Extraordinary Executive, Policy

& Community Safety Scrutiny Panel    11 July 2018


Extraordinary Cabinet                            19 July 2018 (afternoon)


Extraordinary Council                            19 July 2018 (evening)


Report Author                                            Madeline Homer, Chief Executive


Portfolio Holder                                         Cllr Robert Bayford, Leader of Council


Status                                                        For Recommendation


Classification:                                            Unrestricted


Key Decision                                             No


Previously Considered by                         None


Ward:                                                         All


Executive Summary:


The Local Plan supports the Council’s Corporate Plan priorities and is one of the Council’s key strategies in delivering on its priority to promote inward investment and job creation. It helps set the strategic framework for delivery of the Council’s economic ambitions. Not only does it help to deliver the economic strategy, it also makes provision for new housing to meet local needs and to support the growth of the workforce, and other development requirements, and supports the provision of key new infrastructure.


It is also a statutory document that is assessed by an independent Planning Inspector, and   this report describes the legal requirements and processes for the Local Plan at this stage, and the guidance which affects decisions through the Local Plan process.


This report sets out the current position with the draft Local Plan; identifies new information to be considered in relation to the draft Plan; and seeks Members’ views on the next steps to be taken with the draft Plan. The report also records the Cabinet consideration of the draft Local Plan position.


The Panel are asked to consider whether to respond to the Cabinet’s initial proposals.



The Panel are asked to consider whether to respond to the Cabinet’s initial proposals which are as detailed below:


Cabinet recommends:


(1)    That Council agree to proceed with the draft Local Plan on the basis of Option (2) set out in this report; that is, as recommended to Council on 18 January 2018, with the revised distribution of sites and other amendments set out in this report and in the Addendum at Annex 2;


(2)    That Council agree for inclusion in the draft Local Plan the main changes in Annex 4 of the Council report of 18 January 2018, as modified by any decision on Recommendation (1) above (set out in Annex 1);

(3)    That Council agree for inclusion in the draft Local Plan the other changes set out in this report regarding the identification of additional Local Green Spaces, and a proposed new policy relating to foster homes in the district (also set out in the Addendum at Annex 2);

(4)    That, subject to the other recommendations above, Council delegate authority to officers to make such minor technical and factual amendments to the draft Plan as are necessary for clarity and consistency;

(5)    That Council agree that the draft Local Plan (as amended), together with the associated evidence base, including the Sustainability Appraisal/Habitat Regulations Assessment, and the draft Transport Strategy, be published for comment (under Reg 19) for a period of six weeks, and then subsequently be submitted for Examination (under Reg 22); and

(6)    That the Council request the Examination Inspector, under Section 20(7) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004) to recommend any modifications to the draft Local Plan, which they consider are required in order to resolve problems that would otherwise make the Plan unsound or not legally compliant.





Financial and Value for Money

The arrangements for formal publication of a draft local plan are anticipated to cost about £10,000, taking into account printing costs; venue costs; etc. This is within the current budget.


There are no specific requirements under Contract Standing Orders/ Financial Procedure Rules relating to the Publication stage.



This report relates to the next stage of the Local Plan process, and needs to be carried out in accordance with any relevant Regulations (including the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012) and Government guidance, and in line with the Council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement (SCI).


• Primary corporate risk is not having a well-evidenced Local Plan.  Lack of a “sound” Plan places the Council “at risk” in terms of Appeal decisions and also delays the provision of infrastructure, effectively losing control of the development process. There continues to be a significant risk of further intervention by MHCLG, if timely progress is not made on preparation of the draft Plan. Any decision on the draft Plan that runs counter to the available evidence would be likely to fail at Examination and also potentially be subject to Judicial Review.

• There is a strong “fit” between the draft Local Plan and corporate strategy priorities.

• Environmental implications – none directly from publication of a draft Plan. Environmental issues related to the provisions of the draft Plan are considered through the Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment/Habitat Regulations Assessment, which also need to be available for comment at Publication stage.

Equality Act 2010 & Public Sector Equality Duty

Members are reminded of the requirement, under the Public Sector Equality Duty (section 149 of the Equality Act 2010) to have due regard to the aims of the Duty at the time the decision is taken. The aims of the Duty are: (i) eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act, (ii) advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it, and (iii) foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it.


Protected characteristics: age, gender, disability, race, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, religion or belief and pregnancy & maternity. Only aim (i) of the Duty applies to Marriage & civil partnership.


