Agenda item

Alan Scott asked the Executive Member for Planning and Enforcement the following question:

 

Question

Policy CP18 of the Core Plan provided for measures to maintain separation between the Arborfield Garrison SDL and surrounding settlements; Policy CP11 made similar provision in more general terms for all of the SDLs. Residents in the surrounding areas relied on those provisions when they acquiesced to these major developments taking place. There are now a number of housing proposals being considered in the area around the Arborfield Garrison SDL and in particular at Barkham Square. Such developments would be in violation of policies CP11 and CP18 of the Core Plan. Would you affirm that CP11 and CP18 are still in force and that it would be perfidious to renege upon them and allow these proposals to go ahead or to be included in the Local Plan Update?

 

Minutes:

Policy CP18 of the Core Plan provided for measures to maintain separation between the Arborfield Garrison SDL and surrounding settlements; Policy CP11 made similar provision in more general terms for all of the SDLs. Residents in the surrounding areas relied on those provisions when they acquiesced to these major developments taking place. There are now a number of housing proposals being considered in the area around the Arborfield Garrison SDL and in particular at Barkham Square. Such developments would be in violation of policies CP11 and CP18 of the Core Plan. Would you affirm that CP11 and CP18 are still in force and that it would be perfidious to renege upon them and allow these proposals to go ahead or to be included in the Local Plan Update?

 

Answer

The Core Strategy sets out the spatial strategy for managing development in the period to 2026.  A key element was locating the majority of housing development in the four Strategic Development Locations, an approach that has enabled significant new infrastructure to be delivered to help mitigate impacts and to alleviate pressure on other areas.

 

The strategy set out in the Core Strategy is working.  It is clear from the number of homes built, under construction and already permitted, that homes will be delivered to meet and indeed exceed current government expectations.

 

With the Core Strategy delivering applications which are contrary to its provisions should be refused, unless there are specific, locally important reasons for flexibility.  This will rarely be the case.  Robust defence is made of our delivery record at planning appeals, however I am sure we would all agree that some of the decisions by some Government Planning Inspectors to allow developments contrary to our decisions is extremely disappointing and undermines the principle of a plan-led system.

 

Through the Local Plan Update, the Council will put in place an extended strategy through to the period to 2036.  In doing this, the clear process and requirements set out in legislation and Government policy must be followed.  This includes assessing all sites submitted by landowners and developers, and consulting on potential approaches towards managing development.

 

We are currently consulting on and seeking views on a number of key issues which will help us define options for managing development in the future.  This includes inviting comments on all of the land promoted by landowners and developers.  I would encourage everyone with an interest to engage with this and to submit their views to us.

 

In conclusion given the stage of the Local Update, it is not possible for me to comment on what might be the future spatial strategy or the policies associated with this.  This is for future debate.  I can however confirm that the assessment of promoted land will include the consideration of the important roles that land plays in the separation of settlements.

 

Supplementary Question:

In her speech on ‘Making Housing Fairer’ on 5 March 2018, the Prime Minister endorsed the Government’s policy saying our 25 year Environment Plan commits us to leaving the natural environment in a better state than when we found it.  So we will expect any development, whether in the greenbelt or outside it, to look first at sites which have previously been built on, rather than opting immediately for virgin countryside. 

 

Paragraph 170b of the revised National Planning Policy Framework states that planning policies and decisions should contribute to an enhanced natural and local environment, by recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and the wider benefits of the natural capital and ecosystem services – including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land and of trees and woodland.  The promoted development nature site on Barkham Square comprises 144 acres of virgin countryside.  Do you agree that approving a development of this site and including the Local Plan Update would not only be seen as a breach of faith by the local electorate, but would also be incompatible with both the Government’s explicit policy position articulated by the Prime Minister, and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework?

 

Supplementary Answer:

It was a little challenging to identify the question in that, but I think that what I would say is that the Arborfield Strategic Development Location is a classic case of the Council preferring to build on brownfield sites, and at this point in time there are no planning applications for any other sites beyond that in that location.