Cornwall Council

Report to: Cabinet Member for Environment, Heritage and Planning

Date: 10 th October 2014

Title: Neighbourhood Development Plan: Plan Proposal Decision

Portfolio Area: Environment Heritage and Planning

Divisions Affected: and

Relevant Scrutiny Committee: Scrutiny Management Committee

Key Decision: N Approval and Y / N clearance obtained:

Urgent Decision: Y / N Date next steps can Normally 10 be taken: calendar days (e.g. referral on of after decision for recommendation or Cabinet implementation of substantive decision)

Appropriate pre-decision notification given where an Y / N executive Decision?

Author: Sarah Arden Role: Principal Development Officer

Contact: 01872 224294/sarden@.gov.uk

Recommendation:

1. That the St Eval Neighbourhood Development Plan is amended according to the Examiner’s recommendations and the plan proposal decision is published.

1. Executive summary

Cornwall Council

The St Eval Neighbourhood Development Plan has been successful at examination, with the examiner recommending that the plan should proceed to referendum, subject to a number of recommended amendments.

The Local Planning Authority is responsible for deciding what action to take in response to the examiner’s recommendation. This report details the recommendations and the proposed action to take in response. The recommendation is to make all the recommendations suggested by the examiner, since they strengthen and add clarity to the plan and the St Eval Neighbourhood Steering group are in agreement.

The recommendations, the reason for them and the proposed actions are detailed in a table in part 3 of this report. Agreeing this will enable the plan proposal decision to be published so that the plan can proceed to examination.

2. Background

The Council has a statutory duty to assist communities in the preparation of Neighbourhood Development Plans and Orders and to take plans through a process of Examination and Referendum.

The St Eval Neighbourhood Development Plan ( NDP) is one of the frontrunner pilots in Cornwall and the work of the community to develop the NDP has been supported by Cornwall Council officers. St Eval started work on the plan in July 2011, before the Neighbourhood Planning (General)Regulations 2012 (the Regulations) came into force. The impetus for the NDP was the sale of the MOD site, a former airfield and associated buildings which are immediately adjacent to the village of Trevisker.

A Development Brief for the site had been prepared by the Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) in conjunction with St Eval Parish Council and the local residents’ association, the St Eval Area Community Action Forum (SEACAF CIC.) This development brief was adopted by Cornwall Council in December 2011 as a guide to the future development of the site. The NDP has taken the MOD Development Brief as its basis and used the new neighbourhood planning powers to give the brief full policy weight.

The NDP has been through the statutory stages of area designation and pre-submission draft consultation. The area designation application was correctly made by the Parish Council, publicised by Cornwall Council and designated by Portfolio Holder decision on 2 September 2013.

Several stages of consultation and public engagement have been carried out during the NDP preparation (as detailed in the Consultation

Cornwall Council

Statement) and the statutory 6 week pre-submission consultation was carried out from 10 February 2013 – 24 March 2014. It was publicised and the relevant consultation bodies were contacted in accordance with Regulation 14 of the Regulations. The NDP Steering Group have detailed the comments received and their responses in the Consultation Statement submitted with the NDP documents.

Cornwall Council Environment, Heritage and Planning Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) considered the NDP at their meeting on 17 June 2014 and recommended that the NDP should be supported and publicised.

The six week publication consultation was held from 16 July – 27 August 2014. Eight comments were received and were forwarded to the Examiner for consideration with the NDP and the supporting documents.

Cornwall Council, with the agreement of St Eval Parish Council, appointed Mr Graham Self as Examiner, at the beginning of September 2014. Mr Self carried out the examination by written representations and supplied his report on 30 th September 2014. The report is very detailed and is provided at Appendix 1. The Examiner makes recommendations and suggestions relating to the policies in the plan, to parts of the supporting text and to one of the maps. He states that although he has made a number of recommendations and suggestions, many of them cover detailed points aimed at helping the NDP to comply with national guidance about the need for clarity, precision and absence of ambiguity in planning policies. Some other recommendations result from his consideration of objections to the plan. But he concludes:

‘the general thrust of the plan remains, and all those in the Parish Council and others who have worked on preparing the plan are to be commended on steering it through what has probably seemed a convoluted process, especially as much of this work has been carried out by people giving their time as volunteers.’ (Appendix 1, St Eval NDP, Report by Examiner Graham Self.)

His overall recommendation is that the Neighbourhood Plan, as amended following the recommendations, be submitted to a referendum.

