In accordance with the Council Procedure Rules, all questions –
v Must be relevant to an item which the Council has powers or duties;
v Must not relate to an items which is included elsewhere on the Agenda;
v Should be limited to obtaining information or pressing for action; and
v Should not exceed two minutes in duration.
Questions should not divulge or require to be divulged, confidential or exempt information.
Contact:15 Minutes.
Minutes:
A question was raised by Councillor Dr M Pickering to the Executive Councillor for Leisure, Waste and Street Scene regarding the Alternative Land Management Scheme. Having been asked to provide an indication of the feedback received, Councillor S L Taylor explained that the majority of this had been positive. Although there were 4 sites where residents and Parish Councils had expressed concerns. Officers would continue to work will all communities and the parish / town councils and encourage the residents to allow the project of alternative land management to run its course.
Arising from a question by Councillor C H Tevlin, the Executive Councillor for Planning provided a detailed and in-depth clarification regarding the operation and process of the District Council’s No Amendment Policy for Planning Services and the impact upon Development Management. In doing so, he explained that no amendments advice was available on the District Council’s website and that the District Council’s approach was supported by the Planning Advisory Service.
Following a request from Councillor M L Beuttell, the Executive Councillor for Waste Street Scene and Open Spaces updated the Council on the status of Civic Parking Enforcement (CPE) which she reported was currently running to time and not overspent. In doing so she reiterated that Huntingdonshire were not experiencing the issues that were being reported in the media regarding Fenland CPE and undertook to talk further with Councillor Beuttell outside of the meeting if this was considered necessary.
Pursuant to Minute No. 76 of the meeting held on 29 March 2023, Councillor T Alban sought an update on action which had been taken to address issues regarding sites owned by Housing Associations in Huntingdonshire which benefited from planning permissions, yet no development had commenced. Having noted that this formed part of the strategic element of the portfolio of the Executive Councillor for Jobs, Economy, and Housing. Councillor S Wakeford explained that as part of the Council’s annual monitoring Registered Providers were asked about their development plans for developing sites and this now included other sites without active plans. He also reported that the situation was not as widespread as Councillor Alban had first feared and that the overall delivery target for affordable housing was on target at this stage of the year. Whilst agreeing to set out the current position in writing, he stated that concerns only existed relating to 3 Cross Keys sites, two of which were in Councillor Alban’s ward.
In response to a question from Councillor J E Kerr with regards to the progress which was being made in the development of a new Local Plan for Huntingdonshire, the Executive Councillor for Planning reported that over 300 potential sites had been submitted in response to the Call for Sites consultation and 270 responses had been received to the draft settlement hierarchy. It was intended to take an update on the Local Plan and Planning Services more generally to the October cycle of meetings.
In response to a question from Councillor J Neish regarding the numbers of planning withdrawals, the Executive Councillor for Planning undertook to take forward a suggestion regarding the setting of targets for withdrawals. Considering the references to the recent experiences and confusion at the Development Management Committee with regards to amendments, the Executive Councillor undertook to seek detailed clarification on the definition of amendments and provide a written response.
Following comments made by Councillor J Neish regarding complaints which had been received from Parish Councils regarding the perceived lack of consultation on the rewilding programme and lack of grass cutting, the Executive Councillor for Waste Street Scene and Open Spaces reported that consultation had taken place, but it had not been possible to communicate with all Town and Parish Councils before the growing season. Members were reminded that this initiative was a trial and were encouraged to wait and see the results that had been obtained in terms of biodiversity. She also took the opportunity to reiterate that play areas could be cut with no issues.
In response to a question from Councillor J E Harvey regarding what the Council to support residents were currently awaiting approval for disability adaptations from Places for People, the Executive Councillor for Customer Services provided an update on the problems which had been experienced and the current situation. He was pleased to report that following a number if interventions Places for People have now committed to providing landlord consent within three weeks, although efforts would be made to reduce this further. They had also granted permission for 53 cases awaiting approval for adaptions which had been outstanding for some time. He reiterated that the Council would continue to work to hold Places to People to account.
The Executive Councillor for Waste, Street Scene and Open Spaces undertook to provide a written response to Councillor S Cawley’s question regarding the extent to which One Leisure is subsidised by Council taxpayers who were not using the service and whether there were any plans to see that reduced.
In response to a Facebook post on the Council’s One Leisure page and having regard to previous assurances that the Courts for Kids initiative would be extended to under 18s, Councillor T Alban sought reassurance from the Executive Councillor for Waste, Street Scene, and Open Spaces that this was still the case. In response, the Executive Councillor agreed to investigate the posting as it was her understanding that it was crucial that those in the 16-18 age group were kept active.
With reference to the Local Plan consultations and specifically the Call for Sites element, Councillor J A Gray commented on the alarm, distress, and confusion that this was causing in several communities and sought clarification as to what action was proposed to address these concerns. In response having acknowledged that this was always part of the Plan which would cause anxieties, the Executive Councillor for Planning suggested that the information collected from the consultation now needed to be collated and fed into Overview and Scrutiny and that communication needed to take place with those parishes and communities which had the biggest concerns. In welcoming further dialogue with these communities, Councillor Gray suggested that there was general confusion regarding the process and that there was an urgent need for further communication in this regard.
In response to a question from Councillor C H Tevlin, the Executive Councillor for Jobs, Economy and Housing updated the Council on the reasons as to why Ramsey and St Neots had not been included within the recent Shopfront Grants Scheme. In doing so, he reiterated that Ramsey was benefiting from additional funding and work was ongoing to develop the produce hub and that in St Neots the designs for the St Neots Market Square Improvement works had just been released.
Finally, in drawing questions to a close, Councillor M A Hassall with reference to the passing of the recent motion surrounding debate not hate, suggested that it would be good practise going forward to share questions in advance. Not only would this secure a better answer for the public, but it was not in the spirit of the motion to seek to catch out Executive Councillors.