Agenda and minutes

To agree the minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the Strategic Planning and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 20 June 2017 were confirmed by the members present and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Matthews, Ransley, Riddick and C Wyatt-Lowe

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

There was no public participation.

None.

None.

An update will be provided at the meeting.

Councillor Timmis gave the committee an update on Luton Airport based on her attendance as a representative Councillor for Dacorum Borough Council (DBC) at the London Luton Airport Consultative Committee (LLACC, see www.llacc.com) and its Noise and Tracks Sub-Committee (NTSC).

Background

The Airport has been expanding far faster than anticipated when planning permission was granted in 2013 for a doubling of passenger capacity from 9m to 18m per annum by 2025. In 2017 the airport expects to have carried more than 14m passengers, and to reach its permitted 18m some 7 years earlier than expected. Annual flights will have risen to 140,000 by end 2017, up 40% on 2013, within 4 years rather than 10. This making Luton the 5^th busiest and one of the fastest growing airports in the UK.

From their point of view this is a very positive increase in finance, business and they would argue, in the local (Luton) and national economy. The holding company LLAL, which owns the infrastructure on behalf of Luton Borough Council (LBC) in Bedfordshire, receives £34m per annum for the operating concession from the Airport Operators LLAOL, and dividends a large part of this to LBC as well as investing in a strategic land portfolio.

Environmental impact

Currently the airspace around Luton Airport is used for Luton Airport take offs and landings, stacking areas for Heathrow, and flights to or from Stansted, Northolt and City Airports, in three tiers. Luton airport has been assigned the lower of these tiers meaning that planes have to keep on a lower trajectory on take-off, so they are closer to the population on the ground and therefore noisier.

The major downside of increased LLAOL activity falls on Hertfordshire and in particular the Westerly flight path out of the Airport which accounts for 70% of flights (98,000) and affects disproportionately Markyate and Flamstead (which Councillor Timmis represents) as well as Redbourn and north Hemel Hempstead. Harpenden and St Albans residents have mounted fierce opposition to the noise and impact on their residents since it has been worsened by the introduction of a narrowed flight path using GPS-based navigation (RNAV).

This system is due to be extended onto all routes from Luton over the next 4-5 years, as part of an initiative to ensure Air Traffic Control safety of the ever more crowded skies.

Community groups have pointed out that government policy tends to favour concentration rather than dispersal of flights, which may be expedient in terms of using GPS navigation to control the ever-more crowded skies, but it does not necessarily guarantee that the objective of minimising the numbers of people affected by aircraft noise is met in a fair way: some people can face a great and increasingly concentrated environmental burden which more dispersed flight paths could even out.

Night flights have also been increased, as Luton has a 24-hour operating license, and the planning restraints set an upper movements limit designed to restrict growth, past the expected maximum.

Mitigating the impact

As  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.

J Doe ran through the main points in the report regarding an update on managing CIL and s106 receipts.

• On page 7, section 2 – there is an ongoing government review of CIL as nationally, it is raising less than anticipated and it is a complex system to run. Page 8, paragraph 2.4 onwards – a review group has suggested a hybrid system to set a local tariff for smaller sites like the system in London where developers pay two tariffs – one the local authority and another to the Mayor of London.
• The Council started collecting CIL in July 2015 but there has been no expenditure yet as revenue is still coming in. An advisory group meets every three months and includes the borough council, the county council and other stakeholders and it is there job to prepare an annual business plan.
• The Infrastructure Delivery Plan sets a long list of necessary infrastructure provision. It is updated regularly with changing priorities. A report went to Cabinet in June to delay inviting bids from service providers as currently, there is £450,000 available but it was felt it was not a meaningful amount to distribute.
• The Council has permitted a lot of new developments but CIL is only paid when the development begins. Page 11 shows there is almost £7 million in assets - £3 million coming from The Beacon development.
• There are costs associated with collecting CIL – 5% of the money collected is allowed to be spent on administration costs.
• In the New Local Plan, there will be a review of the CIL charging schedule as it is inflationary. Also, changes to the property market should be monitored and an increase in house prices should be reflected in the CIL charges.

Councillor Birnie asked about the structure of the Infrastructure Advisory Group (IAG) and the distribution of funds. He said he found it odd that it includes LEPs and outside bodies yet only two members of the council are involved – it does not seem very democratic.

J Doe said it was a working group and the democratic element comes from Cabinet sign off. Member representation on the group is for political input and more technical input is required.

Councillor Birnie asked if the IAG only makes recommendations to Cabinet and the expenditure decisions are made by Council.

R Freeman said yes that was correct.

Councillor Hicks asked how the IAG got the ideas for spending.

J Doe said the process starts through expression of interests which will be opened later this year. Officers will assess their relevance and effectiveness.

R Freeman explained that submissions had to be scrutinised to find out if it is deliverable. A scoring mechanism is being developed and those with the highest score will be promoted as options to recommend for approval.

Councillor Birnie asked if the IAG covered neighbourhood submissions.

R Freeman said no. Core allocation of CIL funds go to the IAG. Town and Parish Councils have set up their own processes.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

Councillor Anderson encouraged the committee to look at the work programme and wanted members to become more proactive in requesting items to scrutinise to add value to the scrutiny process. Also, if any members identify a training need then contact Member Support who can organise the training.