Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Arculus and Councillor Fower.

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.

Councillor Murphy declared a personal interest with regard to item 6 on the agenda, the Disposal of Vawser Lodge as he owned property in the area.

The minutes of the meetings held on 7 June and 29 June 2011 were approved as a correct 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 report provided the Committee with an outline of how the Growth Agenda was facilitated for Peterborough and was being taken forward.  The Head of Growth and Regeneration introduced the report and informed Members that the Growth agenda was facilitated through three service areas:

• Growth and Regeneration
• Opportunity Peterborough
• Planning, Transport and Engineering

Members were informed that investors had become risk adverse and would be more likely to invest if there was a demand for the service they provided.  Part of the role of the Growth and Regeneration Team was to generate demand and therefore provide a market for developers.  The Growth and Regeneration team looked at three distinct areas of focus:

·         Enabling development where the Council has no land interest an example of which was the station quarter

·         Utilising a significant land interest where most of the land was owned by the Council.

·         Minority land interest where only a small part of the land was owned by the Council.

The Council were engaging with investors and developers to develop financial packages for investment in the City.  Government money previously available had been cut and therefore more engagement with private investors was required.  Key to this was the work that Opportunity Peterborough had been doing to market the city to attract new inward investment and as a result had attracted great interest in the City.

The Head of Planning, Transport and Engineering Services informed Members that the planning service played a strong role in delivering the Growth Agenda.  It had worked closely with Opportunity Peterborough and the Growth and Regeneration Team to maximise investment and development opportunities across the City.  The planning, transport and engineering services had merged into one team to enable a more seamless approach to planning applications.  Climate Change and Home of Environment Capital functions would also move into the service area to provide a better service and maximise the sustainability credentials of new development.  The team had become pivotal to driving the Growth Agenda forward.  The service had recently been awarded a Customer Service Excellence accreditation.

Questions and observations were made around the following areas:

·         You mentioned that developers had bought sites for development in the past and they were now disadvantaged because of the economic downturn.  Was the football stadium one of those sites?  The acquisition of the football stadium was bought for use as a community stadium.  At the time of acquisition the market had been on a downward trend and it had been bought at the right price.  The site was unique and bought for development for use to the community.   Development of this site was now progressing.

·         Will future budgets be dependant on how well the three service areas succeed in attracting inward investment and future development into the city?  Lack of development will have an effect on the amount of 106 monies available.  Members were informed that the Authority had a Planning Obligations Implementation Strategy (POIS) in place. This was a local development tariff that generated a significant amount of income.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The report had been produced at the request of the Committee to update them on the progress that had been made on the disposal of the Vawser Lodge site.  The Head of Growth and Regeneration informed members that there had been a delay in disposing of the site due to the fact that it was adjacent to the Peterborough District Hospital site.  A decision had been made that it would be better to sell it as a residential site but to hold back on the disposal of the Vawser Lodge site until the PDH site was sold to increase the marriage value.  However there had been no indication of when the PDH site would be sold so a further decision was taken to look at ways of disposing of the site before the PDH site was sold.  A number of developers had shown an interest. 

Questions and observations were made around the following areas:

Councillor Arculus who had been unable to attend the meeting requested that the Chair ask the following questions on his behalf:

·         When is the consultation with ward councillors going to take place?  Officers would consult with ward members as soon as proposals were available.

·         Has a professional valuation been carried out? If so, what is the market value? What would the development value be? If one hasn't been carried out; then why not? A professional valuation had been carried out but officers were unable to release the figures as it was commercially sensitive information.

·         What is the projected marriage value to any sale of the Peterborough District Hospital site? This was commercially sensitive information that officers were unable to release.

·         Has any thought been given to using this site for university or educational use? If not why not?  Thought had been given but only in terms of residential support to the University.

·         Have any approaches been made either by local schools or care providers to take over the site? No approach had been made by local schools; a care provider had shown interest but it had been an insignificant value and it was decided to turn the offer down.

·         The site is not in good repair. It shows a lack of foresight not to keep the property and buildings in good state as this impacted on the value. Who was responsible for this? When was the property last inspected?  The Head of Growth and Regeneration was responsible for the site but could not recall when it had last been inspected.  The building was not in a fit state to use or keep open and had been made secure.  Any future developer would demolish the building.

·         The land around the site is for sale. Has the council given any thought to assembling a site for development or educational use out of the land currently marketed? The ward needs greater provision of primary and secondary education.  A significant amount of work was done jointly with a number of parties, including the existing landowner.  However at the time the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The report informed the Committee on the background of the Local Development Framework (LDF) Scrutiny Group. Members were asked to consider whether the LDF Scrutiny Group should continue or be disbanded.  If disbanded the Sustainable Growth Scrutiny Committee would provide the strategic and high level overview, scrutiny and monitoring of the Peterborough Local Development Framework (LDF) Development Plan Documents.

Members considered the value of the group going forward and acknowledged the good work that the group had done in the past. Members felt that the group had fulfilled the purpose for which it had originally been formed.  Any remaining LDF Development Plan Documents would be presented through the normal scrutiny reporting process to the Committee.

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends that the Local Development Framework Scrutiny Group be disbanded immediately and that all future monitoring of the Peterborough Local Development Framework Development Plan Documents be dealt with directly through the Sustainable Growth Scrutiny Committee reporting process.

            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

            To note the latest version of the Forward Plan.

Members considered the Committee’s Work Programme for 2010/11.

ACTION AGREED

To confirm the work programme for 2010/11.

Thursday 13 October 2011

Thursday 13 October 2011