|
Strategic Planning, Sustainability and Transportation Committee |
4 December 2018 |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Loose Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Response (Regulation 16) |
||||
|
|
||||
|
Final Decision-Maker |
Strategic Planning, Sustainability and Transportation Committee |
|||
|
Lead Head of Service/Lead Director |
Rob Jarman, Head of Planning and Development |
|||
|
Lead Officer and Report Author |
Mark Egerton, Strategic Planning Manager, and Sue Whiteside, Principal Planning Officer |
|||
|
Classification |
Public |
|||
|
Wards affected |
The report particularly affects Loose Ward and the adjacent wards of South, Coxheath & Hunton, and Boughton Monchelsea & Chart Sutton |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Executive Summary |
||||
|
The Committee is to consider the Council’s formal response to the consultation on the Loose Neighbourhood Plan, in accordance with Regulation 16 of the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012 (as amended). Representations, together with submission documents, will be passed to the independent Examiner at the next stage of the neighbourhood planning process. The report gives consideration to the neighbourhood plan, in the Council’s role as the local planning authority and as a landowner of a designated Local Green Space site (Field to the rear of Herts Crescent and McAlpine Close). The report concludes that regulatory requirements have been met, that the neighbourhood plan is in general conformity with the strategic policies of the Maidstone Development Plan, and that a Strategic Environmental Assessment and/or Habitats Regulations Assessment is not required. However, an objection has been raised to the designation of the Council-owned site as Local Green Space.
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
This report makes the following recommendations to this Committee:
|
||||
|
That:
1. As the local planning authority, the Council supports the Loose Neighbourhood Plan in general terms.
2. As a landowner, the Council objects to the specific designation of Local Green Space at the Field to the rear of Herts Crescent and McAlpine Close in the Loose Neighbourhood Plan.
3. A consultation response be submitted in accordance with the Committees requirements. |
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
Timetable |
||||
|
Meeting |
Date |
|||
|
Strategic Planning, Sustainability and Transportation Committee |
4 December 2018 |
|||
|
Loose Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Response (Regulation 16) |
|
|
1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Background
1.1 Parish councils and
designated neighbourhood forums can prepare neighbourhood development plans,
also known as neighbourhood plans, for their designated neighbourhood areas.
Neighbourhood plans are required to have regard to national policy and be in
general conformity with the strategic policies of the development plan for the
area. Neighbourhood plans go through two rounds of mandatory public
consultation before independent examination, local Referendum and being ‘made’
(adopted) by Maidstone Borough Council. The procedures
for designating neighbourhood areas and preparing neighbourhood development
plans are set out in The Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as
amended).
1.2 Loose
Parish was designated as a neighbourhood area on 4 October 2013. During the
preparation of the Loose Neighbourhood Plan, officers have offered advice and
support to the parish council on matters such as the neighbourhood planning
process, the evidence base, the plan’s regard to national policy, and general
conformity with the strategic policies of the Maidstone Development Plan.
Contact with the parish council has been maintained throughout the plan’s
preparation. The parish council has afforded officers the opportunity to
informally comment on draft iterations of the plan, and has responded
positively to the advice given.
1.3 The
parish council undertook public consultation on the pre-submission version of the
Loose Neighbourhood Plan (Regulation 14) between 31 October and 13 December
2016. In accordance with this Committee’s neighbourhood planning protocol, the
Council submitted a representation on the plan under the delegated authority of
the Head of Planning and Development. Following consultation, the parish
council has amended the plan, as appropriate, in response to all consultation representations.
1.4 When a parish
council submits a neighbourhood plan to the Borough Council, the Council has a
responsibility to ensure that regulatory requirements have been met: that
public consultation on the pre-submission draft plan was carried out in
accordance with Regulation 14, and that the submission plan and supporting
documentation meets Regulation 15 obligations. These requirements have been
met.
1.5 The next stage is a
further public consultation on the submission plan (Regulation 16), prior to
the plan’s submission for independent examination. The Borough Council is
responsible for facilitating this consultation and agreed the consultation
dates with the parish council: 2 November to 14 December 2018. Consultation is
being undertaken in accordance with neighbourhood planning regulations, the
Council’s Statement of Community Involvement 2018, and the neighbourhood
planning protocol.
1.6 The Loose Neighbourhood Plan is attached as a background document to this report. The full set of consultation documents can be viewed on the planning portal at http://maidstone-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/ , and comprise:
· The Loose Neighbourhood Plan
· Consultation Statement and Summary
· Basic Conditions Statement
·
Environmental
Statement and Appendix.
