Agenda item

The Chairman introduced this item. He thanked officers for their hard work, they had faced significant challenges due to Covid, yet they had continued to deliver. There had been some decisions taken as to what should be prioritised and there were some exciting projects coming forwards that would be delivered by May 2023.

The Chairman invited members to speak:

Cllr N Dixon referred to the theme of business growth and page 86, section 3.3 which stated the objective of publishing an Economic Growth Strategy. He commented that this should have been done much earlier. He went onto say that he was concerned that the Local Plan was now in its closing stages and he was struggling to understand how the Council could have a new Local Plan which did not include a current strategy for economic growth as it was a key strand of the local plan. He said that for many years he had been raising the importance of infrastructure sitting alongside residential development. He referred to page 94 and said that he was concerned that there were not sufficient suitable locations for economic growth, or the use of mixed site allocations in the draft local plan, or that the Council had thought through the infrastructure that would go alongside this. He said that the Council had considerable ground to make up on economic growth and he did not see how this could be achieved on the back of a strategy that was several years out of date. The new Local Plan was looking ahead for the next 15 years and the Economic Growth Strategy was one of the key planks, in the same way that the Housing Strategy was. The Chairman agreed that there was considerable ground to make up and the impact of Covid had meant that the Council had to respond quickly to the needs of businesses and the focus on strategic matters had slipped. He confirmed that it would be delivered, adding that the Local Plan had been delayed due to the impact of nutrient neutrality. He concluded by referring Cllr Dixon to the timescales provided in the Delivery Plan and said that he was confident that the Economic Growth Strategy would come to Cabinet in December, as stated.

Cllr Dixon said that he understood the impact of Covid and the effect on timescales. His concern was that the Local Plan and the Economic Growth Strategy were not aligned. The latter should have been in place to inform the Local Plan and growth of the economy and implications for infrastructure. He said that he was struggling to understand how a strategy approved in December, could inform the Local Plan that was almost ready for submission.

Cllr J Toye agreed that the Local Plan and the Economic Growth Strategy should be joined up, however, in the past there had been issues with other providers and partners not delivering effectively – for infrastructure, power water etc. So, although he supported better connectivity, it must be acknowledged that there were external factors that could affect this. He concluded by seeking assurance that the Economic Growth Strategy would be brought forward before the Local Plan was submitted.

Cllr A Brown, Portfolio Holder for Planning, said that there were measure within the Local Plan for the allocation of economically productive land. He added that the District had very little brownfield land available, yet this was a Government priority. The intention was to take the Local Plan to the February meeting of Cabinet, to agree submission. There were two more meetings of the Planning, Policy & Built Heritage Working Party before then, so there further opportunities for input and comment. He was happy that it was compliant and sound. He agreed that it would be nice to marry up economic policy with the Local Plan but the demands on the Council to provide allocated sites meant that it needed to be in place as soon as possible.

Cllr V Gay said that she had been through the local plan process twice and she said that although there may not be an economic growth strategy in place, it should not be assumed that the Local Plan was not founded in economic research.

The Chairman thanked everyone for their comments and said that work would continue on all of the Council’s key projects and workstreams.

Cllr N Dixon referred to page 86, section 3.3, which mentioned the High Street Task Force in Stalham. He asked for more information on this as it was not a project that he was aware of. The Chairman replied that the Council secured funding for this scheme. It was currently in the early stages and work was under way to engage with the local community and businesses about what they would like to see happen. The Chief Executive added that the High Street Task Force was a Government sponsored organisation which had worked with a number of local authorities in terms of the Future High Street funds and Town Deal proposals. In March 2022, they identified a longer list of authorities with whom they would like to work in the next 24 months and North Norfolk was in the second tranche for delivery in quarter one of 2023. The Council was asked to nominate a town and Stalham was put forward. As yet no update had been provided regarding when it would be progressed. Cllr Dixon replied that this was good news but he had not seen the initiative referenced anywhere else at all. The Chairman said that it had been discussed informally with Cllr Dixon and that it had been on the cards for some time. Cllr Dixon commented that it was now a firm proposal and that it should be shared in the public domain now to help the town prepare for the scheme and garner support.

Cllr V Gay commented that it had never been her impression that the Council was overstaffed, yet in recent years many officers had stepped up to respond to Covid, the Ukraine crisis and now the challenges posed by the cost of living crisis. She said that she wanted to express her thanks to all the staff for their hard work.

It was proposed by Cllr T Adams, seconded by Cllr W Fredericks and

RESOLVED

To review and comment on the progress made against the original and revised Delivery Plan objectives and agree those objectives where they would wish focus to be directed over the period to May 2023.

Reason for the decision:

To reflect the changed circumstances in which the Council has operated over the period since March 2020 in seeking to balance its Corporate Plan priorities against unforeseen developments such as COVID and the war in Ukraine.