Issue - meetings

Cabinet, at its meeting on 11 July 2013, will consider a report on making the Thame Neighbourhood Plan part of the Development Plan for South Oxfordshire.

The report of the head of planning, which Cabinet will consider on 11 July 2013, was circulated to all councillors. Please bring this report (copy attached) to the meeting.

The recommendation of Cabinet will be circulated to councillors on Friday 12 July.

Mrs D Brown, Mr D Dodds and Mrs A Midwinter declared an interest in this item because of their association with landowners who will be affected. In addition Mrs A Midwinter declared that two family members were employed by Thame Town Council. All three left the room during the discussion and voting on this item.

Mr D Bretherton and Mr M Welply made statements that they had been involved with the development of the plan and did not therefore consider it appropriate to take part in the discussion or voting on the item. However, as they had no disclosable pecuniary interest in the item they remained in the room but withdrew to the public seating.

In the absence of both the Chairman and Vice-Chairman Council agreed that Mrs J Carr should chair this item.

Mrs J Carr in the chair.

Council considered the recommendation of Cabinet, made at its meeting on 11 July 2013, to make the Thame Neighbourhood Plan part of the Development Plan for South Oxfordshire.

Mr JCastle, local landowner, addressed Council. He advised that he had a beneficial interest in Site F.  He considered it premature to make the Thame Neighbourhood Plan part of the Development Plan for South Oxfordshire whilst a police investigation into possible breaches of the legal referendum expenditure limits by the ‘Yes’ campaign was ongoing and questioned whether, in light of this, the referendum could be considered free and fair.

Councillors Jeanette Matelot and Helena Fickling, Thame Town Council addressed Council in support of the making of the Thame Neighbourhood Plan. They referred to the fact that the plan had been awarded two prestigious awards and received the backing of the majority of residents in the referendum. They believed the plan would control the future development of Thame and protect its character and identity. 

In response to the issues raised by Mr Castle, Mrs Reed, Head of Legal and Democratic Services, advised that even if there were criminal proceedings, prosecutions and a conviction it would not result in the referendum result being set aside. There was a six week period from publication of the referendum result within which a legal challenge of the conduct of the referendum could be brought by way of judicial review. That had passed and there had been no such challenge. Council could therefore act on the referendum result without awaiting the outcome of the any other investigation underway and act on the recommendation of Cabinet.  

RESOLVED: to make the Thame Neighbourhood Plan part of the Development Plan for South Oxfordshire

Mrs D Brown returned to the chair.

Purpose: to consider whether the Thame Neighbourhood Plan should be made part of the Development Plan for South Oxfordshire following the positive outcome of the referendum held on 2 May 2013

Cabinet considered the report of the Head of Planning that asked Cabinet to recommend Council to make the Thame Neighbourhood Plan part of the Development Plan for South Oxfordshire. The independent examiner found that the plan, amended to include modifications proposed in his report, met the basic conditions and other requirements prescribed by the relevant legislation. The referendum met the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 and greater than 50 per cent of those who voted were in favour of the plan being used to help decide planning applications in the plan area. The plan and its preparation did not breach and was not otherwise incompatible with any EU obligation or any of the Convention rights within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Mr J Castle, local landowner, addressed Cabinet. He explained his interest in the details of the plan as he had a beneficial interest in Site F. He had been involved with the community for many years. He considered it premature to make the Thame Neighbourhood Plan part of the Development Plan for South Oxfordshire. A police investigation into possible breaches of the legal referendum expenditure limits by the ‘Yes’ campaign was ongoing. Given that the expenditure may have directly influenced the voting, the outcome of the referendum was open to question. He would prefer the decision to be deferred until the conclusion of the investigation.

Mr P Webb, local resident, addressed Cabinet. He said that in his opinion the Thame Neighbourhood Plan did not conform to the council’s adopted core strategy and was therefore unsound. It should not become part of the development plan. Introducing Elms Field as an additional development site exceeded the remit of the neighbourhood plan; contradicted the commitments in the core strategy to no net loss of green space and to biodiversity; would lead to further difficulties with traffic and services; and impacted on the conservation area. Publicity for the referendum had implied there was no point in a ‘no’ vote as this would lead to the district council imposing housing on the town. The sources of the stated benefits to the town were unclear. A determination that the neighbourhood plan did not conform to the core strategy would be an opportunity to start again.

In response to the speakers, Mr Buckle and Mr Price stated the advice of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services. This was that even if there were criminal proceedings and a conviction it would not result in the referendum result being set aside. There is a six week period from publication of the referendum result within which a legal challenge of the conduct of the referendum can be brought by way of judicial review. That has passed and there has been no such challenge. Cabinet and Council may therefore act on the referendum result without awaiting the outcome of the criminal investigation.  Mr Thompson stated that the Thame Neighbourhood Plan had been subjected to a full independent examination by a planning inspector  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3