To answer questions asked by members of the public. The constitution requires that questions are received three working days before the meeting (deadline 4.00pm on Monday, 11 July 2011).

Question 1

The following question was received from Mr Lorne Henry

 

Is the present Forest of Dean District Council strategy on affordable housing stagnating the availability of future housing and flat development, not only to those in need but also to the general public, by unaffordable percentage donations being placed on small developers over 5 units?

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for Efficient Council and Planning Policy, Councillor Brian Robinson 

 

Thank you for your question.

 

Planning Policy Statement 3 issued by the Government requires local authorities to set out in Local Development Documents, the likely overall proportions of households that require market or affordable housing. Findings from the latest housing needs survey indicates that there is a need for 50% affordable housing to be provided on mixed tenure developments. Forest of Dean District Council policy for affordable housing on mixed developments seeks a 40% affordable housing provision.

 

It is recognised and understood that a residential or mixed development needs to be financially viable if it is to proceed. Where applicants make the case that 40% affordable housing is not deliverable individual site viability assessments will be undertaken to assess the applicant’s position. If the Council is satisfied that the financial appraisal confirms that the affordable housing requirement renders the scheme unviable, the Council can consider:

 

• retaining the target percentage but adjusting the tenure split or unit mix; or
• a lower percentage of affordable housing but retaining the tenure split and unit mix; or
• supporting the introduction of grant funding to achieve the target contribution, tenure split or mix via a cascade; or

 

a combination of these options, such that the scheme viability is restored.

 

With the Council having a flexible system to determine the affordable housing provision on an individual site basis whilst enabling the scheme to remain viable, the Council considers that the policy for affordable housing provision on mixed developments is fair and transparent. There is no evidence that the policy is stagnating future housing delivery.

 

Mr Henry was not present at the meeting, so the council would send him the response to his question.

 

Question 2

 

The following question was received from Mr Roger Drury, Woodend, Parkend Walk, Coalway, Coleford, Glos GL16 7JR

 

As the majority of Councillors expressed their support for the HOOF Campaign in their election promises how is the Council going to fulfil its promises and work with local people to make sure that the Forest remains as it is.

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for the Environment, Councillor Martin Quaile

 

I should like to thank Mr Drury for his question - and especially for the timing of it as on the agenda for this evening’s meeting there are three papers that are relevant.  Later on this council will be discussing both the Core Strategy and the Cinderford Area Action plan.  These documents have been extensively consulted upon and they set out our vision for sensitive and sustainable development in the District.  If they are approved, following examination in public, they will form the basis of our future planning policy. 

 

However, I believe your question related specifically to the future of the Forest.

 

Further on in the agenda, Council will consider a suggested response to the Independent Panel on Forestry (at Item 13) and indeed a further Motion from Councillor Andrew Gardiner, our Forest Champion (at Item 16.1).  I think the Council has gone to some lengths to engage with the community in formulating its proposed response and I believe it shows that we have kept our promise. However, as the item is on tonight’s agenda I do not propose to go into further detail now - but you are, of course, very welcome to stay and listen to the discussion and resolution.

 

Mr Drury was not present at the meeting, so the council would send him the response to his question.

 

Question 3

 

The following question was received from Diana Gash, 2b Sparrow Hill, Coleford, Glos. GL16 8AS

 

During the run up to the recent local elections there appeared to be a very little opportunity to find out Candidate’s positions on a number of important issues.  As far as I am aware the only Public Meeting was the one organised by the Forest Against the Cuts Group.  Can members of this council explain how, in future, they will ensure that they are more easily available to hear and discuss the views of their electorate in order that they may represent us more accurately when making decisions in Council.  For instance will they be prepared to hold regular surgeries and agree to meet with interest groups when reasonably requested?

 

Response from the Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux

I would like to thank you for your question as it  raises an important issue about the role of Councillors in listening to their electorate in order to represent them more accurately at Council meetings.

