Agenda item

Appendices 1 and 2 are attached to a limited number of paper copy agendas as separate documents, and to the electronic version of the agenda on the Council’s website.

The New Communities Portfolio Holder

(a) NOTED the representations received during the Issues and Options 2 consultation, set out in Appendix 1

(b) AGREED the responses and recommendations in Appendix 2:

· review the approach to the Gypsy and Traveller Development Plan Document (DPD) in 2011 when the new Needs Assessment has been completed and further information regarding government policy, in particular the Localism Bill and the new guidance regarding planning for Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation, is available.

· review the Vision and Objectives in light of the approach to the development plan following changes to government policy having regard to relevant issues raised during the consultation.

· provision at major developments could be either public or private, determined at the time of delivery and taking account of needs at the time. A Site Delivery Strategy will be prepared to explore innovative methods of site delivery, funding and management.

· review the criteria based policy on major developments following changes to government policy having regard to relevant issues raised during the consultation.

· major developments should be required to provide a specific number of pitches through the GTDPD, with flexibility on how that number is provided left to masterplanning of the development.

· the delivery of sites should be phased so that key services and facilities at the major development are available before Gypsy and Traveller pitches are occupied.

· prepare local guidance on design of Gypsy and Traveller sites, including site size, and consult on it at the next opportunity, including consultation with Gypsies and Travellers.

· the following sites are no longer site options:

· Site 5: University site - Land between Madingley Road and

Huntingdon Road Cambridge)

· Site 7: Cambourne (in association with a major development

proposal)

· Site 18: Land at Spring Lane, Bassingbourn

· Site 21: Blackwell (Transit Site)

· commission further assessment of the potential noise impacts of train stabling and the proposed new railway station at Chesterton Sidings on the Chesterton Fen Road area.

· sites suggested through the consultation by, or with the support of, landowners, are subject to public consultation at the next stage of the plan making process, identifying whether or not they should be proposed as site options or rejected.

· if sites are allocated in the Green Belt under exceptional circumstances, they should remain in the Green Belt, including the area west of Chesterton Fen Road if sites are allocated in this area.

· Policy CNF6 from the Local Plan 2004 should not be included within the Gypsy and Traveller Development Plan Document and will be superseded by it.

· review the draft policies for windfall development and site design in light of anticipated new government guidance.

· utilise the monitoring indicators currently included in the Annual Monitoring Report to monitor the performance of the Gypsy and Traveller DPD. Add information regarding unauthorised encampments in the district during the year as a whole rather than purely on the two specific dates of the caravan count.

The Portfolio Holder,

(c) AGREED that a further report being brought to him on the next steps once changes in the national planning policy framework for plan making and for Gypsies and Travellers are known.

The New Communities Portfolio Holder considered a report and appendices analysing the results of consultation on the Gypsy and Traveller Development Plan Document Issues and Options 2 - Site Options and Policies. .

The Planning Policy Manager said that officers had expected that, by now, they would have had sufficient time to consider the draft Localism Bill, and would have received the new guidance proposed by the Government regarding planning for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation. In the event, the Bill had only been published the day before the Portfolio Holder meeting, and the Guidance Note was still awaited. The report therefore focused on identifying which sites were no longer site options as a result of issues raised during the consultation period, and outlined the next steps in the plan making process.

The New Communities Portfolio Holder referred to a letter received on 13^th December from solicitors acting on behalf of the Northwest Cambridge Consortium of Landowners and Barratt Strategic calling into doubt the legality of the process being followed. He said that that process was fully compliant with the Constitution, and pointed out that he would not actually be finalising the Plan at the current meeting in any event. , The Portfolio Holder noted that Site 5 (land between Madingley Road and Huntingdon Road, Cambridge) had different policy considerations applying to that site. On a separate issue, Site 7 (Cambourne) was no longer a Site Option for delivery through the major development proposal for the remaining 950 dwellings, but other sites might yet be identified elsewhere in Cambourne.

Those present made the following points:

· The methodology adopted for conducting needs assessments should be robust enough to avoid double-counting.

· There was support for Site 18 (Spring Lane, Bassingbourne) no longer being a Site Option, but concern that the Site Option near to the A1198 needed further consideration.

· The existing Travellers site at Smithy Fen, Cottenham should not be expanded.

· The assessment of noise issues in relation to the railway station and sidings at Chesterton Fen Road was welcomed.

· Appropriate drainage was essential.