Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr P Grove-Jones (Vice-Chairman), Cllr V Gay, Cllr N Pearce, Cllr J Punchard, Cllr C Stockton, Cllr J Toye.

Cllr W Fredericks was present as a substitute for Cllr P Grove-Jones, with Cllr V Holliday present as a substitute for Cllr J Punchard

None.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of a meeting of the Working Party held on Monday 16^th January 2023 (meeting adjourned and resumed on Monday 30^th January 2023)

The Minutes of the Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party meeting held Monday 16^th January (meeting adjourned and resumed Monday 30^th January 2023) were approved as a correct record.

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.

None.

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.

None.

None.

None.

National Planning Policy Framework – Consultation on proposed changes 

Contact Officer, telephone number and email:

Mark Ashwell, Planning Policy and CDL Manager, 01263 516325

Mark.ashwell@north-norfolk.gov.uk

1. The PPM introduced the Officers report and advised the background to the report and recommendation. He informed Members that the government had gone out to consultation on a series of proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), expected to be followed by a further 2 to 3 rounds of consultation in 2023 including the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill, additional consultation on the NPPF, and standard development management policies. These consultations would form a fundamental review of planning, with the expectation that Local Plans would be more streamlined, strategic, quicker to prepare, and subject to regular review roughly every 5 years or so.

The PPM highlighted the proposed changes 1 to 9 (Pages 99 to 103 of the Officers report) and invited Members questions regarding the Officers report, any of the specific changes and proposed responses.

Change 1 – Page 99 - The PPM advised that North Norfolk does not follow the standard methodology used to establish how many houses were required, and noted concerns about the 2014 household projections used in the formula. NNDC was classified in the exceptional circumstances category and used their own methodology, similar to other Local Authorities. He affirmed the UK government did not intend to remove the standard methodology, however proposed for this to be referred to as ‘an advisory starting point’ within the NPPF. It was considered that this would provide Local Authorities greater flexibility as they would not have to demonstrate that circumstances were exceptional, rather they would simply have to argue that there is good reason to depart from the standardised approach. The PPM expressed his disappointment and preference that the standard methodology be removed altogether, allowing Local Authorities the ability to establish their own targets on the basis of locally produced need. The PPM concluded, that the proposed change was a step in the right direction, albeit disappointing that the standardised methodology was to remain.

Change 2 – Page 100 – The PPM advised that although greater flexibility was proposed, it was unclear what might constitute grounds for departing from standard methodology. He noted use of language in the document, in particular references to ‘Island of elderly’ which was vague. The PPM stated unless the guidance was extremely exhaustive and cites every single example, Local Authorities would likely challenge that their particular reasons for departure weren’t listed in the guidance, which would be problematic. He reiterated his earlier comments that the standard formula should be rescinded, with determination made by individual Local Authorities who better understood local factors.

Change 3 – Page 101 – The Working Party were advised this was not applicable to North Norfolk as it pertained to uncharacteristically high density.

Change 4 – Page 101 – The PPM advised this also was not relevant to North Norfolk as there is no Green Belt within the district. He confirmed that ‘Green Belt’ was a specific designation, separate to Countryside and Green Fields, with Green Belts only existing around urban areas. However, noted the proposed changed may  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

Contact Officer, telephone number and email:

Iain Withington, Team Leader Planning Policy – (01263) 516034

Iain.withington@north-norfolk.gov.uk

Cathy Batchelar, Senior Landscape Officer – (01263 516155)

cathy.batchelar@north-norfolk.gov.uk

1. The SLO introduced the Officers report and recommendation. She advised that the Council had a statutory duty as a partner of Norfolk Coast Partnership to prepare and publish a plan for the management of the AONB, and to review that plan at intervals of no more than 5 years.

It was noted that Norfolk Coast Partnership had been undertaking a structural review. The Partnership included representatives an Officer and Member representative from Norfolk County Council, Kings Lynn and West Norfolk, Great Yarmouth Borough Council, North Norfolk District Council and Natural England.

The SLO advised this was a slight refresh of the existing management plan and the intention was that a major review of the management plan be undertaken in due course pending guidance following the Glover review.

The SLO noted the main changes, as set out in section 1.5 of the Officers report.