 

We have introduced a number of arrangements to allow the public to participate more in the running of the Council.  We now have Public Question Time at Council Meetings, Cabinet and most of our Committees.  We have also introduced a Petition Scheme, including on-line Petitions to make it easier for members of the public to express their views to Councillors. We also publish the contact details for every Member and Councillors do attend local Town and Parish meetings on a regular basis.

 

Members also meet with Interest Groups when requested and there are numerous examples of where this has worked well to ensure local issues are dealt with effectively.

 

I am not aware of any Councillor holding regular Surgeries but I do know that we are all available on the telephone to listen to local residents at most reasonable times of the day and night.

However, I will give some thought to the suggestion that we should have more open events for local people to come and make their views known.

At the meeting he added that at least one member did hold regular surgeries and that councillors had canvassed opinion on doorsteps recently leading up to the local elections.

Supplementary question

Mrs Gash asked if councillors would be prepared to support and take action if the Lydney and Dilke hospitals came under threat. She also asked if councillors would meet the Forest Against the Cuts Group to consider how to work together. She also urged those councillors who had pledged support for the group’s aims to join it in presenting a petition to the local MP, Mark Harper. She left a copy of the petition with Democratic Services.

 

Response from Cllr Molyneux

Cllr Molyneux said that he and other councillors would always meet with local groups and would respond to Mrs Gash’s request to arrange a meeting. He had met the Chief Executive designate of Gloucestershire Care Services, a social enterprise, and had asked her if she was aware of the previous Save Our Services campaign. She had given her assurance that part of her work would be to address such issues of local concern. All members were fully aware of the health issues in the district

 

Question 4

 

The following question has been received from Mr Claude Mickleson, 66 Lych Gate Mews, Lydney, Glos GL15 5TJ

 

 

Whilst taking into account the plans for new supermarkets now or in the future by the Tesco company will you take into account the fact that although being, probably, the largest and most successful British supermarket they do not pay taxes in Great Britain?

 

We are acutely aware of the present perilous state of the economy and cuts being made in essential services both in the district and nationally and feel that there is no room for non paying companies in this country.

 

Response from the Cabinet Member for Efficient Council and Planning Policy, Councillor Brian Robinson 

 

Thank you for your question.

In considering a Planning Application the Local Planning Authority can only evaluate material planning considerations as such the issue of who the applications are or any of their business practices are not relevant material considerations and cannot be taken into account. 

 

Supplementary question

Mr Mickleson said that while he appreciated the rules and regulations by which the council was bound, councillors had been elected to represent the public. He urged councillors to go further and lobby central government.

 

Question 5

 

The following question has been received from Peter Stanway, Pear Tree Cottage, Popes Hill, Newnham on Severn, Glos GL14 1JX

 

Candidates for the recent District Council elections were asked if elected would they fight to keep the District Nurse Service and the Dilke and Lydney Hospitals in the NHS.

 

The vast majority of those who replied said that they would and therefore I ask will the newly formed administration be in favour of a motion supporting this fight against the privatisation of these services close to the hearts of all the people in the forest?

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux 

 

Thank you for your question.  Protecting and improving our local health services is of vital importance to the well being of our communities.  This Council has a proud record of supporting our local hospitals.  Previous campaigning to protect the Dilke and Lydney hospitals from threatened closure brought all councillors together on a cross-party basis in the Save our Services (SOS) campaign.

 

Gloucestershire Care Services (GCS) who currently manage these services, are going to become a social enterprise organisation from this autumn and will therefore not be a part of the NHS from that point onwards.  This decision has already been endorsed by the NHS Board in Gloucestershire.   GCS aim to develop a patient-focused organisation providing high quality services that link with social care to provide community-based, integrated care as close to people’s home as possible.

 

I do not think, therefore, that there is benefit in fighting a decision that seems to have already been made.  I would rather focus on how future services are delivered to best meet the needs of everyone in our District.

