Issue - meetings

Executive Councillor for Planning to present the Pre-Submission Local Plan 2046: Sustainability and Supporting Documents

The report has been considered at a meeting of the Cabinet earlier in the evening. The recommendations of which will be reported verbally at the meeting.

A copy of the draft Plan has been shared separately to all Members on the Member’s Sharepoint site and is available on the District Council’s website.

The Executive Councillor for Economy, Regeneration and Housing, Councillor B Mickelburgh introduced the report on behalf of Councillor T Sanderson and thanked Members, stakeholders and Officers for their contributions to the preparation of the Local Plan. The Plan was supported by extensive consultation and evidence and would provide a locally led framework for growth to 2046, helping to direct development and secure supporting infrastructure. Approval would enable submission of the Plan for consultation and independent examination. Failure to meet the Government's submission deadline could require the plan-making process to restart.

The Executive Leader, Councillor S Conboy seconded the motion and reserved her right to speak.

Councillor P Gammons stated that he could not support the proposed housing target of 32,200 additional homes by 2049, which he considered excessive and above the national average. The scale of growth proposed would place unacceptable pressure on local infrastructure. He believed the Plan did not reflect the views of many residents and would have a detrimental impact on local communities and infrastructure.

Councillor D McIlwain supported the delivery of homes, jobs and investment, but had concerns about the scale and location of growth and about whether the necessary infrastructure could be delivered. The Plan prioritised housing delivery ahead of infrastructure provision, particularly in relation to transport. Growth should only proceed where there was clear evidence that it was sustainable, deliverable and supported by the necessary infrastructure and community facilities.

Councillor D Keane acknowledged the need for new homes but questioned whether the Plan had the right approach to delivering growth. He also questioned the benefits of progressing the plan through the current process in light of recent changes to the national planning framework and raised concerns about the long-term robustness of viability and delivery assumptions. The decision would have long-term implications for the District and its communities.

Councillor N Wells referred to the Infrastructure Readiness Report, stated that the A141 and St Ives improvement schemes should be delivered before substantial development took place. He sought assurance that the proposed development at Giffords Farm would be regarded as substantial development and therefore be subject to the same infrastructure requirements.

Executive Councillor for Resident Services and Corporate Performance, Councillor N Hunt, emphasised the need for additional housing for young people. He argued that, without a Local Plan, growth would be imposed through speculative development, reducing the Council’s ability to shape development and secure supporting infrastructure. Community feedback had influenced a number of policy changes. The Plan provided the opportunity to deliver necessary growth, secure infrastructure, and protect the District from unplanned development.

Councillor K Maheshwari stated that growth should only take place where the necessary infrastructure, public services and funding were in place. Housing pressures varied across the country. Investment and job creation should be directed towards less prosperous areas rather than concentrating development in areas such as Cambridgeshire.

Councillor S Hodgson-Jones stated that she could not support the Local Plan in its current form. The 14 proposed development sites within her Ward would have a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43

The Overview and Scrutiny (Performance and Growth) Panel is invited to comment on the report for Cabinet and Council.

Executive Councillor- Tom Sanderson

By means of a report by Head of Planning, Infrastructure and Public Protection (a copy of which was appended in the Minute Book), the Pre-Submission Local Plan to 2046 Sustainability Appraisal and Supporting Documents was presented to the Panel.

The Chair queried why a Member’s position on the Local Plan appeared to have changed compared to the adopted Local Plan, noting that they had previously voted against it. The Panel heard that the Member considered their opposition to the previous Local Plan to have been a mistake and urged Members not to make the same error. The importance of having development guided by a robust, infrastructure-led Local Plan rather than being driven by developers was emphasised. Reference was also made to the significant amount of work undertaken over the previous three and a half years to prepare the Plan.

In response to a question, the Panel was advised that the term home in the report referred to an individual unit of accommodation of any form capable of being occupied by a single person, a family or other household. It was also confirmed that infrastructure planning was based on projected population growth arising from the number of new homes expected to be delivered across the district.

Clarification was sought on the number of homes referenced, noting that the figure stated at the meeting differed from that contained within the Local Plan. A request was also made for the proposal relating to Upwood to be referred to as Upwood rather than Ramsey in future references. The Panel was advised that the Local Plan provides for 32,200 homes between 2021 and 2046, of which approximately 4,200 had already been completed and 11,300 had existing planning permission. Regarding the naming of the proposal, Members were informed that, for consistency with the evidence base, it would preferably remain listed under Ramsey for the current consultation stage, with the potential for amendment at a later stage. The proposed approach was accepted.

In response to a question regarding infrastructure in rural areas, the Panel’s attention was drawn to the Infrastructure Readiness Report set out in Appendix 7 to the report. It was confirmed that extensive consultation had been undertaken with infrastructure providers, enabling them to plan when infrastructure would be required and delivered. The Local Plan would provide certainty to support the phasing of development. A stepped trajectory had been included to allow infrastructure to be delivered alongside development throughout the Plan period.

Clarification was sought on whether development would take place only once infrastructure was in place. The Panel was advised that, in the absence of a Local Plan, planning applications could still be submitted by developers. However, an adopted Local Plan provides a clear vision for growth and a delivery trajectory, enabling Officers to work proactively with developers and infrastructure providers to ensure that necessary infrastructure is planned and delivered alongside development.

Concern was raised regarding the fallback position should the A141 scheme not be delivered, given its importance to infrastructure planning in North Huntingdonshire.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21