1.7 The Borough Council
has a duty to screen the neighbourhood plan in respect of the need for a
Strategic Environmental Assessment or Habitats Regulation Assessment, and to
consult the statutory consultees set out in legislation (Natural England,
Historic England and the Environment Agency). This exercise has been
completed, and an SEA/HRA is not required for the plan.
1.8 At this stage, the
Borough Council is also a statutory consultee and can submit comments on the
plan for consideration by an independent Examiner. One of the policies of the
neighbourhood plan, policy LP5(6) Field to the rear of Herts Crescent and McAlpine
Close, affects land in the ownership of Maidstone Borough Council. Consequently,
the response set out in the report first considers the Council’s role as the
local planning authority and, second, as a landowner.
1.9 The Borough Council
is responsible for appointing the Examiner (in agreement with the parish
council) and,
following
the close of consultation, for arranging the examination. The Loose
Neighbourhood Plan and accompanying submission documents will be forwarded to
the Examiner, together with all representations received, for his/her
consideration. A neighbourhood plan examination is usually dealt with by
written representations, although an Examiner can move to a Hearing for more
complex plans or issues.
1.10 The Examiner’s role is limited to testing the submitted neighbourhood plan against the ‘Basic Conditions’ tests for neighbourhood plans set out in legislation, rather than considering its ‘soundness’ or examining other material considerations. It is the role of the local planning authority to be satisfied that a basic condition statement has been submitted, but it is only after the independent examination has taken place and after the examiner’s report has been received that the local planning authority comes to its formal view on whether the draft neighbourhood plan meets the basic conditions. The basic conditions are met if:
· Having regard to national policies and advice contained in guidance issued by the Secretary of State, it is appropriate to make the neighbourhood plan;
· The making of the neighbourhood plan contributes to the achievement of sustainable development;
· The making of the neighbourhood plan is in general conformity with the strategic policies contained in the development plan for the area of the authority (or any part of that area);
· The making of the neighbourhood plan does not breach, and is otherwise compatible with, EU obligations[1]; and
· Prescribed conditions are met in relation to the neighbourhood plan and prescribed matters have been complied with in connection with the proposal for the neighbourhood plan[2].
Local Planning
Authority - Response to the Loose Neighbourhood Plan Consultation (Regulation
16)
1.11 As the local planning authority
consultee, the Borough Council’s focus is on testing the Loose Neighbourhood
Plan against the strategic policies of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan and the
Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan. This is important because, once made
(adopted), the neighbourhood plan forms part of the Maidstone Development Plan
and will be used when determining planning applications within the
neighbourhood area.
1.12 The Loose Neighbourhood Plan sets
the context for the parish, and includes a vision and objectives that focus on
local issues. The plan contains 10 policies that cover access and movement,
landscape protection, and design quality; and includes the designation of 12
areas of Local Green Space. Policies are justified in supporting text with
illustrative photos and plans.
1.13 Overall, the plan is inclusive and
well-written, and is considered to be in general conformity with the strategic
policies of the Development Plan.
1.14 The principle of designating Local
Green Spaces in neighbourhood plans is supported. Following the pre-submission
plan consultation (Regulation 14), the parish council agreed with the Borough
Council’s recommendation to remove a number of Local Green Space designations
that did not meet NPPF criteria, i.e. that a designation is “(a) in reasonably
close proximity to the community it serves;( b) demonstrably special to a local
community and holds a particular local significance, for example because of its
beauty, historic significance, recreational value (including as a playing
field), tranquillity or richness of its wildlife; and (c) local in character
and is not an extensive tract of land” (NPPF, paragraph 100). Policies for
managing development within a Local Green Space should be consistent with those
for Green Belts (NPPF, paragraph 101).
1.15 The parish council has notified all
landowners of designated Local Green Spaces and, in consultation with the
community, has set out reasons for the designation of each site based on the
criteria of the NPPF definition. All sites are in close proximity to the
communities they serve, and none is considered to be an extensive tract of
land. With regard to local significance and the value of individual Local
Green Spaces to the community, the justification of the designations can be
somewhat subjective. Regardless, none of the sites designated raises concerns.
