Agenda item

The Committee considered the report of the Director – Planning & Growth relating to a consultation by the Government and for Members to consider the proposed response to be made.

On 22 December 2023, the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities commenced a consultation on Street vote development orders.  The consultation ran for 6 weeks from the 22 December and would end 2 February 2024.

The report provided information regarding the Government’s directly quoted introduction to street vote development orders, why they were needed and their vision for such orders.

It was reported that the proposals for street vote development orders were guided by three key principles:

·       to create a predictable system where residents have a high degree of certainty on what proposals are permitted to contain before they prepare a proposal;

·       to make the system accessible and easy to use so local people can take up the opportunity that street vote development orders provide; and

·       to create a robust system that enables residents to bring forward well designed development on their street that has local support, in particular, from those most directly affected by it.

Members made the following comments and suggestions:

A Member commented that he agreed to question 41 with eligibility to vote and also the comments provided regarding Rural settlements.

Questions 4, 8, 11, 19, 22 & 38 would prefer it if the Council were more equivocal in their response and should say “yes or no” and “unsure” should not be used.

A Member commented that this system was already in place and was called Parish Councils, Community Groups, District Councils and County Councils.  The proposals may make Parish Councils obsolete to save money.  There would be a place for this if Newark and Sherwood was a Unitary Authority, however this would create another tier of decision making and would generate more work for Officers. The landowner had to be in agreement with any proposed development and it was questioned whether the agreement of the land owner should be sought before any work commenced.  It was commented that the proposals did not make sense.

A Member commented that in relation to Question 22 & 23 Neighbourhood Plans should be referenced in our responseand there was a difference as Neighbourhood Plans were subject to Referendum.  There was no acknowledgment of the role of a neighbourhood plan within this consultation, which was really important as some of the district councils towns had established Neighbourhood Plans and those plans were significant as to where development was required.  It was questioned how these could be put together without a coherent strategy.

It was further commented that this was complex and in reality establishing this would be difficult.  Question 24 had been answered as Yes, it was questioned whether that should be No, looking at the biodiversity side of this.

Paragraph 64 – why lose the right to re-submit for three years, clarification was sought regarding the rationale behind that and suggested to be reviewed.

Paragraph 69 – 60% have to vote to agree, this may need reviewing.

It was commented that the criteria for what can be accepted had to be 50% plus one for the street vote order.  If there wasn’t the threshold what was the point of doing the work.  It was felt that this did not make sense and was far too complex.

It was commented that the impact on residents at the end of a street could be detrimental and been missed out.

Question 11 – it was considered that this did not cover the areas with isolated pockets of up to nine dwellings, which would not get a voice.  Those areas already felt frustrated that they had not currently got a voice.

Split boundaries was also questioned and what would happen in those circumstances.

The Chair requested that the responses be circulated to Members of the Planning Committee before the final version was submitted.

AGREED          that:

(a)         the contents of the report and the proposal for street vote       development orders be noted;

(b)         subject to the above comments and any further comments       submitted after the Planning Committee, the draft Council       response in Appendix 1 be endorsed; and

(c)         the responses be circulated to Members of the Planning       Committee before the final version was submitted.