Any questions from members of the public under Standing Order 32 will be asked at the meeting.
At the time of compiling this agenda notice had been received from Les Clyne, a resident of Abingdon of the following question to Councillor Richard Farrell as Executive Member with responsibility for Planning: -
“The progress in over two and a half years activity in developing the 2126 units given in the Local Plan is rubbish (only 405 permitted). What steps will you now take to bring forward the 3 major developments listed (Faringdon - 400, Grove - 500 and Didcot - 500) so that over 2000 units are completed by 2011?”
Minutes:
Mr Les Clyne asked the following question for response in writing within 10 working days of Councillor Richard Farrell in his capacity at the Executive Member with responsibility for planning: -
“The progress in over two and a half years activity in developing the 2126 units given in the Local Plan is rubbish (only 405 permitted). What steps will you now take to bring forward the 3 major developments listed (Faringdon - 400, Grove - 500 and Didcot - 500) so that over 2000 units are completed by 2011?”
Councillor Richard Farrell read out a detailed response as follows and advised that he would send the information to Mr Les Clyne in writing: -
“The straight, unvarnished answer to your question is that neither I individually, nor this Council collectively, have any power to ensure that that the houses mentioned in your question are brought forward any faster than they are already proceeding through the planning system. We are, therefore, unable to guarantee that they will be built by 2011. Further, and with the greatest respect and only since you raised the matter, the pejorative thrust of your question - describing the progress towards meeting the Local Plan target as rubbish - and the comments that you made at the Strategic Review Committee last week reveal, not only a clear lack of understanding of the Council’s role in the development process, but a determination to attack this Council and its Executive unjustifiably and in a way that, frankly, wastes public resources.
In considering whether to grant planning permission a council is a reactive body. It has to wait for the owners of a property to come forward to apply for permission and has no powers to compel them to do so. This is not to suggest that developers have been tardy in applying for permission, as a lot of complex work is necessary between the adoption of a Local Plan and their being in a position to submit an application. Major applications invariably require a mass of supporting work to be done by the applicant, both before and after application, such as archaeological, environmental, transport and other assessments. Again, let me stress, the speed at which this work is completed is outside the Vale’s control.
A good example is the development at Grove. A major objection to the allocation of this land for development related to concerns about flooding and drainage. As a consequence our Local Plan requires that before any development can start the Environment Agency, and this Council, must be satisfied that satisfactory attenuation measures are in place. The planning, design, examination by both this Council and the Environment Agency, and the implementation of such measures are both extremely time consuming and, importantly, mostly outside the control of this Council.
The Inspectors who examined our Local Plan identified the fact that development of the Grove site might be delayed and, in order to strengthen the Council’s ability to meet its housing numbers, recommended the inclusion of land at Tilbury Lane, in Botley and North Hinksey to compensate. I understand that you left immediately after asking your question at the last planning meeting - if you had remained you would have heard this committee resolve to delegate to our officers in consultation with the committee chair the decision to outline planning permission for 150 dwellings on that site. Also, some months ago the Vale and South Oxfordshire District Council resolved to grant permission at Didcot, subject to the completion of a section 106 agreement.
Once planning permission has been granted it is entirely at the discretion of the developer when a site gets built out and at what speed, and this will be influenced by both the local housing market and wider economic considerations. With that caveat in mind, our officers tell me that, in spite of now expecting fewer houses to be built at Grove, Didcot and Faringdon (810 completions by 2011 rather than the 1,400 originally anticipated) they still expect that the Local Plan target of 5,750 homes by 2011 will be met. Furthermore, they also anticipate that 8,569 will be built between 2001 and 2016, thus exceeding the Structure Plan target of 7,150 homes for that period. All this, and much more, is set out in the Council’s Annual Monitoring Report 2006-07, which is available on the Council’s web site.
Having explained the position very fully and pointed you to where you can obtain further information on our website, I hope that you will now allow our officers to get on with the difficult job that they are doing rather well.”