COMMUNITY LIAISON COMMITTEE

 

MINUTES of a meeting held on 25th September, 2007.

 

Present: Councillor E.T. Williams (Chairman); Councillors R.F. Curtis, A.M. Ernest, G.C. Kemp, Mrs. A.J. Preston and K.R. Stockdale.

 

Representing Town and Community Councils:

 

It was noted that an invitation had been extended to two further councillors from each of the Town and Community Councils to attend the meeting in respect of the item “Dealing with Planning Applications”.

 

Councillors I. Moody, Mrs. E. Jervis, J. Bird, Clerk R. Hulin (Wenvoe Community Council), Councillors J.R. Harris, S. Cox,  D. Morris (Cowbridge with Llanblethian), Mrs. A. Pryer (Llanmaes), Mrs. S. Allen (St. Georges and St. Brides), R. Preston, H. Lewis (St. Brides), M. Hartrey, K. Hatton (Dinas Powys), Mrs. T. Evans (Peterson-Super-Ely), Mrs. C. Brown, P. Thomas (Wick Community Council), Mrs. S. Wilson (Ewenny), G. Roberts (Penarth), J. Mordecai, Mrs. M. Major (Llangan Community Council), T. Lewis (Llancarfan), G.J. Thomas, P. Fox, Mrs. T. Wride (Pendoylan), Mrs. J. Germon, K. Lewis, T. Stenstrom (Barry Town Council), D. Lane (Llantwit Major Town Council), T. Heath (Michaelston and Leckwith), J. Coggins (Llanfair), A. Foyle, G. Jenkins (Welsh St. Donats), R. Skinner (Penllyn), A.S. Murton (Llandow) and R. Thomas (Colwinston).

 

 

Also present:  Mr. R. Thomas (Head of Planning and Transportation), Mr. C. Parish (Operational Manager - Waste Management and Cleansing, Vale of Glamorgan Officer) and Inspector A. Rice (South Wales Police).

           

 

361     APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE-

 

These were received from Councillors Ms. M.E. Alexander, R.J. Bertin, J. Clifford, Mrs. V.M. Hartrey, G. John and Mrs. M.R. Wilkinson (Vale of Glamorgan Council), Mr. P. King (Llandough Community Council), Councillor E. Hacker (Llantwit Major Town Council), Councillor D. Jones (Leckwith and Michaelston), Councillor K. Griffiths (St. Donats Community Council) and Councillor D. Sylvester (Sully Community Council).

 

 

362     MINUTES -

 

AGREED  - T H A T the minutes of the meeting held on 18th July, 2007 be accepted as a correct record.  The Clerk referred to Minute No. 235 “Applications for Street Trading Licences”.  The Committee was advised that following its meeting in July the following recommendations had been referred to the Council’s Licensing Committee as requested:

 

(1)       that the Council’s Licensing Committee be requested to consider the implications of the requirement for individual traders to make applications and pay application fees to the Council in relation to such community events

 

(2)       that the concerns of the Committee be conveyed to the Council in relation to the over-burdening of small businesses when undertaking temporary / charitable events and

 

(3)       that the Council be requested to carry out a review of the current streets that were designated prohibited and consent streets. 

 

The Licensing Committee on 18th September 2007 having considered the above, had resolved:

 

“(1)      T H A T the introduction of a sliding scale of application fees in respect of Street Trading Consents be endorsed.

 

(2)       T H A T the following application fees in respect of Street Trading Consents be approved and become effective from 1st October, 2007:

 

 

Application Street Trading

(1 days)*

 

£10.00

 

Application Street Trading

(2 days)*

 

£15.00

 

Application Street Trading

(up to 6 months)*

 

£45.00

 

Application Street Trading

(up to 12 months)*

 

£90.00

 

*Approval Fee set by Licensing Committee.

 

(3)       T H A T the impending review of Consent and Prohibited Streets in the Vale of Glamorgan identified in the Public Protection Service Plan for 2007/08 be noted.”

 

 

363     DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST -

 

No declarations were received.

