Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber Blackdown House and online via zoom

Contact: Wendy Harris  01395 517542; email  wharris@eastdevon.gov.uk

Media

Items
No. Item

1.

Public speaking

Information on public speaking is available online

 

Minutes:

There were no members of the public present.

2.

Minutes of the previous meeting pdf icon PDF 315 KB

Minutes:

The minutes of the Strategic Planning Committee held on 27 April 2021 were confirmed as a true record.

3.

Declarations of interest

Guidance is available online to Councillors and co-opted members on making declarations of interest

Minutes:

Minute 7. Initial feedback report - local plan issues and options consultation.

Councillor Eleanor Rylance, Personal, Broadclyst Parish Councillor.

 

Minute 7. Initial feedback report - local plan issues and options consultation.

Councillor Jess Bailey, Personal, West Hill Parish Councillor and Devon County Councillor.

 

Minute 7. Initial feedback report - local plan issues and options consultation.

Councillor Kevin Blakey, Personal, Cranbrook Town Councillor.

 

Minute 7. Initial feedback report - local plan issues and options consultation.

Councillor Olly Davey, Personal, Exmouth Town Councillor.

 

Minute 9. Initial feedback report - local plan issues and options consultation.

Councillor Paul Arnott, Personal, Colyton Parish Councillor.

 

Minute 9. Initial feedback report - local plan issues and options consultation.

Councillor Paul Hayward, Personal, Employed as Clerk to All Saints, Chardstock and Newton Poppleford and Harpford Parish Councils.  All are consultees to the Local Plan.

 

Minute 9. Initial feedback report - local plan issues and options consultation.

Councillor Sarah Chamberlain, Personal, Broadclyst Parish Councillor and a resident of Broadclyst Station.

 

Minute 10. HELAA call for site submissions.

Councillor Eleanor Rylance, Personal, Broadclyst Parish Councillor.

 

Minute 10. HELAA call for site submissions.

Councillor Jess Bailey, Personal, West Hill Parish Councillor and Devon County Councillor.

 

Minute 10. HELAA call for site submissions.

Councillor Kevin Blakey, Personal, Cranbrook Town Councillor.

 

Minute 10. HELAA call for site submissions.

Councillor Olly Davey, Personal, Exmouth Town Councillor.

 

Minute 10. HELAA call for site submissions.

Councillor Paul Arnott, Personal, Colyton Parish Councillor.

 

Minute 10. HELAA call for site submissions.

Councillor Paul Hayward, Personal, Employed as Clerk to All Saints, Chardstock and Newton Poppleford and Harpford Parish Councils.  All are consultees to the Local Plan.

 

Minute 10. HELAA call for site submissions.

Councillor Philip Skinner, Personal, Made a submission on land owned and also known to FWS Carter & Sons who potentially could have submitted land owned.

 

Minute 10. HELAA call for site submissions.

Councillor Sarah Chamberlain, Personal, Broadclyst Parish Councillor and a resident of Broadclyst Station.

 

Minute 11. Approach to employment provision.

Councillor Eleanor Rylance, Personal, Broadclyst Parish Councillor.

 

Minute 11. Approach to employment provision.

Councillor Jess Bailey, Personal, West Hill Parish Councillor and Devon County Councillor.

 

Minute 11. Approach to employment provision.

Councillor Kevin Blakey, Personal, Cranbrook Town Councillor.

 

Minute 11. Approach to employment provision.

Councillor Olly Davey, Personal, Exmouth Town Councillor.

 

Minute 11. Approach to employment provision.

Councillor Paul Arnott, Personal, Colyton Parish Councillor.

 

Minute 11. Approach to employment provision.

Councillor Paul Hayward, Personal, Employed as Clerk to All Saints, Chardstock and Newton Poppleford and Harpford Parish Councils.  All are consultees to the Local Plan.

 

Minute 11. Approach to employment provision.

Councillor Sarah Chamberlain, Personal, Broadclyst Parish Councillor and a resident of Broadclyst Station.

 

Minute 12. Housing Policy Matters.

Councillor Eleanor Rylance, Personal, Broadclyst Parish Councillor.

 

Minute 12. Housing Policy Matters.

