Agenda item

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW

(Papers relied on to write the report, which do not contain exempt information and which are not published elsewhere)

The Chairman invited the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Cllr A Brown, to introduce this item.

Cllr Brown began by thanking the Planning Policy team for their hard work over the last 5 to 6 years to bring the Local Plan in its final draft format to Members for consideration. He said, that as Chairman of the Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party, he would also like to thank Members from across the Groups for their help and support throughout the process.

He said that the final draft of the Local Plan provided a blue print for development over the years 2018 to 2036. It included almost 80 policies to help the Council determine future planning applications. It identified sites for development to provide homes for local people, creation of jobs and infrastructure as well as looking after the built and natural environments. In particular, the Plan made provision for managing and adapting to climate change.

Cllr Brown then highlighted the key areas of focus for the Plan;

Delivering sufficient homes at the right time and in the right places, strengthening the local economy, protecting the natural and built heritage and contributing towards health and wellbeing.

He explained that 12,000 homes needed to be delivered during the period of the plan. The aim was to make these as attractive as possible and the plan identified a number of new development sites. To attempt to limit the impact of climate change, a comprehensive range of policies were included to mitigate risk, add resilience and reduce the carbon impacts of new development.

He said that a key challenge was to enable the required growth whilst also conserving and enhancing the landscape and natural environment of the District. The vast majority of development proposed in the Plan was to be located in the larger towns so that residents could access a broad range of facilities and services without the need to travel and so that the impact of developments on open countryside could be minimised. Smaller amounts of development were proposed in a number of selected villages which had either small site allocations or were subject to a policy which allowed for a 6% growth in housing over the Plan period.

Cllr Brown explained that the preparation of a new Local Plan was not the mechanism for review of environmental designations such as the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and conservation areas, however, policies in the Plan ensured that the defining characteristics or special qualities of specific designations were taken into account during the planning application process.

He said that the Plan included a number of new policies relating to wildlife and environmental issues, including new requirements for larger developments to demonstrate a 10% net gain in biodiversity, measures to ensure no new phosphate and nitrate pollution in rivers and broads and a new tariff based contributions process to help mitigate the impact of visitors to designated wildlife sites.

In conclusion, Cllr Brown said that it must be recognised that several factors had impacted on the production of the Local Plan, including delays to planning reforms, the Pandemic and the ongoing issue of nutrient neutrality. All of this highlighted just how crucial it was for the Council to protect its 5 Year land supply and for this reason, he proposed that the Local Plan was submitted for independent examination to the Government Inspector.

Cllr R Kershaw, seconded the proposal and thanked Cllr Brown for his work in chairing the Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party.

The Chairman invited members to speak:

Cllr N Dixon began by saying that the Local Plan had been a long time coming. This was not a criticism at all and he recognised the patience and hard work of the Planning Policy Manager, adding that everyone had endured a number of frustrations along the way. He said that it was not perfect but there was another stage to the process which could address any imperfections. Cllr Dixon said that he was supportive of the Local Plan being submitted for inspection but that he had two serious reservations – the allocation of employment land and infrastructure issues.

Cllr Dixon said that he was very concerned about the negative implications for economic growth, particularly the challenges presented by the capacity for utilities and the connectivity of transport links. In addition, he reiterated his disappointment that proposals to produce a new Economic Growth Strategy had been withdrawn and that it was being replaced with an action plan, which he considered to be weak and half-hearted.

Cllr Dr V Holliday said that was hugely appreciative of the hard work that had gone into producing the Local Plan but she was disappointed from her wards’ perspective. There were no new homes for local people and the issue of second homes and holiday lets had not been addressed. She disagreed with the small growth village proposed for her ward and queried the timing of infrastructure delivery in relation to housing developments. In addition, she said she was disappointed with the control of the AONB and visitor pressure on the marshes remained enormous. She acknowledged that her comments sounded harsh but said she wanted to give the perspective of her ward.

Cllr C Cushing said that he was supportive of the Local Plan being submitted for inspection but wanted to reiterate Cllr Dixon’s comments. In his ward of Fakenham, there were plans to build 950 homes with 600 more to follow under this Plan. There was no employment land allocated to go with them and he challenged where additional jobs would come from with no Economic Growth Strategy in place. Like Cllr Dixon, he believed that it should sit alongside the Local Plan.

Cllr N Pearce said that he was disappointed in the Local Plan. He said that he was very concerned about the infrastructure issues, which were particularly relevant in his ward. Without this and employment land to go alongside housing developments, it would be hard to get the transport links in place. He concluded by saying that he was supportive of the Plan being submitted for inspection and hoped that the process would allow for amendments.

