Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed all in attendance to the October meeting of Development Plan Panel.

To declare any personal / prejudicial interests for the purpose of Section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Councillor James Lewis declared a personal interest in relation to agenda item 7, Draft National Planning Policy Framework – Consultation Response, in his capacity as Chair of West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority. (Minute No. 18 refers)

To receive any apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor Nash.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Development Plan Panel meeting held on 9^th August 2011.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 9^th August 2011 be approved as a correct record.

To consider a report by the Director of City Development informing Members of the publication of the Draft National Planning Framework (NPPF) and associated documents for consultation. The report sets out the City Council’s proposed response to the consultation exercise (closing date of consultation 17^th October 2011).

The Director of City Development submitted a report which outlined Leeds City Council’s (LCC’s) proposed consultation response to the draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPFF).

The following information was appended to the report:

-  NPFF consultation questions

-  Draft letter in response to NPFF consultation.

The Chair welcomed to the meeting, David Feeney, Head of Forward Planning and Implementation, to present the report and respond to Members questions and comments.

The key areas of discussion were:

·  Recommendation that the final LCC response / recommendations should cross reference the corresponding paragraphs in the NPFF consultation document.

·  Concern about the “presumption in favour” of sustainable development being dropped and the adverse impact on local communities.

·  Concern that the principle of simplifying and streamlining the planning system should not be accepted and the response to Leeds MPs and other relevant organisations should be amended to reflect this.

·  The importance of planning guidance informing planning decisions.  Where the review of guidance was necessary, this should be undertaken on a more gradual basis.

·  In relation to section 2, para. 2.4, suggested amendment to last line to read ‘…permission should not be bought and sold’.

·  The need to specify the number of windfall units delivered over a 5 year period in demonstrating the significant contribution windfall had made in the city.  In relation to section 3, para. 5 (Housing Provision) the word “say” needs to be inserted into the sentence as follows “At a minimum build of say 30 units/hectare…”.

·  Concern about the lack of cohesion between the draft NPFF, the localism bill and other key planning guidance.

·  Concern in relation to para. 75 of the draft NPFF which states that ‘planning policies should avoid the long term protection of employment land or floorspace, and applications for alternative uses of designated land or buildings should be treated on their merits having regard to market signals and the relative need for different land uses.’  The Development Plan Panel (DPP) was of the view that this approach would be catastrophic for Leeds, as it would not allow the city to plan for longer term job growth and would result in employment land and premises being displaced by higher value uses (reflecting market signals).

·  Development of the Core Strategy and clarification about LCC position prior to adoption of national guidance.

·  Concern about the lack of strategic direction in relation to transport issues (see section 3, para. 13 (Transport)).

·  Concern that the draft NPFF did not reflect Council Policies and City Priorities and should therefore be redrafted to strongly state that the NPFF as written  was contrary to City Council Policies and City Priorities for sustainable development (in delivering environmental, social and economic objectives at the same time), urban regeneration, protecting local character, distinctiveness and environmental quality (see section 4, para. 4.3.1 (Council Policies and City Priorities).  This was due to the draft NPFF being unduly weighted in favour of development and the economic aspects of sustainable  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

To consider a report by the Director of City Development drawing Members attention to a series of further minor changes being considered by the Inspector on a variety of issues associated with the Natural Resources & Waste Development Plan Document.

The Director of City Development submitted a report which outlined a series of further changes being considered by the Inspector in relation to the Natural Resources & Waste Development Plan Document (DPD).

Appended to the report was a copy of the changes being considered by the Inspector.

David Feeney, Head of Forward Planning and Implementation, presented the report.

RESOLVED – That the attached changes to the report, be noted.

To note that the next meeting will take place on Tuesday, 8^th November 2011 at 1.30pm in the Civic Hall, Leeds.

Tuesday, 8^th November 2011 at 1.30pm. 

(The meeting concluded at 2.45pm.)