Please indicate which aim is relevant to the report.

Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act,


Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it


Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it.



The PSED is engaged by the Local Plan topic. The draft Local Plan is the subject of a continuing Equalities Impact Assessment, which indicates that the duty is met by the draft policies in the Plan.


A number of policies within the draft Plan address issues that could otherwise have an impact on groups with protected characteristics. For example, policies relating to air quality; transport; provision of key social and physical infrastructure; accessible housing; protection of open space; internal space standards and water efficiency measures in new housing, all assist with meeting the aims of the PSED.


It is therefore the view of officers that the duty is met by the policies set out in the draft Plan.


When the draft Local Plan is published, officers will review representations for equality issues in addition to those already considered as part of previous consultations.




CORPORATE PRIORITIES (tick those relevant)ü



CORPORATE VALUES (tick those relevant)ü


A clean and welcoming Environment 



Delivering value for money


Promoting inward investment and job creation



Supporting the Workforce


Supporting neighbourhoods



Promoting open communications




1.0       Introduction and Background


1.1       The Council’s Corporate Plan (as adopted in 2015) sets out the Council’s aspiration to grow the local economy. One of the priorities is to promote inward investment and job creation (Corporate priority 3). Part of the Council’s vision is to accelerate growth and achieve greater economic prosperity for our district; seeking opportunities for inward investment and high quality job creation, and working with partners to ensure we have the right skills, infrastructure and plans in place.


1.2       The Local Plan is one of the Council’s key strategies in supporting economic growth and regeneration and is specifically identified in the Corporate Plan priorities. Not only does it help to deliver the economic strategy, it also identifies locations for new housing to meet local needs and to support the growth of the workforce, and other development requirements. It also supports the provision of new infrastructure (such as schools, medical facilities, transport and so on) through the infrastructure delivery plan, working with key partners to ensure the infrastructure is delivered in a timely way.


1.3       The Local Plan also has a role in supporting the other corporate priorities by seeking to improve design and quality of new development; protecting publicly-accessible open spaces and important wildlife sites; providing a framework for the preparation of Neighbourhood Plans; and working with other statutory providers to seek to ensure that local health, education and other services are provided alongside new development.


1.4       The Local Plan supports the current priorities set out in the Corporate Plan, but to some extent will also help to frame future priorities beyond the current Corporate Plan period.


1.5       The Local Plan process is also a statutory process. The draft Local Plan is assessed by an independent Planning Inspector through an Examination-in-Public, and this report describes the legal processes for the Local Plan and the guidance which affects decisions through the Local Plan process.


2.0       The Current Situation and next steps


2.1       On 18th January 2018, the Council voted not to proceed to Publication and Submission of the draft Local Plan. A copy of the report to Council is attached at Annex 1, for ease of reference, together with the previous Annexes.


2.2       Since that time, there have been a number of changes affecting the draft Local Plan of which Members should be aware.


2.3       Position regarding Local Plan intervention


2.4       Members will recall that in November 2017 the-then Secretary of State (SoS) wrote to the Council (along with 14 other local authorities), raising the possibility of intervention in the Local Plan process, and requiring a response from the Council by 31 January 2018, setting out how the Council intended to progress its Local Plan.


2.5       On 31 January, the Council wrote to the SoS, setting out a timetable for progressing the draft Local Plan, with submission expected in early 2019. On 23 March 2018, the SoS wrote to the Council (and two other Councils) to advise that he had decided to continue with the intervention process.


2.6       The first stage is a diagnostic stage, assessing how the Council intends to move the draft Local Plan forward. The key consideration is whether the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) believes that further intervention would accelerate the Local Plan process. What MHCLG are considering is whether the Council has clear and credible plans to bring forward a “sound” Plan in a timely manner. Their conclusion on this point will be a significant factor in whether there will be further intervention in the Local Plan process


2.7       The Council needs to demonstrate two things:


·         That it has a credible programme for bringing forward a draft Plan without delay; and

·         That the draft Plan has a strong probability of being found “sound”.


2.8       While the current process is not specifically looking in detail at the “soundness” of the draft Plan, it is clear that if the Council were to proceed with a Plan that was clearly not sound (eg: if it did not seek to meet the full housing requirement), this would inevitably lead to significant delays, which could prompt additional, more far-reaching, intervention by the Minister.


