Interactive webcast player

Cabinet
Wednesday, 22nd July 2026 at 2:00pm

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  2. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Peter Strachan
  2. Cllr Thomas Broom
  3. Cllr Steve Bowles
  4. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  5. Cllr Peter Brazier
  6. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  7. Cllr Robert Carington
  8. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  9. Cllr Isobel Darby
  10. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  11. Cllr Carl Jackson
  12. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  13. Cllr Adekunle Osibogun
  14. Cllr Mark Winn
  15. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Peter Strachan
  2. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Peter Strachan
  2. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  3. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  4. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  5. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  6. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  7. Cllr Simon Rouse
  8. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  9. Cllr Simon Rouse
  10. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  11. Cllr Mark Winn
  12. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  13. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  14. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  15. Cllr Michael Bracken
  16. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  17. Cllr Thomas Broom
  18. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  19. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  20. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  21. Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance
  22. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  23. Cllr Isobel Darby
  24. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  25. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  26. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  27. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  28. Cllr Mark Winn
  29. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  30. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  31. Cllr Peter Brazier
  32. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  33. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  34. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  35. Cllr Adekunle Osibogun
  36. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  37. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  38. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  39. Cllr Carl Jackson
  40. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  41. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  42. Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance
  43. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  44. Cllr Catherine Oliver
  45. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  46. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  47. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  48. Cllr Steve Bowles
  49. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  50. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  51. Cllr Thomas Broom
  52. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  53. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  54. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  55. Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance
  56. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  57. Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance
  58. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  59. Charlotte Morris - Planning Policy Team Leader
  60. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  61. Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability
  62. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  63. Cllr Peter Strachan
  64. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Robert Carington
  2. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  3. Cllr Robert Carington
  4. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  5. Cllr Robert Carington
  6. Cllr Robert Carington
  7. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  8. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  9. Cllr Mark Winn
  10. Cllr Robert Carington
  11. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  12. Cllr Isobel Darby
  13. Cllr Robert Carington
  14. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  15. Richard Wilson
  16. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  17. Sarah Murphy-Brookman - Corporate Director for Resources
  18. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  2. Cllr Robert Carington
  3. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Robert Carington
  2. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  3. Cllr Peter Brazier
  4. Cllr Robert Carington
  5. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  6. Cllr Robert Carington
  7. Richard Wilson - Investment and Development Strategic Advisor
  8. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  9. Cllr Robert Carington
  10. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  11. Cllr Thomas Broom
  12. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Robert Carington
  2. David Skinner - Director of Finance and S151 Officer
  3. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  4. Richard Barker - Corporate Director for Communities
  5. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  6. Cllr Robert Carington
  7. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Robert Carington
  2. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  3. David Skinner - Director of Finance and S151 Officer
  4. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  5. Richard Wilson - Investment and Development Strategic Advisor
  6. Cllr Steven Broadbent
  7. Cllr Robert Carington
  8. Cllr Steven Broadbent
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:00:00
Thank you. Good afternoon to everyone watching on the webcast and welcome to the Cabinet
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:00:14
meeting of Buckinghamshire Council today, Wednesday the 22nd of July 2026. Just some
basic elements at the start. Please members can I remind you and also the public to hear
you to use your microphones when you are speaking and turn them off when you are not because
this as I've said is being webcast also members of the public in the room who do
not wish to have their image captured please speak to the committee clerk and
she can advise where to sit. So that being said let's go to what is quite a

1 Apologies

full agenda today. Item number one is apologies for absence. Do we have any? No
no noted apologies for absence which is good for attendance and just
Just while we're on this item, we do have a couple of deputy cabinet members in the
room who are most welcome and will make valuable contributions to debate and discussions, I'm
sure, which they are entitled to do.
But in accordance with the constitution, they do not have the right to vote on matters.
That will be for cabinet members only, just to clarify.
So we move to item two, minutes of the last meeting.

2 Minutes

I think these are the minutes of the meeting
held on the first of July, 2026,
on pages five to 24 of the agenda pack.
Anyone have any comments or questions,
knowing you have seen these in advance?
I see none, therefore are you content for me
to approve the minutes as a correct record?
Agreed.
Thank you very much, they are agreed.
Item three is declarations of interest.
Does anybody have any specific declarations of interest?
they wish to make an addition to those already published.
No, thank you.
That is noted.
And now we'll move to item four, Hot Topics.
So Hot Topics is not a requirement of cabinet members,
but is an opportunity to draw people's attention,

3 Declarations of interest

either public, media, and others,

4 Hot Topics

to a significant outcome within their portfolio.
I just thought I'd start this time and I am clearly Stephen Borba, the leader of the council,
because I'm going to ask cabinet members to include their name and their title when they first speak.
But I do want to draw the public's attention to the so -called hosepipe bans, the water restrictions we now have in place.
They have been put forward by Anglian Water,
Affinity Water, and Thames Water,
all of whom have, to different extents,
some customers in Buckinghamshire.
It's important people go to their relevant
water company's website for more information,
but just a highlight that is happening.
And that the council are not immune to this.
So for example, in some of our parks,
watering will be reduced and so on.
so we may have parched parks for some time.
Importantly, it's also worth noting
there are some exemptions,
which is why I'm saying to go to those websites.
So for example, elements to do with animal welfare
and certain elements of health and wellbeing.
So please do cheque that.
But just thought it worth to highlight that to the public.
So that being said, I will go around the table in this order
so Peter, over to you.
Thank you, leader Peter Strachan, deputy leader
Cllr Peter Strachan - 0:03:36
and cabinet member for planning.
I usually have a hot topic,
which is progress of the local plan.
I don't have that hot topic today
because it's a significant agenda item later later.
So other than that, I have nothing to add today.
Indeed. Thank you, Thomas.
Cllr Thomas Broom - 0:03:53
Thomas Broom, deputy leader and cabinet member for transport.
As we continue to roll out our summer programme
of capital works across the county's highways,
This being part of our 120 million pound roads programme, the biggest investment in roads in the history of the county.
We are cracking on, but as I mentioned a couple of meetings ago, some elements of the programme are having to be moved around a little because of the very hot weather.
We've had a couple of instances where some key bits of machinery have slightly packed up in the heat
and that has required us to move some things around by a few days.
We very much appreciate the cooperation of residents in this and we'll try and keep everybody updated wherever we can.
The other thing I wanted to note was just once again to say to residents,
if you see our gritting fleet out in 30 degree weather, we have not gone mad, I promise.
we are using it to treat surfaces with something that will help us keep the
surface temperature of the road down and therefore stop any potential damage that
needs to be repaired. So we really appreciate everybody bearing with us as
we get through. We are trying to make these changes as agilely as we can
because of course the result of that 120 million pound road programme is that we're
moving from about 230 capital projects last year to 270 this year.
So there is just a lot more activity out on the network.
Excellent.
Thank you very much for that bit of information.
Thomas, Steve, please.
Thank you, leader.
Steve Bowles, cabinet member for communities.
Cllr Steve Bowles - 0:05:37
Just wanted to highlight the community support hub in East Chiltern's community board, which
is an example of how community boards are delivering local priorities to support thriving
communities.
In Amersham and Chesham Boys, community conversations identified a need for a supportive family
centred hub within the area to address gaps in wellbeing and social support for people
living with life limiting illnesses.
So to address this, a community support hub project was developed by the community board
in partnership with Rennie Grove.
It takes place at the Children's Lifestyle Centre in Amersham on the third Monday of
each month.
And the hub provides a friendly, inclusive environment where those affected by progressive
life -limiting illness can drop in, connect with others, chat over refreshments, take
part in general wellbeing and creative activities.
And I've got a quote from a local resident who said,
it feels nice to be out and amongst people who actually understand.
There are people from Rennie Grove at the Support Hub too,
so I know I can chat with them and they can put me in touch
with other types of local support if I need it.
So it's a great example of how community boards are actually contributing to thriving communities.
Excellent, thank you Steve, that's really good to hear. Along with thriving communities,
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:07:10
pulling out one of our golden threads from the corporate plan that we talked about at
Council last week. Thank you. Peter Brazier.
Cllr Peter Brazier - 0:07:17
Thank you Peter Brazier, cabinet member for Culture and Leisure. I have a particularly
hot topic. Please turn out that within the last hour the Leisure Centre at the Children's
Lifestyle Centre welcomed its five millionth visitor. This is well ahead of the centre's
fifth birthday in December. So we're well ahead with our projection for that particular
centre's use. It's not, so that's just the leisure centre. Overall the visitor numbers
are well above six million because we've got the library there, we've got the community
centre. So yeah, congratulations go to Rujav who got a hamper and some balloons and no
out there was a photo opportunity about an hour ago.
Rujav I assume is one of our residents using the leisure centre.
Yeah he's an Amersham resident. Excellent.
A regular gym member. Little did they know they were going to be
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:08:14
first tuned with that. It's great news. I mean it's a real example of
a very successful build out obviously first initiated by
one of the previous councils and I can see
Councillor Darby smiling because she knows that very well but
five million visitors is phenomenal.
So it is a really good site and well used.
So thank you for that.
Robert Carrington, please.
Thank you very much, Lida.
I'm Councillor Robert Carrington,
Cllr Robert Carington - 0:08:38
Cabinet Member for Resources.
I have two hot topics.
Today my first one is in regard to Shop Mobility Aylesbury,
which for those who are not aware,
is a facility which allows residents to hire a wheelchair,
scooter or power chair, or walker free of charge
when they are visiting to allow them
to visit our town centres.
The announcement is that Shop Mobility Aylesbury
will soon be relocating to a new, more accessible location.
The current site in the Upper Hundreds car park in Aylesbury
will close at 4 p .m. on Thursday the 29th of July,
so next Thursday, and the service will then reopen
at its new home in the Friar Square Shopping Centre car park
at 9 .30 a .m. on Monday the 3rd of August.
This new location will significantly improve accessibility,
not only for existing users, but also for new customers.
And it will be particularly convenient for those
travelling into town by bus or train,
allowing us to extend the reach of the service
and make certain more people are able to access
the town centre.
My second topic is in regards to a programme
which we are running this summer,
which is the Free Family Fund on Buckinghamshire's
high streets.
So residents and visitors to Buckinghamshire
are invited to enjoy a summer packed with free
family friendly activities.
A lot of these activities involve dogs,
so my cat users are welcome as well.
On the high street, not users, owners,
on high streets across Barkinshire,
with 10 towns or villages taking place
throughout July, August, and September.
This programme will feature a wide range of exciting events,
such as treasure trails, sports sessions,
community celebrations, which is delivered
by local businesses, high street partners, and the council,
and it's supported by Retail Revival Limited.
These are designed to encourage families to explore,
enjoy, and support the local high streets.
So it will be starting on the 25th of July,
running to the 5th of September.
It's going to cover Princess Risborough, Jerras Cross,
Aylesbury, Haddonham, Winslow, High Wycombe,
Chesham, Buckingham, and additional activities
will take place in Wendover and Chalfont St. Peter,
with trails, fringe events, workshops, and special offers
encouraging visitors and dog and cat owners to discover what their local high
streets have to offer. To find out more information please go onto our website
and on the family information on the webpage you will be able to discover
more details of the specific events. Thank you Robert I think you raise two
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:11:11
really good points first of all the mobility scheme and make sure we've
communicated that to have a bigger reach is is fantastic and just on activities
you're quite right on social media.
If you follow Bucks Family Info,
there's all manner of school holiday
and activity information on there
because today is formally the last day
of the academic year for those schools
that haven't already started their summer holiday.
So I hope people enjoy all of that, the good timing.
So Bucks Family Info on one of the social media channels.
I think they even have an interactive map
of lots of activities going on, so easy to use.
Thank you. Isabelle.
Thank you, leader. Isabelle Darby, cabinet member for health and wellbeing.
Cllr Isobel Darby - 0:12:04
And I thought Councillor Brazier might have mentioned this, but Councillor Brazier and I had the pleasure of opening a new play area in Alfred Rose Park in Aylesbury,
which is in one of the Opportunity Bucks wards and it is part of the Healthy School Neighbourhoods project.
And somebody might have been on a zip wire, but I couldn't possibly comment.
And we had a really good time looking at the amazing work that's been done
by the parks team to get this project to fruition, to be open in time for the school holidays.
And I know that the children who live in that area,
and possibly someone from further afield, will enjoy it.
Another part of the healthy school neighbourhoods, we have now, we had the healthy retail,
We've now formally launched the Healthy Takeaway Scheme,
where our partners Rice Marketing have been working with local takeaways
to encourage the sale of a healthy auction alongside some of the things
that some of us might on from time to time procure from such establishments.
And it was really, really good to go and meet some of these traders
and see how proactive they've been in embracing healthy eating by producing a meal which isn't
full of fat.
We sampled a wrap with grilled chicken and also a burger which was full of lots of healthy
things and very little unhealthy things.
And it was really encouraging to see how business people have said, actually, I can do this
and I can still run my business and I can still make money,
but I can actually offer people what they want.
So really good and we look forward to hearing how well that goes.
Excellent. Thank you for that.
Sounds very interesting.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:13:47
Karl, please.
Thank you, Leena.
Cllr Carl Jackson - 0:13:51
Karl Jackson, cabinet member for Education and Children's Services.
One hot topic, obviously one of the most important roles
that the council performs is to help protect vulnerable children,
children in need of protection across the county.
OSTED recently paid us a visit, a focused visit,
they call it, to see how that service is performing.
This wasn't an inspection, so you don't get a full report
and a grade, it's more kind of brief feedback on strengths
and areas for improvement.
I'm pleased to say there was a lot of positive news
coming out of it, a recognition that there are
ongoing improvements in the service,
strong relationships between children in care
and those looking after them.
They praise the visibility and experience of the Children's Services Leadership Team,
which I can certainly back up from my own experience.
And they are seeing improvements in the quality of assessments and supervision.
There's always, of course, suggestions on how you can get stronger and better at this performance.
So, AUSTEDD has recommended increased use of family networks in helping protect children,
constantly driving to increase the consistency of plans so they recognise a lot of good practise.
that focus on making sure it's great every time,
in every circumstance.
And also they like the new way the council's looking
at assessing whether children are at risk of neglect,
that they want to see it, because it's quite new,
they want to see it rolled out quicker.
And that's of course not just the council,
that's with Partners in Health as well.
It's not just the council involved in providing this service
and looking after vulnerable children.
I think importantly, as well as recognising the strengths
and providing advice on where we can improve.
Ofsted said that there are very strong foundations
in place to deliver those improvements.
So I think overall it is an encouraging report
with also some areas to focus on.
I'll just end by thanking Ofsted as always
for their candid feedback and also for the entire
Children's Services team for everything they do
for vulnerable children across the county.
Thank you and that is a very good summary.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:15:55
More to do but some real good progress.
and that confidence of Sted having in our ability to meet, you know, those further improvements is really good news.
So I echo what you're saying about the hard work of the team and I know you're working very closely with them on that.
So thank you. Ade please.
Cllr Adekunle Osibogun - 0:16:18
Yes, I'm thinking leader, Councillor Adeosha Bergen. I'm a cabinet member for Environment, Climate Change and Waste.
I have not hot topics.
Thank you very much. Mark, please.
Thank you, Lita. A couple of hot topics, if I may.
Cllr Mark Winn - 0:16:30
Mark Wind, Cabinet Member for Housing and Regulatory Services.
One huge and very successful event in Buckinghamshire was held at the start of this month.
And that event, of course, was the Formula One British Grand Prix at Silverstone.
I mention this because the Council really contributed to the success and efficiency of the event.
The event was a record -breaking event with attendance of 564 ,000 people over the four
days.
It's the best attended Formula One race event ever.
And whilst it's a showcase of motorsport, there's also a number of supporting events,
including evening concerts to keep the carats entertained throughout the weekend.
And this year's approximately 60 ,000 people camped in the local area.
And these campsites provide food and entertainment provisions.
and the council were involved in making sure that they were safe and they offered the minimum standard of immunities.
To put an event like this together involved a real partnership approach, not only between parts of this council,
but also with West North End Council. As we know, the county boundary cuts in the middle of the circuit.
but services from Buckinghamshire Council that supported the event included resilience,
environmental health, licencing, building control, communications, public health and
highways.
It was a true collaborative effort which enabled such a safe and successful event to take place.
And officers will be working together again, the Motor GP and Car Fest, which are other
significant events at the circuit, over the summer.
But an event such as the British Grand Prix, the planning for it takes place starting now
for next year.
So council staff are really involved in that.
So I want to highlight the massive involvement of staff in that.
One other short announcement.
Following a 12 week public consultation last year, the government has now confirmed it
will ban the sale of high caffeine energy drinks to children aged under 16 in England.
Many retailers have already taken voluntary action to take this step.
The ban will apply to drinks other than tea or coffee containing more than 150mg of caffeine per litre.
It will cover all retailers including shops, restaurants, cafes and online sellers.
And sales from all vending machines will also be banned.
Trading standards will be enforcing the ban alongside other age restricted products.
So I support Mark to announce.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:19:09
Thank you Mark. Yes, and thanks to you go to people from this council, officers who've helped with the Formula One Grand Prix and the deed
to the stewards who are there, many of whom are volunteers who live in and around Bucks, some from further afield.
When the eyes of the sporting world is on
Buckinghamshire, it's fantastic to see the growing success of Formula One and the British Grand Prix.
And as I've talked about before, there's a huge economic benefit not only to that event,
but the events all year round and the spinoff in advanced manufacturing and other elements
into our enterprise zone, which has a huge link into the economic growth plan.
Yeah, congratulations, Silverstone again, and the British Racing Drivers Club for the
event.
The most, as you've said, the most attended in the world.
And we're very proud to have it here in Buckinghamshire.
And there's all that unseen stuff, you know, from checking the food vans and the highways things like you say
So pulling off that is is a great endeavour. So thank you for that
Okay, that brings us to the end of hot topics which moves us to item five, which is question time
We've received one question

