The Joint Planning Policy Team Leader presented a report, together with supplemental papers, which updated Members on the Allocations and Development Management Plan (ADMP). It was examined by the Planning Inspector in March 2014 and the Inspector’s initial findings were set out in the report. The principal modifications would need to be subject to six weeks of public consultation.

An update on proposed amendments to Policy EMP3 on Fort Halstead were tabled for Members consideration. The Planning Policy Team Leader confirmed that the Inspector had requested that 12 main amendments be made to the ADMP, for it to be found sound. The vast majority of these were fairly minor with three more significant. In Policy MM6 there was to be the release of strategic land in Edenbridge which would make a contribution towards meeting the District’s housing needs and was in neither the Green Belt nor an AONB. In Policy MM8 the Inspector sought clarity on the mix of development at Fort Halsted as 450 residential units was found be required to make the employment land viable. The Inspector also sought the Council’s opinion on the impact of a recent court case. The Council had sought legal advice concerning the case and the Inspector’s recommendation following this was that the Council should  begin a new Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), which could trigger a review of the Core Strategy. All proposed changes would be sent for consultation.

In response to a question, the Chief Planning Officer confirmed Officers could be made available for drop-ins in Edenbridge, Sevenoaks and Swanley during the consultation to deal with questions from members of the public.  It was confirmed that the modifications were proposed by the Inspector rather than the Council.

Members raised concerns that developers may try to avoid requirements for social housing and infrastructure development. Officers confirmed that they used section 106 agreements to achieve these but legislative changes meant that arguments of viability could be used to reduce developers’ obligations. From 4 August 2014 developments would be subject to CIL payments, which were not subject to flexibility due to viability considerations.

A Member raised concerns that development of Fort Halsted together with any crematorium and any Gypsy and Traveller site would mean excessive density was being proposed for the Polhill area until the infrastructure was improved. The roads in the area were moving and were subject to flooding.

Public Sector Equality Duty

Members noted that consideration had been given to impacts under the Public Sector Equality Duty.

Resolved: That it be recommended to Cabinet that

                          a)     themain modifications to the ADMP be agreed and published for consultation (along with the Sustainability Appraisal) during a six week period to be agreed by the Portfolio Holder;

                          b)     the Portfolio Holder be authorised to agree minor presentational changes and detailed amendments to the consultation document to assist their clarity; and

                           c)     the consultation document be published on the Council’s website and made available to purchase in hard copy at a price to be agreed by the Portfolio Holder.

(Cllr. Williamson voted against the motion)