 

I would like to inform you that on the 29^th June this year, Terry Hale and myself met with Ingrid Barker, the Chair Designate of Gloucestershire Care Services, to discuss the new social enterprise. At the meeting we talked about the strength of feeling within the district towards our hospitals, and the SOS campaign in particular, and we were given a strong, personal assurance that our hospitals played a key part in their plans for delivery of health services in the district.

 

I am, therefore, happy to confirm that this administration will strive to ensure that the people of the Forest of Dean continue to be well served by their local health services and hospitals.

 

Supplementary question

Mr Stanway was not satisfied with the answer, stating that he believed the council to be giving up before the issue had even been started. He mentioned that over one thousand people had signed a petition. He did not trust the private sector to prioritise care over profit and asked if the council agreed that the current situation did not bode well for the future of services in the district.

 

Response from Cllr Molyneux

Cllr Molyneux believed that the government had the issue under review and reminded the meeting that the social enterprise company was a not-for-profit organisation. The council would take into consideration the views expressed and keep a close eye on developments. He said that the last time local hospital provision came under threat, the whole council came together to fight it and he was sure that the council would do so again if needed.

 

Question 6

The following questions has been received from Mr L G Moseley, 44 Belle Vue road, Cinderford, Glos GL14 2AG

 

Item 9 Cinderford Local AAP, response 14.

 

My first question is “What proportion of the councillors on the planning committee have read the documents The Forest of Dean Story 2005 some statistical observations and The Forest of Dean District a 2004 rational approach to planning its future?” If the answer is “100%”, my follow-up questions would be “Are they satisfied with assurances from officers that the evidence base is robust and relevant to their decisions?” If the answer is “< 100%”, my follow-up question is “Why not?”

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux 

 

Thank you for your question.

 

Members have approved the Core strategy for submission to the Secretary of State and are therefore satisfied that it and its evidence is suitable for submission.

 

It is impossible to say what percentage of the Councillors on the Planning Committee have read the document referred to.  It is in any event based on several other published documents so the information it contains can be obtained from other sources.  The evidence on which the Core Strategy is based is openly available and  is accessible to members.  In addition, the evidence itself has been the subject of discussion, not least during the 2010 scrutiny of the Core Strategy.  As Professor Moseley will be aware, there has been an election since he submitted his papers and thus it is possible that not all current Members have read them – but many will have done so.

 

Item 8 Core Strategy Responses page 25 and following

 

My further questions are:

 

a)      “What proportion of the new dwellings proposed in the Core Strategy are expected to be filled by in-migrants?”

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux

It is not possible to answer this question.  Whilst the current indications are that there will be a continuing excess of deaths over births within the district, it is impossible to be certain.  If however this continues then the population of the area will show a modest increase which could be attributed to the expected levels of in migration. The requirement for new housing comes in part from this increase and in part from the expected continuing fall in household sizes. 

 

New dwellings however add to the overall stock and are generally free to anyone (in migrants and indigenous population) to occupy.  One exception is in the case of affordable dwellings where the occupants would be expected to be in housing need within the district.  The occupancy of new dwellings is therefore difficult to predict.  It is more a question of ensuring that new dwellings help to balance the overall housing stock against the expected requirements.  The numbers provided are intended to ensure that the total stock meets the expected requirements arising from changes in the population and they will also try to maximise the provision of affordable housing.  

 

b)      “Have councillors been invited or permitted to vote specifically to increase the amount of in-migration?”

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux

No, though they have been aware that providing for it is a component of the overall housing requirement (which now stands at about 4934 dwellings by 2026).

 

c)      “Have councillors been invited or permitted to vote on the question of whether the district should be further urbanized?”

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux

The Council has discussed and supported on a number of occasions the Core Strategy along with its proposed development allocations.  Councillors are therefore aware of the implications including the scale and extent of new development.  These are broadly speaking the completion of areas allocated for development in the 2005 Local Plan (these were fully debated at the time of its Inquiry in 2003/4), and the addition under the Core Strategy of the development of the Cinderford Northern Quarter.

