Cabinet Member for Planning
Minutes:
22.1 Councillor Humphreys, Chairman of the Council invited Councillor Burn, Cabinet Member for Planning to introduce Paper MC/20/8.
22.2 Councillor Burn addressed some of the key points in the report including the background stages of the Joint Local Plan’s production, the extensive evidence base of the plan, the recommended options, and the principles provided by the plan.
22.3 Councillor Burn went on to explain the amendments required to the Statement of Community Involvement due to the ongoing situation with Covid-19.
22.4 Councillor Burn expressed thanks to the Chief Executive, the Assistant Director for Sustainable Communities, Tom Barker and his teams, especially the Strategic Planning team. He also thanked Phil Isbell, Chief Planning Officer and the Planning Team for their support. Special thanks were given to the Corporate Manager for Strategic Planning, along with the Joint Local Plan Members Working Group.
22.5 Councillor Burn MOVED recommendations 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 in the report, which was SECONDED by Councillor Guthrie.
22.6 In response to Councillor Otton’s question regarding the Neighbourhood Plans, which were still waiting to be sent out to referendum and those which were in the process of being developed, the Corporate Manager for Strategic Planning explained that Neighbourhood Plans would continue to be supported and any alternative views in relations to the Joint Local Plan (JLP) could be put forward for consideration.
22.7 Councillor Fleming asked for reassurance for that the Council’s commitment to local and National environmental and biodiversity policies was taken into account in the JLP and that these policies and commitment were fed into the planning decision taken by the Council.
22.8 Councillor Burn reassured Members that the JLP had been developed around the Councils’ environment ambitions and that the main issues of the plan were the provisions to mitigate carbon neutral and environment ambitions.
22.9 Councillor Mansel asked if consideration had been made for an extension of the minimum consultation period due to the Christmas period and the Covid-19 Pandemic.
22.10 The Assistant Director – Sustainable Communities explained that any extension of the consultation would be during the Christmas period. Consultation had been undertaken in the previous stages of the JLP in 2017 and 2019. The current draft JLP did not contain too many changes and that this consultation was for residents to comment.
22.11 In response to Members’ questions, Councillor Burn said that careful consideration of the distribution and allocation of developments in the area had included not only the Ipswich fringe but also towns, villages and hamlets.
22.12 The Corporate Manager – Sustainable Housing clarified that representation would be online and that information was available on the Council’s website.
22.13 Further responses to questions included how the JLP sought to meet the requirements for biodiversity and net gain, the relationship between site allocations for Neighbourhood Plans and the JLP and the weight each carried at Planning Committees, the dialogue between the JLP working group and parish councils and neighbourhood planning teams, the local policies included in the JLP which maximised the contribution to wellbeing in communities and the energy bio diversities document included in the plan.
22.14 Councillor Burn outlined the timeline for supplement planning documents, which would begin in a few months after the completion of the consultation.
22.15 Members debated the issues and Councillor Morley felt that this was a comprehensive plan, which replaced previous plans including the Core Strategy and provided clarity for communities. The JLP was underpinned by evidence and she felt it supported heritage, as well as biodiversity, carbon reduction it also developed economic support in the District.
22.16 Councillor Stringer felt that the plan provided certainty for developers and that it would benefit the Five-year Housing Land Supply. Although he thought the JLP failed in some areas in the attempts to be sustainable, he would be supporting the plan.
22.17 Members continued the debate including:
· That hamlets and clusters were included as small-scale developments.
· That the plan would bring a democratic balance to planning applications.
· That the JLP considered appropriate developments and responded to local needs.
· That the plan was unfair to some villages, such as Elmswell and Thurston.
· That the infrastructure was not well considered and was flawed for the distribution of developments along the A14 and risked losing the sense of community.
· That the policies included in the plan for achieving carbon reduction and sustainable development would take too long to reach the Councils target for carbon zero.
· That some compromises had to be made and that the document did not contain complete deliverable solutions.
· That sustainable economic growth, tourism and employment would be supported by the JLP.
· That residents had been consulted throughout the long journey of the JLP and that the allocation of sites was not an easy task.
· That the JLP would provide a planning framework.
· That neighbourhood plan teams might feel that their work had been futile, if the JLP was approved.
· That the balance and mix of houses would support healthy communities and individual living.
· That the JLP would benefit the Council when dealing with planning applications and carried weight at Planning Committees.
22.18 Throughout Members praised the good debate and thanks were expressed to those involved in the process of bringing the JLP forward to Council.
22.19 Councillor Burn summed up the debate and thanked Members for their contributions. He felt that regardless of which side of the Chamber Members represented, there was generally a pragmatic feeling that the JLP should be supported, but he accepted the reluctance some Members displayed. He thought that the JLP would provide a period of stability, but it was important to review the JLP once the plan was in place.
22.20 On behalf of all Members the Chairman thanked all those involved in the development of the JLP for their diligence, passion, tenacity and at times compromise in developing the papers before them, specifically Councillor Burn and the cross-party Member Working Group, consisting of Councillors Guthrie, Stringer and Field. He also thanked Tom Barker, Assistant Director - Sustainable Communities, Robert Hobbs, Corporate Manager – Strategic Planning, and the whole team.
22.21 Recommendations 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 were put to Members for voting.
By 27 votes for, 3 votes against and 2 abstentions
It was RESOLVED:
1.1 That the Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan Pre-Submission (Regulation 19) Document (November 2020) (Appendix A) be approved for publication under Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning Act (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 (as amended).
1.2 That delegated authority be given to the Assistant Director for Sustainable Communities, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning, to submit the JointLocal PlanPre-Submission (Regulation19) Documentto theSecretary ofState for an independent Examination and for modification and procedural processes necessary for theExamination.
1.3 That the addendum to the Statement of Community Involvement (November 2020) (Appendix E) beapproved.
Supporting documents: