Agenda item

In order to ensure that the Council has the necessary Planning Policy tools in place to respond to the forthcoming changes in Local Government finance, the enactment of the Localism Bill and the delivery of its own objectives, the existing Local Development Scheme (programme for preparation of planning policy documents) must be reviewed.  This includes a minor review of the Core Strategy timetable to enable proper consideration of issues raised by the Inspector following submission of the Draft Core Strategy for examination.

Caroline Kay (Chief Executive, Bath Preservation Trust) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 5 and is available on the Council's website] welcoming the revised LDS but making some observations, in particular about the need for the specific mention of a building heights strategy.

The Chair referred the statement to Cabinet for their consideration.

David Dunlop (The Bath Society and London Road Residents Association) made a statement in which he reminded the Cabinet that government advice PVS25 requires the Council to address flood risk.  On the grounds of flood risk, and for other reasons, he questioned the viability of the proposed Bathampton Park and Ride site, which included a lowering of the site so that it would be more likely to flood.

Councillor Paul Crossley asked David Dunlop by how much the site was to have been lowered under the proposals.  David replied that the original proposals showed the site being lowered by 8.8 metres.

Councillor Tim Ball asked David Dunlop how many lorry loads of soil this would be.  David replied that it would not be difficult to remove the soil because it could be disposed of at the gasworks site – but the project would bring no discernable improvement to congestion on the London Road.

The Chair referred the statement to Cabinet for their consideration.

Councillor John Bull made an ad hoc statement in which he drew attention to paragraph 5.4(e) where the Inspector had expressed concern that the affordable housing needs were not adequately addressed by the original proposals.

Councillor Paul Crossley asked Councillor Bull whether he would agree that it was essential for the Council to insist on 35% affordable housing provision.  Councillor Bull readily agreed.

Councillor Les Kew made an ad hoc statement in which he expressed the concern that actions being taken by the Cabinet might put the Core Strategy at risk.  He felt that Cabinet must address the need for economic growth and a transport network to sustain it.

Councillor Paul Crossley asked whether Councillor Kew would agree that it was essential to get flood protection measures in place to protect western Riverside.  Councillor Kew agreed.

Councillor Roger Symonds asked whether Councillor Kew’s concern extended to Bathampton Meadows.  Councillor Kew agreed that it did.

Councillor Tim Ball, in proposing the motion, emphasised the need to find a way forward which the Inspector could agree with.  He felt that this would be achieved by the document being presented for adoption.

Councillor Roger Symonds seconded the motion.  He pointed out that the original growth assumption of the Regional Spatial Strategy had been 3% per annum but the new realities of 1.8% growth demanded a less ambitious Local Development Scheme, and that this also applied to the realities of the less ambitious Bath Transport Package.  He emphasised that the proposals met all the prescribed criteria listed in paragraph 5.2 of the report.

On a motion from Councillor Tim Ball, seconded by Councillor Roger Symonds, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously):

(1) To ADOPT the revised Local Development Scheme 2011 to 2014 for B&NES;

(2) To RESCHEDULE the Core Strategy examination hearings to enable consideration of the issues raised by the Inspector in his letter dated 3rd June 2011.