Agenda and minutes

Councillor Cherry Beath had sent her apologies to the Panel, Councillor Paul Crossley was present as her substitute for the duration of the meeting.

At this point in the meeting declarations of interest are received from Members in any of the agenda items under consideration at the meeting. Members are asked to indicate:

(a) The agenda item number in which they have an interest to declare.

(b) The nature of their interest.

(c) Whether their interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other interest,  (as defined in Part 2, A and B of the Code of Conduct and Rules for Registration of Interests)

Any Member who needs to clarify any matters relating to the declaration of interests is recommended to seek advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officer or a member of his staff before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

Councillor Fiona Darey declared an other interest with regard to Agenda Item 12 (Student Accommodation) as she is a tutor at the University of Bath.

The Chairman, Councillor Rob Appleyard declared a disclosable pecuniary interest during Agenda Item 8 (Cabinet Member Update) as he is a Director of Curo.

Mr David Redgewell has registered to make a statement to the Panel regarding the devolution of planning.

Mr Robin Kerr has registered to make a statement to the Panel regarding the Placemaking Plan.

Robin Kerr, Chairman of the Federation of Bath Residents’ Associations (FoBRA) made a statement to the Panel on the subject of the Placemaking Plan. A copy of the statement can be found on the Panel’s Minute Book, a summary is set out below.

FoBRA has been tracking the Placemaking Plan for some years, as we did the Core Strategy. We have contributed to its long development assiduously, meeting with officers and probably making more comments than any other body. Its importance to Bath residents is obvious, but it is lengthy and complicated.

From the beginning we have wanted a Student Housing Policy, my colleague Chris Beezley is going to speak about this further later, but that duty cannot be shirked. The seemingly unstoppable expansion of our two universities, however desirable, is a ticking time-bomb threatening our citizens’ ability to find homes or jobs here and placing further pressure on the Green Belt.

We also want to see space standards for market housing. About half of English Authorities impose minimum space standards on new commercial housing, but not B&NES, with the result that many of our new-build houses are cramped, often with less space than social housing.

Lastly, flooding risk, there is much in the Plan about mitigation of this risk in the Enterprise Areas, which is understandable, as otherwise no development would take place in them. However, there is a considerable likelihood some 2000 existing homes upstream, many of them Listed, and of great importance to World Heritage, yet this is hardly mentioned and no practical measures are proposed to deal with it.

Moreover, in the sections on development sites in Central Riverside and Manvers Street mitigation is planned for the development parts, but, scandalously, nothing for the existing properties close by, thereby condemning them to damage. In all fairness this has to be rectified and money found to carry out the necessary work.

Councillor Barry Macrae commented that in a previous representation to the Panel the Environment Agency had clearly stated that upstream flooding would not be a problem.

Ian Herve, Abbey Ward Flood Group made a statement to the Panel on the subject of the Placemaking Plan. A copy of the statement can be found on the Panel’s Minute Book, a summary is set out below.

Throughout this Draft Placemaking Plan there are many contradictory statements and much wishful thinking where flood risk in Bath is concerned. In the Bath subsection of this Plan, paragraph 122 states that the Recreation Ground “Functions as an important storage area during flood events”.

All well and good you might say except for one missing piece of information.  The flood risk maps for that area.  These can be viewed on the B&NES website in the 2013 Black and Veatch Technical Note for the Bath Quays Project.

This shows the actual flooded areas for various Annual Probability return risk events.  The Rec does indeed flood at a low risk event of a 1:25 year flow but so do  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

The Cabinet Member(s) will update the Panel on any relevant issues. Panel members may ask questions.

The Head of Housing informed the Panel that the Housing Zone capacity funding bid to DCLG to provide resident support, a viability assessment and a full time Project Officer to manage the Council’s involvement in the regeneration of Foxhill and the development of Mulberry Park had been successful. He added that the level of detail was not known at this stage, but the figure was £313,000.

Councillor Paul Crossley asked in terms of gypsy and traveller sites what the unmet demand of the travelling community is.

The Head of Housing replied that the full transit need had been met and that they were 10 permanent pitches short from what was originally identified.

The Group Manager for Policy & Environment added that identifying new pitches was in the work programme for the coming 2 to 3 years and that an options document could be published towards the end of 2016 or the beginning of 2017.

Councillor Lisa O’Brien said that she was pleased to read about the successful remodeling and extension of a property in Keynsham, but that she was aware of a similar property that was having difficulty in securing funding.

The Head of Housing said that he was aware of the case referred to by Councillor O’Brien as the costs were higher than the current threshold for funding. He added that low interest loans are available in these circumstances providing security can be given.

The Head of Housing informed the Panel that the annual estimate of rough sleeper numbers was carried out in November in partnership with DHI Reach and Julian House. Twenty two people were identified as rough sleeping, which is a reduction from twenty seven in 2014 and thirty three in 2013.

