Issue - meetings

RESOLVED:

1.     That the content of the report be considered the suggested approach to the Council’s response be approved: and

2.     That authority be Delegated to the Executive Head of Planning Regeneration and Economy in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Regeneration and Infrastructure to make minor amendments to the response.  

REASONS FOR DECISION:

As set out in the report.

KEY DECISION:

Yes

PORTFOLIO:

Planning, Regeneration and Infrastructure

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED/REJECTED:

As set out in the report.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST:

None

DISCUSSION:

The Portfolio Holder introduced the report which followed the consultation on the National Planning Policy Framework.  A number of the proposed changes would be significant for the District by further protecting and enhancing the environment.  The Portfolio Holder welcomed the clarification that Local Planning Authorities might not be compelled to review green belt land for development.  The Appendix to the report contained the consultation questions and the proposed responses.

The Executive Head of Planning, Regeneration and Economy reported that there were 3 elements to the consultation.  There were changes to the NPPF, the first were proposed to be introduced in Spring and these related to the constraints around meeting housing need and the Housing Delivery Test.  It was recognised that the District Council did not currently have a 5 year housing land supply and therefore the proposals were positive.   It was reported that the national target housing target would remain and would not be reviewed until 2024.

Members spoke in support of the consultation and the proposed District Council’s response.  It was particularly welcomed that the existing Neighbourhood Plans would be protected.  Members recognised that the character of the District was different to other areas, with 80% of the area being within the National Park.  This therefore increases pressure on the areas outside of the National Park and on green belt land, particularly as there were few brownfield sites available for development.  A member welcomed the comments about wind generation and felt that a pragmatic approach needed to be taken.