Issue - meetings

In accordance with Appendix 5 - 3.4 of the Constitution a member has requested that an item be placed on the agenda for the next scheduled Licensing & Planning Policy Committee on March 10^th  “To update the committee on all submissions and modifications made to the Inspector for the Local Plan, following examination hearings last year.”

This report responds to the above item request and reflects the position as of 23 February 2026.

Following consideration, the Committee resolved (7 for, 2 abstaining, and the Chair not voting) to:

(1)      Note the contents of this report.

In accordance with Appendix 5 - 3.4 of the Constitution a member requested that an item be placed on the agenda for the next scheduled Licensing & Planning Policy Committee on March 10^th  “To update the committee on all submissions and modifications made to the Inspector for the Local Plan, following examination hearings last year.”

The Committee received a report responding to the above item request and reflecting the position as of 23 February 2026.

Councillor Persand gave a verbal statement to the Committee.

The following matters were considered:

a)            Refusal of Plan.  In response to a Member question it was reported that if the plan was not adopted by full Council, then the current local plan that was nearing 20 years old would continue to be the development plan for the borough. It was not known what the process would be following that as the council would not have the time to restart the whole new local plan process again before the unitary comes into force.

b)            Councillor Coley statement.  Councillor Coley gave a verbal statement and spoke of advice from the monitoring officer regarding motions from the committee on this agenda item. That advice relied on custom and practise reflected in the December 2000 model constitution commissioned by the Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions. He suggested it was absurd that members were asked to rely on legal advice from a constitution which this Council chose to abandon in 2023.

c)            Future Consultations. A Member asked if there would be an opportunity to remove sites from the land supply during the next consultation.  The Head of Planning Policy and Economic Development explained that there would be two consultations.  The first would be specifically on the extra work that the inspectors recently asked us to undertake, one of which is for the council to suggest potential additional allocations for inclusion in the plan.  The second consultation will be after an examination hearing, if the inspector considers that the plan can be found to be sound with main modifications. The Inspectors draft main modifications will be subject to consultation. He was unable to confirm dates for these, and it would depend on these timings whether the Committee would be involved again.

d)            Priest Hill. In response to a Member statement that some public wanted Priest Hill removed from the local plan the Head of Planning Policy and Economic Development explained that the plan remained as it was when submitted to the inspector. No changes had yet been made. Priest Hill was not a site within the proposed submission local plan.

e)            Greenbelt Suitability. In response to Member questions the Head of Planning Policy and Economic Development gave a detailed explanation of the Calverton Assessment method to judge whether a site was suitable to be included in the green belt.  He explained what the Calverton method looked at but more importantly what Calverton didn’t take into consideration and the work currently being undertaken by the council on those areas.

f)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36