1.16 The Loose Neighbourhood Plan (submission
version) was first published in June 2018, prior to the publication of the
revised NPPF
in July 2018. This has resulted in two instances where the plan should be
updated to reflect the new NPPF, in addition to two further factual errors
noted:
· Paragraph 2.15 – The Loose Valley Conservation Area extends into Tovil Parish, but it abuts the Parish of Boughton Monchelsea rather than extends into it;
· Paragraph 2.18 – Reference to the General Permitted Development Order 2011 should be replaced by The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015;
· Paragraph 4.5 – Amend quotation to reflect paragraph 29 of the NPPF 2018; and
·
Paragraph
4.7 Objective 4 – Amend reference to carbon-neutral to a low carbon future, to
reflect the NPPF 2018.
These are minor
points that do not affect the policies of the plan.
1.17 In summary, the Loose Neighbourhood
Plan is considered to be in general conformity with the strategic policies of
the Maidstone Development Plan. Following assessment, a Strategic
Environmental Assessment and/or Habitats Regulations Assessment is not
required. The regulatory requirements for consultation (Regulation 14) and
submission (Regulation 15) have been met.
1.18 IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE LOOSE
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN (ATTACHED AS A BACKGROUND DOCUMENT) IS SUPPORTED, AND THAT
THIS REPORT IS APPROVED AS THE COUNCIL’S RESPONSE TO THE CONSULTATION.
Landowner - Response to the Loose Neighbourhood Plan Consultation
(Regulation 16)
1.19 A neighbourhood plan can designate
land as Local Green Space, even if the landowner objects to the designation.
Any objections to a designated site, supported by the reasons for the objection
will be considered by the Examiner who will recommend the retention or deletion
of the site in the neighbourhood plan. Although policies for managing
development within a Local Green Space should be consistent with those for
Green Belts, boundaries can be amended where exceptional circumstances are fully
evidenced and justified, through the preparation or updating of development plans
(NPPF, paragraph 136).
1.20 In the case of the Loose
Neighbourhood Plan, the Borough Council is the landowner of one of the Local
Green Space designations: Field to the rear of Herts
Crescent and McAlpine Close (policy LP5, site 6). The land is managed for
informal recreation has a football kick-about goal and is used by dog walkers.
1.21 Departmental officer-level
consultations on the neighbourhood plan have included the Parks and Open Spaces
Manager and the Corporate Property Manager. The Council has no current plans
for an alternative use of the site and is sympathetic to the aspirations
expressed in the draft Neighbourhood Plan. However, it is considered that the
specific ‘Local Green Space’ designation is too inflexible. The designation of
the Field to the rear of Herts Crescent and McAlpine Close may at some future
date prevent the land from being used for the benefit of the whole Borough’s
residents. It is also worth noting that there are already 11 other sites
identified in the Plan as Local Green Space. Taken in the context of the
Council’s overall responsibilities and strategic priorities as a public body,
it is therefore proposed that an objection be raised to this specific
designation.
1.22 IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT, AS A
LANDOWNER, AN OBJECTION IS RAISED TO THE DESIGNATION OF LOCAL GREEN SPACE AT FIELD
TO THE REAR OF HERTS CRESCENT AND MCALPINE CLOSE (POLICY LP5, SITE NO. 6) IN
THE LOOSE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN (ATTACHED AS A BACKGROUND DOCUMENT).
________________________________________________________________
2. AVAILABLE OPTIONS
2.1 Option A: To not to
make representation on the Loose Neighbourhood Plan. The consultation is being
run in accordance with the requirements of national legislation. There is no
requirement for the Council to submit a representation on the neighbourhood
plan. However to follow this option means that the Council’s overall view as
the Planning Authority is not asserted and its objection as landowner to a
specific designation within the Plan is not made to the neighbourhood body.
This approach would compromise the Council’s opportunity to inform the Examiner
of its position on the Neighbourhood Plan.
2.2 Option B: To
approve this report as the basis for the Borough Council’s representation on
the Loose Neighbourhood Plan including the objection to the designation of the land
at the rear of Herts
Crescent and McAlpine Close as Local Green Space.
3. PREFERRED OPTION AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Option B is recommended. Once a Neighbourhood Plan is made, it becomes part of the Maidstone Development Plan and is used for development management decisions. This option affords an opportunity to inform the Examiner of the Council’s position in respect of the Loose Neighbourhood Plan.
4. RISK
4.1 The
risks associated with this proposal, including the risks if the Council does
not act as recommended, have been considered in line with the Council’s Risk
Management Framework. That consideration is shown in this report at paragraph
2.1.
