The Local Plan Panel of Uttlesford Council convened to discuss updates on the Local Plan and the emerging Countryside Protection Zone (CPZ) Policy. The panel reviewed progress on the Local Plan, including draft chapters and responses to consultation comments, and examined the CPZ Policy with input from Hankinson Duckett Associates.

Local Plan Update

The Strategic Director of Planning provided a comprehensive update on the Local Plan's progress. Since the last meeting, three draft chapters had been reviewed by members and legal counsel, with more chapters to follow. The panel also began considering draft responses to the 5,000 Regulation 18 consultation comments and elements of the evolving site allocations.

Councillor J Evans highlighted the disparity in major applications between Uttlesford and neighbouring districts, noting that Uttlesford had 33 major applications in the last year compared to Maldon's 22 and Braintree's 18. He stressed the importance of having an up-to-date Local Plan to manage this growth effectively.

Members agreed that working drafts of the Local Plan should only be made publicly available once completed to avoid confusion. Councillor C Criscione requested follow-up on previously discussed items, such as affordable housing, to ensure that members' comments were incorporated into the Regulation 19 draft before public consultation.

The update was noted by the panel.

Countryside Protection Zone Policy

The Strategic Director of Planning introduced the emerging Countryside Protection Zone (CPZ) Policy, addressing concerns raised by public speakers. Tanya Kirk from Hankinson Duckett Associates presented the outline thinking for the policy, which aims to strengthen the existing Policy S8 by aligning it with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Key points from the presentation included:

• Examination of planning appeals in the CPZ to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the existing policy.
• Recommendations to change the wording of Regulation 18 Core Policy 12 to promote separation rather than avoiding coalescence, making it easier to demonstrate encroachment.
• The importance of protecting landscape identity in line with Greenbelt tests.
• The need for updated evidence reflecting changes since the last study conducted by LUC eight years ago.

Members supported the development of the emerging policy, emphasising the importance of maintaining openness around the airport and including metrics such as noise and air pollution. They acknowledged that a blanket prohibition on development was not compliant with the NPPF and suggested a criteria-based approach similar to the Newport, Quendon and Rickling Neighbourhood Plan.

The panel expressed sympathy towards the residents of Takeley and reassured them that officers had found a solution addressing most concerns raised at Regulation 18.

The meeting concluded with the Chair thanking the public for their attendance.

For more details, you can refer to the Minutes 08052024 Local Plan Panel.