Agenda item

Public speaking

Information on public speaking is available online

 

Minutes:

Councillor Matt Osborn representing Cranbrook Town Council and the residents of Cranbrook spoke about the continued delays and loss of faith of a promised town centre.  He advised the committee that residents want the delivery of a town centre now and thanked the Planning Officers, Ward Members and Committee Members for their hard work in the negotiations that had gone into producing the current proposal which delivers what Cranbrook needs.  He urged Committee Members to listen to the people of Cranbrook and look at how to start to deliver for Cranbrook.

 

Lythan Nevard, Minister for Cranbrook welcomed the changes that had been made since the last Strategic Planning Committee. She welcomed the provision of apartments on top of retail units in the town centre and saw this as a means of providing smaller and more affordable housing in the town. She also welcomed the additional space for community facilities which was so desperately needs.  She stressed there was so much potential for Cranbrook but this was held back because of the lack of space for people to meet and urged members to consider the extra space in the town centre which the town needs.  She stated this may not be the dream of what a town centre might look like but would rather have a living breathing town centre that worked for a community rather than something that was award winning.

 

Mr Paul Smith, a resident of Cranbrook, had submitted a statement read out on his behalf by the Democratic Services Officer, which stated:

 

I commend the extensive work undertaken by council officers in preparation of the New Local Plan preparation advisory report and draught ‘Issues & Options Consultation document – Jan 2021, prepared against a backdrop of changing Government Housing policy, and the introduction of Environmental and Agricultural Legislation which will have far reaching implications for the use of agricultural land, and permitted levels of air and noise pollution.

 

However I have concerns with regard to ‘information’ included in both report and Consultation documents.

 

Report para 7.8 suggests that at the present trajectory of house building within EDDC there will be a shortfall of 6415 dwellings by 2031. The existing Local Plan indicates an objectively assessed housing need figure of 17100 during the lifetime of the Plan. A review of the latest House Monitoring report, March 2020 indicates that between 2013-2020 houses in excess of 6000+ were built, and between 2020 -2031 houses totalling 18415 are projected to be built. This does not include an increasing number of windfall sites coming forward. A 5 year land supply was confirmed throughout the period. I question a shortfall?

 

Report Para 7.8 also refers to proposals initially set out in the Government white paper, ’Planning for the Future’ which translates to a new requirement for annual house building of 1614 homes per annum, also detailed within Chapter 5 of the Consultative document- Housing Needs. This information is factually incorrect, as it is clear that the Housing Minister under pressure from Conservative MP’s has acknowledge that the algorithm used in these calculations is unfit for purpose, and an alternative substitution will be considered.

I would contend that this incorrect information should not be included in the consultative document.

 

The Chapters 4 & 8 Consultative document appears to give very limited acknowledgement to the two major pieces of legislation passing through parliament ie, the Environment and Agricultural Acts both of which will have enormous implications for the use of agricultural land and protection of environment and habitat. The requirement to devote an increased  4% of such land to afforestation involving the annual planting of 30th hectares of land will impact upon availability for house building purpose, and again raises the important issue of protection of greenfield sites, including EDDC ’green wedges’. I hope that Councillors will make time to revisit the importance of ‘Green Wedge land’ within future policy. I note that 90% of house builds during 2019/20 were on Greenfield sites!

 

Whilst acknowledging that the creation of a new Local Plan will involve an inordinate amount of work and commitment by both Council officers and Councillors alike, the headers and tone of Report Para 9.1- 6 raise concerns that the Consultative process will not be as transparent and accessible to either Councillors or Communities as it should be. My concerns, and that of other Cranbrook residents whose homes overlook the Parsons Lane Green Wedge are reinforced through bitter experience resultant from a failure of transparency/disclosure by senior council officers, during the Cranbrook Plan Consultation process.

‘Cutting out Tasks to make Plan production quicker: Non production of draught Plan for consultation: Less debate on site allocations.’

 

Recommendations:

I would commend Councillors to consider support for progression as set out within Para 10 of the Report.

 

1)      I would have reservations as to the extent of authorisation granted ‘to make any minor changes to finalise the consultation document and facilitate the requirements of consultation software’.

 

East Devon New Community Partners

Nick Freer spoke on behalf of the East Devon New Community Partners and introduced a 3 minute video that Members watched that outlined a 3D image of the proposed town centre. 

 

He updated Members on what could be delivered that included:

 

·         The option to accommodate a leisure centre at the rear of parcel TC2;

·         A double sided retail frontage along the length of Till House Road which would be the heart of the town centre with food stalls, retail units, town council offices, health and wellbeing centre, smaller scale offices and workshops and nursery;

 

Members were urged to accept the agreement of the MOU to enable the delivery of the first stage of the town centre which could be in place in little over 18 months.   Mr Freer highlighted to Members that the MOU also included the amendment that would allow the council to purchase three additional parcels of land in the town centre at market housing value.

 

Finally, Mr Freer expressed the Consortiums concerns about the Supplementary Planning Document and said it should not replace the MOU process.  He urged Members to accept the amended proposals highlighting the risk of losing the momentum built up in the last year.