Agenda item

The Committee considered a report from the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management that updated Members on the proposed timetable for the production of the local plan to bring forward site assessment work for the six main town’s sites to Committee on 9 August, followed by the smaller towns and villages in tiers 3 and 4 on 6 September 2022, with the remainder of the tiers alongside the approval for public consultation of the Local Plan on 4 October 2022.   He advised that taking this approach would avoid a heavy workload for Members and would see the work spread over a number of meetings rather than a single one.

He referred to Section 3 of the report that detailed key aspects from the assessment of development sites and how sites would be assessed.  He also drew Members’ attention to a number of challenges raised from the revised timetable including the workload of Committee Members over the coming months and whether to fit in an opportunity for further presentations from site promoters and developers that Committee agreed on 3 May 2022.

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management sought endorsement of the proposed timetable and asked Members’ to consider the following questions detailed in Section 6:

a)    Does Committee want to extend the invitation to make presentations to all agents and land owners as assessed by officers and in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of Strategic Planning Committee that are promoting land for development at the towns?

b)    Do Committee wish to hear presentations at the same Committee meeting at which officer site assessments are heard?

c)    Are Committee happy to have town based presentations at extra Committee meetings in August?

d)    Would Committee wish to have a series of meetings where they consider officer assessment on one or two towns only and then agents/landowners presentation for sites at those towns at the same meeting?

Members’ comments included:

·         Lympstone residents did not favour any further development;

·         Woodbury residents did accept the need to contribute to development but recognised a balance between development and protecting the countryside;

·         Reference was made to the favoured approach in Section 4 and the need to allow adequate time to go through each town in detail  to ensure the public were aware that detailed consideration had been given;

·         Support expressed for the landowners/agents to present their sites as this would help understand what is being proposed which would allow Members to give guidance to officers;

·         Clarification was sought on potential dates in August/September especially as this was a difficult time for Members going on holiday.  The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised that some of the sites could be presented at the meeting on 9 August which Members should already have diarised and then a number of further meetings could be set up in September.

·         The developer presentations are not fundamental to getting our Local Plan ready to go out to consultation especially as the timetable is tight already;

·         Concern was raised about not having a specific policy to tackle the issue of disability and accessibility insides homes and the design of homes to enable wheelchairs to move around.  In response Members were reminded about the  first draft of the Local Plan where discussions included policies to address the issues around care and disabled access in new homes which officers had taken on board and would be brought to Committee on 4 October 2022;

·         Concern was raised about effluent infrastructure in and around the edge of Exeter and the Culm Valley and the implications of higher water flows and run offs created by the volume of concrete.  In response Members were reminded about a previous report that advised about commissioned consultants that are undertaking a water cycle study to holistically look at water infrastructure and its impacts in the district. 

·         Our priority is getting our Local Plan out to consultation and there is a danger of not keeping to timescale especially as there will be purdah next year;

·         A Committee Member responded to the questions raised in Section 6:

(a)  Does Committee want to extend the invitation to make presentations to all agents and landowners?

Yes but would only like to see presentations on large scale development and infrastructure of 100 dwellings or more.

(b)  Do Committee wish to hear presentations at the same Committee meeting at which officer site assessments are heard?

Preference expressed for a separate meeting.

(c)  Are Committee happy to have town based presentations at extra Committee meetings in August?

Preference was expressed for an additional meeting at the end of July or September.

(d)  Would Committee wish to have a series of meetings where they consider officer assessment on one or two towns only and then agents/landowners presentations for sites at those towns at the same meeting? 

Whichever is easier?

·         Some Members felt that 5 minutes presentations would be sufficient time;

·         Support was expressed for a full consultation with the public but concern was expressed about the need to keep on track with the timetable as falling behind could jeopardise the Council’s five year land supply;

·         It was commented that no further development from Exmouth to Clyst St Mary should commence until sufficient sewerage water infrastructure was in place to reduce the pressure of overcapacity;

·         It was questioned whether there should be a scoring review on those that developers thought the scoring was incorrect;

·         Support was expressed to see the site assessments before the presentations as this would speed up the process considerably as this would filter out the non-starters and it would also help Members understand what the developers are trying to do.  It was advised that if Members did want to see the officer site assessments ahead of the presentations they could be published in an agenda with an indication of whether they are ‘acceptable’, ‘unacceptable’ or a ‘maybe’;

·         There was a need to consider the smaller settlements and what number of dwellings would be acceptable;

·         Not in favour of August meetings;

·         A comment was made about the need to consider the officers when considering August meetings and to bear in mind this may add considerable pressure to some officers especially if they have young children or children of school age;

·         It was hoped that with discipline allocations could be discussed in one meeting;

·         It was commented that the last presentations were useful as it helped to understand about developers wanted their sites to be developed;

·         It was suggested to look at using a percentage of the local housing stock to determine the number of houses for new development.  For example a town of 5,000 houses would be 100 new dwellings;

·         It was suggested to update the live map with the sites that had been eliminated;

·         For transparency it was suggested that Members should have sight of the documentation for the sites that had been eliminated.

The Chair proposed the suggestion made from the Planning Barrister to determine the questions as a series of straw polls.

a)    Does Committee want to extend the invitation to make presentations to all agents and landowners as assessed by officers in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair?

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised in view of Members comments of only wanting to hear presentations from sites that officers had determined as ‘acceptable’, or a ‘maybe’, as well as limiting presentations in the towns to sites of 10 dwellings or more, he was fairly confident that the number of presentations would be manageable.  He further advised if further reduction was required delegated powers could be given to the Chair and Vice Chair to consider further.

Strategic Planning Committee Members raised no concerns.

b)    Do Committee wish to hear presentations at the same Committee meeting at which officer site assessments are heard?

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it was his understanding that Members wished to hear presentations at the same time as officers site assessments which would be published in the agenda.

Strategic Planning Committee Members raised no concerns

c)    Are Committee happy to have town based presentations at extra Committee meetings in August?

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it was his understanding that Members were happy to go ahead with the scheduled Committee meeting on 9 August 2022 and try to fit as much in as possible and if additional meetings were required to look at dates in September.

Strategic Planning Committee Members raised no concerns.

d)    Would Committee wish to have a series of meetings where they consider officer assessments on one or two towns only and then agents/landowners presentation for sites at those towns at the same meeting?

The Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it was his understanding that Members wished to have the officer site assessments and the presentations alongside each other.

Strategic Planning Committee Members raised no concerns.

Strategic Planning Committee Members noted the contents of the report.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.    Endorse the proposed timetable for bringing officer assessments of potential development sites to Committee as set out in Section 4 of the report.

2.      Endorse (a) Hearing presentations from developers and site promoters in relation to proposed allocations and ‘maybe’ allocations and only sites of 10 dwellings or more in towns and where outside this sites will be assessed by officers in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair; (b) Hearing presentations at the same committee meeting with officer site assessments; (c) The town based presentations to go ahead at the scheduled August Committee and any extra committee meeting are to be held in September; (d) To have a series of meetings to consider officer site assessments on one or two towns only and the agents and developers presentations for sites at all those town at the same meetings.

DECISION:

The recommendations were approved by a Senior Officer.  The Senior Officer Decision Notice is listed under Additional Documents.