Items
No. |
Item |
36. |
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Minutes:
Apologies for absence were received from Cllr
P Grove-Jones with Cllr L Withington present as a substitute.
|
37. |
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
Minutes:
|
38. |
MINUTES PDF 234 KB
To approve as a correct record the Minutes of
a meeting of the Working Party held on Monday 17th
October 2022.
Minutes:
- The
Chairman noted typographical and grammatical errors within the
minutes of the Working Party held Monday 17th October,
but considered the contents of the minutes broadly sound. He
suggested, rather than amending each at the meeting, that delegated
authority be granted to the Chairman to make minor changes to
spelling and grammar as required.
- Cllr V Gay commented that when referring to the design guide she
implied that it should be utilised, rather than it had always been
utilised. The Chairman stated that he would ensure this be
reflected in the minutes.
- It
was agreed that the Chairman be given delegated authority to make
minor grammatical and typographical amendments to the minutes of
the Working Party held Monday 17th October
2022.
|
39. |
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
To determine any other items of business which
the Chairman decides should be considered as a matter of urgency
pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act
1972.
Minutes:
|
40. |
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST PDF 721 KB
Members are asked at this stage to declare any
interests that they may have in any of the following items on the
agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members
requires that declarations include the nature of the interest and
whether it is a disclosable pecuniary
interest. Members are requested to refer to
the attached guidance and flowchart.
Minutes:
|
41. |
UPDATE ON MATTERS FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING (IF ANY)
Minutes:
The
PPM advised that work on the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) was
progressing that the IDP would be brought back to the Working Party
as an item when he considered the document a completed piece of
work. The PPM advised this would occur
within the next couple of months.
|
42. |
ANY OTHER BUSINESS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN AND AS PREVIOUSLY DETERMINED UNDER ITEM 4 ABOVE
Minutes:
|
43. |
Coastal Adaptation Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) PDF 142 KB
Coastal Adaptation Supplementary Planning Document
(SPD)
Summary:
|
To inform the Planning Policy
and Built Heritage Working Party of the draft Coastal Adaptation
SPD in preparation for its formal public consultation.
|
|
|
Recommendations:
|
Members of the Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working
Party recommend to Cabinet that the draft Coastal Adaptation
Supplementary Planning Document be published for formal
consultation; and
Delegated authority is given to the Planning Policy Manager in
consultation with the Portfolio Holder, to make minor modifications
and presentational or typographical amendments to the draft Coastal
Adaptation Supplementary
Planning Document that arise from other relevant Local Planning
Authority sign-off committees prior to it being published for
formal consultation.
|
Cabinet Member(s)
|
Ward(s) affected
|
All Members
|
All Wards
|
Additional documents:
Minutes:
- The
SPO introduced the Officers report and Coastal Adaptation
Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and advised that the Council
were representatives on a joint steering group established to
produce the SPD. Other representatives included officers from East
Suffolk Council, Great Yarmouth Borough Council, the Broads
Authority and Coastal Partnership East. The SPO commented that the
SPD built on the statement of common ground agreed in September
2018 with the overarching aim to provide a whole coast approach
across the various Local Authorities.
The initial
consultation was undertaken in Autumn 2020, with the steering group
subsequently meeting on a regular basis to progress the document
based on the initial consultation feedback. Other informal
stakeholder discussions including that with the Environment Agency
had further informed the contents and detail of the document. The
SPO advised that progress on the SPD was time sensitive with the
various authorities aiming to launch a public consultation in
January 2023.
- The
CTAP Manager affirmed that Climate Change would result in an
increased impact on coastal change with an acceleration of sea
level rise and an increase of storminess and rainfall; key drivers
of coastal erosion. He advised that the Shoreline Management Plan
was going through a refresh and commented that whilst the Council
would work to protect its coastline, it may not be economically or
technically viable to protect all areas. He commented that the SPD
formed a key part of the transition with a good policy setting to
enable the Council to move forward working with individuals,
communities and businesses as they adapt. He stressed the need to
work flexibly considering this an evolving situation.
- Cllr N Dixon recognised the need to work flexibly but expressed
concern that this may conflict with fixed policies which formed an
important framework for applicants. He asked the PPM how
flexibility would be demonstrated over the period of the
plan.
- The
PPM acknowledged that if a policy incorporated a great deal of
flexibility it may negate the policy itself. He stressed the 2
fundamental principles of the SPD were to 1. To manage risk, and,
2. The application of the rollback policy. He noted previous
discussions on how rollback could be incentivised, and commented
that unlike the prior policy, the new policy offered more
flexibility with regards to the floor space of replacement
dwellings. Under the new policy if a replacement dwelling was
larger, provided the development was not considered harmful, it may
be approved. He affirmed that it was for the Development Committee
to look at the proposal and to determine whether there were harmful
impacts associated with the building.
