Agenda and minutes

No apologies were received.

The meeting held on 20 January 2010 were agreed as a true and accurate record.

The meeting considered a report from the Head of Planning Services which outlined the potential changes to the Council’s Constitution in respect of operation of the Council’s Planning and Environmental Protection Committee (PEPC) and to introduce new guidance for parish councils and community groups on the planning process.  The report also included “The Planning Process: A guide for Parish Councils and Community Groups” which was prepared by the Planning Delivery Service at Peterborough City Council.

In presenting the item, the Head of Planning Services advised that:

• The proposed changes to the operation of the PEPC, should they be approved by Council, were relatively minor.
• The right of Parish Councils to call in planning applications to the PEPC would remain in place.
• The public speaking scheme for the PEPC was currently under review, with a view to simplifying the system and capping speaking times.
• One suggestion under investigation was that objectors be given the opportunity to submit a written statement to be read out by the committee clerk if unable to send a representative to speak on their behalf.

During discussion, the following questions were raised and responses given:

• The issue around objectors’ rights to submit images/presentations was acknowledged to be a complicated point and that there was the opportunity to submit images/presentations within the written information prior to the meeting. 
• An equitable solution was needed.
• There was a risk that Committee members could be provided with too much information, and too many presentations could become very difficult to administer.
• Additional information from objectors needed to be made available to the Committee members well in advance of the meeting to enable them to take the information into consideration.

The Head of Planning Services offered to provide a training session for parish councils on the planning application process.

The report was noted and thanks extended to the Head of Planning Services for “The Planning Process: A guide for Parish Councils and Community Groups” which was a welcome and extremely useful tool for parish councils in responding to planning application consultations.

The meeting received a report from the Neighbourhood Manager City Wide which sought to provide an overview of the progress of Neighbourhood Councils and sought the input of parish councils into their continuing development.

In presenting the item, the Neighbourhood Manager City Wide commented:

• It was recognised that the relationship between neighbourhood councils and parish councils needed further development.  The meeting that was to take place between the Neighbourhood Management Team and parish council representatives had now been rescheduled to late May due to the forthcoming elections.
• Feedback received so far had been taken on board, such as avoiding the use of jargon in agendas and minutes, and making meetings more interactive and engaging.
• Neighbourhood Management needs to be clearly defined and understood as separate to neighbourhood councils.
• Neighbourhood councils are there to ensure that priorities identified through community planning process are actioned and dealt with.
• Various teams are working to improve neighbourhood councils and deliver targeted marketing work.

The Neighbourhood Manager City Wide also informed the meeting that she had recently attended and given a presentation on Neighbourhood Councils at a meeting of Ufford Parish Council.

During discussion, the following questions were raised and responses given:

• Responses on the ‘you said we did’ issues needed to demonstrate real progress toward finding solutions for issues.
• Each neighbourhood council will receive £25,000 for the 2010/2011 year following the successful completion of its Community Action Plan.
• The issue regarding the size of the Rural North area and possible benefits of it being halved would be considered at the meeting between the Neighbourhood Management Team and parish council representatives in May.
• The council was working hard to increase public participation through improved communications and marketing, but it was accepted that there was a low turnout overall.

The Chairman invited members to Google their village and use streetview, and give some thought to how they would like their villages to look in ten years time, with views to be shared at the next meeting in July 2010.

A report was received from the Solicitor to the Council on the Code of Conduct and role of the parish clerks as a result of recent guidance coming from Standards for England of the effect of the local standards framework on town and parish councils.

Parish Councils were asked to informt he Monitoring Officer of the steps they are taking to implement the recommendations arising from:

• The parish council toolkit
• Model standing orders (NALC) regarding breaches of the Code of Conduct
• Recent guidance from Standards for England concerning notifications under the local standards framework

Members noted the contents of the report and agreed to advise the Monitoring Officer of the awareness in their respective parish council of the recommendations by Standards for England and to forward a copy of the relevant standing order to the Monitoring Officer on adoption.

A report from the Director of Operations was received which sought to update parish councils about the recent improvements to the Green Wheel undertaken by Travelchoice and to identify any additional gaps and opportunities.

During discussion, the following points were noted:

• Could the Green Wheel network come out somewhere near Wansford, as it currently stops considerably short – currently need to cycle on the A47 to get in to Peterborough.  This was looked in to by the Parish Council several years ago but was cost prohibitive due to the new bridge required at the time.
• The cycle path should be continued to Eye, not to Eye Green as mentioned in paragraph 3 of the report.
• The new directional fingerposts due to be installed in 2010/11 were a recommendation of the Scrutiny Commission for Rural Communities as it was agreed that they would be distinctive and appropriate for use in rural areas.
• Gritting and potholes - the cycleways needed to be maintained and kept safe as a priority during inclement weather.

At its meeting on 20 January 2010, the Chairman had asked parish councils to consider a proposal to change the name of the City of Peterborough to the ‘City and Soke of Peterborough’.  Comments had been received from several parish councils in response to this request.

During discussion, the following points were noted:

• the name change had not been costed as yet.  Unless there were any legal implications, it was considered that things such as stationery could be renewed as required with the new name.
• Glinton Parish Council and Thorney Parish Council expressed opposition to the proposal.

Following discussion, the Chairman indicated that he would next take this matter to his group meeting for discussion.

Q. Why does Peterborough City Council not have a Lord Mayor if we are a city?

The Governance Officer agreed to investigate the matter and provide an answer at the next meeting.

Members considered the current work programme and made the following recommendations for inclusion:

• Evaluation of Neighbourhood Councils following the meeting between Neighbourhood Management and parish council representatives
• View of how villages to be in ten years time
• Training session from the Head of Planning Services on planning applications
• Q & A session on Neighbourhood Councils with Leader and Chief Executive.