Agenda item

To provide an update on the Evidence Base required for the Tendring Colchester Borders Development Plan Document including evidence already gathered and further work that is underway.

Members had before them a report (A.2) which provided the Joint Committee with an update on the Evidence Base required for the Tendring Colchester Borders Development Plan Document (DPD) including evidence already gathered and further work that was underway.

 

The report was introduced by Colchester Borough Council’s Lead Officer for Planning, Housing & Economic Growth (Karen Syrett), who informed the Joint Committee that this report related to report A.1 considered earlier on in the meeting report which had highlighted a number of issues where decision-making would need to be informed by more robust information and evidence. The following additional studies were being compiled and would be made available to Members and Officers during the evolution and finalisation of the Plan. This additional work would consider all relevant issues and provide appropriate justification for the final approach.

 

Approach to Land Use & Type of Place

 

Various issues and concerns had been raised about the proposed boundary of the Garden Community, the scale and locations of certain land uses, and the nature of place that was being proposed. The following work was being taken forward which would provide additional evidence to enable robust decisions to be taken:

 

·      Strategic Framework/Masterplan & Strategic Design Guide/Code

 

The approach to the Garden Community would continue to evolve and become more detailed through an on-going master planning process. To date, work on master planning had considered the baseline position (including constraints and opportunities analysis), the overall spatial vision and some initial land use and masterplan options. Going forward additional strategic master planning work would be undertaken by the Councils to illustrate, justify and set the basis for land use proposals to be set out in the Final Plan to be submitted. 

 

It was acknowledged that at this stage of planning for the Garden Community, it was not possible (primarily due to the extent, cost and time required to undertake all of the detailed technical site survey and design work that would be required - which was the responsibility of site developers to inform their planning applications), for further master planning and related policies in the DPD to contain precise details of design, layout and appearance of the new buildings and spaces that would be delivered. Instead, the additional strategic master planning work illustrated how development could be brought forward and provided further direction to developers to enable them to prepare appropriate and more detailed proposals.

 

The Draft Plan (Policy 1) had included specific wording to require a comprehensive approach to development that met the Councils’ high expectations for design and quality and the key principles that underpinned the development of Garden Communities. It set out the requirement for proposals seeking planning permission to adhere to a ‘Strategic Masterplan’ and ‘Strategic Design Code’ for the whole site and more specific and detailed ‘Neighbourhood Masterplans’ and ‘Neighbourhood Design Codes’ for the relevant neighbourhoods. The draft Plan set out that those Masterplans and Design Codes would need to ultimately be approved by the Councils before planning applications could be approved.

 

The Councils had commissioned additional work to start to develop additional master planning and design coding/guidance. This was being produced to illustrate more widely how it was envisaged that the Garden Community would be developed and to ensure that there was a robust and sound evidence in support of the DPD. It would need to remain separate to the DPD and be illustrative in nature until such time as conclusions could be drawn from the examination of the DPD as this might result in modifications to policies, land uses or areas. The work could then be reviewed, updated and taken forward for additional consideration, potentially to be adopted as some form of supplementary planning policy to guide the determination of future planning applications.

 

·      Crockleford Heath Area of Special Character Appraisal

 

The Draft Plan had identified an ‘Area of Special Character’ at and around the settlement of Crockleford Heath, aimed at safeguarding its distinctive rural character. The Councils had commissioned additional work to consider this area in more detail and provide the appropriate level of guidance and base line analysis to develop a character appraisal, including landscape, historic and built environment appraisals and a design strategy for Crockleford Heath.

 

·      Land south of A133 assessment

 

Some focussed work would be undertaken to consider the sensitivity and visual impact of development options south of the A133 both within, and directly adjacent to, the Area of Search, including consideration of the capacity of growth within the existing University of Essex campus.

 

·      Economic Study Update

 

Further work would be undertaken related to the Economic and Employment Study to update and evolve the advice the Authorities on the potential means of maximising the positive economic and employment generation opportunities at TCBGC and provide an analysis and options for location, format and potential end-users of the employment allocations proposed for the site. Additional related and specialist work would be undertaken to consider the growth potential of the University of Essex, both in terms of student numbers, research potential and wider economic relationships.

 

Approach to Nature & Open Space

 

Additional work was required to consider elements related to nature and the type/scale of open space. The following work was being taken forward which would provide additional evidence to enable robust decisions to be taken:

 

·      Environmental Audit & Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment

 

An assessment was being undertaken to consider the potential to secure Biodiversity Net Gain, through a comparison of the habitats within the site prior to development activities (the ‘baseline’) with those proposed through the proposed spatial approach and land use proposals. The calculation would be undertaken using the ‘Defra Metric’ Biodiversity Net Gain calculator.

 

·      Tendring and Colchester Councils, Indoor Sport, Playing Pitch and Open Space Strategies

 

These had been commissioned and would set out an over-arching strategy for the two Council areas individually and collectively, with a particular focus on the sport and open space needs and issues related to the Garden Community. The work would include a review of all facilities in the Councils’ areas, including council-owned facilities and privately-owned facilities, where appropriate. In particular, the audit, assessment and recommendations would have regard to the facilities currently available at University of Essex Campus which adjoined the area of search for the Garden Community, and the potential to create or cooperate on new facilities that could serve both the needs of the university itself and the future residents and other users from the Garden Community itself.

 

In addition, work on the strategic masterplan and design guidance would consider the overall approach to land uses including suitable protection and enhancement of natural features & assets across the site.