5 Question Time

This is from councillor Robin Stutchbury
Asked to Pete Strachan and add a Osseboogen
Councillor Stutchbury is unable to attend today to read this himself as he's participating in the relevant planning committee
That's also happening in the building. So therefore I'm going to ask and invite
The clerk of today's meeting Ellie cook to read out the question on councillor structures for half, please
And then I think Peter you're giving the response. Okay, please Ellie
Thank you. I know that the local plan sets out significant areas of housing growth
and I understand that whilst developments can be built and receive planning permission,
they cannot be occupied until utility firms and water companies have ensured that there are adequate drainage and sewerage arrangements in place.
Can the cabinet member provide details on how the council is working with Anglian Water and other relevant bodies
to ensure that adequate drainage and wastewater capacity is being delivered to support new developments
while protecting the ecological health of local water courses, including the river Great Ouse.
Thank you for the question from Councillor Stutchbury.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 0:21:37
And this response comes from myself, the cabinet member for planning,
and Ade Osiboguen, the cabinet member for Environment, Climate Change and Waste.
As discussed in some detail at the recent growth infrastructure and housing select committee,
new development must be served by adequate water services before it can be occupied.
Where there isn't adequate infrastructure at the point
when a planning application is being considered, then conditions will be applied
to phase development to limit connexions until upgrades have been carried out.
The water cycle study and local plan policy set out a capacity assessment outcome of engagement with Anglian Water,
where infrastructure investment plans are and a recommended approach to manage impacts of growth.
The Council is working with Anglian Water at the evidence gathering, local plan engagement and planning application stage,
and on their water resource planning
to ensure plan growth fully takes account
of the impact on water infrastructure.
And that answer will be contained in the minutes
as they're published.
Thank you, Peter.
So that brings us to the end of question time.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:22:55
And onto item six, the forward plan.

6 Forward Plan (28 Day Notice)

These are items on what is termed 28 -day notice.
This is the forward plan of business coming
towards cabinet and this is taken at a moment in time.
So this is updated regularly as needed
on the council website, but of course
in order to produce today's back,
it is taken at a certain moment in time,
but I do encourage people to look at the online version
for the most up -to -date one.
The one in the pack is on pages 25 to 36.
Does anyone have any comments or questions
about the forward plan, please?
No? You will note cabinet will meet again before the summer so there's a number of items that will come next week.
Okay, thank you then. You have to content and note the forward plan.
Thank you. Okay, that brings us to item seven. A substantial item of business.