2. The Chairman noted North Norfolk was the third most bio-diverse area in the County and asked if there was a case to argue for an international dark skies designation. He reflected that light pollution had been a key issue for the Development Committee.

3. The SLO advised there were areas of the UK which held the international designation, and commented that there was the intention to obtain other designations within the AONB. She acknowledged this was an area already covered NNDC Local Plan Policy EN1 specifically references Dark Skies and Policy EN2 which looks at retention of nocturnal character. The AONB team were working as a priority to publish further guidance. The SLO advised she would be happy to feedback any requests from the Council to Norfolk Coast Partnership.

4. The PPM echoed the SLO comments and affirmed as a partner in the organisation, perhaps more could be done to effectively influence what it is the organisation does. The PPM reflected that when he was the Officer Representative that it was not the norm to routinely report back the work of the Partnership to the Council, which may have adversely impacted Members understanding of the Partnership and its functions. He considered the Council could be more active in directing the Partnership on what it does on the Councils behalf, including issues surrounding Dark Skies, and that this ought to feature in the next management review in the next cycle.

The PPM considered that the update presented to Members was effectively an interim review with the expectation that a more substantial review take place which would better engage with the district partners.

5. The PPTL stated that it was important not to confuse ‘Dark Skies’ designation with planning designation. Dark Skies designation applied to areas which were particularly dark and provided astrological views of skies in dedicated remote locations away from artificial lights. The Local Plan focused more on the character of the landscape, and the value features of the landscape as demonstrated through landscape studies.

6. The SLO endorsed the PPTL comments that an international dark skies designation was not a planning designation. She argued there was much to be gained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

1. The PPTL introduced the Officers presentation and outlined the current areas of work for the Planning Policy Team, Next stages for submission of the Local plan, Background Papers and Neighbourhood Plan update.

Current Areas of Work – Local Plan

The PPTL advised that the main focus and priority for Officers was the Local Plan, with Officers reviewing representations and creating a Schedule of proposed modifications for consideration through the examination. The next stage required the combining of the 5 Schedules into a single Schedule, as required for submission. Accompanying the submission would be a track changed version of the Local Plan which would consolidate the proposed additional modifications. The PPTL advised that Officers were reviewing the challenges and undertaking early high level work to pre-emptively prepare responses. Officers were also in the process of preparing the statement of common grounds, which would aid the Planning Inspector to narrow down key areas for examination.

The PPTL advised the purpose of the background papers was to bring together the evidence to justify the reasoning behind the topic area, they would also help clarify matters for the Planning Inspector. Some of the background papers were required for legal purposes to meet legal tests i.e. demonstrate compliance with the duty to co-operate. The background papers, consulted in at Regulation 18 and or 19 stages,  included(not exhaustive) ; approach to setting the housing target, distribution of growth, approach to employment, infrastructure delivery plans, green infrastructure, site selection methodology, housing construction standards, approach to renewable energy, coastal change and management, historic impact assessment, small growth village boundary review, strategic policy identification, D2C compliance statement, AGS study update, equalities statement, soundness/legal  check sheets, site assessment booklets and examination library. The PPTL advised majority of work on these background papers was in progress to bring them up to date.

The PPTL noted the submission preparation process which included the appointment of a programme officer (pending submission) whose role would be to act as the co-ordinator the between the Council and the Examiner. This would ensure that the Planning Inspector remained impartial. Further, Officers would be expected to set up an examination library; an online resource where all submission documents, evidence, supporting documents, correspondence and examination matters would be published.

Other Work

In additional to Local Plan work, Officers continued to work on Nutrient Neutrality, fulfil monitoring requirements (5 year HLS, Housing flow return, and AMR 2022/2023) which required months of dedicated Officer work, provide pre application advise, maintain brownfield register, Self-Built Register, Norfolk Strategic Framework including GIRAMS and Neighbourhood Plan Support, which has been significant time resource this year to date.

Neighbourhood Plans

The PPTL advised that it had been a very busy year so far with Neighbourhood Plans, with two plans at examination stage – Blakeney & Holt. Blakeney was in late stages of examination with work actively ongoing to implement the 14 recommendations for modification following independent review, with a further 3 incorporated that are required by Officers, all of which would be subject to referendum in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

             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.”

None

None

None