Minutes:
Question from Dr Ian Gibson
The District Plan Inspector was critical of the Council for its failure to provide adequate guidance to neighbourhood plans...on the amounts of housing development they should aim to accommodate. He also said Future plans, both neighbourhood plans and the Site Allocations Plan, must take account of the numbers of new homes expected in each settlement.
The proposed methodology for the SHELAA does not set any housing targets for individual settlements or provide any role for Neighbourhood Plans in the site selection process.
Will the Council ask the Scrutiny Committee to reconsider this approach and involve Neighbourhood Plan communities?
Response from Cllr. Andrew MacNaughton, Cabinet Member for Community, Housing & Planning
Thank you for your question Dr. Gibson, because this provides me with an opportunity to reiterate what officers have already explained to you.
The District Plan does in fact set out the housing requirement for individual settlements in Policy DP6: Settlement Hierarchy. I can also confirm that the Inspector, in his Report into the Examination of the District Plan, acknowledged (in Para 33) that this “is a sound and helpful approach that has been evolved in consultation with parishes and neighbourhoods”.
You are confusing the role of the District Plan with that of the SHELAA. It is the role of the District Plan to provide housing targets which it does in DP6.
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advises that the purpose of a SHELAA is to inform local planning authorities of the land available in their area. The sites identified in the SHELAA are the palette of potential housing and employment sites which are then subject to further assessment.
There are a number of stages the Council must go through in the Site Selection process. Stage 1 is to assess the sites against the District Plan strategy based on 2 criteria: connectivity to settlements and the size of the proposed site in relation to the existing housing requirement for each settlement, as set out in DP6. At its meeting on 25 September 2018 the Scrutiny Committee considered the outcome of the Stage 1 Assessment. A report outlining Stage 2 of the process will be considered by Scrutiny Committee at its meeting on 21 November 2018.
I can therefore assure you that the Council is satisfied that it has followed government policy and guidance in establishing its methodology. As you will know from your attendance at various meetings I am satisfied that the development of the criteria and the approach has involved Neighbourhood Plan communities. Furthermore the policies of Neighbourhood Plans will be considered in the Stage 2 assessment. Therefore, there is no need for the Scrutiny Committee to reconsider the approach.
Supplementary question from Dr Gibson
My question arose from a vigorous debate by Parish Councils at a recent MSALC meeting. 19 of the 24 Town and Parish Councils in Mid Sussex have made, or drafted Neighbourhood Plans. The preparation of those plans has involved many thousands of unpaid hours from residents committed to their communities and hundreds of thousands of pounds of council tax spent with consultants.
The identification of suitable non-strategic or small scale sites for development is supposed to be one of the key roles of these plans. It is disappointing that Mid Sussex have chosen to take this task away from the local communities that will be affected by the decisions.
Many Councils are now commencing costly reviews of their neighbourhood plans. In order to avoid wasted effort on these reviews, will the Council publish guidance on the role of the neighbourhood plans in the future development of Mid Sussex?
Response from Cllr. Andrew McNaughton
I will give this follow up question further consideration.
The following written response has been given.
“Thank you Dr Gibson. I am fully aware of the work carried out by Towns and Parishes over the preparation of Neighbourhood Plans and also of the significant level of professional and financial support provided by the Planning and other staff of Mid Sussex District Council in order to ensure that Neighbourhood Plans have been successfully ‘Made’.
Paragraph 69 of the revised NPPF (July 2018) clearly states that “neighbourhood planning groups should … consider the opportunities for allocating small and medium sized sites suitable for housing in their area”. Therefore, allocating small sites is clearly a role which can be performed by Neighbourhood Planning groups and I can assure you that Mid Sussex District Council has never sought to say otherwise.
Equally, Neighbourhood Planning Groups may choose not to allocate sites but instead to focus on more detailed local policies. This is entirely a decision for the Neighbourhood Planning group.
Mid Sussex District Council has consistently made clear through our regular briefings with Town and Parish Councils and through individual meetings with Parishes that officers will support whichever approach Neighbourhood Planning groups wish to take.
For the purpose of preparing the District Plan, Mid Sussex District Council defined a ‘strategic site’ as one of 500+ units. Given that Mid Sussex District Council is required to prepare a Site Allocations DPD to identify sufficient sites to meet the residual housing need figure to be adopted by 2020, the Council must now look at allocating sites of a range of sizes. This approach is made clear in District Plan Policy DP4 which states that the Sites DPD will look to allocating sites of 5 or more units. The need to prepare the Sites DPD was a modification required by the Independent Planning Inspector. This does not preclude a Neighbourhood Planning group from allocating sites however they must do so within the same time frame as the Sites DPD in order that Mid Sussex can demonstrate certainty over delivery of sufficient houses to meet identified need.
Finally, given that there is clear guidance already set out in the NPPF and NPPG on neighbourhood planning, I do not consider that there is any need to publish local guidance on the role of Neighbourhood Plans in the future of development of Mid Sussex.”