Still no plan in place for Northumberland’s Future after five years of Tory rule.

 

July 2017 BRIEFING​ ​NOTE and advice on removal of core strategy document in 2017 prepared for Tory Secret Cabinet

Ignoring this advice has caused untold angst for residents of New Hartley who did not have any protection in place when the Tories led them up the Garden Path!

 

 

Northumberland​ ​Local​ ​Plan​ ​Core​ ​Strategy 

 

● The​ ​Draft​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​was​ ​submitted​ ​to​ ​Government​ ​in​ ​early​ ​April​ ​for​ ​independent examination​ ​with​ ​the​ ​hearing​ ​sessions​ ​currently​ ​scheduled​ ​to​ ​commence​ ​in​ ​late September​ ​2017.​ ​Further​ ​information​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Inspector​ ​is​ ​due​ ​in​ ​June​ ​and​ ​July​ ​on the​ ​timetabling​ ​and​ ​content​ ​of​ ​the​ ​hearing​ ​sessions. 

 

● Relatively​ ​minor​ ​“major​ ​modifications”​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​could​ ​be​ ​presented​ ​at​ ​the examination​ ​as​ ​suggested​ ​amendments​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Inspector​ ​to​ ​consider​ ​and,​ ​if​ ​found 

acceptable,​ ​would​ ​be​ ​subject​ ​to​ ​consultation​ ​as​ ​part​ ​of​ ​any​ ​other​ ​main​ ​modifications 

required​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Inspector.​ ​There​ ​may​ ​however​ ​be​ ​the​ ​need​ ​to​ ​request​ ​a​ ​delay​ ​in​ ​the 

examination​ ​process​ ​so​ ​that​ ​such​ ​amendments​ ​can​ ​be​ ​fully​ ​considered​ ​by​ ​the 

Council. 

 

● More​ ​fundamental​ ​modifications​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy,​ ​such​ ​as​ ​a​ ​reduction​ ​in​ ​the 

overall ​ ​housing​ ​numbers​ ​and​ ​removal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​proposed​ ​Green​ ​Belt​ ​deletions​ ​for 

example,​ ​could​ ​potentially​ ​be​ ​a​ ​change​ ​in​ ​the​ ​overall ​ ​strategic​ ​direction​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Plan 

requiring​ ​a​ ​withdrawal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Plan​ ​from​ ​the​ ​examination​ ​process. 

 

● Should​ ​withdrawal​ ​of​ ​Plan​ ​be​ ​required,​ ​a​ ​request​ ​would​ ​need​ ​to​ ​be​ ​made​ ​to 

Government​ ​for​ ​it​ ​to​ ​be​ ​withdrawn​ ​and​ ​advice​ ​sought​ ​on​ ​what​ ​stage​ ​the​ ​Plan​ ​would 

need​ ​to​ ​go​ ​back​ ​to​ ​e.g.​ ​re-publish​ ​under​ ​Regulation​ ​19​ ​(Pre-Submission​ ​Stage),​ ​or 

go​ ​further​ ​back​ ​to​ ​reconsult​ ​under​ ​Regulation​ ​18​ ​(Issues​ ​and​ ​Options​ ​Stage) 

 

Process​ ​for​ ​withdrawing​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy 

 

The​ ​Head​ ​of​ ​Planning​ ​Services​ ​has​ ​recently​ ​spoken​ ​to​ ​DCLG​ ​concerning​ ​the​ ​process​ ​for withdrawing​ ​a​ ​submitted​ ​Plan​ ​and​ ​the​ ​following​ ​advice​ ​has​ ​been​ ​received​ ​from​ ​DCLG’s​ ​legal 

team​ ​on​ ​two​ ​specific​ ​questions​ ​raised: 

 

(1)​ ​Can​ ​an​ ​LPA​ ​withdraw​ ​their​ ​plan​ ​once​ ​it​ ​has​ ​been​ ​submitted​ ​for​ ​examination? 

  

The​ ​short​ ​answer​ ​is​ ​yes​ ​–​ ​s.22​ ​PCPA​ ​2004​ ​allows​ ​an​ ​LDD​ ​to​ ​be​ ​withdrawn​ ​at​ ​any​ ​time​ ​before​ ​it​ ​is​ ​adopted. Worth​ ​being​ ​aware​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Localism​ ​Act​ ​2011​ ​repealed​ ​subsection​ ​(2)​ ​of​ ​s.22​ ​which​ ​only​ ​allowed​ ​an​ ​LPA to​ ​withdraw​ ​a​ ​DPD​ ​which​ ​had​ ​been​ ​submitted​ ​for​ ​examination​ ​if​ ​the​ ​examiner​ ​recommends​ ​withdrawal,​ ​or 

the​ ​SoS​ ​directs​ ​withdrawal. 

