The Council considered the report of the Director of Built Environment which presented the Preferred Option Document, a key stage in the preparation of Sefton’s Local Plan. The Document set out the issues and challenges facing Sefton, which included:
· a vision for Sefton’s planning ahead to 2030;
· a strategy for how Sefton’s housing, business and other development needs can be met;
· a ‘preferred’ option indicating where those needs might be met including detailed site allocations;
· details of other options which have been considered and discounted;
· development management policies to help guide development and provide a policy framework for making decisions on planning applications; and
· details of the 12 week consultation arrangements.
This was a corporate strategy document which was being developed within the statutory planning framework. The Preferred Option Document was a key stage in the process of adopting a Local Plan, which would in due course replace the Unitary Development Plan.
The Council also considered an addendum note to the report produced by the Director of Built Environment which set out two minor updates to the Preferred Option document.
The Mayor reported that the Local Plan Preferred Option Document had been considered at the following meetings, prior to the Council meeting:
· the Overview and Scrutiny Committee (Regeneration and Environmental Services) on 28 May 2013;
· the Planning Committee on 12 June 2013; and
· the Cabinet on 20 June 2013
The Mayor advised Members that the report set out a preferred option for consultation, which was a key stage of the journey to work out what was the best way forward with respect to the important strategic document. No final decisions on the adoption of the Local Plan would be made until 2015.
The Mayor also advised Members that they could all participate in the debate so long as they retained an open mind and had not and did not say anything that would lead others to think that they had a closed mind.
It was moved by Councillor P. Dowd and seconded by Councillor Maher:
That:
(1) the further evidence which supports the Preferred Option Document be approved for consultation, as outlined in Section 18 of the report;
(2) the approach to consultation on the Preferred Option Document be approved, as outlined in Section 20 of the report;
(3) the Preferred Option Document be approved for consultation, including a correction to the land proposed for development, south east of Hightown as set out in Section 19 and the plan attached to the report; and the amendments set out in the addendum note; and
(4) the Head of Planning Services be granted delegated powers to make minor editorial changes to the Document before it is published, as referred to in Section 20.7 of the report.
The Leader of the Council (Councillor P. Dowd) made the following comments:
· The Council was required by the Government to produce a robust and sound Local Plan in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework. The content of the Plan could be challenged by the public, action groups and developers, and the final decision upon the content of the Plan would be taken by a Planning Inspector appointed by the Government.
· The current figure of 510 housing units per year was based on evidence provided by Planning Consultants and the housing requirement figure would be reviewed next year when the next round of the population and household projections data was published by the Government. If the figure had to be reduced, then it would be done on the basis of the latest information available at that time.
· The Plan had to deal with social, economic and environmental issues, including the Port redevelopment and the provision of affordable housing to meet housing need within the Borough.
· He was aware that some Members of the Council were currently concerned about the proportionality of the development proposals in Maghull and Lydiate, but gave an assurance that all of the consultation feedback would be fully considered, to ensure that the right proposals were included in the final version of the Local Plan to be submitted to the Planning Inspector for examination in due course.
During a lenghty debate, Members of the Council raised the following issues:
· The Government required the Council to plan for the future employment and housing needs of the Borough and the Option 1 proposal for the provision of 270 homes per year was not viable and would not be accepted by the Planning Inspector.
· The Government figures indicated that 400 homes or more would need to be provided each year and if the Council did not plan for that provision, the Government would do it for the Council. The figures would need to be challenged to ensure they were correct, following the publication of the population and household projections data in 2014.
· It was possible that the number of homes to be built each year would reduce from 510 to say 470 homes when the latest projections are published in 2014.
· Councillors fully appreciated the public concerns about the use of green field sites. It had to be acknowledged that some sites would need to be used to meet the housing need but the amount of green field sites to be used should be kept to as low an amount as possible.
· Concerns were raised about the current allocated sites in the Preferred Options Document for Maghull and Lydiate, which were disproportionate to the housing need in that area and would increase the volume of traffic, the demand for other services and change the overall character of the area.
· Concerns were raised about the number of new homes proposed for Ainsdale which would increase the demand for schools, other services and infrastructure to be provided in that area. A request was made for the retention of the sports field at the former Ainsdale Hope High School site for recreational use and for the provision of more allotment sites.
· Concerns were raised that schools had been closed in some areas based on previous long term planning need and this could now lead to insufficient school places being made available in due course, to meet increased demand following the proposed housing development set out in the Preferred Option Document.
· There was a need for more 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom accommodation and the provision of affordable housing in the Borough to meet the growing housing demand.
