Copeland LDF - Submission

Local Development Framework 270912 Item 6 Copeland LDF - Submission EXECUTIVE MEMBER: Councillor George Clements LEAD OFFICER: John Groves REPORT AUTHOR: Chris Bamber PURPOSE OF REPORT: To consider the following: 1. The content of representations received after the Core Strategy was published in May 2012. 2. The next steps before submission to the Secretary of State. 3. Proposed minor changes to the document RECOMMENDATION: That the Working Party note the report and approve the submission of the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies document, with suggested minor changes, to the Secretary of State 1.0 RESULTS OF THE CONSULTATION ON PUBLICATION OF THE PRE-SUBMISSION DRAFT OF THE CORE STRATEGY AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES 1.1 As Members will recall, the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD was published on May 31 for a six week consultation period. The responses have now been analysed and the submission documents are on course to be ready to be sent to the Secretary of State (in fact, to the Planning Inspectorate) on the scheduled date of October 31. 1.2 The published DPD is the version which will be submitted to the Secretary of the State for examination. At this stage only the Inspector, not the Council, can change the document. However, the Council can suggest minor changes where objections or other representations have suggested valid improvements. It is not permissible for changes to be made at this stage which make significant alterations to the plan; any such change would require further public consultation, therefore causing considerable delay and some additional expense. The Planning Policy team propose to submit, in the schedule, 35 suggested changes. 1.3 The Proposed Minor Changes schedule and the Statement of Consultation are appended. A ‘tracked change’ version of the DPD, showing the proposed minor changes, will be available as a background document on Sharepoint. This text has not been circulated as it is substantially the same as the published document; the key proposed changes are described below. The Planning Policy team has also conducted a ‘soundness self-assessment’ based on templates supplied by the Planning Advisory Service. This will be discussed with the Inspectorate shortly, and is also available as a background document. 2.0 THE REPRESENTATIONS AND PROPOSED CHANGES 2.1 148 representations were made by 32 organisations and individuals. 35 of these were supporting the plan, and 55 comments suggesting improvements (such as textual errors or omissions). Thus only 58 were objections questioning the soundness of the plan. Of these, 29 were from Parish Councils and refer to matters of detail which are unlikely to jeopardise the plan at examination. In particular, we have explained to Millom Without Parish Council that their concerns (which are based on the plan not having enough detail) can most appropriately be met by incorporating them in their proposed Neighbourhood Plan, with which the Parish Council appears to be content. 2.2 By way of comparison, other Core Strategies submitted by second tier districts in recent months have generated between 400 and 2000 objections, with up to 300 changes being submitted to Inspectors. 2.3 The main content of the representations, and the Planning Policy team’s intended responses, are in Appendix 3 of the Statement of Consultation (this is a bulky document; its content is laid down by regulation). About 80 changes have been suggested, and about a third of those have been accepted in whole or in part, another third rejected as being contrary to what has emerged during production of the plan and previous consultations, with the remainder being considered unnecessary (including the comments of Millom Without, who will have the support and advice of the Planning Policy team as they express their concerns in their own plan). 2.4 The Planning Policy team has identified three main objections which it would be wise to meet, as follows. 2.5 Firstly, there is a series of objections, mostly from Sainsbury’s but also from wind power generators, that the plan is not compliant with the National Planning Policy Framework and does not support growth. We do not agree with this, but Inspector reports from other districts indicate that the Inspectorate is insisting that authorities explicitly refer to NPPF requirements that there is a ‘presumption in favour of development’ and that applications consistent with the plan will be approved. Thus insertions are proposed which will deal with that. 2.6 Sainsbury’s have also objected, with respect to out-of-centre retail applications, that the plan does not have arrangements and floorspace size thresholds for impact assessments. The council’s longstanding practice has been to use the ‘sequential test’ and thresholds for impact assessment as laid down in national policy, and it is proposed to insert text making that explicit. 