Meeting Details

Cabinet
17 Sep 2020 - 17:00 to 18:25
Occurred
  • Documents
  • Attendance
  • Visitors
  • Declarations of Interests

Documents

Agenda

Meeting Details
Meetingdetails
MeetingDetailsCOVID19

Members are invited to an Extraordinary Meeting of the Cabinet

to be held on Thursday, 17 September 2020 at 5:00pm

 

This meeting will be conducted remotely, pursuant to the Local Authorities and Police and Crime Panels (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority and Police and Crime Panel Meetings) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020.

 

The meeting will be facilitated using the Zoom video conferencing system and broadcast via the East Suffolk Council YouTube channel at https://youtu.be/zAbCYyRPg8o

 

Part One - Open To The Public
1 Apologies for Absence

To receive apologies for absence, if any.

1
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Alison Cackett, T-J Haworth-Culf and Mary Rudd.
2 Declarations of Interest

Members and Officers are invited to make any declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary or Local Non-Pecuniary Interests that they may have in relation to items on the Agenda and are also reminded to make any declarations at any stage during the Meeting if it becomes apparent that this may be required when a particular item or issue is considered.

2
There were no declarations of interest.
NON-KEY DECISIONS
Report of the Cabinet Member  with responsibility for  Planning  and Coastal Management
3

The Cabinet received report ES/0474 of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management who reported that the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan was being presented to Cabinet following a thorough process of preparation which has taken place since 2016 involving a number of public consultations and careful consideration of evidence, followed by Examination by an independent Government Inspector who had concluded that, with modifications, the Plan was legally compliant and sound and could proceed to adoption.

 

The Suffolk Coastal Local Plan covered the former Suffolk Coastal district area and set out the strategy for growth and development over the period 2018-2036, and once adopted would guide decisions on planning applications within that area.  The Plan would sit alongside the Waveney Local Plan which was adopted in March 2019, and the Local Plan for the Broads (prepared by the Broads Authority) which was adopted in May 2019, together providing up to date plans across the whole of East Suffolk.  There were in addition, seven ‘made’ Neighbourhood Plans in the former Suffolk Coastal area and a number of others under preparation.

 

The Cabinet Member advised that production of the Local Plan had begun in 2016, and following early consideration of evidence, such as in relation to employment and housing needs, the first formal stage of consultation, on Issues and Options, was held in 2017, generating considerable interest and almost 7,000 comments from more than 600 individuals and organisations.  This initial stage enabled alternative strategies to be considered and tested.  Following close consideration of the feedback received, including by the Local Plan Working Group of the former Suffolk Coastal District Council, and further development of the evidence base, the First Draft Local Plan was consulted on in Summer 2018.  This set out a draft plan with feedback sought on the proposals, and provided further opportunity for alternatives to be put forward. 

 

The Cabinet Member explained that again, this consultation generated a significant level of interest with over 3,000 comments received from over 1,300 individuals and organisations.  These comments were carefully considered in progressing the Plan further alongside the evidence base, and in January 2019 the former Suffolk Coastal District Council approved the Final Draft Local Plan for publication to receive representations relating to soundness.  This was held for six weeks between January and February 2019.  Over 1,500 representations were received from over 500 individuals and organisations. Following this period of publication, the Local Plan was submitted to the Government for Independent Examination in March 2019.

 

An independent Inspector from the Planning Inspectorate (the PINS) was appointed to examine the Plan, to consider whether it was legally compliant and sound.  Public hearings were held during August and September 2019, and subsequently the Inspector published his post-hearings letter in January 2020.  This led to consultation on Main Modifications, held for 10 weeks between May and July 2020, and following consideration of the responses received the Inspector published his final report on 8 September 2020.  This report concluded that the Plan was legally compliant and sound, subject a number of Main Modifications being made, and could be adopted.  The Plan, with the modifications incorporated, was presented to the Cabinet. 

 

The Cabinet Member considered that the Local Plan set out an ambitious vision, which aligned with the vision for the Council, and set out aspirations to ensure a diverse, strong and prosperous economy; provision of sufficient homes of the right types and tenures to meet needs, including addressing needs for younger and older people; active and healthy communities, protecting, maintaining and enhancing the high quality built, historic and natural environment, and mitigating and adapting to climate change.