· Concerns were raised about the potential loss of Grade 1 agricultural land and the impact of proposed development on bordering land in West Lancashire and Knowsley which would have an impact on the services provided within Sefton. These issues needed to be looked at more widely and robustly. The Council should become more of a campaigning Council to put pressure on the Government to protect agricultural land.
· Concerns were raised about the proposed development at Moss Lane, Churchtown, the potential land sewage problems on the peat land and the increased traffic on the adjoining country lanes.
· The Local Plan needed to address, in more detail, how the infrastructure problems in many areas of Sefton, as referred to in the Preferred Options Document, would be addressed with developers and infrastructure/service providers; the make-up of the 510 homes to be built each year; and the carbon economy policies.
· Concerns were raised about the proposed use of reserved sites after 2020, if the capacity on the allocated sites falls below the five year supply and officers were requested to ensure that developers fully utilised the number of units on each site, to ensure that the reserved sites would not need to be used, especially in Lydiate.
· Concerns were raised that the Preferred Options Document made no reference to the Shale Gas developments which could take place within the licensed area, which stretches from Crossens to Ainsdale within the Borough and the environmental and economic impact it would have on the Borough.
· Concerns were raised about the proposed development in West Lancashire on land adjacent to Birkdale Ward and the impact upon schools and other services in that Ward.
· A request was made for more recognition to be given to the statement in paragraph 2.44 on page 71 of the Preferred Options Document that “about 1 in 4 of Sefton’s residents lived in an area classed as within the 20% most deprived areas in the country.” Provision needed to be made in the Local Plan for policies to address the provision of improved housing and health services to address the major variations in health and life expectancy within the Borough.
· Requests were made for the proposed consultation arrangements to be reviewed, with less emphasis on booked appointments, to ensure that the public and in particular, Action Groups could actively challenge the figures and proposals in the Preferred Options Document. The Council would need to ensure that it took the public along with it, all the way on the process leading up to the adoption of the Local Plan.
Following the debate, the requisite number of Members having signified their wish that the voting on the Motion should be recorded in accordance with Rule 92 of the Council and Committee Procedure Rules, the voting was duly recorded and the Members of the Council present at the time, voted as follows:
FOR THE MOTION:
Councillors Atkinson, Bradshaw, Brennan, Byrom, Carr, K. Cluskey, L. Cluskey, Cummins, M. Dowd, P. Dowd, Friel, Gatherer, Hardy, John Kelly, John Joseph Kelly, Kermode, Killen, Lappin, P. Maguire, Maher, Mahon, McGinnity, Moncur, Page, Roberts, Robinson, Roche, Tweed, Veidman and Webster.
AGAINST THE MOTION:
Councillors Ashton, Ball, Blackburn, Brodie – Browne, Crabtree, Cuthbertson, Dawson, Dodd, Dorgan, Dutton, Lord Fearn, Hands, Hartill, Jones, Keith, S. McGuire, McIvor, Preece, Rimmer, Robertson, Shaw, Sir Ron Watson, Weavers and Welsh.
ABSTENTION
The Mayor (Councillor M. Fearn)
The Motion was carried by 30 votes to 24, with 1 abstention and it was
RESOLVED:
That:
(1) the further evidence which supports the Preferred Option Document be approved for consultation, as outlined in Section 18 of the report;
(2) the approach to consultation on the Preferred Option Document be approved, as outlined in Section 20 of the report;
(3) the Preferred Option Document be approved for consultation, including a correction to the land proposed for development, south east of Hightown as set out in Section 19 and the plan attached to the report; and the amendments set out in the addendum note; and
(4) the Head of Planning Services be granted delegated powers to make minor editorial changes to the Document before it is published, as referred to in Section 20.7 of the report.
The Cabinet heard representations from Mrs B. Porter on behalf of a deputation who had submitted a petition containing the signatures of 26 residents of the Borough, which related to the proposed Local Plan for Sefton and stated:
“We the undersigned support the proposal by the Ainsdale Community Wildlife Trust (A.C.W.T.) to re-establish and extend the sand dune conservation area into the green belt presently occupied by the former Ainsdale Hope High School playing field, to protect it for the future and to enable use by the Ainsdale community at large.”
Further to Minute No. 16 of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 12 June 2013, the Cabinet then considered the report of the Director of Built Environment which presented the Preferred Option Document, a key stage in the preparation of Sefton’s Local Plan. The Document set out the issues and challenges facing Sefton, which included:
· a vision for Sefton’s planning ahead to 2030;
· a strategy for how Sefton’s housing, business and other development needs can be met;
· a ‘preferred’ option indicating where those needs might be met including detailed site allocations;
· details of other options which have been considered and discounted;
· development management policies to help guide development and provide a policy framework for making decisions on planning applications; and
· details of the 12 week consultation arrangements.