7 Draft Local Plan for Buckinghamshire Consultation (Regulation 19)

This is the draught local plan for Buckinghamshire
underneath the consultation with regard to regulation 19.
This is a hugely comprehensive report
that you can find on pages 37 to 62 of the agenda pack.
And in the last two pages of that
is feedback from the Growth, Infrastructure, and Housing
Select Committee.
And I'm pleased to welcome for this item
Councillor Simon Rouse, who's the chair of that committee.
and we'll hear from Simon in a moment on the feedback from what we regard as,
what we refer to as GIH as that select committee.
I think it's just important to put some context around this.
This is, and Peter Strachan will introduce the item.
And we have Steve Bambrick here, who's the corporate director for planning,
growth, and sustainability, along with Richard Ambrose,
who's the interim service director for planning and environment.
for any technical questions.
And Charlotte, we've also got you,
so we have a full team to answer questions.
It is undoubtedly the case that the local plan for Buckinghamshire
dealing with the imposition of that 91 ,000 housing
target onto Buckinghamshire is a considerable piece of work that
will dictate not only the short term, but the 20 year period
that the plan is expected to last for.
So I'm sure there will be a number of questions around that and a lot of interest from the public.
What I think I'm going to do here, Peter, is ask you to introduce it with any immediate comments from Steve and Richard.
And then before we get to questions, I will ask for Simon to present his part of the GIA response and then we'll pick up questions.
If there are any direct questions to Simon at that point, please feel free to ask them.
But then at one point Simon will be finished and then we'll go on to questions for the
overall report.
So Peter, over to you please.
Cllr Peter Strachan - 0:25:58
Thank you Lita for the opportunity to say a few words to introduce this significant
item.
This afternoon I'm seeking cabinet approval to publish the draught Buckinghamshire local
plan under regulation 19, which is the final stage of consultation before the plan is submitted
to the Secretary of State for independent examination.
The Local Plan is one of the most important documents the Council prepares.
It sets out our strategy for managing growth across Buckinghamshire and provides the framework
for decisions on where new homes should be built, where employment land should be located,
what infrastructure is needed to support communities and how we protect our environment and heritage,
and also how we ensure our town centres continue to thrive.
Having an up -to -date local plan is essential.
Without one, the Council has significantly less control
over where development takes place and how growth is managed.
And this can lead to a greater number of speculative and unplanned development proposals,
making it more difficult to secure the right development in the right place
and to ensure that growth is supported by the infrastructure and services that our communities need.
The plan before you today has been shaped by extensive engagement and evidence gathering over a number of years.
Since 2021, we have undertaken an attitude survey, five separate call for sites exercises, consultation on the vision and objectives for the plan,
and most recently the Regulation 18 consultation on the draught local plan during September and October 2025.
The Regulation 18 consultation generated significant public interest, resulting in 1 ,345 representations.
Earlier this year we also carried out a programme of site engagement which generated more than
10 ,000 responses from residents, stakeholders and community groups.
Alongside this engagement the Council has published a comprehensive suite of technical
studies and assessments which provide the robust evidence base that underpins this plan.
The strategy proposed in the local plan is based on a clear set of principles.
It prioritises a brownfield first approach, seeks to optimise densities in sustainable and well -connected locations,
proposes two new settlements and eight large strategic extensions to our most sustainable towns and settlements,
And it allows for limited development in smaller villages where appropriate and importantly
does not allocate any new housing or employment sites within the green belt. Taken together
the strategy provides for approximately 91 ,000 new homes which is a requirement set out by
this government and around 270 hectares of employment land over the period to 2045. This
will support both the housing needs of our growing population and the economic growth
necessary to sustain a prosperous Buckinghamshire. The purpose of the Regulation 19 consultation
is different from earlier consultation stages.
At this point, representation should focus
on whether the plan meets the statutory test of soundness.
These tests require the plan to be positively prepared
by seeking to meet development and infrastructure needs,
justified by being supported by robust evidence
and representing the most appropriate strategy
when compared with reasonable alternatives.
Effective by being deliverable,
capable of implementation and subject to ongoing monitoring
and consistent with national policy,
ensuring that it promotes sustainable development
in line with the national planning policy framework.
Subject to cabinet approval this afternoon,
Again the Regulation 19 consultation will run for six weeks from the 23rd of July until
the 6th of September.
This will provide residents, businesses, statutory consultees and other stakeholders with the
opportunity to comment on the plan before it is submitted for independent examination.
This local plan represents many years of evidence gathering, engagement and careful plan making.
It provides a clear framework for managing growth,
delivering homes and jobs and protecting the qualities
that make Buckinghamshire a special place.
I therefore recommend that cabinet approves the publication
of the Buckinghamshire local plan
under regulation 19 for consultation.
And just to add leader, if I may,
I've got Councillor Michael Bracken with me today.
Michael did a page turning exercise with all of the policies and regulations that support this plan.
So Michael will be pleased if the questions come up to deal with any detail in those policies and regulations.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:31:48
Yes, thank you for that. Michael being the portfolio Deputy Cabinet Member, we will want to hear from Michael later I think.
Well thank you for pointing that out and that introduction.
Steve, Richard, Charlotte, anything you wish to add at this point?
If I may, just very briefly, Councillor Strachan mentioned the tests of soundness.
I think it's just important to emphasise in your report Paragraph 5 .2 sets those tests out.
And it's important for the council to be satisfied before we embark upon a regulation 19 consultation
that the plan meets those tests of soundness.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 0:32:31
There's a very considerable body of evidence that sits behind this plan that's also available publicly.
And that evidence sets out all of the steps, all of the necessary steps that we've taken in preparing this plan.
and also the technical evidence that sits behind the justification for the strategy.
And it's, I think, on the back of that evidence that we and I, as the professional officers,
are able to recommend to you that this plan is sound and does meet the test of soundness.
That's all I wanted to say at this stage.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:33:04
Thank you. I think that's a very important point and good to have your professional view on the record.
And I know when Simon speaks at a moment,
the select committee were very keen
to ensure they explored the elements of soundness.
I think just before we get to that,
Peter's comments have outlined the bases
of how we got here.
There is, I think as you just said, Steve,
lots of information, technical documents,
there's about 800 pages or something in the pack
beyond just the report numbers that I referred to earlier.
I just want to be very clear,
I said this would be one of the biggest impacts
for the next 20 years, and it is a 20 year plan,
so this wouldn't all happen overnight.
We have to bring this forward.
We have a legal duty to ensure that the number bestowed
upon us by government that was increased by 43 %
when this government came in, we have to show,
through tests of soundness as well,
but we have to show how possibly
those numbers can be delivered.
That is what this plan does and that is why it will subject to today's final decision.
It would go for the public to have their final say.
Can you just, I want to ask, I'm sure we'll cover things like infrastructure later because
there is no centrally committed number for infrastructure.
But ultimately this is all going to get us to a position where we say, are we, the decision
today is to go out to regulation 19.
Can you right up top just give me some certainty for members of the public who are watching
about if they give a response to this consultation, where does it go and who sees it?
Thank you.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 0:34:53
So the period for people making representation subject to today's decision will commence
tomorrow 23rd of July and will run through to the early early September.
Where those comments are made in that period the council will first of all
collate those and consider those comments and determine whether or not
there's any evidence to suggest that we can make any
recommendations to an inspector and we will then submit the plan and all of the
comments that we have received in that time period to the Inspector.
Ultimately then, the Independent Inspector will view all of those comments and the plan
and will then test those through a public inquiry and will make recommendations back to the Council
about any potential changes to the final plan ahead of the Council.
They're making a decision to adopt the final plan.
I think that's really helpful just to put that out there.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:35:51
So let's park the questions I'm sure we have and invite Simon to speak as chairman of the
GIAH select committee.
But before you do that Simon, just a bottom record thanks to you and your committee members
for the thorough job you did at this, having ploughed through a lot of that evidence base
to be able to put us through a scrutiny scenario and come up with your thoughts.
So just up front thank you for the leadership you showed on that and to
your committee members but please if you would like to give your feedback.
Thank you leader and can I just start as well by saying a thank you back which is
the committee greatly appreciated the chance to review the local plan and I
know it wasn't easy given the timelines but I think it proved to be a helpful
step in the process and as you say it was a mammoth session so I also just
want to place on record my thanks to the cabinet members that attended and
particularly the officers that attended and stayed as energised and clear in
their answers from beginning to end. It was a very long session and there was a
significant evidence base to review but the committee took its responsibilities
Cllr Simon Rouse - 0:37:04
very seriously and read it all and I would just commend in particular the
water cycle study is one definitely worth a read,
particularly when we start to talk about infrastructure.
Just to set out how the committee approached it,
so we did spend a great deal of time looking at the soundness test,
and I think the reasons for the importance of that have been set out.
And that was particularly looking at those tests and
whether it was positively prepared, justified, effective, and
consistent with national policy.
And I'll share at the end the conclusion that the committee got to.
Clearly as we were going through it, there were challenges to stay focused on the plan,
but there were inevitably moments where we crept into the implementation of the plan.
And I think some of that discussion around implementation of the plan does get to one
of the key challenges, which is the way that we communicate with residents
through this next phase of the Regulation 19.
And the committee set out some suggestions about the way to approach that,
particularly in the context that during regulation 18 there was a perception that there was some misinformation and
miscommunication about that part of the process
I think it's really important in the regulation 19 that the residents at residents understand a what's being asked of them and be what the plan
Is doing because there is a huge amount of technical
Content and so we set out two observations around making the materials easy to understand
clear presentation of mapping, particularly developments
that have occurred between March 24 and 26,
which weren't on the site map.
And I welcome the response that's been set out
and the reply that I've got that sites
with over 350 dwellings will be shown
on the policies map as committed development.
I think that will help residents to understand
how the shape of their areas is playing out
and equally appreciate the response
on the communication approach.
That also extends to town and parish councils.
There was quite a lot of discussion about the confusion that may arise about neighbourhood plans and how neighbourhood plans may interact
I know there's been a town council town and parish council presentation
and again, I think appreciate the response about how
The fit of it of neighbourhood plans with local plan will be explained. So I think that is about how the regulation 19
processes progressed
having spent some time then looking at
at the soundness tests and exploring both the strategy
of the plan and I think I would just say the committee,
a significant number of members of the committee
noted the very clear thread from the strategy
around Brownfield first density through to protection
of the green belt was flowing through into the plan
and you can see that very clearly in the way
that the housing allocation and employment allocation
has happened.
The committee then turned to the themes in the plan,
The first of which was infrastructure and clearly whilst that isn't part of the council's
It's not all in the council's gift in terms of the local plan
It is clear that confidence is needed for residents that water sewage
Transport education health care infrastructure will be delivered and funded at the right time and the committee certainly supported
the
Collaborative approach that's being sought with MPs and with other stakeholders to try and secure that funding
from government.
In particular, there is a significant concern
about the ability to deal with sewerage,
with flooding risk, and with transport,
and healthcare and education in the plan.
And I think, again, going back to residents,
that would be an important part
of the communication that's needed.
There was then quite a lot of discussion
as a committee around affordable and social housing.
That was a theme we then explored.
the committee has raised the point which I think is important which is to demonstrate how the identified affordable housing need will be met
given the split between the north and the south and the existing run rates that have been experienced.
I would just add, and again I note in the response that the cabinet has provided, that the residents and other stakeholders understanding the mix of social rent
within that affordable housing requirement is an important component to really make sure that we bring out.
And I appreciate the response again that's been provided there.
We then explored the theme of employment sites and high streets
and in particular how the local plan interacted with the employment sites to ensure that there were accessible employment opportunities.
And again the key risk that the committee was exploring was that of dormitory towns being created.
Again, I think we've set out clearly the need to demonstrate to residents that
won't be the case and appreciate again the response that's been provided to the
committee there. I would also just draw the committee's point that what was
striking in the map was the way that high streets have been protected on the
map that could be mistaken for development in the way that it was
originally set out and I do think residents are likely to welcome the
protection of high streets and would encourage that that is set out really
clearly for residents that the red line around those areas is protection not development.
We then explored the theme of data centres which is obviously a significant pressure
in parts of the county. The committee noted and I would say welcomed the fact that the
council has identified that there is an a -specific Buckinghamshire need for data centres and
I think that is really clearly set out in the supporting documents. But I think it is
important for residents to understand that doesn't remove the risk of data
centres and again the risks and the approach and the reasons for the
approach we encouraged offices and cabinet to set out the reasons for that
and again I welcome the response that's been set out. We then moved on to town
centre densification there was again significant discussion around this and
particularly I would then connect that through to the discussion that we had on
car parking and the impact on car parking.
That again is something where we think it's important
for residents to be able to understand how the council
will manage both density, densification sorry,
and the increased demand that will place on parking
whilst there will be naturally some changes
to the parking approach.
And again, the response that I've received today
does I think helpfully set out how applicants
will be required to meet that parking provision need
in any future developments.
We explored gypsum traveller sites where clearly
one of the things we wanted to test
was that the approach was justifiable
because we haven't clearly met the,
there is a shortfall currently in the need.
And again, I think the committee was clear
around the way that the windfall approach
in particular will support that going forward.
But that was an area we obviously tested
given the shortfall that was identified in the plan.
So having spent several hours going through that in detail,
and I think I would just say members certainly felt
they got to ask all the questions that they wanted to ask,
and it was a very thorough session.
We then discussed whether we felt
the soundness tests had been met.
I just wanted, in fairness to all members,
just set out how the committee approached that.
There were some members who felt
that they hadn't had sufficient time
to properly review all the materials.
I can understand that.
There was a lot for members to do.
to review and some members were particularly waiting
for some parts of materials, I think in particular
the healer assessment at that stage hadn't been available.
However, the committee then on a vote,
the majority of the committee felt that having looked
at all the evidence -based, asked the questions,
explored those themes, that they felt that the soundness
tests had been met and that was the conclusion
of our scrutiny, thank you.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:45:00
Simon, thank you and yeah, you distilled a five plus hour
meeting down into a few minutes there.
So well done on that.
You referred a few times to the response.
The response is based on the aspects
that you've just drawn out and that you'd written
into cabinet on.
That response will form part of the public pack
after the meeting.
But I think both the points raised and the response given
highlight the values you identified of having done
the scrutiny exercise.
So the very first one as you said about making sure residents found it easier to understand on the map
Those sites with planning permissions so we can do that on elements
Developments that are over 150 dwellings with permissions between March 24 and 26 and I think that
That fresh look at things by the committee was really helpful
Questions for Simon, I think, because he doesn't have to,
you know, we'll do the, as I said, we can do the select committee part before the rest of the cabinet elements of this point.
Does anyone have any specific, there was a number of us in the room,
but does anyone else have any specific questions to Simon on GIA and the feedback given?
And you may not because it was quite comprehensive.
Okay.
Simon, I appreciate you getting to the end and
recognising where the committee got to on the soundness test.
