The Chairman invited the Cabinet Member for Planning to speak on Minute No. 31 (2) to give more clarity to the recommendation.  He explained that Central Government had set unrealistic housing number targets and option C was the only viable option that gave the ability to deliver on the coalition priorities as option D had too much housing in the east of the Borough and option B would encourage piecemeal development.   He added that whilst he had concern over windfall sites, guidance would be given to smaller developers and option C gave more control on what, how and where housing was built in the future.

In the discussion that followed, Members raised issues including:

·       Option C was a reluctant compromise;

·       the reference to option D as the second preferred option should be removed;

·       accepted the need for more housing but option C would change the character of Faversham;

·       should consider a more proportionate and equitable option;

·       must do what was right for the whole Borough;

·       referred to Sheppey and Sittingbourne, situated within the former Thames Gateway, historically having more development than Faversham;

·       concerned about lack of infrastructure if option C was agreed;

·       more data was required to consider option C;

·       SBC wanted control of how and where development was, and it needed to be proportionate, realistic, deliverable and meet local need;

·       option C was difficult but was the best SBC could do and it would meet the affordable housing figures;

·       against option C and should look at adapting option B; and

·       option C was the ‘least worst’.

The Cabinet Member for Planning said that option C was a steer to give an idea which sites could be included in the Local Plan and that windfall sites would more likely be in the west and rural areas of the Borough, not Faversham.  He added that he was expecting the figure of 3,000 allocated to Faversham in option C to drop.

The Leader proposed an amendment to Minute No. 31 (2) from the Local Plan Panel held on 30 July 2020: That option C was the preferred option and would form the basis of a development strategy for the Local Plan Review.  This was seconded by the Cabinet Member for Community.  On being put to the vote, Members agreed.

Resolved:

(1)  That the recommendations in Minute Nos.  738, 739 and 740 from the Local Plan Panel meeting held on 9 July 2020 be agreed.

 (2) That the recommendations in Minute No. 31 from the Local Plan Panel meeting held on 30 July 2020 be agreed, subject to an amendment to 31 (2): That option C was the preferred option and would form the basis of a development strategy for the Local Plan Review.

(3)  That the recommendations in Minute Nos. 68, 69 and 70 from the Local Plan Panel meeting held on 3 September be agreed.