Newark and Sherwood District Council agree to submit amended Allocations and Development Management Development Plan Document to the Secretary of State and planning inspector for examination and approval

An amended plan of allocated sites for development is set to be submitted to the secretary of state and planning inspector for examination.

Newark and Sherwood District Council members were presented with an amended Allocations and Development Plan Document (DPD), which sets out a number of sites across the district for housing and other development, at its last full council meeting and approved the submission with 23 votes for, six abstentions and one against.

Matthew Spoors, portfolio holder for sustainable economic development proposed the submission, and said :“The original DPD was agreed at full council in September and then issued for consultation for six weeks... and has eventually come back to full council for us to approve and then submit.

“During that period of consultation there were 123 representations by 59 representors who made comments, and you will see in the appendixes of the report the agreed amendments that officers are making to the DPD.”

Among the changes to the plan is the recommended deallocation of a planned site at Winthorpe Road, due to an environmental report on noise revealing it is not suitable for habitation.

Additionally a mixed use allocation adjacent to Newark Showground is proposed to be altered to enable the showground operations to continue to operate efficiently.

The developer, Lindum, is in the process of a land swap with the showground to alter the parcel of land panned for development.

Wording detailing a proposed hotel or conference facility is also proposed to be changed as the site cannot deliver the facility.

An agreement has also been found with the Environment Agency, which objected to the first publication DPD.

“The Environment Agency felt there wasn’t enough detail in the council’s submission for the flood alleviation scheme on Tolney Lane, however due to the fantastic efforts of the officers in providing information to the Environment Agency they’ve agreed to work with us on a statement of common ground, which will enable us to move further and faster on that particular issue and that particular site,” Mr Spoors added.

Recommendations were also made to clarify wording to ensure the document is in line with National Planning Policy Framework, there is flexibility for development at Clipstone Colliery, and to make clear the council will work with existing businesses in the countryside.

Johno Lee raised concerns about allocations in the DPD, and said: “Some of this DPD, some of this development is owned by the council. Even if its allocated, the council doesn’t need to develop it. It’s in your gift, there’s a financial burden to the council that you can decide to offset elsewhere, so by saying that it has to be developed — not really true.

“Whatever you say, whatever you do, the truth of the matter is you don’t have to do it if you don’t want to. I stand here not to echo my own election pledges, but to highlight a commitment that others made, a commitment to prevent overdevelopment, especially within the council's purview. This backpedalling from those pledges is not just a policy reversal; it's a betrayal of the public’s trust in those who made these promises.

“Moreover, this DPD places an undue some surrounding areas and some communities more than others. It's unfair for one community and its neighbours to bear the brunt of the district's development. My constituents in Balderton and the surrounding areas are shouldering a disproportionate share of this weight. This plan needs a comprehensive re-evaluation to distribute development more equitably across our district.

“In light of this, and respecting the pledges made by others, I cannot support this and will be voting against it. I urge those who promised to stop such development to reconsider and uphold their promises to our residents. It's our collective responsibility to ensure fair and balanced development throughout our district.”

Peter Harris raised concerns about the lack of challenging which could be done regarding housebuilders’ viability assessments and was backed up by Irene Brown who had had a resident speaking with her about concerns parish and town councils didn’t get enough transparency.

He said: “Frankly, the Home Builders Federation needs to take a grip on its members, because the viability assessment on one of the housing areas in my ward was set so low that in the end house prices were 100% more than the viability assessment set as a maximum they could possibly get.

“So, as a consequence there was no social housing on that area, there was very little CIL, very little additional infrastructure provided because the Home Builders Federation member said ‘oh we can’t possibly afford it, its far to expensive a site’ and so therefore the viability assessment was too low. Can I ask the portfolio holder to ensure, as I think was promised, that viability assessments are open book so they can be challenged.”

Irene Brown added: “Perhaps somewhere along the line we might be able to rectify that.”

Paul Taylor said: “My understanding is that this has been worked on for many years… and to be honest it was kicked down the road and the bulk of this work wasn’t under our control. We have addressed some of the issues that actually needed to be addressed.”

He added that it was a pity Mr Lee hadn’t been arguing his points over the years as the plan was devloped, or hasn’t been effective.

Council leader Paul Peacock, who seconded the proposal, added that he was “surprised” by Mr Lee’s comments as he voted for the allocation of the site in September 2022, and said: “It’s interesting that now you think there’s a few votes in it you decide to say you’re against it.”

He added: “We’ve got a housing crisis in this country and that’s a crisis born out of an unfettered housing market, so developers have got far too much power over local authorities in terms of where they can build and what they can build.”

“Overall our officers have worked extensively and extremely hard over a period of time. Councillor Taylor is quite right, we are now getting problems within our planning system because this has been kicked down the road for too long.

“We know if we don’t adopt this as soon as possible we’re going to keep having these problems.”