Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Remote meeting using Microsoft Teams

Contact: Democratic Services  01530 454512

Media

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

2.

Declaration of Interests

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

Minutes:

In accordance with the Code of Conduct, Members declared the following interests:

 

Councillor D Bigby declared a non-pecuniary interest in items 5, Local Plan Review – Update and 6, Local Plan Review – Draft Objectives, as he had previously commented on several aspects of the Local Plan Review during the consultation process, but had come to the meeting with an open mind. He also advised that in relation to item 6, Local Plan – Draft Objectives, he had submitted a question to Cabinet the previous week on the item and had publicly commented on the response that was provided, however he had again, come to the meeting with an open mind.

3.

Public Question and Answer Session

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

 

Minutes:

There were no questions received.

4.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 289 KB

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 27 May 2020

Minutes:

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 27 May 2020.

 

It was moved by Councillor D Harrison, seconded by Councillor J Legrys and

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

The minutes of the meeting held on 27 May 2020 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

5.

Local Plan Review - Update pdf icon PDF 229 KB

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure

 

Minutes:

The Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report to Members.

 

Councillor J Legrys noted that if the figure of 910 per annum was agreed it would almost double the amount of houses that currently needed to be built. He sought clarity on when it would be known which base line figure the authority would be working to, whether it would hold up the review and what the “social housing for rent need” in the district was.

 

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that he was unsure of when the Government would give an indication on the method however, he felt that work needed to be done to get a better understanding on how the forecasts were put together. He hoped to bring back a report as soon as he could once the base line was known and that he did not want it to hold up the review. In terms of affordable housing, he hoped to commission a piece of work using the household predictions to give an indication on the level of need that may arise.

 

Councillor D Bigby noted that it would take some time to establish the figures and asked that if whilst waiting for the information, whether officers would begin work on identifying suitable sites for development. In relation to employment needs, he highlighted the work that was required following the changes to the NPPF and sought clarification on what the key changes were and its significance. He was pleased to see that the report mentioned the need for more carbon friendly distribution operations and the need to understand and use rail freight when possible, as there were railheads that could be used. He stated that it was good to see that local employment opportunities were being looked at and taken seriously, and the intention to commission work on the start-up premises. He advised that, when he had first read the paragraphs on climate change, he was worried that the new evidence was some sort of backdoor attempt to water down some of the crucial objectives of the Council’s Climate Change action plan. He stated that having read the remit for the study he was pleased that it did cover the climate areas that needed clarification. He asked if it would be possible for officers to provide the committee with a framework setting out all aspects of the areas to be covered in the review, and when they were likely to come forward for consideration.

 

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that officers were working to identify suitable sites to accommodate the additional houses that would be required and that in relation to the NPPF, there were not many changes and for the first time it made reference to meeting the needs of the logistics industry including a need to identify sites for lorry parks. In terms of climate change, a consultant had been appointed and a meeting would take place the following week and that he would look at pulling together a framework  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.

Local Plan Review - Draft Objectives pdf icon PDF 215 KB

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report to Members. He drew Members attention to the additional papers that had been circulated and advised that Cabinet had considered the report at its meeting on the 23 July 2020. Following a submission of a question from Councillor D Bigby to that meeting, Cabinet agreed to amend objectives 2, 3 and 10 as set out in Councillor R Ashman’s response. He informed Members that, due to the Cabinet decision, they were being asked to note the decision of Cabinet with respect of the Draft Local Plan Objectives taking account of the changes to Objectives 2, 3 and 10 as set out on the additional paper.

 

Councillor D Bigby explained to the committee why he had submitted the question to Cabinet rather than consideration at the Committee first. He was pleased that Cabinet agreed the changes to objectives 2, 3 and 10 and, that the Council was making progress in developing the framework for the substantive review. He welcomed the new objective 7 that laid down the need to respond to the Climate Emergency but expressed disappointment that Cabinet had rejected the suggestions for objective 5. He fully understood that the District operated in the national and international economic framework and was sure that all wanted a thriving economy, with high standard working environments. He acknowledged that the impact of COVID would bring challenges to maintaining employment in the district along with the limitations within the Local Plan that had been imposed by national legislation. He agreed that thriving local businesses were necessary to the survival of communities, he disputed the assumption that the economic interests of businesses in general, were compatible with the economic interest of local residents. He felt that the continuation of large warehouses being built in the district was not in the interest of the community, which was weighed against the environmental impact. He stated that the Portfolio Holder’s response had sited paragraph 8 of the NPPF, with the last part having caught the Council out. He advised that he had tried to come up with a form of words that would improve the objective, however he had not been able to find any suitable words to suit it. He stated that, unless any other member could suggest some wording, he would support the recommendation as amended by the agreed changes, having had some influence on them.

 

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that he appreciated the questions that were submitted by Councillor D Bigby. He noted that a consultation would then be held on the draft objectives and that there was a possibility that an amendment to objective 5 could come through that way, therefore the position regarding objective 5 was not set in stone.

 

Councillor J Legrys raised the announcement from HMG and the additional £2billion transport funds to local councils for including walking and cycling and put forward a slight addition to objective 4. The wording was:-

In light of HMG recent announcement to provide £2bn  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Statement of Community Involvement For Planning Purposes - Addendum pdf icon PDF 216 KB

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report to Members and advised that the recommendations in the Cabinet report, at appendix 1 of the report, had been agreed by the Cabinet, at its meeting on 23 July 2020

 

Councillor J Legrys stated that he understood the need for the report before them but noted that there had become heavy reliance on the internet and the need to use online forms. He felt that a way needed to be found to communicate to residents, who did not have access to the internet, on how they could take part in consultations and view relevant documents. He also advised that even residents who had access to the internet, could struggle to view the information as the technology that they were using, such as mobile phones, may not have been fit for purpose.

 

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that the concern raised by Councillor J Legrys was noted in the addendum and that hardcopies would be made available.

 

Councillor V Richichi stated that Ward Councillors could be valued to those who did not have internet connection by offering assistance in getting the information out to residents in their areas.

 

The officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor V Richichi, seconded by Councillor J Legrys and

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

The revisions to the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) as set out in 4.1 of the report to Cabinet, as attached at appendix 1 be noted.

 

8.

Diseworth Village Design Statement pdf icon PDF 215 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Planning Policy Team Manager presented the report to Members.

 

The officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor D Harrison, seconded by Councillor J Legrys and

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

The undertaking of a consultation in respect of the revised Diseworth Village Design Statement be agreed.

 

Councillor R Ashman left the meeting at 7.00pm

Councilor A C Saffell left the meeting at 7.38pm