3. Outcomes/outputs

The next stage of the Regulations requires the Council to • Decide what action to take in response to the recommendations of the examiner • Publish the decision and their reasons for it • Publish the Examiner’s report

This report is the Council’s decision on how to incorporate the Examiner’s recommendations. The power to decide whether the Examiner’s

Cornwall Council

amendments are incorporated or not, lies with the Local Planning Authority. However the Examiner’s report has been discussed in detail with the NDP steering group and the decision has been reached jointly, with their full agreement.

The Examiner has made a number of recommendations, either to ensure that policies are in generally conformity with national and local strategic policy framework, or to ensure that policies comply with national guidance on clarity and precision, so that they can be interpreted and applied with confidence. The Examiner has taken into account any comments or objections submitted during consultation. Additionally he has provided a list of suggested corrections, which are not mandatory but would improve the language of the plan.

The following table gives details of the recommended changes and reasons and the action taken by the Council to amend the plan proposal.

Table 1: Modifications in line with Examiners Recommendations

Examiner Recommendation – General Matters Recommendation The text on page 7 of the plan (indicating that the village boundary follows clear defined physical features) should include a brief comment explaining why part of the village boundary is an exception. Reason To improve and strengthen the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken Text on page 7 amended to state “The village boundary followed a combination of clear defined physical features and current land availability which solely relates to land included within the parish boundary of St Eval.”

Examiner Recommendation – Policy SENDP1 Recommendation Policy SENDP1 be amended so that it reads: 1 Proposals which support the re-use of the former American buildings will be encouraged and permitted where an applicant for planning permission can show that the proposal: (a) would create local employment opportunities or community facilities; and (b) would maintain or enhance the function of the American buildings in providing local shopping and other services. Reason To improve and strengthen the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken Policy SENDP1 amended to reflect the recommendation made.

Cornwall Council

“1. Proposals which support the re -use of the former American buildings will be encouraged and permitted where an applicant for planning permission can show that the proposal:

(a) would create local employment opportunities or community facilities; and (b) would maintain or enhance the function of the American buildings in providing local shopping and other services”. Recommendation Sentence added to the supporting t ext stating that 2 these buildings are those shown in pale brown on Figure 3 (this could be conveniently done by adding to the text under the heading "Intention"). Reason To improve clarity of the Neighbourhood Development Plan Action Taken Sentence added to the intention “ These buildings are those shown in pale brown on Figure 3”.

Examiner Recommendation – Policy SENDP2 Recommendation Policy SENDP2 be amended so that it reads: 1 Housing development will be permitted within the village boundary of St Eval where the development would meet the following criteria: (a) Proposals must provide quality design and layout which suits St Eval and demonstrate that the existing context, local constraints and land covenants have been considered, and that the development would make a positive contribution to social, economic and environmental sustainability. (b) [As per sub-paragraph (c) in the draft plan]. (c) Development must provide community benefits in the form of affordable housing and contributions for local facilities, services or infrastructure requirements. (d) [As per sub-paragraph (e) in the draft plan]. (e) [As per sub-paragraph (f) in the draft plan]. (f) [As per sub-paragraph (g) in the draft plan]. (g) The proposed design and layout must provide suitable space for rubbish or waste bins. Reason To improve and strengthen the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken Policy SENDP2 amended to reflect the

Cornwall Council

recommendation made. “1. Housing development will be permitted within the Trevisker boundary of St Eval where the development would meet the following criteria: (a) Proposals must provide a high quality of design and layout which suits St Eval and demonstrate that the existing context, local constraints and land covenants have been considered, and that the development would make a positive contribution to social, economic and environmental sustainability. (b) Proposals consider the need to design out crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour to ensure ongoing community safety and cohesion (c) Development must provide community benefits in the form of affordable housing and contributions for local facilities, services or infrastructure requirements. (d) Adequate car parking and safe highway access is provided (e) Connections with existing walking and cycling routes are made and on-site infrastructure is provided to support sustainable modes of travel (f) Account of light pollution is considered (and minimalised) (g) The proposed design and layout must provide suitable space for rubbish or waste bins”. Reco mmendation Sentence of the supporting text under the heading 2 "Intention" on page 7 be deleted and replaced by: "As a general indication, it is envisaged that about 100 new dwellings would be provided within the settlement boundary of St Eval in the period up to 2030, subject to the conditions set out in the policy". Reason To improve clarity of the Neighbourhood Development Plan Action Taken Sentences deleted under the heading “Intention” and replaced by “As a general indication, it is envisaged that about 100 new dwellings would be provided within the Trevisker boundary of St Eval in the period up to 2030, subject to the conditions set out in the policy”.

