Mr. Steve Craddock (Senior Planning Officer), Mr. Alan Dyer (Planning Service Manager), Ms. Helen French (Planning Policy Officer), Ms. Hannah Gooden (Principal Planning Officer), Mr. David Lagzdins (Democratic Services Officer), Mr. Peter Slaughter (Development Planner, KCC) and Mr. Bob White (Development Planning Manager, KCC).

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Apologies had been received from Mr. Coupland and Mr. Czarnowski.

Resolved:      That the minutes of the Group (07.09.11) be approved as a correct record

None.

The completed actions were noted.

Presentation

The Kent Highways Development Planning Manager gave a presentation about planning for parking. He emphasised that standards could be based on the local area guidance but KCC could provide assistance, such as with data.

Non-residential parking was still based on Supplementary Planning Guidance 4 (SPG4), Vehicle Parking Standards 2006, together with national Planning Policy Guidance 13. SPG4 was no longer adopted but it provided a good guide. SPG4 had referred to a maximum standard but he was unsure whether the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) might soon change this to provide greater flexibility. If it were decided that new maxima should be set for the number of spaces to be provided it was likely the decision would be evidence based, using TRICS.

The need to have maximum standards for residential parking was removed by the government in January 2011. If maximum standards were to be set locally he suggested that levels must be set sufficiently high in order to avoid complications.

It would be difficult to reduce the amount of parking provided without also controlling on-street parking, because roads would become littered with cars. Provision would also still be needed for visitors. He felt this view had now been accepted at the national level. KCC’s Interim Guidance Note 3 on residential parking was based on setting maximum standards in town centre and edge of centre locations and minimum standards in suburban and rural areas.

The Vision for Kent included a focus on creating “attractive, safe and friendly”  neighbourhoods with a good “quality of life”. Since August 2007 KCC had carried out transport surveys, which included questions about parking. He congratulated the planning officers and Members for creating safe developments where residents got on with their neighbours.

Ashford Borough Council had used the Kent Design Guide and Interim Guidance Note 3 as the basis for their Residential Parking SPD. Other district councils had since expressed interest in making their own documents based on Ashford’s. He confirmed that Local Planning Authorities were free to amend the controls to fit local circumstances; local plans would take precedence as the Kent Design Guide was only meant to be a framework.

The Chairman was happy a more flexible approach was being taken as the Council was still dealing with the consequences of the formerly strict 1.5 spaces rule.

In response to a question the Development Planning Manager clarified that he believed the relaxation of maxima was still in line with the green agenda. The Transport Strategy advocated giving as many options to residents as possible. People may still own cars even if they used public transport. In the Sevenoaks district it was common for residents to use cars to get to their nearest appropriate railway station.

The Chairman thanked the KCC Officers. She believed the information provided a basis for further thought.

A schedule of minor additions and explanations was circulated to Members. The Report covered the period 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011 and compared the progress of the Local Development Framework against the Local Development Scheme as well as considering the success of policies. The Core Strategy had been adopted in February 2011, towards the end of the monitoring period, and so more information would be known about its effects in the Monitoring Report for 2011-12.

The Planning Policy Officer notified the Group that, under the Localism Act, from January 2012 the Council would still be required to produce Monitoring Reports but they would no longer have to be submitted to the Secretary of State. The Chairman had found the Reports to be particularly useful.

It was noted by the Officer that 281 housing units had been completed in 2010-11 which was above the annual target of 165. The Council was on a trajectory to meet and exceed the targets set under the Core Strategy for 2026.

In the rolling 5 year housing land supply a total of 1072 units were expected or had been identified, which was 247 units above target. The draft National Planning Policy Framework stated that Local Authorities should demonstrate that housing land supply was 20% above the target. The Council would have met this standard in 2010-11 as the total was 29.9% above the target.

A Member asked whether land supply could be relaxed to meet other community needs because it was above target. The Planning Services Manager reminded the Group that there were assumptions in the figures and a change in approach could put the targets at risk. Individual planned sites could be reviewed but a surplus of supply was required to make the target defensible.

Members suggested that the housing unit targets in the Core Strategy were appropriate for the district and should not be amended lightly.

Resolved:                  That it be recommended to Cabinet that:

(a)       the contents of the Annual Monitoring Report be noted and made publicly available;

(b)       the Portfolio Holder be authorised to agree minor presentational changes and detailed amendments prior to publication to assist the clarity of the documents; and

(c)        copies be made available for sale at a price to be agreed by the Portfolio Holder.

The Planning Services Manager informed Members that consultation had already been carried out for both site allocations and development management. These still needed to be combined into a single document incorporating formal consultation responses, be published and deposited for representations before being submitted for approval.

He recommended that the publication stage be delayed until the final NPPF was published as it was likely significant changes could be made to the draft NPPF. If the Development Plan Document was not consistent with the final NPPF then it could be found to be unsound and it could be difficult to withdraw the document if publication had already taken place. The final NPPF was expected in April 2012.

If the Allocations and Development Management DPD went ahead as scheduled there would still also be uncertainties regarding allocations in Swanley Town Centre and the land west of Blighs Meadow.

Instead it was proposed that publication be delayed and the time used to bring forward a draft, combined Allocations and Development Management document following the consultation responses. Members could consider it subject to any further changes which could result from the final NPPF.

In response to a question, the Planning Services Manager suggested a national document on future Traveller need would form part of the NPPF.

Resolved:      That the need to amend the timetable for the Allocations and Development Management DPD be noted.

It was agreed that the next meeting would be moved from Wednesday 4 April 2012 to Monday 12 March 2012 at 5pm.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation about the Sevenoaks Residential Character Area Assessment Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).

The document was a commitment under policy SP1 of the Core Strategy. It had identified 15 area typologies and 166 sub-areas, covering Sevenoaks town, Riverhead, Dunton Green, Bessels Green and Chipstead. For each of these sub-areas the SPD gave a description of its character, identified its historical context and noted local landmarks or features.

In line with national guidance in Planning Policy Statement 3 it was a locally led document as local communities were involved in identifying characteristics they felt attracted or detracted from their area. This would help steer new development to fit in with existing characteristics.

Consultation on the full document was to take place over 6 weeks in January and February 2012 and would be in line with the Statement of Community Involvement. The document would be available online, in the Council offices and in libraries and notification would go to those on the emailing list, those who went on the walkabouts in September 2011, to statutory consultees and it would also be advertised. It was expected that consultation responses would then be incorporated and considered by the Environment Select Committee and Cabinet in March or April 2012.

Following a request it was agreed that, due to the document’s size, all local Members would be provided with those sections which related to their own ward. Officers were also considering allowing the public to purchase parts of the document, rather than having to buy the complete version.

Action: Officers to provide the relevant parts of the Sevenoaks Residential Character Area Assessment SPD to each local ward Member.

Resolved:      That:

(a)    the draft Sevenoaks Residential Character Area Assessment SPD be agreed for public consultation;

(b)    the Portfolio Holder be authorised to agree minor presentational         changes and detailed amendments prior to publication to assist the clarity of the document; and

(c)     copies be made available for sale at a price to be agreed by the Portfolio Holder.

None.