Agenda and minutes

Venue: Norfolk Room, The Conference Suite, Elizabeth House, Dereham

Items
No. Item

23.

Minutes (Agenda item 1) pdf icon PDF 115 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 February 2013.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting held on 12 February 2013 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

24.

Apologies (Agenda item 2)

To receive apologies for absence. 

Minutes:

An apology for absence was received from Elizabeth Gould.

25.

Non-Members Wishing to Address the Meeting (Agenda item 5)

To note the names of any non-members who wish to address the meeting.

Minutes:

Mesdames E Jolly. S Matthews, L Monument, J North and P Spencer and Messrs G Bambridge, P Cowen, P Duigan, T Jermy, A Joel, M Nairn, M Robinson and F Sharpe.

26.

Local Plan Working Group (Agenda item 7) pdf icon PDF 84 KB

To receive the Minutes of the Local Plan Working Group meeting held on 6 March 2013.

Minutes:

The Executive Member for Internal Services had observed that this was the fifth revision of the timetable for the Local Plan.

 

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Local Plan Working Group meeting held on 6 March 2013 be adopted.

27.

Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) (Agenda item 8) pdf icon PDF 78 KB

Report of Elizabeth Gould, Executive Member for Planning & Environmental Services and Mark Kiddle-Morris, Executive Member for Assets & Strategic Development.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) was a Council policy setting out how the community would be involved in the production of planning policy documents and determination of planning applications.

 

The Executive Member for Assets & Strategic Development reported that there had been many changes to planning regulations since the adoption of the previous SCI in 2006.  There was also a new piece of legislation under the Localism Act called ‘Duty to Co-operate’ which required all Local Planning Authorities and other organisations to engage with each other on strategic planning matters.

 

The Chairman of the Overview & Scrutiny Commission said that this document had already been included on the Commission’s Work Programme for the meeting on 6 June 2013.  He stated that this ‘Duty to Co-operate’ was all very well but the efforts to persuade these statutory bodies to attend Overview & Scrutiny Commission’s meetings to discuss planning matters such as infrastructure had not been successful. The Executive Member for Assets & Strategic Development totally agreed with the aforementioned comments but Council’s now had a statutory duty to demonstrate that efforts had been made to consult.   In response to a question about what could be done if all efforts to engage with these organisations failed, the Chief Executive stated that this area had not been tested in law therefore it would be interesting to see how this proceeds.

 

Options

 

(1)         Cabinet approves the content of the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) for consultation between 2 April and 3rd May 2013;

 

(2)         Cabinet approves the SCI but considers is should not be consulted on and should move to adoption at the next available Full Council meeting (23 May 2013);

 

(3)         Cabinet approves the SCI but requests a longer consultation period; or

 

(4)         Cabinet rejects the content of the SCI and requests further amendments and reconsideration.

 

Reasons

 

The Statement of Community Involvement meets the requirements of the regulations, and reflected existing practices as well as setting out clearly how the Council would engage with communities and stakeholders on development management decisions and planning policy.  The SCI had been set out in a logical manner, with the use of plain English to make it accessible.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

(1)         the content of the Statement of Community Involvement be approved; and

 

(2)         authority to commence the public consultation between 2nd April and 3rd May 2013 be approved.

28.

Breckland Community Infrastructure Levy - Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and Viability Assessment (Agenda item 9) pdf icon PDF 154 KB

Report of Elizabeth Gould, Executive Member for Planning & Environmental Services and Mark Kiddle-Morris, Executive Member for Assets & Strategic Development.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The purpose of the report was for Members to consider the findings of the CIL viability assessment, and review the Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and agree this for a period of pubic consultation.

 

As this had been a very complicated piece of calculation that the Planning Policy Team had put together, the Executive Member for Assets & Strategic Development had asked the Planning Policy Team to provide a small presentation to Members which described the viability of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). 

 

The Planning Policy Team Leader presumed that everyone knew what CIL was; however, for those who did not, he explained that a CIL represented a tax on new development over 100sqm and was intended to produce a fairer system for the funding of community infrastructure than the existing use of Section 106 Agreements.  Furthermore, the role and use of such Agreements was being scaled back through national planning regulations which would come into effect from April 2014.  Due to these changes to the S106 process the production and implementation of a CIL for Breckland Council had become imperative.

 

The approach taken in the viability assessment was to consider a range of notional development scenarios that aimed to demonstrate whether there were variances in viability across the district for particular land uses.  This approach was in accordance with best practice and had been adopted in other Local Authority CIL viability assessments that were further progressed through the process.  The viability of the scenarios had been assessed using the residual valuation method.

 

The extent of any changes in viability across the District could warrant multiple zones or charges per different types of development.  Some areas, for example in London, just one CIL was being charged.    For Breckland, there was evidence that a single rate could not be introduced due to the viability differences between residential and other commercial developments.  The variations across Breckland had been particularly notable for the approach to residential development which had been characterised by a number of different sales value areas.  This had been confirmed in the latest viability assessment from a review of residential sales data supplied from the Council’s Hometrack system.  This had established that when looking solely at sales values there were, in effect, three residential zones in Breckland.  The first zone included the market town of Attleborough and the majority of rural parishes within the District.  These had the highest residential sales values within the District and consequently, proposals would result in a greater overall development value.  The second residential sales value zone included the market towns of Dereham, Swaffham and Watton plus a number of the rural parishes to the west of Dereham.  The third, was Thetford.  Residential sales values within the town (for all property types) were lower than seen in the rest of the District.

 

From April 2014, local authorities would not be able to pool any more than five planning obligations for projects or specific types of infrastructure.  Therefore, the implementation of CIL would provide that flexibility in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

29.

Next Meeting (Agenda item 10)

To note that the date of the next meeting of Cabinet will be held on Tuesday, 7 May 2013 at 9.30am in the Norfolk Room.

Minutes:

The arrangements for the next meeting on Tuesday, 7 May 2013 at 9.30am in the Norfolk Room were noted.

30.

Exclusion of Press and Public (Agenda item 11)

To consider passing the following resolution:

 

“That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to the Act”.

 

PART B – ITEM FROM WHICH THE PRESS AND THE PUBLIC ARE EXCLUDED

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED that under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to the Act.

31.

PFI Benchmarking (Agenda item 12)

Report of Lynda Turner, Executive Member for Localism, Community & Environmental Services.

Minutes:

The PFI Monitoring & Strategic Sports Officer presented the report which sought delegated authority to accept or reject the Benchmark figures and to agree any changes to Service Specification and whether to go through the Market Test process as described in the report.

 

Members’ questions were invited.

 

The Chief Executive asked for a slight amendment to the recommendation to accord with the general provisions of delegation.

 

Options

 

See report.

 

Reasons

 

To allow the Council to meet its contractual obligations as described in Schedule 18 Part 1 ‘Benchmarking Procedure’ of the Project Agreement.

 

To establish if refinancing the agreement would deliver financial benefits.

 

RESOLVED that authority be delegated to the Deputy Chief Executive in consultation with the Executive Member for Localism, Community & Environmental Services for the decision to:

 

(1)         accept or reject the Benchmark figures;

 

(2)         agree any changes to Service Specification; and

 

(3)         whether to go through the Market Test process as described in the report.