 

 The Cabinet Member said that this vision followed through into the strategy for the Local Plan which sought to support and facilitate the delivery of at least 6,500 jobs, including through the provision of employment land to support growth in retail, commercial leisure and town centres and to meet the needs for new housing.  Provision of infrastructure and protecting and enhancing the environment formed a key part of this overall strategy.

 

Spatially, the Local Plan sought to deliver two new Garden Neighbourhoods (at North Felixstowe and South Saxmundham), new employment growth based around key transport corridors, strategies for market towns to reflect and strengthen their roles and appropriate growth in rural areas, including through site allocations, to sustain existing communities. 

 

The North Felixstowe Garden Neighbourhood had been identified as a leisure led development which would comprise a new leisure centre, green infrastructure, community facilities and employment land alongside residential development of up to 2,000 homes.  The Cabinet Member stated that it was recognised that the integration with the existing community would be critical to its success and the garden neighbourhood would be expected to come forward through a masterplanned approach informed by community engagement. 

 

The South Saxmundham Garden Neighbourhood was considered to provide an opportunity to provide new primary school provision, green infrastructure, recreational facilities and other community facilities, in addition to approximately 800 homes and employment land.  As with North Felixstowe, the garden neighbourhood was expected to come forward through a masterplanned approach informed by community engagement.  The Cabinet Member highlighted that whilst alternative options around Saxmundham had been considered throughout the production of the Plan, bringing the development forward on one site had been considered to provide benefits in relation to the comprehensive delivery of the development and infrastructure. 

 

Informed by consideration of opportunities and constraints and the strategy of the Local Plan, site allocations had also been identified in other locations across the Local Plan area to meet housing and employment needs.  To provide confidence in maintaining sufficient housing supply, the amount of housing planned for included a contingency of around 25% (including an allowance for some development to come forward as windfall in accordance with other policies in the Plan).  Possible sites for allocation were initially consulted on in the Issues and Options consultation, followed by preferred sites being put forward in the First Draft Local Plan, and the approach being finalised within the Final Draft Local Plan.  A number of site allocations were also reviewed and carried over from the 2017 Site Allocations and Area Specific Policies and the 2017 Felixstowe Peninsula Area Action Plan. 

 

The Cabinet Member confirmed that in recognition of the desire to bring forward Neighbourhood Plans in many communities, where a Neighbourhood Area was designated at the time the Local Plan was being prepared the Local Plan set out a housing requirement for that area, to be planned for through the Neighbourhood Plan where housing is to be covered. 

 

The Local Plan also set out a number of topic based policies for use in determining planning applications, including in relation to economic uses, housing (including Gypsies and Travellers), tourism, transport, community facilities and assets, climate change and coastal change, the natural environment, the built and historic environment and infrastructure. 

 

Through the Examination, the Inspector considered whether the Local Plan was legally compliant and sound.  The tests for soundness set out in the National Planning Policy Framework had required the Plan to be positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy.  Having considered the Local Plan, the evidence base and the representations received in relation to the Final Draft Local Plan, and having consulted on proposed Main Modifications, the Inspector had concluded that a number of Main Modifications would be needed for the Plan to be sound.  These were set out in the appendix to the Inspector’s report and were summarised in the Cabinet report at paragraph 2.1.

 

Following publication of the Inspector’s Report a significant amount of correspondence was received in relation to the housing allocation at Land West of Chapel Road, Grundisburgh (Policy SCLP12.51), including objections to the inclusion of the allocation in the Local Plan. The main matters raised were summarised as issues related to:

 

The suitability of the local road network and provision of safe access to the site, including for pedestrians;
Capacity of infrastructure such as schools and doctors;
Loss of countryside and open space;
Lack of a need for additional homes in Grundisburgh;
Lack of consultation with the community.

 

The Cabinet Member advised that the matters raised in recent correspondence reflected issues raised in representations to the Final Draft Local Plan and to the Main Modifications consultation, which had been considered by the Inspector in arriving at his conclusions on the Local Plan.  The representations received on the Final Draft Local Plan and on the Main Modifications were available to view on the Council’s website.  The Cabinet Member considered that some correspondence related to the current planning applications that had been submitted for the site and advised that officers were working through the correspondence and would respond to those who have written in as appropriate. 