 

 

364     DEALING WITH PLANNING APPLICATIONS (DEER) -

 

The purpose of the report and presentation to Committee detailed the development control process and the stages involved in dealing with planning and similar applications.  The Head of Planning and Transportation presented the report to the Committee commencing with the reasons why planning permission was necessary.  Planning permission was required for all forms of development unless excluded from the definition of development or classified as permitted development.  To carry out any building operations and / or changes of use, two types of consent are generally required from the local planning authority being planning permission and building regulation approval.  In completing an application a number of documents are required by the planning authority. 

 

The report further outlined the consultation process required for planning applications and the material considerations that are taken into account when determining them.  The timescales referred to for receipt and determination of an application were 8, 13 and 16 weeks, which would obviously depend on the type of application itself.  In determining applications for planning permission the decisions were made in one of two ways by the Council, either by officer delegation (meaning that the Head of Planning and Transportation can determine the application with the Authority having been delegated by the Planning Committee) or  the Planning Committee itself.  A written report was produced for inclusion in the agenda, copies of which were made available three working days prior to the date of the meeting.  The public were entitled to attend meetings of the Planning Committee however they were not entitled to speak or address the Committee. It was also highlighted that the Committee may not determine every application on the agenda, they could resolve to defer consideration of the application to clarify any outstanding matters or to visit the site.  Committee site visits were not public meetings their intention was to provide Committee Members with a greater understanding of the issues involved before they meet again at the next Committee meeting to determine the application.  The report also covered applications in Conservation Areas and issues concerning listed buildings, planning appeals and enforcement control. 

 

Following conclusion of the presentation the following question and answer session ensued:

 

Question

Answer

Town and Community Councils were concerned about the short notice given to put their views to the Planning Committee in view of the fact their Council meetings took place once a month.

It was confirmed that the statutory time period was 21 days for the Authority to consult.  However Mr. Thomas advised that if the Town and Community Council had difficulty in issuing their representations in the timescale provided, he suggested that they contact the relevant Planning case officer or team leader to ascertain whether the application was still “alive”.  He advised that the Department would always consider any representations that were made unless a decision had already been agreed.

 

 

Retrospective planning.  Members of Committee considered that this was a matter of where double standards could be misconstrued.

 

 

Mr. Thomas concurred with the views of the Committee and stated that it was a real issue.  He advised that he, as an officer of the Department, had encouraged the Welsh Assembly Government to consider changing the fee structure for retrospective applications by, for example, doubling fees.  He was aware that currently the Welsh Assembly Government was reviewing its guidance in respect of planning enforcement and that this may entail revisions to the guidance in respect of retrospective applications.  Members would be advised of any changes if and when received.

 

In relation to the statutory duty to consult, Councillors requested that officers refer to the Town and Community Councils not only the decisions for approval and refusal but the reasons behind the Council’s decision to approve or refuse.

 

Mr. Thomas responded by stating that all decisions now included specific reasons for approval / refusal and that all decision notices are now issued as a matter of course to all Town and Community Councils.  Should any wish to receive further clarification they could also enter into correspondence with the Authority.

 

The Council had changed the process for any amendments to applications.  Applicants had to re-submit applications again which meant that on many occasions the Town and Community Councils were looking at applications that had very minimal changes.  They requested that the Authority should point out the differences in order that they can speed up the process and assist each other when making any further representations.

 

Mr. Thomas responded by stating that as a result of a High Court decisions, the process had to be changed which had resulted in applications having to be resubmitted.  He confirmed that this was not a Vale of Glamorgan process, but something that was happening nationally.

 

When Town and Community Councillors raise issues with planners during the construction process, they were informed that the Authority has to treat it as a complaint. 

 

Accept the fact that these matters were not complaints and agreed to look into the matter, with a view to treating them as “enquiries”.

 

 

Could the Council consider that at site visits members of the public be afforded the opportunity to speak.

 

Some local authorities allowed the public to speak and those Councils have various procedures in place (.e.g time limits and petitions as well as right of response to the applicant).  Due to the vast number of applications it would be very difficult to deal with plus the Council would need to consider the suggestion and amend its constitution if considered appropriate.  The Council would also need to consider what if any value such a scheme would add to the process.

 

At the conclusion of the presentation and the question and answer session, the Committee

 

AGREED -

 

(1)       T H A T Mr. Thomas be thanked for his informative and comprehensive presentation and that any further queries be forwarded to the Clerk or Mr. Thomas direct.

