Agenda item

To consider the Authority Monitoring Report and provide feedback to the Cabinet Member for Planning

The Authority Monitoring Report was introduced by Cabinet member for planning, Councillor Anne-Marie Simpson.

The purpose of the annually produced report is to track progress on meeting the district’s development needs and whether the adopted policies of the development plan are implemented effectively. This report is for 2018-19 and was published in December 2019. The adopted core strategy is the main focus. When the new Local Plan 2035 is adopted, future AMRs will reflect policies in that document.

This report contains a lot of useful data and officers were present to help answer any questions.

The committee were asked to consider the Authority Monitoring Report and provide feedback to the Cabinet Member for Planning, noting that the report is already published and cannot be changed for 2018-19.

Comments were made as follows:

• A view was fed back that transport links to main employment and leisure hubs were not adequate in the evenings. It was asked when the next survey for rural transport would be. Item 1.17, page 3. Lucy Murfett to check.
• Committee asked about the spend for Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – it was explained the staffing resource was for collecting CIL. Two teams use this administration income.
• 6.13 – affordable homes were discussed – what is included in affordable? How do we get up to the 40% level? The committee were informed that the figure is the outcome of negotiations by officers. Sites for affordable housing are assessed, and priorities are given to access to roads and closeness to schools. We negotiate to get a balance of affordable housing and the priorities needed for the site to go ahead. Viability on a case by case basis. Viabilities for developers are checked by an external independent body. We tell developers that we make the document public.
• Committee asked about traveller consultation and the process for this. It was confirmed that interviews were carried out by specialists, it’s a thorough piece of work, and has been done in conjunction with other authorities. Includes housed travellers and travelling show people. Ten pitches are now needed. Potential pitches undergo the same fair assessment and there is no added pressure on other applications if a previous application is refused.
• The committee discussed social rent. Not all can afford shared ownership, and we want to deliver social rent. Cabinet member for Planning replied that it is difficult to achieve and we need to see what happens going forward. Affordable vs social rent – what is the definition, is there a difference? Planning clearly sets out percentage affordable housing in planning applications going to planning committee. Planning negotiates as best as it can under the regulations. It was asked if there could be a running total of secured affordable homes. There is currently a yearly data collection, can quarterly be achieved for housing land supply? Picture is distorted by the delay due to Covid-19.
• Loss of retail floor space – worsened by Covid-19, conversion to accommodation is happening more often and could be worse in future. Permitted development rights have been given by Central Government. Issues to be addressed in the new Local Plan. There is also a new use class and we have no ability to stop that. Permitted development rights cannot be stopped, maybe under Article four if there are strong reasons. We have to wait and see the effect of Covid-19 on the retail market. The AMR is an opportunity to learn lessons for the future.

Recommendation:

Cabinet member for Planning to discuss with the Head of Planning to decide if we can bring forward more data on the delivery of affordable housing.

The Head of Planning, Cabinet member and planning officers were thanked for their work.

The meeting closed at 19:30pm