Agenda, decisions and minutes

To take any questions from members of the the Public

Please note:  Members of the Public are requested to inform the Democratic Servicers Officer before the meeting begins if they wish to ask a verbal question to the Committee.

No written questions were submitted or were asked by members of the public.

No written questions were submitted or were asked by members of the public.

Members are asked to declare the existence and nature of any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests in respect of any item of business to be considered at the meeting.

No declarations of interest were made by Councillors regarding items on the agenda.

No declarations of interest were made by Councillors regarding items on the agenda.

The Committee is asked to confirm as a true record the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 27 September 21018 (attached) and to authorise the Chairman to sign them.

The Minutes of the Meeting of the Licensing and Planning Policy Committee held on 27 September 2018 were agreed and signed by the Chairman as a true record.

The Minutes of the Meeting of the Licensing and Planning Policy Committee held on 27 September 2018 were agreed and signed by the Chairman as a true record.

This report has been prepared for the Committee’s information.  Members are asked to note the content of the latest Regulation 62 report for the year April 2017 until March 2018, which will be published on the Borough Council’s website before 31 December 2018.

The Committee noted the contents of the Regulation 62 Report for the year April 2017/2018.

The Committee received the Regulation 62 report for 2017/2018, prior to publication on the Council’s website.  The report set out how much CIL had been spent, allocated or still available to allocate. 

Whilst individual sums collected were not allocated to specific infrastructure projects, it was explained that all CIL monies collected were combined into one fund and split as follows:

·       80% to main infrastructure projects

·       15% to local schemes

·       5% for administration

It was noted that CIL receipts were recorded in line with the Council’s financial regulations and receipts were defined as monies that had been invoiced but not necessarily received. It was further noted that the CIL regulations allow phased payments for larger development proposals.  This could result in invoices being paid in stages, which may extend over a nine month period, and could lead to some CIL liable developments being reported across two reporting years. 

Accordingly, the Committee noted the contents of the Regulation 62 Report for the year April 2017/2018.

The Committee is asked to review and agree to the publication of the Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan and recommend to Strategy & Resources Committee that the Kiln Lane Link be removed from the Infrastructure Delivery Plan.

The Committee:

(1)            Approved the content of the Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan and;

(2)            Did not recommend to the Strategy and Resources Committee that the Kiln Lane Link be removed from the Infrastructure Delivery Plan.

The Committee was informed that the Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) provided an assessment of the additional provision and improvements in infrastructure required to support future planned-for growth across the Borough. It was emphasized that in its current format the IDP was a live document.   In that role it sought to identify rather than prioritize potential infrastructure schemes.   It provided a snapshot (as of late 2018) that would require modification as the Local Plan progressed – specifically once the Borough Council had confirmed the scale of growth that the Local Plan would delivery and the sites that needed to come forward to enable that development.

It was confirmed that the plan was based on the latest population census figure of 75,102 and the projected infrastructure requirements were founded on the estimated population increase from delivering an objectively assessed housing need of 579 homes per annum.

The IDP takes account of supporting evidence.  This includes a Borough-wide assessment of existing transport infrastructure capacity.   The study has highlighted that some highway junctions within the borough were operating at above their designed capacity.  It was noted that whilst alternative modes of transport would be investigated as part of the infrastructure plan, constrained capacity on the roads would not be a factor that could be used to influence the scale of the Borough’s future housing reqirement.

The Committee was informed that the Kiln Lane link highway improvement scheme had not been included in the plan as it was no longer considered deliverable.  This was in part due to the considerable cost of the scheme outweighing the anticipated benefits.  However it was pointed out that whilst accessible sources of funding were not currently available to progress the project, there was a possibility that alternative sources could be secured in the future.  Subsequently the Committee voted to delete recommendation 2 in the report ‘Recommendation to the Strategy and Resources Committee that the Kiln Lane Link be removed from the Infrastructure Delivery plan.

Having deliberated the plan, the Committee approved the Draft Infrastructure Delivery plan subject to the reinstatement of the Kiln Lane Link.

