Meeting documents

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 September, 2017, copy attached as an appendix.

RESOLVED –

That the Minutes of 6 September, 2017, be approved as a correct record.

RESOLVED –

That the Minutes of 6 September, 2017, be approved as a correct record.

Councillor Mrs Paternoster

Cabinet Member for Growth Strategy

To consider the attached report.

(a)          Decision(s)

That Council be recommended to:-

(1)  Approve the proposed submission draft of the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan, as amended by the changes now agreed by Cabinet and itemised in the schedule attached as an Appendix to this Decision Notice, for the purposes of formally consulting for a statutory period of 6 weeks in accordance with Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012, and as the version proposed to be submitted to the Secretary of State for examination in accordance with Regulation 22 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012, subject to the recommendations contained in (2) and (3) below.

(2)  Delegate authority to the Assistant Director (Community Fulfilment), after consultation with the Cabinet Member for Growth Strategy, to make amendments to the final VALP document and maps to address typographical errors and improve clarity, provided that these amendments did not alter policies significantly or change the sense of the supporting text, prior to the start of the publication period.

(3)  Delegate authority to the Director with responsibility for planning, after consultation with the Cabinet Member for Growth Strategy, to approve any modifications or other amendments which might arise during the Examination.

(b)          Reason(s) for Decision(s)

To enable the Authority to meet its statutory obligations with regard to the preparation of a Local Plan.

(c)        Alternative Options Considered

None, as referred to above all local planning authorities are under a statutory obligation to prepare a Local Plan.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

VALP Scrutiny Committee.  That Committee had considered the Submission Draft at its meeting on 26 September and had made a number of suggestions concerning the text of the Submission Draft.  These were itemised in the Cabinet report and a schedule of suggested changes circulated at the meeting.  All of the suggested changes were discussed individually by Cabinet.  Those recommended for approval by Council are referred to in the attached Appendix.  The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee attended the Cabinet meeting and elaborated upon his Committee’s deliberations.  Cabinet asked for its thanks for the work undertaken by the Scrutiny Committee to be recorded formally.

For the sake of completeness within the context of this Decision Notice,  Cabinet heard statements from three members of the Public and three District Councillors.  The views expressed were dealt with during the debate.

Cabinet’s recommendations will now be submitted to full Council and as such, they are not subject to call-in.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest / Dispensation(s)

None.

All local planning authorities were under a statutory obligation to prepare a Local Plan.  The last adopted Local Plan for Aylesbury Vale dated from 2004 and therefore did not take account of recent changes in Government planning policy.  The Council had tried to prepare a replacement Plan on a number of occasions and the most recent attempt had been withdrawn following an examination in public in 2014.  Since then, the Council had been committed to delivering a new Local Plan and to ensuring that this met the Government’s expectation that Local Plans were produced as soon as practicable.

Cabinet received a report, submitted also to the VALP Scrutiny Committee on 26 September, 2017, setting out the background to the production of the Plan, as well as providing a summary of the contents.  All Members of the Council had received a copy of the submission draft document.  The Scrutiny Committee report had included a list of minor post-publication changes.  Paragraph 3.7 of the Scrutiny Committee report referred to evidence that supported VALP being attached as an Appendix.  However, in view of the significant number of documents that evidence had not been attached to the report.  Cabinet received a complete list of the supporting evidence for the Plan, which included links to the documents on the Council’s web site.

The VALP Scrutiny Committee had made a number of comments and suggestions.  The Cabinet report included a summary of both categories, broken down into specific changes that the Committee would like Cabinet to take into account, and general comments covering a range of issues within the consultation draft.  A schedule of all those items which Cabinet had been asked specifically to consider was circulated at the meeting. The Cabinet report (and the Scrutiny Committee report) also summarised the next stages in the process.

Before considering the schedule of proposed changes, Cabinet heard statements from three members of the public covering specifically the allocation of sites for gypsies and travellers, the need to reconsider the omission of a site at Shenley Park from the of the sites allocated for development and the percentage of affordable housing that should be required within new developments.

