Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Bigby and Sewell.

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

No interests were declared.

To receive questions from members of the public under rule no.10 of the Council Procedure Rules.

There were no questions received.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 16 March 2023

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 16 March 2023.

It was moved by Councillor Legrys, seconded by Councillor Morris and

RESOLVED THAT:

The minutes of the meeting held on 16 March 2023 be approved and signed by the Chair as an accurate record of proceedings.

Report of the Planning Policy Team Manager

The Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report.

In response to a question about whether it was possible and appropriate to bring developers with large-scale proposals before the Committee, the Planning Policy Team Manager advised how it would work: once officers had suggested their preferred sites it may then be the opportune moment to bring developers before the committee. It would be an unrealistic timeframe between now and the next meeting of the Committee. The preferred sites should be selected first.

A Member commended the idea of bringing developers before the committee but suggested that there was a number of points to consider: September was earmarked for putting land allocation proposals in front of the committee; the mechanics of bringing developers in must be fair and equitable when deciding which developers to bring before the committee, and due consideration must be given to legal matters and conflicts of interests, particularly for members who were also on the Planning Committee.

The Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager acknowledged that the question of how to fairly determine which developers spoke before the Committee was an important one. In response to a question about how the provision of services, infrastructure and amenities for a given development was managed, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager advised that any proposed  allocation would have individual requirements attached to it that any future development would need to satisfy. Following that there would be consultation with stakeholders. In addition,the next stage of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan would look in specific detail at each site in terms of what was required. 

Any development would always be subject to viability, and adjustments may need to be made. However, most infrastructure would emerge in a phased manner throughout the life of the development, although some critical facilities such as sewage treatment would of course be present from the opening of a site.

In response to a question about possibly beginning the process of rescinding the earlier Statement of Common Ground to take some of Leicester’s unmet housing need, the Planning Policy Team Manager said it was a matter for Council. There were significant risks attached, which would need to be taken into consideration, especially around the duty to cooperate with other councils.

In response to a question about changes to the preferred existing employment allocation and potential changes to this because of the planned Freeport, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager said that there was only one outstanding allocation, at Ashby Money Hill. It was unlikely that changes to recommendations would occur at this time: the local plan had assumptions about what was likely to be built incorporated into them. They then explained the distinction between strategic land and employment land within the Local Plan framework.

In response to a question about the legal requirement of water companies to provide sewage treatment infrastructure to a development, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager confirmed that there was an obligation to provide capacity.

In response  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Report of the Planning Policy Team Manager

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report.

A member commended the parish for producing the Neighbourhood Plan.

It was agreed that a reference to consultation with the local Member be added to resolutions three and four.

In response to a question about what support from the Council is given to the smaller parishes unable, due to their size, to create neighbourhood  plans, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager advised that the Council always gave what support they could in the consultation process, and there was also national government funded aid available in this process.

In response to a question about which parishes have Neighbourhood Plans, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager advised that it was Council policy to encourage their production throughout the district; discussions and processes were ongoing towards that end; and the number was increasing slowly but surely.

A Member commended the Neighbourhood Plan which was just coming to fruition in their ward.

In response to a question about environmental and ecological concerns and whether they had been considered in the report, the Planning Policy and Land Charges Team Manager advised that Neighbourhood Plans generally had a positive impact on environmental and ecological protection, and for this particular plan these concerns featured prominently.

It was moved by Councillor Legrys, seconded by Councillor Moult and, subject to amendment,

RESOLVED THAT:

1. The proposed response to the submission draft of the Lockington-Hemington Neighbourhood Plan in Appendix A be approved.
2. The consultation period for the Lockington-Hemington Neighbourhood Plan be noted.
3. Following receipt of the Independent Examiner’s Report the Strategic Director of Place in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Infrastructure and the local ward member will determine whether the conditions have been met for the Neighbourhood Plan to proceed to referendum be approved.
4. Following the referendum and if time does not allow for a report to this committee, the Strategic Director of Place, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Infrastructure and the local ward member, will determine whether the Neighbourhood Plan should be ‘made’.