The Borough Council is in the process of forming strategic relationships with its neighbours.  This report sets out a framework for further developing those relationships so that the Borough Council can submit a sound Local Plan for examination.  The Committee is asked to consider the proposed engagement plan and agree to its implementation.

The Committee considered the proposed engagement plan and agreed to its implementation.

The Committee was informed that the duty to co-operate was a key requirement of national planning policy indicating the increasing emphasis on local authorities working together to address planning issues such as delivering future growth and the infrastructure required to support it.

The purpose of the report was to set out a framework for further developing strategic relationships with neighbouring boroughs.

The importance of being able to demonstrate to the Planning Inspectorate that the Council had communicated with neighbouring boroughs to assess their potential to fulfil unmet housing need was highlighted.   In particular the process of securing statements of common ground, as a means of demonstrating that strategic issues were being given full collective consideration by the planning authorities. 

It was recognised that none of our neighbouring boroughs have sought to accommodate a greater amount of growth than the target objectively assessed housing need identified for them through the government’s standard method.  It was also noted that some had indicated insufficient capacity to meet their own needs.  It was suggested that the Council could take an approach to actively seek to identify sites outside of the Borough in order to meet Epsom & Ewell’s objectively assessed housing need in full.  Should the Council decide to take this approach it would support the case of strong intent to meet its housing requirement in full, which could secure a sound Local Plan.

Having considered the proposed engagement plan the Committee agreed to its implementation.

The Committee is asked to note the contents of the Study and agree to it being used to inform the preparation and production of the new Local Plan and the associated Transformation Masterplan.

Subject to a minor amendment agreed at the meeting, the Committee noted the contents of the Study and agreed to it being used to inform the preparation and production of the new Local Plan and the associated Transformation Masterplan.

The purpose of the Longmead and Nonsuch Industrial Estates study was to explore and assess the possibility of these areas being sources of housing land supply. 

The study examined the landownership parcels within these sites and evaluated the likelihood of them becoming available, deliverable and developable sources of housing land supply during the new Local Plan period.  The assessment also included a comparison with other mixed use developments, although it was commented that finding like for like sites was challenging as all redevelopment sites had their own individual qualities.

Having discussed the evaluation the Committee noted that there was no evidence that the two industrial estates could provide available, viable, deliverable and developable sources of housing land supply to meet the Borough’s objectively assessed housing need during the local plan period.

The following clarification/amendments were agreed:

Subject to a minor amendment agreed above, the Committee noted the contents of the Study and agreed to it being used to inform the preparation and production of the new Local Plan and the associated Transformation Masterplan.

It is proposed that this report will be a standing agenda item to inform members on the progress being made on the review of the local plan.

The Committee:

(1)            Noted the overview of the Office for National Statistics new household growth projections;

(2)            Noted the recently published consultation ‘Technical consultation on updates to national planning policy and guidance’ and agreed the Council’s draft responses to the consultation as set out in Annex 1.

The Committee received a report updating members on the progress of the Local Plan, and it was noted that this would be a regular report to the Licensing and Planning Policy Committee.

In September 2108 the government’s Office for National Statistics had published projections relating to future population changes (mid 2016 – mid 2041).  As the government used household growth projections as a baseline for its standard method calculations it was anticipated that objectively assessed housing needs would be adjusted accordingly. Initial calculations indicated that the housing projections for Epsom & Ewell could result in a reduction in the Borough’s objectively assessed housing need from 579 new homes per annum to 372 new homes per annum.  However, it was noted that the government remained committed to significantly boosting the supply of new homes (in order to deliver their target of 300,000 new homes per annum) and as a consequence had indicated that the standard method would not, in the short to medium term be adjusted to reflect the latest household growth projections.

The Committee noted that the implementation of the new Housing Delivery Test could also see the introduction of additional measures to address a potential shortfall in delivery. 

The report also included a technical consultation published in October 2018 requesting views on the updates to the National Planning Policy.   The Committee reviewed the responses.

Subsequently, the Committee:

(1)            Noted the overview of the Office for National Statistics new household growth projections;

(2)            Noted the recently published consultation ‘Technical consultation on updates to national planning policy and guidance’ and agreed the Council’s draft responses to the consultation as set out in Annex 1.