Issue - meetings

Please note that this report is accompanied by a number of appendices. Given their size, these appendices have been published on the County Councils website alongside the agenda and are available via the modern.gov app.

(1)          Mr Oakford moved, and Miss Carey seconded the following motion :

“County Council is asked to:

(i)      consider the Inspector’s Report (see Appendix A) on the examination of the Early Partial Review (EPR) and Minerals Sites Plan (MSP) and note and accept his recommended modifications; 

(ii)     note the content and recommendations of the Sustainability Appraisals of the EPR and MSP; and 

(iii)    adopt the Kent Mineral Sites Plan and modifications to the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan (as set out by the EPR) (as modified) as set out in Appendices B and C respectively.

In addition, County Council is asked to: 

(iv)    delegate powers to the Corporate Director for Growth, Environment and Transport to approve any non-material changes to the text of the MSP and  modifications to the KMWLP (as set out by the EPR) in consultation with the Deputy Leader prior to publication.  

(v)     note and agree the future work activities on mineral and waste planning activities  as set out in para 6.5 as the basis for a revised Local Development Scheme”.

(2)           Following the debate, the Chairman put the motion set out in paragraph (1) to the vote and the voting was as follows:

For (66)

Mrs Allen, Mr Angell, Mr Barrington-King, Mrs Bell, Mrs Beresford, Mrs Binks, Mr Bird, Mr Bond, Mr Booth, Mr Bowles, Mr Brazier, Mr Burden, Mr Butler, Ms Carey, Mr Carter, Mrs Chandler, Mr Chard, Mr Chittenden, Mr Clinch, Mr Collor, Miss Constantine, Mr Cook, Mr Cooke, Mr Cooper,  Mrs Crabtree, Mr Daley, Mr Dance, Miss Dawson,  Mrs Dean, Mr Farrell,  Mrs Game, Mr Gough, Mrs Hamilton, Mr Harman, Mr Hill, Mr Hills, Mrs Hohler,  Mr Holden, Mr Homewood, Mr Hotson, Mrs Hurst, Mr Kite, Mr Koowaree, Mr Lake, Mr Lewis, Ida Linfield, Mr Long, Mr Love, Mr Lymer, Mr Marsh, Mr McInroy, Mr Murphy, Mr Northey, Mr Oakford, Mr Pascoe, Mr Payne, Mrs Prendergast, Miss Rankin, Mr Rayner, Mr Ridgers, Mr Simpkins, Dr Sullivan, Mr Sweetland, Mr Thomas, Mr Whiting, Mr Wright.

Against (1)

Mr Hook  Mr Whybrow

Abstain (1)

Mr Whybrow Mr Hook

Motion carried

(3)          Members asked that thanks be recorded to Mrs Thompson, Head of Planning, and her team for their work in developing a robust plan and also to Mr Brazier who chaired the cross-party member group. 

(4)          RESOLVED that:

(i)         the Inspector’s Report (attached as Appendix A to the report) on the examination of the Early Partial Review (EPR) and Minerals Sites Plan (MSP) be noted and the inspectors recommended modifications be accepted; 

(ii)        the content and recommendations of the Sustainability Appraisals of the EPR and MSP be noted; and 

(iii)       the Kent Mineral Sites Plan and modifications to the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan (as set out by the Early Partial Review) (as modified) as set out in Appendices B and C respectively to the report be adopted

(iv)       authority be delegated to the Corporate Director for Growth, Environment and Transport to approve any non-material changes to the text of the MSP and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 242

(1)         Mr Gough welcomed the report and said its length and comprehensiveness were a strong argument in favour of electronic papers.  Mr Oakford introduced the report which set out the Inspector’s Report on the examination of the Early Partial Review (EPR) of the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan and the Kent Minerals Sites Plan (MSP).  He said it was important to recognise the considerable efforts of Sharon Thompson and her team in progressing this work.  Mr Oakford also said that, following publication of the pre-submission drafts, for the statutory period between January and March 2019, 405 representations had been received.  Ms Thompson said the final phase of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan work would be the adoption of the Plans by the County Council.  She also said the Inspector had found both Plans satisfactory subject to the modifications set out in paragraph 2.2 of the report and in the appendices to the Inspector’s report (Appendix A of the papers). Ms Thompson updated the Cabinet on the outcome of the Environment and Transport Cabinet Committee’s consideration of a similar report at its meeting on 17 July and said all but one member, of that Committee had endorsed the recommendations.

