Agenda and minutes

The Panel received a report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development), which outlined the main issues involved in a new approach to the production of Conservation Area Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) and sought agreement on the nature of the revised approach.  Officers drew the Panel’s attention to late revisions to the report which had been included on the tabled Addendum.

A Member expressed concern that the proposed new approach represented a reversal of a decision previously made by Cabinet, and drew the Panel’s attention to the “significant time and resource implications” highlighted in paragraph 2.2.4 of the report.  Officers advised that, if the new approach were agreed by the Portfolio Holder, it was intended that existing staffing levels would be maintained and time reallocated accordingly to the new priorities.  The new approach would take approximately three years longer than the approach previously agreed by Cabinet, but during this time there would be a gradual adoption of SPDs.

Members who spoke in support of the proposed new approach expressed the view that it would produce a more thorough and comprehensive set of documents, which would afford Harrow’s Conservation Areas statutory protection and added weight at appeal, which would not have been the case under the previously adopted strategy.

Upon being put to a vote it was

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to the Portfolio Holder for Property, Housing, Planning (Development) and Planning (Strategic)

That (1) the revised approach to the production of Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) for Harrow’s conservation areas, which would involve a series of SPDs based on geographical groups of conservation areas, be agreed;

(2)  the Local Development Scheme (LDS) be amended accordingly;

(3)  the time and resource implications as outlined in the main body of the report and illustrated in Appendix 2 be noted.

[Notes:  (i) Councillors Marilyn Ashton, Mrs Camilla Bath, Robert Benson and Mrs Kinnear wished to be recorded as having voted in favour of paragraph (1) of the recommendation above;

(ii)  Councillors Mano Dharmarajah, Thaya Idaikkadar and Navin Shah wished to be recorded as having voted against paragraph (1) of the recommendation above].

[REASON:  To enable work on the production of Conservation Area SPDs to proceed.  The Council will also be working towards meeting its statutory requirements under Planning Policy Guidance Note 15, and English Heritage’s “Guidance on the Management of Conservation Areas” and also towards meeting the Local Development Scheme timetable].

(See also Minute 4).

The Panel received a report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development) which included a draft of the Harrow School Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy which had been revised in light of comments made by Members at the Panel meeting held on 14 March 2006.  The report recommended that the draft be approved for public consultation.

In response to a question from a Member of the Panel, officers confirmed that the documents would be resubmitted to the Panel for consideration following the public consultation.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to the Portfolio Holder for Property, Housing, Planning (Development) and Planning (Strategic)

That the revised draft of the Harrow School Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy be approved for public consultation.

[REASON: The Council will be working towards its statutory requirements under PPG15 and towards improving its performance against BVPI 219 on conservation areas].

The Panel received a report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development), which included a draft of the Grimsdyke Estate and Brookshill Drive Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy, which had been revised in light of comments made by Members at the Panel meeting held on 14 March 2006.  Officers had recommended that the draft be approved for public consultation.  The report also recommended alterations to the Conservation Area boundary and the introduction of an Article 4(2) Direction to the area.  Officers drew the Panel’s attention to late revisions to the report which had been included on the tabled Addendum.

The Panel considered the revised documents and suggested changes to the text and diagrams, which were noted by officers.  A number of typographical errors were also highlighted and officers confirmed that these would be corrected.  A Member commented that officers might wish to reconsider the formatting of the document in relation to the three-column layout.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to the Portfolio Holder for Property, Housing, Planning (Development) and Planning (Strategic)

That (1) the revised draft of the Grimsdyke Estate and Brookshill Drive Conservation Area Appraisal and Manaegement Strategy, amended in accordance with the comments made by the Panel, be approved for public consultation;

(2)  a new Article 4(2) Direction for the Grimsdyke Estate and Brookshill Drive Conservation Area, to include the properties and classes of development described and denoted in Appendix 1 and Maps A and B of the officer report, be approved;

(3)  the proposed alterations to the boundaries of the Grimsdyke Estate and Brookshill Drive Conservation Area, as set out in Section 2.3 of the officer report and the map within the draft document in Appendix 2 of the officer report, be approved;

(4)  subject to the approval of (2) and (3) above, that the Director of Legal Services be authorised to carry out the necessary publicity and notification in relation to (2) and (3) above, as prescribed by the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and the Town and Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, in that respect.

[REASON: The Council will be working towards its statutory requirements under PPG15 and towards improving its performance against BVPI 219 on conservation areas].

(See also Minute 4).

