Agenda item

Appendix 3 – Hyperlinks to the identified potential green wedge areas.

Beer to Seaton

Budleigh Salterton to Knowle

Colyford to Colyton

Colyford to Seaton

East of Exeter and South of the A30

Exmouth to Lympstone

Land between the Exe Estuary and the A376

Ottery St Mary to West Hill

South of Poltimore

Rockbeare to Cranbrook

Sidbury to Sidmouth

Whimple to Cranbrook

The Committee considered the Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management’s report which sought endorsement of the proposed methodology for defining Green Wedges that Members agreed in principle at the meeting on 3 October 2023.

A summary of the proposed changes, the methodology and resulting full assessment were detailed in the appended appendices where in most cases it was proposed to reduce the size of the current Green Wedges.  The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised that although many of the Green Wedges had been carried over from previous Local Plans this cannot be relied upon in the new Local Plan as the constraints of the district will make it increasingly difficult to find suitable sites for development and there is significant risk of challenge at examination if they are carried over again.  It is important to have clear robust evidence that will identify areas designated as Green Wedges and the need to show that land is not being protected simply for the sake of it and to show there is a real purpose for the Green Wedges.

Strategy 8 in the adopted Local Plan states ‘that within a Green Wedge development will not be permitted if it would add to existing sporadic or isolated development or change the individual identity of a settlement or could lead to or encourage coalescence’.  This wording leads to assessments being taken on a case by case basis to determine whether the Green Wedge would be harmed.  However, the proposed wording for the Green Wedge policy in the new Local Plan would take away this uncertainty and would prevent development within the Green Wedges unless there was an essential need that could not be located elsewhere.

The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it was important to remember that areas where Green Wedges were being proposed to be removed would still be protected as open countryside and in some cases other protections would apply such as Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (now National Landscapes) and flood zones.  It was also advised that additional benefits of designation such as for recreational purposes, landscape protection and habitat protection purposes would be best dealt with by other policies and included in the new Local Plan and should not be reasons for designating as a Green Wedge.  These could be dealt with by a Green Infrastructure Strategy or a Local Nature Recovery Plan.

Points raised by Members during discussion included:

·       Green Wedges are needed to prevent urban spawl by keeping land permanently open.

·       The concerns raised by Members at the Strategic Planning Committee meeting on 3 October 2023 have not been implemented in this report.

·       There is no mention of the assessment of Green Wedges already in neighbourhood plans.  Ottery St Mary Neighbourhood Plan specifically states their Green Wedge which could not be removed.

·       It was suggested that the report did not provide Members with sufficient information to truly make an informed decision.

·       The maps and images are incorrect and arrows are facing the wrong way.

·       The methodology does not take into account the loss of character and essence of a place.

·       Support was expressed that the green spaces of special interest would still be protected.

·       It was questioned why Green Wedges were proposed to be removed in flood areas.

·       It was reported there would be a net loss of 75.7% of our current designated Green Wedges with only one existing Green Wedge remaining the same.  Whimple would see a 47% net loss, Budleigh Salterton 70%, Exmouth and Lympstone 84% and West Hill and Ottery St Mary 84%, Clyst St Mary at 99% and the worst affected would be Poltimore which loses its protection entirely.

·       Reference was made to the minutes of the meeting held on 3 October 2023 where Members had raised concerns about the evidence criteria that focused heavily on the visual impact on landscapes when in reality the impact would need to focus on more than what can be seen.  There is no wording at all in the current report that reflects these comments.

Councillor Todd Olive advised that as the existing Green Wedges had been looked at by external experts including the Planning Inspectorate on three separate occasions including on adoption of the 1995 – 2011 Local Plan and at the adoption of the current Local Plan 2013 – 2031 there is no reason to cut it to pieces and proposed the following motions which were seconded by Councillor Dan Ledger as he believed the methodology was flawed and so much more was needed to protect communities from coalescence. 

1.          That Strategic Planning Committee cannot agree that the draft Green Wedges as presented are drawn in accordance with the intent of the Committee or with the spirit of the proposed policy.

2.          That the Assistant Director for Planning Strategy and Development Management, in review of the proposed boundaries in light of he issues raised by Committee and bring a revised proposal with relevant evidence back to Committee as soon as possible for consideration prior to Regulation 18 consultation.

