Presented by Gemma Wildman and Ed Dade, FDC
Minutes:
Gemma Wildman gave a presentation on the Fenland Local Plan which is now under review. The new plan will set out how Fenland will grow up until 2040. The public consultation is now open and will run until 21/11/19 and all the information and reports are available on the FDC website.
The Chairman thanked GW for her presentation and asked if all members of the forum received her notification. GW stated that due to data protection laws it was not possible to use the same list but she had advised people on the list to register their details and believed most had.
Martin Williams said that he had seen the evidence re the flood risk assessment. If a piece of land is in FZ3, would the report carry weight? GM said that we have to follow national policy, therefore we would have to assess sites by looking at FZ1 first and if we could not meet our requirements then we would have to assess FZ2 then FZ3. There has to be a sequential approach, however in this area it is very likely that we will be unable to meet all our housing needs in FZ1 so we will look at our water cycle and flood risk assessments to find the most appropriate sites. MW mentioned that the last action plan stated the cost of the barrier in respect of Wisbech development and that it could be removed from FZ3. The Chairman suggested that MW read the documents that GW had referred to as this would give him the information he required and showed how sites are scored. The points MW made had been raised in a meeting that the Chairman and PH had attended with CP, GW and NH; flood zone on its own is not the best indicator of the actual risk of flood on site. FDC is constrained by national policy that says they have to look at FZ1 but if the intention is to have a strategy of growth they do have to be able to assess the individual sites as to where the lower risk points and sites that may all be in FZ3 but are not all at the same flood risk. It is a question of finding the process we can properly assess if we are going to have situations where there are villages that are all flood zone 3 and we are still going to allow a certain amount of development, scale to be determined, how we direct that development to the right areas in the village where you minimise the flood risk. GW added that the full site assessment process balances lots of issues, so flood risk is one of many; there may be other constraints on sites but we have to build on the best site based on all sorts of criteria, not just flood risk.
Councillor Mrs Laws said that as Chairman of the working party, what we have said is that we would work any developments and she added that any proposals that have previously been refused, we want to view again and asked that the members of the forum bear that in mind.
CW asked if there is a minimum size of site. GW said it is 0.165 hectares and 5 dwellings.
The Chairman said that several forum members attended a seminar on the Council’s viability work on the 19th September. This was a presentation by Simon Drummond-Hay on the draft report he is putting together that shows the methodology the Council will be using. Since that date the consultation period has been extended to 5th November. The Chairman added he is putting together a report funded by a consortium of developers that will do a full study of their own as to land values, costs, and what the S106 ask is at policy level. This should be a document that produces some answers of its own, comparable with the Council’s, that will hopefully lead to full and frank discussion on where the answer is. We know that the 2014 plan is not viable. It will not be possible to look at every site individually going forward and that is going to produce challenges. How will the Council produce the right numbers of affordable housing and what sort of affordable housing will we not want. The Chairman added he believes it is very important at an early stage that developers have a robust evidence document to assist the Council in getting the right answers; it should be a collaborative process and not a battle.
The Chairman added that he is grateful to GW and her team for extending the deadline and for those who agreed to help fund this. However, we are not quite up to the required budget and if there is anyone else willing to contribute, then he would be very grateful.
GW asked if she could attend the forum in January to provide a summary of results of the consultation. The Chairman said that whilst the Local Plan is in preparation, the hope is that she would want to come to every forum with updates.