2.9       If the SoS is not convinced by the Council’s proposals, this could result in direct intervention:


·         MHCLG could direct the Council to publish/submit a draft Plan; or

·         MHCLG could take over the writing of the draft Plan, or direct another body to do so (for example, KCC) at this Council’s expense.


2.10     At the time of writing, it is believed that the report of the MHCLG advisors has been submitted to MHCLG, but it is not known what recommendations will be made to the Minister, or when the Minister will make a decision on any further action on those recommendations.


            Implications for draft Local Plan


2.11     The Council needs to continue to progress the draft Local Plan in the context of the risk of further intervention. The Council therefore has two options:


(1)  To proceed to Publication/Submission as recommended to Council on 18th January 2018, including the allocation of Manston Airport for mixed-use development, including 2,500 dwellings. This option also includes a number of additional Local Green Spaces at Westgate, and a proposed policy for fostering homes. This is the recommendation of officers; or


(2)  If Members are not minded to follow that recommendation, to proceed to Publication/Submission with a draft Plan that does not allocate the Airport for mixed-use development, and meets the housing requirement for the period to 2031 on other sites.


Draft Policy SP05 would be deleted, and replaced with text that recognises the existing use of the Airport and acknowledges the current Development Consent Order (DCO) process for the site. This also provides the opportunity for any other interested parties to pursue the operational use of the airport through agreement with the landowners or through becoming an indemnity partner as part of a potential CPO process with the Council. The statement regarding existing use is not a policy statement; it is simply a recognition of the current planning status of the site. This also means that current Policy EC4 (and other Airport-related policies) would not be continued, or replaced with equivalent policies, in the new Local Plan.


In the event that a DCO or CPO is not accepted or granted, or does not proceed, the Council will need to consider the best use for this site (including housing), in the next Local Plan review.


2.12     If Option (2) is to be considered, the selection of housing sites should be:


·      In line with the draft Local Plan Strategy;

·      Consistent with the findings and recommendations of the Sustainability Appraisal;

·      Compatible with the Transport Strategy for the district;

·      Based on the sites submitted to the Council by land-owners/agents; and

·      Otherwise consistent with Government guidance, and the Council’s own evidence base.


2.13     Members will be aware that following the decision of Council in January 2018, a new “call for sites” was launched, to try to ensure that there was a sufficient pool of suitable sites available if there was a need to identify additional housing sites. A significant number of sites were submitted to the Council and these can be found at


2.14     In locational terms, considering Option 2 means that:


·       Housing development should be focused at urban areas or the urban edge and larger villages;

·         That any housing distribution should avoid any additional traffic loading of the  Haine Road corridor (as advised by KCC Highways), and should be well-related to the road network improvements proposed in the draft Transport Strategy, including the Inner Circuit;

·       Housing development should not be located in the vicinity of the Airport;

·       Housing development should not be located adjacent to the national and international wildlife designations along the coast; and

·       In addition, the designated Green Wedges should be avoided, as should Flood Risk Areas and sensitive landscape areas (identified through the Landscape Character Assessment).


2.15     Based on these criteria, there are very limited options available in which to accommodate the 2,500 dwellings previously allocated at the Airport. These are primarily focussed on land at the urban edges in the northern part of the district.  It is therefore advised that the re-distribution of housing set out in the Addendum is the best option to adopt in terms of the soundness of the draft Plan.


2.16     This is, to re-allocate the 2,500 dwellings as follows:


·         An additional 600 dwellings at Birchington, as an extension of the previous draft allocation;

·         An additional 1,000 dwellings at Westgate, as an extension of the previous draft allocation;

·         An additional 500 dwellings at Westwood, as an extension of the previous draft allocation at Manston Court Road/Haine Road;

·         An additional 300 dwellings on a new site at Hartsdown, south of Margate; and

·         An additional 100 dwellings on the allocated housing site at Tothill Street, Minster.


2.17     Such a distribution would broadly follow the principles set out in paragraphs 2.12 and 2.14.


2.18     The site plans and detailed policy provisions for these sites are set out in the Addendum (Annex 2).


Assessment of re-distribution of housing


Sustainability Appraisal


2.19     In summary, the assessment of the SA consultants (see Annex 5) is as follows:


2.20     Option 1 – This was assessed previously. It is important to ensure that new settlement mitigation measures are addressed in the Policy. The main benefit of this option is that most of the housing is delivered on previously-developed (brownfield) land.