So there's an increasing degree of confidence here that we've heard from
Steve Bamberg as the corporate director that he believes it passes a soundness test.
members, although not planning professionals,
you know, at least on a majority basis,
were satisfied with that.
No one said they felt it was unsound,
which, let me ask that as a question.
Did anyone feel it was unsound?
No, I think that's an important point of clarification.
Cllr Simon Rouse - 0:47:07
The concerns were over the time
that they'd had to properly absorb all of the materials
and a couple of elements that were missing
or were due to come and you've now had in the cabinet,
but nobody expressed concerns over the plan being unsound at all.
And as I say, the majority of the committee felt able to judge that they felt the soundness test had been met.
Thank you, that's really helpful.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:47:26
So obviously the decision before cabinet today ultimately is,
do we believe it's, it basically is sound and therefore can go forward on the Reg 19 consultation.
So your comments, both yours and on behalf of the committee, are really helpful in that.
We don't have any further questions, so thank you for coming today to present that.
And whilst this will be part of the public pack, I'm now just checking.
We sent this to GRH members.
And if we haven't yet, we will do.
Because I just think it's right, given you wrote it on behalf.
We'll arrange for that to happen.
Okay, so we'll send it to chair and you can distribute it then Simon.
Maybe at the 11th hour, Councillor Wynne has a question.
Cllr Mark Winn - 0:48:22
Not a question, it's just a point out as a typo and a bit under affordable.
It says 60 % of the affordable housing requirement is for social housing.
I think that should be social rented.
Okay, well we can correct that.
and I'm getting nods from Steve Bamberg, so well spotted.
Thank you.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:48:36
Right. Thank you very much.
So now having incorporated,
because what has happened although there's a response,
some of those responses do talk about changes
such as elements of the mapping.
Steve, those things have been enacted in order
to update what's before cabinet.
Is that right?
Yes, and where, particularly in relation to things
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 0:49:01
like policies, maps, where they go live,
in effect from tomorrow, they are all ready
to go live tomorrow.
Okay, thank you.
What I think I might do, now,
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:49:11
I think we'll ask Michael Bracken
if you would just like to outline the policy element
of the local plan, because when I anticipate questions
will come that may rely partly on policy
as well as some of the modelling.
So would you like to outline how policy,
the policy elements alongside the plan,
because the plan is not just about raw housing numbers
and required infrastructure.
It's also about how have we been able to use
the policy hooks to ensure that any development does come,
has some protections or is well built,
so that Buckinghamshire isn't just carpeted
in concrete alone.
Cllr Michael Bracken - 0:50:00
Thank you, yes, I think it's a very key part actually of the local plan that will be going
out for Reg 19 consultations. So when we're talking about policies, we're talking about,
as the leader has said, matters which determine what type of development is allowed and also
how it will be done. And I think there's a really important principle that we as Buckinghamshire
Council wish to adopt in this, which is we want to be very firm but very practical. Firm
in the sense that if you are looking to extend your house, build a whole home, do a small
or large development, there will be robust decision making against all those planning
decisions for the individual developments. But it needs to be practical in that we are
not here to make life more difficult than it already is.
And I can give a very specific example of this,
which is around building regulations.
So nationally building regulations are set,
and they are set at very high and demanding levels.
This council is proposing to take a position
where we will not add additional things
on top of those sorts of areas.
And I think that's a really important thing,
and I have to say I mostly have this in my mind
for the individual homeowners and the smaller developers.
I think if you're a large developer,
you can find your way to jump through
additional complicated hoops that other councils might set.
But if you're an individual resident,
you will already have a significant challenge
for your extension or development.
And we are not looking to make that more difficult
than it needs to be.
And again, as I said, this is in contrast, I think,
to many, many other councils who often for ideological reasons load very complicated
environmental and even net zero matters into their development management policies in a
way that actually discriminates against the individual residents. Thank you.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:52:07
Thank you very much. Okay, we'll come to questions and I suspect there may be quite a few. I
Dilip really won't just go down the table,
but I saw Thomas first, so you go first,
and then I'll come round.
Thank you, Leda.
We find ourselves in the unfortunate position
Cllr Thomas Broom - 0:52:22
of standing on the latest front of the government's war
against the countryside.
90 ,000 homes is a truly ridiculous number
to impose on a county like Buckinghamshire.
It represents more than a 40 % increase
in the population of our county and it is fundamentally not based on need. I think it's
really important that we establish that at the beginning. We are going to talk a lot
I think about what we are doing to make the best of a very difficult, challenging situation,
but I also think it is incredibly important that we very firmly set out where those challenges
have come from. The 90 ,000 number that we've been given, or I think it's 91 ,000,
is the original sin of this government as far as I'm concerned. You
know this is completely out of proportion for the county and it puts us
in a position where while we were developing a local plan based on a needs
based assessment under the previous government of 60 ,000,
we have had to turn around and find an additional 30 ,000
on top of that.
Now, the reason for that, of course, is because if we don't
meet the number that we have been given, we run the risk,
as we've seen in places like Three Rivers District just
across the border, of the Secretary of State coming in
and simply directing us to allocate sites.
And there is no cap on what the Secretary of State
can tell us to do.
There is no reason, for example,
the Secretary of State could not direct us
to in fact release more sites than the 90 ,000
that are set out in our original number.
So I think there is a huge amount of work
that has gone into this process.
And I do thank colleagues and officers
for drawing this together.
We are acutely aware of the fact that we are going to have to do things in this plan that we do not want to do.
And I think we have to be straight with people about that.
But given that restriction that's been placed on us, I think the architecture we've set in place to deliver this local plan has been sensible.
that's been set up in the interests of residents and I think it has got us to
as good a place as we can get to given the limitations that we have in place.
So I plan to be supporting this today. I am somewhat frustrated that I am now
seeing, for example, some of our Labour members of Parliament going around the
the county, talking to town and parish councils, and starting to sort of say,
well, I don't think this is a very good idea.
And frankly, I don't think they should be allowed to get away with that,
because they are the reason why we are in this mess in the first place.
They all voted for this.
Some of them have continued to support these policies long after
it has been explained to them what the impact will be on their constituents.
and we need to get all of our members of Parliament together and I know that the
the leader has written to all members of Parliament across the county,
whatever their party, to implore them to help us go to the government and say
look you know you are imposing this enormous number, this is not based on
needs, this is not reasonable and you are not providing a single penny of
infrastructure alongside it and that has to change. The government has to step in
and help us in terms of providing the infrastructure
that will be needed to deal with such a huge rise,
in particularly as I say in the population of the county.
And I'm acutely aware of this within my own portfolio
because that is going to be an enormous number
of extra people, and it doesn't matter,
I've got a big emphasis in the local transport plan
on choice, it doesn't matter what choice they make
as to how they're going to get about the county,
they are going to have to get about the county
and they're gonna have to use infrastructure
to do that and frankly government must step in.
I would also say to colleagues and Simon mentioned some colleagues from other parties on the
select committee would not step forward and endorse the plan and I'm already hearing this
in some other parts of the county from some of our Liberal Democrat colleagues that they're
starting to say well this is, we should have taken other options, we should have done something
different.
I would remind those colleagues that Liberal Democrat policy would have 20 ,000 more houses
imposed on the county than even the 90 ,000 that we've received from government.
So I think this has been a very long, very challenging process.
I think we have come out with the best possible outcome that we can for Buckinghamshire.
I again would pay huge thanks to colleagues here in cabinet and to officers in terms of
getting us to this point.
But this is just the beginning.
It's going to go out for consultation, but we must start now pushing on the government
and telling them, you know, all the money in this country cannot now flow up to Manchester
and the north.
If Buckinghamshire is taking 90 ,000 homes, it must have infrastructure funding from government.
Thank you Thomas, and you're quite right. I think infrastructure, I doubt that will
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 0:58:13
be the first and only comment about that today, and you are quite right. I have written to
all of our MPs because there is a collective endeavour required here, and we will get questions
on infrastructure I'm sure because the price tag is something in the order of £6 billion
and not all of that, although the majority is expected to be covered by developers, not
all of it will and therefore it is highly likely we will need government to
make contributions. If I take your comments in the round it led me to just
want to ask Steve or Richard or indeed Charlotte. To what makes the point we have
to take the 90 ,000 and work up a plan and I said earlier there was a legal
duty to do so. Could you outline for us the risks of not having a plan please?
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 0:59:16
Yes thank you. So not having an up -to -date plan means that the council
first of all will not be in a position to demonstrate what's known as a five
important test that's used to assess whether or not there is a sufficient supply of housing
land in the system in order for us to be able to meet the requirements, the national requirements
for housing. In circumstances where you're not able to demonstrate a five year supply,
when making decisions on planning applications there's something that's known as the tilted
balance that then applies and what that effectively means is that decisions are
then made in favour of permitting schemes because you are applying a
tilted balance in favour of those schemes because you don't have a five
year supply. In turn therefore what all of that means is you're more likely to
face speculative applications that are not planned that are not and don't have
the necessary infrastructure assessments done because they by their very nature
come forward on a speculative basis and because you don't have a five -year
supply you're in a much more difficult place to resist those speculative
applications whether that's here as the decision -maker as the planning authority
or subsequently on appeal to the planning inspectorate what you're likely
to find by the lack of a plan and not having a five -year supply of housing
land is that you will find more of those speculative schemes being permitted
because we're not in a position to be able to defend them. Thank you, so there'd
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:01:11
be far less control over planned growth speculative development would mean you
know you you won't necessarily say this but an almost free -for -all for
developers and not getting the planned work that is in the plan on those sites
particularly if it then went to appeal
and a decision about Buckinghamshire development
would be made outside of Buckinghamshire.
Okay, Richard, yeah.
Yeah, I just wanted to add a couple of other bits
to what Steve's just said.
So firstly, we don't currently have a five -year
housing land supply, so we've got no defence
Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance - 1:01:45
against those speculative applications at the moment.
But also, it is a statutory duty to have a local plan,
as we've said.
And if we don't, and we've seen it for three rivers
and other places, there will be government intervention,
there will be allocations made,
they could well be in the green belt.
Thank you.
And in many ways, that was down,
the situation is down to the fact that
we were working on a plan that would have been
in the 60 ,000s, and then the new government came in
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:02:16
and upped, increased the number we had to do,
which meant let's go back round the loop
on local plan to meet 90 or 1 ,000,
which of course puts pressure on that five -year land supply.
I know this all sounds very technical,
but ultimately government wants assurance
that houses can be built,
and if they don't think the council
have enough in the pipeline to use the phrase,
then the planning decisions are expected
to rule more in favour of development
to make sure those numbers get close
to the five -year land supply.
I'm seeing nods, so I don't think I've erred
from the, you know, I'm not a planning professional,
but just trying to make sure people watching
are able to appreciate the steps and the balances
we've got to do on this challenging endeavour.
I've got a huge list of people, Isabel.
Yes, thank you very much, Lida,
Cllr Isobel Darby - 1:03:14
and unsurprisingly, my questions are going to be,
or my questions and comments are going to be health related.
I mean, first of all, in terms of the plan itself,
and this is in no way meant to criticise the team
that have produced it, we are making the best of a bad job.
We have been given an impossible task, really,
to buy this Labour government to find places for over 90 ,000
houses in Buckinghamshire.
And we know the growth statistics
show that we don't need that many houses in Buckinghamshire.
The government just wants us to have them.
So unsurprisingly, people like our colleagues in health
are not looking at any kind of growth like that.
They're just looking at normal population growth
and it makes their job incredibly difficult.
I mean, we don't know who is gonna come
and live in these houses once they've been built.
We don't know is it going to be an ageing population
or is our demographic gonna change?
We've got no idea.
So we really are venturing into very new territory.
But my concern is for the people that live here now
and for the people that will be perhaps moving on from, you know, a family, kids being able
to continue to live in Buckinghamshire, is what are we doing
about the public health infrastructure, I would call it.
So I'm not necessarily talking about so much the hospital buildings, although that is really,
really important because we need hospitals, we need GPs, we need pharmacists,
all the things which our residents are now telling us.
Every time there's a planning application for more than one house almost,
these are the things like we need better roads better transport because
Everything is creaking but the public health infrastructure in terms of the environment
We're building if we're going to build all these houses
What are we doing to ensure that we are creating?
high quality
usable
Green environment and you know stuff like active travel getting kids to walk to school that kind of thing
What are we doing? What are we doing to ensure that that is there because we surely have a duty if we are having to
Take on this burden of all these houses. We have a duty to make sure that what we're building is high quality
It's fit for purpose fit for the future to ensure that our residents
Maintain their healthy lifestyles and improve them
I'll look over in that direction see
Yes, thank you. Thank you for the for the question. So
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:05:45
Perhaps just to break that down in a couple of areas.
So in terms of the preparation of the plan itself,
we've obviously worked very closely with
public health colleagues, but also wider partners,
health partners as well, in the development of the plan.
And there are a number of different policies
that are contained within the plan,
as Councillor Blackhand mentioned earlier,
that set out some of the public health priorities
and how we expect them to be delivered
through new developments.
We do have, as part of this plan,
for the first time, a healthcare infrastructure calculator.
So that's something that we haven't had before
in Buckinghamshire, and that is something
that will set out how new developments,
the types of new developments,
and how those new developments will make contributions
to new healthcare infrastructure
that will help support those new developments.
And again, that's been developed in partnership
with healthcare partners and that also is important as part of the overall infrastructure
delivery plan that they contributed to that and been able to set out what their needs
are.
I think as well just in terms of the new developments themselves, what we've also got as part of
the suite of documents with this local plan is a new design code for new developments
and what that does as well, it sets out some of the really important design principles
that we will want to see developed as part of the creation of new places.
So again, that will not just be talking about what the new buildings might look like, but
actually the spaces in between those buildings, what sort of quality we expect them to be
and how usable they are in the process to enable those healthy communities that will
use those spaces in the future.
So there's a number of different ways in which we've sought to address that challenge.
And obviously it will be important for people to see when they engage with the consultation
if there's more that they would like to add to that because those are the things that
are going to be create the places of the future.
Thank you.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:07:57
So and on the on the spatial part of green space, knowing how important it is to and
one of the key tenants of being in Buckinghamshire is our reasonably close proximity to the countryside
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:08:13
in green space. How have you picked that part up? So again number of policies in the plan that support
for example active travel and also our kind of connexion to both existing green spaces and some
of those green spaces that people already value. So that again we've got a number of those areas
as part of the development of the new sites and the connexion into existing spaces that support
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:08:42
those active links. Okay thank you. Mark Wynne please. Thank you leader. Firstly I want to
Cllr Mark Winn - 1:08:46
really associate myself with the comments that Councillor Broome made
about the Labour government and imposing 91 ,000 houses on Buckinghamshire. It's a
really ridiculous total but we have to unfortunately work with it and in terms
of working with it. One thing that has changed in the planning system that didn't exist under
the last Conservative government was before we used to have housing improvement funds,
this time all the owners is on the developer providing all of the infrastructure, so that's
