Agenda and minutes

To receive and note any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence received.

Under the Code of Conduct members are reminded that in declaring disclosable interests you should make clear the nature of that interest and whether it is pecuniary or non-pecuniary.

Councillor J Legrys declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 5 – Town Centres – Review of Boundaries, as a volunteer at Hermitage FM which was located within Coalville town centre.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 9 September 2014.

Councillor D De Lacy asked if there was any progress or setbacks to report on the agreement of the SHMA figures and the housing land supply.

The Director of Services advised that in respect of the SHMA figures, a memorandum of understanding was undergoing agreement across Leicestershire; there would be a report to Cabinet in October and to a meeting of Council in November.  He added that ours was the last Council to agree, therefore subject to that, there would be an agreement in respect of the housing requirements across the Housing Market Area.  He advised that as reported at the last Planning Committee, the Council was currently achieving a 6.2 year housing land supply provision.

The Consultant commented that these processes all took so long that the position was bound to change.  He referred to comments made by a planning inspector that local authorities should not ignore the housing implications of economic development aspirations.  He added that the differences between economic aspirations and housing needs were at odds in some authorities.  He advised that the housing need issues would need to be considered and compared against the aspirations.  He added that it would be a matter for local authorities to convince an inspector how robust the housing need figures were in light of reality and aspirations.  He stated that as far as the Local Plan was concerned, he felt that there was time to undertake this work and officers were talking to others in the area to see if this issue would affect the robustness of the housing land supply.

Councillor J Bridges stated that he understood officers were looking into this however he felt that further discussion was required with Members.  He expressed concern regarding aspirations and felt the situation should be monitored.

Councillor J Legrys concurred with Councillor J Bridges’ comments and felt there were a number of issues that Members needed to keep on top of.  He referred to the Packington Mill and Charnwood inquiries.  He stated that he had taken the personal view that the SHMA was only as good as inspectors were prepared to sign it off.  He requested a written briefing to all Members to explain the situation.

Councillor V Richichi sought clarification whether more weight would be given to economic aspiration or housing need.  He commented that this was a chicken and egg situation in his opinion.

The Consultant commented that the aim of planning was to balance the demand for one against the other.  He added that SHMAs were built up from demographic projections and some economic assumptions, however inspectors were now saying that if you have high economic aspirations, you need to have enough housing to satisfy this.  He commented that it was a question of balancing aspirations and reality, and the aspirations needed to be carefully considered to ensure that housing was not oversupplied.

Councillor V Richichi agreed with those comments and felt that houses should be built to encourage people to come to the area.

Councillor D De  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Terms of Reference attached.

By affirmation of the meeting it was

RESOLVED THAT:

The Terms of Reference be noted.

Report of the Director of Services.

The Director of Services presented the report to Members.  He advised that the current town centre boundaries were set out in the existing Local Plan and had not been reviewed for over 20 years and were clearly in need of review.  He explained that in a number of cases, there were uses which would no longer be regarded as town centre use, and in most cases the suggested town centre boundary was significantly smaller than the existing boundary.  He sought comments from the Advisory Committee on the report and each of the settlement boundaries suggested by officers.  He advised that it was proposed to undertake an informal consultation with the Town and Parish Councils.

Councillor J Legrys asked that Ward Members be included in the consultation.  He commented that there may be other organisations that could be included in the consultation and felt that this should be considered.

Councillor D De Lacy asked if the results of the consultation would be reported back to the Advisory Committee.

The Director of Services advised that the results could be reported back if desired, subject to the timings. 

Members agreed that they would want the results of the consultation to be reported back to the Advisory Committee in the first instance.

Councillor S Sheahan pointed out one property in Measham which had been marked as residential, which was currently being fitted out for a shop unit.  He sought clarification on whether function or form was the primary consideration.  He commented that it was very difficult to say where the town centre began and ended.  He also sought clarification on the significance and implications of defining the town centre.

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that the in defining the town centre boundary, this would be the area where officers would seek to direct retail and town centre type uses to initially.  He added that this was a way of trying to maintain town centres as the main concentration of retail and other town centre uses.

Councillor S Sheahan commented that it seemed officers were trying to stop the decline of town centre areas, and it was a hard judgement.

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that this was the case; the boundaries had shrunk in many cases and it was about maintaining a concentration.  He commented that the fringe areas were transitional zones and this was a matter of judgement.

Councillor J Bridges commented that he was sure the Parish Councils may express different views when the matter was out for consultation.

Councillor C Large commented that it would have been useful to have had sight of the policies that would be applied to the town centre boundaries.  She asked for example if a shop that was just outside the boundary would have any restriction on how they could erect signage.

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that in that particular circumstance there would be no restriction, as this would relate to an already established use.  He advised that the policies would impact  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

The Chairman invited Members to highlight any items they would like the Advisory Committee to consider in future.

Councillor J Legrys requested that Members be kept updated on the situation in respect of the SHMA and felt that all Members should be informed as soon as there was likely to be any change.