Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Maqbool and Councillor McKean attended as substitute.  Apologies were also received from Councillor JA Fox and Councillor Ash attended as substitute.

Apologies were also received from the Cabinet member for Growth, Strategic Planning, Economic Development, Business Engagement and Environment Capital.

At this point Members must declare whether they have a disclosable pecuniary interest, or other interest, in any of the items on the agenda, unless it is already entered in the register of members’ interests or is a “pending notification “ that has been disclosed to the Solicitor to the Council.

Members must also declare if they are subject to their party group whip in relation to any items under consideration.

Agenda item – 7 Peterborough ‘Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL): Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule (PDCS)’ and Infrastructure Delivery Schedule (IDS)

Councillor Nadeem declared a personal interest in that he was a developer and builder.

• 13 June 2012
• 12 July 2012

The minutes of the meeting held on 13 June 2012 were approved as an accurate record.

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 July 2012 were approved as an accurate record.

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.

There were no requests for call-in to consider.

The Cabinet Member for Growth, Strategic Planning, Economic Development, Business Engagement and Environment Capital was unable to attend the meeting and had sent his apologies in advance. The Committee therefore agreed to defer the item to the next meeting in November to allow the Cabinet Member to attend and present his report.

The Group Manager Strategic Planning and Enabling introduced the report.  The report provided the Committee with an update on Peterborough City Council’s 2010/11 and 2011/12 carbon dioxide emissions.  The emissions were reported as part of the mandatory participation in the Carbon Reduction Commitment Energy Efficiency Scheme and to assess progress under the Carbon Management Action Plan (CMAP). Steady progress had been made towards the 35% target of reduction in carbon dioxide emissions but to achieve the  target by 2013/14 would be a challenge.

Questions and observations were made around the following areas:

·         How are you going to achieve the 35% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions and how do you propose to make up for the shortfall.  Members were advised that the council was on track to hit the 35% target but not in the timeframe originally set.  This had been an ambitious target and the progress towards it had been steady. Some examples of initiatives in place to achieve the target had included working with schools, the new Energy Services Company, consolidation of office space in more energy efficient buildings, behavioural change of staff in the way they use the buildings, improvement in the heating system in buildings.

·         Lots of schools have had solar panels fitted.  What sort of impact do you think this will have on the figures mentioned in the report in the future?  Members were advised that solar panels on schools would assist in the reduction of carbon emissions in the future.  The council was keen to work with schools to educate them and effect a behavioural change in the future.

·         The report showed that the fleet vehicles that were now part of the outsourced services had shown an increase in emissions of 19% during  2011/12.  Could the Officer explain why there had been an increase?  The Group Manager Strategic Planning and Enabling advised that he did not have the information available with regard to this and would advise the committee at a later date.

·         Had the outsourcing contract for the fleet vehicles included targets for reducing carbon emissions?  The Group Manager Strategic Planning and Enabling advised that he did not have the information available with regard to this and would advise the committee at a later date.  The  Head of Planning, Transport and Engineering Services informed Members that the team under the Group Manager  for Strategic Planning and Enabling only recorded the information with regard to carbon emission output and was not involved in procurement of contracts.

·         Why had there been no further consultation on CMAP since it had been approved by Council in April 2010.  Members were advised that a refresh of the all of the Environment Capital targets including CMAP would commence this year.

·         The report states that officers would continue to monitor carbon emissions annually.  How would this be done?  Members were advised that monitoring had to be completed annually and was a complex process which included looking at energy bills and how gas had been converted into carbon emissions.  This was calculated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Group Manager Strategic Planning and Enabling introduced the report which informed Members that the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was  a new nationally based optional approach to securing developer contributions alongside the limited continued use of Planning Conditions and Obligations (financial or in-kind contributions e.g. land). If adopted by the city council it would replace the current POIS tariff-based system.   Members were informed that CIL would not be a radical new initiative in Peterborough and was very similar to the existing POIS system that had been in place in Peterborough for the past few years, i.e. a ‘levy’ placed on development, a similar set of ‘£’ rates, and a similar proposed spending arrangement. It was not therefore anticipated to cause undue concern by the vast majority of developers and investors in the city.  The report also included a Proposed Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule (PDCS).  From April 2014 the current local POIS system would become unlawful.  The officer wished to note an administrative error in the report on page 30 paragraph 5.  A figure of £1.5 Billon had been quoted when it should have read £491 Million.

Questions and observations were made around the following areas:

·         Members were concerned that developers would not fulfil their instalment payments. Members were advised that if the instalments policy was put in place as proposed it would still have to be paid at commencement of development of each building phase. As soon as the development had started the council would send a bill to the developer which effectively became a charge on the land.

·         What would happen if the developer said he could not afford to pay the S106 payment?  Members were advised that the CIL payment was not negotiable and would have to be paid at the start of the development. Outstanding S106 Obligations would continue to be negotiated in the same way as they are currently negotiated.

·         Neighbourhood Committees did not meet very often so how would you ensure they were consulted?  Members were informed that Neighbourhood Committees could influence how the money was spent in two ways with the new system.  Directly through the Community Action Plans by stating how they wanted their 5% contribution to be spent and then indirectly influence the remaining 95% of contributions for the bigger infrastructure schemes through the Infrastructure Delivery Schedule. CIL would not change how the money was distributed to communities.

·         How will CIL be distributed across the neighbourhoods?  Members were informed that the money collected from the developers would go into a single pot.  The pot of money would then be split on an annual basis as listed in the table below. 

Proposed CIL funding split

·         Members wanted confirmation that the money for neighbourhoods would be split equally across the neighbourhoods. The Head of Planning, Transport and Engineering Services informed Members that the document  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

            The Committee received the latest version of the Council’s Forward Plan, containing key decisions that the Leader of the Council anticipated the Cabinet or individual Cabinet Members would make during the course of the following four months.  Members were invited to comment on the Plan and, where appropriate, identify any relevant areas for inclusion in the Committee’s work programme.

ACTION AGREED

The Committee noted the latest version of the Forward Plan.  Councillor Ash requested further information on the Organic and Food Waste Treatment Services Contract.  Senior Governance Officer to contact Officers and request information.

Members considered the Committee’s Work Programme for 2012/13 and discussed possible items for inclusion. 

ACTION AGREED

To confirm the work programme for 2012/13 and the Senior Governance Officer to include any additional items as requested during the meeting.

Thursday 8 November 2012