Issue - meetings

To approve the

(i)            Cotswold Beechwoods SAC Recreation Mitigation Strategy

(ii)          Rodborough Common SAC Recreation Mitigation Strategy

for avoidance of likely significant adverse effects on Special Areas of Conservation (SAC).

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the report and advised that under the Habitats Regulations all plans and projects must give consideration whether they are likely to have significant effect on protected habitats sites. The Mitigation Strategies were measures intended to reduce or prevent any adverse significant effect to these habitats from any planning projects. An Interim Rodborough Mitigation Strategy had been in force since 2015 and the Cotswold Beechwood Mitigation Strategy was new and required a partnership approach in Gloucestershire between Local Planning Authorities.

In response to Member questions, the Principal Planning Officer responded by advising:

·       Cotswold Beechwoods zone of influence was broadly worked out on where 75% of visitors originated from.

·       As to the current uncertainty on the future of Habitats Regulations, it was explained that the Council can only operate on current regulations and guidance in place on the national habitat sites.

·       Any future proposals from Central Government on habitat protections would require the Strategies to be reviewed.

Councillor Jones advised Committee he had a potential amendment and asked for Officers advice on the legitimacy of either excluding affordable housing or a mitigation contribution under HC4 of the Local Plan or giving Officers provision to use the Country Surveyor viability reports to exempt affordable housing making the contribution. The Principal Planning Officer responded that he hasn’t heard of an exclusion for affordable housing under these regulations.  The Head of Planning Strategy and Economic Development advised the Council must demonstrate Local Plan developments were viable with policy requirements as part of the draft Local Plan evidence.  There was no requirement on developers to pay money towards the Mitigation Strategies if their own schemes could mitigate adverse impacts.

Councillor Jones proposed an amendment that Community Land Trusts were excluded from making the mitigation contribution but welcomed officers’ advice. The Head of Planning Strategy and Economic Development advised alternative ways could be more appropriate to address the impact of costs on Community Land Trusts developments. The mitigation strategy was a statutory requirement and focussed on nature conservation. The Chair, Councillor Turner suggested Councillor Jones and the Head of Planning Strategy and Economic Development discuss outside of Committee based on Officer feedback.

Based on Officer feedback, the amendment did not proceed and Councillor Kay proposed and Councillor Drury-Layfield seconded the original motion. Councillor Jones informed Committee he would have preferred to have deferred the report to seek Legal Advice to try and accommodate the exclusion on affordable housing.

On being put to the vote, there were 6 votes for, 3 against and 1 abstention.

To approve the

(i)            Cotswold Beechwoods SAC Recreation Mitigation Strategy

(ii)          Rodborough Common SAC Recreation Mitigation Strategy

for avoidance of likely significant adverse effects on Special Areas of Conservation (SAC).