EH.1.1

CORNWALL SITE ALLOCATIONS DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT

EXAMINATION

Hearing – Day 1

Tuesday 27 February 2018

Atlantic Hotel, Newquay

10.00 am

Presiding Inspectors: B Sims and T Bristow

Duty to Co-operate, Legal Compliance

and

Matter 1 –General Considerations

AGENDA

General Notes

iThis agenda is provisional and flexible.

iiIt is not intended to repeat introductory matters covered in the Guidance and Draft Matters and Issues [INSP.S3-4] but to proceed as quickly as possible to the substance of the Agenda.

iiiThe Hearing will not re-visit in detail nor re-open matters which have been resolved in connection with the examination and adoption of the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies.

ivParticipants,includingthe Council, named in [italic square brackets] may be invited to open the item concerned but this is optional.

vItem 2 – Matter 1 – will not commence before 11.00am

viSOCG = Statement of Common Ground

Opening

  1. Welcome and Introductions
  2. Opening Remarks by the Lead Inspector

[see separate transcript]

  1. Any questions on procedure

Duty to Co-operate and Legal Compliance

Participants

Cornwall Council (CC)

Natural England (NE) [138]

North & Middle Pill Land Owner Consortium (NMPL) [211] (William Holman)

Hannah Dash (HD) [295] (Stephen Reynolds)

SHED (SHED) [213] (Stephen Reynolds)

Redrow Homes(RRH)[205](Barton Wilmore)

Saltash NDP Steering Group (SNDP) [176]

  1. Duty to Co-operate

With reference to the Duty to Co-operate Statement [B.5], does the Plan and its preparation comply with the statutory Duty to Co-operate with prescribed bodies regarding cross-boundary strategic matters?

  1. In its role as a non-strategic plan required to be consistent with the adopted LPSP, does the submitted Cornwall Site Allocations DPD, and its draft policies and proposed site allocations Saltash in particular, properly reflect the outcome of ongoing, positive engagement and co-operation with Plymouth City Council on strategic, cross-boundary housing (or other) planning issues?[ref SOCG – CC and Plymouth CC – CC.S6][NMPL]
  2. Are suggested AMs84, 87-89, 91, 94-99 [CC.S4.1] necessary and appropriate to clarify the relationship of Plymouth to Saltash and should these be considered as MMs[CC]

(May also be covered under soundness Matter 11 – Saltash - Day 2)

  1. Legal Compliance

Is the Plan [otherwise] legally compliant including with respect to the:

  1. Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment/Appropriate Assessment
  2. Does the SA consider reasonable alternatives to the strategies for each town in the submitted Plan?
  1. Public consultation process and the Statement of Community Involvement
  2. Was the quality and extent of public consultation during the preparation of the Plan adequate with reference to the Consultation and Representations Procedure Statements [B.8-9] [SHED]?

(see also item d below)

  1. Local Development Scheme
  2. Does the Plan comply with the revised LDS dated December 2017 [B.3.1]?
  1. Relevant Legislation?
  2. Does the Plan meet the requirements of the Town and Country Planning (England) Regulations 2012 with specific reference to notification of and consultation with the residents of Heamoor regarding the proposed site allocations PZ-H4-8 of the Plan for Penzance within the West Penwith Community Network Area (CNA) of the LPSP?[SHED]
  3. Given the strength of Cornish identity within Heamoor and the legal national minority status of Cornish people, has the preparation of this Plan, as a non-strategic DPD in the context of the adopted LPSP, taken appropriate account of the potential effects of the Heamoor site allocations on Cornish minority interests

1)Equality Impact Assessment

2)Scope of the present Examination regarding

  • specific site allocation proposals not previously considered in connection with the LPSP, and
  • European legal opinion[1]issued subsequent to the LPSP Examination[HD]

(Site-specific matters will be covered under Matter 2 Penzance and Newlyn – Day 2-3)

  1. MATTER 1 –PLAN-WIDE GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Participants:

Cornwall Council (CC)

Irregular Cornwall Ltd (ICL) [319] (Mc Murdo Land Planning & Devel Ltd)

Natural England (NE) [138]

Progress Land Ltd (PLL) [198b) (Heynes Planning)

Bodmin LVA LLP (BLVAL) [225] (Walsingham Planning Ltd)

Duchy of Cornwall (DoC) [208] (Emery Planning)

Durrants Land Ltd (DLL) [163]

Wainhomes Ltd (WHL) [192] (Emery Planning)

Westcountry Land (WL) [212a&b] (Boyer)

Home Builders Federation (HBF) [206]

Oceans Reach – Penvose Ltd (ORPL) [217] (Axis Ped)

Cranford Developments Ltd (CDL) [107] (Simply Planning Ltd)