2.21     Option 2 – There would be a permanent redistribution of housing allocation and changes to how inward investment and employment opportunities are realised, thus effecting the development of sustainable locations (Objective 11). This has socio-economic implications for Thanet (Objective 6 and Objective 8) in that it is likely to affect diversity of employment types (opportunities for more Class B businesses) coming forward, potentially resulting in less sustainable options being implemented.


2.22     Whilst aspects of the Option 2 addendum items meet the SA Framework in promoting housing development (Objective 1), potential conflict exists between the need to prioritise the redevelopment of brownfield land for economic growth and continue to remain on track to meet local housing need and associated infrastructure such as healthcare provision (Objective 2) as the number of houses may not trigger new healthcare services.  The sites identified either as strategic sites or an alternative to the former Airport site as a new settlement is likely to place permanent pressure on local resources.


2.23     Piecemeal additions at different locations throughout Thanet may only serve to add pressure on existing social infrastructure, rather than create a local critical mass that would warrant a (viable) increase in local social infrastructure provision. Sustainability would depend on how well these new sites will link to neighbouring established developments and rural settings (Objective 20).


2.24     The increased designations associated with Policy SP30 (Local Green Space) are likely to increase and improve access to local green space for residents of Westgate. This is likely to have benefits with respect to resident’s health, which may go some way in ensuring that pressures on healthcare provision and facilities (Objective 2) are limited.


2.25     The addition of new wording to policy HO26 (Fostering Homes) supports sustainable development and meets the social objectives of the Plan by providing an appropriate mix of housing tenures (Objective 1) for Thanet as well as improving access to health care facilities and provision (Objective 2).  New housing for foster homes will ensure that vulnerable people are supported by living in mixed communities and therefore able to foster a sense of community (Objective 6).


Habitat Regulations Assessment

2.26     Members will be aware that one of the key issues for Thanet is that development (wherever located in the district) is considered to have an effect on the national and international nature conservation designations at the coast, by virtue of the level of informal recreation that is generated along the coastline.


2.27     To provide the appropriate level of mitigation for these impacts, the Council has adopted a Strategic Access, Management & Mitigation (SAMM) Strategy, which has been agreed with Natural England, the Government’s nature conservation advisors.  This seeks to ensure that all development, by contributing to the SAMM Strategy, is able to sufficiently mitigate the impacts resulting from development.


2.28     The advice from the Council’s advisors in relation to the Habitat Regulations is that Option 1 is preferable to Option 2. The issues with Option 2 relate to the additional allocations, which are on agricultural land, and the possible conflict with Golden Plover, in particular at the Westgate site.  However, either Option 1 or Option 2 could be capable of meeting the requirements of the Habitat Regulations.


2.29     The advice is that it might therefore be appropriate for the cross-cutting safeguarding text that is included in draft Policy SP12 (“Include an assessment of the site’s functionality as a roosting or feeding resource for the interest features of the Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay SPA Special Protection Area, including areas within 400m of the development site’s boundary, and provide mitigation where necessary”), or similar, to also be included in any policies that relate specifically to the new Westgate allocation.


2.30     However, the existing cross-cutting reference in draft Policy SP12 may also be considered adequate, in that it applies to all new housing sites.  This is the course recommended to Members.


Whole Plan Viability

2.31     The initial advice from the viability assessment work is that the sites identified under Option 2 (viewed as developments in themselves) continue to have reasonable prospects of viability.


2.32     However, the degree to which their viability can support wider strategy on infrastructure is probably not going to be fully clear until the wider requirements are more settled and are costed.


Transport Strategy

2.33     One of the key issues from an infrastructure perspective is that any re-distribution of housing is compatible with the overall Transport Strategy. A key element of the draft Transport Strategy would be the provision of an “inner circuit” that links strategic development sites to key destinations such as service/employment centres (including Westwood).


2.34     This important piece of infrastructure would:


·      relieve pressure on the existing urban route network;

·      assist with managing traffic-related air quality issues in parts of the urban area (notably The Square in Birchington and St.Lawrence in Ramsgate);

·      managing “rat-running” within existing highway routes such as Manston Court Road and Manston Village; and

·      provide scope for sustainable journeys through the provision of enhanced pedestrian/cycle facilities and enhanced public transport coverage.


2.35     The “inner circuit” is a required piece of infrastructure to deal with traffic pressures arising from growth and development.  As a result, the re-distribution option does not materially change the measures set out in the Transport Strategy, except that the Airport site would not be able to provide a direct road link between the A299 (Hengist Way roundabout at Cliffsend) and Manston Road.