  

(2)​ ​Once​ ​the​ ​plan​ ​has​ ​been​ ​withdrawn,​ ​does​ ​the​ ​LPA​ ​effectively​ ​have​ ​to​ ​‘start​ ​again’​ ​at​ ​the​ ​Reg​ ​18 consultation​ ​stage? 

  

Once​ ​the​ ​LPA​ ​has​ ​withdrawn​ ​the​ ​plan,​ ​they​ ​are​ ​required​ ​(in​ ​accordance​ ​with​ ​Reg​ ​27​ ​of​ ​the​ ​2012​ ​Regs)​ ​to make​ ​available​ ​a​ ​statement​ ​of​ ​that​ ​fact​ ​at​ ​their​ ​offices​ ​and​ ​on​ ​their​ ​website,​ ​send​ ​notification​ ​to​ ​the​ ​general 

consultation​ ​bodies​ ​and​ ​remove​ ​al ​ ​the​ ​local​ ​plan​ ​documents​ ​from​ ​their​ ​website. 

  

The​ ​statutory​ ​provisions​ ​are​ ​silent​ ​as​ ​to​ ​the​ ​consequences​ ​of​ ​withdrawing​ ​a​ ​plan.​ ​PPG,​ ​at​ ​paragraph​ ​025, states​ ​“Following​ ​withdrawal​ ​of​ ​a​ ​Local​ ​Plan​ ​from​ ​examination​ ​a​ ​Local​ ​Planning​ ​Authority​ ​should​ ​consider 

whether​ ​to​ ​republish​ ​under​ ​regulation​ ​19​ ​or​ ​reconsult​ ​under​ ​regulation​ ​18​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Town​ ​and​ ​Country Planning​ ​(Local​ ​Planning)​ ​(England)​ ​Regulations​ ​2012​ ​and​ ​what​ ​matters​ ​this​ ​republication​ ​or​ ​reconsultation 

should​ ​address”. 

 

On​ ​the​ ​basis​ ​of​ ​the​ ​above​ ​advice​ ​it​ ​is​ ​possible​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Council​ ​to​ ​withdraw​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy from​ ​examination​ ​to​ ​al ow​ ​for​ ​a​ ​review​ ​and​ ​further​ ​modifications​ ​to​ ​be​ ​made.​ ​Given​ ​that submission​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​for​ ​examination​ ​was​ ​endorsed​ ​by​ ​Ful ​ ​Council​ ​less​ ​than​ ​six months​ ​ago​ ​however,​ ​advice​ ​from​ ​Legal​ ​Services​ ​is​ ​that​ ​withdrawal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​document​ ​would similarly​ ​require​ ​Full ​ ​Council​ ​approval.​ ​To​ ​kickstart​ ​the​ ​withdrawal​ ​process​ ​a​ ​motion​ ​would be​ ​required,​ ​signed​ ​by​ ​at​ ​least​ ​9​ ​members,​ ​requesting​ ​the​ ​previous​ ​decision​ ​agreeing​ ​to submission​ ​of​ ​the​ ​document​ ​to​ ​Government​ ​for​ ​examination​ ​to​ ​be​ ​called​ ​back​ ​to​ ​Full  Council. 

 

Key​ ​Issues​ ​to​ ​Consider 

 

● There​ ​is​ ​a​ ​need​ ​for​ ​discussions​ ​with​ ​DCLG​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Planning​ ​Inspectorate​ ​on​ ​how​ ​to proceed​ ​should​ ​fundamental​ ​modifications​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​be​ ​sought,​ ​including a​ ​discussion​ ​on​ ​implications​ ​for​ ​potential​ ​Government​ ​intervention. 

 

● DCLG​ ​have​ ​offered​ ​a​ ​Ministerial​ ​visit​ ​to​ ​speak​ ​to​ ​the​ ​new​ ​Administration​ ​about​ ​the 

potential​ ​scenarios​ ​relating​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​but​ ​this​ ​would​ ​not​ ​be​ ​arranged​ ​until 

after​ ​the​ ​General​ ​Election​ ​on​ ​8th​ ​June.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​considered​ ​important​ ​that​ ​this​ ​discussion 

takes​ ​place​ ​at​ ​the​ ​earliest​ ​opportunity​ ​to​ ​inform​ ​future​ ​decisions​ ​on​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy. 

