Public Participation
To consider questions (if any) by members of the public of which the appropriate notice has been given to the Assistant Director (Corporate and Contracted Services).
Decision:
Questions from Graham Bright (Grove Fields Residents Association) to Councillor G Sutton:
Q1: "There was a lockdown when DBC voted to commence the public consultation and there is currently a lockdown. This alone is a good enough reason to postpone or at the very least extend the end date of the public consultation until a date when the lockdown is lifted and the public can properly engage with the consultation. There is a complete lack of awareness in Tring that there is an ongoing public consultation. I have not received anything through my door about how to engage with the consultation. There are many people in Tring who are now shielding, and engaging with the consultation does not fit within the government's definition of 'essential travel', therefore, the only way to engage is online. Many members of the public in Tring do not have access to the devices, Wi-Fi or the technical know-how to engage online. The current date of the 7th February, does not allow enough time for a fair or equitable access to the public consultation and DBC is opening itself up to judicial challenge.
In addition, on the 16 December the government published its response to the local housing need proposals on the consultation on changes to the current planning system. This sets out important changes to the standard method which has been amended so that the 20 most populated cities and urban centres in England (none of which are in Dacorum) see their need uplifted by 35%.
Government also said "More broadly, we heard suggestions in the consultation that in some places the numbers produced by the standard method pose a risk to protected landscapes and Green Belt. We (Government) should be clear that meeting housing need is never a reason to cause unacceptable harm to such places." and they went on to say "Within the current planning system the standard method does not present a ‘target’ in plan-making, but instead provides a starting point for determining the level of need for the area, and it is only after consideration of this, alongside what constraints areas face, such as the Green Belt, and the land that is actually available for development, that the decision on how many homes should be planned for is made. It does not override other planning policies, including the protections set out in Paragraph 11b of the NPPF or our strong protections for the Green Belt.
Therefore, there is no logic why DBC should slavishly pursue a plan to build on so much green belt when they should develop a plan based upon 'need' rather than using the standard method figure as a target that must be achieved at all costs.
Therefore my question is, can DBC either:
Response:The Council took the decision to extend the consultation ... view the full decision text for item 3
Minutes:
Questions from Graham Bright (Grove Fields Residents Association) to Councillor G Sutton:
Q1: "There was a lockdown when DBC voted to commence the public consultation and there is currently a lockdown. This alone is a good enough reason to postpone or at the very least extend the end date of the public consultation until a date when the lockdown is lifted and the public can properly engage with the consultation. There is a complete lack of awareness in Tring that there is an ongoing public consultation. I have not received anything through my door about how to engage with the consultation. There are many people in Tring who are now shielding, and engaging with the consultation does not fit within the government's definition of 'essential travel', therefore, the only way to engage is online. Many members of the public in Tring do not have access to the devices, Wi-Fi or the technical know-how to engage online. The current date of the 7th February, does not allow enough time for a fair or equitable access to the public consultation and DBC is opening itself up to judicial challenge.
In addition, on the 16 December the government published its response to the local housing need proposals on the consultation on changes to the current planning system. This sets out important changes to the standard method which has been amended so that the 20 most populated cities and urban centres in England (none of which are in Dacorum) see their need uplifted by 35%.
Government also said "More broadly, we heard suggestions in the consultation that in some places the numbers produced by the standard method pose a risk to protected landscapes and Green Belt. We (Government) should be clear that meeting housing need is never a reason to cause unacceptable harm to such places." and they went on to say "Within the current planning system the standard method does not present a ‘target’ in plan-making, but instead provides a starting point for determining the level of need for the area, and it is only after consideration of this, alongside what constraints areas face, such as the Green Belt, and the land that is actually available for development, that the decision on how many homes should be planned for is made. It does not override other planning policies, including the protections set out in Paragraph 11b of the NPPF or our strong protections for the Green Belt.
Therefore, there is no logic why DBC should slavishly pursue a plan to build on so much green belt when they should develop a plan based upon 'need' rather than using the standard method figure as a target that must be achieved at all costs.
Therefore my question is, can DBC either:
Response:The Council took the decision to extend the consultation ... view the full minutes text for item 3