The Chairman used his discretion to allow the Chair of the New Edenbridge District Residents’ Association (NEDRA) to address the Committee regarding infrastructure and the Local Plan 2040.

The Planning Policy Manager presented the report which provided an update on the Local Plan, in relation to the evidence-based work which covered green belt, settlement hierarchy, transport, sports and leisure and landscape impact.

Members were advised that in regard to the Green Belt two pieces of work had been undertaken.  One identifying previous developed land and brownfield land, in addition to land on the brownfield register and maximising those opportunities. Secondly an extension to the Green Belt assessment had been commissioned to help identify grey belt and to look at all land and land around villages and train stations outside of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB, now referred to as National Landscapes).

The settlement hierarchy was being updated, which looked at each of the settlements in terms of population, services and facilities. Regarding transport, the Local Plan tests report had been published which modelled the output of the three options, subject to the Regulation 18 consultation.  It looked at the cumulative impact on key road and junctions and SRN. The baseline model had identified some key junction hotspots. The next stage would be the preferred scenario, tested with more detailed junction modelling and mitigation.

For Sports and Leisure, the Sports facility strategy, playing pitch and outdoor sports strategy had been completed and signed off by Sport England and Government bodies. They each comprised a Needs Assessment Report and a Strategy Report. The Needs Assessment Reports audited the existing provision of facilities and compared this to demand (including an assessment of future demand), highlighting areas of quantitative and qualitative deficits. The Strategy Reports made recommendations, both strategic and site specific, as to how to address these deficits through, the more efficient use of existing provision and funding from, and/or provision on, new development. The Strategies now formed up to date pieces of evidence in accordance with Paragraph 102 of the NPPF and must be used to inform both decision-making and plan-making, including the requirements of our eventual growth strategy.

The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) had been completed, in relation to Local Plan options. It had assessed the potential site allocations in the Kent Downs National Landscape/AONB, put forward at the last Regulation 18 consultation, providing an indication of their likely sensitivity and the potential effect of development with respect to landscape and views. It was concluded that there would be significant impact on the AONB for all three options, but option two (Pedham Place) was considered the least harmful and more able to be identified on the grounds that it was more able to accommodate development of the type proposed due to its land use, character, context and larger size. Furthermore, it provided more opportunity to incorporate extensive mitigation, provide benefits to landscapes and visual amenity and provides more potential to incorporate enhancements.

Since undertaking this work, the Government has published a consultation on revisions to the NPPF, with wide-ranging changes including excluding AONB from the definition of Grey Belt and having a new sequential approach to Green Belt Development.

The Planning Policy Manager set out that the next steps included the Local Plan Timetable being adjusted and it was anticipated that an additional Regulation 18 consultation would take place later in 2025, with Regulation 19 in early 2026 and be submitted by the end of that year. A targeted consultation with landowners would also be undertaken regarding Grey Belt. The Council was still thoroughly involved through its duty to cooperate and there was a West Kent meeting taking place to look at a potential for a West Kent Strategic Plan. The evidence base was largely complete, but some updates would be required.

The Portfolio Holder expressed her thanks to the Team who had continued to be flexible and cautious with the approach that had been undertaken with the unknowns around the NPPF, whilst still undertaking the stage two Green Belt assessment.

In response to questions, Members were advised that Grey Belt was defined in the consultation document as land that did not perform against the five Green Belt purposes that were set out in the NPPF. Land in protected landscapes could not be defined as Grey Belt. As the District was 60% Natural Landscape it excluded a lot of sites from the Grey Belt. Members discussed transport and the modelling scenarios. Members were advised that KCC were updating their local transport plan which was a strategic document that covered the whole of the county.

In regard to questions regarding flooding, Members were advised that the flood risk was taken into account as detailed in paragraph 7 of the report with the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA). Stage two specifically looked at individual sites and the flood implications of those sites. The assessment would then feed back into the overall site assessments that would be taken where all the various constraints were considered and a judgement on which site was more suitable than others. Furthermore, Members were reminded that following the consultation around the settlement hierarchy, feedback received included that the council should be looking to do more around village settlements in the Green Belt as some of rural communities felt that their future potential growth was being stifled by not supporting the facilities that were fundamental to those future of those areas, and this needed to be considered.  

In response to further questions Members were advised that it was anticipated that that more biodiversity net gain (BNG) would be secured through development sites.

Resolved: That the report be noted.