Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Election results > Document library > Issue
31 Greater Cambridge Statement of Community Involvement PDF 337 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Matter for Decision
The Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) sets out how
the Council would engage on planning matters and must be reviewed at least
every five years. The report presented a reviewed and updated draft SCI and
sought agreement to carry out a public consultation prior to a final version
being brought back to Committee for consideration and adoption.
Decision of the Executive Councillor for Planning,
Building Control and Infrastructure
i.
Agreed the draft reviewed Statement of Community
Involvement 2023 (attached at Appendix 1 of the Officer’ report) and
accompanying Equalities Impact Assessment (EqIA)
(Appendix 2) to be subject to public consultation.
ii.
Approved that the preparation of materials and
the running of the consultation be delegated to the Joint Director of Planning
and Economic Development
iii.
Agreed that any subsequent material
amendments prior to consultation be made by the Executive Councillor for
Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure, and
that any subsequent minor amendments and editing changes that do not materially
affect the content prior to consultation, be delegated to the Joint Director of
Planning and Economic Development in consultation with the Executive Councillor
for Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure.
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Planning Policy and Strategy
Team Leader.
In response to Members’ questions the Planning Policy and
Strategy Team Leader said the following:
i.
Agreed there was a need to strengthen the
wording relating to early developer led community engagement and would look at
the wording in section 4.
ii.
Would look at the wording to strengthen the
alternative to digital services. Online services were a convenient way for
residents to engage at a time that suited their lifestyle; should be noted that
Central Government were very keen to digitise the planning system, and the
Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Services was already involved in some of
these digitalisation projects.
iii.
Officers were mindful that not all residents had
access to the internet or able to use a computer/ electronic device, therefore
face to face events have previously and would continue to be explored where
possible and relevant, including engaging directly with gypsy and travellers on
issues such as the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan.
iv.
Noted the comment that sixteen percent of the
English population were illiterate.
v.
Welcomed the comment to make digital services at
the simplest level so could be used on a mobile phone.
vi.
The Shared Planning Services website was
undergoing a review, one of the key focuses was to ensure that the entire website
and its services was completely readable on tablets and mobile phones as much
as a laptop.
vii.
Confirmed the fifteen-minute free advice service
was available for householders and small business queries. From September 4,
the pre application level one advice had been temporarily withdrawn for
charities, as agreed with lead members. This service was currently being
reviewed.
viii.
Within the list of non-statutory consultees in
Appendix 5, it did state that officers consult with a number
of internal council services areas and provided some examples, however
more of these services could be added to that list as requested, but the caveat
should be, where relevant, as not all internal service areas were relevant for
each planning application.
ix.
Acknowledged the lead local flood authority
should be included as a statutory consultee in Appendix 5.
x.
Noted the comment that the language in all
public documentation needed to be simplified, had to consider that planning was
full of technical jargon with a wide audience, but would look at simplifying
the introduction.
xi.
Agreed that high quality engagement from
residents was what was required, it shouldn’t just be based on the number of
residents attending an event.
xii.
Acknowledged there was not a southern area
forum. Feedback had been received from the communities’ team at how well they
considered the current area forums were working. The Joint Director for Planning and Economic
Development would be looking at developing this work further at a corporate
level, to consider whether the geographical locations of each forum were
correct and how they could be improved in terms of input and community
participation.
xiii.
Would speak with the development management team
regarding compliance of whether target times were being achieved.
xiv.
The SCI should be seen a statement of intent,
setting out what would be done in terms of Section 106 engagement.
xv.
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
stated that that planning conditions could only be applied if they met the six
key tests:
1. Necessary
2. Relevant
to planning
3. Relevant
to the development
4. Enforceable
5. Precise
6. Reasonable
If a planning condition was in
place it was there for a reason and could be enforced. There may be
circumstances where it is not appropriate to enforce, may come down to individual
circumstances.
The Executive Councillor informed the Committee there had
been a review of the compliance team and wording of the conditions to ensure
that they were enforceable.
The Committee unanimously endorsed the Officer recommendations.
The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and
Transport approved the recommendations.