Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillor J Punchard.

None.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of a meeting of the Working Party held on 16 March 2020.

The minutes of a meeting of the Working Party held on 16 March 2020 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.

The Acting Planning Policy Manager referred to an update report that had been circulated to the Working Party prior to the meeting, covering matters that had been dealt with under Covid-19 interim arrangements.  Sites at Stalham, Sheringham and Ludham had been discussed and would be going forward for Cabinet approval for inclusion in the Local Plan.  Discussions had also taken place on the timeline and a new Local Development Scheme timeline had been produced, which would be published on the website (https://www.north-norfolk.gov.uk/tasks/planning-policy/local-development-scheme/ ).

An Inspector would shortly be appointed for the examination of the Ryburgh Neighbourhood Plan examination, which was expected to commence at the end of June/early July.

Site Selection Report B: Holt, Hoveton and Mundesley

The Acting Planning Policy Manager presented the report and site assessment booklets relating to proposed allocations for Holt, Hoveton and Mundesley.  He outlined the main issues relating to each settlement and recommended sites for inclusion in the Local Plan, ahead of Regulation 19 consultation and subsequent submission.  

Holt

The Acting Planning Policy Manager reported that in response to concerns raised by this Council, the Local Education Authority was seeking to vary its standard procedures for commissioning a new primary school at a meeting on 16 June.  A proposal was being put forward that the Norfolk County Council Schools Capital Programme specifically included a commitment to a new primary school for Holt, which if approved would show the County Council’s determination and commitment to delivering a school on site H04 and go some way to addressing delivery concerns.

Councillor D Baker, local Member, stated that he was comfortable that Holt had been identified as a Small Growth Town as there had been a large amount of growth in the town over recent years.  He considered that the proposed sites were reasonable and would not impact the town centre, but conversely they involved building further away from the town, disconnecting properties and elongating the town so that it merged with High Kelling.  There was no suitable access into H04 and although the Highway Authority did not object, it had recognised that there were issues. 

The Acting Planning Policy Manager explained that the site had undergone a rigorous assessment, had scored positive in the Sustainability Assessment and had good connectivity to the town.  Whilst the Highway Authority preferred two accesses, it considered that a suitable access could be achieved off Beresford Road provided that the layout included an internal loop road.  He referred to a recent planning application on this site, when the Highway Authority had raised no objection to the single point of access proposed in the application and an independent highway consultant appointed by the Council had considered the single access to be acceptable.   Although the planning application had attracted a great deal of feedback, there had been very little response to the Local Plan consultation.  Officers considered that the site remained one of the most achievable, deliverable and sustainable sites in Holt.  He referred the Working Party to the reasoned justification contained in the assessment booklet.

The Planning Policy Manager added that the proposed allocation allowed for a smaller number of dwellings than the planning application to enable a better layout to be achieved within the site.  The applicant did not control sufficient land to provide two accesses, and the Highway Authority could not sustain an objection on highway grounds provided there was an internal loop road.  The planning application had not been refused on highway grounds and it would be inconsistent and contrary to evidence to reintroduce it as a reason at allocation stage. The proposed policy had been amended to include a clear mechanism for the delivery of the school, to address the reason for refusal of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Acting Planning Policy Manager presented a report in respect of the Open Space Assessment and recommended modifications to Policy ENV7 within the draft Local Plan.

Councillor Ms V Gay welcomed the Study, and in particular the argument on the wellbeing value of parks and open spaces, and emphasis on biodiversity, climate change and ecological networks.  She also welcomed the reference to the health profile of North Norfolk and diabetes rates in particular.  The recent weeks under Covid-19 lockdown had highlighted the importance of open spaces.

Councillor Ms Gay highlighted errors in the study.  She requested a correction to state that the Green Flag had been re-awarded to Sadlers Wood and was no longer an aspiration.  She stated that the study stated that there was no need for allotments in North Walsham, whereas there had been a waiting list for a number of years and they were greatly in demand and much appreciated.  She considered that allotments were as important for exercise and health as a sports pitch.

Councillor Mrs P Grove-Jones supported Councillor Ms Gay’s comments.  She also pointed out some slight discrepancies relating to allotments at Sutton and availability of school buildings for community use.  She stated that the study had highlighted that youth provision was poor and youths often had to travel to facilities but transport links were a problem. 

Councillor Mrs Grove-Jones asked if the Council had teeth when it came to negotiating with developers.

The Acting Planning Policy Manager explained how the study would be used in assessing the amount and type of open space required.  It would provide evidence to defend the Council’s policy requirements and would be used when assessing viability.

The Chairman asked if there was any difference in terms of viability between a development with a freehold management company and one which did not.

The Acting Planning Policy Manager explained that the study took account of delivery of the open space provision but not its management.

It was proposed by the Chairman, seconded by Councillor Ms V Gay and

RECOMMENDED unanimously

1.      That the findings of the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study (Part 1) are accepted and the Open Space calculator used for subsequent planning applications and the proposed allocations within the Local Plan.

2.      That the revised wording of Policy ENV 7 is endorsed and that responsibility for drafting such an approach, including that of finalising the associated policy is delegated to the Planning Policy Manager.