James Biscoe (JB)[45]

Carn Brea Parish Council (CPC)[234]

Saltash NDP Steering Group (SNDP [176]

Saltash Community Flood Forum (SCFF) [118]

Hallam Land Management (HLM)[139b] (David Lock Associates)

Redrow Homes (RRH) [205](Barton Wilmore)

Persimmon Homes (PH) [216a&b]

Church Commissioners for England (CCFE) [219b] (Lichfields)[2]

Note

The following matters of a general nature relate to the Plan as a whole but will ultimately require to be addressed in the light of considerations of the individual towns and their respective strategies and site allocations. The programme therefore allows for these subjects to be discussed in a final session currently scheduled for Wednesday 18 April 2018, depending upon the outcome of the hearings for the individual towns.

  1. Is it appropriate to regard the Plan as sound as a whole:
  2. provided the site allocations for each individual town covered by the Plan are found to provide for the timely and effective implementation of the respective town strategies with respect to the numerical requirements of the adopted Cornwall LPSP?
  3. Conversely, is the Plan unsound as a whole if one town is subject to a shortfall in any category of development land provision with respect to the LPSP requirements?
  4. Is the Plan positively prepared in providing for minimum requirements, with particular reference to affordable housing needs?[DLL]

Note – Further detailed discussion is deferred to Matters 2-11 including Falmouth and Launceston [HLM][ICL]

  1. In general terms, is the existing housing land supply situation in each town based on robust, up to date evidence with reference to updated evidence [CC.S4.4]?

Note – this item allows for general comments upon the available evidence of housing land supply, to be discussed in detail in the Hearings for individual towns. [HLM][WHL][RRH][WL][PH][BLVAL]

  1. Do the housing land allocations of the CSADPD make a sufficient contribution to the overall and five year housing land supply requirements of the adopted Cornwall LPSP 2010-2030?
  2. Should the housing land supply for all towns of the Plan be subject to a contingency or flexibility allowance to ensure the defined minimum requirements of LPSP 2a are met in practice? [WHL]
  3. Should the Plan make specific reference to and provisionfor identified need for older persons communal living accommodation? [WL]

Note – for convenience Item h on Directions of Growth will be taken next

  1. Do the employment (commercial, industrial and retail) land allocations of the CSADPD make a sufficient contribution to the employment land supply requirements of the adopted Cornwall LPSP?
  2. Is there quantitative evidence to demonstrate that there is sufficient spare capacity within existing safeguarded employment areas to meet identified requirements? [ORPL]

Note – Further detailed discussion is deferred to Matter 6 - Falmouth) [ORPL]

  1. General consideration as to whether the CSADPD makes effective provision for the delivery of highway and other infrastructure necessary to the implementation of the respective town strategies, including with reference to SOCG – Highways England – CC [CC.S3.2]

Note – Detailed discussion deferred to Hearings for individual towns, including Launceston [HLM]

  1. Does the CSADPD make appropriate provision for open space and sports pitches and green infrastructure with reference to current guidance?
  2. Do the Additional Policy Requirements of site allocations for securing open space and green infrastructure provision comply with the relevant policy and statutory testsfor planning obligations and conditions?[CCFE]
  3. Consideration of site-specific revisions to ensure adequate open space provision with reference to proposed AMs and SOCG – Natural England – CC [CC.S4.1, CC.S5], and
  4. should these be MMs? [NE/CC]
  5. Relationship of open space provision against policy requirement and relationship to flood capacity of the Broadmoor allocation in Saltash[SCFF]

(detailed discussion deferred to Matter 11 – Saltash - Day 2)

  1. Does the CSADPD make appropriate provision for the protection of European wildlife habitats (in advance of the adoption of a European Sites Mitigation SPD)?
  2. Consideration of the views expressed by Natural England[NE/CC]
  1. Note –this item to follow item c on housing land allocations

Should the Purpose and Definition of ‘Direction of Growth’ (DoG)allocations be clarified:

  1. By way of a MM to the Plan text? See MM1[CC.S4.1]
  2. Are DoG Allocations to be regarded as Reserve Sites?
  3. Has the need for DoG allocations been consistently assessed across the Plan as a whole? [CC]
  1. Should the ‘retail requirement’ of the Plan be clarified in the absence of any retail allocations in the towns by way of a MM to the Plan text?
  2. Consideration of CC.S4.5 and MM2 [CC.S4.1][CC]
  1. Additional Question

Does the Monitoring Framework in Chapter 15 of the Plan provide for the identification and management of future necessary changes to the Plan and to Neighbourhood Plans? [SNDP]

[1] Council of Europe Advisory Committee – Framework Convention for the protectionof National Minorities (FCNM)

[2]appear in support of the CSADPD with the consent of the Inspector to assist discussion.