Agenda item

On 22^nd September 2021 the Council agreed to consult on an Addendum to the Pre-submission version of Local Plan Part 2 (LPP2) (hereafter referred to as the Addendum). This addendum focussed on main modifications to the Pre-Submission Version of LPP2 that was consulted on in the Winter of 2020/21. The six-week period of consultation for the Addendum ended on 12^th November 2021. It resulted in nearly 600 separate comments on the Addendum from 221 individual respondents.

In response to the representations on the Addendum, this report seeks comments and observations from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the recommendation to Executive and Council.  These recommendations are that the Council should submit the main modifications set out in the Addendum, together with the Pre-submission version of LPP2 November 2020 for its examination.  It is also recommended, that in addition to those minor changes to the pre-submission version to LPP2 agreed at its meeting of 22^nd September 2021, the Council make further minor modifications to LPP2 on adoption. It is also recommended that it is agreed that the Council requests that the Local Plan Inspector considers two further main modifications to LPP2 at the examination if it is agreed that LPP2 should be submitted for examination.

Recommendation

That the Executive considers the comments and observations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and recommends to Council that:

1)    The Council agrees to submit to the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities the Pre-submission version of LPP2 November 2020 (Annexe 1 to this report) for examination as modified by the main modifications set out in the Addendum to the Pre-submission version of LPP2 October 2021 set out in Annexe 2.

2)    The Council agrees that the schedule of minor modifications to the Pre-submission version of LPP2, set out in Annexe 5 to this report, be submitted to examination of LPP2 in addition to the minor modifications agreed on 22^nd September 2021.

3)    The Council requests that the Local Plan Inspector appointed to examine LPP2 considers making two further main modifications to LPP2 at the examination as set out in Annexe 6 to this report.

4)    The Head of Planning and Economic Development be authorised to formally request that the Local Plan Examination Inspector recommends further main modifications to the Pre-Submission version of LPP2 November 2020 and the Addendum to the Pre-submission version of LPP2 October 2021, if the Inspector considers that they are necessary to make the plan sound and/or legally compliant.

5)    The Head of Planning and Economic Development be authorised to make any other minor modifications to the Pre-Submission version of LPP2 November 2020 and the Addendum to the Pre-submission version of LPP2 October 2021 with regard to factual updates and corrections before the Plan is submitted for its examination.

72.1     The Leader presented the report on behalf of the Portfolio Holder for Planning, which set out modifications to the pre-submission draft considered at the Special Council meeting on 22 September and proposed submission to the Secretary of State for examination.  He thanked the officers involved in delivering the draft for consideration.  He reminded Councillors on the limitations placed on the Council in respect of what could be added to the Local Plan, which could not establish new policy in addition to that already established in Local Plan Part 1 (LPP1).  The Leader read out a short list of corrections to the report which had been raised at the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee the previous night.  Notwithstanding the restrictions of Local Plan Part 1, he felt that the Local Plan Part 2 (LPP2) reflected the wishes of Waverley residents as far as possible and would ensure that the borough was protected for the future, therefore it was important to submit the Plan to the Inspector without delay.  Councillor Clark duly seconded the recommendations.

72.2     Councillor Dear spoke on the recommendations in respect of the exclusion of the Red Court site and the choice of the Royal School site for inclusion. He referred to a discussion at a Haslemere Town Council meeting regarding restricting development on the Royal School site to the existing footprint due to it being in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).  However the draft Plan included proposed development beyond the existing footprint and therefore he wished to move an amendment to either remove the Royal School site from LPP2 or redraw the boundary to be in line with the decision of Haslemere Town Council.  This amendment was duly seconded by Councillor Mulliner who reserved his right to speak until later in the debate.

72.3     The Mayor called for any speakers on the amendment.  The Leader spoke in objection on the grounds that there had been a number of opportunities to raise this issue prior to the meeting and to propose this amendment at this stage was negligent.  The site proposed to replace the Red Court site would deliver more housing on previously developed land, as defined in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). 