 

Correspondence had also been received in relation to the housing allocation at Land adjacent to the Farthings, Peasenhall (Policy SCLP12.59), in particular raising matters around the site not being available for development.  The Cabinet Member said that the site would only come forward for development should the landowners bring it forward.  The Plan contained a contingency by planning for a number above the housing requirement, to acknowledge that some sites may be delayed or not come forward.

 

The final Local Plan, incorporating the Main Modifications, was contained in Appendix C to the Cabinet report.  The Cabinet Member stated that the purpose of bringing this report to the Cabinet was to recommend to the Full Council that the Local Plan be adopted.  He said that the adoption of the Local Plan would enable development to come forward and be managed in line with an up to date plan, facilitating economic growth and delivering housing to meet identified needs, whilst providing certainty for communities.  The Cabinet Member said that the importance of having a Plan in place was further emphasised in relation to the current pandemic and ensuring a positive and planned approach was in place to support economic recovery.

 

The Cabinet Member concluded that what was before the Cabinet was a plan that had been through all stages and examination and was a final version that the Full Council could adopt or reject.  He advised that to adopt the plan would take the best possible plan forward and if it were rejected, there would be planning chaos and inappropriate sites being developed across East Suffolk.  He reminded the Cabinet that sites being allocated in the Local Plan did not equate to planning permission being granted and highlighted the recent appeal decision in Rendlesham, where refusal of a proposal for 75 homes had been upheld; the site was allocated in the current Local Plan but had been refused planning permission as the design quality had not been of a sufficient standard.

 

The Cabinet Member paid thanks to all the Planning officers who had been involved in the development of the Local Plan for their hard work, giving particular thanks to the Planning Policy and Delivery Manager and the Principal Planner (Policy and Delivery).

 

The Leader of the Council invited questions from Cabinet Members and asked if the Full Council could modify or remove elements of the Local Plan that it did not like.  The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management confirmed that this was not the case and noted that compliance with the Local Plan was the first of several elements that had to be considered by a developer when seeking planning permission.

 

In response to a question from the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Customer Services and Operational Partnerships, the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management confirmed that he was confident that all necessary details had been provided to the Planning Inspector; he noted that there was no such thing as a perfect Local Plan but said that the document before the Cabinet was the result of three years' hard work and had been scrutinised in detail and subject to public hearings as part of its development process. 

 

The Principal Planner, when invited to address the Cabinet, confirmed that all necessary details had been provided to the Inspector, including all representations that had been received in the allocated timescales.  She highlighted a site allocation at Peasenhall as an example of where the Inspector had asked for and been provided with further information on flooding and a flood risk assessment, stating that this demonstrated that the Inspector had wanted to ensure that they had all the relevant information when examining the Local Plan.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Housing highlighted the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the need for housing in the district and asked when the new Local Plan, if adopted, would be reviewed to consider this.  The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management acknowledged that there would be an impact but considered this to not be fully known at this stage.  The Cabinet Member explained that the Local Plan looked ahead to 2036 and said to not plan for housing need positively would have a bigger impact in the long-term.  He advised that the Local Plan would be reviewed on an annual basis through the Annual Monitoring Report and would also be reviewed on a five-yearly basis to see if any part of it needed to be adapted.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for the Environment sought reassurance that the Local Plan would engage with the climate emergency declared by the Council and would add to the Council's ambition to be one of, if not the most, environmentally friendly district councils.  The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management explained that although the Local Plan had largely been prepared prior to the Council's declaration of a climate emergency it contained mitigation and adaptation for climate change and this was a thread throughout the plan, highlighting sections on flood risk, coastal erosion and a chapter entirely on climate change that included policies on low carbon, energy, transport, and both biodiversity and geodiversity.  

 

In response to a question from the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Customer Services and Operational Partnerships, the Principal Planner advised that any revisions to the Local Plan would follow the same process followed to prepare a new Local Plan as it was covered by the same legislation and need for examination.  The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management and the Principal Planner noted that the Local Plan formed part of the Council's development plan and should be accorded with, but that other material planning considerations may influence planning decisions.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Housing made reference to the housing target in the Local Plan and asked how much weight would be given to this in the event that an unsuitable planning application was made and the housing target had not been met.  The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management reiterated that the amount of housing planned for included a contingency of around 25% and that there were processes for the Government to address local planning authorities not meeting housing targets; he advised that current housing targets in the former Suffolk Coastal district area were being met or exceeded and it was anticipated that this would continue.  The Cabinet Member acknowledged that not all sites allocated in the Local Plan would come forward but did not consider that the Local Plan would put the Council in a position where it needed to accept unsuitable housing developments in order to meet housing targets.  The Principal Planner outlined the Housing Action Plan that the Council had in place for the entire district, which would identify issues as they arose so that they could be addressed in a timely manner.  She added that officers maintained contact with developers about bringing sites forward.