3.          That the Assistant Director for Planning Strategy and Development work with the Portfolio Holders for Strategic Planning and Coast, Country and Environment, as well as relevant Assistant Directors,to scope the potential approach to a new Countryside and Green Infrastructure Strategy and Supplementary Planning Document and bring a proposal back to Strategic Planning Committee at the appropriate time.

Further points raised included:

·       The assessments have not been completed in an efficient and robust way and they clearly have inconsistencies.

·       There is a need for an electronic mapping system.

·       It was suggested that the Committee had been ambushed with the changes to the Green Wedges and that they are important to protecting our countryside.

·       The methodology does not address the aspirations of residents and its imperative that the Green Wedges are kept.

·       Support was expressed for the motion made by Councillor Olive as it reflected Members views.

·       Support was expressed for a workshop to focus on the wording of the Green Wedge Policy and an invite should be sent to all Members.

·       Section 144 of the NPPF suggests that this council qualifies for Green Belts.  There is a need to encompass Green Belts in larger developments.

In response to all the points raised the Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it was not officers’ intentions to blindside Members and suggested that perhaps Members misunderstood the likely outcome of the methodology which was agreed by Members.  He acknowledged that the report needed tidying up and reformatting but thought Members would prefer to input into the draft work as soon as possible and that it was important they did in order to keep to the timetable.  He advised that officers could look at the methodology again but they would need a clear steer from Members highlighting exactly where it was incorrect.  The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management was happy for Members to attend a workshop session which could include Planning Officers to go through individual areas.

In light of the comments received Councillor Todd Olive proposed the following revised motions which was seconded by Councillor Dan Ledger.

1.          That Strategic Planning Committee cannot agree that the draft Green Wedges as presented are drawn in accordance with the intent of the Committee or with the spirit of the proposed policy.

2.          That the Assistant Director for Planning Strategy and Development Management in consultant with the Chair and Vice Chair of Strategic Planning Committee, urgently review the methodology, proposed policy wording and proposed boundaries in light of the issues raised by Committee.  With particular regard to accounting for non-visual, intrinsic settlement separation and with input from Ward Members and bring a revised proposal with relevant evidence to a workshop with all Committee Members invited, with conclusions and recommendations brought back to Committee as soon as possible for consideration prior to Regulation 18 consultation.

3.          That the Assistant Director for Planning Strategy and Development Management work with the Portfolio Holders for Strategic Planning and Coast, Country and Environment, as well as relevant Assistant Directors, to scope the potential approach to a new Countryside & Green Infrastructure and Supplementary Planning Document and bring a proposal back to Strategic Planning Committee at the appropriate time.

4.          That a report be brought to Committee as soon as possible setting out the options of exploring a Green Belt designation in the West End of the District.

The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management sought clarification from Members about what they wanted to achieve from the workshop.  Members advised the workshop should be to consider the methodology and that this should be arranged as soon as possible.  The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised the workshop would need to be before the next Strategic Planning Committee meeting on 5 March 2024.

RESOLVED:

1.          That Strategic Planning Committee cannot agree that the draft Green Wedges as presented are drawn in accordance with the intent of the Committee or with the spirit of the proposed policy.

2.          That the Assistant Director for Planning Strategy and Development Management in consultant with the Chair and Vice Chair of Strategic Planning Committee, urgently review the methodology, proposed policy wording and proposed boundaries in light of the issues raised by Committee.  With particular regard to accounting for non-visual, intrinsic settlement separation and with input from Ward Members and bring a revised proposal with relevant evidence to a workshop with all Committee Members invited, with conclusions and recommendations brought back to Committee as soon as possible for consideration prior to Regulation 18 consultation.

3.          That the Assistant Director for Planning Strategy and Development Management work with the Portfolio Holders for Strategic Planning and Coast, Country and Environment, as well as relevant Assistant Directors, to scope the potential approach to a new Countryside & Green Infrastructure and Supplementary Planning Document and bring a proposal back to Strategic Planning Committee at the appropriate time.

4.          That a report be brought to Committee as soon as possible setting out the options of exploring a Green Belt designation in the West End of the District.

Councillors Collins, Fitzgerald, Hartnell and Levine left the meeting.