 

Approach to community related matters

 

Other issues and concerns had been raised about key social and community infrastructure, and the ability to deliver on Garden City principles. The following work was being taken forward which would provide additional evidence to enable robust decisions to be taken on the following topics:

 

·      Health Impact Assessment / Topic Paper

 

Further work was underway to ensure the TCB Garden Community was designed and delivered in ways that would enhance the quality of people’s lives both from the outset and in the long term by positively addressing and innovatively responding to the fundamental elements that influenced the social determinants of health and well-being.

 

·      Stewardship Topic Paper (Update)

 

Officers would prepare an update to this topic paper, which had been prepared in relation to the examination of Section 1 of the Joint Local Plan. This would provide additional up-to-date information relating to the options for stewardship for the Garden Community, including an overview of the importance of long-term stewardship to the project; a summary of options for long-term stewardship that could be considered; their implications and potential approaches to decision making on any final preferred model/approach.

 

Approach to infrastructure, phasing and viability

 

A number of issues and concerns had been raised about the overall approach to infrastructure, its phasing and the viability/deliverability of the proposals. Whilst the Draft Plan included a number of specific infrastructure requirements within the separate policies, this work would now need to be updated and drawn together to enable all policy expectations and requirements to be clearly set out and justified. The following work was being taken forward which would provide additional evidence to enable robust decisions to be taken on the following topics:

 

·      Transport Planning

 

Further work would be required to provide an update on strategic infrastructure works coming forward via the Housing Infrastructure Fund (A120-A133 Link Rd and Rapid Transit System). Additional work was also required to frame the approach to mode share, confirming transport related infrastructure requirements alongside supporting transport measures (on and off site), and identifying wider opportunities and dependencies.

 

·      Integrated Water Management Strategy Stage 2

 

A Stage 1 Integrated Water Management Strategy (IWMS) had been carried out to support the Section 1 Local Plan. A Stage 2 IWMS had been commissioned which would specifically identify integrated water management options and strategies for the Garden Community. It would feed into the developing master planning and identify a range of options for how water and flood risk could be managed in an integrated and sustainable way.

 

·      Infrastructure Delivery Plan (& Phasing)

 

Officers were in the process of drawing together all information on infrastructure requirements and would prepare an Infrastructure Delivery Plan which would show what infrastructure was required and how it would be provided (e.g. co-location, etc); who was to provide the infrastructure; how would the infrastructure be funded and when it would need to be provided to align with the phasing of the Garden Community. The IDP would draw from responses from infrastructure providers in response to the Regulation 18 consultation and would be produced in collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders and strategic infrastructure providers including Essex County Council.

 

·      Viability Study

 

The site had been subject to detailed consideration of viability via Section 1, and Officers continued to be supported by experts during the preparation of the DPD. The Councils were in the process of commissioning additional expert property consultants to provide an update to the viability work in accordance with the latest information, assumptions national policy and guidance. It was intended that such expertise would be available to support more broadly viability discussions with site developers in due course.

 

Other evidence studies and background work would also come forward and be updated as the DPD progressed, such as ongoing work on analysing engagement feedback and the evolution of work on the Sustainability Appraisal, Heritage Impact Assessment and others.

 

Pursuant to the provisions of the Public Speaking Scheme for the Joint Committee, Bill Marshall and Professor Anthony Vickers (Crockleford & Elmstead Action Group) addressed the Joint Committee on the subject matter of this item.

 

The Lead Officer for Planning, Housing & Economic Growth (Karen Syrett) then responded to points made by the speakers.

 

Councillor Andrea Luxford-Vaughan requested that her comments on this report be included within the Minutes of the meeting. Those comments were summarised as follows:-

 

(i)      Welcomed the report which had picked up most of the points in the feedback from the public consultation and which noted that there was evidence that needed to be updated;

(ii)     Asked whether a new Sustainability Appraisal was going to be commissioned with the same objectives as Section 1 of the Local Plan;

(iii)   Will the evidence base include details of the classification of any nature reserves and country parks; the ownership of those; the management of them and their funding; and also the status of any green buffer when it is removed from the ‘field of search’;

(iv)   Requested that information on the ‘stewardship model’ be shared with Members;

(v)    In relation to the Gypsy & Travellers Needs Assessment, requested clarification why a site had been proposed within the garden community area given that Tendring District Council’s Section 2 Local Plan had stated that there was no present need for extra sites;

(vi)   Requested confirmation that residents of the new garden community would be able to use the medical centre at the University given that one would not be provided within the garden community site;

(vii)  Requested an investigation into the alleged clearance of trees within the garden community site and whether they were ‘protected’ trees;

(viii)Requested clarification of what would need to happen if the requested increase in HIF money was not forthcoming; and

(ix)   Requested clarification of what would need to happen if the Government funding for the dualling of the A120 was not forthcoming.

 

Following a discussion and debate on matters pertaining to this report and questions by Members which were answered, as appropriate, by the Acting Director (Planning) (Gary Guiver), the Spatial Planning Manager (Matthew Jericho) and the Lead Officer for Planning, Housing & Economic Growth (Karen Syrett):-

 

It was moved by Councillor Carlo Guglielmi, seconded by Councillor Tom Cunningham and:-

 

RESOLVED that the Tendring Colchester Borders Garden Community (TCBGC) Joint Committee notes the update on gathering additional evidence to support the preparation of the Development Planning Document.