Agenda item

To note an update on local plan progress, and risks and mitigations including staff resourcing.

The Director of Planning provided an update on emerging Local Plan, covering the progress of the project plan as well as risks and mitigations. He highlighted staffing and the timetable within the updated risk register and explained that whilst he had managed to recruit into the outstanding vacancies, the team were now four weeks behind schedule and likely to lose further traction as new staff aligned themselves with the work. As a result, officers would be requesting that the LPLG consider an extension to the Regulation 18 consultation which would be until no later than the end of October 2023. If approved, a revised Local Development Scheme would be brought to an upcoming meeting of Cabinet.

In response to questions, the Director of Planning confirmed that no site allocations had been made and officers were conducting robust site assessments over the coming months in preparation for members to consider potential allocations over the summer. In addition, all sites had been put forward by site owners, bar one where officers had approached the landowner. In this case, it had been agreed not to publish details of the site in order to not worry tenants if nothing were to happen. Members raised concerns with the decision to choose to commercial interests over transparency and the Council’s obligations as a public authority.

The Director of Planning agreed to provide Councillor Driscoll with an update on the Local Housing Needs Assessment.

Members debated the progress made on producing a Local Plan over the last four years. Some argued that the Council had failed in the duty to communicate and engage with the public, and that the lack of a Local Plan had led to a mass of speculative and inappropriate for the district as the Planning Committee were not provided with the tools required to defend their decisions. In regard to the committee’s function within the process, members had not been kept informed enough to be able to apply the required levels of scrutiny and the next cohort must be more demanding, as well as ask more questions.

On the other hand, others highlighted that members needed to be patient as it had taken some time for the Council to realise what had to be changed in order to produce a robust plan. Furthermore, officers had encountered further delays due to unforeseen factors such as staff changes and the pandemic.

In response to the debate, the Leader of the Council explained that whilst the district was in trouble because of the lack of a Local Plan, they were also in trouble when they have submitted the wrong plan which subsequently failed. She said that it was crucial that the Council needed to get it right this time around.

The Portfolio Holder agreed to provide a resume of work to-date before the start of the pre-election period.

To summarise, the Chair thanked the Director of Planning for his work and honesty in recruitment and project management. He did not agree with the approach of some members that the emerging Plan would “take as long as it takes”, as a lack of a Local Plan had left Planning exposed and he was disappointed that the recurring reaction to problems was to delay the process further.

The report was noted.