the roads, the hospitals, they're really putting a contribution in there. And as Thomas quite
rightly said, the performance of our Labour MPs in particular in terms of actually pushing
that infrastructure so far has been woeful.
They really do need to up their game in working
with their own Labour government to push
for those things that we want.
One thing that is highlighted
within the report is the fact that affordable housing.
And to get that affordable housing built is going
to be very difficult, especially with the infrastructure there.
And one thing I want to do as the person responsible
for trying to build more social homes in the county is to actually put together a housing
pipeline, really working with developers, working with planning, working with social
housing providers to make sure that those homes are built.
Because otherwise we could end up in the situation such as the Labour Mayor in London, Mayor
of 40 watt homes actually manage 8 ,184, absolutely missing the target and they are missing the
target every single year and we need to work hard as a council to make sure that we're
not in that position and I want to make sure that happens. One of the things that I know
people have commented on are that there is 40 % in the south of the county and 25 % in
the north and that is one of the problems of the infrastructure. If we were to press
for the 40 % across the county, we simply won't achieve it. We'd be in the position of Mayor
Kahn absolutely failing. So we need to get that pipeline together and we need to endorse
what the plan says in terms of that. One thing that Housing needs to do, and this was highlighted
in the LGA's peer review is to actually,
and I'll sort of quote the thing here,
is to line our housing strategy,
which was delivered a couple of years ago,
with asset management and our regeneration plans
for the town centres.
And I think it's real opportunity to do that.
But one thing that does come up, I think quite a lot,
is the high density.
One of the things about high density
is we will be building on some of our assets,
but also some of the car park.
And I just wondered if we could have a question
on the impact of parking within our town centre
as a result of that.
Car parking then please.
Yes, thank you.
So, and again,
I think important to emphasise the point actually
that as part of the overall strategy for the plan,
and this point has been made
on a couple of occasions today,
there is a real focus on trying to maximise the provision on Brownfield town centre locations.
Alongside that there comes a choice around how we ensure that we've got sufficient car parking
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:12:33
but we don't over provide car parking in those locations where there may be alternative choices for people to move around.
We do have policies in the plan that seek to mitigate that impact, so we are not saying as part of this plan that every single car park, for example, that's included in the plan will automatically be built on without any further assessment.
The policies within the plan talk about ongoing assessments being undertaken as part of the
release of any sites that come forward to ensure that as they come forward we can be
satisfied that there are sufficient spaces that exist within the vicinity and that there
are appropriate mitigations in place.
So there will be a process of those ongoing assessments.
But again, to emphasise, the choice that we're having to make as part of this is to maximise those brownfield locations.
We will have to make some compromises in terms of parking provision in those better accessible areas.
But that is enabling us to adopt the strategy which means we're minimising greenfield and particularly greenbelt locations as a result of that.
Thank you. Peter Brazier, please.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:13:45
Cllr Peter Brazier - 1:13:49
Thank you, Leader. Continuing with the infrastructure theme, I think.
But I just wanted to repeat the feeling that we're finding ourselves in this ridiculous, and everybody's saying ridiculous,
I was trying to find another word, but it's all got written down here, where we're having to work with these housing numbers that have just been imposed on us,
dictated by this Labour government,
with no evidence of need, no evidence of deliverability,
and of course, as we've discussed,
no money for infrastructure.
In my board, we're looking at a tripling
of the number of houses,
just because we've got a train station.
It's proposed that a new town that's bigger than Buckingham
be created around this station, but with no A roads,
It's just rural B roads littered with single track,
canal bridges, even the bridge to the station itself
is single track, although that's earmarked to be upgraded.
So none of the roads in that area have footways,
cycle lanes, anything.
They are glorified farm tracks
that have been tarmacked over.
So Buckingham, the comparison town I've just used there,
has the A413, the 422, the 421,
and a bit of a bypass that links them all together.
It's got that level of infrastructure.
No such infrastructure is proposed
for this Cheddington new town.
I've written the word yet here,
because that's me hoping.
So, but I've got experts telling me
this is never gonna happen,
because developers won't build in such an infrastructure
expensive location.
But we're putting our residents through this pain,
threatening their very rural life.
And there's even talk about house prices being depressed,
thanks again to this government's vanity housing targets.
But we do have to have a local plan.
Not having one, the potential is even worse.
So we must have a made plan so we can remain in control
of development in this county.
So I will be supporting the recommendation that we go
for regulation 19 representations
and I will be making some representations.
But this is about infrastructure and I do have a question
at the end of this.
Can we talk a bit or can you tell us a bit
about how the infrastructure providers have been involved
in this process?
Obviously we've got health,
which Councillor Darvidge has mentioned, but utilities.
I understand that Cheddington -Newtown is going to require a quadrupling of the power supply
to that area because it just, it's farms.
So water companies, highways, have they been involved in the development of this plan please?
Okay, I think there's quite a lot in that and I don't want to turn this debate into
any ward specific elements.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:16:50
Obviously we are brought through a local plan that reflects the needs and the demands put
on it of the entire county.
It's very clear there's a huge infrastructure requirement as will be the case when there's,
if you like, a lack of infrastructure existing already.
And that's why, and you can see this on the table on page 46,
talking about that approach of brownfield first,
growth of it which is about 14%, growth on existing towns around 17%, and so on.
But we can't get away from some of the new expansion areas of which
you made reference to a couple.
Within all of that though, you will notice between regulation 18,
which was when the sites were first proposed, and regulation 19,
some of those areas have, you know, have had numbers reduced,
and some new areas have been brought into the plan,
partly because of the technical work done.
So all that in the round, if you could, how have we got to viability on sites,
particularly linked to infrastructure and as Peter said what is the
involvement of infrastructure providers it's not the council doesn't provide a
GP doesn't provide a gas main and so on so can you maybe give some reassurance
and clarity overall how that came together please Steve. Yes thank you
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:18:28
perhaps three areas of the evidence base to highlight in all of that so the
evidence that sits behind the allocations that are in the plan. First
of all we've got detailed transport modelling that's been undertaken on all
of those sites and for pretty much all of the sites there are requirements that
flow out of that that then are contained within the plan and particularly in
those areas which are subject to large -scale growth. We have policies in
the plan that seek or require all of the sites within those areas to contribute
to those infrastructure upgrades. So to tie those things together to avoid the
kind of piecemeal picking off of development of sites without the
necessary upgrades and on transport in particular there are several hundred
mitigations across the whole of the plan area that are expected to come forward
then as part of the part of the development. You've also heard today
from Councillor Rouse about the water cycle study and so that's another key
piece of evidence that we've again we're required to do we've developed in
consultation with water companies across the whole of the county area and as part
of that piece of work we're able to identify with them what infrastructure
upgrades are needed and some of that will be infrastructure upgrades that
that will be funded by new developments.
Some of it is through them properly and appropriately
planning their investment plans to bring forward
the upgrades at the right time.
And then in more broader terms, again,
as I've mentioned earlier, an infrastructure delivery plan
is part of the evidence base as well,
which pulls together all of the necessary
infrastructure requirements.
And again, working with not just internal groups
within the council, but also, as I mentioned earlier,
healthcare providers, water companies, electricity providers,
to make sure that they, A, are aware
of where the developments are proposed, and B, can both tell us
where the, what requirements might be needed,
and that they can then also make sure that they've got
in their investment plans the necessary infrastructure update.
So all of those are very significant pieces of evidence.
They've all been produced as part of the development
the plan and they also inform the mitigations that are then contained
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:21:01
within the plan. And Steve could you just in case people are watching so even if
this plan was adopted as is by the inspector says you can now do you know
there's nothing nothing to add and it comes back what happens on an
infrastructure assessment when a developer comes forward to build a site
that's been allocated please.
So there's certain requirements on site A
that might come forward as a planning application
will have requirements that are then contained
within the policy of the plan.
And that's been informed by the evidence.
But we will, depending upon when that site comes forward,
we will of course need to then assess and understand
at that point in time, are those requirements still
the requirements for that site, are there any upgrades
or any further requirements that have,
since the adoption of the plan, that are necessary.
Our starting point will remain, what does the plan say,
but we will of course assess the, you know,
at the time of the planning application,
we will then assess any new requirements
that might come out of that, and we will also do
updated viability assessments, et cetera,
all as part of the planning application process.
But the starting point for any application is what does the plan say and it will then
just be assessing is there any evidence to suggest we need to depart from the plan.
Okay, thank you.
I just think that's important.
We've talked about being a 20 -year plan that we have to do and of course what's in there
now as you said it might need updating and any development comes through the normal planning
process then.
I think you've just said we use this as a starting point,
but of course it isn't, well, 15 years ago you said this
and we're not doing anything else, it'll be updated.
Hopefully that will help give some reassurance
as well to residents.
I've got Ade next, please.
Thank you very much, Lida.
I think I do adopt the comments of the previous speakers,
Cllr Adekunle Osibogun - 1:23:03
particularly Councillor Broome and Derby.
But I'll also add to it that in spite of the vindictive approach of the central government
towards Box Council and the adversity that this council has faced, we as Conservatives
have been able to abide by our pledge of protecting the Green Belt.
I emphasise that because as the cabinet member for Environment, Climate Change and Waste,
I think that achievement is a big landmark which I hope our residents are appreciative of.
And as a northern council as well, I also do appreciate the work the officers have done in ensuring that densification, prioritisation of brownfield sites are also implemented to ensure our green spaces and our green fields up north
are impacted at the minimal level.
But what I'd like to emphasise,
because I heard during Councillor McQueen's comments,
he talked about the division between the north and the south
when it comes to affordable housing,
whereby we have a 40 % housing target,
in the south and 25 in the north.
I know this is a piece of the plan that has been quite contentious of north, being why
do we have separate systems despite the ambition to harmonise our planning system.
I have listened in the past as to how it ensures that our plan is viable, but can I just also
hear from our office, particularly Steve Bamberg, to give us that for the reassurance that these
numbers have been properly evidenced and without these numbers we may not have a viable local
plan.
So I'd like to hear that response from Steve.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:25:20
So by the numbers you mean affordable housing?
Affordable housing.
25 % up north and 40 % down south.
So the local plan, previous consultations had consulted on 40%.
That is not what's including.
Here this is in the Old Aylesbury Vale area, 25 % affordable housing allocation
and 40 % in the south and that does raise eyebrows.
So why is that the case, Steve?
So thank you.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:25:48
So that's absolutely correct.
At the Regulation 18 stage, the previous consultation stage,
we set out our ambition to achieve 40 %
given the priority that we have
for delivering affordable housing.
One of the other pieces, key pieces of evidence
that's been conducted since the Regulation 18
is now part of the evidence base for the Regulation 19.
Again, a requirement of the plan preparation
is a viability assessment, and what that does
Is it tests the overall viability of the plan as well as our large allocated sites?
And it looks at things like what are the land values but also what are the infrastructure costs in those particular sites?
What what are the areas of cost of those areas of the county and the sites expected to?
Pick up as part of bringing those forward what that viability?
assessment has told us is that it is not achievable for us to have a single
blanket policy of 40 % across the whole of the county and that's why the plan
that's before you today has a requirement in the south of the county
of 40 % because the viability assessment tells us that is achievable but one of
25 % in the north. Now that is actually consistent with the existing policy
across the county so whilst we are operating from the kind of legacy
previous local plans the policy requirement in the south of the county
is actually in some cases higher than 40 % but in general terms is 40 % in the
north of the county it is currently 25 % and we're actually quite close to
achieving that 25 % in the north of the county. If we were to ignore the
viability evidence and say well we understand what that says but our ambition is just to get to 40 a
We won't deliver that because the viability assessment is telling us that that's not deliverable
And because it's not deliverable that means we will we will fall foul of the test of soundness
And so we would also I wouldn't be sat here today being able to say and recommend to cabinet
That we have a plan that will meet the test of soundness
So we're following the evidence and the evidence is telling us that we need to have that differentiated approach.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:28:11
Thank you Steve. I think that's really important because the inspector will look at, have you got the sites, have you got the numbers and so on,
but then really test the deliverability point to say is it a viable plan and they will be undoubtedly very robust in doing that.
and that's why there's 800 pages of technical work
so that the inspector can satisfy themselves
that it's been rigorously tested.
I know your comments about the green belt.
We undoubtedly need to protect the green belt
because it's only there once,
but actually we've also,
we've talked about brownfield sites
and we've talked about other use of other land,
and Brownfield town centres and so on.
That is aligned with national planning
policy requirements as well,
which means in order to incur anything in the Greenbelt,
you would have to prove extraordinary
special circumstances which do not exist
if there are sites elsewhere outside of the Greenbelt
that are deliverable.
And so there's been,
complete balance across the counter, but it is very important that the green belt is protected.
But equally, everything we're saying about the policy work, the design code to make sure
that what protections do exist is therefore green spaces and towns and the build out beyond
the green belt as well.
We talk about how special Buckinghamshire is.
We've got to make sure if this comes forward that it's built,
that means Buckinghamshire is still a great place to live.
Albeit, it will by its nature be changed by 900 ,000 homes coming in.
And someone earlier made reference to the regeneration plan.
So in our town centres, the building of more housing, including affordable,
will be linked to employment sites, regeneration and so on.
And I think we can't lose sight of those elements as well.
And that will play a part in the infrastructure assessment.
But this all loops around, as you've just heard,
including the affordable housing numbers
to that huge cost of infrastructure
when you impose this level of house building on the county.
Anyway, that being said, I've got Karl and then Catherine.
Thank you, Nita.
Cllr Carl Jackson - 1:30:43
I'd like to thank Councillor Peter Strachan,
Michael Bracken and everyone in the planning team for what I think is an excellent piece of work under very difficult circumstances.
Between you, you have steered a course between a very, very high target,
a desire from residents to see our green spaces, particularly Greenbelt and AOMB protected.
And I know a very pressing timeline and regular checkups from the relevant government ministry.
So, you know, I want to thank you for doing that, particularly since I think
the draught plan delivers on so much of what residents would want to see.
Just over a year ago, like a lot of people around this table,
I was putting more leaflets through doors and let residents probably wanted to see.
And one thing it said on all of them was we will do everything we can to protect the green belt.
And through this draught plan, I can look my residents in the eye in little chow fun,
Charles and Charles, Sierk, Green Jordans, Colesville and Chaney's and say,
we've got a long way to doing that and keeping our promise.
I of course completely agree with Councillor Broome's
incredulity at criticisms of the amount of housing
coming in from Buckinghamshire's Labour MPs.
For them to criticise the amount of housing
under this plan is a bit like someone turning off
the heating in the middle of winter and then
complaining that the house is getting cold.
They are directly responsible for these housing
numbers which bear no relation to need and that's
something they need to think about.
I have two questions, one on sort of evolving government policy, which might be one for
Steve, and another very mundane one, if you'll forgive me.
There's been recent announcements on changes to the level of protection for AOMBs, and
also sort of evolving guidance on building on green belts near railway stations.
How is that taken into account, or will be taken into account, as this local plan continues
to evolve?
And second and this consultation is not to escape our attention pretty much perfectly lines up with the summer holidays
We obviously want to maximise participation. We want to all our residents to know and to respond and that's not our choice of timetable. I
Had some comments last time from residents on the engagement exercise on the sites
Maps saying I'm struggling with the portal. Can I submit responses by email? Can I submit responses in writing?
