To consider how and when the Committee wishes to be consulted in respect of the programmes for adopting the Local Development Framework and Local Transport Plan as set out in the attached draft report to Cabinet on 12 July 2012.

The Committee considered a report outlining how and when it should be consulted in respect of the programmes for adopting the Local Development Framework (LDF) and Local Transport Plan (LTP) as set out in the report to Cabinet of 12 July 2012.  It was noted that a number of public questions had been received for this item, and would be submitted to Officers for a written response.

The Head of Transportation and Access and the Head of Strategic Planning and Regeneration presented the report and outlined the respective timetables for consultation on the LTP and LDF.  In view of the timetable changes proposed, work should proceed on an LTP covering the period to 2014/15 with key long term linkages between the two strategies being maintained.

During the discussion, the following principal points were raised:

·         That whilst the possibility of an Eastern Link Road had been raised to link Holme Lacey Road and Ledbury Road, the feasibility study had yet to be completed

·         That whilst there were differences of opinion regarding the summary of results of the Revised Preferred Option consultation undertaken in the Autumn of 2011, the results were a matter of public record as part of the consultation process.

·         That the LTP and LDF were of such weight, that a broader discussion was required, perhaps as a series of one off meetings that would allow for a wide ranging discussion of the issues.

·         A Member suggested that the Committee should be advised when each area of evidence was nearing completion and should then be briefed on its contents.  He asked that non-technical summaries to help explain the evidence base should also be produced as a matter of course in order to help the Committee ensure that the evidence base was adequate.  The evidence base should include a refreshed Community Strategy, as the LDF was required to have this as part of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPFF).

·         He went on to say that under the NPFF, paragraph 49 of the report would allow any developers to put forward plans for development on greenfield rather than brownfield sites.  He suggested that identified brownfield sites should be given development priority over greenfield sites for the first five years of the land bank.  This would provide protection for the first five years in order to allow greenfield sites to be identified in an appropriate manner.

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet be recommended that:

a)    subject to outstanding issues being resolved, the proposed scale and distribution of development and strategic housing, employment and infrastructure proposals, as set out in paragraph 49 of the Draft report to Cabinet of the 12 July 2012, should form the basis of the consultation process.

b)    as a result of the possibility that a Western Relief Road should not come to fruition for planning or cost reasons, it would be inappropriate to approve large scale developments for inclusion within the draft Core Strategy until the necessary infrastructure had been similarly approved;

c)    under Paragraph 18 of the Draft report to Cabinet, the Committee requested that a copy of the package of necessary infrastructure improvements should be made available;

d)    under Paragraph 24 of the Draft report to Cabinet, the Committee requested a copy of the commissioning document to Amey to assess the environmental and amenity issues associated with the many changes which had taken place directly adjacent to the old Southern bypass route in recent years;

e)    under Paragraph 26 of the Draft report to Cabinet, the Committee requested that the staged assessments should be made publicly available;

f)     under Paragraph 49 of the Draft report to Cabinet, the Committee requested that consideration should be given to an alternative plan for the 2,300 proposed houses in Leominster if water phosphate levels could not be satisfactorily improved;

g)    under Paragraph 49 of the Draft report to Cabinet, the Committee strongly recommends that Cabinet should include identified brownfield sites for inclusion in the Draft Core Strategy and agrees that these sites should be given priority over greenfield sites for the first five years of the Land Bank Supply; and

h)    under Paragraph 53 of the Draft report to Cabinet, the Committee requested that Cabinet should take note of where community consultation has noted significant negative community impact.