To receive a report.

The Chairman welcomed Ismail Mohammed, Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager to provide Members with an update.

The Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager presented Members with a report that advised Members on the current progress with the Local Plan review and to consider the next steps, pages 21 to 28 of the Agenda refer.

Members were advised that the preparation of the revised Local Plan had been delayed due to on-going work on the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) and was unlikely to be progressed to the ‘Regulation 19’ Pre-Submission consultation by the end of this year, with the Phase 1 report expected to be completed by mid-September 2024.

The Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager advised Members on concerns with the proposed housing targets being unachievable and that the Council had not previously come close to achieving housing figures as high as 1091 in several years.  Members were informed that the current Local Plan remained fit for purpose and that a further report would return to the Committee once the 800 sites in the strategic housing land availability assessment had been reviewed and assessed for their suitability for housing.  The Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager assured Members that processes were underway to meet the government target of December 2026. 

Members were invited to put their comments and questions forward.

·       At the indulgence of the Chairman, Councillor Ruchira Yarsley queried whether most of 800 sites included in the strategic land assessment was in flood risk or nearby areas.  In response, the Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager confirmed to Members that a number of sites within the strategic housing land assessment were in flood risk areas.

·       Councillor Ruchira Yarsley further queried whether a solution could be achieved by siting renewable energy in flood risk areas instead of affecting good quality agricultural land.

·       In reference to the 61 representations received in the Issues and Options Consultation in Spring 2021, Councillor Ruchira Yarley queried whether it was possible to obtain a list of the parish councils which had responded, page 23 of the Agenda refers. In response, the Interim Planning Policy and Research confirmed that an examination of the data would be undertaken.  

·       A Member queried whether caravans could be considered as residential for the purpose of housing numbers and commented on the differences between East Lindsey and Boston Borough who were able to build in flood risk areas.  In response, Paul Jackson, SHDC Executive Programme Manager advised Members on the background that led to South Holland and Boston Councils building on flood risk locations and encouraged that East Lindsey required resilience and commitment to work with the numbers and strengthen relationships with the Environment Agency to achieve solutions.

·       A Member requested examples of extra resilience that East Lindsey could undertake.  In response, the SHDC Executive Programme Manager explained to Members that resilience involved three approaches which included a defence approach through working with the Environment Agency to upgrade and maintain flood defences, mitigation measures such as raised floor levels and upstairs accommodation and to work in partnership with the County Council which was the lead flood risk authority.

·       In relation to the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, a Member provided an example of unsuitable land for housing that was flooded in Horncastle which had been granted permission on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate and queried whether there were any alternatives when decisions by the Council could be overruled by the Planning Inspectorate, page 23 of the Agenda refers.  In response, the Assistant Director - Planning and Strategic Infrastructure advised Members that the Council had the opportunity to appeal decisions made by the Planning Inspectorate and there could be wide variation in the individual judgements and decisions by the Planning Inspectorate.

·       A Member further commented that the public were likely to lay the blame on the Council for the decisions of the Planning Inspectorate.  In response, the Chairman advised Members that this was not always correct and that members of the public were aware that the housing was granted by Planning Inspectorate on appeal in the example in Horncastle.

·       At the indulgence of the Chairman, Councillor Jill Makinson-Sanders commented that areas along the North Sea Coast and in Holland and Germany had been successful in building on areas that were prone to flooding and queried whether their expertise could be shared with East Lindsey.  In response, the Chairman explained to Members that the entirety of the Netherlands coastline was protecting the majority of its economy including its businesses and financial services in the major cities, whereas Lincolnshire did not have that availability of money or economy that required protection and added that Britain’s coastline was very long and diverse.  In conclusion the Chairman emphasised the importance of working with the Environment Agency and the County Council to protect the coast and identify ways to build safely in flood risk areas.  

·       Councillor Jill Makinson-Sanders further queried whether the majority of flooding in East Lindsey had been from the rivers rather than from the sea.  In response, the Chairman confirmed this was correct and that flooding from rivers was occurring on a more frequent basis.

·       A Member queried the commencement date for reviewing Local Plan Policies and whether new policies could be introduced, particularly in relation to caravans and those that were being used in the curtilage of dwellings and also policies to protect the night skies from the negative effects of domestic lighting.  In response, the Chairman reminded Members that not everything could be achieved through Planning Policy and that further considerations would be made to ensure that the Council had sound polices.