Councillor Jess Bailey, Personal, West Hill Parish Councillor and Devon County Councillor.

 

Minute 12. Housing Policy Matters.

Councillor Kevin Blakey, Personal, Cranbrook Town Councillor.

 

Minute 12. Housing Policy Matters.

Councillor Olly Davey, Personal, Exmouth Town Councillor.

 

Minute 12. Housing Policy Matters.

Councillor Paul  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

4.

Matters of urgency

Information on matters of urgency is available online

 

Minutes:

There were no matters of urgency discussed.

5.

Confidential/exempt item(s)

To agree any items to be dealt with after the public (including the Press) have been excluded. Thereare no itemswhich officersrecommendshould be dealtwithin thisway.

 

Minutes:

There were no items that officers recommended should be dealt with requiring exclusion of the press and public.

6.

Joint Strategy for East Devon, Exeter, Mid Devon and Teignbridge pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

The Committee considered the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management’s report which sought Members agreement to the scope, resourcing timetable and governance arrangements for the preparation of a non-statutory Joint Strategy for East Devon, Exeter, Mid Devon and Teignbridge Councils to ensure a collaborative and co-ordinated approach to meeting development needs in a timely manner.

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management gave an overview of the progress made so far and outlined the resourcing required for the Joint Strategy.  He specified the five options available and advised Members’ he considered the best option would be to engage a consultant to prepare the Joint Strategy on behalf of the authorities, supported in a limited capacity by a group of officers.  He also outlined the proposed timetable which sought formal agreement and adoption of the Joint Strategy in September/October 2022.  Members noted that there were sufficient funds in the GESP budget that would cover the cost of recruiting a consultant and the public consultation.

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management referred to Appendix B appended to the report that summarised a range of governance groups that would need to be involved in the preparation of the plan.  Members were made aware that key decisions for the plan were held with each of the four councils and their committees and not with the governance groups.

 

Comments made by non-Committee Members included:

·      Reference was made to the recognisable brand and the importance to keep the Greater Exeter branding and a question was raised about whether there had been discussions amongst the other authorities on what the branding might be.  In response the Leader advised that all the Leaders of the four councils had agreed that they did not want to call it GESP and said he was not aware of the new brand name.

·      Clarification sought on the public consultation and dealing with issues received from the responses.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it was expected the public consultation would commence next summer to assist in finalising the plan quite quickly.  However, if there are issues following the consultation then the timetable may need to be extended to accommodate those concerns.  He advised it may be a challenge to engage with the public due to it being a high level strategic plan.

 

Questions raised by Committee Members included:

·      Clarification and assurance was sought that this council was working closely with neighbouring authorities outside of the GESP area to avoid potential impact on East Devon.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised in terms of the non-statutory plan the council was not required to fulfil the duty to co-operate but was engaging with them through the duty to co-operate on the local plan.

·      Clarification sought on the key differences between option 3 and option 5.  It was advised the main difference was that option 3 would require the employment of an internal Project Manager to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Initial feedback report - local plan issues and options consultation pdf icon PDF 270 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Service Lead – Planning Strategic and Development Management presented the report which updated Members on consultation feedback.  The report provided an update on the 150 responses received that did not respond online and Members’ attention was drawn to the final issues and options feedback report appended to this report.

 

Comments made by Committee Members included:

·         Clarification sought on the comment made on page 24 of the report that read:

Meeting unmet need from neighbouring areas (Duty to Cooperate) that went against the Service Lead – Planning Strategic and Development Management advice about not picking up neighbouring authorities requirements.  In response the Chair advised the council was still bound through the local plan process to the duty to co-operate until any new legislation comes through.

·         The report is biased by excluding responses from landowners and rigid key questions. 

·         The report is massively skewed to the older population.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it was an open consultation for anyone to comment on and recognised the lack of engagement from the younger generation despite efforts through social media and other avenues.  This would be addressed in future consultations and work would be done with the Communications Team to address that and engage with the full age range within the district.

·         It was suggested to amend the recommendation so that the neighbourhood plan was given greater weight than the ORS and the consultation report.

·         The need to engage with younger people and working families.

