Agenda and minutes

The Panel received a report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding progressing the adoption of the replacement Harrow Unitary Development Plan (HUDP) and preparation for the Local Development Framework.

The Panel had previously made provision to hold a Special Meeting on 1 April 2004 to consider the objections received to the proposed modifications to the HUDP, with a view to recommending the HUDP to the April meetings of Cabinet and Council for adoption. However, officers now advised that certain matters within the HUDP were at odds with the finalised London Plan and, as the replacement HUDP was required to be in general conformity with the London Plan, the timetable for adoption needed to be amended to allow further time for officers to discuss these issues with the Government Office for London (GOL) and the Mayor for London. It was indicated that Harrow was not the only Borough in this situation and officers were liaising with the Association of London Government and other similarly affected boroughs in negotiating a solution with the Mayor.

It was advised that, if further modifications were required to bring the HUDP into general conformity with the London Plan, depending on the extent of the modifications, it might prove necessary to re-open the public inquiry into the Plan and this, it was noted, would cause significant further delays to adoption.

It was also explained that, as resources were currently being diverted to deal with the negotiations regarding the London Plan, and due to the outstanding matters relating to the replacement HUDP, it was not proving possible to progress the preparation of a draft Local Development Scheme, as required under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill which was currently proceeding through Parliament. Once the legislation came into force it would require authorities to have a Local Development Scheme in place by December 2004 and officers advised that, whilst this deadline would be met, it was unlikely that it would be possible to make any progress with preparing any of the documents for inclusion within the Local Development Framework.

During the discussion, which followed, the Panel expressed concern at the position the Authority had been placed in and praised the officers for their efforts In seeking a solution. Clarification was also sought on a number of issues. In response to question from a Member, officers confirmed that, on current advice, halting work on the HUDP did not appear to be a practical option as this might be counted as ’withdrawing’ the HUDP, meaning that the 1994 Plan, which was now significantly out of date, would be reverted to.

 At the conclusion of the discussion it was agreed that the 1 April Special Meeting would be cancelled and officers would circulate information to keep the Panel informed of any progress in the negotiations with the Mayor.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (To the Portfolio Holder)

That (1) the current position in respect of progression on adoption of the replacement HUDP, and the implications for the approach to, and timetable for, the production of a Local Development Scheme (LDS) for Harrow, be noted; and

(2) the Special Meeting of the Panel scheduled for 1 April 2004 be cancelled.

[REASON: To keep the Panel informed of progress on replacement Harrow Unitary Development Plan and the Local Development Scheme].

Your Panel received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which set out a draft Conservation Area Study for the Harrow School Conservation Area, and which it was advised had been produced after a comprehensive review of the area. The Panel was requested to recommend the approval of the document for the purposes of public consultation. 

During the discussion which followed, a Member expressed concern that there were a number of factual inaccuracies in the document and indicated that she felt that the document would benefit from the input of bodies such as the Conservation Area Advisory Committee prior to being circulated for consultation. In response, officers stressed that input from such local bodies would be very much welcomed but advised that it had been envisaged that such input would be sought as part of the public consultation, once the draft had been agreed by the Panel and Portfolio Holder. The Member added that she believed it was usual for a draft of the document to be circulated to the relevant Ward Councillors prior to being submitted to the Panel. Officers confirmed that this was the case and apologised for this oversight.

Following further discussion, it was

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (To the Portfolio Holder)

That (1) subject to further consultation with Councillor Mrs Kinnear regarding the text of the document, the draft Harrow Conservation Area Character Study at Appendix 2 to the Officer report, including the proposed planning polices and proposals for the conservation area, be approved for the purposes of public consultation; and

(2) any queries arising out of the further consultation with the Member indicated above be resolved via consultation with Nominated Members .

[REASON: In order to fulfil the Council’s obligation under Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, which carries the continuing duty that every local planning authority is to consider whether it should designate and review the boundaries of conservation areas from time to time].

Further to the report at item 8 on the agenda and previous reports on this subject, the Panel received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which outlined the main messages of the recently published London Plan, the main changes to the Plan and the main policy issues of importance for planning in Harrow.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (To the Portfolio Holder)

That the main messages in the published London Plan, and the main policy implications for Harrow set out in the officer report be noted.

[REASON: To ensure that the replacement Harrow Unitary Development Plan can be adopted as expeditiously as possible, and for work on the preparation of the Local Development Framework to be started].

Your Panel received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which set out and sought agreement to the draft Council response to the Government consultation on the proposal to replace PPG6 with a new Planning Policy Statement PPS6 as part of a wider Government agenda to modernise the planning system. The report explained that the consultation draft broadly followed the principles established in PPG6 and did not therefore raise any fundamental issues, although the requirement relating to additional research and information needs which would be imposed on local planning authorities would stretch existing resources unless additional help was provided by the Government.

It was

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (To Cabinet):

That (1)the comments set out at Appendix A to the officer report be agreed as the Council’s response to the Government Consultation on revised PPS6; and

(2) officers be authorised to forward these  comments as the Council’s response to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

[REASON: As set out at paragraph 4 of the officer report].

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no Reserve Members in attendance at this meeting.

To receive declarations of interest (if any) from Members of the Committee arising from business to be transacted at this meeting.

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no declarations of personal or prejudicial interests made by Members of the Panel arising from the business transacted at this meeting.

To consider whether any of the items listed on the agenda should be considered with the press and public excluded on the grounds that it is thought likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that there would be disclosure of confidential information in breach of an obligation of confidence or of exempt information as defined in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.

RESOLVED:  That all items be considered with the press and public present.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 January 2004, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 January 2004, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

(1)                 A Member queried whether a copy of the standard Section 106 agreement had been circulated to all Members of the Panel and Development Control Committee as agreed at the previous meeting (Minute 75, note 9 on page 5 of the agenda). The Senior Assistant Solicitor (Planning) explained that the document had only recently been updated and would be circulated shortly.

(2)                 Further to the comments relating to this matter at Minute 78, a Member queried whether the cross-party Member-level informal discussions regarding the consultant’s report on the review of the Development Control process had been held yet. The Chair confirmed that they had and that an action plan was to be drawn up. It was further queried whether the report would be submitted to the Panel. The Chair advised that he was unsure as to whether this would be the case.

(3)                 A Member reiterated concerns which she had expressed at the previous meeting, that the existing HUDP policies did not adequately address residents’ fears in relation to telecommunications masts and needed to be amended. She referred to a letter from the Borough Solicitor to the Ombudsman which she advised also raised this issue. Several Members advised that, as they had stated at previous meeting, they were satisfied that the existing policy adequately dealt with such applications, however it was agreed that the Member would pass a copy of the letter to officers  to  follow up.

RESOLVED: That the information set out above be noted.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents or organisations under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no public questions to be received at this meeting under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 13 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no petitions to be received at this meeting under the provisions of the Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 13 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no deputations to be received at this meeting under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

Report of the Chief Planning Officer.

Recommendation 1, above, refers.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer.

Recommendation 2, above, refers.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer.

Recommendation 3, above, refers.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer.

Recommendation 4, above, refers.