2.7 Finally, wind power generators have suggested that the policy on renewable energy generation is too negative and thus contravenes national policy. We propose to address this by changing the wording of policy DM2 from ‘Proposals … must satisfy the following criteria’ to ‘Renewable energy development will be encouraged and planning permission granted where …’. This wording is more in keeping with the strategic policy ER2. Most importantly, we do not propose to change the policy criteria themselves. In other words, our position at examination will be that we accept that national policy towards wind farms is positive, and we are willing to support that, subject to proper consideration of the environment of this scenically sensitive area. 2.8 A list of the proposed changes, as it will be submitted, can be found at Appendix 2. 3.0 NEXT STEPS – SUBMISSION AND EXAMINATION 3.1 The Local Development Scheme (the project plan for the Local Development Framework) sets the scheduled submission date as October 2012, and we expect to be able to submit the plan on October 31. The Planning Inspectorate has been informed of this, and it is understood that an Inspector has been earmarked for the Public Examination to start then, with a public hearing, if needed, probably in February 2013. 3.2 The plan will be submitted along with the Sustainability Appraisal (which was complete before publication), the Statement of Consultation and a selection of key supporting documents – notably the Strategy for Infrastructure, Topic Papers on such subjects as housing and employment land, and the West Cumbria Economic Blueprint. (Supporting documents are accessible on the Local Development Framework Evidence Base page on the Council web site.) The suggested minor changes, and ‘tracked change’ text incorporating them, will also be submitted. 3.3 Assuming that the plan is found to be sound, and that the Inspector is able to stick to the standard timetable, a report should be received about May 2013, enabling the Council to adopt the plan soon after that. APPENDICES Appendix 1 Statement of Consultation Appendix 2 Schedule of Proposed Minor Changes BACKGROUND PAPERS ‘Tracked change’ text of Core Strategy and development Policies, to accompany the submitted document. Core Strategy and development Management Policies Soundness Assessment Available on Sharepoint or from the Planning Policy team. Core Strategy and Development Management Policies Statement of Consultation - Submission October 2012 2 Contents The consultation and involvement process Page 5 Annex 1: Consolidated list of representors 8 Annex 2: Regulation 20 (pre-submission publication) 11 Annex 3: Representations made under Regulation 20 13 (publication consultation, May/July 2012) Annex 4: Regulation 18 („Preferred Options‟) stage Page Annex 5: Regulation 18 („Issues and Options‟) stage Page Annex 6: Statement of Community Involvement (summary) Page 3 4 The consultation and involvement process The Statement of Community Involvement This was adopted in January 2008, and revised in September of that year to incorporate procedural changes brought in by the 2008 Planning Act. Although the 2008 Act did away with the „Issues and Options‟ and „Preferred Options‟ terminology, the former stage had already been set in motion, and it has been considered logical to present the subsequent (2010) consultation as a „preferred option‟. The SCI sets out a range of consultation and involvement possibilities. In jkeeping with a strategic document, consultation, especially in the later stages, has focused on the methods which the SCI sets out as standard (advertisement of published documents, use of the Council‟s web site, and local mass media), along with targeted locality-based meetings – either to invited stakeholder audiences or public „drop in‟ sessions. The SCI is available on the ldf section of the Council‟s web site www.copeland.gov.uk/ldf, and its Executive Summary is at Annex 7 (page ). Early engagement „Stakeholder Launch‟ events were held in November 2008, one for stakeholders in the Borough and another for external invitees. This set the agenda for further work; the framework of identified issues is set out in an Appendix to the report of the „Issues and Options‟ stage (page 18). The Issues and Options stage This stage of consultation took place in May to July 2008 and the report of the process is at Annex 6 (page ). The consultation report from that stage, and the summary of responses, are on the LDF pages of the Council‟s web site. Policy options set out at that stage were set out with reference to national and regional planning policy, and the circumstances of the Borough. The general policy approach was carried forward from that already expressed in the adopted Local Plan, which at that stage was only two ywars old. In general there was support for this, although opinion was more split with reference to how development should be distributed between Copeland‟s settlements. Preferred Options document consultation The „Preferred Options‟ document was published in May 2010 for consultation in May to July of that year.

Load more