 

● The​ ​timing​ ​of​ ​any​ ​withdrawal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​is​ ​critical​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​forthcoming 

public​ ​inquiries​ ​during​ ​June​ ​relating​ ​to​ ​Highthorn​ ​Surface​ ​Mine​ ​and​ ​a​ ​proposed 

Barratts​ ​housing​ ​site​ ​at​ ​New​ ​Hartley.​ ​Withdrawal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Plan​ ​during​ ​and/or​ ​prior​ ​to​ ​the 

end​ ​of​ ​these​ ​public​ ​inquiries​ ​would​ ​throw​ ​the​ ​inquiry​ ​processes​ ​into​ ​disarray,​ ​likely 

resulting​ ​in​ ​an​ ​adjournment​ ​of​ ​both​ ​inquiries​ ​and​ ​potential y​ ​weakening​ ​the​ ​Council’s 

position​ ​in​ ​both​ ​cases,​ ​particularly​ ​in​ ​relation​ ​to​ ​New​ ​Hartley​ ​where​ ​housing​ ​land 

supply​ ​issues​ ​are​ ​paramount​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Council’s​ ​defence​ ​of​ ​its​ ​refusal​ ​reasons. 

Tactical y​ ​it​ ​is​ ​therefore​ ​considered​ ​by​ ​Officers​ ​that​ ​any​ ​decision​ ​to​ ​withdraw​ ​the​ ​Core 

Strategy​ ​should​ ​not​ ​be​ ​taken​ ​until​ ​after​ ​both​ ​inquiries​ ​have​ ​finished​ ​(currently 

anticipated​ ​to​ ​be​ ​21st​ ​June)​ ​due​ ​to​ ​the​ ​complications​ ​this​ ​would​ ​otherwise​ ​present​ ​for 

the​ ​public​ ​inquiries.​ ​The​ ​Planning​ ​Inspectorate/Secretary​ ​of​ ​State​ ​would​ ​stil ​ ​have​ ​to 

have​ ​regard​ ​to​ ​any​ ​withdrawal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​in​ ​making​ ​their​ ​final​ ​decisions, 

and​ ​would​ ​possibly​ ​seek​ ​additional​ ​evidence​ ​from​ ​al ​ ​parties​ ​involved​ ​on​ ​the 

implications​ ​of​ ​the​ ​withdrawal​ ​to​ ​their​ ​respective​ ​cases,​ ​but​ ​this​ ​would​ ​be​ ​most​ ​likely 

dealt​ ​with​ ​through​ ​an​ ​exchange​ ​of​ ​written​ ​representations​ ​rather​ ​than​ ​re-opening​ ​the 

public​ ​inquiries. 

 

● It​ ​is​ ​important​ ​to​ ​establish​ ​the​ ​changes​ ​being​ ​sought​ ​by​ ​the​ ​new​ ​Administration​ ​in 

relation​ ​to​ ​the​ ​overal ​ ​housing​ ​figures,​ ​housing​ ​distribution​ ​across​ ​the​ ​County​ ​and​ ​the 

impacts​ ​on​ ​key​ ​strategic​ ​site​ ​al ocations​ ​including​ ​those​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Green​ ​Belt.​ ​This​ ​wil  

ultimately​ ​dictate​ ​how​ ​far​ ​back​ ​in​ ​the​ ​plan-preparation​ ​process​ ​we​ ​wil ​ ​need​ ​to​ ​go. 

Counsel​ ​advice,​ ​and​ ​advice​ ​from​ ​DCLG​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Planning​ ​Inspectorate,​ ​wil ​ ​need​ ​to 

be​ ​sought​ ​on​ ​procedural​ ​matters​ ​once​ ​the​ ​potential​ ​changes​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Plan​ ​are​ ​more 

clear. 

 

● Preferably,​ ​the​ ​level​ ​of​ ​change​ ​would​ ​be​ ​capable​ ​of​ ​being​ ​dealt​ ​with​ ​through​ ​a​ ​further Reg​ ​19​ ​stage​ ​which​ ​would​ ​involve​ ​approximately​ ​6​ ​-​ ​8​ ​months​ ​of​ ​work​ ​on​ ​revisions​ ​to the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​and​ ​the​ ​supporting​ ​evidence​ ​base​ ​plus​ ​time​ ​allowed​ ​for​ ​the Council’s​ ​internal​ ​approval​ ​processes​ ​resulting​ ​in​ ​an​ ​overall ​ ​9​ ​to​ ​12​ ​month​ ​delay. 

Likely​ ​costs​ ​involved​ ​in​ ​making​ ​modifications​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy,​ ​revisions​ ​to​ ​the 

supporting​ ​evidence​ ​base,​ ​carrying​ ​out​ ​the​ ​necessary​ ​consultation​ ​and​ ​providing 

additional​ ​staff​ ​resource​ ​to​ ​speed​ ​up​ ​the​ ​process​ ​is​ ​estimated​ ​at​ ​£350k 

 

