Agenda and minutes

Councillor Merlita Bryan  -  personal

Councillor Michael Wildgust  -  personal

None.

None.

Councillor Brian Grocock presented a petition signed by 193 people requesting that the Bestwood Estate Community Centre be excluded from development boundaries on the former Padstow School site.

The minutes of the meeting held on 18 January 2016 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Lord Mayor.

The Chief Executive reported the following official communications:

Nottingham City Council has been shortlisted for three awards for the way it buys its goods and services for the public.  The authority is the finalist in three categories of the National Government Opportunities Excellence in Public Procurement Awards.  These recognise new and innovative ways to buy, or procure for the Public Sector.  The awards will be announced at a ceremony on Tuesday 8 March.

The City Council received a ‘Highly Commended’ award at the Apprenticeships for England Apprenticeship Employer Awards in 2016.  These awards recognise outstanding examples of quality, best practice, innovation and excellence in apprenticeship delivery.

None.

Land and Planning Policies Document – resident’s parking

Councillor Andrew Rule asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Housing:

Will the Portfolio Holder ensure, that in the event that the Land and Planning Policies Document is found to be sound and replaces the current local plan, that measures are put in place to ensure that appropriate provision is made for resident’s parking in those areas identified for residential development that are situated in close proximity to existing residential areas; as this will then avoid additional pressure being placed on roads serving existing residential areas?

Councillor Jane Urquhart responded as follows:

Thank you Lord Mayor, and thank you Councillor Rule for the question.  Of course, at the beginning of the answer I should say that the only way in which our Land and Planning Policies document is likely to be found sound is if it’s found to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework issued by the Tory government.  I’ll come to that a little more in due course.  I see that of course, even though I’m no longer the Portfolio Holder for Transport, it seems that questions about residents’ parking should come to me.  Perhaps it wouldn’t be a Full Council without me answering a question of that nature.

Anyway, I’m interested that you feel our planning policies should be so very locally prescriptive, because of course that puts you at odds with the Tory government’s changes to planning, which have taken away local discretion at every turn, and left local authorities very much in the hands of developers, unable any longer to resist schemes because the government has removed our powers.

Perhaps you were unaware of that; a few examples might help?  The removal of the need for planning consent to turn offices into residential – that’s come through.  Nothing in that about what should happen to new residents of those office conversions who have cars and need to park - nothing from the government in that, and no power for us to intervene there.

Of course, more proposals coming along - a new assumed consent, so a number of those sites that you refer to in your question; those sites on brownfield land that are identified for residential development, if our plan is found sound, it is highly likely that there will be an assumed consent on those sites.  If we have said in our Land and Planning Policies Document that we think it is suitable for residential the assumption will be that that is what will happen, without us making a local decision.  Nothing about parking in there, just the government saying that permission will be granted without a local decision being made.  And the National Planning Policy Framework itself – perhaps that is where we will find the help that Councillor Rule is seeking, and against which of course, our own plan of course will be judged in terms of soundness.  Perhaps it gives us that scope in the National  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

Report of the Leader.

The Leader submitted a report on decisions taken under the urgency procedures, as set out on pages 19 to 23 of the agenda.

RESOLVED to note the urgent decisions taken, as follows:

(1)   urgent decisions (exempt from call-in)

(2)  key decisions (Special Urgency Procedure)

Report of the Leader.

The Leader submitted a report on Constitutional amendments, as set out on pages 25 to 28 of the agenda.

RESOLVED to:

(1)  note the following changes to Executive delegations already approved by the Leader of the Council:

(a)  amendment of delegation 274(a) to reflect a new authorisation process for Child Care Packages as outlined in paragraph 5.2

(b)  changes to Executive Portfolios as outlined in paragraphs 5.3-5.5

(c)  amendment of the scheme of delegation to enable Corporate and Strategic Directors to sub-delegate the countersigning of Portfolio Holder delegated decisions to colleagues at head of Service level or above as outlined in paragraphs 5.5-5.6

(2)  note (in relation to Executive matters) and approve (in relation to non-executive matters) the amendment to the scheme of delegation in Part 2 of the Constitution clarifying how variations to delegated authority are authorised as outlined in paragraph 5.7;

(3)  approve the change to the Health and Wellbeing Board Commissioning Sub-Committee Terms of Reference as outlined in paragraph 5.8;

(4)  approve changes to the Officer Employment Procedure Rules (Standing Orders on Employment Matters) and the Terms of Reference for Appointments and Conditions of Service Committee and Full Council, as outlined in paragraph 5.9 and 5.10.

Report of the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Resources and Neighbourhood Regeneration.

The Deputy Leader submitted a report on the 2015/16 Treasury Management Strategy, as set out on pages 29 to 66 of the agenda.

RESOLVED to:

(1)  approve the 2016/17 treasury management strategy document, including the strategy for debt repayment and the investment strategy, as detailed in Appendix 1;

(2)  approve the Prudential Indicators and limits from 2014/15 to 2018/19, as detailed in Appendix 3 (pages 16-19 of Appendix document).

The Deputy Leader submitted a report on the 2015/16 Budget, as set out on pages 5-24 of the supplementary agenda.

Councillor Culley presented a proposed amendment to the Budget, as follows:

In recommendation 2.1 add after “the revenue budget for 2016/17”

“subject to the following:-

In recommendation 2.2 add after “The capital programme for 2015/16-2020/21”

Subject to the following:-

And amend the following recommendations as indicated:

·  In recommendation 2.3(a) substitute £941,161,476 for £942,968,586;

·  In recommendation 2.3(b) substitute £848,716,670 for £848,756,670;

·  In recommendation 2.3(c) substitute £92,444,806 for £94,211,916;

·  In recommendation 2.4 substitute £1,488.86 for £1,517.32

And amend the following sections as indicated:

·  In section 5.2 substitute £92,444,806 for £94,211,916 and £1,488.86 for £1,517.32

·  In section 5.3 and 5.6 substitute the following basic amounts of council tax for the ones shown in the report:

·  In section 5.6 substitute the following aggregate council taxes for those shown in the report:

Councillors voted as follows on the proposed amendment: