Agenda item

The Chair, Councillor Bower, will present the Minutes containing a recommendation from the meeting of the Planning Policy Committee held on 6 October 2021.

There is a recommendation for Council to consider at Minute 338 [Arun Local Plan Update]. The minutes from the meeting and the Officer’s report is attached.

       The Chair of the Planning Policy Committee, Councillor Bower, presented the minutes of the Planning Policy Committee held on 6 October 2021.

       Councillor Bower alerted Members to a recommendation at Minute 338 (Arun Local Plan Update), and he explained that the Council was being asked to support Option 3 which was to pause the preparation of a revised Local Plan until details of the new plan making system had been agreed, with this pause be reviewed in six months’ time. Councillor Bower outlined that the Planning Policy Committee had debated this item at great length. What had been relevant to that debate was that the new Secretary of State had made comments on Local Plans and suggestions over the removal of housing targets and zones. This meant that there was a significant risk that planning reforms could impact the Arun Local Plan update resulting in abortive costs and the need to comprehensively redo work under the new review arrangements. Councillor Bower advised that the content of the planning reform bill was therefore eagerly awaited and that this had been the main reason for proposing a six month pause.  Councillor Bower therefore formally proposed the recommendation which was then seconded by Councillor Hughes.

       The Chair then invited debate.  The first to speak was Councillor Stanley confirming that he wished to propose an amendment. This read as set out below – deletions have been shown using strikethrough and additions in bold:

Option 3 to pause the preparation of a revised Local Plan until details of the new plan making system be agreed, and or for a  maximum of 6 months’ time. that the pause be reviewed in six months’ time.

       Councillor Stanley stated that he could see the advantage in proposing a delay. With a new Minister in post, there were Planning Policy changes being proposed and so it would be sensible to pause and wait to see what the changes might be. However, the Council did have a Local Plan in place which was not working; it was not delivering what the Council needed; and the Council as a result was being subjected to applications because of that. Councillor Stanley stated that he did not believe that it was sensible for the Council to leave the Local Plan potentially open ended so he hoped that the Council would either receive the information in the six month period or the Council would need to look at moving a review forward.

       This amendment was then seconded by Councillor Jones. He outlined that he had been disappointed with the outcome of the Committee’s debate and recommendation stating that the Council should continue with the review of the Local Plan which was currently not fit for purpose.  He understood that the Government was possibly going to be introducing new planning reforms, however, he felt that to sit, stall and wait for the Government to solve the Council’s problems was not the best course of action for the Council to be taking, the Council needed to be more proactive. Councillor Jones stated that it was encouraging that the Council had noted that its Local Plan had issues and that these needed to be rectified so he could not understand wishing to delay this work.  This was why he supported this amendment as he did not want the Council to delay updating the Local Plan when many of the updates would be transferrable to a new plan in any case. The Officer recommendation proposed had been to continue the local plan update as scheduled as this was the most effective method of progress.

       Other Councillors spoke in support of the amendment confirming that the vital evidence gathering work already undertaken could be out of date by the time the review of the Local Plan would recommence. A budget had already been approved to undertake the updates and several studies had been commissioned.

       Those not supporting the amendment stated that this was because the recommendation agreed at Committee was very straight forward. It was awaiting details of the new plan making system to be agreed first, with the pause then being reviewed in 6 months’ time. Whatever the Council wanted, it could not force the Secretary of State to move any faster with his review due restrictions of consultation that would need to be undertaken, the amendment made it sound that the Council had the power to do something that it did not have the power to do. Councillors were reminded of the major problem with the 5 year land supply and how this had affected the review of the existing Local Plan, which had been challenged on its housing numbers each time causing delay and additional cost. The Council did not want to review its existing Plan falsely. 

       On this amendment being put to the vote it was not carried.

       The Chair then returned to the substantive recommendation and following further discussion, a request was made that the voting on this substantive recommendation be recorded.

       Those voting for it were Councillors Bower, Caffyn, Chace, Chapman, Charles, Clayden, Mrs Cooper, Cooper, Coster, Dendle, Dixon, Edwards, Elkins, Goodheart, Gunner, Hamilton, Haywood, Hughes, Huntley, Kelly, Lury, Madeley, Oliver-Redgate, Pendleton, Roberts, Stainton, Stanley, Tilbrook, Walsh, Warr and Yeates (31). Those voting against were Councillors Catterson, Jones, Thurston, and Smith (4). Councillors Brooks, Needs, Staniforth and Worne abstained from voting (4).

       The Council

            RESOLVED

That Option 3, to pause the preparation of a revised Local Plan until details of the new plan making system be agreed, andthat the pause be reviewed in six months’ time.