Issue - meetings

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure

The Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report to Members.

Councillor D Bigby stated that he supported the conclusion of not identifying specific sites for self-build. He expressed concerns over the policy as he felt that it was quite complex and cumbersome, and sought a better understanding of the word ‘seek’, as it could lead to misunderstanding by the planning committee as to what it meant. He noted that there were forty-four names on the self-build register and asked if the register noted what type of plot those that were interested were looking for, adding that he would be surprised that those on the register would be looking at living on housing estates. He felt that the policy should be modelled on the one that had been adopted by Blaby DC.

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that in terms of the wording issues, the word seek was not a specific requirement and the wording of the policy would always be supported by text, which would be subject to consultation. In terms of the register, he advised Members that the type of plot required was not logged but the possible settlement location was. He informed the committee that in terms of the policy from Blaby it did not add a great deal to what was in the national policy, but that it would be a decision for the Committee following consultation.

Councillor V Richichi stated that it was a pretty good policy but there were some areas that he sought clarification on. He felt that anyone wishing to self-build would want to do so on a small plot of land not a small-scale housing estate. He noted that some sites where people would wish to build were outside Limits to Development even though the site could fall between two existing properties, asking if there would be any leniency on granting that kind of development. In terms of the self-build register, he felt that it would make the process transparent and highlight the number that wanted to build. He sought clarification on whether there would be more flexibility with self-builds in planning terms and where an application met the small scale application with local connection requirements but lay outside the limits would it be permissible.

The Planning Policy Team Manager informed Members that the Limits to Development would be part of review as they had been drawn tightly and the authority may need to introduce an element of flexibility in regards to small-scale growth, which could include self or custom build developments. He cautioned that it would need careful consideration to ensure appropriate balance. In terms of the register, he noted that it was a requirement to keep one but it was not a published document. Officers could advise members of the numbers on there if requested. He advised that in relation to more flexibility with self-build, the national policy did not allow it and at examination unless strong evidence was provided to show why North West Leicestershire was different to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32