Agenda item

To receive a Local Plan update. (Verbal report)

The Chair asked the Leader a number of questions relating to the Local Plan:

• Why the delay?
• Which Members of Cabinet requested further time for consideration of the sites and evidence base? Why and when did they do so?
• What was the proximate cause of this request?
• When did concerns first arise about the Local Plan process that have given rise to this further delay?
• There have been two delays to the Local Plan, totaling eight weeks, announced since 21 March. Are any more delays anticipated? What occasioned these serial delays following eighteen months where the Local Plan had run strictly to timetable?
• Were the delays caused by staffing issues, as identified in the risk register?
• Had the loss of key personnel exacerbated the situation?
• Were there broader project management issues of which Scrutiny should be aware?
• Would the regular project management meetings with Councillor LeCount resume? If so, when? If not, why?
• What effect would this new delay have on the total budget and overall project timetable for the Local Plan?
• Would we still meet the MHCLG deadline of end 2023?
• Where would lost time be made up?
• How would the Regulation 18 consultation falling in the school summer holidays be dealt with?
• Why was potential legislation following the Levelling Up White Paper deemed relevant to the delay?

The Leader of the Council gave a verbal update on the Local Plan. She said that:

• The delay was due to the need to balance meeting key milestones alongside making the right decisions and future proofing plans.
• The first delay was a result of outside contractors
• The second delay was initiated at Chief Executive level.
• The delays were not as a result of staffing issues or change in staff.
• The MHCLG deadline would be met
• The length of the consultation would be extended by two weeks in recognition of the school holiday period
• The Regulation 18 meeting would be scheduled for 11 July 2022
• Full Council would be scheduled for 21 July 2022
• It was important to pause, reflect and ensure the correct decisions were made

The Chief Executive agreed that the vast amount of work had been done and noted the importance of getting the Local Plan right. He said that he hoped to regain most of the additional time during the remainder of the process and that the Regulation 19 milestone could potentially be at risk. It would not be published during the pre-election period. The delay was regrettable, but necessary to get the Local Plan right.

Members asked whether Central Government were content with the slips in the timetable and whether Regulation 18 would be one preferred option or would there be an alternative offer. Furthermore, Members questioned whether additional land had been put forward in the last three months and at what point would the possible eight week delay to the Regulation 19, due to purdah, create a risk for the 2023 deadline.

The Leader confirmed that Regulation 18 would be one of two options and land could be put forward at any point and it would be sensible for all options to be considered.

The Chief Executive confirmed that the Government had not indicated that they were not content and the delay was not as a result of an additional big site coming forward, although further sites could be put forward. Officers constantly sought sites, conversed with major land owners and developers. Furthermore, some similarities with the last draft plan would be expected as it was the same district, geography, topography and sites in play. He said once the new Director of Planning was in situ his view on recoverability would be sought. If the Regulation 19 had to be moved to after the elections, this could be discussed with the Government at an early stage, who would likely be content if the delay was for good reasons.

Members requested a guide to identify the differences between the previous and latest versions of the draft Local Plan, which the Leader acknowledged, and agreed the importance of getting the Local Plan right. Members requested that steps were taken to make it clear to the public what would happen and when.

Councillor LeCount confirmed his role meeting regularly with the Local Plan Project Manager to ensure deadlines were met. He subsequently reported back to the Scrutiny Committee. He said that for the previous eighteen months deadlines had been met and since the Project Manager had left the Council there had been two delays. He said the Scrutiny Committee was not informed that the Project Manager had left the Council and he would like meetings reinstated with a new Project Manager.

The Chief Executive apologised and said that the meetings would be reinstated immediately.

He said that the outgoing Project Manager had carried out a number of duties, and as a result of the changes in personnel, the meetings which had been taking place so routinely had been missed.

The Chair thanked the Leader and Chief Executive for putting forward a robust and positive defense of the Council`s position.

Councillor Pavitt and Mr Hall left the meeting.