The Panel received a report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development), which included the first draft of the Eastcote Village Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy.  The report recommended that the draft be approved for public consultation, and that an Article 4(2) Direction be introduced in the area.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to the Portfolio Holder for Property, Housing, Planning (Development) and Planning (Strategic)

That (1) the draft Eastcote Village Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy be approved for public consultation;

(2)  a new Article 4(2) Direction for the Eastcote Village Conservation Area, to include the properties and classes of permitted development described and denoted in Appendix 1 of the report of the officer report, be approved;

(3)  subject to the approval of (2) above, that the Director of Legal Services be authorised to carry out the necessary publicity and notification in relation to (2) above, as prescribed by the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and the Town and Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, in that respect.

[REASON:  By agreeing to the Conservation Area Appraisal the Council will be working towards its statutory requirements and towards improving its performance against BVPI 219 on conservation areas.  The implementation of an Article 4(2) Direction will provide better protection against development that would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the conservation area].

The Panel received a report of the Executive Director (Urban Living) which provided an update on progress made towards the adoption of the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) since the submission stage.

In response to a question from a Member, officers confirmed that the changes recommended by the Inspector were small, and could be comfortably absorbed.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to Cabinet)

That (1) the binding Inspector’s report and recommendations on the Statement of Community Involvement be accepted;

(2)  the final stage and progress towards the adoption and publication of the final document be noted.

[REASON:  Accepting the Inspector’s recommendations and progressing the SCI in accordance with the agreed timetable set out in the adopted Local Development Scheme (LDS) will improve the Council’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) rating.  By meeting important milestonesthe Council’s desired objective of excellence will be achieved].

The Panel received a report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development), which provided an update on progress made in the early stages of preparation of the Harrow Core Strategy and Site Specific Proposals Document.  The Panel was invited to comment on the Issues and Options identified for both documents, and to consider recommending to Cabinet that the documents go forward for formal consultation. Officers tabled an addendum to the report with some revisions to the circulated document.

A Member congratulated officers on the report, and emphasised that the purpose of the report was to encourage community engagement.  A Member proposed that officers be invited to present the report at a meeting of the Harrow Strategic Partnership Board in order to assist with dissemination of information throughout the community.

A Member noted the ‘Travel to work’ survey on page 50 of the agenda had been undertaken in 2001, and questioned the validity of five year old research.  Officers advised that conducting surveys was costly and time-consuming, and, in view of this, the Council and Government had taken a pragmatic view on the evidence base that would be used to support the Local Development Framework (LDF) documents.  The Council had identified three key pieces of significant research that had been undertaken to support the LDF: the employment land survey, the housing needs survey and work in relation to open spaces (PPG17 study).

The Panel suggested changes to the text and highlighted a number of typographical errors, which were noted by officers.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to Cabinet)

That (1) the draft issues and options contained in the officer report provided the basis for documents to be used in the first stage of formal consultation on the Harrow Core Strategy and the Site Specific Proposals Documents;

(2)  the six-week statutory consultation on the issues and options for the Harrow Core Strategy and the Site Specific Proposals Documents be undertaken between the 4 September 2006 and 13 October 2006;

(3)  officers be invited to present the report at a meeting of the Harrow Strategic Partnership Board in order to assist with dissemination of information throughout the community.

[REASON:  Failure to undertake through consultation on the Issues and Options would expose the Council to challenge.  There would also be implications for the level of Planning Delivery Grant received, as the timetable for the production of the Harrow Core Strategy and the Site Specific Proposals Document would not be adhered to].

The Panel received a report of the Executive Director (Urban Living) which outlined the responses received following consultation on the draft Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).

A Member expressed the view that the new administration held a different policy stance from the one articulated in the SPD, and proposed that the document not be adopted.

A Member noted that the SPD had undergone a valid public consultation process and should be adopted in its current form.  He expressed the view that the production of a new SPD would have time and resource implications.

In response to a question from a Member regarding what the risk would be to the Council if the SPD were not adopted, officers advised that the Council would continue to follow its current policy, which was stated within the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to the Portfolio Holder for Property, Housing, Planning (Development) and Planning (Strategic)

That the Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and its accompanying Sustainability Appraisal (SA) not be adopted.

[Notes:  (i) During discussion on the above item, it was moved and seconded that the SPD be adopted.  Having been put to a vote, the motion was not carried;

(ii)  subsequently, it was moved that the SPD not be adopted.  Having been put to a vote, this was carried;

(iii)  Councillors Marilyn Ashton, Mrs Camilla Bath, Robert Benson and Mrs Kinnear wished to be recorded as having voted in favour of the recommendation above;

(iv)  Councillors Mano Dharmarajah, Thaya Idaikkadar and Navin Shah wished to be recorded as having voted against the recommendation above].