·       A Member expressed disappointment with the lack of progression in housing design and build quality and commented that modern designs fit for the current time period were much needed.

·       A Member requested clarification on the opportunity to revise existing strategic policies or for the creation of new ones.  In response, the Chairman advised Members that a list of policies that was coming forward for review could be made available to the Committee for consideration without necessitating a full review.  The Assistant Director – Planning and Strategic Infrastructure further supported the benefits of refreshing on the way in which policies had been developed without the need for a full review and welcomed the opportunity to obtain Members’ views. 

·       A Member further queried whether the Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager could elaborate on the implications of the Council having a Local Plan that was outdated.  In response, the Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager confirmed that the current Local Plan was out of date in the sense that it was 6 years old.  The Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager assured Members that the Local Plan was still compliant with the current requirements in the NPPF and that the Council’s policies were robust and met present requirements.

The Interim Planning Policy and Research Manager further clarified to Members that the policies were governed by the National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) which was criteria set by the government for development management and that the Local Plan was not required to provide more detailed development management policies except where provisions did not meet national requirements.

·       At the indulgence of the Chairman, Councillor Jill Makinson-Sanders queried whether policies could be developed to be more ambitious and robust and to encourage improved landscaping and housing design to leave a legacy for the future.  In response, the Chairman supported high standards of design and recognised the detrimental effect of increased challenges from highly revised housing targets being imposed by the government.

·       Councillor Jill Makinson-Sanders further commented that biodiversity was an important consideration.  In response, the Chairman stated his commitment to ensuring that all opportunities were explored to support better and more sustainable places to live.

·       A Member commented in support of Councillors undertaking more informal meetings to explore ideas and discuss concerns.

·       A Member further expressed concern with the outdated infrastructure in East Lindsey, particularly in relation to water and further commented that the Council should insist in the revised Local Plan that all new developments should have solar panels installed.  In response, the Chairman advised Members that the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan had been ambitious in making similar requirements which had not been detrimental to build out rates and that further examination of such an example may assist East Lindsey in making a decision on whether to adopt similar requirements.

The Assistant Director – Strategic Planning and Infrastructure further advised Members that relationships were being strengthened with other organisations including Anglian Water who were actively seeking to improve their relationship with Councils, planning departments and planning committees.

·       At the indulgence of the Chairman, Councillor Andrew Leonard queried the amount of land that was being allocated to social housing, whether a ratio was set by the government and what the consequences were for not meeting the government’s deadlines.  In response, the Assistant Director – Planning and Strategic Infrastructure advised Members that the allocation was dependent on local need for affordable housing and that ELDC was the decision makers on the percentage of land through an evidence-based approach.  In relation to the consequences of not meeting deadlines, the Assistant Director – Planning and Strategic Infrastructure advised Members that the backstop measure was the Council’s ability to meet the five-year housing supply, and that the ultimate penalty would be the government implementing a Local Plan on the Council’s behalf.

N.B Councillor Neil Jones left the Meeting at 7.55pm.

·       A Member commented that the Council needed to be more proactive in determining which properties were required to have solar panels.  In response, the Chairman advised Members that he was committed to further discussion as a Committee, or as a working group to examine the issues through an evidence-based approach whilst being mindful of the approaching deadlines.

·       A Member spoke in further support of ensuring that solar panels were installed on every new build rather than on agricultural land.

·       At the indulgence of the Chairman, Councillor Ruchira Yarsley queried whether a working group could consist of non-Committee Members.  In response, the Chairman advised Members that discussion was being undertaken with Monitoring Officer on what was Constitutionally permitted.

·       At the indulgence of the Chairman, Councillor Jill-Makinson Sanders encouraged that all Members were entitled to attend Meetings and shape the Local Plan but could not vote unless they were Members of the Committee.

The Chairman thanked everyone for their comments.

Following which, it was

RESOLVED:

·       That Members noted the current position on the preparation of the draft emerging Local Plan and potential changes to national planning policy.

·       That Members agreed that Officers take stock of the current situation and prepare a revised Local Development Scheme (LDS) setting out a programme for preparation of the Local Plan review.