Cabinet then invited the Chairman of the VALP Scrutiny Committee to elaborate upon the deliberations of that Committee at its meeting on 26 September.  Cabinet placed on record its thanks to the Scrutiny Committee for its input to the whole of the Local Plan development process.

Lastly, Cabinet heard statements from three District Councillors covering specifically Neighbourhood Plans and site allocations, affordable housing provision and unmet housing need from other authorities after the adoption of VALP.

All of the issues raised by the speakers were dealt with by Cabinet during its discussions on the Submission Draft.

Cabinet then considered the schedule of proposed changes on an item by item basis, seeking clarification from officers that these would not alter significantly or change the sense of the supporting text.  Of all the changes suggested by the VALP Scrutiny Committee,  Cabinet felt unable  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

Councillor Bowles

Cabinet Member for Economic Development and Regeneration

To consider the attached report

(a)          Decision(s)

That Council be recommended to approve the inclusion of £4,993,269 in the Capital Programme and the Treasury Management Strategy in connection with a capital grant to the Aylesbury Vale Enterprise Zone to help meet the cost of advanced infrastructure provision at Silverstone Park Enterprise Zone.

(b)          Reason(s) for Decision(s)

To facilitate the early delivery of infrastructure for future phases.

(c)        Alternative Options Considered

Not to make funding available as requested.  However this would prevent the progression of the scheme and delivery of the Enterprise Zone objectives.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Finance and Services.  However this is a matter for final determination by full Council and as such, is not subject to call-in.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest / Dispensation(s)

None.

In May, 2016, approval had been given to the creation of three Enterprise Zones (EZs) within the Vale as part of a group comprising Bucks County Council, Bucks LEP and the landowners.  Collectively, these sites were referred to as the Aylesbury Vale Enterprise Zone (AVEZ).  As part of this arrangement, and because the Council was the collection authority for business rates, it had been agreed that AVDC would be the accountable body for the AVEZ.

A founding principle of EZs was that the Government allowed business rates retention from new development so that the income generated was invested in infrastructure to facilitate future EZ development in accordance with agreed investment strategies.  Each of the AVEZ sites had a Memorandum of Undertaking (MoU) agreed with the landowners that set out each site’s investment strategy, including priorities for investment of retained business rates.  As the accountable body, any borrowing requirement necessary to future fund infrastructure needs fell to this Council.

At Silverstone Park, the MoU with MEPC (the land owner) specified that infrastructure funds of £10M would be applied (funded jointly by MEPC and business rates retention) to support infrastructure provision in advance, such as power supply, utilities, ground works, site roads and broadband.

To date, MEPC had delivered the first phase of speculative development (12,164 sq. m) in the EZ and tier 1 infrastructure works, including a 21 MVA upgrade to the high voltage electricity distribution network and gas and drainage infrastructure.  MEPC’s infrastructure investment priority was to deliver tier 2 infrastructure as set out in a schedule forming part of the Cabinet report.  Tier 2 infrastructure would accelerate the future provision of site specific services on future development phases.  This would enable MEPC to respond rapidly to future occupier requirements for premises across the whole of the remaining EZ site.

MEPC was committed to future development under the terms of the MoU.  The ability to move forward rapidly with the early delivery of development to meet future occupiers’ time scales would be greatly assisted by the tier 2 infrastructure provision.  This would ultimately result in earlier delivery of additional rates income being secured for the EZ.

In March this year the EZ Board had given approval in principle to MEPC’s proposal for EZ funding support for utilities infrastructure.  The EZ Implementation Plan, as submitted to the DCLG, had been revised to take account of this proposal.  This had been finally agreed in September, 2017.  Following this, Hewdon Consulting had been appointed to appraise the project.  Hewdon’s conclusions were submitted as part of the confidential Cabinet agenda.  Members took account of this appraisal in reaching the recommendation referred to below, but it was not necessary to exclude the public for the consideration of this particular element of the Cabinet report.

The tier 2 infrastructure works would enable the connection of future EZ development plots (accommodating 80,000 sq. m employment floor space) to the main incoming utilities supplies.  The total cost of the investment required was £4,993,269 (including professional fees and a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.