Sort of what are we doing to kind of maximise the way that residents can respond to the consultation?
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:33:11
Two for one there, so but I think I think the second one's really important for residents to understand how they could participate
Steve
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:33:20
So if I may just take the first one, I think Richard will pick up the second piece. So
There have been recent changes in terms of the MPPF and what that might be saying about particularly around
well -connected locations and the kind of presumption
in favour of development in those locations.
We have taken those changes into account
as part of the development of the draught plan.
And again, what I would say is that, you know,
our strategy remains our strategy
and provided we continue to deliver on our strategy,
then the opportunity for speculative developments
that come forward that might otherwise
accord with the MPPF remains more limited. It's when we step away from our strategy and
stop delivering it or slow down that the spectre of further speculative schemes coming forward,
either on those sites or on other sites, runs its course. We will of course, until the plan
is adopted, if there are very significant changes to national planning policies, we
will be expected probably through the public inquiry and the examination to respond to
those. The Inspector may ask us to look at certain changes or certain modifications because
the national policy has changed. We will just need to be agile through the process to respond
to that as would anybody going through that process. But for the purpose of where we are
today, we've taken into account the most up to date national policy and that's reflected
in the plan.
If I could just say a little bit about the communications.
Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance - 1:35:01
So yeah, multi -channel communications, we've got a big strategy around this to try and
encourage and make it as easy as possible for people to respond.
So that not just includes the websites, we will have customer contact and customer services
will be helping to support people.
We'll have it at libraries, town and parish councils, ward members themselves will help
push this.
So we've got various channels.
In terms of how we accept those responses,
so we are really trying to push people
and encourage them to use our online platform.
That makes it so easier for analysing it
and for passing it on to the inspectors in due course.
It's not that we won't accept emails,
we're just strongly trying to encourage people.
And we will have in the main libraries
and in the council buildings,
officers who can help people actually put them
onto those platforms.
So we're doing everything we can to support
and help with that.
But we will get some from emails and it's not that we won't accept those.
Right, thank you.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:36:01
Catherine Oliver.
Thank you.
Cllr Catherine Oliver - 1:36:07
How do the transport and infrastructure requirements in the local plan relate to
the priorities in the local transport plan?
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:36:18
Yes, Steve, I mean, because we know we've,
alongside this was local transport plan five
that isn't formally part of the local plan
but works alongside it.
So a good question.
How do they link at this stage?
Yeah, thank you.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:36:31
So people will have seen recently the council agreeing
local transport plan five and again important
to kind of point out the distinction I guess
between the two documents.
So the local transport plan sets the kind of strategic
direction and ambition and also talks about how we might over time better
connect the county and make the county operate more effectively from a
connectivity point of view. What the local plan is assessing
particularly comes to transport priorities is what are the requirements
that are arising as a consequence of the new developments that are being proposed.
So how do those new developments,
or how can those new developments be accommodated,
and what improvements are necessary
to make those developments acceptable?
That's different, and it's less strategic than the LTP.
But take the two documents together,
the LTP and the local plan,
then look at how are we accommodating growth,
and what are our strategic priorities.
And in relation to our strategic priorities,
that's when we then get into a conversation about
how are those strategic priorities funded,
and where are those conversations that we can have
with government and others about funding that.
Probably the most relevant and important
of those strategic priorities that we talk about a lot,
and is in the LTP, is for example the Aylesbury link,
so the rail link from Winslow, East West Rail,
into Aylesbury, and the connectivity,
and the improvement in connectivity that that can bring
is one of those strategic ambitions
that we want to be able to deliver.
Thanks Steve.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:38:17
I know we could go around the table multiple times,
so as much as I don't want to have a huge guillotine
on debate, I am mindful we want to cover,
we have other things on the agenda.
So I have two or three quick fire questions to put out,
but before then, I've got Steve Bowles, then Thomas Broom,
and then I'll ask mine and then we'll move to conclusion.
Cllr Steve Bowles - 1:38:44
Great thanks, thanks very much. Firstly I'd like to congratulate the team on
producing a really robust plan that I'm happy to support. I would concur with Councillor Broome
and colleagues having 91 ,000 houses imposed on us with no evidence of need or infrastructure
funding is absolutely ridiculous and I would call on our Labour MPs to go back to their government,
stand up for bucks and fight for infrastructure funding.
My question is, the local plan mentions
densification in town centres.
How much land in town centres is owned
or controlled by the council,
and what does the council play in delivering these sites?
Yeah, thank you.
And so there's a very significant proportion of land
within town centres that the council has responsibility for.
You heard earlier on from Councillor Wynne the question around car parks, for example.
So there are a number of council owned car parks that have the potential to contribute.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:39:51
And so there'll be decisions that the council will be required to make
in terms of releasing those sites.
The inclusion of the local plan does not equal a decision to release the site.
That's for a future decision to be made.
But in overall terms in the plan there are 33 sites in combination within our town centre
and within the council ownership and in total I think we estimate that that could contribute
around about 4000 of the total and again to put that into some context we've got around
about 13 and a half thousand in our town centres and well connected locations so roughly speaking
around about a third of that is within council ownership and within the council council.
So we play a significant role in bringing forward those prime field sites that will
also contribute to the regeneration priority.
Good, thank you. Thomas?
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:40:44
Cllr Thomas Broom - 1:40:47
Just very briefly, I think a lot of us here today have raised some of the challenges that
we face. But almost everybody has also said that we are going to be voted for and supporting
the plan and I think the reason for that is because at every stage of the
formulation of this plan we have made sure that we prioritise the things that
we know that residents want. So we have pushed for Brownfield first, we
have protected greenbelt and green spaces wherever we can, we have looked to
densify rather than add additional sites that would mean that more of the
countryside is lost. And so while there are some really really challenging
circumstances that we find ourselves in, I think there is a positive message in
terms of how we put this plan together and wherever we can we will wring out of
this benefits for Bucks residents even against a very very difficult backdrop.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:41:47
Thank you I'm sure that yeah that's absolutely right and we made a couple of
references to corporate plan. But you know shaping great places having thriving
and communities aren't just words.
They mean you have to look at something like the local plan
and say, how do we make this work best for BUGS residents
and reflect them?
So thank you for those comments.
So three quick ones, and maybe it's
one for Steve, Richard, and Charlotte each.
I don't know.
One is, could you just outline the approach
to employment land?
Because I know it was referred to in the GIAH work.
It isn't just, whilst there is a strong basis
around our existing employment sites,
enterprise zones and so on,
to create a thriving community.
So could you just outline that,
particularly with an emphasis of where they are
across the county and what type.
We've touched through that conversation on data centres,
and we've also heard from Michael
about some of the policy elements.
but maybe Richard you could outline the importance
of a criteria based approach to things like data centres
because as we said earlier,
that doesn't take away the risk of applications coming in,
but it is a step change in the armoury that the council have
or rather the framework the council has,
the toolbox in dealing with those.
And Charlotte I know we have this outline maps and plans
on some of the nest sites on,
as the new and expanded settlement areas.
In particular on the website.
And I'd just like to communicate to residents
how your view on how they are put together
and where they sit on being illustrative
rather than prescriptive
in terms of what the site layout might be like.
So hopefully that helps.
Employment lands, criteria -based policies,
and outline plans.
Okay, so thank you, we'll take them in that order.
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:43:47
So if I deal with the employment land position first.
So similar to the approach to housing, we have an overall requirement for
the amount of employment land we need to provide through the plan period.
For us, that's 219 hectares of employment land.
The plan that's before you today is actually proposing to allocate
270 to 270 hectares of employment land.
So a small over provision,
but that's principally because we are also
allocating growth in some of our key areas.
One of those key areas in particular
is Westcott Venture Park,
which is in the north of the county.
We've got also existing commitments of around 124 hectares.
So these are sites that have either
already got planning permission or are in existing plans
that we're rolling forward.
So all of those in combination means
that we're bringing forward a suite of employment sites
across the county.
On top of that, we have policies that seek to protect
key employment sites in the county.
So as well as providing new employment provision,
protecting 42 of our most important employment sites
in a variety of locations across the county.
And then on top of that, our key strategic employment sites.
So I've mentioned Westcott, but we've got Woodlands, Silverstone,
all in the north of the county, and also Pinewood in the south of the county.
All of which are contributing to our priorities in our recently adopted
growth plan.
Those are also our key strategic employment sites that we're protecting and
wanted to deliver more employment uses on those sites as well.
That's the suite of policies that set out our approach to employment provision
in the plan.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:45:40
Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance - 1:45:42
Thank you. So I can say a little bit on data centres. So we know there is a national demand
for that driven by AI, clouds, computing and data intensive industries. However, not necessarily
a local need around those. So just to say, we'll reiterate the point that no site allocations
are in the local plan for data centres. However, what we have done is develop a flexible criteria
based policy and that policy talks about making sure
any proposals that come forward are in suitable locations.
Probably most importantly they have the required
infrastructure in place, so particularly they are
heavy users of electricity and water, so making sure
they're in place before any proposal got agreed.
And also that they don't undermine that wider
employment strategy.
So we try to be quite positive around this knowing
the national approach and how decisions are made.
So positive but cautious ensures flexibility
in this fast changing sector.
But there are and there are also a number
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:46:42
of criteria based policies in different areas,
not just data centres that mean the council
have got more frameworking to rely on
when they come forward through the normal planning process
as opposed to just the local plan,
which we haven't always had before.
So, there's, you know, some policy work is there to assist in the assessment of those sites.
Is that correct?
Yeah, that's absolutely correct.
Richard Ambrose - Service Director for Resources and Corporate Finance - 1:47:08
We've really focused on that framework, those criteria -based policies.
Excellent, thank you.
And Charlotte?
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:47:14
Charlotte Morris - Planning Policy Team Leader - 1:47:16
So, in terms of the concept plans which are included within the plan,
these are for our 10 sites that have been identified through the new and expanded settlement process.
So these plans are very much concept.
They show how the policy requirements could be delivered within that site.
But I think it's important to understand that that's just one way that that site could be
delivered.
So it's very much concept and the planning application stage will need to have a robust
master plan of the whole entire site.
And it will be through that development management process in terms of the implementation that
will finalise the different land uses within those sites.
So within the plan, there's concept plans
which just reflect how that site could be delivered.
Thanks Charlotte.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:48:05
So as much as people might say,
if I don't like that layout,
they're conceptual to try and help bring numbers
and policies into something more visually meaningful
for residents, but obviously is not a prescription
of what definitely will go where
at some point in the next 20 years.
Correct.
Yeah, great, okay, thank you.
And the last point, I just would seek some clarification
on it, it was partly to do with the proliferation
of data sets, sites, or all the development sites.
Steve, can you just outline, we've said it's for 20 years,
I don't believe there's any control over the ordering,
the timing, the chronology of when those sites come forward.
If this were a plan to be adopted,
Then it's kind of developers in the market based on deliverability
Availability infrastructure that would determine the proposals other than anything that's on a council owned site. Is that correct?
It's not like we can say what comes first
To some extent so yes, absolutely. We've got control over the sites that the council owns as part of the
development of the plan
Particularly on relation to housing sites. We will be required to agree
with the inspector a trajectory of housing and
Steve Bambrick - Corporate Director for Planning, Growth & Sustainability - 1:49:25
In order to do that what what I mean by that is the overall amount of housing that's going to be built each year
In order for us to be able to meet over 20 years the 91 ,000 now what that trajectory will show is that for the first few years
We will not make it to make the big step change in terms of the developments that will happen
Because of course those developments will need to work their way through the system
So in the first few years, what we will be building out
are sites that we already know about
and probably have got permission
and are already in the system.
Over the next four or five years,
the new sites will then come on stream
and there will be some requirements,
well, they'll each have their own requirements
and depending on how onerous those requirements will depend
on the timing of their delivery.
But in general terms, that will be a decision
for the developers to bring them forward.
It's not our decision, but we will want to try and match our trajectory to the sites as they come forward
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:50:25
Okay, that's helpful. Thank you. Okay. Look, I think we've had a
significant debate on that. I'm going to turn back to Peter for any succinct concluding remarks and then
for you to take us through the recommendation and then we'll be lucky to vote. So Peter
over to you, please
Cllr Peter Strachan - 1:50:44
So don't worry I do succinct and I'm not going to attempt to summarise the last hour and a half
Clearly, this has been well debated and I think it's important to be so because of the
members of the public watching what we're doing.
So it's very important to give it a good airing.
Now, in reality, none of us like this plan.
It is imposed upon us.
But the alternative to not having a plan would really provide a significant disservice to
our residents because then we would have unlimited unfettered development where
we have no control whatsoever. So we don't like it but I think we all
recognise its necessity. I'm very grateful to the officer team sitting in
the bottom corner there who put so much work into this to get us to where we are
now. I heartily recommend that we endorse this plan. There's not really an
alternative, frankly.
I'm very grateful for all of your contributions
this afternoon.
And I think we've had a good, very healthy debate.
I'm also grateful to Simon Rouse for his work
with the scrutiny committee.
I think that's added another layer to it
so that we can all understand exactly
what is going on here.
I absolutely endorse this plan.
I'd be grateful for your support with it.
And I will say no more than that.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:52:13
Thank you Peter, so it brings us to the recommendations. These are quite lengthy
I intend to take them on block unless anyone has a final objection and that's
that the local Buckinghamshire local plan pre submission plan in appendix 1 and
supporting documents are published in accordance with regulation 19 of the
Town and Country planning local planning regulation as amended and other relevant
legislation so therefore we publish the Buckinghamshire local plan pre -submission plan and the supporting
documents for a period of six weeks as by the way we are statutorily required to do
commencing no date and then 23rd of July i .e. tomorrow.
And that two, authority be delegated to corporate director for planning growth and sustainability
in consultation with the cabinet member for planning to make necessary any minor modifications
to the local plan pre -submission plan before it's published,
so anything between now and tomorrow,
and to make any necessary technical amendments
to supporting documentation from the completion
of the ongoing technical work prior to the Regulation 19
publication in point one, before that commences, and three.
The corporate director for planning, growth, sustainability
and the cabinet member for planning provide updates
to the growth infrastructure and housing select committee,
Chair Vice -Chairman Rauss, at the committee's scheduled meetings on the progress of the local plan process
following the closure of that six -week Regulation 19 consultation period.
Are members in agreement with those recommendations?
Agreed. I think that was unanimous. Therefore, to members of the public watching, we will, as we've made reference to,
there will be multi -channel promotion advertising of the existence of this regulation 19 consultation.
Please do provide your comments at commences tomorrow and of course we'll use this all routes
to make sure that people are aware of it and you can find the link as of tomorrow through
the social media channels of the council or indeed the website. Thank you all for that and again
And thank you to officers for the work done in compiling a plan that collectively is believed
to be sound.
We now send that out for that consultation.
Okay, that brings us to item eight on the agenda, which is the disposal of Highways