 

The Leader of the Council invited questions from other Members present.

 

Councillor Graham Elliott queried why this report was before the Cabinet, given that it was the Full Council that would make the decision on whether to adopt the Local Plan.  The Democratic Services Manager explained that it was considered good practice for the Cabinet to consider any new Local Plan and make its recommendations to the Full Council.

 

Councillor Elliott asked if the seven Neighbourhood Plans in the former Suffolk Coastal district area would need to be updated in response to the new Local Plan and if so, how easy would this be to achieve.  On the invitation of the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, the Principal Planner advised that those Neighbourhood Plans were 'made' and would continue to be part of the Council's development plan; she advised that legislation dictated that where there was a conflict between plans, the most recently adopted plan would take precedence.  The Principal Planner said that some elements of the Neighbourhood Plans may need to be reviewed by the communities that had produced them and that officers would work with any groups who identify they need to review elements of their Neighbourhood Plan.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Elliott about the implication of the Government's White Paper on Planning reform on the Local Plan, the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management acknowledged the concerns that the White Paper had raised.  He noted that the White Paper proposed the most significant changes to the Planning system since the Second World War and was open for consultation until 29 October 2020.  The Cabinet Member highlighted that any subsequent legislation may differ from the initial proposals in the White Paper and was unlikely to come into force for at least another two years, and that there would then be another 42 months for the Council to conform with any new regulations.

 

Councillor Elliott sought confirmation on the implications of the Temporary Suspension of Parts of the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) for Planning Policy Purposes – Adoption of the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan, noting that procedures in the SCI had applied when the former Waveney District Council had adopted the Waveney Local Plan in March 2019.  The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management explained that the normal requirements to place hard copies of the Local Plan in Council offices and libraries could not be met during the COVID-19 pandemic and that hard copies of the Local Plan would be mailed out on request.  He noted that a similar offer was in place during the Main Modifications consultation and around 20 requests were received.  The Cabinet Member gave assurances that hard copies could be provided to Members on request, for instance for members of the Planning Committees North and South, and it was anticipated that the Local Plan would predominantly be accessed online.

 

Councillor Mike Deacon outlined his long-term opposition to large housing development in the Felixstowe and The Trimleys area for reasons including density, the impact on the community, the impact on the A14 and the additional burden on local services and the environment.  Councillor Deacon acknowledged that the Local Plan did its best to mitigate the impact of new housing in this area but that 4,000 new homes were still planned, which Councillor Deacon suggested would increase the population in the area by 8,000.

 

Councillor Deacon said that sites in the area were limited and considered that the major sites identified would have a major impact on local agricultural land.  Councillor Deacon noted that Natural England would have been a statutory consultee for the Local Plan and would have been asked for advice on developing listed agricultural land; Councillor Deacon was concerned about the loss of agricultural land in the Felixstowe and The Trimleys area and asked to be referred to Natural England's response on site allocation in this area.

 

In reply, the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management acknowledged the figures quoted by Councillor Deacon and highlighted that a significant portion of housing growth in the Local Plan was directed towards Felixstowe, The Trimleys and Kirton.  It was highlighted the number of people commuting into Felixstowe was three times the number of people commuting out of the town, largely due to the Port of Felixstowe.  The Cabinet Member explained that consideration had been given to this area and the A14 when formulating the Local Plan; it was highlighted that Felixstowe also provided rail connectivity and sustainable connections in walking and cycling routes and that alternative considerations for sites had been given during the creation of the Local Plan.  The Cabinet Member noted the land north of Candlet Road that had been allocated, some of which was already subject to extant planning permission for development.  

