Purpose

The reason for the decision is to provide a
transparent process for the continued assessment of up-to-date
evidence post Local Plan adoption. Such evidence informs changes to
Local (Wildlife and Geological) Sites to which Policy 31 of the
Local Plan applies, be they additional sites, amended site
boundaries, or sites no longer meeting
the criteria for designation. These can be incorporated on, or
removed from, as appropriate, the Local Plan’s Policies Map;
and used in helping to determine relevant
planning applications.

Content

a)That the Cabinet Portfolio Holder for
Finance, Traded Services and Planning (or his/her successor) be
delegated authority to consider recommendations from
Doncaster’s Local Sites Partnership, for the inclusion,
removal or amendment of sites, as considered against the Council
adopted Local Site Selection Guidelines; changes
to be then shown on the Local Plan’s Policies Map, and taken
into account when determining relevant planning applications.

b) Subject to the approval of (a), that the Cabinet Portfolio
Holder for Finance, Traded Services and Planning (or his/her
successor) determines whether to make the recommended changes set
out in Appendix 1 of this report.

Alternative options considered

An alternative to the decision taken is only
to update the Local Plan’s Policies Map as part of Local Plan
Review – Local Planning Authorities have a duty to assess
whether their adopted
Local Plans should be reviewed five years from adoption. For
Doncaster, this would be by September 2026 at the latest. It should
however be noted that the Levelling-up &
Regeneration Act 2023 proposes a number of reforms to the
development-plan making system, including transitional
arrangements, which means the timescales for a Review of the
Local Plan may change. However, in the intervening period, there is
a risk that the absence of up to date assessed site information on
the Policies Map could lead to misinformed planning
decisions.
As Local Sites are to be identified as ‘areas of particular
importance for biodiversity’ in Local Nature Recovery
Strategy mapping and priority setting, this decision could also
weaken the
validity of this work and delivery outcomes.