8 Disposal of Highways Depot, Wing

Depot wing.
This is under Robert Carrington's name and is on pages, having lost reference, 6372 of
over to you please Robert.
Thank you very much leader.
Cllr Robert Carington - 1:55:02
For people's reference this paper is to discuss
approving the disposal of the site
which is a currently overgrown and unused
to a preferred bidder and this recommended
conditional offer exceeds the capital receipt target
for the site and the medium term financial plan.
As a reminder cabinet on the 11th of November last year
It was decided after debate to proceed to market the site for disposal.
The site was extensively and openly marketed,
inviting offers from all interested parties.
The marketing material was publicly available for viewing.
It is important to note, I have received correspondence from the two local
ward members, Councillor Ward and Councillor Gibbon, who in turn
and have received communication from the Parish Council,
which so for you to consider during the debate,
I will just briefly read out the correspondence,
it is just a paragraph.
Local members understand that Wing Parish Council
have submitted a bid.
Residents are keen for the site to be restored
to green open space and believe the green proposal
presents the best option for the cleaning of the land.
They feel that it presents a valuable buffer
between Wing and Burcotte.
When reaching a decision today,
we understand there are rules and guidance
that cabinet will need to adhere to,
but request that consideration be given
to the views of Wing residents.
As I would like to say, thank you to the Parish Council
for their interest and engagement during this process,
including submitting a bid,
and I think it's important to note
that as a gesture of goodwill,
initial developer bids were received on the 18th of March
and to allow the parish council time to submit a bid
because we've had lots of engagement with this on this.
We extended the deadline for the 31st of March
to allow them to do so.
But it is important to note that as mentioned,
following the marketing, we had four bids were received
and considered, including the parish council.
Two of these were subject to planning
while two were unconditional.
Having reviewed the offers, as I alluded to
in my brief sort of introduction,
the recommendation is to accept the subject
to planning offer, which provides best value for money
and contributes towards housing targets.
The reason why this one is being recommended
over the others is for a number of various reasons.
I think as I touched upon the main one,
which is value for money,
but there's also capital receipt offered,
composition of the scheme, detail on conditions,
level of approvals, and financial cheques
on the bidders to cheque viability.
So I will stress again, as I think you have all heard me say
many a time in this chamber, we are under a legal obligation
under section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972
to dispose of council owned land for best consideration
that can reasonably be obtained.
And the duty of 10 best value on any contracts related
to disposal under part one of the Local Government Act 1999
and the recommended bid achieves this.
So in summary, the recommended bid
represents best value for residents
and best value for residents in regard to a site
which is overgrown, unused, surplus to requirements,
and when considering the price offered,
retirement for the receipts and delivery of a scheme
that takes into account, particularly after the conversation
we've just had, the current housing needs in the area.
So I am happy to now open this up to,
well before I do that, I will hand over to Rich Wilson
If there's anything further you want to add before we go to questions.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:58:48
Thank you, Councillor Carrington.
No, nothing further to add.
I think it's quite a clear cut one from my perspective.
Thank you.
I ought to note that the remaining items or the items on the agenda 8 through 11 inclusive all have two parts.
All have the ability for us to enter confidential session and we will do that as required.
Therefore, questions to Robert or the officer team at this stage are based on the public
report.
Do we have any questions?
Cllr Robert Carington - 1:59:24
Karl, please.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 1:59:27
Thank you.
Cllr Robert Carington - 1:59:30
So you mentioned obviously it's conditional on planning what we're proposing to do.
So if that's approved, what are the next steps from there?
and also if you're able to comment publicly on it,
is there any revenue cost to disposing of the site?
Well thank you very much for those questions.
So as mentioned, the recommended offer,
obviously subject to everyone's views on the matter,
is conditional to planning,
and if we are so minded to approve it,
the developer has committed to submitting
a planning application by the end of this year,
and completion will take place once foreplanning
has been determined.
but I just once again, as that this is sub -conditional
to planning, so there is always risk there,
but it is, and I mean the Parish Council,
their comments will be addressed during the Parish,
sorry, the planning application as per the normal process.
Regarding revenue, as I have said
in my introductory statement, this is a site
which is surplus to requirements
and is not currently in use,
so there is no income generation,
so there is no revenue cost.
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:00:32
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:00:32
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:00:33
Thank you very much mark win, please. It's just if you could highlight the level of affordable within the
site and to make sure my housing team can work together with the
Cllr Mark Winn - 2:00:44
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:00:49
Thank you, but I'm I said because it's conditional planning an offer and of they may watch it
I can't really go into too much detail on that point in the public session. That's more one for
confidential, but I'm looking at Rich if there's anything
that you can say, but I think in the public session
I can't comment on that one.
OK, thank you.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:01:05
So we may go into confidential in a moment,
but Isabel, you were sure to ask a question.
Let's do that now.
Thank you.
Not sure if it's public or private,
Cllr Isobel Darby - 2:01:13
but I'll ask a question and Robert can either answer it
or defer to later.
If this goes through and they get planning permission
and we sell it, is there anything,
Are there any provisions if they then go and sell the site to somebody else who wants to
do something with it, something else with it?
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:01:36
I'll go to Rich just in regard to confidentiality.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:01:39
Richard, would you say your title please so people know you?
Yeah, Rich Wilson, strategic advisor to the investment and development team.
The current proposal has all the normal and regular covenants in place, so an overage
Richard Wilson - 2:01:56
provision is in there and protections against flipping as per the normal policies we require.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:02:04
Okay thank you. I've got no more questions but we will need to answer Mark's so we will go into
confidential session. Before we do so I just thought is there anything in public session
as our section 151 officer statutory requirement here. Any comments you wish to add other than
on what's in the report, David.
Sarah Murphy-Brookman - Corporate Director for Resources - 2:02:27
Nothing to add to the comments that have already been made
by Councillor Cavanagh, it was covered in the report.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:02:31
Thank you, so just for those watching,
we will go into confidential session
to answer Mark's question, and also just to discuss
the four bits in particular, the request to do so
from the parish council.
So what that does mean though is the website,
the webcast will be paused and then we will come back having had
that discussion to make a decision
and then we'll continue with the meeting.
So I'm required to read the following statement.
To resolve under the local authorities executive
arrangements, meeting and access
to information England regulations 2012,
the regulation 42B that the public be excluded
from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that they are likely
to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined within Schedule 12A of the Local
Government Act 1972. And at this point we are going in for disposal of the Highways
Depot in Wing. And is that therefore agreed? Thank you. Please could you pause the webcast?

8 Disposal of Highways Depot, Wing

Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:03:43
Thank you and we resume today's cabinet meeting of Buckinghamshire Council having just come
out of a confidential part of the discussion for what is item eight, disposal of the Highways
Depot in Wing. Having had that discussion and answered the query that was made and had
a wider discussion, Robert would you like now to put the recommendations please?
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:04:09
Yes, are you happy for me to put them as a block?
There are three recommendations.
Recommendation one is cabinet approves the disposal of council and site and wing to the
preferred bidder on the term set out in confidential appendix A. Recommendation two, cabinet delegates
authority to the corporate director for resources in consultation with the cabinet member for
resources to finalise the terms of the legal documentation to give effect to the disposal
and to the head of legal to take all necessary steps
to serve any associated notices.
Recommendation three, cabinet delegates authority
to the corporate director for resources
in consultation with the cabinet member for resources
to exchange and complete the land sale contract
and other related legal documentation,
including service of notice and submission
of any related applications.
Thank you very much, Robert.
So with those having been read,
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:04:58
can you please indicate support for those recommendations?
Thank you, everyone is in agreement.
Thank you, that item passes
and that will, based on those recommendations.
Item nine, disposal of a different plot of land.