This was a corporate strategy document which was being developed within the statutory planning framework. The Preferred Option Document was a key stage in the process of adopting a Local Plan, which would in due course replace the Unitary Development Plan.
The Director of Built Environment circulated an addendum note to the report which set out two minor updates to the Preferred Option document.
Members of the Cabinet raised questions on the following issues referred to in the report and officers responded to the Issues as indicated below:
|
Councillor Fairclough enquired whether all of the available brown field sites were been made available for housing development.
Response: The Director of Built Environment confirmed that a comprehensive exercise, including a strategic housing land availability assessment and two ‘calls for sites’ had ensured that all of the available brown field sites were included in the land supply as set out in the Preferred Option Document.
|
|
Councillor Cummins sought clarification on the amount of greenbelt land which would be utilised under the Preferred Option Document for development purposes.
Response: The Director of Built Environment indicated that based on the supply of 510 units per year until 2030, 3.2% of the available greenbelt land in the Borough would be used for development purposes under Option 2 in the Preferred Option Document. The requirement for 510 net additional units per year would be reviewed during 2014 when new population and household information data is due to be released.
|
|
Councillor Moncur enquired about the life span of the Local Plan.
Response: The Director of Built Environment indicated that the Local Plan would operate for 15 years from the adoption of the Plan but that the housing requirement took account of need from the revocation of the North West Regional Spatial Strategy in 2013 and the backlog of housing supply for the current plan period.
|
|
Councillor Hardy enquired how long the New Homes Bonus Scheme would continue.
Response: The Director of Built Environment indicated that the scheme could end at any time but reiterated that the predominating factor in the Local Plan would be to meet housing need within the Borough and not maximise New Homes Bonus. He added that significant New Homes Bonus had also been secured by bringing vacant homes back into use rather than new development.
|
|
Councillor P. Dowd commented that there was a view that the Council was selling off its available land for a large capital receipt and enquired if this was the case.
Response: The Director of Built Environment indicated that there was little land within the proposed land supply under option 2 which was in the Council’s ownership.
|
|
Councillor Tweed enquired how the Council would enforce any proposals for affordable housing to be provided to meet the growing housing need within the Borough.
Response: The Director of Built Environment indicated that policies were contained in the Preferred Option Document and in local agreed policies for the provision of 30% affordable housing on developments which had 15 or more units. The majority of ’Affordable’ Housing would be in the form of social rented accommodation or let at the Governments ‘affordable’ rented level of 80% of market rents. Shared ownership would account for the remainder, allowing people on to the housing ladder with a share of a property, ‘ramping’ up to 100% as disposable income increases. |
|
Councillor Maher commented that while the focus of public concern was around green belt issues, there were other very positive policies in the Preferred Option Document including those relating to ‘fast food’ outlet exclusion zones around local schools to protect young people. He asked officers to ensure that those wider issues were communicated.
|
|
Councillor P. Dowd enquired about the arrangements for consultation on the Preferred Option Document
Response: The Director of Built Environment indicated that the Council would be holding a 12 week consultation period commencing on 8 July 2013 and the responses to the Preferred Option Document would be reported to the Planning Committee and Cabinet in due course for consideration. The Consultation arrangements had been approved by the Public Consultatation and Engagement Panel and included a media campaign, mail drops to community groups in liaison with colleagues in the youth, health and housing services and various consultation events throughout the Borough |
This was a Key Decision and was included in the Council’s Forward Plan of Key Decisions.
Decision Made:
That:
(1) the petition be noted and taken into account during the consideration of responses to the consultation on the Preferred Option Document;
(2) the Council be recommended to:
(i) approve for consultation, the further evidence which supports the Preferred Option Document, as outlined in Section 18 of the report;
(ii) approve the approach to consultation on the Preferred Option Document, as outlined in Section 20 of the report;
(iii) approve the Preferred Option Document for consultation, including a correction to the land proposed for development, south east of Hightown, as set out in Section 19 and the plan attached to the report; and the amendments set out in the addendum note to the report; and
(iv) grant delegated powers to the Head of Planning Services to make minor editorial changes to the Document before it is published, as referred to in section 20.7 of the report.
Reasons for Decision:
To enable the Preferred Option Document and supporting evidence to be available for public consultation.
Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:
The report set out three options which included different levels of development and growth and it recommended a Preferred Option.
The Council was required to prepare and adopt a Local Plan. It would be necessary to have the Local Plan formally examined by a planning inspector. The Local Plan must meet statutory planning requirements and would be assessed for ‘soundness’. The Preferred Option presented in the report is considered to be the most appropriate option for Sefton when considering these various requirements.