(2)          Mr Gough and Mr Oakford thanked Ms Thompson and her team for the comprehensive report. 

(3)         Resolved to:

(i)            note the Inspector’s Report on the examination of the EPR and MSP and note his recommended modifications

(ii)          note the recommendations of the Sustainability Appraisals of the EPR and MSP and

(iii)         endorse the adoption of:

(a)     the Kent Mineral Sites Plan (as modified by the Inspector’s recommendations) at Appendix B of the report; and

(b)     the modifications to the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan as set out by the Early Partial Review (as modified by the Inspector’s recommendations) at Appendix C of the report.

(iv)    note that the decision to adopt the Kent Mineral Sites Plan and modifications to the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan is a matter for County Council and request the County Council to:

(a)          accept the modifications recommended by the Inspector to the Kent Mineral Sites Plan and modifications to the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan (as set out by the Early Partial Review); and

(b)          adopt the Kent Mineral Sites Plan and modifications to the Kent Minerals and Waste Local Plan (as set out by the Early Partial Review) (as modified); and

(c)          delegate powers to the Corporate Director for Growth, Environment and Transport to approve any non-material changes to the text of the MSP and modifications to the KMWLP (as set out by the Early Partial Review) in consultation with the Deputy Leader prior to their publication.

(v)        note and agree the future work activities on mineral and waste planning activities as set out in paragraph 5.5 of the report as the basis for a revised Local Development Scheme.

Please note that this report is accompanied by a number of appendices. Given their size, these appendices have been published on the County Councils website alongside the agenda and are available via the modern.gov app.

Sharon Thompson (Head of Planning Applications) was in attendance for this item.

1.    Mr Oakford (Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Corporate and Traded Services) introduced the report and commended Ms Thompson and her team for the significant amount of work undertaken. He said, following publication of the pre-submission drafts for the statutory period between January and March 2019, a total of 405 representations had been received.

2.    Ms Thompson paid tribute to Mr Oakford for his considerable support and guidance throughout the duration of the plan making process. The report outlined the final phase of the Council’s minerals and waste work that set out the strategy for consideration of planning applications in the future. The final decision on whether to adopt the Plans was a matter for the County Council. Ms Thompson said that following the County Council’s decision, in 2018, to submit a Minerals Sites Plan and Early Partial Review of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan to the Secretary of State for independent examination, the result of that examination had found both Local Plans to be sound and legally prepared, subject to the modifications that were discussed at the examination. On that basis, Ms Thompson said that the County Council could proceed to adopt the Plans, subject to those modifications being made (the modifications and the inspector’s report were set out in Appendix A and summarised in paragraph 2.2 of report). Overall, they clarified requirements to ensure development impacts were minimised, and addressed matters raised by the community during the examination process. Ms Thompson said that the modifications did not alter the objective or intentions of policy promoted by the Council or change the sites proposed for allocation. Should the decision be taken by County Council to adopt the Plans, the Cabinet Member responsibility for future Local Plan work would transfer from Mr Oakford to Miss Carey as the Cabinet Member for Environment.

3.    In response to concerns regarding the need for new machinery and the impact upon the greenbelt and potential flood management issues arising from the Stone Castle Farm and Moat Farm sites, Ms Thompson said that, as a result of the inspector’s examination, and in conjunction with concerns raised by the community surrounding the proposed allocated sites, the policy advice to developers in the Mineral Sites Plan had been strengthened.

4.    Members paid tribute to Ms Thompson and her team for the extensive amount of work carried out.

5.    Mr Whybrow requested that his objection to the Mineral Sites Plan be formally recorded. He also thanked Ms Thompson and her team for their hard work.

6.    It was RESOLVED that the Committee:

(a)  note the Inspector’s Report (Appendix A of the report) on the examination of the EPR and MSP and note his recommended modifications;

(b)  note the recommendations of the Sustainability Appraisals of the EPR and MSP; and,

(c)  endorse, the adoption of:

(a)  the Kent Mineral Sites Plan (as modified by the Inspector’s recommendations) (Appendix B of the report); and,

(b)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 269