537 Consultation: Schedule of Post-Hearing Changes to the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies Proposed Submission Document 2010-2030 (March 2014) incorporating the Schedule of Focused Changes (September 2014) Representation Form Consultation – 1 July to 5pm 12th August 2016 Representations can be submitted by email to: [email protected] by post to: Cornwall Council – Local Plans Team Carrick House St Clement Street Truro TR1 1EB We are consulting only on the proposed changes arising from the recent hearings of the Examination. The schedule also includes changes proposed prior to the Examination. The changes we are consulting on are highlighted in a schedule as either double strikethrough or bold, double underlined. We are not consulting on the complete Cornwall Local Plan – Strategic Policies, this was done earlier in March 2014, September 2014 and changes, as part of the Examination in January 2016. All representations should be submitted using this form. Please be as succinct as possible and use a separate box under ‘Question 4’ for each change on which you are commenting. 1 537 This form has two parts. Part A asks for your contact details and Part B asks questions for you to consider and gives you the opportunity to make comments. Part A: Your personal details You must complete Part A for your representations to be accepted. The Council can not accept anonymous representations. Regulation 22 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012, requires all representations received to be submitted to the Secretary of State. By completing this form and submitting it to the Council you are giving your consent to the processing of personal data by Cornwall Council and that any information received by the Council, including personal data, may be put into the public domain, including on the Council’s website. 1. Personal details. Name Roger Kayes Organisation X Address line 1 XXXXXXXXX Address line 2 XXXXXX XXXX Address line 3 Address line 4 XXXXXXXXXXX Postcode XXX XXX Telephone number XXXXXXXXXX Email address XXXXXXXXXXXX Preferred contact method email 2. Agent details (if applicable). Name Organisation Address line 1 Address line 2 Address line 3 Address line 4 Postcode Telephone number Email address Preferred contact method Email Post 2 537 Q1 Do you wish to be notified of future stages in the Local Plan including examination and adoption? Yes X No Part B: Your Representations Representations should only relate to the Post Hearing Schedule of Changes to the Local Plan (bold figures shown in the second column from the left in the schedule) and clearly state the respective reference number. Soundness Paragraph 182 of the National Planning Policy Framework sets out the consideration in relation to a plan being considered ‘sound’: Positively prepared Justified Effective Consistent with national policy Legal compliance For a Local Plan to be considered legally compliant, the following needs to be determined: Whether the Local Plan is detailed in the current Local Development Scheme and that the key stages have been followed, That community involvement has been carried out in accordance with the current Statement of Community Involvement Whether the Local Plan makes satisfactory regard to the Sustainable Community Strategy That the Local Plan complies with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended) That the Local Plan complies with the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 That a Sustainability Appraisal report is published to accompany the Local Plan and is adequate That the Habitats Regulations Assessment is carried out in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (The Habitats Regulations) 2010 That the Local Plan has regard to national planning policy That Section 110 of the Localism Act 2011 (Duty to Co-operate) has been complied with. Q2 A local planning authority should submit a plan for examination which it considers to be ‘sound’. Do you consider the Post Hearing Schedule of Changes to the Local Plan has met these tests? Yes No X Please specify the reasons below 3 537 I do not consider that the plan satisfies the requirement for soundness, on the grounds that it fails with regards to the criteria of being justified and effective, as outlined below. Q3 Do you consider that the Post Hearing Schedule of Changes to the Local Plan meets the legal and procedural requirements? Yes No I don’t know Please specify the reasons below Q4 Please provide any comments on the Post Hearing Changes to the Local Plan – Strategic Policies Please use a separate box for each change and state which number on the schedule your comment refers to. Any additional comments will need to adhere to the same format as set out below. Document Post Hearing Schedule Change Number Cornwall Local Plan – 7b, Policy 2a Strategic Policies In the first bullet point, numbered 1, the introduction of the word ‘minimum’ raises considerable concerns. There are several dimensions to this concern. 1 The LP is to some extent a document for public information and guidance. Given the standard, ‘lay’ use of ‘minimum’, its introduction would carry stronger connotations than those which I presume lie behind its introduction in this context. The term is likely to cause unnecessary confusion and concern about the role of this figure in the LP, given that many members of public don't understand this context. 2 It must be correct that in the context of Local Plans, the word ‘target’ is more accurate than ‘minimum’. A significant role of the Local Plan is to co- ordinate the provision of housing over the plan period with that of employment, as well as with other infrastructure such as hospitals and roads. It would therefore be nonsensical if the Local Plan resulted in the provision of, say, 55,000 or 60,000 extra houses over the plan period. Further, the thrust of debates within Cornwall Council’s meetings (taking the word ‘Council’ here to be the body of councillors) on the housing figures in the LP has been to consider the figures as a target to be aimed for, not a minimum to be achieved over the period. If the outcome that is to be aimed for during the implementation of the LP were to be an unspecified figure that might well be substantially higher than the figures presented in the 2016 Hearings, for example, this would call into question the entire value of the local plan 4 537 preparation process. 3 Perhaps the primary goal of introducing ‘minimum’ is to prevent the 52,500 figure from being employed as a cap or ceiling on housing allocation in the later period of the plan, as suggested by comments in the agenda for the Hearing on the 20th of May 2016. It is not clear that this concern is warranted. The Local Plan will need to be revised in the mid-1920s (as argued further below) – and therefore this figure will never function as a ceiling, given that the plan will be revised before that number of allocations for the entire plan period has been reached. One of the reasons that the LP will need to be revised during the mid-1920s is as follows. The Housing Trajectory Table prepared by Cornwall Council mixes together the notion of permissions and completions (N.SC.1- LP Schedule of Changes May 2016 (3) (4), p.57). The 52,500 housing figure refers to completions, yet the Trajectory Table focusses substantially on permissions (8 rows of data after the first two that deal with completions). This is hardly surprising given the Council’s specific role in housing provision. Now... the Trajectory Table indicates that from the year 2020/21, the ‘Remaining requirement’ (for additional planning permissions during the plan period in addition to ‘Windfalls on small sites <10’) is for the allocation of 930 dwellings per year for 10 successive years until the end of the plan period. Evidently these 9,300 dwellings would need be completed within the plan period in order to fulfil the total provision of 52,500. There are two points arising. Firstly it is very unlikely that large sites forming part of this 9300 and allocated within the last few years of the period would indeed be completed within the plan period. Secondly there seems to be no provision within the plan for the granting of planning permissions for dwellings that would sustain completions in the first few years immediately following the end of the plan period. For these reasons it is evident that it will be crucial for Cornwall Council to be well advanced in its revision of its Local Plan by around 2025. This adds weight to the argument there is little to be gained by adopting the word ‘minimum ‘in relation to the 52,500 figure for housing allocation Suggested solution Replace the words ‘A minimum’ with ‘The provision’ and add a qualification in the accompanying text to the effect that the housing provision figures is not to be seen as a ceiling or a cap on housing provision during the latter part of the plan period. (This change would also serve to bring the structure of this point in line with other points in Policy 2a.) Q5 If your representation is seeking a change; do you wish to participate at the examination in public if there are further hearings? Please select one option, if you do not select a preference we will assume you do not wish to attend. No I do not wish to participate at the examination in public 5 537 Yes I wish to participate at the Yes examination in public If you select No, your written comments will still be considered by the independent Planning Inspector.