Agenda and minutes

At this point in the meeting, Members were asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on the agenda.  The following interests were declared:

·        Councillor D’Agorne declared a personal interest in agenda item 4 – “City Centre Area Action Plan City Centre Movement and Accessibility Framework”, as a member of the Cycle Touring Club and York Cycle Campaign.

·        Councillor Merrett declared a personal interest in agenda item 4 – “City Centre Area Action Plan City Centre Movement and Accessibility Framework”, as an honorary member of the Cycle Touring Club and a member of York Cycle Campaign.

·        Councillor Potter declared a personal interest in agenda item 4 – “City Centre Area Action Plan City Centre Movement and Accessibility Framework”, as Operations Manager for York Wheels.

·        Councillor Riches declared a personal interest in agenda item 5 – “Draft National Planning Policy Framework”, as   a student member of RIBA.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting of the Local Development Framework Working Group held on 14 March 2011 be approved by the Chair.

RESOLVED:                That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 March 2011 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

At this point in the meeting, members of the public who have registered their wish to speak, regarding an item on the agenda or an issue within the remit of the Working Group, may do so.  The deadline for registering is 5.00 pm on Friday 30^th September 2011.

Councillor Warters had requested to speak at the meeting.  He expressed concern at the cancellation of scheduled meetings of the group.  He stated that previously the LDF Working Group had provided an opportunity for cross-party involvement and public consultation but he was concerned that this was no longer the case. He drew attention to decisions in respect of the Core Strategy that had been taken by the Cabinet at their meeting on 21 June 2011.  Councillor Warters stated that he questioned the relevance of the LDF Working Group if its views were not taken into account.

This report advises Members of the production of a City Centre Movement and Accessibility Framework as an evidence base document for the City Centre Area Action Plan.

Members received a report that advised them of the production of a City Centre Movement and Accessibility Framework as an evidence base document for the City Centre Area Action Plan. 

The Framework had been produced by a multi-disciplinary consultant team as part of the Yorkshire Forward funded Renaissance programme.  Key stakeholders had been consulted in the production of the report.

Officers explained that the framework was a visionary document

that made a series of recommendations to help inform policies and

projects relating to movement and accessibility.  The production of the framework was part of a process in developing the vision for the city centre to be included in the City Centre Area Action Plan preferred options document.

Members were asked to consider the following options:

Option 1:    To approve the City Centre Movement and Accessibility proposals, as included in the draft Area Action Plan Preferred Options policy in paragraph 33 of the report for inclusion in the City Centre Area Action Preferred Options document, which would be put out for consultation.

Option 2:    To seek amendments to the strategy and main proposals and/or further work to be undertaken to review these proposals.

The Chair stated that it was acknowledged that comprehensive

modelling had not yet been carried out to ascertain how it might

work in practice and he drew attention to the need for full consultation to be carried out with residents.

Members commented on the need to address traffic issues and

congestion in the city centre and to look at ways at reducing pollution.

Members stated that it was important that inaccuracies in the

document were addressed prior to the consultation on the City Centre Area Action Plan taking place. 

The following amendments to the document were put forward:

National planning policy, in the form of Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) and their predecessors the Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPG) is extensive. It is proposed that this will be replaced by a single, succinct document the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Consultation on the draft framework began on the 25^th July 2011 and will end on 17^th October 2011. The purpose of this report is to inform Members of the content of the draft framework and ask them to consider a potential response to the consultation from the Council.

Members considered a report that informed them of the content of the Government’s draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).  A presentation was given on the proposed planning reforms. 

It was noted that consultation on the draft framework had begun on 25 July 2011 and would end on 17 October 2011.  Cabinet would be considering the Council’s response on 4 October 2011.

Members noted the draft response to the consultation statement, as detailed in Annex C of the report, and were asked to consider whether or not they wished to recommend to Cabinet that the proposed response be amended prior to its submission to the Department of Communities and Local Government.

Members made the following general comments in respect of the NPPF:

·        Whilst accepting that there was a need to make national policy more concise and accessible, concerns were expressed that the proposed simplification of planning law had gone too far.

·        There would be an unfair balance in terms of the interests of developers and local communities.

·        The use of the term “sustainable development” is not adequately defined.

·        Concerns were expressed regarding the non-inclusion of a ‘brownfield first’ target.

·        Undesignated assets had not been afforded a sufficient level of protection, for example areas of open green space.

·        The framework did not provide sufficient control of advertising.

·        It was imperative that transitional arrangements were in place to cover the gap between the new NPPF being in place and the adoption of Local Plans particularly given that PINS have been instructed to begin implementing the NPPF.

·        The framework had contradictory elements.  Whilst there was recognition of Neighbourhood Plans, there were statements in respect of a presumption in favour of development.

·        More needed to be done to ensure that there was an adequate supply of affordable housing.

Members recommended that the issues of Brownfield First and a clearer requirement on affordable housing be specifically reflected within the “General Comments” of the Council’s response to the draft NPPF, and other comments picked up in the appropriate section of the text.  It was also requested that the introductory “General” issues section be amended to read “Headline”. They also recommended that the following amendments be made to the wording of the response in Annex C:

Referring to issues raised by Councillor Warters under agenda item 3, the Chair reminded Members that although regular meetings of the LDF Working Group had been scheduled, this was to ensure that the group could consider business as it arose and in a timely manner.  If there were no items of business requiring attention at a particular time then meetings would be cancelled.