Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Deputy Christopher Hayward (ex-officio) and Jaspreet Hodgson.

There were no declarations.

To agree the draft public minutes and non-public summary of the meeting held on 22nd July 2022.

MATTERS ARISING

Election of Chairman (page 4) – A Member questioned whether the matter of voting rights for ex-officio Members of this Sub-Committee had yet been clarified. The Town Clerk advised that ex-officio Members were those who have been appointed to a body by virtue of the position or office that they hold and that they were not permitted to vote in the elections of a Chairman and Deputy Chairman. The Town Clerk informed the Sub Committee that the status of the two Members concerned here was not that of an ex-officio - they were Members appointed as representatives of the Policy and Resources Committee and the Port Health and Environmental Services Committee respectively. The Town Clerk therefore advised that they did have voting rights.

A Member stated that the terms of reference for the Sub Committee and the Planning and Transportation Committee should be updated to reflect this position. The Town Clerk accepted that the current arrangements for this Sub-Committee were implicit and not explicit. She explained that there would be an opportunity for Members to re-consider the constitution of all of the Sub committees reporting into the Grand Committee and their terms of reference in April, as was the case annually, at the first meeting of the Grand Committee each new civic year.

On another matter, a Member stated that, in the interests of transparency, the minutes ought to be amended to record the names of all Members who stood for Chairman and Deputy Chairman as well as the number of votes that each candidate received.

Another Member noted that the City Corporation’s minuting style for Committee elections had alternated between recording the names of Members who have stood for various positions and omitting them. The Member was of the view that all committees should adhere to the

Report of the Planning & Development Director.

The Sub Committee considered a report of the Planning and Development Director setting out the potential ways that the City Plan’s policies around health, inclusion and wellbeing could be amended based on current evidence, best practice and the responses to the consultation on the draft City Plan 2036. The report also provided an update on the engagement plan and overall work programme for the City Plan.

Officers introduced the area of the report focusing on the health, inclusion and wellbeing policies within the City Plan. They explained that it was essential to ensure that the Plan was as inclusive as possible with a view to putting independence, access, dignity, comfort, safety and enjoyment at the heart of the document. They went on to set out the background of these policies, their current status and expectations for their development in the future. It was also recognised that there were other policies which dealt with these matters concerning things such as the development of tall buildings, public realm and the Thames Policy Area which also dealt with the need for publicly accessible and inclusive spaces.

Officers highlighted that the report also featured an Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA). They clarified that there was a statutory duty to prepare a sustainability appraisal setting out the economic, social and environmental implications of the Plan but that the draft Plan went beyond this and pulled all of this together alongside an equalities impact assessment and a health impact assessment. This had been undertaken in house but was then audited by an experienced external consultant. The Sub Committee were informed that the IIA had not identified any real problems with the way in which the Plan addressed matters of health, inclusion and wellbeing. welcomed the focus on health, inclusion and wellbeing policies. It was highlighted that this

Tall Building Modelling

A Member stated that a number of residents had requested whether there could be a requirement for all planning applications to have a physical model available to demonstrate the bulk and scale of the proposals as opposed to just a photograph. The Sub Committee were informed that Officers could ask developers to provide a physical model in certain instances (for tall buildings within the City context – 75m plus) but Officers highlighted that many tended to operate in a digital/3-dimensional manner now and that it may therefore be preferable to look at ways in which the public could access a 3D model for any future, substantial schemes.

There were no additional, urgent items of business for consideration.