Cllr H Blathwayt referred to the issue of infrastructure and said that he would like to see a guarantee from Anglian Water that it could deal with the added water recycling and that there would be no dumping in the sea or rivers.

Cllr P Heinrich commented that following the Regulation 19 consultation and the amendments proposed, North Walsham members had raised considerable concerns and he thanked officers for addressing these. However, members had been expecting a comprehensive development brief for the North Walsham West area. This had not been prepared but it seemed that the developers had prepared their own, and this was a matter that should be led by the Council, involving local members, he said he would like to ask for clarity on the timescale for the Council’s completion of a development brief and an assurance that it would involve local members and the town council. Secondly, he said that it was accepted several years ago under Regulation 18 that the road linking Norwich Road to Cromer Road and the industrial estate was essential. Not only to support the land set aside for economic development but also to move the heavy goods vehicles that were causing chaos in the surrounding roads. Therefore, the road was critical and he sought confirmation that it was the intention of the Council to ensure that the full length of the North Walsham Western link was built including the section into the industrial estate and that the southern section was built before any significant development took place.

Cllr V Gay said that although all wards were touched by the Local Plan, North Walsham was affected more than most and the greatest protection for the District lay with having a strong Local Plan. For North Walsham it also lay in having a strong Council-led development brief for the town together with a design guide for the District.  She said that she had the following question – ‘may we be guaranteed that a Council-led development brief will have been consulted upon and formally agreed before any planning application for the North Walsham West extension receives consideration by NNDC?’

Cllr N Lloyd said that he shared the same concerns as his fellow North Walsham members. Residents of the town were expected to receive 1800 new dwellings in the town in the next 15 years and they deserved adequate infrastructure to support this.

Cllr J Rest asked about the cost of appointing an Inspector for independent examination and whether this was fixed.

Cllr S Penfold said that he was supportive of the comments made by North Walsham members, as the County member for North Walsham west but also as District Councillor for the surrounding villages of Scottow, Worstead, Skeyton and Swanton Abbott. It was important that they were included in any consultation as they would be impacted by traffic, particularly along the B1150.

The Planning Policy Manager said that the Council was responsible for appointing a Programme Officer for the examination process which had a salary attached and the Council also had to pay the examiner’s fees which were significant – over £100k. There was an earmarked reserve in place to cover these costs.

He then spoke about the contents of the Local Plan and some of the issues raised by members. He said that members were not being asked to determine planning applications at this stage. Members were being asked to agree a set of policies that would provide assurance that when development takes place it would be acceptable. He referred to North Walsham as an example and explained that the Urban Extension had a specific policy and plan attached to it and it required that a lot of processes were undertaken before approval was granted. This included the prior approval of a comprehensive drainage strategy and Anglian Water had been consulted on the preparation of the Local Plan to support this. The drainage strategy would come in as part of the development brief and certainly as part of the planning application and would be subject to further rounds of public consultation and engagement with Anglian Water. He said that the same principle would apply to all other infrastructure and Highways, Anglian Water and the Environment Agency would be involved in developing the District through two further stages past Local Plan preparation. It was currently the very early stages and was focussed on the principles of allocating land not the approval of planning applications.

The Planning Policy Manager explained that the policy for North Walsham included two important provisions, one was that prior approval of the development brief was required planning permission could be granted. He acknowledged that there was concern that the developer might prepare their own development brief. It said that Members could turn that brief away and agree for the Council to develop its own brief. Regardless, the policy required a brief and the Council had to agree to its content before an application was determined.

Secondly, the policy specifically required the development of the road link from Norwich Road, Cromer Road and through into the industrial estate and this was written into the Local Plan.

Regarding infrastructure, he said that there was a policy within the Plan that required developers to make the required supporting infrastructure as part of their proposals.

In conclusion, the Planning Policy Manager said that it was not a perfect Local Plan. There were things that could be done better and officers had worked hard in recent months to address Members’ concerns. He said that he would not be recommending submission if he was not happy with the Plan and prepared to defend it.

The Chairman thanked the Planning Policy team for their hard work and said it would be almost impossible to satisfy everyone’s demands.

It was proposed by Cllr A Brown, seconded by Cllr R Kershaw and

RESOLVED

To submit the Draft North Norfolk Local Plan to a Government appointed Inspector for independent examination

One member abstained.