Agenda item

The Panel is to receive the Huntingdonshire Local Plan To 2036 Quarterly Update and the Infrastructure Planning Update.

With the aid of a report by the Head of Development (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book), updates on the Huntingdonshire Local Plan To 2036 Quarterly Update and Infrastructure Planning Update were presented to the Panel.

Members were informed that the Council has received clarity in regards to what the Government means by adopting a written local plan by March 2017 and that the Council’s existing Core Strategy meets the requirement. This therefore means that the March 2017 deadline does not apply to the District.

However, the Panel was advised that, as the Core Strategy pre-dates the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework in 2012, a later deadline of March 2018 would have to be met.

The Panel noted that the Council has a timetable for the Local Plan but that the timescales have slipped because of a delay with the revalidation of the Cambridge Sub-Regional Model (CSRM) traffic model by consultants for Cambridgeshire County Council. The CSRM was expected to be complete by May 2016 but is now expected to be complete at the end of June 2016 and it will then require further checking.

The Panel was asked to consider two options in relation to the CSRM. Option A would involve continuing to work on the Local Plan using the old CSRM model. Option B is to pause work on the Local Plan until the County Council has provided the revalidated CSRM.

In response to a question regarding the Environment Agency, the Panel was informed that the Council is awaiting the Lower Great Ouse Flood Model. Members noted that the Council is engaging with the Environment Agency at a senior level in order to get the model completed.

A Member asked how the Local Plan would affect specific locations as well as the Market Town Strategy. In response, Members were advised that the Council requires a revalidated CSRM model in order to predict what would happen in individual towns and villages throughout the District.

Members were reminded that the CSRM helps to establish what the provision of roads should be rather than the maintenance of roads. It was asked if some thought could be given to future proofing the provision of road lanes and the Panel was advised that the CSRM would determine how many lanes should be provided.

Following a question regarding the consideration of the flood risk at the northern end of the District, the Panel noted that the Environment Agency is a statutory consultee and if the Council was not following the advice from the Environment Agency then there are extra steps that would be required to be taken.

The Panel agreed that, out of the two options presented to them, the Cabinet should endorse Option B to wait for the revalidated CSRM to be made available. Members noted that it would not benefit the Council to work with a flawed model as the outcomes from the model would also be flawed. This is what would happen if Option A was adopted.

Members agreed to advise the Cabinet that they believe that pressure should continue to be applied to the County Council to ensure the revalidation of the CSRM is made a priority as any further delay would have a greater detrimental impact upon the delivery of the Local Plan. The Panel

RESOLVED

1)  to recommend to the Cabinet that option B should be endorsed; and

2)  to invite Officers from the County Council to the July 2016 meeting of the Panel to explain why there is a delay with the revalidation of the CSRM.

(At 8.13pm, after the consideration of this item, Councillors G Bull, R Harrison and R B Howe left the meeting and did not return).