Agenda item

(Planning Portfolio Holder) To consider the attached report (LPC-002-2012/13).

(1)        Appendix 1, Issues & Options for the Local Plan, has been published to the website as a separate supplementary agenda as the report is 165 pages, and printed copies have been provided to the members of the Cabinet Committee and Group Leaders. If any other Member wishes to have their own printed copy then please contact Democratic Services by Wednesday 20 June 2012.

(2)        Appendix 3, the Sustainability Appraisal, will not be available until Thursday 21 June 2012 as it is yet to be received from the Consultants.

(1)        That the “Community Choices – Issues & Options” document be published for public consultation;

(2)        That the Portfolio Holder for Planning be authorised to agree any further minor amendments to the document which might be necessary prior to publication;

(3)        That the Sustainability Appraisal for the Issues & Options document prepared by Scott Wilson/URS be approved by the Portfolio Holder prior to publication as part of the consultation;

(4)        That the consultation period be commenced on Monday 30 July 2012 and run for 8 weeks until Friday 21 September 2012.; and

(5)        That the draft questions attached at Appendix 2 of the report, to guide responses to the consultation document, be agreed subject to any further comments being received by the Portfolio Holder for Planning or Officers prior to publication; and

(6)        That the Portfolio Holder for Planning be authorised to agree any further minor amendments to the draft questions prior to the commencement of the consultation period.

The Forward Planning Manager and Principal Planning Officer presented a report regarding the Issues and Options consultation for the Local Plan.

The Cabinet Committee noted that, following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in March 2012, the Council was required to produce an up-to-date Local Plan. The Community Choices consultation document covered a wide range of issues including options for potential growth targets, possible distribution patterns and locations for growth. It also identified a number of policy issues that needed to be addressed, including Green Belt, historic and natural character, transport, economic development and the Community Infrastructure Levy. The consultation period had been proposed to run between 30 July and 21 September 2012.

The Forward Planning Manager reported that chapter four was the key section of the document and potentially the most controversial. This chapter presented the options for the levels of growth that could be included in the Local Plan and the possible strategies for the distribution of this growth. The Council was also under an obligation to take account of the East of England Plan, as it had not yet been abolished, and paragraph 47 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which required the Local Plan to include the assessed needs for market and affordable housing within the District. It was emphasised that this was not a policy document and that the intention was to protect the Green Belt in the District, but it was inevitable that some Green Belt land would have to be released for development in the future.

The Forward Planning Manager stressed that the Council was required to consider all reasonable options during the preparation of the Local Plan and thus more land had been identified for possible development in the document than would actually be required under any of the possible growth options. The proposed consultation was 30 July to 21 September, which Officers acknowledged was not ideal as it encompassed the principal holiday period, but was necessary to achieve the timely preparation of the Local Plan. However, the proposed consultation period was two weeks longer than the statutory minimum of six weeks. The consultation documentation would be published on the Council’s website, with hardcopies available for inspection at selected locations around the District – including the Civic Offices. A number of methods would be utilised to encourage the involvement of residents and stakeholders, including social media, mail shots, leaflets, and Road Shows. Respondents would be urged to submit their comments via the new, online response system.

The Principal Planning Officer reported that three different housing targets had been included in the consultation, ranging from 7,700 to 11,500 new homes within the District. In addition, two different employment targets for 3,960 and 3,917 new jobs had also been included. A number of different spatial options were outlined, including the effect of growth on the edge of Harlow within the District. A proportionate distribution pattern had been investigated, i.e. the largest settlements accommodate the largest growth, but it had quickly become clear that Loughton, as the largest settlement, was the most constrained. The presence of the Epping Forest, the River Roding flood plain and strategic areas of the Green Belt within the District also precluded a proportionate distribution pattern.

The Principal Planning Officer stated that the report also detailed a number of different spatial options, including development in or around the railway stations within the District. It was also possible for respondents to suggest alternative growth targets and distribution patterns, provided that they were evidence based. It was important that every reasonable option for future development within the District was considered in an open and transparent way.

