Issue - meetings

To consider and receive the report of the Director (Business, Development and Growth).

1.    That options 1 and 2 be considered further by officers with greater detail to be provided to Members at another meeting.

2.    To request the Leader to urge Homes England to respond to his recent letter.

3.    To note that Officers will continue to look at the feasibility of delivering residential and a gypsy and traveller (G & T) allocation on the Chorley land rather than employment and a G & T allocation.

Councillor Alistair Bradley, Executive Member (Economic Development and Public Service Reform), presented the report of the Director (Business Development and Growth) which provides an update on the current progress of delivering an employment and gypsy and traveller (G & T) site at Cowling Farm, and presents the options available to deliver the G & T allocation.

Members noted the G & T family’s comments regarding proximity to employment and residential sites and the Leader advised that Homes England had now submitted an application for their site rather than continuing to work collaboratively with the Council. Members expressed their disappointment and noted that the Leader had written to Homes England to express the Council’s concerns. It was agreed that waiting for a response before deciding on which option to pursue would be preferable, and in the meantime both options 1 and 2 should be investigated further.

Decision:

1.    That options 1 and 2 be considered further by officers with greater detail to be provided to Members at another meeting.

2.    To request the Leader to urge Homes England to respond to his recent letter.

3.    To note that Officers will continue to look at the feasibility of delivering residential and a gypsy and traveller (G & T) allocation on the Chorley land rather than employment and a G & T allocation.

Reasons for Recommendation(s):

To progress the delivery of the G & T site and to progress the delivery of the wider site with a use that is financially viable.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:

1.    To continue to progress with the employment development has been rejected as it is unviable.

2.    Delivery of the G & T site with the wider site development has been rejected as it will not deliver the G & T allocation within the required timescales.