 

d)      “What proportion of officers have read the 22 research studies which show that protecting a good quality rural environment is the greatest economic asset that an area can possess – largely because it attracts entrepreneurs who bring high-quality, high-income, knowledge-intensive, sustainable employment?”

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux

Whilst it is impossible to provide a numerical answer, officers and members are generally very well aware of the importance of the environment in attracting businesses to the area.  The basic philosophy of the Core strategy is to provide new quality opportunities in order to make the area more attractive to a wider range of employment. 

 

e)      “What influence did those research studies have on the formation of the Core Strategy?”

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux

Much of the Core Strategy is framed around the need for environmental quality to be paramount.  Examination of the core policies reveals this approach. Policy CSP 1 sets out this basic principle, CSP 2 and 3 secure sustainable development, and CSP4 concentrates new development at settlements, in a manner that is expected to make best use of resources and respect the environment.  CSP5 accommodates the required housing largely within existing settlements in a manner that protects the form and character of settlements.  CSP 7 gives selective priority to employment that improves that range on offer and promotes tourism.

 

f)        “Why cannot the decision on the Core Strategy be postponed until the details of the Localism Bill have been finalised?” There is no rush, after all.

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux

Government advice remains that Local Authorities should continue to prepare Core Strategies.  The alternative which seems to be emerging is that there will be a nationally imposed view in favour of “sustainable development” as defined by government.  The government agenda is both about localism and providing new development.  It is not about pausing the plan making process and the implementation of schemes for which the need is established.

 

If the Localism Bill becomes an act late in 2011, there will still be a period before its provisions are able to be carried out, as many will need further regulations etc.  The delay of waiting therefore is not only undesirable and contrary to government advice, it would be considerable.

 

During any period where there are not up to date plans in place a Local Authority is vulnerable to ad hoc planning applications which do not best serve the area concerned.  As there is no evidence to suggest that development in the Forest of Dean should cease, this risk would be very real and could prejudice any eventual strategy.

 

Supplementary question

Mr Moseley said that researchers received different data from that given by officers when they went outside the district for data and was shocked that data was not independently verified. He asked if it was reasonable for the council to have evidence on in-migration.

 

Response from Cllr Molyneux

Cllr Molyneux answered that it was difficult to be specific about who might move into the district.

 

Question 7

 

The following question has been received from Mrs M K Newton, The Grove, Littledean Road, Elton, Newnham, Glos. GL14 1JY

 

Item 9 Cinderford Area Action Plan

 

The RSPB, Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust and Forest of Dean Friends of the Earth have found the Cinderford Area Action Plan DPD to be unsound because it is not accompanied by an  Appropriate Assessment.  Will the Forest of Dean District Council conduct an Appropriate Assessment now before approving this DPD in line with the Habitat Regulations?

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux 

 

Thank you for your question.

The Habitats Directive (Article 6(3)) requires that any plan or project, which is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of a European site, but would be likely to have a significant effect on such a site, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall be subject to an ‘appropriate assessment’ of its implications for the European site in view of the site’s conservation objectives.

As the plan making authority the council has undertaken this responsibility diligently with Cinderford AAP partners and Natural England. Extensive survey work has culminated in the Cinderford AAP habitat regulations screening report (March 2011). This report identifies the potential for ‘likely significant effects’, it also identifies that due to the strategic nature of the AAP, and therefore limited precise development detail, there is an element of uncertainty as to whether any of the potential impacts are ‘likely’ and /or ‘significant’ under the terms of the directive. Therefore ‘Appropriate Assessment is more likely to be relevant at a lower tier i.e. through planning applications. The Council therefore has developed policy 26 in the AAP in order that it was clear that future planning applications would need to be screened with regards to the Habitats Regulations and where appropriate undertake an appropriate assessment prior to a consent.