He said that the Government funding stream for this service was due to end in March 2016.  However, the Supporting People & Commissioning Team has confirmed that new funding has been identified for 2016/17. 

The four West of England authorities are preparing a Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) for the sub-region. The four UAs have published an Issues and Options document for public consultation. The consultation period lasts until 29th January 2016 and the Panel are asked to provide their comments on the published options.

The Group Manager for Policy & Environment introduced this item to the Panel. He explained that the Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) is being prepared by the officers of the four UAs and that the costs of which are being managed within existing budgets. However, additional funding has been required to procure specialist expertise and for the public consultation process.  It is proposed that this will be funded during 2015/16 from reserves.

He stated that the Joint Transport Study (JTS) is being undertaken by Atkins on behalf of the West of England Councils. The need for additional resource input from Atkins is presently being reviewed, to support the initial transport assessment of JSP options. This is likely to entail a small additional funding requirement from B&NES and the other UAs, the source for which will be identified and approval sought through usual process prior to any further commitment.

He said that chapter 3 of the document sets out the evidence on the quantum of development that needs to be accommodated. In summary, the Wider Bristol Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) identifies that around 85,000 dwellings are needed between 2016 and 2036. Around 56,000 are already identified in existing plans leaving around 30,000 still to find.  The affordable housing needed between 2016 and 2036 is around 30,000 of which around 20,000 still need to be identified.

He added that the JTS is being undertaken alongside the JSP with complementary milestones. The first stage of the JTS has assessed the performance of the current transport network, study objectives and outline concepts for investment in improving the transport network. In addition, the Issues and Options document includes a commentary on transport issues and a transport-focused spatial scenario.

He informed the Panel that the consultation period closes on January 29^th 2016 and that a draft Plan could be expected towards the middle of this year.

Councillor Paul Crossley asked if the ‘vision’ within the Plan had been adopted by any of the four UAs. He stated that he did not agree with it in its entirety.

The Group Manager for Policy & Environment replied that this vision had taken key points from existing versions across the four UAs based upon the agreed Strategic Economic Plan, but that no overall agreement for it had yet been received.

Councillor Paul Crossley commented that the housing shortfall in his opinion was through Bristol’s inability and their lacking of a High Buildings Strategy.

The Group Manager for Policy & Environment replied that the three other authorities encouraged Bristol to complete work relating to urban intensification and that they have acknowledged there is a need for a “step change” in their approach.

Councillor Lisa O’Brien commented that she felt it was a rose tinted vision that was over ambitious and not a solid blueprint. She asked if any consideration had been given to discussing development outside of the four UAs, Monmouthshire for example.

The Group Manager for Policy & Environment replied that discussions have only been in relation to the prescribed areas  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

This report seeks the views of the Scrutiny Panel on the Pre-submission Draft Placemaking Plan which was published for public consultation on 16^th December 2015.  The consultation period ends on 3^rd February 2016 and any comments from the Panel can be taken into account as part of the forthcoming examination process.

NOTE: Given the large file size of the pre-submission draft B&NES Placemaking Plan it can be only viewed on Council’s website at http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/services/planning-and-building-control/planning-policy/placemaking-plan/placemaking-plan-pre.

The Group Manager for Policy & Environment introduced this item to the Panel, He explained that the draft Placemaking Plan includes;

·  Spatial frameworks for Bath, Keynsham, the Somer Valley & the Rural Areas.  It allocates sites for development where these are necessary to deliver the strategy, setting out the required land-use mix and the development principles.

·  Designations where there is a need to identify and protect valued assets, such as important open hillsides or Local Green Space

·  Identifies schemes to be implemented such as road or cycleway improvements 

·  Generic criteria-based planning policies

He said that the consultation period ends on 3^rd February 2016 and any comments from the Panel can be taken into account as part of the forthcoming examination process.

He stated that in Bath, the key issue is how to facilitate the Council’s ambitions for growth and change in a relatively small city, recognized for its unique heritage and environment and constrained by the Green Belt. The development of the spatial strategy has therefore required that the Council make choices, in order to ensure its key priorities are met. The Plan reflects the ambitions of the Economic Strategy the Housing & Well-being Strategy and the Bath Transport Strategy.  In particular the proposals of the Bath Enterprise Area Masterplan have been formalised. The Plan highlights the transport interventions that are needed to realise the District’s growth proposals.

In Keynsham, the Plan seeks to build on the growing strengths of the town, providing a Masterplan for future change. This takes account of the significant growth contained in the Core Strategy.  It seeks to consolidate this growth and address the identified key issues facing the town.  It includes the allocation of Riverside for mixed use, residential led development including a replacement Leisure Centre. He said that a key element of the strategy for the town is the need to regenerate the High Street and the Plan includes a number of policies to achieve this.