 

The Principal Planner confirmed that Natural England had been consulted at all stages of the Local Plan's production and agreed to supply their responses to Councillor Deacon after the meeting.  The Principal Planner explained that the Local Plan was supported by a sustainability appraisal which had considered a number of objectives including the impact of loss of resources such as agricultural land.  The Principal Planner said that this was one factor in considering the suitability of sites but was not in itself an absolute constraint.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management highlighted that a sifting process had taken place to identify possible allocation sites in order to identify the most suitable ones and that the former Suffolk Coastal District Council's Local Plan Working Group would have looked at the details in each instance.

 

Councillor Peter Byatt noted the statement from Councillor Deacon and asked if any investigation and/or consultation had taken place about the amount of the food grown in East Suffolk, highlighting that the National Farmers' Union was pushing for more locally grown food.  Councillor Byatt also asked when there would be a single Local Plan for East Suffolk.  

 

In response, the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management highlighted that agriculture was more efficient than it used to be and considered that it could feed the country on a smaller amount of land that was previously required; he was of the opinion that the district nor the country would run out of farming land.  With regard to Councillor Byatt's second question, the Cabinet Member acknowledged that there were three Local Plans applicable to East Suffolk, the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan, the Waveney Local Plan, and the Broads Authority Local Plan.  For the latter, this was because the Broads Authority held planning responsibility for the areas of the district that fell within the Suffolk and Norfolk Broads and that both the Suffolk Coastal and Waveney Local Plans had been developed in synchronisation with the Broads Authority Local Plan; he did not consider that this amounted to a piecemeal approach.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management reminded all present that planning reforms proposed in the government's White Paper would bring the Suffolk Coastal and Waveney Local Plans together should the reforms become legislation.  He highlighted that both plans had a great deal in common and had been developed with the input of the same officers; he considered that the Council's planning officers were more than capable of working to more than one Local Plan.

 

Councillor Colin Hedgley noted that the new Suffolk Coastal Plan had not yet been adopted and that planning applications had already been made in respect of the site at Chapel Field in Grundisburgh; he sought the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management's comments on the haste of these applications.  The Cabinet Member noted that any developer had a right to make a planning application at any time and although it may have been more suitable for these applications to have been made after the adoption of the new Local Plan, they would still be considered on their own merits.

 

Councillor Rachel Smith-Lyte stated that the UK currently imported 40% of its food and considered that this would get worse with Brexit.  She acknowledged that agriculture was now more efficient than in the past but was at more of a price as soils were ruined and there were issues with black grass.  Councillor Smith-Lyte was of the view that the Council should be pushing back hard at the government, particularly with the current threat of significant planning reform; she was concerned that the required housing targets of the Local Plan was the government trying to build its way out of trouble and was unsure if this amount of housing was required.  Councillor Smith-Lyte asked if this was the message that the Cabinet was sending to the government.

 

In reply, the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management said that it saddened him when agricultural land was needed for housing but noted that there had been a housing crisis in the country for some time.  The Leader of the Council added that there was a need to have a balanced approach to the natural environment, agriculture and housing need and that one could not exist without the other two.  He considered that there was a need for housing across the district and that the Council was also obligated to deliver on housing targets set by the government, and that it was the Council's responsibility as the local planning authority to meet the needs of the natural environment, agriculture and housing need.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management stated that he had worked hard for brownfield sites in Lowestoft to be developed but that some of these sites were valued in negative terms, which made them difficult to develop.  The Cabinet Member said he was passionate about bringing brownfield sites forward for development but acknowledged that housing would also need to be built on agricultural land to bring forward sufficient housing numbers.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Customer Services and Operational Partnerships asked that if a majority of allocated sites in the plan were not delivered would this trigger compulsory orders to deliver on housing targets and if allocated sites prejudiced other sites coming forward.

PIN

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management referred to contingency of over-provision of housing targets in the Local Plan and that the targets did not take into account windfall development that could come from unallocated sites.  The Cabinet Member considered that this was a stronger position from which to maintain a five-year housing land supply.  The Principal Planner advised that the Council's housing action plan enabled the Council to support sites identified in the Local Plan to come forward for development.

 

The Assistant Cabinet Member for Community Health asked what the options and risks were to communities should the Local Plan not be adopted.  The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management explained that the current Suffolk Coastal Local Plan was considered out of date in some respects by the Planning Inspectorate and if a new Local Plan was not put in place and the Council could not demonstrate having a five-year housing land supply, this would result in any applications refused on sites unsuitable for development being difficult to defend on appeal.  The Cabinet Member said that the Council had two options, to adopt the Local Plan which would result in planned development or to not adopt the plan and end up with planning chaos and unplanned development.

