Issue - meetings

Matter for Decision

This report referred to the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) which outlined how the Council would engage on planning matters and were obligated to review at least every five years.

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure

 

      i.         Considered the main issues raised in the public consultation, agreed responses to the representations received and agreed proposed changes to the Statement of Community Involvement as set out in the Statement of Consultation (Appendix 1 of the Officer’s report).

    ii.         Agreed to adopt the amended Greater Cambridge Statement of Community Involvement (Appendix 2 of the Officer’s report); and

   iii.         Delegated to the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development, in consultation with the Executive Councillor for planning policy and transport and the Chair and the Opposition Spokes for the Planning, Building Control and Infrastructure Scrutiny Committee, the authority to make any necessary editing changes to the SCI prior to publication.

 

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 Senior Planning Policy Officer who updated the Members on the following:

      i.         Paragraph 4.13 would be amended accordingly as the Disability Review Panel merged into the Cambridge Design Review Panel as agreed at Planning Committee on 6 March.

    ii.         Hayden in South Cambridgeshire District Council had been designated as a neighbourhood area with the purpose of preparing a neighbourhood plan on 15 March. Therefore, paragraph 3.14 would be amended to stated that there was now eighteen neighbourhood area designated in Greater Cambridge.  

 

In response to Members’ questions the Senior Planning Policy Officer, Planning Policy and Strategy Team Leader and Joint Director of Planning & Economic Development said the following:

      i.         Believed that the Shared Planning Services had a good reputation in terms of public engagement and had tried to raise as much awareness regarding consultations events as possible.

    ii.         The Council’s social media was a powerful tool, and Officers did factor in community led social media platforms into the communications strategy, both at Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council, for consultation events.

   iii.         During the last consultation on the emerging Local Plan the Comms team had actively responded to some of the comments as they were received, which were then re-shared with local community groups. 

  iv.         Officers worked hard to de-jargon the terminology and explain the planning process in simpler terms as it was a very technical process, the aim was to enable the public to feel empowered to be able to make comment on the consultations that were run.

    v.         Non-internet engagement was just as important as digital engagement. Officers had held door to door consultation events with the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community, targeted college engagements, posters had been installed at bus stops and various notice boards, both in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire.

  vi.         Noted the suggested that shop notice boards could be used as part of public engagement, particularly in rural areas; however, this was when engagement with parish councils and ward councillors became important as they became a conduit to share, pass on the information and encourage residents to take part in the consultation process.

 vii.         Would look at the suggestion to explore opportunities to embed the terminology to the glossary.

viii.         The Shared Planning Service had a long-term commitment to the youth engagement service. This was a positive tool to communicate with harder to hear communities or those who conventionally did not engage but had done so through young people.

lix      Could strengthen the section in relation to developer engagement with the local communities. 

 

The Committee voted unanimously to endorse the Officer recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and Transport approved the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor informed Members there would be a new framework for the Pre-Application Process allowing Ward Councillors and members of the Planning Committee to integrate engagement at certain stages of the process. During the last consultation for the emerging Local Plan there had been 8,000 responses, usually a consultation would bring 300 to 400 responses. The results were a testament to the work and engagement of the Shared Planning Services.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted).

None.