● Alternatively,​ ​should​ ​the​ ​changes​ ​be​ ​so​ ​significant​ ​that​ ​they​ ​would​ ​effectively 

represent​ ​a​ ​new​ ​strategic​ ​direction​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Plan​ ​then​ ​going​ ​back​ ​to​ ​Reg​ ​18​ ​stage 

would​ ​be​ ​necessary.​ ​A​ ​current​ ​estimate​ ​of​ ​the​ ​amount​ ​of​ ​work​ ​required​ ​in​ ​preparing​ ​a 

new​ ​Plan,​ ​new​ ​evidence​ ​base​ ​and​ ​the​ ​numerous​ ​consultation​ ​stages​ ​that​ ​would​ ​be 

necessary​ ​would​ ​lead​ ​to​ ​at​ ​least​ ​a​ ​two​ ​year​ ​delay​ ​in​ ​re-submitting​ ​the​ ​Plan​ ​to 

Government​ ​and​ ​costs​ ​comfortably​ ​exceeding​ ​£500k 

 

● Withdrawal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy​ ​would​ ​leave​ ​the​ ​Council​ ​and​ ​local​ ​communities​ ​at 

risk​ ​of​ ​being​ ​disadvantaged​ ​by​ ​speculative/unplanned​ ​development​ ​whilst​ ​changes 

are​ ​made​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Plan.​ ​There​ ​is​ ​also​ ​an​ ​increased​ ​likelihood​ ​of​ ​significant​ ​planning 

appeals​ ​in​ ​cases​ ​where​ ​the​ ​Council​ ​seeks​ ​to​ ​resist​ ​development​ ​proposals​ ​on​ ​the 

basis​ ​of​ ​a​ ​Plan​ ​that​ ​is​ ​withdrawn​ ​and​ ​carries​ ​no​ ​weight​ ​in​ ​the​ ​interim​ ​period.​ ​It​ ​is 

therefore​ ​essential​ ​that,​ ​should​ ​the​ ​Plan​ ​be​ ​withdrawn,​ ​any​ ​time​ ​gap​ ​between 

withdrawal​ ​and​ ​resubmission​ ​to​ ​Government​ ​for​ ​examination​ ​is​ ​minimised. 

 

● A​ ​reduction​ ​in​ ​the​ ​overall ​ ​housing​ ​target​ ​figure​ ​from​ ​24,320​ ​to​ ​between​ ​19,000​ ​- 

21,000​ ​would​ ​still ​ ​allow​ ​the​ ​Council​ ​to​ ​present ​the​ ​Plan​ ​as​ ​a​ ​strategy​ ​for​ ​growth. 

There​ ​are​ ​two​ ​evidence-based​ ​scenarios​ ​carried​ ​out​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Council’s​ ​consultant 

Edge​ ​Analytics​ ​that​ ​would​ ​support​ ​this​ ​approach,​ ​albeit​ ​changes​ ​to​ ​the​ ​anticipated 

unemployment​ ​and​ ​commuting​ ​ratios​ ​for​ ​the​ ​County​ ​would​ ​be​ ​required.​ ​On​ ​a 

settlement-by-settlement​ ​basis​ ​this​ ​would​ ​still ​ ​represent​ ​growth​ ​but​ ​would​ ​result​ ​in 

some​ ​loss​ ​of​ ​working​ ​age​ ​population.​ ​This​ ​then​ ​reduces​ ​the​ ​demographic​ ​re-balance 

and​ ​would​ ​be​ ​likely​ ​to​ ​make​ ​the​ ​achievement​ ​of​ ​10,000​ ​new​ ​jobs​ ​much​ ​harder.​ ​The 

potential​ ​impact​ ​of​ ​a​ ​lower​ ​overal ​ ​housing​ ​figure​ ​on​ ​delivery​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Council’s 

Economic​ ​Strategy​ ​would​ ​therefore​ ​need​ ​to​ ​be​ ​considered. 

 

● A​ ​reduction​ ​in​ ​the​ ​proposed​ ​housing​ ​numbers​ ​would​ ​assist​ ​in​ ​overcoming​ ​existing 

opposition​ ​from​ ​many​ ​local​ ​communities​ ​and​ ​neighbouring​ ​authorities​ ​such​ ​as 

Newcastle​ ​and​ ​Gateshead​ ​who​ ​consider​ ​the​ ​current​ ​proposed​ ​level​ ​of​ ​housing 

growth​ ​to​ ​be​ ​too​ ​ambitious​ ​for​ ​Northumberland​ ​and​ ​potentially​ ​prejudicial​ ​to​ ​the 

success​ ​of​ ​their​ ​housing​ ​market​ ​areas.​ ​However,​ ​whereas​ ​the​ ​main​ ​volume 

housebuilders​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Home​ ​Builders​ ​Federation​ ​(HBF)​ ​are​ ​very​ ​supportive​ ​of​ ​the 

current​ ​version​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Core​ ​Strategy,​ ​a​ ​reduction​ ​in​ ​the​ ​overall ​ ​housing​ ​numbers 

would​ ​inevitably​ ​result​ ​in​ ​significant​ ​challenge​ ​from​ ​the​ ​development​ ​industry​ ​at​ ​any 

future​ ​examination.