2.36     It is important to note that whatever development takes place at the Airport will need to provide (on-site) and contribute to (off-site) the key link from Westwood through to the Mount Pleasant junction at Minster. This is an integral part of the Transport Strategy, and it is therefore considered essential that it is incorporated within any DCO proposals.


2.37     Members will be aware that KCC’s Environment & Transport Cabinet Committee has endorsed the initial principles of the draft Thanet Transport Strategy and confirmed their support for an initial public consultation exercise to be progressed, based on the housing allocations proposed in January 2018. Given KCC Highways’ advice, it is proposed to amend the draft Transport Strategy to reflect the housing distribution set out in Option (2), and for the Council to publish it for comment alongside the draft Local Plan.


            Risk Assessment


2.38     There are risks associated with the adoption of Option (2), and these are set out in Annex 3.


            Other changes to the draft Local Plan


2.39     In addition to the above, there are a number of other changes for which Member support is sought.  These were set out in Annex 4 (Proposed main changes to the draft Local Plan) of the Council report on 18 January 2018 would be carried forward into the draft Plan for Publication and Submission (see Annex 1 to this report, p224).


2.40     The main policy changes are:


     A new policy to support the Thanet Landscape Character Assessment, and its use as supplementary planning guidance;

     A new policy to support the designation of sites as Local Green Spaces;

     Carrying forward the policy in the 2006 Local Plan to identify land for possible QEQM expansion;

     A new policy to support ancillary accommodation for family members, subject to design and other criteria; and

     A new policy to support the implementation of the Government’s national standards in relation to new development - internal space standards; energy and water efficiency; and accessible and adaptable accommodation.



Update to Local Green Space assessments


2.41     The Council received a number of proposals for Local Green Spaces (LGS) as part of the consultation in January 2017. A number of sites were not considered by previous Committees. The proposed sites are all located in Westgate - Adrian Square; Ethelbert Square; a playing field at Lymington Road/Minster Road; the recreation ground at Lymington Road; a local park at Victoria Avenue and the Esplanade Gardens at Royal Esplanade.


2.42     As with the previous submissions, these sites have been considered against the criteria in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and taking into account recent case law and best practice. Para 77 of the NPPF advises that Local Green Space should meet the following criteria:


·      The green space is in reasonably close proximity to the community it serves;

·      The green area is demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular local significance; and

·      The green area concerned is local in character and is not an extensive tract of land.


2.43     The NPPF also advises that “the Local Green Space designation will not be appropriate for most green areas or open space” (para 77). When the previous LGS proposals were assessed, it was recommended that clifftop/seafront sites should not be included as LGS for operational, coastal defence and public safety reasons.


2.44     On that basis, it is recommended that the Esplanade Gardens area should not be designated as LGS. It is, however, recommended that the following sites are included in the draft Local Plan as Local Green Space:


1.    Adrian Square, Westgate-on-Sea;

2.    Ethelbert Square, Westgate-on-Sea;

3.    Playing field at Lymington Road/Minster Road, Westgate-on-Sea;

4.    Recreation ground at Lymington Road, Westgate-on-Sea; and

5.    Local park at Victoria Avenue, Westgate-on-Sea.


2.45     Summary assessments are attached at Annex 4.



Proposed new policy relating to foster homes


2.46     For some years, vulnerable children have been placed in care in Thanet, notably in Cliftonville. Partner organisations, including the Police and the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), have become increasingly concerned about the impact of new foster homes, or similar facilities, being located in the district, and in particular, in the Cliftonville area.


2.47     Parts of Margate and Cliftonville experience multiple layers of risk and significant deprivation, and are the subject of substantial inter-agency efforts to improve the environment and lives of people already resident in the area.


2.48     There is evidence that the concentration of these premises in this area causes a range of problems, including:


·           The children placed in these facilities being at increased risk;

·           Significant impact on, and diversion of, the resources of key agencies, undermining the delivery of core services in the area; and

·           Harm to the area in which these homes are located.


2.49     It is therefore recommended that the Council include in the Publication draft of the Local Plan a policy that:


·           Introduces a moratorium on new foster homes involving more than 6 people (including carers) in the Cliftonville West Ward; and

·           Provides the opportunity for foster homes in other areas of the district to be assessed individually in terms of the impact on the issues set out above.