·         Although we are not reaching the younger demographic that does not mean they do not deserve the houses built for them.  Their needs need to be incorporated into our decision making.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Mike Allen, seconded by Councillor Philip Skinner that the recommendation be amended to read:

 

That the neighbourhood planning results should be given greater weight than other consultation reports. 

 

Councillor Allen advised the reason being that they are voted on a much bigger number and in some cases it was a high majority of the local population voted

 

In response the Planning Barrister advised that the recommendation as written in the report recommends that the Strategic Planning Committee to note the feedback report and the consultation responses and to not form any view.  She advised Members that Councillor Allen’s comments gave weight to the neighbourhood plan and it may be more appropriate for Councillor Allen to raise that point in agenda item 13.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Mike Allen, seconded by Councillor Ben Ingham that the recommendation be amended to read:

 

That Strategic Planning Committee note the feedback report and the consultation responses received to the local plan issues and options report be noted and the lack of response in the under 40’s age group which needs to be addressed in future be noted.

 

RESOLVED:

That the feedback report and the consultation responses received to the local plan issues and options report be noted and the lack of response in the under 40’s age group  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

HELAA call for site submissions pdf icon PDF 3 MB

Minutes:

The report presented to Members’ provided an update on site submissions into the East Devon call for sites process.  There had been a total of 359 site submissions received which included 194 new sites and 165 sites already received summarised in paragraph 2.2 in the report.  The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised a lot of work was currently underway in assessing the new sites and reviewing the other sites.

 

Members’ noted a series of plans of the district appended to the report which showed the sites that had come forward.  The sites in blue represented the new sites that had come forward in 2021 and the sites in red represented those that previously come forward in 2017.

 

Members’ agreement was sought to a number of minor amendments to be made to the HELAA methodology to bring it in line with recent updates to Government guidance.  The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management referred to paragraph 4.2 which detailed a summary of the proposed main changes.

 

Comments made by Non-Committee Members included:

·      The need to resist any change from employment land to housing land.

·      It was noted under paragraph 4.2 – amended guidance to clarify how to consider flood zones in stage A assessment where no data on functional floodplains exist.  Concerns raised about the floodplain in Sidford and the consequences for local residents as the brook was being widened to pass the water further downstream.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management assured Members that flooding as a constraint was considered throughout the process in terms of which sites are to come forward for development and Government guidance is clear that housing development should not be allocated on land liable to flood.

 

Comments and questions raised by Committee Members included:

·      Comment made that there was not enough information about who would be sitting on the HELAA panel.  It was advised the panel would be a group of key stakeholders who would give advice on the achievability of sites.

·      Clarification sought on the balance between developers, landowners and community representatives on the panel. A suggestion was made to include a recommendation that requires further information on the panel be brought back to committee before the panel starts work.

·      Concerns raised about Devon County Highways being unable to commit to providing feedback by a particular date and that the proposed solution was to ask Devon County Highways to prioritise on the larger sites.  This would be difficult bearing in mind how many sites there are and all the work that had to be done.  It was questioned whether there was another way to get their feedback more quickly.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management emphasised that Devon County Council and other consultees’ had limited resources that were overly stretched and to be mindful that may delay the process.

·      Clarification sought on whether brownfield sites were considered.  In response it was advised it was government policy that brownfield  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Approach to employment provision pdf icon PDF 513 KB

Minutes:

The committee considered the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management’s report detailing a number of matters on the provision of employment land in the local plan and setting out the existing position of employment in the district which was in the region of 78,500 residents of working age, the third lowest proportion of working age people in the UK and 64,000 jobs in East Devon with a ratio of working age people to jobs of 0.82.  41% of East Devon residents had to travel outside the district to work with Exeter being the most popular location to commute.

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management referred to a report to the Strategic Planning Committee in September 2018 and asked Members to consider the relevance of those principles for future growth in East Devon to the key objectives detailed in the report. 

