Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors J Punchard and Dr C Stockton.  One substitute Member was in attendance as shown above.

None.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of a meeting of the Working Party held on 14 December 2020.

The Minutes of a meeting of the Working Party held on 14 December 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.

Councillor P Fisher stated that he was the Ward Member for Wells (Minute 71).

None.

The Planning Policy Manager presented a report that recommended the inclusion in the Local Plan of revised settlement boundaries around each of the Small Growth Villages.

The Chairman requested that the settlement boundary identified in the Corpusty & Saxthorpe Neighbourhood Plan be used as the Local Plan settlement boundary for Corpusty.  He requested clarification as to how the Local Plan would be consulted upon and the approximate timescale.

The Planning Policy Manager explained that development boundaries that had been identified in existing or emerging Neighbourhood Plans would generally be used as a policy tool.  He explained that the Local Plan was currently a working draft and would be revised prior to consultation.  He stated that plans for Corpusty would be included, and a clear explanation given of the status of Neighbourhood Plans and how boundaries were defined in them.

With regard to the consultation process, it was expected that the review of the remaining policies would be completed by the middle of the year, with a working target of July to commence consultation.  However, there was a great deal of work required to meet that target.  The development boundaries would be published as a separate background paper and referred to in the Local Plan document and publicity material.  A number of background papers would be published to provide the reasoned justification and supporting evidence for the key policy approaches. 

Councillor Mrs A Fitch-Tillett commented on the extended boundary for Overstrand around the garden centre.  She considered that the land should be used for employment, and asked why the land immediately to the east of the garden centre had not been included within the boundary.

The Planning Policy Manager explained that the Planning Policy Team had followed a methodology in drawing up the settlement boundaries.  The garden centre was part of the built up fabric of the village and its inclusion on those terms was reasonable.  If built up areas such as garden centres were excluded, it would possibly mean excluding other facilities that were part of the structure of the village, which would be a different approach to the one that had been taken.  He considered that it would be best to take a view based on the responses to the Regulation 19 consultation.  There would be an opportunity to make modifications to the Plan if necessary between the Reg. 19 consultation and submission for examination and to request that the Inspector considers those modifications.

Councillor N Dixon requested clarification of the existing and proposed boundaries for Badersfield as he could not see any difference between them.

The Planning Policy Manager explained that there were some settlements where there had been little or no change that would justify moving the boundaries, and therefore the existing boundary had been used.  He explained that boundary lines were not as critical as they had been in the past as the policies would allow more flexibility to develop outside the boundary where proposals were adjacent or closely related to the settlement.

Councillor Dixon considered that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

The Planning Policy Manager presented a report in respect of additional open land designations at Wells-next-the-Sea.

The Chairman stated that the site photographs at page 93 and 94 of the report should be numbered AGS/WEL22.

The Planning Policy Manager referred to representations that had been submitted by Mr Peter Terrington, which had been circulated to the Working Party, in support of the designation of the three areas of land that had been identified in the report.  Whilst Mr Terrington had acknowledged that two of the sites did not qualify for designating as Open Land Areas, he had requested that other controlling mechanisms, such as Article 4 Directions, be applied to those sites.  The Planning Policy Manager explained that Article 4 Directions were used to limit specific types of development that would otherwise be permitted and could be applied at any time.  He advised the Working Party that it was not appropriate to consider them in relation to Local Plan preparation.  He offered to prepare a separate report for the Working Party with regard to Article 4 Directions if required.  The development potential of the two sites in question was already limited as they were subject to other policy constraints, being within the AONB, Conservation Area and high flood risk area.  He stated that he would write to Mr Terrington following the meeting.

Councillor P Fisher, the local Member, reported that the Town Clerk had indicated support for the recommendation to designate the site opposite the sailing club and that there were no issues with the other sites that were not recommended.

At the request of the Chairman, the Planning Policy Manager expanded further on the background to Article 4 Directions.

Councillor Mrs P Grove-Jones asked if restrictive covenants were a limiting factor.

The Planning Policy Manager explained that restrictive covenants were separate legal controls that were nothing to do with the Local Planning Authority and could only be enforced by the person that had imposed them.  Often there was an overlap with planning conditions, which were enforceable by the Local Planning Authority.

The Planning Policy Manager presented the recommendation as set out in the report.  He suggested that a training event for all Members on the broader issue of planning controls, to include Article 4 Directions, might be appropriate.  The Working Party supported this suggestion.

It was proposed by Councillor A Brown, seconded by Councillor P Fisher and

RECOMMENDED unanimously

That Cabinet includes the additional Open Land Area Designation for site WEL22 (Wells East Quay) in the Local Plan.