Examiner Recommendation – Policy SENDP3 Recommendation Sub -paragraph (c) of Policy SENDP3, th e words 1 "increased character or" be deleted and substituted by "harmful". Reason To improve and strengthen the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken Sub -paragraph amended to reflect recommendation. “The size and design of the replacement dwelling is in

Cornwall Council

keeping with its surroundings and there is no harmful or visual impact on Cornwall’s landscape that is in, or within the setting of, the AONB”

Examiner Recommendation – Policy SENDP4 Recommendation Policy SENDP4 to be amended in the following wa ys: 1 1. by changing the words in brackets "identified within Figure 3" to "shown in blue and labelled 'Environment' in Figure 3". 2. by omitting the words "and where possible, achieve a net enhancement to the biodiversity within Trevisker St Eval"; 3. by omitting paragraph 2; 4. by re-labelling paragraph 3 as paragraph 2 and amending the text so that it reads: "Proposals for new housing or other built development must show that where appropriate, the existing walking, cycling and horse riding network would be retained and improved". Reason To improve and strengthen the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken 1. Wording changed in “Policy Justification”, “Intention” and “Policy SENDP-4” to state “shown in blue and labelled ‘Environment’ in Figure 3. 2. “and where possible, achieve a net enhancement to the biodiversity within Trevisker St Eval” has been omitted. 3. Paragraph 2 omitted. 4. Paragraph 3 has been amended to paragraph 2 and the text amended to “Proposals for new housing or other built development must show that where appropriate, the existing walking, cycling and horse riding network would be retained and improved”.

Examiner Recommendation – Policy SENDP5 Recommendation Policy SENDP5 be amended so that it reads: 1 The effect of development on the American buildings should be taken into account in determining applications for planning permission. Development proposals involving the retention of the American buildings and their re-use for small-scale commercial purposes or as community facilities will be supported Reason To improve and strengthen the Neighbourhood Development Plan.

Cornwall Council

Action Taken Policy SENDP5 reworded to reflect the recommendation. “The effect of development on the American buildings should be taken into account in determining applications for planning permission. Development proposals involving the retention of the American buildings and their re-use for small-scale commercial purposes or as community facilities will be supported”. Recommendation The explanatory text hea ded "Intention", the words 2 "the setting of" be omitted. Reason To improve the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken “The setting of” omitted from the text headed “Intention”.

Examiner Recommendation – Policy SENDP6 Recommendation Paragraph 1 of this policy be amended so that it 1 reads: Development proposals affecting St Eval playing field (identified as a "green asset" in Figure 3) will be permitted where: (a) the development would enhance the use of the playing field by providing play or sports equipment; or (b) the development would provide a building with community facilities such as a clubhouse or changing rooms, subject to the scale, siting and design of the proposal; and (c) it can be shown that the area of playing field affected is surplus to requirements; or (d) the loss resulting from the development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in a suitable location. Reason To improve and strengthen the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken Policy SENDP6 reworded to ref lect the recommendation. “1. Development proposals affecting St Eval playing field (identified as a "green asset" in Figure 3) will be permitted where: a) the development would enhance the use of the playing field by providing play or sports equipment; or b) the development would provide a building with community facilities such as a clubhouse or changing rooms, subject to the scale, siting and design of the proposal; and c) it can be shown that the area of playing field affected is surplus to requirements; or (d) the loss resulting from the development would be

Cornwall Council

replaced by equivalent or better provision in a suitable location”. Recommendation Part 2 of this policy is amended by omitting the words 2 "through the use of a planning obligation”. Reason To i mprove the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken “Through the use of a planning obligation” omitted from part to of policy SENDP6.

Examiner Recommendation – Policy SENDP7 Recommendation Policy SENDP7 be amended so that it reads: 1 Development proposals should achieve high standards of sustainable development and demonstrate how their design, construction and operation would minimise the use of fossil fuels and natural resources. Reason To improve and strengthen the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken Policy SENDP6 reworded to reflect the recommendation. “Development proposals should achieve high standards of sustainable development and demonstrate how their design, construction and operation would minimise the use of fossil fuels and natural resources”.