The PPM
noted historic debate about whether rollback should be retained
within its host community, and stated that the emerging policy
would be more restrictive ensuring rollback was not relocated
elsewhere in the district. He stated that the undercurrent of the
policy was to sustain places and communities and that the wrong
impression would be created if relocation was permitted elsewhere.
The PPM referenced the success of the rollback ...
view the full minutes text for item 43.
|
44. |
Local Plan Update (Verbal)
Minutes:
- The
PPM updated Members on the current position of the Local Plan and
what the next stages would be ahead of its submission. He noted
that Members were in receipt of a schedule of modifications
following the Regulation-19 (Reg-19) consultation responses. As
part of the submission process Members had the opportunity to
consider the responses made during the Reg-19 process, and were
encouraged by the PPM to do so. Any modifications agreed by Members
would form a separate schedule of modification document which would
be submitted to the Planning Inspector alongside the Local Plan. It
would be for the Inspector to decide if the proposed modifications
were acceptable or not.
He
confirmed that when brought to the Working Party at the next
meeting, issue matters would be grouped into policy areas and
subdivided into key issues. The PPM commented that the process of
aggregating responses had taken Officer time as not all responses
from the public had been received in the prescribed
format. It was envisioned that at the
December Working Party Policy Area would be considered with Site
Allocations considered at the January 2023 meeting. If supported by
the Working Party the Local Plan would progress through to Cabinet
and then to Full Council. Issues of a typographical nature would be
added to the schedule by officers, it was not asked for Members to
comment upon any grammatical or typographical errors.
The PPM
cautioned Members that if any substantial changes were proposed
that the Local Plan would not be submitted within the intended
timeframe.
- Cllr V Gay asked if the Planning Inspector would be interested
in the quality of Members’ discussion and if Minutes would be
provided to the Inspector evidencing debate and
deliberation.
- The
PPM advised the Planning Inspector would have access to Minutes,
contents of the website and the Livestream of meetings via the
Council eDemocracy YouTube page. Whilst the Inspector may be
curious about Members’ debate, they would largely focus on
the contents of the Local Plan itself, including consultation
responses and the contents of the schedule of modifications. He
stressed the importance to give justice to the Reg-19 responses at
the next couple of meetings.
The PPM
acknowledged one area of difficulty presented since the Reg-19
Consultation was the matter of Nutrient Neutrality (N.N), and noted
that the Local Plan made no reference to N.N. He contended that
viability assessments regularly changed and that a new NPPF was to
be published in the New Year with the Levelling Up and Regeneration
Bill to follow. The PPM was satisfied with the approach to submit
the Local Plan ahead of the new administration.
- The
Chairman stated that he was keen for the Local Plan to be submitted
before May 2023, and cautioned Members that there would likely be
an Extra-Ordinary Full Council Meeting required in February to
address Local Plan submission. He considered it important for the
sake of openness and transparency that the Local Plan be considered
by Full Council rather than by Cabinet alone.
- Cllr ...
view the full minutes text for item 44.
|
45. |
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
To pass the following resolution (if necessary):
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972
the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following
items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely
disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule
12A (as amended) to the Act.”
Minutes:
|
46. |
TO CONSIDER ANY MATTERS ARISING FROM CONSIDERATION OF THE PUBLIC BUSINESS OF THE AGENDA
Minutes:
- Cllr N Dixon expressed his disappointment that, at the prior
meeting, the item of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) had
been poorly received, with Members not having been supplied full
documentation prior to the meeting which was further exacerbated by
issues with technology at the meeting. He stated that he would like
sight of the IDP before its inclusion on any future Agenda, ideally
within the next 10 working days regardless of whether the IDP was
in draft form. He stressed the importance that Members have sight
of the document with the appropriate time to properly consider its
contents.
- The
PPM advised that whilst he had seen the draft IDP document, he
would like to consider and be satisfied with its contents before
releasing to Members. He advised that the IDP had been included on
the Agenda of the prior meeting for information purposes only and
commented that Members had not been asked to approve the
document.
- Cllr N Dixon stated that he was surprised that the IDP had been
included as an item on the Agenda if it was not ready for review by
Members. He considered the contents presented to Members to be
insubstantial, which had failed to enable Members the opportunity
to properly consider the contents of the IDP. Cllr N Dixon
commented that he would be reticent to be presented with a large
document for consideration and sign off without prior sight, and
reiterated his disappointment that the IDP had not been presented
to Members for the last meeting or subsequently.
- The
Chairman advised that there would be large agendas both in December
and January to address the Local Plan, irrespective of whether the
IDP was included as an Agenda Item.
- Cllr N Dixon argued that this further justified Members being
circulated the IDP before its inclusion as an Agenda Item and
called on the PPM to supply the IDP within the next 10 working
days.
- The
PPM agreed to supply the IDP within the next 10 working days. He
cautioned Members that the document was a work in progress and
would be in draft form.
|
47. |
ANY OTHER URGENT EXEMPT BUSINESS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN AND AS PREVIOUSLY DETERMINED UNDER ITEM 4 ABOVE
Minutes:
|