72.4     Councillor Nicholson clarified the discussion which had taken place at the Haslemere Town Council meeting in respect of the site.  Councillor Clark spoke against the proposed amendment and urged Councillors to vote against so as not to delay the submission of the draft Plan for one site allocation which did not sit comfortably with a small number of councillors.  Councillor Liz Townsend spoke in objection to the amendment which would be contrary to the NPPF.  She felt that it was important to get the best use of the land.

72.5     Councillor Adams spoke in support of the amendment and disagreed with the comments made by Councillor Townsend as the site was within the AONB which was under review by Natural England and he felt that the site would be rejected on that basis.  Councillor Cockburn spoke in support of the amendment on the grounds that the Council had the duty to do no more harm to the AONB or the Green Belt than already exists and she felt that the inclusion of the Royal School site would cause harm.  Councillor Davidson spoke in opposition to the amendment and the powers of a planning inspector to allow development in the AONB and Green Belt.

72.6     Councillor Mulliner spoke in support of the amendment and disputed that the entire Royal School site could be classed as previously developed land.  He referred to the definition as set out in the NPPF and the advice of Surrey County Council’s AONB officer in respect of safeguarding the AONB.  He felt that the inclusion of the Royal School site would not be accepted by the Inspector.  At the invitation of the Mayor, Councillor Dear clarified that his amendment would represent the views of the Haslemere Town Council 

72.7     On a point of order, the Leader sought clarification on whether the amendment would be ultra vires.  The Head of Policy and Governance confirmed that the amendment was in order and the Borough Solicitor advised that he was of the view that it would not be ultra vires.  The Leader requested a recorded vote on the amendment, in accordance with Procedure Rule 17.4, which was supported by five Members and that vote was lost.

For (12)

Councillors Cockburn, Deanus, Dear, David Else, Jenny Else, Goodridge, Henry, Hesse, Howard, James, Mulliner and Seaborne.

Against (26)

Councillors Adams, Baker, Beaman, Blishen, Clark, Davidson, Dickson, Follows, Foryszewski, Gale, Heagin, Penny Marriott, Peter Marriott, Merryweather, Neale, Nicholson, Palmer, Reed, Paul Rivers, Penny Rivers, Liz Townsend, Phillip Townsend, Williams, Wilson, the Deputy Mayor Councillor Ward and the Mayor, Councillor Robini.

Abstentions (2)

Councillors D’Arcy and Ellis.

72.8     The Mayor asked for speakers on the substantive recommendations.  Councillor Nicholson spoke briefly on sewage issues and screening.  Councillor Goodridge spoke in opposition, referring to the relocation of the Royal School and the implications for traffic. 

72.9     Councillor Foryszewski spoke in support of the recommendations and the importance of approving LPP2 which would give the protection to the borough it so needed.  Councillor Jenny Else spoke against the recommendations, particularly in reference to the inclusion of the Royal School site and the impact of a proposed development on that site on the waste water network.  Councillor Seaborne spoke on the inclusion of the Royal School site and sought clarification on the mitigation of the loss of sports pitches.

72.10   Councillor Merryweather spoke in support of the recommendations and echoed comments made by Councillor Foryszewski although was surprised that the debate was focussing on the Royal School site.  Councillor Cockburn spoke against the recommendations.  She fully supported the previous iteration of LPP2 which she had expected to be submitted earlier in the year and which she felt was sound.  Cllr Cockburn expressed concern over the process for selecting the Royal School site and stressed the need for a defensible plan which worked for the whole borough and not one small part of it.

72.11   Councillor Beaman spoke in support of the recommendations, although expressed concern over the allocation of traveller sites which he felt were in conflict with local planning policies and would therefore abstain from voting on that basis.  Councillor Williams also spoke in support and referred to the strength of public opinion on the inclusion of the Red Court site.

