendices to the report.

2)   GAAP DPD reports considered by Cabinet on 7 February 2011 and 4 July 2011, including feedback from public consultation.

3)   Costs for the consultation and examination process could be met from within existing budgets.

Other options considered:

The adopted Core Strategy provides the overarching policy framework which requires the inclusion of these additional policies in the GAAP. If they are not included within the Grantham Area Action Plan DPD, the plan will not be in conformity with the Core Strategy and could fail to be found sound at examination.

In respect of the representations received, Appendix 1 to report PLA898 sets out the consideration of the issues raised and whether the changes as requested to the policies are appropriate.

Report PLA900 from Economic Development Portfolio Holder.

(Enclosure)

Please note that due to the size of this report’s appendices they are available electronically via the Council’s website at www.southkesteven.gov.uk – click the ‘Your Council and Democracy’ link, then ‘Agendas, Minutes and Reports’.

Decision:

Cabinet recommends to Council that:

1)  Subject to the recommendations in reports PLA898 and PLA899, the Grantham Area Action Plan and Site Allocation and Policies DPDs attached as Appendices A and B to report PLA900 be approved for publication for the making of representations

2)  Subject to there being no representations which raise fundamental issues on soundness, the Grantham Area Action Plan and Site Allocation Policies DPDs be submitted to the Secretary of State

3)  Authority is delegated to the Head of Development and Growth in consultation with the Economic Development Portfolio Holder to make any necessary changes to the DPDs associated with publication and subsequent processes

4)  Representations received after the end of the six-week representation period are not accepted as duly made

Considerations/ reasons for decision:

1)   Report number PLA900 by the Economic Development Portfolio Holder and the appendices to the report.

2)   The publication of the DPDs supports the Good for Business and Quality Living priority themes.

3)   The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations require the final versions of the two DPDs to be published and for representations to be invited from stakeholders prior to submission for independent examination.

4)   Both DPDs have been subject to a sustainability appraisal.

5)   The cost for publishing and the examination of the DPDs could be met within existing resources.

Other options considered:

The adopted Core strategy provides the overarching policy framework for the SAP and GAAP DPDs. If the DPDs do not include relevant policies they will not be in conformity with the Core Strategy and could fail to be found sound at examination.

Each of the policies in the DPDs is based upon a Core Strategy Policy and has provided little scope to consider alternative policy options. However, this is a requirement of the LDF preparation process and has been addressed through earlier consultations, in particular through the Issues and Options consultation in 2005 and the Housing and Economic DPD consultation in 2006, and through the consideration of the responses to the public consultation undertaken on the two DPDs over the past 12 to 18 months. The allocated sites have been identified following assessment, against consistent criteria, of a considerable number of alternative sites. Both DPDs have also been subject to a sustainability appraisal.

At examination the DPDs will be tested as to whether they are the most appropriate strategy when considered against reasonable alternatives and that they have been developed from a robust and credible evidence base.

Report PCC02 from Engagement and Corporate Services Portfolio Holder

(Enclosure)

Decision:

Cabinet notes the performance and progress achieved for the period April to March 2011.

Considerations/reasons for decision:

1)   Report number PCC02 by the Engagement and Corporate Services Portfolio Holder and the Quality Organisation performance report attached as an appendix to the document.

2)   The summary of customer feedback for 2010/11. Work was also underway to develop a mechanism for collecting feedback through Leisure Connection.

3)   The report forms part of the overall performance management framework of the Council

Other options considered:

No other options were considered.

DATE DECISIONS EFFECTIVE:

Decisions CO10-13 as made on 1 August 2011 can be implemented on 10 August unless subject to call-in by the Scrutiny Committee Chairman or any five members of the Council from any political groups.

Decision CO14 is referred to full Council for decision on 8 September 2011.