Issue - meetings

(1)       The report summarised the progress that had been made on the preparation of the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan (MWLP) documents and explained why it was now necessary to carry out a county wide consultation on the preferred options for both the ‘Mineral Sites Plan’ and the ‘Waste Sites Plan’.

(2)       A cross party Informal Members Group, chaired by David Brazier steered the preparation of the minerals and waste plans.  The Kent MWLP would consist of three main documents supported by a range of evidence base topic papers, a Sustainability Appraisal, a Habitats Regulation Assessment and a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. The three main minerals and waste plan documents being prepared, which would contain policies and site allocations were:-

          (a)The Minerals and Waste Plan (formerly the Core Strategy);

          (b) The Minerals Sites Plan; and

          (c) The Waste Sites Plan

(3)       The consultation would involve arranging a series of stakeholder meetings and drop-in sessions in community halls around the county during June 2012.  The total costs for the consultation including the hire of the venues, printing of consultation documents and CDs was estimated at £6.5K, which would be funded from the Minerals and Waste Planning Policy team’s revenue budget.

(4)       The MWLP would become part of the statutory development plan, alongside the District Council Local Plans.  Once the MWLPs had been through an independent examination process, they would need to be adopted by the Council. After adoption, all future minerals and waste applications would be assessed against their policies and site allocations.  The May 2012 consultation would ask for views on the preferred options for minerals and waste sites required to meet Kent’s needs up to the end of 2030. 

(5)               Mr Sweetland and Dr Harrison answered questions and noted comments from Members which included the following:-

·        the documents presented to the Cabinet Committee were the preferred options

·        in response to a query as to whether the 8 week consultation period would be long enough, Dr Harrison assured Members that the issue had been raised last year, and all Parish Councils were aware of the whole process

·        Members supported the county wide consultation stage

·        It was important that the work of the IMG continued, even if it proved necessary to establish a revised forum.

(6)               Mr Sweetland thanked Mr Brazier and Dr Harrison for the hard work that had been carried out in producing very helpful and informative documents.

(7)       During discussion Mr Brazier moved, Mr C Smith seconded a change to the wording of the recommendation in the report, to read as follows:-

‘Members of the Cabinet Committee are asked to consider and either endorse or make recommendations on the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste’.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Carried

(8)       RESOLVED that the commencement of the 8 week consultation on the Mineral Sites Plan and Waste Sites Plan at ‘preferred options’ stage commencing on 28 May 2012, be endorsed.