9 Disposal of Land at Cooks Lane, Mursley

This is land at Cooks Lane in Mursley.
Again, this is an item in two parts,
a public pack and a confidential pack.
The public report can be found on pages 73 to 86.
And again, Robert will introduce this.
And he has Dave Skinner here,
Sarah Murphy -Prock, the Director for Resources as well.
And Richard Wilson is remaining in his place.
So Robert, over to you on this one please.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:05:51
So again, this paper is about recommending approving the disposal of the site,
which is the sole housing allocation
within the Mursley neighbourhood plan 21 to 24.
And it is recommended and preferred bid
is a conditional offer again subject to planning.
And again, this exceeds the capital receipt target
for the site in the medium term financial plan
and meets our legal obligation under section 123
of the local government at 1972 to deliver best value.
Members of cabinet will be aware
that you have received correspondence on this site
from a local resident with their views on the planned disposal.
And Paul tonight is saying this now, so this will be noted
into the minutes and bearing in mind this will be taken
into account by members when considering the item.
Also it goes without saying that if cabinet is minded
to approve the disposal to the preferred bidder,
all the points raised by the resident will need to be
addressed by the bidder during the planning process.
as a reminder, this is subject to planning.
The resident will obviously be allowed
to make representations during the normal planning process.
So going back to the clock, this one's before November.
This was from a cabinet meeting on the 23rd of September
where it was decided to proceed to market
the site for disposal as a residential development
taking account of the Mursley neighbourhood plan.
Marketing was extensively and openly marketed,
inviting offers from all interested parties.
The marketing material was publicly available for viewing.
Following marketing, several bids were received
and considered, all were subject to planning.
Having reviewed the offers, the offer from the preferred
bidder is recommended, as mentioned, it provides best value
and a commitment to deliver a scheme based around
the one which is in the sole residential development
mentioned in the Mursley neighbourhood plan,
which in turn contributes to meeting local housing targets
as set out in the veil of Aylesbury Local Plan,
VALP 2013 to 2033.
I would remind that as the site
is the sole residential allocation
in the Mursley Neighbourhood Plan,
inaction of no decision would delay
provision of housing within the area.
In summary, the recommended offer represents
best value for residents for this site,
which provides residential development and local amenities as allocated within the neighbourhood
plan.
I will go over and see if officers have anything further to add.
Head shakes from this side.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:08:30
Can I just ask Cabinet just for the record to please confirm you have received and read
the representations that Robert referred to from the resident?
Yes.
Yes.
Thank you very much.
Right, comments and questions to Robert then please.
Peter Brazier.
Thank you.
This is a good example of a neighbourhood plan working.
Cllr Peter Brazier - 2:08:54
Good example why it should happen.
I haven't read the neighbourhood plan,
but what else will the community get out of this
apart from some houses?
I won't, well thank you for that.
Very good question.
So as alluded to, I said there's gonna be local amenities.
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:09:16
That is in the form of a playground, communal space, and there will be a commuted 25 year
sum to be provided to the Barrage Council for the maintenance of this.
So this will provide the parish with greater control over the management of their communities
open space and provide playground facility for the young of the village.
Thank you very much for that question.
Anyone else?
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:09:37
So we had a number of beats.
Can you just, and you said they're all subject to planning,
and obviously you've taken best value as a result.
Is that the only assessment?
There are a number of assessments.
I mean, as you all know,
that best value is not just the financial impact.
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:09:58
There's also the social impact of the bids
and a whole number of reasons,
but particularly this bid was the highest financial one
and had the additional of a point.
So I'm looking at Rich.
If there's anything further you want to add on that.
Only that all the bidders have been analysed past performance,
Richard Wilson - Investment and Development Strategic Advisor - 2:10:25
financial viability, deliverability, et cetera,
et cetera, have been analysed and this party
became out the top and preferred bidder.
Excellent.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:10:38
So I'm not seeing any further hands.
Nothing particularly has been raised
because you have all seen the details of the confidential pack
that makes me think anyone wishes to go
into confidential session, but let me cheque
that perception I have.
Anyone, does anyone wish to go
into confidential session on this item?
No. Okay. In which case, Robert, we can turn to you to put
on block the recommendations, please.
Thank you very much, Lita.
So there again are three recommendations here.
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:11:10
Number one, this cabinet approves the disposal of the council loan site in Mursley, see Appendix
A, to the preferred bidder on the term set out in the confidential appendix.
See agreed heads of terms confidential, Appendix 7.
Recommendation two, cabinet delegates authority to the corporate director for resources and
consultation with the cabinet member for resources to finalise the legal documentation to give
effect to the disposal.
Recommendation 3, Cabinet delegates authority to the corporate director for resources in
consultation with the cabinet member for resources to exchange and complete the land sale contract
and other related legal documentation.
Thank you very much.
Robert, are cabinet members in agreement with those recommendations?
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:11:53
Thank you.
We'll take that as agreement.
Thank you, Robert.
And just a note, I think, to residents that disposals,
and we talk about things like capital receipts,
it is that capital programme that is substantial in our budget
with a total of over $600 million
over the three or four year period.
These disposals mean we're able to invest capital
on our places or on our purchasing of the buildings
or indeed on our capital roads programme
that Thomas Broom will often talk about.
So there is always some churn and that's why the best value point is really important and it isn't just in the receipt,
it's then in the redeployment of that over time through our capital programme.
Thomas?
Can I just very briefly say, Leader, we have been on occasion accused of not providing
Cllr Thomas Broom - 2:12:48
an opportunity for scrutiny on decisions like this.
I would just like to point out that as we have said before, these matters do come before Cabinet.
any member of the council is entitled to attend cabinet
and as someone did at the beginning,
they're entitled to ask a question.
I would simply note that no such person has chosen to attend
despite the fact that we have four disposals today.
The gallery here is empty.
Thank you for that.
I'm sure that we noted in the minutes.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:13:17
Although I'm not sure we have four disposals.
The next one is, yes.
But the property holdings of the council are very important
for not only the finances but in the place shaping.
And the next one here is item 10,
Globeside Business Park in Marlow.
So Robert, we're back with you again

10 Globeside Business Park, Marlow

to discuss this item again in two parts.
Public section is in pages 87 to 94.
And here you have Richard Barker here as well,
of corporate director for communities,
given parts of this will fall under his responsibilities.
So again, over to you to discuss the public report, please.
Thank you very much, Lila, and just to reassure residents,
it is not four disposals today, it was just the two.
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:14:07
This one, I assure you, we are not disposing
of number three, Globeside.
This is regarding a lease.
So this paper proposes capital investment
in an asset that enhances its investment value
through refurbishment works required to meet
modern market compliance and environmental standards.
This enables the letting of a council owned asset
to a prospective tenant that has expressed strong interest
in leasing the entire building on competitive terms.
This supports the retention of a long term employment
and delivers wide economic benefits
while producing rental income for the council.
The proposal represents good value for money for the council
providing a proportionate and sustainable use
of capital resources aligned with our strategic objectives.
This is in the form of supporting local, economic,
and social sustainability by retaining employment
within Marlowe and contributing to the council's
economic growth plan and place shaping objectives
through supporting skilled jobs, community resilience,
and long term prosperity.
I will hand over to Dave if there's anything further
you want to add on the paper.
Nothing further to add.
David Skinner - Director of Finance and S151 Officer - 2:15:20
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:15:22
Thank you. So as I said, we have as a council, we do hold properties and in order to let those, they need to be on a competitive basis.
You need them to be in a competitive condition to be able to do that.
So this paper, if we're to simplify down, is to make the investment required, having lined up someone who wishes to let the entire site, or at least the entire site from us.
And therefore that requires, as you have in your second recommendation, the movement of elements of capital money from EMI Reserves to do exactly this.
To boost our economy and make sure that we get a good return for the Council.
Anyone have any direct questions on this? To Robert, the outline details are in the
confidential appendix. There were a number of, I ought to draw attention to, a number
of other options here to either not invest, not re -let the land, possibly demolish the
building because we know, although our business parks are really important to us, they do
challenges not least parking but obviously this is felt to be the best
use of this property at this moment for the overall financial impact on the
council with Richard is there anything you wanted to add either Richard in fact
yeah thank you leader and Richard Parker corporate director for communities
Richard Barker - Corporate Director for Communities - 2:16:59
nothing to add for this okay thank you well with no questions then we can move
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:17:05
straight to the recommendations that I think you've already outlined Robert but
if you'd like to if you want me to go well we are approving the letting of
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:17:12
globe site three globe site milo including the conclusion of heads of
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:17:17
terms to authorise the procurement and delivery of the refurbishment works in
order to reach the lease conditions and that the cabinet approves those
movements in EMR reserve and monies to be able to do that. Are we so agreed?
Agreed. Thank you everybody. That passes and now another property related item, item 11,

11 Hillcrest site at Coronation Road, Cressex Business Park, High Wycombe

again in two parts. The public report is on pages 95 to 106 inclusive. The usual phalanx of people
I've referred to already today remain in place. So back to you Robert to outline what this
this particular paper and this property proposition is.
Thank you very much, Lita.
And this paper did start life off as a disposal paper,
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:18:05
but as I will go into detail, it has now evolved into a letting paper.
So this paper discusses approving the letting of the site following marketing
for disposal, and as the offers then, two offers came back, and
this was the one which provided best value and
consideration to the council in the current market.
This has come about following cabinet on the night of September and the decision there
to proceed to market the site for disposal, inviting all offers for the future use of
the site.
As mentioned, there were two bids.
One was on a leasehold basis, one was on a freehold basis.
The leasehold offer, which is the one which is being recommended, exceeded prevailing
market rents for comparable sites in the area and generates an annual income which over
the term delivers value comparable with cattle receipts
previously reported to cabinet and in excess of the highest
freehold offer received.
The preferred bidder's proposal would establish a specialist
nurturing educational environment tailored to young
people at risk of exclusion from mainstream education.
This is expected to generate wider societal benefits for the
local community through reduced youth disengagement and
and antisocial behaviour, alongside longer term
economic gains driven by improved employability,
stronger family engagement, and enhanced social mobility.
So that is why I'm recommending the lease offer
rather than the freehold offer.
Thank you, Robert.
And I think it's a really good example.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:19:39
You will often make the case, as you have done today,
on the best value elements under the relevant act,
and that will be supported by the Section 151 officer.
However, I note the flexibility in here
and the approach has meant that this proposal will rely heavily
on the provision that is required
or will be of benefit to IWICM.
But importantly, you've added the recommendation number four
that the, which is not always the case,
but that the rental income from the deal
is ring -fenced as a contribution to capital reserves.
So that big programme of in and outs that I talked about
to fund the capital programme moving forward,
whilst it doesn't get the single injection of cash,
it will receive the benefit of this
so we can continue to deploy capital
in the way that we envisage doing.
There's also and I'm gonna ask Dave's comments in a minute just link to that
The section 6 .5 on page 99 says the tenant will take a full repairing and ensuring the lease
That means the council have no ongoing liability for the site once that lease completes
Beyond being a landlord, but so this is you know, they will keep the site in a in good order
Therefore ring fencing that money into capital
doesn't create a later revenue charge on our day to day budget.
How does that all square with you please David as our financial person section 151 officer.
David Skinner - Director of Finance and S151 Officer - 2:21:22
Thank you so this does represent best value in a different way in terms of rather than
a straight disposal this creates a lease as you say it protects the councils financial
interest in terms of there will be no financial liability.
The tenant will have responsibility for maintaining the building and looking after it and keeping
it in good order, that still retains the capital value.
Therefore, going forward, the council will have different set of options at the expiry
of the lease and the lease renewal dates in terms of kind of going forward.
As you say, recommendation four means that there's still no reduction in terms of the
capital inflows coming through to the council to support the ongoing investment in the capital
programme, whether that be in the roads or the provision of waste vehicles and so on in terms
of kind of going through.
So that income stream is secured in a slightly different kind of way in terms of kind of
going through but this still retains best value
and is the recommended approach.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:22:13
And Richard Wilson, the bidder here will have been subject
to the same financial cheques and so on that you outlined
on a previous paper, is that right?
Yeah, absolutely, they've been through the same,
exactly the same cheques as a disposal entity would be.
Richard Wilson - Investment and Development Strategic Advisor - 2:22:29
Just like to make one further point for me.
The rental here on offer is at such a level
that is just above the current market level
which provides excellent comparables
for the rest of the council's ownership at the estate.
Therefore we'd expect rental increases to come forward
at the appropriate time under the lease mechanism
for the other leases at the estate.
Thank you very much.
I think this again, not any example of flexible use
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:22:58
of our estate but also we have just passed
our corporate plan and that corporate plan talks about thriving communities,
aspiration and opportunity for people, great places and an example where you
know we are we are delivering for the best interests of the residents of the
county in this case of High Wycombe in particular but they will draw in users
from further afield than that. So you know it was a useful exercise for the
Marketing to have brought this forward. So we've seen this twice now in High Wycombe
Same with the the QVR disposal where the marketing has helped create a real genuine option
But this in that case through health provision for the people of the town and here again now
for youth provision in particular
in
Up on the Cressix Business Park
State area. So thank you for that and I hope those watching can see that
This is the approach we take, deploying that corporate plan through everything to try and
get best outcomes and best value for residents.
That being said, we haven't made a decision on it yet.
So let's not miss that element.
Robert, would you like to put these, please?
All right.
I will read the full recommendations.
Cllr Robert Carington - 2:24:24
So recommendation one, cabinet approves the leading of the council -owned site at Coronation
road, Cressix Business Park, High Wycombe to the preferred bidder on the terms set out
in the confidential appendix.
Recommendation 2, cabinet delegates authority to the corporate director for resources in
consultation with the cabinet member for resources to finalise the terms of the legal
documentation to give effect to the letting.
Recommendation 3, that cabinet delegates to the chief legal officer to undertake all legal
steps required to give effect to the letting upon agreement of the terms and serve any
associated notices.
As the leader has already said, recommendation four,
the cabinet agrees the revenue rental income
from the proposed deal is ring -fenced as a contribution
to the capital reserves in lieu of a capital receipt.
Thank you, Robert.
Are cabinet members in agreement with those recommendations?
Thank you all very much.
Cllr Steven Broadbent - 2:25:12
That then brings us now to the end of today's agenda,
having with the elements listed on the agenda
have just been the confidential elements
of those disposals and property related elements
we've discussed.
So item 17 is date of next meeting.
That is, as I mentioned earlier, just next week

17 Date of next meeting

on the 28th of July, 2026 at 10 a .m.
We conclude today's meeting.
Thank you for your attendance
on what is a very important meeting.
Thank you for those watching.
And please now end the webcast.
Thank you.