 

Principles for future growth in East Devon as discussed in September 2018 included:

·      Accommodating growth in locations that would not prejudice the future growth and operation of Exeter Airport

·      Ensure adequate employment spaces provided to meet the needs of all types of business in sustainable and accessible locations

·      Promote new and emerging high technology industries

·      Encourage greater connectivity across the district

·      Ensuring high quality broadband infrastructure is incorporated into new development and existing infrastructure

 

Members were reminded about the key objectives in the current adopted plan which included:

·      Improving average income levels

·      Diversifying the sectors within the local economy

·      Improving local job opportunities

·      Reducing the need to travel by car to secure works and jobs

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management referred to the economic development needs assessment and advised although it predated the pandemic and brexit and would need updating in due course it was still useful in demonstrating issues, such as the average wage levels and the need for more micro businesses in the district.

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management also referred to the employment land study and highlighted a number of key findings relating to the availability of sites which included:

·      The willingness of landowners to bring sites forward

·      The infrastructure costs

·      Viability of sites

 

Reference was made to paragraph 6.2 on page 132 and Members were asked to consider these key concepts in progressing the new local plan.

 

Non-Committee Members discussion included:

·      Concerns raised about access to properly connected broadband to enable and encourage more people to work from home

·      Support was shown that the population was rising in technical competence

·      The need to consider what happens to allocated employment sites when employment opportunities do not come forward

·      There is a need to encourage people to work from home to reduce carbon emissions and traffic congestion

·      Concerns raised about the inward migration of elderly retired people and the need to include something in the local plan that would limit the scale of residential development aimed at that specific age group.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Housing Policy Matters pdf icon PDF 511 KB

Minutes:

The report presented to the committee sought an early steer from Members on housing policy matters for the new local plan and provided Members with an introduction to housing need options, housing supply and policy requirement.

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management drew Members attention to section 3 of the report that detailed the responses to the issues and options consultation and outlined the three options for consideration.

 

Members’ attention was drawn to Section 6 of the report that raised a number of issues for debate and consideration.

 

Comments made by Non-Committee Members included:

·      Devon faces significant problems with insufficient truly affordable housing.

·      Growth in second homes is eroding our housing stock and according to an article in the Sidmouth Herald Sidmouth is the second home capital in East Devon.

·      Holiday lets also affects the viability of villages and small town.

 

Points raised by Committee Members during discussion included:

·      Our affordable housing need requirements should be led by our need for houses.  Can we look at the needs first and proceed on that basis rather than pandering to developers.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised that developers make their profit on delivering market housing in order to deliver 25% as affordable housing.  It may not be viable to deliver a higher proportion and so if we are led by meeting affordable housing needs then the total number of homes needed to deliver to the affordable housing need would have to be substantially higher.

·      The need for more social housing.

·      The need to make sure the infrastructure is in place first.

·      In response to paragraph 6.3 a) no  b) no - it is hard to accept the premise of this question, if we want more affordable and social housing then there should not need to be a higher housing figure. c) yes – but need to prove the jobs are there first before the houses are built d) – yes further training would be gratefully received.

·      Support for option one.

·      In response to paragraph 6.3 a) yes - it is our duty to challenge because it impacts directly on the lives of residents b) yes – developers make promises that are not always kept c) yes – prove the jobs first d) yes – it is our duty to welcome further training.

·      In two minds between option one and two and a suggestion to work into a buffer just in case sites were to stall so the council does not meet its five year land supply.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised he was only seeking Members views on eliminating option 3 of going for a lower figure than the standard method at this stage.   Further evidence would need to be produced and presented to Members to reach a sound conclusion on the other options but Members’ views were sought on the principal.

·      In response to paragraph 6.3 a) no – choose battles that we can  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

11.

Strategy for the distribution of development - initial overview pdf icon PDF 301 KB

Minutes:

The Committee considered the report which provided an initial overview of potential issues with a strategy for the distribution of development for inclusion in the emerging local plan and highlighted the responses received on the local plan issues and options consultation.

 

Points raised during discussions included:

·      Comment made that the fields between villages in the West End of East Devon were in tier one and actual villages themselves were in tier three of even lower if their broadband provision was not up to speed.

·      Concerns raised about adding broadband into the mix of what makes a village sustainable.  Do we really want to be telling villages they cannot develop because they have poor broadband?  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised that broadband speeds were simply being considered as a further criteria and it was not intended to make decisions based on broadband speed alone

·      Exmouth as a whole within the built up boundary is considered sustainable but there is a huge amount of traffic going in and out of Exmouth and there are part of Exmouth that are further away from the town centre or from a school than some villages.  We need to be more subtle about the way we treat sustainability when looking at a location of development.