 

There being no further questions, the Leader of the Council invited comment and debate from Cabinet Members.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Customer Services and Operational Partnerships noted that if an allocated site is promoted but development is not pursued by the landowner, the most efficient way to address this would be through the planning process as land changes hands over time, and new owners may choose to develop sites.

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Housing supported the recommendation in the report to recommend that Full Council adopted the new Local Plan.  He noted that a survey in the IP10 and IP11 postcode areas shortly before lockdown had highlighted 542 people on the housing waiting list in that area.  The Cabinet Member considered that the best way to get social housing on allocated sites would be through Section 106 agreements as sites came forward.  The Cabinet Member also outlined the large amount of grain exported from Ipswich Port and considered there was sufficient land available to fulfil the food needs of the District's residents.

 

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member with responsibility for Economic Development thanked both the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management and the planning officers for their extensive work on formulating the Local Plan.  The Deputy Leader said it was important that the Local Plan was adopted to prevent planning chaos and that the plan would not automatically confer planning permission on sites; he stated that the fine details of development proposals would be explored through the planning application process.

 

The Leader of the Council invited comment and debate from the other Members present.

 

Councillor Byatt added his thanks to the officers for their hard work; he was particularly interested in the Local Plan's relation to Felixstowe as its port was of significance to both the town and the economy.

 

Councillor Jocelyn Bond agreed that the Local Plan was a very good one and that everyone involved in its development should be very proud, particularly the Planning officers.  Councillor Bond said that she had been asked to highlight the cumulative effect of current and proposed energy projects on her Ward and the District as a whole; she considered this to be an important area that would affect much of the electorate.  Councillor Bond asked for a stringent regime to review the Local Plan should be it be adopted.

 

Councillor Byatt asked if there was any capacity in the Scrutiny Committee's work programme to scrutinise both the Suffolk Coastal and Waveney Local Plans.  The Leader of the Council reiterated his earlier comments on the development process followed to create the plan and stated that he had confidence in the Planning department to constantly review the Local Plans. 

 

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management reminded Councillor Byatt that the Scrutiny Committee decided its own work programme but would be happy to appear before the Committee should it be required.  The Cabinet Member explained that the Local Plan Working Group would remain in place and would review the Local Plans as they progressed.

 

There being no further comment or debate the Leader of the Council moved to the recommendation in the report.

 

On the proposition of Councillor Ritchie, seconded by Councillor Gallant it was by a majority vote

 

RESOLVED

 

1. That the content of the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan, as contained at Appendix C of report ES/0474, be noted and endorsed.

 

 2. That the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan be recommended to Full Council for adoption.

 

 3. That the Head of Planning and Coastal Management, in consultation with the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, be authorised to make any presentational or typographical amendments to the Local Plan prior to adoption.

 

 4. That the Temporary Suspension of Parts of the Statement of Community Involvement for Planning Policy Purposes – Adoption of the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan, as contained in Appendix D of report ES/0474, be recommended to Full Council for approval.

 

Before closing the meeting, the Leader of the Council echoed the thanks already expressed by other Members during the meeting.  In particular, the Leader of the Council thanked the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management and the Planning officers who had worked on the development of the new Local Plan; he highlighted that they had guided the Local Plan Working Group, which had worked tirelessly in the production of the Local Plan.  

 

The Leader of the Council also took the opportunity to thank the former members of Suffolk Coastal District Council, that were not members of East Suffolk Council, for their work on the development of the Local Plan prior to the creation of East Suffolk Council.

Part Two - Confidential

There are no Exempt or Confidential items for this Agenda.

Meeting Documents

Declarations of Interests

Member NameItem Ref.DetailsNature of DeclarationAction
No declarations of interest have been entered for this meeting.

Visitors

Officers present:

Stephen Baker (Chief Executive), Karen Cook (Democratic Services Manager),  Nick Khan (Strategic Director), Matt Makin (Democratic Services Officer), Sue Meeken (Political Group Support Officer (Labour)), Andrea McMillan (Principal Planner (Policy & Delivery)), Agnes Ogundrian (Political Group Support Officer (Conservative)),  Desi Reed (Planning Policy & Delivery Manager), Deborah Sage (Political Group Support Officer (GLI))