4.2 There are
some risks to the examination including the Council’s objection as landowner
and the fact that it may fail if statutory requirements are not met in terms of
the latter point. These risks have been mitigated by the parish council’s
positive response to the constructive advice offered by officers on draft
iterations of the neighbourhood plan, by ensuring compliance with regulatory
requirements and the strategic policies Development Plan, and by undertaking
consultation (regulation 16) in accordance with the Statement of Community
Involvement.
4.3 The risks associated are within the Council’s risk appetite and will be managed as per the Council’s policy.
________________________________________________________________
5. CONSULTATION RESULTS AND PREVIOUS COMMITTEE FEEDBACK
5.1 The
Loose Neighbourhood Plan is subject to two rounds of public consultation. The
first (Regulation 14) was undertaken by the parish council in 2016. Maidstone
Borough Council’s representation to that consultation was submitted under
delegated authority to the Head of Planning and Development. The comments
received during consultation, together with the parish council’s responses to
the issues raised, are summarised in the Consultation Statement. The plan has
been amended as a result.
5.2 The current consultation (Regulation 16) is undertaken by the Borough Council on behalf of Loose Parish Council. All representations will be collated by the Borough Council and forwarded to the independent Examiner of the plan, together with the submission documents, for his/her consideration.
6. NEXT STEPS: COMMUNICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION
6.1 Examination of the Loose Neighbourhood Plan would normally be expected to be dealt with by written representations rather than a Hearing. However, given that the council is objecting as landowner there is a possibility that a hearing may be necessary. Maidstone Borough Council is required to pay for the costs of the examination. Following the examination, the Examiner will issue his/her report and recommendations. A report will be presented to this Committee, outlining the Examiner’s recommendations and seeking a decision on whether to move the plan to Referendum. If more than half of those voting in the Referendum have voted in favour of the plan being used to inform planning applications in the area, the plan will move forward to being made (adopted) by full Council.
7. CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS
|
Issue |
Implications |
Sign-off |
|
Impact on Corporate Priorities |
It is not expected that the recommendations will by themselves materially affect achievement of corporate priorities. However, when the neighbourhood plan is ‘made’, it will form part of the Maidstone Development Plan, which will assist in the delivery of the Council’s objectives, notably ‘Keeping Maidstone Borough an attractive place for all’. |
Rob Jarman, Head of Planning and Development |
|
Risk Management |
Risks are set out in Section 4. This consultation (Regulation 16) is being run to ensure that the plan maintains the requirements of national legislation. |
Rob Jarman, Head of Planning and Development |
|
Financial |
The costs for consultation (Regulation 16), examination, Referendum and adoption of the Loose Neighbourhood Plan are borne by the Borough Council. There is a dedicated budget for this purpose, funded by HCLG neighbourhood planning grants. No additional budget is required for neighbourhood planning at this stage. The Council’s position as landowner in relation to one site addressed by the Neighbourhood Plan is set out in paragraph 1.21 of the report. |
Finance Team |
|
Staffing |
The recommendations can be delivered within current staffing levels. |
Rob Jarman, Head of Planning and Development |
|
Legal |
Accepting the recommendations will fulfil the Council’s duties under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by the Localism Act 2011, the Housing and Planning Act 2016, and the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017. The recommendations also comply with the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended). |
Cheryl Parks, Mid Kent Legal Services (Planning) |
|
Privacy and Data Protection |
Accepting the recommendations will increase the volume of data held by the Council. The data will be held in line with the Council’s data protection policies and the GDPR. |
Cheryl Parks, Mid Kent Legal Services (Planning) |
|
Equalities |
The needs of all interested parties have been considered as part of the consultations. As part of the neighbourhood planning process it is for the parish council to consider equalities matters.
|
Strategic Planning Manager |
|
Crime and Disorder |
There are no implications for Crime and Disorder. |
Rob Jarman, Head of Planning and Development |
|
Procurement |
The appointment of an Examiner from IPE or NPIERS can be made under the procurement waiver signed by the Director of Finance and Business Improvement. |
Rob Jarman, Head of Planning and Development |
8. REPORT APPENDICES
The following documents are to be published with this report and form part of the report:
None
9. BACKGROUND PAPERS
· Loose Neighbourhood Plan https://www.maidstone.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/227542/Loose-Neighbourhood-Plan.pdf
· Consultation Statement and Summary, Basic Conditions Statement, Environmental Statement and Summary can be viewed at http://maidstone-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/