Agenda and minutes

Venue: Hendon Town Hall, The Burroughs, London NW4 4BQ

Contact: Maria Lugangira Email: maria.lugangira@barnet.gov.uk 

Note: Public Questions or Written Comments must be submitted by 10am on Wednesday, 19 May 2021 

Items
No. Item

1.

Minutes of last meeting pdf icon PDF 380 KB

    Minutes:

    RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting dated the 8 February 2021 be agreed as a correct record.

     

2.

Absence of Members

    Minutes:

    Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Anthony Finn. Councillor Mark Shooter was substituting.

     

    The Chairman informed the Committee that Councillor Finn would be retiring from the Policy and Resources Committee as of 25th May 2021, Annual Council meeting. He thanked Councillor Finn for his work and contribution to the Committee.

     

3.

Declarations of Members Pecuniary Interests and Other Interests (if any)

4.

Report of the Monitoring Officer (if any)

    Minutes:

    None.

5.

Public Questions and Written Comments (if any)

    Minutes:

    None.

6.

Members' Items (if any) pdf icon PDF 400 KB

    Minutes:

    At the invitation of the Chairman, Councillor Ross Houston introduced the Member’s Item.  

     

    Members Item Request:

    Instruction from Committee

    A gambling licence for a Merkur Slots casino at 48 Ballards Lane, Finchley Central was agreed at a Licensing Hearing, despite resident and local councillor objections. Barnet Council later rejected a planning application for change of use for this premises, but the application was approved on appeal by the Planning Inspector. 

     

    This means there will be a slot casino in both Finchley Central and North Finchley to add to the 5 other betting shops in the area.  

     

    I know this is not the only ward or town centre facing the problem of the proliferation of gambling premises.  

     

    I ask that the Committee considers this issue and agrees that a review is done of the number and location of gambling outlets in areas across Barnet with a view to using planning powers like Article 4 directions, cumulative impact policy licensing powers and any other relevant powers to ensure there is not an overconcentration in any one area. 

     

    Barnet’s Labour councillors have proposed use of Article 4 directions and Cumulative Impact Zones to tackle this issue for some years, and I think it is time that we seriously consider use of the powers we have for the wellbeing of our communities. 

     

    The Council needs to have the most robust policy framework to allow us to resist these types of applications. 

     

    We should also consider the public health dimension of problem gambling, demographic issues, the cost of problem gambling to our public services, and the impact on our communities, including young people and vulnerable people. 

    The Committee requests 

    1.     That officers carry out a review on the number of gambling and betting offices across the Borough and document where there is a particular proliferation of such premises.

    2.     That the above is conducted factoring in the Local Plan and its policies.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The Chairman informed the Committee that as part of the Local Plan there a policy specifically relating to places of gambling, betting offices, etc. The policy addresses monitoring and keeping a register of such places.

     

    RESOLVED that the instructions as set out in the table above are noted.

7.

Barnet Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule Review - submission for examination pdf icon PDF 733 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman introduced the report which sought the Committee’s agreement to submit the Draft Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule for examination, following consultation. The Draft Charging Schedule proposed to revise the Barnet CIL rate to £300 per square metre for residential development and introduce a charge for employment and leisure uses of £20 per square metre. 

     

    The Independent viability evidence commissioned, indicated the new proposed rates to be (i) viable and (ii) would not unduly prejudice development coming forward in the borough.

     

    Further set out in the report was an explanation on the representations received and how they were taken into account.

     

    With regards to the EIA and the data presented on Page 120, Table 3: Religion 2011, it was requested that this data and all the data in the other tables is reviewed to ensure it is accurately presented prior to the final submission.  

     

    Following consideration of the report a separate vote was taken on the recommendations

     

    Upon being put to the vote the recommendations 1, 2,4 as set out in the report were declared carried. The vote was recorded as follows;

     

    For

    13

    Against

    0

    Abstentions

    0

     

     

     

     

     

    Upon being put to the vote recommendation 3 as set out in the report was declared carried. The vote was recorded as follows;

     

    For

    8

    Against

    0

    Abstentions

    5

     

     

     

     

     

    RESOLVED – That the Committee

     

    1.          That the Committee considers the consultation responses received in relation to the Draft Charging Schedule, summarised in a table at Appendix B.

