Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Cottle-Hunkin (who appointed Cllr Tinsley as her substitute), Councillor Lock (who appointed Councillor Leather as her substitute), Councillor Hacket, and Councillor Worden (whose apologies were received but not read out at the meeting).

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 18^th July 2025 (circulated previously) be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

There were no items brought forward by the Chair for discussion as a matter of urgency.

There were no declarations of interest announced.

Report by the Planning Policy Team Leader (TDC) (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Planning Policy Team Leader (TDC) regarding the Update on the Preparation of a New Joint Local Plan (circulated previously). 

The Planning Policy Team Leader presented the report to the Committee and confirmed that:

·                The report provided an update to the preparation of a new joint local plan, however, it was tentative and based upon limited detail about planning reforms and no firm understanding of the timing or nature of the new plan making system. The authorities had now received some more detail - although not the full picture.

·                Plan-making Guidance (draft form) and details of what the Government expected to set out as the process had been received - but not the actual regulations - latest insight suggested would be issued on 30th January.

·                It confirmed a 30-month plan-making and examination period, shouldered by a 'getting ready' pre-period and a post-adoption monitoring period.  Importantly, the draft guidance set out a lot of what was expected or required during the initial 'getting ready' period.

·                Appendix 2 consolidated some of the key guidance, focussing on the 'getting ready' phase.

·                Getting ready phase was a minimum of 4-months - predicated by the need to give formal notice of commencing plan-making at least 4-months prior to the formal start of the 30-month period. This would culminate in the completion and publication of a Gateway 1 Self-assessment, which triggers the commencement of the start of the formal 30-month period.

·                In terms of the getting ready phase - expected to make process in five areas:

o   Local plan timetable

o   Project management and governance

o   Consulting and engaging on the plan

o   Content of the plan

o   Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

·                The required process is to:

o   Prepare and publish first version of local plan timetable

o   Publish formal notice of intention to commence

o   Run a scoping consultation

·                Expected to make progress on a range of other activities including:

o   Project management and governance arrangements, preparation of a Project Initiation Document (PID)

o   Baselining

o   Begin evidence gathering Availability of land, including a call for sites

o   SWOT analysis of the area and its context

o   Scope of the plan - main areas and locally specific topic matters

o   Initial shaping of a draft vision

o   Identifying measurable outcomes

o   Likely levels of development

o   High-level spatial options and topics that might need policies

o   Scope and commence SEA

·                Progress had already been made on a number of these activities - with more work ongoing.

·                PID - set out details of programme, project management, resourcing, governance, etc. The PID was now a mandatory requirement. The PID would be developed over the coming months, with an expectation of a complete version to be available by the time pass through Gateway 1 Self-Assessment.

·                PID sets out indicative timeline. Including indication of publishing notice of intention to start plan-making in June 26 and Publishing a Gateway 1 Self-assessment and commencing 30-month period in October 2026. This fitted perfectly with a recently  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

Report by the Senior Planning Policy Officer (NDC) (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Senior Planning Policy Officer (NDC) regarding the Draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Consultation (circulated previously). 

The Planning Policy Team Leader (TDC) presented the report to the Committee and confirmed the following:

·                The NPPF proposed reforms and changes to the planning system formed part of the wider reforms of the planning system.

·                The consultation comprised of the Draft NPPF and a wider consultation document.

·                The consultation would close on 10th March 2026.

·                The consultation had 225 questions which were to be answered which made the process unworkable. In order to perform a more meaningful consultation the joint authorities would need to focus their response; and identify/target the more useful questions.

·                There was to be no replication of the content of national decision-making policies in our plans, nor were we to deviate substantially from policies, and local areas were required to ‘do their bit’ towards UK growth.

·                The presumption of being in favour of development within settlements in that ‘development should be approved unless benefits are substantially outweighed by the harms’ but ‘not at all costs’.

The draft definition of a ‘settlement’ being:

o   Including cities, towns, villages and other predominantly built-up areas

o   Excludes hamlets and scattered groups of houses.

·                Outside settlements there was a closed list of acceptable developments, supported in principle. If not on the list, it was only allowed in exceptional circumstances.

·                Housing Delivery (or lack of) would no longer trigger the ‘tilted balance’.

·                There were clearer, stronger rules regarding the viability and affordable housing. This included stronger emphasis on social rent, and the inclusion of military homes.

·                Within local plans there was a stronger focus on allocations, and a need for 10% on sites which were under 2.5 hectares (which was previously a requirement only for those under one hectare).

·                There was a benchmark that 40% of all new homes were required to be accessible and adaptable.

·                Accessible homes, parking, and green space standards were expected to be present in the plans. This would ensure that developers were clear on what they were required to attain when taking on new developments.

In response to questions from the Committee, Cllr Bell, the NDC Lead Member for Housing, agreed that there was a real need for a percentage (possibly 5%) of the adaptable housing to be created for those with need for extreme-requirements (fully adaptable for severe disability rather than more elderly/less mobile residents) in order to enable residents to stay in their own homes.

Cllr Walker wished to emphasise the importance of the fact that not all those requiring adaptive homes would be elderly. The provision of adapted homes for those under 55 was almost non-existent.

The Planning Policy Team Leader advised the Committee of policy HC01 “Assessing the need for homes” placed ‘older people’ front and centre, (rather than disabled) although there was mention of ‘those looking after children’, ‘specialist community-based accommodation’.

The Chair noted that the exclusion of hamlets and small villages from policies could make exception  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

To agree the dates for the Joint Planning Policy Committee meetings for 2026-2027 as follows (each at 10am) at TDC:

·         24 April 2026

·         17 July 2026

·         23 October 2026

·         22 January 2027

RESOLVED that the dates of the next meetings be approved (each to be held at 10am at TDC):

• 24 April 2026
• 17 July 2026
• 23 October 2026
• 22 January 2027