Following the change in road alignment, from the A4136, in the pre submission draft, the council and Natural England are considering if this change alters the severity of the potential impacts on bats (principally in the Northern United area) and therefore the conclusions of the HRSA report. In order to inform this evaluation the Council, in consultation with Natural England, has commissioned additional bat surveys beginning in June 2011 and completed by the following September.  In consultation with the Gloucestershire Bat Group and Natural England this summer survey programme includes emergence surveys, transects surveys and radio tracking to support the existing substantial data collected on bat activity as part of baseline assessments.

This additional information will be reviewed in light of the existing HRSA and an updated HRSA presented prior to examination. If as a result of this review, in consultation with Natural England, it is considered that an appropriate assessment is required the Council will undertake one prior to examination and subsequently review it following any recommendations made following examination, prior to the Council adopting the AAP.

Supplementary question

Mrs Newton questioned why the council was moving forward on this matter before knowing the results of the screening being carried out by Natural England. The council risked extra costs if found wanting at a later date.

 

Response from Nigel Gibbons, Forward Plan Manager

Upon invitation from the Leader the Forward Plan Manager said that the Cinderford Area Action Plan was proceeding to a detailed stage, considering such things as road layout, and that the appropriate assessments would be carried out when information was known. He added that Natural England was aware of and agreed the approach being taken by the Council.

 

Question 8

 

Item 9 Cinderford Area Action Plan

 

The following question has been received from Mrs M K Newton

 

Will the District Council consider in full the alternative proposals put forward by Forest of Dean Friends of the Earth, which would conserve this important biodiverse area for future generations?

 

Response from Leader of the Council, Councillor Patrick Molyneux 

 

Thank you for your question.

 

The alternative proposals put forward by Forest of Dean Friends of the Earth (FODFOE) were presented as a written submission during May 2009 as part of the Cinderford AAP Preferred Option Consultation.  FODFOE representatives also attended a Stakeholder Workshop on 19 May 2009 at the Miners’ Welfare Hall in Cinderford.  The purpose of the Workshop was to engage and bring together a series of key stakeholders who had been identified during the AAP’s baseline analysis as being crucial to the formation of a robust Masterplan and AAP.  The Cinderford Northern Quarter Masterplan and AAP Consultation Report (August 09) captures all the community consultation around this vital stage of plan formulation and makes specific reference to FODFOE’s written submission.  This Consultation Report forms part of the AAP Evidence Base (item 17) which can be accessed from the Council’s website. http://www.fdean.gov.uk/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=7440&tt=graphic

 

The May 2009 consultation work informed the Preferred Option Formal Consultation in Oct/Nov 2009, which in turn has helped to shape the AAP Pre-Submission Document that has been taken through two further stages of informal and formal consultation this year.  FODFOE has submitted a written response to the Pre-Submission AAP and these comments are highlighted in Annex A Summary of Representations appended to the report Agenda Item 9 – Cinderford Area Action Plan (Northern Quarter) – Publication - being presented to Full Council on 14^th July 2011.  FODFOE’s suggested alternativeproposal is based on a model of “Life Support” which promotes the role of nature in achieving a wide range of goals and objectives.

 

The Council’s proposed response to FODFOE’s representation is as follows:

 

Alternatives are noted, however the  AAP should be viewed in the context of the Core Strategy which proposes a different form of regeneration based strategy for Lydney which includes substantial new development, support for Coleford and for Newent to bolster their role as market towns.  There is much to be supported in the FODFOE proposals for the area however they do need to be assessed in the context of the need to address the need for future employment housing and education. The general theme of using the environment for education is very likely to be taken up within the AAP proposed educational facility.

 

Supplementary question

Mrs Newton asked if the council had considered the full alternative proposal put by the FODFOE, which put the environment at its centre with regard to habitat and translocation of species.

 

Response from Cllr Molyneux

Cllr Molyneux reminded the meeting that Full Council had already endorsed the plan and that the report before members later in the meeting concerned consultation. He confirmed that the council had considered all alternatives.