     

    2.          That having considered the consultation responses, officers and viability consultants proposed responses, the Committee agrees that the rates set out in the Draft Charging Schedule should not be amended apart from clarification points in relation to B2 and B8 uses and the use classes order. 

     

    3.          That the Committee agrees submission of the draft Charging Schedule (Appendix A) and other evidence documents, including updates to the Council’s draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan (Appendix C), to the Planning Inspectorate for examination. 

     

    4.          That the Committee note that the Charging Schedule, post examination (if recommended for approval by the examiner), will need to be approved by the full Council in line with s.213(2) Planning Act 2008 and Government Guidance on approving and implementing the Charging Schedule.

     

8.

Review of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Allocation, Eligibility Criteria and Guidance pdf icon PDF 368 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman provided a brief introduction to the report which sought the Committee’s agreement, in respect of the Area Committee budgets, the allocations of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), the CIL Funding Policy and Eligibility Guidelines to enable funding applications to be assessed and determined by Members, and to provide CIL funding for a Road Safety & Parking fund to be managed by the Executive Director for Environment.

     

    The Committee’s attention was drawn to the additional amendments to Appendix B that had been circulated. 

     

    With regards to the issue on revenue impact and consideration around CIL projects the Assistant Director - Capital Delivery, encouraged the need for Members to have informal discussions with officers around the development of schemes before they come to Committee. This would help identify whether there’d be any revenue impact.

     

    With regards to the following paragraph in the additional amendment, Appendix B, Road Safety and Parking Request

     

    “Should the Executive Director, Environment be minded to decline a request for Road Safety & Parking funding, this will be in consultation with the Chairman of the Environment Committee (for individual member requests) or the relevant Chairman of Chipping Barnet, Finchley and Golders Green or Hendon Area Committees (for requests made by committee member items)”

    Councillor Alison Moore requested an amendment to the above, asking that when the decision to decline a request is made, along with those to be consulted an opposition member or one of the following is also consulted to aide transparency and openness;

     

    Ø  The lead opposition Member on Environment Committee

    Ø  Lead opposition Member on the Area Committee or

    Ø  Leader of the opposition

     

    The Chairman confirmed that there would be transparency and openness by way of providing an explanation and the reason for declining the request to the Area Committee and to the Ward Councillor concerned. He reiterated the point raised by Assistant Director - Capital Delivery on working with officers and having those informal discussion as it may be the case that an alternative solution can be presented.

     

    With the assurance that (i) a full report will be presented to Committee, clearly documenting and setting out the reasons on why the request has been declined and therefore enabling members to question the decision and (ii) there being a review in October, Councillor Moore withdrew the amendment.

     

    Upon being put to the vote the tabled amendment to Appendix B and the additional amendment to Appendix B were unanimously agreed.

     

    Upon being put to the vote the recommendations as set out in the report were unanimously agreed.

     

    RESOLVED – That the Committee

     

    1.     Agree arrangements in respect of Area Committees allocations of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funding of up to £1.2m per annum (£400,000 per Area Committee).

     

    2.     Agree to remove the funding limit for each individual Area Committee CIL funded project.

     

    3.     Agree in respect of the Area Committees the new CIL Funding Application Guidelines and Funding Application Form (Appendix A).

     

    4.     Agree CIL funding for a Road Safety & Parking Fund of up to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Committee Forward Work Programme pdf icon PDF 357 KB

    Minutes:

    Councillor Rawlings requested if the 2 items currently listed as ‘items to be allocated’ can be update allocated to a meeting.

     

    With regards to the Customer Strategy Update – Improving Customer Services, the Chairman confirmed the update report would be considered by the Policy and Resources Committee.

     

    RESOLVED – subject to the above the Committee note the forward work programme.

     

10.

Any item(s) the Chairman decides are urgent

    Minutes:

    None.