Agenda item

Recommendations of the Policy and Resources Committee re: the Planning Process

A Member reported that the recommendations of the Policy and Resources Committee on the Planning Process had been opposed in a petition that had been signed by almost 1260 to date including City residents. He noted that the recommendations of the Policy and Resources Committee were due to be put to the full Court for consideration but did not appear on the April Court agenda and questioned why this had been postponed.

The Deputy Chair reported that he was not aware of this matter having been postponed. The Assistant Town Clerk reported that the petition was on the April Court agenda but that the recommendations of the Policy and Resources Committee were not. She went on to explain that the intention was that the petition, after being received by the Court, would be forwarded to the relevant Committee for consideration so that they could take this into account before any report on future recommendations could come forward.

Another Member questioned whether the recommendations of the Policy and Resources Committee due to come forward to Court would be considered at a virtual or in-person meeting. She went on to state that she understood that the recommendations of the Policy and Resources Committee were very vague with little detail on the constitution of Panels for example and questioned why therefore only half a recommendation would be put to the Court. She also questioned whether there would be an opportunity for this Committee to feed into proposals ahead of the Court of Common Council. Officers reported that any decisions around in person/remote meetings would be made by the Court of Common Council later this week. The Deputy Town Clerk undertook to provide a written response to members of the Committee around next steps for the report on Planning Panels but underlined that this would need to be considered further by both this Committee and the Policy and Resources Committee ahead of the Court of Common Council. She acknowledged that whilst the principle of geographically based Planning Panels had been endorsed, the details of this were yet to be worked up.

In response to further questions, Officers reported that the paper to Committees and eventually the Court would present Members with various options around things such as quorums, terms of reference and chairmanship of Panels.