The material relevant to this item is the report on pages 15 to 28 of the Cabinet agenda for 3 December 2019 and the supplementary appendices pack.
The report contains the following recommendations for the Cabinet to make to the Council:
1. That:
a. the Summary of Representations included as Appendix 1 to this report is noted.
b. the proposed Council responses to the representations set out in that document are agreed, and
c. the Director of Planning and the Environment be authorised, following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning Services, to make minor amendments to the Summary of Representations and Responses prior to its publication.
2. That the issues raised in the Summary of Representations document and the other relevant issues summarised in section 9 of this report are noted as key considerations for the ongoing production of the Local Plan.
3. That the programme of further technical work set out in section 11 of this report is endorsed.
4. That the implications for the distribution of development set out in section 12 of this report are endorsed, subject to further technical work and testing through Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment being completed.
Minutes:
The Chairman invited Mrs Taylor to introduce the report and referred members to pages 15 to 28 of the Cabinet agenda for 3 December 2019 and the appendices in the supplementary appendices pack.
Mrs Taylor explained that a consultation on the Local Plan Review took place over an eight week period from 30 December 2018 until 2 February 2019. A total of 3200 representations were received from 729 respondents. The report sets out a summary of the representations received for Part I of the Local Plan Review Preferred Approach which relates to Strategic Policies and Allocations. A separate report to Cabinet and Council will address representations on Part II of the Plan relating to Development Management Policies. Mrs Taylor drew attention to appendix 1 to the report which contains the initial council response and paragraph 8 of the report. She explained that paragraph 9 sets out a number of new issues which require consideration including the declaration of a Climate Emergency and the discharge of nitrates into Solent and the impact this has on future development. Mrs Taylor confirmed that A27 discussions remain ongoing with Highways England and WSCC regarding the nature and finance of improvement works and this uncertainty will need to be addressed within the Local Plan. She then drew attention to the Schedule as set out in appendix 3 to the report and the Sustainability Appraisal detailed in paragraph 4 of the report. She confirmed that further technical work is required.
Mrs Lintill then reminded members that in responding to the report they should consider that the council is currently in Purdah.
Mr Brown commented on the high number of noted responses and raised concerns about how this could give the public a negative perception of the council. With reference to the ongoing Road Transport Study he then referred to what he viewed as the critical Southbourne road bridge. Mrs Taylor responded to Mr Brown’s comments. She explained that officers had put a lot of time and work into the Plan to date and that they were dealing with a number of complex issues.
Mr Barrett noted that a number of responses were similar to the 2013 Local Plan Review. He requested clarification on why the Peter Brett Study had not included the northern bypass option. He also asked why a number of aspects of the current Local Plan had not been implemented. He then asked why there is no reference to Southern Gateway. He also asked when the southern option would start and how long it would take. Mrs Taylor responded to Mr Barrett’s questions. She explained that it was likely that the 2019 responses would be similar to the 2013 responses as people largely comment on the same main factors. With regard to the current Local Plan she explained that as it runs until 2029 there is ample time for more project implementation. She also explained that there was no Government funded road scheme in either RIS 1 or RIS 2 (Road Investment Strategy) for the A27 and therefore the draft Local Plan scheme is only required to mitigate against the impact of new development and would not deal with the current capacity issues on the A27.
Mr Moss commented that the training of new members should not be an excuse for the level of progress and raised concerns that members would not have enough time to fully scrutinise the final decisions as the right level of public consultation would also be required. Mrs Taylor responded to Mr Moss. She explained that the training of new members is the reason why officers had to take a step back. Mr Frost then confirmed that as and when the evidence base is completed it will be published online so not all documents will be given to members in one go.
Mr Johnson referred to page 237 of agenda pack which explains that more distribution strategies would be coming forward. He requested clarification on how members could agree to endorse today if there are more strategies yet to be considered. Mr Frost responded to Mr Johnson and explained that members are being asked to note the overall progress to date and endorse the programme of work.
Mr Johnson then proposed that recommendation three be amended to state that members note rather than endorse. This was seconded by Mrs Johnson.
Mr Evans requested clarification on how many homes would be included in the north of the Plan area and where would they be located. Mr Frost responded to Mr Evans. He referred Mr Evans to paragraph 12.12 of the report on page 24 of the agenda pack. He added that the revised Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment would be brought to members in the new year.
In relation to the Peter Brett report Mr Page raised concerns regarding the disruption and inconvenience that would be caused to the south and east of the A27.