In the Somer Valley, the Plan focuses on regeneration in light of the Core Strategy objectives of seeking a greater balance between homes and jobs. Both Midsomer Norton and Westfield are preparing their own Neighbourhood Plans and the Placemaking Plan complements the Neighbourhood Plans.

In the rural areas, B&NES has worked closely with the parishes to produce spatial frameworks for inclusion either in the Placemaking Plan or in their own Neighbourhood Plans. The approach has been to identify locations for new development where required in consultation with the local communities whilst identifying the key environmental assets for protection and conservation.

Councillor Paul Crossley questioned the need for approx. 30,000 m² of comparison retail up until 2029 as a vast majority of people now do their shopping on the internet.

The Group Manager for Policy & Environment replied that this recommendation was within the Plan following advice that had been sought by retail experts.

Councillor Lisa O’Brien commented that whilst internet sales were obviously massive a great number of people still look at items in shops prior to purchasing.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

This report provides an update on Neighbourhood Planning in B&NES.

The Divisional Director for Development introduced this item. She explained that the Council has worked closely with local communities in both preparing neighbourhood plans and on the Placemaking Plan. She stated that there are currently  three ‘made’ plans which have been brought into force (Stowey Sutton, Freshford & Limpley Stoke and Clutton) and another 10 plans under preparation with 6-7 expected to be ‘made’ by the end of 2016.

She said that a number of the Parish and Town Councils have sought to allocate sites or designate local green spaces via the Placemaking Plan rather than through a Neighbourhood Plan. This is an efficient way for the Parish and Town Councils to impact on development locally without incurring the additional work of a Neighbourhood Plan.

The Chairman asked is these Parish & Town Councils were still able to receive CIL funding.

The Divisional Director for Development replied that once the Neighbourhood Plan is made (adopted), a parish will receive 25% of CIL payments for development within their Neighbourhood Area, in line with the CIL Regulations (rather than the typical 15%).

The Panel RESOLVED to note the current position on Neighbourhood Planning in B&NES.

This reports sets out the Council’s proposed strategy to respond to the demand for Student Accommodation in the Bath through the draft Placemaking Plan.  The Panel’s comments can be taken into account in the presentation of Placemaking Plan to the Inspector at the forthcoming public consultation.

The Chairman commented that he welcomed this report as decisions need to be made on how we work in the future regarding this subject.

The Divisional Director for Development introduced the report to the Panel. She explained that at the time of the preparation, examination and adoption of the Core Strategy in 2013/14 the combined published growth forecasts/corporate plans of both institutions were lower than the growth rates achieved prior to 2011.

She said that the data provided by the University of Bath (UoB) in July 2015 shows that it aspires to grow from around 14,000 registered students in 2011/12 to around 19,300 in 2020/21. The forecast growth is very much set to be oriented towards full time study, which generates the greatest need for further study bedrooms. The aspiration is therefore for 5,300 more students and this would equate to a need for 4,700 more bed spaces to 2020/21.

She said that the data provided by Bath Spa University (BSU) between March and July 2015 lacks clarity in respect of future changes in actual students, their mode of study and accommodation needs revising. She added that in its representations at Options stage it stated that it aspired to grow from 6,632 FTEs (full time equivalents) in 2014/15 to 10,500 FTEs in 2020/21. This was broken down by year group but not mode of study. In response to the Council’s request to back date FTEs figures to 2011/12 the University provided a figure of 6,060. Total aspired to FTE change for the current decade is therefore around 4,500.

She stated that on the basis of the representations received at the Placemaking Plan Options Stage (Jan- July 2015) it is prudent for the Development Plan to assume in total that:

·  aspired to enrolment would see numbers increase from around 22,500 to around 31,700 (+9,200) to 2020/21

·  accommodation needs would increase from 16,300 to 24,800 (+8,500)

·  that these figures are only to 2020/21 and that if they are not achieved by then, that they may be achieved later in the Plan period. If they are achieved then further growth may be aspired to later in the plan period.

She explained that in December 2015, the Council had taken into account dedicated new supply (on and off-campus) that has been built since 2011, is under construction or is permitted, and estimated additional capacity of not more than 1,000 within specific areas currently shown for accommodation development in the UoB masterplan (2014 update). Exclusive use developments yield around 3, 000 bed spaces (1,700 to UoB ad 1,300 to BSU). A further 944 bedspaces that are built, under construction or permitted are currently or potentially available to any student.

She said that the Council still seeks to enable, as far as possible, the continued success of The UoB and BSU and the contribution they make to the city’s identity, profile and employment base, and their a wider contribution to the UK skilled workforce and GVA. However, in terms of the strategy for Bath,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

This report presents the latest workplan for the Panel. Any suggestions for further items or amendments to the current programme will be logged and scheduled in consultation with the Panel’s Chair and supporting officers.

The Panel confirmed their current workplan as printed in the agenda pack.