Issue - meetings

To receive and consider report 96/08 of the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy). 

Introduction and Report Summary

The Government is consulting on the proposed changes it intends to make to the draft South East Plan that will guide development in the region to 2026.  The closing date for comments is 24 October 2008. Members will recall that the draft plan was prepared by the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA).  It was submitted to Government in March 2006 and after a period of consultation an examination in public was held (November 2006 – March 2007) where an independent panel of planning inspectors tested the plan for soundness.  The report of the panel, including their recommended changes, was published in August 2007.  The Council made comments on the panel’s recommendations (see report to Executive October 2007). 

Three key documents have been received

·      a schedule of the changes proposed to the draft plan with the Secretary of State’s reasons for doing so (532 pages)

·      a sustainability appraisal and habitats regulation assessment (40 pages) and

·      a companion document showing what the final plan would look like if all the changes proposed were incorporated (313 pages).

These documents are available for public inspection at the local services point and the members lounge in Abbey House.  They can also be viewed on the Government Office web site at www.gose.gov.uk/planning/regional planning  and there is an item for information on the Council’s web site.

Section 4 of this report very briefly summarises the key changes proposed and focuses on the implications of the changes for Central Oxfordshire and the Vale.   The South East Plan is important as when approved it will replace the Oxfordshire Structure Plan and along with key documents in the Council’s Local Development Framework it will form the development plan.  All plans and strategies of the Council must take the development plan into account, and applications for planning permission should be determined in accordance with it. 

The contact officer for this report is Katie Barrett (Development Policy Manager) telephone (01235 540339).  E-mail address:  

katie.barrett@whitehorsedc.gov.uk

Recommendations

The Advisory Group recommends the Executive to inform the Secretary of State for the Environment that the Council:

(a)       Broadly supports the proposed changes to simplify the structure and format of the South East Plan, in particular the definition of a clear spatial strategy, and make the wording clearer, more focused and more succinct than in the draft plan.  However, the focus for Central Oxfordshire should be managed economic growth as this more accurately reflects the policies for the sub region.  It is also regrettable that some proposed policies that set out the approach local authorities should take when preparing LDFs in the form of a list of criteria (e.g. Policy C7) have not been expressed as general policies that could be used to determine applications – this would have obviated the need for policies in local development documents covering the same matters.

(b)       The changes to the wording from general intentions to a more positive approach,  ...  view the full agenda text for item 73

(Time: 3.33pm to 3.36pm)

The Executive received and considered report 96/08 of the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy) that set out proposed changes to the South East Plan to 2026 as they affected the Vale.  The report also set out recommendations from the Strategic and Local Planning Advisory Group on the response that should be made to the Secretary of State. 

The Executive concurred with the views of the Advisory Group, particularly surrounding the removal of the conditionality clause in policy CC7, which stated development would only be allowed if there was the infrastructure to support it, as it could result in unsustainable development.  Members considered that councils could not be held responsible for the aspects of infrastructure delivery they could not control. 

RESOLVED

that the Secretary of State for the Environment be informed that this Council:

(a)       Broadly supports the proposed changes to simplify the structure and format of the South East Plan, in particular the definition of a clear spatial strategy, and make the wording clearer, more focused and more succinct than in the draft plan.  However, the focus for Central Oxfordshire should be managed economic growth as this more accurately reflects the policies for the sub region.  It is also regrettable that some proposed policies that set out the approach local authorities should take when preparing Local Development Frameworks in the form of a list of criteria (e.g. Policy C7) have not been expressed as general policies that could be used to determine applications – this would have obviated the need for policies in local development documents covering the same matters;

(b)       The changes to the wording from general intentions to a more positive approach, and the use of the word ‘will’ rather than ‘should’, put a much greater onus on the local authorities to deliver, particularly through the Local Development Framework process.  Whilst this is not unreasonable, or the tasks difficult in themselves, the implications for local authorities are considerable.  Local Development Frameworks are required to have a greater scope, give greater certainty and detail early in the development process, and cover a much longer time period than the local plans they replace.  The Government should not expect such plans to be delivered more quickly than old style local plans particularly in view of the need to consider all reasonable options, the much greater emphasis on a robust evidence base, limited public funds (including the requirement for year-on-year efficiency savings), the shortage of experienced planning staff and the demands being put by all local authorities on the service providers who may be unable to respond fully in the timescales set out;

(c)        The Council objects to the removal of the conditionality clause in policy CC7, which stated development would only be allowed if there was the infrastructure to support it, as, particularly through the development control process, it could result in unsustainable development and lead to a continuation of past trends of under investment in the region that could damage its social and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73