The Cabinet Committee was informed that the Sustainability Appraisal had not yet been received from the Consultants. As this was a technical document, it had been proposed that approval be given by the Portfolio Holder, prior to its publication as part of the consultation. There had also been a change to the map for Ongar, as three additional options had been identified since the publication of the agenda.

The Chairman reminded the Cabinet Committee that a number of revisions to the Local Plan budget had been agreed at the Cabinet meeting on 11 June, including a refund of monies spent in relation to the Design & Development Brief for the St Johns Road area in Epping. It was felt that there was now enough funding available for the Consultation, and the contracts had been extended for the temporary staff in Forward Planning to complete the work. The Director of Planning & Economic Development added that it was important to retain the current experienced staff and was confident that the section was now properly resourced to produce the Local Plan. Work on the Community Infrastructure Levy had been included in the revised budget, which would provide funding for the necessary infrastructure changes for the future development.

Other members present at the meeting highlighted some issues for further consideration by the Cabinet Committee, including the need for agriculture land in future, the Dutch method of zoning growth away from existing large settlements, the need to provide further school places due to the tremendous growth in young children, and the fact that the Central Line was already at full capacity. The Principal Planning Officer responded that Officers were aware of these issues but strategic Green Belt land had been identified to prevent the existing settlements from coalescing, and the Council was not proposing the use of high quality agricultural land for development. There was a separate policy pertaining to large glasshouse developments in the District, and it was also intended for the current urban open spaces to remain as urban open spaces. The Council was looking to make an objective assessment of the required future growth in the District, which was not influenced by any outside bodies or any financial incentive for development.

The average quoted within the consultation of 30 homes per hectare was queried, as the Council could have used an average of 50 homes per hectare for example. Officers acknowledged that the density of development was a key question for the consultation; if more flats were built then less land would be used. An average of 30 homes per hectare was the standard used but the density could be higher or lower. The Chairman added that, although the current trend was for smaller units, a density of 30 homes per hectare was felt to be more appropriate, but agreed that the actual density of development could be higher or lower. It was requested, and agreed by Officers, that an extra column be added to table 4.2 – Housing Target Options on page 79 of the consultation for figures relating to a density of 50 homes per hectare.

It was highlighted that some of the sites identified were currently car parks, including those at London Underground stations. Officers explained that Transport for London had suggested their car park sites should be included as options, but a loss of car parking spaces within the District would be detrimental. The Cabinet Committee was also reminded that sites for affordable housing, and Gypsy and Traveller pitches had to be included within the consultation. The Council risked its Local Plan being found unsound if it did not include a Gypsy and Traveller policy.

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Cabinet Committee that a number of the proposed draft consultation questions required re-wording and additional options added as possible answers. Any suggestions from Members would be welcomed in the period before the draft Questions were published. The Members were also reminded that reasons had to be given for rejecting any of the identified options from the final version of the Local Plan. The Chairman stated that it was planned for a Road Show to visit as many parishes as possible during September, before the consultation closed, and that the Council had to follow the guidelines laid down by the Government in producing their Local Plan.

Decision:

(1)        That the “Community Choices – Issues & Options” document be published for public consultation;

(2)        That the Portfolio Holder for Planning be authorised to agree any further minor amendments to the document which might be necessary prior to publication;

(3)        That the Sustainability Appraisal for the Issues & Options document prepared by Scott Wilson/URS be approved by the Portfolio Holder prior to publication as part of the consultation;

(4)        That the consultation period be commenced on Monday 30 July 2012 and run for 8 weeks until Friday 21 September 2012.; and

(5)        That the draft questions attached at Appendix 2 of the report, to guide responses to the consultation document, be agreed subject to any further comments being received by the Portfolio Holder for Planning or Officers prior to publication; and

(6)        That the Portfolio Holder for Planning be authorised to agree any further minor amendments to the draft questions prior to the commencement of the consultation period.

Reasons for Decision:

To meet the timetable previously agreed by Members to prepare a new Local Plan for the District as quickly as possible.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

To agree an amended ‘Community Choices’ document for public consultation.

To not agree the ‘Community Choices’ document for public consultation.

To not delegate authority to the Portfolio Holder to approve the Sustainability Appraisal for publication.

To stipulate an alternative period of public consultation.

To amend or not agree the draft consultation questions for publication.