Agenda item

(Director of Governance) to consider the attached report.

The Planning Policy Manager, Mr K Bean introduced the report on Chelmsford City Local Plan consultation issues.  Chelmsford’s current local plan runs until 2021 and the next local plan is intended to roll forward to 2036. This consultation on the issues and options was the first of three such public consultation exercises.

The Issues and Options consultation runs from 19 November 2015 to 21 January 2016 – longer than the normal six-week period, but allowing for the Christmas/New Year break. 30 questions have been posed by this consultation document.

Chelmsford shares boundaries with seven other Essex local authorities including Epping Forest District. It has an area of about 34,000 ha, 34% of which is in the Green Belt – this covering the south-west of the City Council area, including the boundary with this Council. It has a current population of 168,300 (with approximately 110,000 in Chelmsford Urban Area) and this is expected to increase to 192,000 by 2022.

There are 13 themes which make up the vision for the new Local Plan. From Epping Forest Council’s perspective, the most significant of these are:

·         protecting the Green Belt – there was no intention to undertake a strategic review;

·         meeting the housing needs of existing and new communities (including appropriate levels of affordable and other specific forms of housing) at sustainable locations where supporting infrastructure will be provided;

·         ensuring sufficient land was available to promote a wide range of employment and business opportunities, and continuing to support and encourage diversification within the rural economy;

·         supporting development and improvement of the strategic transport network, including (inter alia) a potential western relief road for Chelmsford City; and

·         retaining the town’s status as the premier city centre shopping destination in Essex – this should be reinforced by the opening of the new Bond Street centre in 2016 (anchored by John Lewis).

The consultation document outlined how (i) housing need (including affordable housing) has been calculated at 930 new homes per year (totalling 13,950 over the period 2021 to 2036) and (ii) using Edge Analytics work, the need to make provision for an additional 887 new jobs per year was also to be tested through the consultation.

Mention was also made of future accommodation needs for travellers with the Essex Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA – 2014) identifying a need for an additional 55 pitches in the period 2013 to 2033. The consultation document suggested that (i) the revised Government Guidance (Planning Policy for Traveller Sites 2015) may reduce this figure, because of changes in the definition of a “traveller” for planning purposes, and (ii) the need can be broadly met by making provision on major housing sites.

Members noted that provision for traveller sites and pitches was a particularly difficult issue for this authority because of the 92% Green Belt coverage and the fact that permanent and temporary pitches were inappropriate development in the Green Belt. As this authority has a target of 112 extra pitches from the Essex GTAA 2014, one of the options for meeting this figure will be to discuss with our neighbouring authorities the possibility of their meeting some of this need through joint or shared provision. Chelmsford’s consultation document does not mention this as a potential option and therefore the report suggested in the response sent, raising this matter as a cross boundary issue.

Councillor Neville noted that there were other ways of dealing with bottle necks other than building a new (western) bypass – such as increasing public transport.

Councillor Wixley asked if the development of the Gypsy and Traveller sites would have to be in one authority or the other or would they be jointly owned. The Planning Policy Manager explained that under the duty to co-operate requirements, if it could be demonstrated that the identified need for additional pitches cannot be met within Epping Forest District, surrounding authorities maybe asked to consider whether they are able to provide suitable pitches to help meet any identified EFDC shortfall. Councillor Wixley asked if that meant that Chelmsford was unwilling to co-operate. Mr Bean replied that  this could not necessarily be assumed and at this early stage with Chelmsford’s plan, the intention was just to flag the concern up as a potential boundary issue.

Councillor Chris Pond asked how recommendation ‘f’ on the support of the potential western bypass to Chelmsford helped this district. Mr Bean agreed that maybe the word ‘support’ was too strong in this context.  Councillor Pond supported Councillor Neville’s request that the wording be changed to “notes with interest”. This change of wording was agreed by the Committee.

RESOLVED:

That the following comments on and responses to the consultation be made:

(a)  To note Chelmsford City Council’s commitment to on-going co-operation with other Councils and key organisations on cross-boundary planning issues including housing provision;

(b)  To note the approach being proposed for future provision for the travelling community in the light of the revised guidance “Planning policy for traveller sites” (August 2015), and to suggest that this should be included as a cross-boundary issue, particularly with reference to paragraphs 4(d), 4(h), 10(c) and 16 of the revised guidance;

(c)  To support the City Council’s intention to discount development growth in the Green Belt;

(d)  To support the intention to meet the housing needs of existing and new communities including appropriate levels of affordable housing and of other specific groups at sustainable locations and including necessary supporting infrastructure;

(e)  To support the spatial principles and the options (including hybrids) for accommodating future growth;

(f)   To note with interest the idea in principle of a potential western bypass to Chelmsford.