72.12   Councillor Liz Townsend spoke in support of the recommendations and highlighted that all the comments in the debate so far were focussed on the Royal School/Red Court and was concerned that no comments had been made about any of the other site allocations.  She felt that the Council should be looking at the delivery of the whole plan and stressed the importance of the recommendations being approved without delay.  She had some concerns over biodiversity, but that would be looked at as part of any planning applications submitted. 

72.13   On a point of clarification, Councillor Cockburn advised that she did not want to delay the plan any further.  Councillor Wilson stressed that the protection of the Royal School site would come when it came before the planning committee and importance of approving the plan for submission without delay.  Councillor Dickson echoed the comments made and felt it was essential that LPP2 be approved.  She highlighted some issues in Farnham around the small list of green spaces and the Strategic Gap between Aldershot and Farnham.  She also expressed concern over two fields between Badshot Lea and Farnham which were vulnerable to development that must receive protection.

72.14   Councillor Clark addressed the points made by the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the pre-occupation with one particular site  He reiterated the comments made by Councillor Townsend that the Plan should be viewed as a whole and be approved without delay.  Councillor Mulliner spoke in support of the recommendations as he felt that the Plan should be submitted to the Inspector without delay and welcomed the recommendation to delegate authority to the Head of Planning to make further minor modifications the Inspector felt necessary.  However he stressed that it was impossible to conduct proper scrutiny when the Overview and Scrutiny took place the day before the Council meeting. He felt that the debate had focussed on one particular site as that was the site which could jeopardise the approval of LPP2. 

72.15   The Leader summed up and responded to some of the points raise by the councillors in relation to water and drainage, playing fields and protection of greenspaces. He spoke about the frustrations with the current planning system, in having to allocate sites which it did not own, and the restrictions placed on the Council by the Government.  He advised that the owners of the Royal School site wanted to amalgamate their two sites and had begun consulting parents on this issue, with a view to redeveloping the site.  Officers were confident that the Plan was sound although reminded the Council that nothing was ever guaranteed, they could only go on best efforts.  He urged Councillors to vote for the Plan as he felt that a vote against or an abstention was a vote for further delay.  The Leader requested a recorded vote, in accordance with Procedure Rule 17.4, which was supported by five Members and it was

RESOLVED that

1)    The Council agrees to submit to the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities the Pre-submission version of LPP2 November 2020 (Annexe 1 to this report) for examination as modified by the main modifications set out in the Addendum to the Pre-submission version of LPP2 October 2021 set out in Annexe 2.

2)    The Council agrees that the schedule of minor modifications to the Pre-submission version of LPP2, set out in Annexe 5 to this report, be submitted to examination of LPP2 in addition to the minor modifications agreed on 22^nd September 2021.

3)    The Council requests that the Local Plan Inspector appointed to examine LPP2 considers making two further main modifications to LPP2 at the examination as set out in Annexe 6 to this report.

4)    The Head of Planning and Economic Development be authorised to formally request that the Local Plan Examination Inspector recommends further main modifications to the Pre-Submission version of LPP2 November 2020 and the Addendum to the Pre-submission version of LPP2 October 2021, if the Inspector considers that they are necessary to make the plan sound and/or legally compliant.

5)    The Head of Planning and Economic Development be authorised to make any other minor modifications to the Pre-Submission version of LPP2 November 2020 and the Addendum to the Pre-submission version of LPP2 October 2021 with regard to factual updates and corrections before the Plan is submitted for its examination.

For (30)

Councillors Baker, Blishen, Clark, D’Arcy, Davidson, Deanus, Dickson, Ellis, Follows, Foryszewski, Gale, Heagin, Henry, Hesse, Penny Marriott, Peter Marriott, Merryweather, Mulliner, Neale, Nicholson, Palmer, Reed, Paul Rivers, Penny Rivers, Liz Townsend, Philip Townsend, Williams, Wilson, the Deputy Mayor Councillor Ward and the Mayor, Councillor Robini.

Against (5)

Councillors Cockburn, Dear, Jenny Else, Howard and James.

Abstentions (5)

Councillors Adams, Beaman, David Else, Goodridge and Seaborne.