 

(2)               T H A T the report be referred to the Council’s Planning Committee Members for information as useful guidance.

 

 

365     CLEAN NEIGHBOURHOODS AND ENVIRONMENT ACT 2005 (REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION FROM PENARTH TOWN COUNCIL) -

 

Penarth Town Council had referred the matter to the Community Liaison Committee for consideration as a result of a presentation they had received in relation to the new powers under the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005.  The purpose of the request had been to explore ways in which Town and Community Councils within the Vale of Glamorgan could take advantage of the new powers available with regard to the issuing of Fixed Penalty Notices.  Fixed Penalty Notices could be issued by employees of Community Councils and other persons authorised by them in respect of litter, graffiti, fly posting and dog control offences. 

 

The presentation to the Committee detailed the legal requirements of Fixed Penalty Notices and the offences for which Fixed Penalty Notices could be used.  As a result of the new legislation it was suggested that strong inter-agency partnerships would be central to any successful enforcement strategy.  To this end, the Council could possibly provide training packages to raise Community Council awareness and provide the required competencies for Community Council staff to become authorised enforcers.  Further joint initiatives could be: joint communication and enforcement strategies, joint publicity, the sharing of resources to enforce low level environmental crime prevention within the Community Council area and working together in partnership to provide cleaner local neighbourhoods. 

 

As a result of the presentation, members of the Town and Community Councils raised their concerns in relation to costs that could be associated with such joint arrangements and stated they would prefer to rely on the Vale of Glamorgan enforcing regulations and that currently these matters were an issue for community police and they would prefer to rely on the police as opposed to employing staff to deal with the matter, although they did concur that some of the larger Town and Community Councils may wish to explore the matter.

 

AGREED - T H A T Mr. Clifford Parish be thanked for his informative presentation and that if any Town and Community Councils required further information, to contact Mr. Parish at the Council Offices.

 

 

366     POLICE MATTERS -

 

Inspector Andy Rice advised the Committee of the following:

 

                   crime in general had reduced in the South Wales area in the last quarter and had significantly reduced for the Vale of Glamorgan,

                    violent crime was reported as down by 13.6% although there had been a slight increase in auto crime,

                    the detection rate for June was 40%, July 31% and August 31%,

                    two homicides had taken place in the St. Athan area.  They were unconnected but he considered but he had considered it important to advise the Committee of the facts as they were major crimes and a considerable amount of resources and manpower into the investigations had to take place.  The impact had been extremely significant on the local force. Together with the homicide in Penarth earlier in the year it had been extremely unusual for the Vale to have had three homicides in one year.  In relation to the homicide on 27th April, a youth had been charged in respect of the matter.  However the incident on 31st July, a 17 year old had been arrested although the Crown Prosecution Service was currently considering in what capacity the youth should be charged due to the fact the victim had received a number of injuries and been referred to the local hospital.  However, shortly after the incident he had been discharged from hospital and it was as a result of further infection that his death occurred.  It was therefore the responsibility of the Crown Prosecution Service to ascertain whether the infection had led to his death and that this would have been a direct result of the injuries he had received.

 

 

Members also raised their concerns in respect of the press surrounding the incident of a young Manchester child where it was stated that local PCSOs had not been trained to rescue him from the water and as a result he subsequently died.  Inspector Rice stated that in terms of training, PCSOs do not have the same training as police officers and that it would have been a judgement decision made on the day that he could not comment on.  One of the Members confirmed that for the Vale of Glamorgan in particular in the Llantwit Major area, the PCSOs were responding to matters in an exceptional manner and the community was realising the benefits of such a presence within the community.  The Inspector concurred with the views of the Councillor and responded by stating that the incident in Manchester had left some PCSOs feeling vulnerable but he had reiterated that the work they were undertaking was invaluable and would have an effect on the policing role within the Vale of Glamorgan.

 

AGREED - T H A T Inspector Rice be thanked for updating the Committee with statistics on the Vale as well as reiterating that the Vale was a safe place to live. Members welcomed the reports which provided information on various initiatives and incidents that had / were taking place within the Force throughout the Vale.