Venue: Bourges/Viersen Room - Town Hall. View directions
Contact: Paulina Ford Senior Governance Officer
No. | Item |
---|---|
Additional documents: |
|
Apologies for Absence Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Allen and Fower. Councillor Sandford was present as substitute for the Liberal Democrat Group. |
|
Declarations of Interest and Whipping Declarations At this point Members must declare whether they have an interest, whether personal or prejudicial, in any of the items on the agenda. Members must also declare if they are subject to their party group whip in relation to any items under consideration.
Minutes: Councillor Sandford declared a personal interest in item 8 – Planning Policies Development Plan Document - as he was employed by the Woodland Trust. |
|
Minutes of Meeting held on 6 September 2011 PDF 98 KB Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 6 September 2011 were approved as a correct record. |
|
Call In of any Cabinet, Cabinet Member or Key Officer Decisions The decision notice for each decision will bear the date on which it is published and will specify that the decision may then be implemented on the expiry of 3 working days after the publication of the decision (not including the date of publication), unless a request for call-in of the decision is received from any two Members of a Scrutiny Committee or Scrutiny Commissions. If a request for call-in of a decision is received, implementation of the decision remains suspended for consideration by the relevant Scrutiny Committee or Commission.
Minutes: Peterborough City Council’s Response to the Draft National Planning Policy Framework
A request for call-in of the decision made by the Cabinet Member for Housing, Neighbourhoods and Planning had been received from Councillors Murphy and Sandford.
The request for call-in stated that the decision had not followed the principles of good decision making as set out in Article 12 of the Council’s Constitution, specifically that the Cabinet Member had not realistically considered all alternatives and, where reasonably possible, considered the views of the public.
In support of the request Councillor Sandford made the following points:
Councillor Murphy supported the views made by Councillor Sandford however as planning policy was a big issue in Peterborough it should have been expected that there would have been a higher level of consultation however he thought the response had been excellent and challenging.
In responding to the request for call-in, the Head of Planning, Transport and Environment made the following comments:
Comments and observations were made around the following areas:
Following the discussion on the merits of ... view the full minutes text for item 5. |
|
Draft Housing Strategy 2011-15 (Incorporating the Peterborough Strategic Tenancy Policy) PDF 74 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The report presented the Draft Peterborough Housing Strategy 2011-15 and incorporated the Peterborough Strategic Tenancy Policy.
The Housing Strategy was the overarching housing-related strategy in Peterborough and was a statutory requirement. The Strategy defined the key objectives for the housing agenda between 2011 and 2015 and the priorities for action. It set out the role that the housing agenda would play in helping the Council and its partners to meet its key strategic objectives. The Strategy had been produced in collaboration with a wide range of partners. The Strategy had four objectives:
The Strategic Tenancy Policy was being developed as part of the Government’s housing reforms in which Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) had been granted a range of additional flexibilities including:
Whilst RSLs would be expected to set out their own policies on the new flexibilities, the Government was keen to ensure that local authorities retained a degree of strategic influence. The Strategic Tenancy Policy set out the broad objectives to be taken into consideration when RSLs were devising their policies but RSLs would be expected to give due regard to an authority’s Strategic Tenancy Policy.
The Policy had four themes:
The Policy advocated:
The draft Strategy would be considered by Cabinet in November 2011 and would then undergo four weeks of consultation. The final Strategy would be considered again by Cabinet in February 2012.
Comments and observations were made around the following areas:
|
|
Enterprise Peterborough PDF 70 KB Minutes: The Chairman welcomed Dave Martin, Regional Managing Director and Richard Oldfield, Transformation Director of Enterprise to the meeting.
The Enterprise Peterborough partnership had been launched just over six months ago and generally the partnership had worked well and there had been progress in a number of service areas and successes. Due to the nature of the partnership, there had been a few challenges and where such challenges had emerged, the Council had worked hard with Enterprise to understand the issues, resolve them, learn from them and move forward.
The following were an example of some of the key service delivery and improvements that had taken place in during the first six months:
Monitoring of complaints was part of the day to day management of the partnership and the following table indicated the number of service complaints received by Enterprise Peterborough in the first seven months since the partnership began. These had been compared to a similar period last year when the services were carried out by Peterborough City Services. It needed to be remembered that front-line services such as those provided by Enterprise were more likely to attract complaints because of the visibility ... view the full minutes text for item 7. |
|
Adjournment Minutes: Due to the time it was proposed to adjourn the meeting until Tuesday 18 October 2011 at 7pm.
Before agreeing to adjourn Members asked whether there was a deadline for consideration of the item on Manor Drive.
The Executive Director of Strategic Resources advised that he had now made a recommendation on the preferred bidder and the proposed Cabinet Member Decision Notice had now been published for its five day consideration period. The decision had not yet been made and was expected to be taken on 20 October 2011. Once the decision had been made it would then be subject to the call in process.
On being put to the vote it was agreed 4 votes for, 0 against and 2 not voting to adjourn the meeting until 7pm on Tuesday 18 October 2011. |