Agenda item

The Development Management Policies Local Plan has been in preparation since 2005.  It has previously been subject to consultation and this has shaped its current content.  It is now considered appropriate to issue the draft Plan for representations consistent with the requirements set out in Planning Regulations, prior to its Submission to the Planning Inspectorate for examination.  This report provides a summary of the consultation responses.   

Members considered a report that provided a summary of the consultation responses to the Brent Development Management Policies Local Plan together with an explanation of the main changes that were being proposed to the draft Plan.  Paul Lewin, Planning Policy Manager, in introducing the report stated that the rationale for producing the Development Management Policies (DMP) Development Plan Document derived from the need to bring up-to-date, the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) policy.  He then gave a summary of the issues raised. 

Paul Lewin informed members that town centre policies had been largely retained and that the heritage policies on built environment had been rationalised to make them more focussed so as to address issues raised by English Heritage.  He continued that Brent specific policies such as the retention of 50% of front gardens had been retained with emphasis on providing additional locally specific guidance. Paul Lewin advised members that given the likely limited applications for residential moorings, it was considered appropriate to address this issue through other policies in the Plan.  In respect of transport, he informed the Committee that parking and servicing standards had been amended in relation to comments made with reference made to TfL freight and construction management documents. 

In respect of housing, he continued that there was sufficient evidence to justify the 70/30 mix from a needs and viability perspective.  On viability assessment, he updated members that the Council would now seek reviews for significant developments of 200 dwellings that would take more than 18 months to start, or where a phased approach to delivery would be undertaken.  The Council had also reaffirmed its preference for on-site provision of affordable housing however a flexible approach for strategic landowners on a site by site basis can be agreed if was consistent with other policies. In respect of social infrastructure, Paul Lewin informed members that a pub protection policy had been introduced into the DMP, whilst general social infrastructure was addressed sufficiently well in the London Plan.

In the ensuing discussions, members referred to the appendix to the report and raised a number of questions to which the Policy Manager addressed as follows; town centre teams focussed on schemes that kept the town centres vibrant with a clear definition of primary and secondary shopping areas and a flexible approach to change of use and permitted development rights.  He continued that accessible design statements would be raised and that high quality planting schemes would always be sought for major developments.  On air pollution, he stated that applicants would be required to demonstrate that there would be no adverse impact on air quality resulting from their proposed development. He then outlined the process for submitting the DMP for examination and to the Planning Inspectorate.

Sujata Aurora, speaking from the Save the Queensbury Group welcomed the commitment to a pub protection policy but pointed out that Campaign for Real Ale’s (“CAMRA”) expert planning advisors felt that the draft policy fell short of its stated intent.  She drew the Committee’s attention to a CAMRA document which had been circulated to members and contained suggestions for amendments which would make the policy robust, and also to the pub protection policy adopted by Waltham Forest Council which is regarded as one of the best. 

Ian Elliott spoke on behalf of the Save the Queensbury group and requested the draft policy be amended prior to going to Cabinet with CAMRA’s advice incorporated.Councillor Miller also spoke in support of the submissions put forward on behalf of the Save the Queensbury Group. 

The Committee voted in favour of the officers looking again at the pub protection policy in the light of the CAMRA submission and the Waltham Forest policy.  Officers stated that they would consult with CAMRA and would attempt to revise the policy before it was submitted to Cabinet on 21 September 2015. 

.   

RESOLVED:

(i)        that Cabinet be recommended to agree the proposed responses to individual representations, as set out in the schedules attached as Appendix 1 to the report from the Director of Regeneration and Growth;

(ii)       that Cabinet be recommended to agree that the draft Brent Development Management Policies Development Plan Document in Appendix 2 for publication for 6 weeks, and recommend that Full Council agree that the draft Plan be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for Examination;

(iii)      that the Strategic Director, Planning & Development be authorised to make further editorial changes to the document prior to it being issued for publication.