            Update to Retail Study


2.50     Since the previous report, there has been an update to the Thanet Retail and Leisure Assessment. This has concluded that the district-wide comparison retail floorspace projection to 2031 is 24,567sqm. This has reduced from 33,118sqm from the 2016 study reflecting the situation post-EU referendum. Comparison retail floorspace at Westwood has fallen from 23,903sqm to 16,787sqm needed over the plan period.


2.51     Convenience retail floorspace need to the end of the Plan period is only 1,255sqm, approximately half what it was in 2016; and 4,338sqm of food and beverage floorspace is needed to 2031. This has reduced from 6,043sqm.


2.52     These findings have no implications for the draft Local Plan.



Recent changes to the National Planning Policy Framework


2.53     Members will be aware that the Ministry for Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) has previously published proposals for a new methodology to be applied by all local planning authorities in determining housing requirements.  This includes a specific calculation to adjust the housing need figure to take account of market signals, based on a comparison of median house prices and median earnings. The consultation document indicated that, where a draft local plan has not been submitted for Examination by 31 March 2018, the new standardised housing method should be used.


2.54     The latest proposals from MHCLG extend the transition period for until 6 months after the NPPF is published, for the purposes of considering draft Local Plans.  This means that, if the transition period is confirmed, the new housing methodology should not apply if the Council submits a draft Plan for Examination this year.


            Amendments to the Local Development Scheme (LDS)


2.55     The Council reviewed the LDS in 2017, but following the Council decision on 18th January, it needs to be updated to reflect the proposed new programme.


2.56     The timetable is proposed as follows:


·         Publication for comment: August 2018


·         Submission for Examination: October 2018


·         Examination hearings begin: February 2019


·         Adoption of Local Plan: Summer 2019


2.57     There may be other, minor consequential changes to the LDS.



Cabinet consideration of the report


2.58     Cabinet considered this matter on 2nd July 2018, and resolved to recommend that Council agree Option (2) under Recommendation 1, and Recommendations (2) – (6).  Cabinet resolved to publish the revised LDS, and to delegate authority to officers to make minor consequential changes to the LDS as are necessary to reflect the anticipated timetable for Local Plan preparation.


3.0       Options


3.1       In considering this report, there are 2 options:


3.2      Option 1 – to publish the draft Plan as recommended to Council on 18 January 2018 – this option responds to Government guidance, the developing evidence base, and accords with legal advice. It also provides local communities and other stakeholders with the opportunity to comment further on key issues affecting the Local Plan; or


3.3      Option 2 – to publish the draft Plan as described in this report – This option also provides local communities and other stakeholders with the opportunity to comment further on key issues affecting the Local Plan.


4.0       Next Steps


4.1       Once this report has been considered by Scrutiny Panel, it will be presented to the following Committees:


·      Cabinet (if referred by Scrutiny Panel) – 19 July 2018

·      Council - 19 July 2018


4.2       At the Publication stage (Reg 19) of the Local Plan process, the Local Plan is published for a 6-week period (in accordance with Reg 35(3)(b)).


4.3       The publication of the draft Plan will give people an opportunity to comment on the proposals ahead of the draft Plan being submitted for independent Examination. People who make comments at Publication stage will have the opportunity to appear at the Examination.


4.4       Following Publication for comment, the draft Local Plan will be submitted (Reg 22) to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) for independent Examination, together with any comments made at Publication stage.


4.5       At Examination stage, it is usual practice for the Local Planning Authority to request the Inspector to recommend modifications to the draft Plan that they consider are required to ensure the soundness and legal compliance of the draft Plan.  This requires a Council resolution, and is set out at Recommendation (6).


Contact Officer:

Adrian Verrall, Strategic Planning Manager, extn 7139

Reporting to:

Bob Porter, Head of Housing & Planning, extn 7006


Annex List


Annex 1

Council report on draft Local Plan and Annexes, 18th January 2018

Annex 2

Local Plan Addendum

Annex 3

Risk Assessment – Option 2

Annex 4

Local Green Space summary assessments

Annex 5

Sustainability Appraisal of Options


Background Papers



Details of where to access copy

National Planning Policy Framework

Draft Revisions to NPPF

Local Plan evidence base documents

Call for sites 2018

Airport Viability Study and Assessment of Local Plan Representations


Corporate Consultation



Matt Sanham, Financial Services Manager


Tim Howes, Director of Corporate Governance and Monitoring Officer