Examiner Recommendation – Map at Figure 3 and Related Text Recommendation The purpose of the map at Figure 3 be reviewed and 1 that the map (and/or its title and key) be amended in the light of the comments above. Reason To improve the clarity of the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken The title of the map at Figure 3 amended to “Trevisker Village Boundary”.

Map at Figure 3 and Related Text Recommendation The purpose of the map at Figure 3 should be 1 reviewed and that the map (and/or its title and key) be amended in the light of the comments above. Reason To improve the clarity of the Neighbourhood Development Plan. Action Taken The title of the map at Figure 3 amended to “Trevisker Village Boundary”.

Cornwall Council

We consider that the Examiner’s recommendations are fair and will strengthen the plan. St Eval NDP steering group agree that all the recommendations are reasonable and should be made.

All the recommendations and suggestions have therefore been incorporated into the Examination draft plan, and the final Plan Proposal, as amended, is included at Appendix 3.

4. Options available and consideration of risk Cornwall Council has a duty to support communities who are preparing neighbourhood plans. The Regulations detail the Council’s responsibilities. Failure to take the plan forward to referendum would risk customer dissatisfaction and would be a failure of the Council’s duty.

5. Proposed Way Forward The plan proposal decision and examiner’s report should be published and the NDP should progress to referendum. In order to take the plan to referendum this year, avoiding the publication of a new electoral roll in December, the Referendum process needs to start on Monday 20 th October with the Publication of an Information Statement.

6. Implications

Implications Relevant Details and proposed measures to address to proposals Y/N Legal /Governance Y Relevant legislation: Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Localism Act 2011 Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012. Financial N There are no direct financial implications arising from the recommendation in this report. All costs associated with the development of the Neighbourhood Development Plan have been covered within existing approved resources. Risk Y Failure to take the plan forward to referendum would risk customer dissatisfaction and would be a failure of the Council’s duty to support neighbourhood plans. There is also a time factor involved – to achieve the referendum this year, the referendum process must start on 20 th October and therefore the plan proposal decision must be published. Comprehensive Impact Assessment Implications

Cornwall Council

Equality and Y The Plan has to contribute to sustainable Diversity development. The supplementary document includes Equality and Inclusivity Assessment and a Sustainability Appraisal Checklist. Equality and Diversity

Safeguarding N Safeguarding

Information N Management Information Management

Community Y The plan includes a policy which requires Safety, Crime development proposals to design out crime. and Disorder Community Safety, Crime and Disorder

Health, Safety Y The Plan has to contribute to sustainable and Wellbeing development and will have a generally positive impact on Health, Safety and Wellbeing. Health, Safety and Wellbeing

Other N implications Committee Report Template- Other Implications

Supporting Information

Appendices:

Appendix 1 – St Eval NDP Report by Examiner Appendix 2 – Plan Proposal

Background Papers:

None

Approval and clearance of report

All reports must have Finance Service clearance and, in the case of Cabinet, Council and Portfolio Advisory Committees, Legal Service clearance. Your report will only receive clearance if the implications in Section 6 are considered by the Finance and Legal Services to be complete and accurate. Make sure you contact the Finance Service and the Legal Service early on for advice where there are potentially financial or legal implications. If there are other resource implications you must

Cornwall Council

forward your report to the appropriate Head of Service for clearance. If those clearing the report make amendments they will advise you of that fact and refer you to the relevant changes. As report author you are responsible for finalising the report and its content but you are required to have regard to the comments of the Finance and Legal Services and clear reasons for not following their advice.

All reports:

Final r eport sign of fs This report has been Date cleared by OR not significant/not required Legal (if significant/required) Finance Andy Brown, Assistant 26 Sept 2014 Required for all reports Head of Finance Equality and Diversity

Cabinet/individual decision reports:

Final report sign offs This report has been Date cleared by Head of Service Corporate Director

Draft reports process checklist for Cabinet/individual decision reports:

Complete the checklist below while you are drafting your Cabinet or individual decision report. It will be removed before publication.

Process checklist Completed Portfolio Holder briefed Yes/No Corporate Director briefed Yes/No Head of Service s ign off (draft) Yes/No Data protection issues considered Yes/No If exempt information, public (par t 1) report Yes/No also drafted. (Cabinet/Scrutiny) If not on Cabinet Work Programme , Scrutiny Yes/No offered the opportunity to consider the report