Issue - meetings

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure

The Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report.

Concerns were raised once again in relation to the language used in the consultation.  Reference was made to the comments made for the previous item in relation to the clarity of the communication and the current sense of panic amongst members of the public, particularly on social media, due to misunderstanding.  It was stressed that not all local people understood the process, and it was causing a significant amount of upset.   It was agreed for the consultation key message to be that the SHELAA was not a policy document and did not allocate sites to be developed or grant planning permission.

Some Members felt that the current process was not ideal as it seemed to be led by developers but acknowledged that it was compulsory under the current planning regulations.  It was suggested that the message to the public be clear that it was not NWLDC’s choice to develop the suggested sites and include the four reasons that a site could be rejected for the SHELAA.   The Chairman did not agree that the process was developer led but stressed that if the process was not completed, it could be, as NWLDC would not have a Local Plan in place.  

Concerns were raised on the timing of the public statement released, just days after the recent elections, which could be interpreted as a deliberate hold back of information.  Criticisms were shared on the lack of explanation provided to the public at this time as many Councillors were blamed unnecessarily due to a lack of understanding from the public.

A discussion was had on the methodology involved when assessing the suggested sites, as a site in Hugglescote St Johns (off Richmond Road) had been included even though it was hazardous due to a national power line.  A Member requested that more information be provided in relation to the methodology involved in the process and an explanation be given on the reasons for sites being included or rejected, particularly the site at Hugglescote St Johns as mentioned.  Members felt that this information would be helpful as they were being contacted by residents regularly asking for clarity.  The Planning Policy Team Manager clarified that all sites available had to be considered and that nothing had been rejected at this time. 

In response to a question, the Planning Policy Team Manager explained that future development would not be restricted to only the sites within the SHELAA.  Other sites could be considered at any time, however the process would be more difficult as proof of viability would need to be provided, for example thesupport  from the landowner.

It was moved by Councillor A C Saffell, seconded by Councillor N Smith and

RESOLVED THAT:

The significant additional sites that are to be included in the 2021 update of the SHELAA be noted.

The meeting was adjourned for a comfort break at 7.18pm and reconvened at 7.24pm.