[REASON:  The SPD offers the opportunity to clarify the Council’s application of existing HUDP policy].

The Panel received a report of the Executive Director (Urban Living) which set out a revised timetable for progressing the main Local Development Framework (LDF) documents.

In response to questions from Members, officers advised that the programme had slipped as a result of such matters as the Borough Elections and a review of dates in the 2006/07 Municipal Calendar, but confirmed that, following discussions with officers at the Government Office for London (GOL), the Council’s explanations about necessary timetable revisions had been provisionally accpted by GOL.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to Cabinet)

That (1) the revised Local Development Scheme (LDS) and timetable for document preparation contained within it be agreed;

(2)  the revised LDS be submitted to the Secretary of State;

(3)  subject to the Secretary of State not directing any changes to the revised LDS, that the revisions be brought into effect.

[REASON: The Council has a statutory duty to prepare and keep up to date a Local Development Framework, for which the project management plan is the Local Development Scheme].

To note the appointment of Councillor Marilyn Ashton at the Cabinet meeting on 8 June 2006 as Chairman of the Strategic Planning Advisory Panel for the Municipal Year 2006/2007.

RESOLVED:  To note the appointment of Councillor Marilyn Ashton at the Cabinet meeting on 8 June 2006 as Chairman of the Strategic Planning Advisory Panel for the Municipal Year 2006/07.

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

Reserve Members may attend meetings:-

(i)                 to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)               where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)             the meeting notes at the start of the meeting at the item ‘Reserves’ that the Reserve Member is or will be attending as a reserve;

(iv)              if a Reserve Member whose intention to attend has been noted arrives after the commencement of the meeting, then that Reserve Member can only act as a Member from the start of the next item of business on the agenda after his/her arrival.

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Members:-

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from:

(a)               all Members of the Committee, Sub Committee, Panel or Forum;

(b)               all other Members present in any part of the room or chamber.

RESOLVED:  To note the following declarations of interest made by Members present at this meeting:

(i)                   Councillor Mrs Camilla Bath declared a personal interest arising from the fact that she was a Board Member of the Harrow Churches Housing Association.  Accordingly, she would remain in the room and take part in the discussion and decision-making.

(ii)                 Councillor Marilyn Ashton declared a personal interest arising from the fact that RAF Bentley Priory was mentioned generally in an item on the agenda.  Accordingly she would remain in the room and take part in the discussion and decision-making.  Councillor Marilyn Ashton wished it to be noted that, should the Panel’s discussions at any time become detailed or specific in relation to RAF Bentley Priory, she would be declaring a prejudicial interest and leaving the room.

[Note:  Subsequently, RAF Bentley Priory was not discussed specifically by the Panel, and Councillor Marilyn Ashton did not declare a prejudicial interest].

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 Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

RESOLVED:  That (1) in accordance with the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1972 (as amended), the following agenda items be admitted late to the agenda by virtue of the special circumstances and grounds for urgency detailed below:-

(2)  all items be considered with the press and public present.

To consider the appointment of a Vice-Chairman of the Strategic Planning Advisory Panel for the Municipal Year 2006/07.

Nominations were received and seconded for Councillors Mrs Kinnear and Navin Shah.  Upon being put to a vote, it was

RESOLVED:  That Councillor Mrs Kinnear be appointed Vice-Chairman of the Strategic Planning Advisory Panel for the Municipal Year 2006/07.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 March 2006, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 March 2006, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

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

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were 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 Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 13 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no petitions were 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 Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

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

To note the terms of reference of the Strategic Planning Advisory Panel.

RESOLVED:  That the terms of reference of the Strategic Planning Advisory Panel be noted.

Report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development).

(See Recommendation 1).

Report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development).

(See Recommendation 2).

Report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development).

(See Recommendation 3).

Report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development).

(See Recommendation 4).

Report of the Executive Director (Urban Living).

The Panel received a report of the Executive Director (Urban Living), which provided an update on work being undertaken in relation to town centre health checks.

In response to a question from a Member in relation to resources, officers advised that it was intended that the work described in the report would be absorbed within current staffing levels.

A Member welcomed the proposed resumption of the reporting of town centre health checks as a positive move.

RESOLVED:  To (1) note the proposed approach to future town centre health checks;

(2)  confirm the Panel’s support of the next health check being prepared for North Harrow District Centre.

Report of the Executive Director (Urban Living).

(See Recommendation 5).

Report of the Group Manager (Planning and Development).

(See Recommendation 6).

Report of the Executive Director (Urban Living).

(See Recommendation 7).

Report of the Executive Director (Urban Living).

(See Recommendation 8).