Councillor Dale, Chairman of the Council, welcomed everyone to the meeting, and explained that the meeting was to provide an overview and briefing on the process followed by officers presenting their report to Council who then make their decision to approve or reject the plan having considered the officers’ recommendations.  It was explained that the Parish Forum could not feed into the report or the Local Plan document directly. The primary method of ensuring that the views of our communities are heard is through Councillors and questions or deputations should be centred on the recommendation and options in the Report. 

The Chairman explained that Parishes could submit questions or deputations. 

Questions and deputations may be submitted through the Council’s Governance team, but please note that in accordance with the Constitution they will only be considered if they directly relate to an item on the Special Council agenda.

Due to the Bank Holiday, petitions and questions must be submitted by 4.30pm on Friday 27^th August 2021.  Requests to make deputations must be submitted by 12:00 noon on the day of the meeting (Wednesday, 1^st September 2021).

Apologies were received from Ashwell Parish Council.

Mark Andrews (CEO, RCC) thanked everyone for attending explained that the purpose of the meeting was to enable parishes to understand the recommendations and alternative options in the report going to Special Council.  Attendees could then advise their parishes and work with their ward councillors ahead of the debate, using the information to submit questions and deputations if required.

Presentation to provide overview and recommendations in report to be presented to Council. 

Penny Sharp then provided a presentation on the recommendations of the report.  The presentation provided was to help Parish and Town Councils understand the report going to Council and covered:

·         Special Council Meeting on 1 September 2021

·         Recommendations to Special Council

·         Implications of withdrawing the Local Plan

·         Alternative options

·         How parishes feed into the Council decision making process (this element covered by Phillip Horsfield, the Council’s Deputy Director Corporate Governance and Monitoring Officer)

Opportunity for each parish to ask questions.  Please note, for parity, timings will be strictly controlled and limited in the first instance to 5 minutes per parish.

Following the report and briefing Parish and Town Councils were given the opportunity to ask questions.

·         Adrian Gombault (Ryhall Parish Council): 

·         Requested clarification on the situation with the Quarry Farm (Stamford North) site. 

·         Response from Penny Sharp:  If the Local Plan was withdrawn, there would be no strategic allocation for housing development at Quarry Farm in Rutland therefore there would be no existing policy framework for the Local Planning Authority to agree to a development.   This was complicated by the Stamford North development being allocated within the South Kesteven adopted Local Plan on the basis that the part of the development within Rutland would count towards South Kesteven’s housing needs.  This would not be a straightforward matter and would need to look at any applications very carefully but without Rutland Local Plan there would be no policy basis for Rutland County Council to approve them.

·         If RCC have to develop a new Local Plan the 650 houses at the site would need to be looked at carefully and in light of the refreshed housing needs evidence base.  Any consideration as to confirm whether they would form part of meeting Rutland’s or South Kesteven’s housing needs would also need to take into account any legal considerations.

·         Jeremy Orme (Hambleton Parish Meeting):

·         Asked for clarification on reverting to HIF bid. 

·         Response from Penny Sharp:  Constitutionally the council could revisit the HIF decision after a period of 6 months (after 22 September).  There would be an option for Council to re-consider whether it would want to accept HIF funding. Homes England has confirmed that contracting for the £29.4m remains an option that could still be pursued.

·         Homes England have indicated that the end date of the spend could be moved to March 2025 to accommodate a delayed acceptance of this funding.  Aside from the spend date it is unlikely there would be any material change to the agreements that Council considered in March 2021.

·         It was stressed that this is a decision for Council as to whether it wishes to revisit this decision. 

·         Sinclair Rogers (Ketton Parish Council):

·         Ketton PC concerned about unintended consequences of decision not to accept HIF.  Already have enough housing developments proposed which will increase their population by over 20% with no increase in services or size of school, doctors surgery, public transport etc.  When will RCC look at impact on the villages in Rutland?

·         Mark Andrews explained that officers implement policy as set by Council and this policy was set back in February 2020 based on the Local Plan, however the decision to then not accept the HIF grant makes things challenging. 

·         There was further concern raised about potential planning “free-for all” if Local Plan not adopted and with a delay in getting a new one. 

·         Mark Andrews reiterated that such risks have been highlighted in the report and this would be considered by members in due course.  The risks had also been covered in the financial projection in the report.

·         Christopher Renner (Normanton  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.