·      If developments are not allowed in some villages then the villages would wither on the vine. 

·      There are a lot of villages that would like to see a little more housing, not large developments as that would change the diversity but smaller growth to help maintain the village schools.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Ben Ingham, seconded by Councillor Paul Arnott that recommendation one be amended to read:

 

That Strategic Planning Committee to note the various issues and options relating to the strategy for the distribution of development in the emerging local plan.

 

RESOLVED:

1.    That the various issues and options relating to the strategy for the distribution of development in the emerging local plan be noted.

2.    That the intention for a further report refining the strategy for the distribution of development to be presented at a future Strategic Planning Committee be noted.

12.

The emerging new local plan and the relationship with neighbourhood plans pdf icon PDF 857 KB

Minutes:

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management presented the report which sought Member endorsement of the undertaking of a detailed analysis of existing neighbourhood plans to inform the preparation of the local plan.  It also sought endorsement of the development of a communications plan for liaison with neighbourhood planning communities throughout the local plan production.

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised that neighbourhood plans carry more weight as a material planning consideration further they are progressed, although the new local plan when adopted will take precedence over any neighbourhood plan made prior to the adoption.

 

Members’ noted that further material modifications would require further consultation which would be supported by government funding and that that the emerging neighbourhood plans would be tested against conformity with the adopted local plan.  Members’ were mindful that advice would be given to parish councils.

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management summarised the feedback received from the issues and options consultation in section 3 of the report and drew Members’ attention to the practical suggestions detailed in figure 2.

 

The report also summarised discussion points from a webinar hosted by officers from the Planning Department which was well attended by 21 neighbourhood plan areas that covered both those with made and emerging plans.

 

The committee considered paragraph 4.4 of the report which detailed the key considerations.  The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management sought Members views on these key considerations going forward and also sought Members’ endorsement to the undertaking of a detailed analysis of existing neighbourhood plans.

 

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised both reports would be brought back to a future meeting for Member approval.

 

Points raised by Committee Members during discussion included:

·      Support was shown for the comprehensive report. 

·      As Clerk to two parishes that have neighbourhood plans and a member of a Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group I am heartened by the report as the support and communication by the District Council for those parishes will be critical

·      Reference was made to d) conflicts in paragraph 4.4.  It is the duty of the district council to resolve conflicts as some parishes are disenchanted with the neighbourhood process.

·      Many of the parish councils view neighbourhood plans as part of the planning process which would enable them to have a say in the outcome of development. 

·      There is a need to understand each village in terms of understanding what housing is in the village, the people that live in the village, the age concept and what type of houses those people need.

·      Suggestion that neighbourhood plans should detail what type of employment is in the village.  The neighbourhood plan should encourage employment growth.

·      Support was shown for Recommendation 3 in order to address the needs and aspirations of our communities.

·      It helps to maintain a good dialogue with the Planning Authority as it is a gruelling process to put together a neighbourhood plan that accords with the local plan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

13.

Duty to co-operate pdf icon PDF 498 KB

Minutes:

The Committee considered the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management’s report detailing the legal requirement to work with certain bodies in respect of strategic cross boundary issues and sought Members’ views on the a number of strategic matters identified in the report which included:

·      Transport

·      Water quality

·      Climate change

·      Habitat mitigation

·      Green infrastructure

 

The report to Members also considered the broad range of bodies that were subject to the duty to co-operate as detailed in paragraph 2.1 and table 3 on page 173 that highlighted the key topic areas.

 

Points raised by Committee Members during discussion included:

·      Clarification sought on whether all the bodies listed embrace the duty to co-operate.

·      Support was shown for the recommendations.

·      Reference was made to table 3 and whether climate change should be put at the top of the list as the most important issue that the council needs to address in the next few years.

·      Reference to page 18.  Leisure – proposals for sporting venues serving wider area than an East Devon need was supported.

 

RESOLVED:

1.    That the initial work on cross-boundary strategic issues be focussed around the topics set out in table 3 of this report be agreed.

2.    That the requirement to maintain and publish a statement (or statements) of common ground be noted.