Agenda item

Report of the Head of Planning and Infrastructure

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 of the areas for review.

Councillor V Richichi sought clarification on what was meant by “Businesses are invested in the wellbeing of their communities” and what the identified demand was in “the demand and the types of premises which would match the demand identified.”

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that, in relation to investing in the communities, many businesses did care about the communities in which they were situated, and highlighted the link between them. In terms of identified demand, it was not known what was required until the demand was there.

Councillor R Johnson expressed concern in relation to over development of sustainable urban extensions in his ward and asked that if sites could not be found for the increase in numbers, would a new town need to be built?

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that if 910 per annum was the figure that had to be worked to then a significant number of sites would need to be found and various options would need to be explored.

Councillor N Smith stated that a number of years previously, when large numbers of housing requirements had been suggested, a complete new settlement had been considered and asked if that was feasible or would existing developments be expanded. He also noted that a number of residents had questioned the size of developments being built outside settlement boundaries yet they were unable to build one or two dwellings within their own land and asked if that system would be looked at.

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that both options were on the table and nothing could be ruled out.

Councillor M B Wyatt supported the valid points that had been raised by both Councillors R Johnson and N Smith and highlighted that the residents of the district had had enough of the level of development within the area and felt that the Authority needed to put its foot down on the additional housing numbers proposed.

Councillor A C Saffell reminded officers that he had requested on a number of previous occasions, consideration be given to a new town and that he had identified a site. He highlighted that the district needed to provide more low cost housing for those who could be employed at the SEGRO site to elevate the need for employees to travel in.

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised that, in terms of the site identified by Councillor A C Saffell, a piece of work had been commissioned to look at the site along with three other significant locations, to understand what potential infrastructure would be required.

Councillor D Harrison stated that members had considerable concerns over housing levels and that an area needed to be identified to take significant growth, but it had to be done strategically. He felt that the pause button needed to be pressed so that careful consideration could be given to what was required in terms of infrastructure from roads and drainage to schools and health.

The Planning Policy Team Manager advised the committee that it would not just be about sites being available but consideration would need to be given as to whether the development could be delivered. He stated that a report would be brought to a future meeting of the committee on the feasibility study.

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

RESOLVED THAT:

1. The current position in respect of the partial review be noted;

2. The current position in respect of the development of the evidence base be noted.