Mrs Sharp then reminded members that at some stage a decision would have to be made and members should be mindful of that. She requested further discussion regarding the Peter Brett report and sustainability routes. She then requested clarification on whether members would be able to vote on sections of the Local Plan document or whether the vote would be to agree the Local Plan as a whole document. Mrs Taylor responded to Mrs Sharp. She clarified that the Local Plan is due to be submitted for examination by July 2020. She explained that the Peter Brett report remains ongoing and that the next stage of the Local Plan review would be reported to Council in its entirety. Mr Ayling added with regard to sustainability routes the Plan must satisfy Highways England and therefore although ambitions should not be limited they must be measured and clear.
Rev Bowden requested an officer’s report to the next Development Plan and Infrastructure Panel regarding the risks associated with the Local Plan and the A27. Officers agreed to do so.
Mr Oakley commented on the amount of work that would be required to complete the Local Plan. He then requested information relating to the cost to date to facilitate the Local Plan Review and the anticipated future spend to complete the project. With regards to the A27 he raised concerns about the impact on the Local Plan if a viable option could not be demonstrated. He also commented on the need to demonstrate a reasonable funded delivery plan. He then requested clarification on whether section 11.1f of the report includes Pagham Harbour. He then highlighted the importance of the waste water works at Tangmere to support the volume of new houses. With regard to 11.1c line 3 of the report he requested confirmation on whether the cumulative impact assessment would include the transport impact on the number of houses proposed to the east of Chichester and the Portfield roundabout. He also requested reassurance that the Peter Brett work would fully consider the implications of the closure on the A27. Mr Ayling responded to Mr Oakley. He explained that 11.1f of the report relating to the nitrates work did consider Pagham Harbour. The reason Pagham Harbour is highlighted is due to its different classification with Natural England. He also confirmed that the transport assessment would consider all development. Mr Frost then confirmed that a written response would be provided to Mr Oakley regarding the cost of the Local Plan.
Mrs Apel commented on the number of trees lost to committee papers. Mrs Shepherd responded and reminded members that they could opt for a paperless option which could be discussed further outside of the meeting.
Mr Moss then requested it be made clear that all respondents should receive a reply to their comments on the Local Plan Review other than a response to say that their comments have been noted.
Mr Hughes raised concerns regarding the provision of new houses without the provision of new schools given that a number of local schools are already oversubscribed. Mrs Taylor responded to Mr Hughes. She explained that West Sussex County Council (WSCC) is consulted on the Infrastructure demands arising from new development and it is the county who decide whether there is a need for additional school places. Mrs Lintill added that the decision is linked to anticipated birth rates. As a WSCC member Mr Oakley gave an example of the Graylingwell site where the ultimate demographics of the site did not justify the planned spend on a school.
Mrs Johnson then commented on the difficulty in ensuring public support for the Local Plan when there are minimum numbers of houses but no maximums. Mrs Taylor responded to Mrs Johnson. She explained that it is not possible to give a maximum number but confirmed that if the council has no Local Plan there would be no control over the maximum numbers. Mrs Johnson responded that the wording of the consultation documents needs to be open, honest and transparent. Mr Frost added that not having an up to date Local Plan would lead to speculative applications and a greater number of applications succeeding on appeal.
The Chairman read out the proposed amendments to the recommendations as follows:
· The addition of ….and supplementary material prior to its publication to the end of recommendation 1c
· Replacing endorsed with noted with recognition that they are….’ to recommendation 4
Mrs Taylor proposed the recommendations including the first amendment which were seconded by Mrs Lintill. The seconded amendment had been proposed by Mr Johnson and seconded by Mrs Johnson.
In a show of hands the Council voted in favour.
RESOLVED
1. That:
a. the Summary of Representations included as Appendix 1 to this report is noted.
b. the proposed Council responses to the representations set out in that document are agreed, and
c. the Director of Planning and the Environment be authorised, following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning Services, to make minor amendments to the Summary of Representations and Responses and supplementary material prior to its publication.
2. That the issues raised in the Summary of Representations document and the other relevant issues summarised in section 9 of the report are noted as key considerations for the on-going production of the Local Plan.
3. That the programme of further technical work set out in section 11 of this report is endorsed.
4. That the implications for the distribution of development set out in section 12 of this report are noted with recognition that they are subject to further technical work and testing through Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment being completed.
Members took a short break.