Agenda and draft minutes

To receive as a correct record the minutes of the previous meeting (n.b. 13^th January 2026 is the first meeting of the PPCAG). 

Nb. 13^th January 2026 was the first meeting of the PPCAG.

To consider any such items authorised by the Chair and to consider where in the agenda the item(s) are to be considered. 

The Chair welcomed everyone to the first meeting of the PPCAG, and also thanked Paul Hatch (Service Manager – Planning & Housing Strategy) for all his work, as he would be leaving the authority shortly.

To receive declarations by Councillors of interests in respect of items on this Agenda. 

Councillors are reminded that, in accordance with the Localism Act 2011, they are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which have not already been declared in the Council’s Register of Interests. (It is a criminal offence not to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest either in the Register or at the meeting). 

Whilst not a legal requirement, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9 and in the interests of clarity and transparency, Councillors should declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which they have already declared in the Register, at this point in the meeting. 

In accordance with Part B Section 2 of the Code Of Conduct, Councillors are required to declare the existence and nature of any other interests as defined in paragraphs 8(1) or 9(2) of the Code of Conduct. 

There were no declarations of interest.

Officers introduced the main topics within the report previously circulated, and responded to questions from the members of the PPCAG.

Greater detail on changes to the Local Plan process had been awaited from the Government. Two of the most significant changes announced had been: a new 3 Gateway assessment procedure; and a 30 month period within which to complete. It was recalled that the previous Local Plan for the district had been undertaken between 2014-2020; nationally, Local Plans usually took 3-4 years. Consequently, the aim of completing a Local Plan within 30 months appeared ambitious, especially as  LGR (Local Government Re-organisation) would be taking place simultaneously.  

The aim of the new Gateway process was to identify problems and issues at an early stage, allowing them to be tackled and resolved at that point, rather than have them cause delays and additional work later on. Gateway 1 was a self-assessment process but, significantly, once it had been undertaken it then triggered the beginning of the 30 month period within which the Local Plan must be completed. A discussion then followed on when the optimum time would be to commence the 30 month period. This included the following points:

·         work had already been prepared or taken place, in anticipation of what was likely to be required under the new Local Plan process;

·         Cabinet had expressed a commitment to undertaking and completing a new Local Plan as quickly as possible, ideally commencing it in January 2026; 

·         a completed Local Plan achieved by mid 2028 would likely coincide with new LGR structures; and this may be advantageous;

·         whilst it was not yet clear how individual Local Plans would be combined when local authorities merged under LGR arrangements, especially if they were at different stages, the message being given by Government was to press on and make progress with Local Plans, rather than wait for LGR; 

·         the worst case scenario would be not to have a new Local Plan ready and in place;

·         there was no information yet on any consequences or sanctions should the 30 months be exceeded;

·         the need for resources at the Planning Inspectorate to undertake all of the demands of the new Local Plan process was noted, along with the advantage of being an early completer and thus being ahead in the queue;

·         following Gateway 1 and the start of the 30 month period would be the ‘Visioning and Options’ stage – however, the PPCAG were informed that this could not be undertaken any more promptly regardless of when the 30 month period was triggered, as it required work to be prepared and undertaken by consultants;

·         pausing the triggering of the start of the 30 month period and potentially gaining some flexibility later on for unexpected delays was weighed against the advantages of making immediate progress and avoiding slippage.

Action: It was noted that Cabinet had agreed that the decision to initiate the Local Plan 30 month period was one for the Chief Officer to take. The Chair and Chief Officer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Officers introduced the previously circulated report, outlining: the work that had already been completed; what was currently underway; and the work programme to follow. It was noted that consultants were currently drafting a report on the Local Housing Need Assessment. This should be available shortly, and it was intended that it would be made available to all Councillors via a briefing and presentation.

Action: all Councillor briefing to be arranged.

In response to questions from members of the PPCAG it was confirmed that:

·         the methodology used for calculating housing need was prescribed by the Government, and differed from methodologies used previously;

·         whether sites were deliverable / commercially viable would be addressed within the site allocation process, i.e. is there a reasonable prospect of delivery?

·         it was considered that the Gateways assessments would examine deliverability; 

·         work assessing the siting for net zero and renewable energy reports would link into the Local Area Energy Plan;

·         the sensitive topic of Green Belt and Grey Belt, and potential changes to designations and boundaries, was currently being worked upon by consultants, who would report in due course;

·         potential new areas for Local Green Spaces had been supplied by the public, and were being assessed;

·         the profile of the Local Plan process to the wider public was likely to be raised as the location of sites for development began to be considered, along with other issues such as whether a CIL (Community Interest Levy) ought to be introduced;

·         the difficulty of resolving transport challenges and pursuing initiatives such as the ‘cycle superhighway’ or ‘modal shift’ was recognised, with the County Council (and National Highways) having greater responsibility and scope to lead and make progress (in order to enable Local Plan submission); 

·         any limits on development around Heysham, in particular regarding the nuclear energy plant and regulations around suburban population density criteria in the surrounding radius, would be considered as part of the plan-making process and would involve discussions with the Office for Nuclear Regulation and EDF (with it noted that the population density figures will include caravan sites and the traveller community).

Finally, it was confirmed that the Local Nature Recovery report would be published by Lancashire County Council later this week.

To be agreed with the Chair.