Contact: Stuart Roberts, ext 6782 e-mail: [email protected]

Kevin Travers, ext 7763 e-mail: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report firstly outlines the new framework of regional and sub-regional spatial strategies that replace Regional Planning Guidance and Structure Plans under legislation which could become operative this summer. It also summarises the progress being made on the preparation of strategies relating to Hampshire. More detailed information is provided in relation to the Eastern Dorset/South Hampshire/Isle of Wight sub-regional study as it covers part of this Panel's geographic area. Secondly, the report describes the progress on the Regional Transport Strategy and other regionally important transport studies and strategies.

2. The Proposed New Development Plan Framework

2.1 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill proposes to replace the current system of Regional Planning Guidance, Structure Plans and Local Plans with a new two-tier system of development plans:

(i) Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) prepared by Regional Assemblies; and

(ii) Local Development Frameworks (LDFs) prepared by Unitary and District Councils.

2.2 Sub-regional strategies might be prepared for selected areas, which would become part of the RSS. The Bill gives Regional Assemblies the discretion to invite local authorities to assist their regional assembly in the preparation of the RSS and any sub-regional strategies. The Government has tabled an amendment to the Bill in the House of Lords to make it a statutory requirement for regional planning bodies to seek advice from County and Unitary Councils on the preparation of RSSs and for such Councils to respond.

2.3 Minerals and Waste Local Plans would be replaced by Minerals and Waste LDFs, but still be prepared by County/Unitary Councils.

2.4 The Government's current intentions are that the Bill should become an Act in March 2004, with the new system likely to come into operation in June or July 2004. Adopted Structure Plans (and Local Plans) would remain operative for up to three years until superseded by new style plans; so the Hampshire Structure Plan will remain in force until 2006 when the RSS for the South East is expected to be finalised by the Deputy Prime Minister. However, the House of Lords has recently voted to amend the Bill such that the proposed regional planning arrangements would only take force where there is an elected assembly in place. Whilst it is highly unlikely that the Government will accept this amendment, it may have the effect of introducing further delays to the Bill before it becomes an Act.

2.5 The RSS will provide part of the guidance framework for the next Local Transport Plan.

3. Progress at Regional Level

3.1 A project plan for the preparation of RSS and sub-regional strategies for South East England has been approved by the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA). (This can be seen at http://www.southeast-ra.gov.uk/regional_policies/planning/rss/index. html.) It proposes a tight timetable for the preparation of the RSS: strategic options on the level and broad distribution of growth should be ready in summer 2004, leading to a draft Strategy being available for public consultation during winter 2004/05. This would lead to submission of a draft strategy to the Government Office for the South East (GOSE) in spring 2005. Approval by the Deputy Prime Minister is hoped for in mid-2006. A detailed timetable is attached as an appendix.

3.2 The project plan identifies ten areas across the South East for which sub-regional studies will be undertaken by the local authorities in the areas involved. Three affect Hampshire:

(i) Blackwater Valley;

(ii) Western Corridor (based on the Thames Valley but including Basingstoke town, the northern parts of Hart District and the whole of Rushmoor Borough); and

(iii) Eastern Dorset/South Hampshire/Isle of Wight.

3.3 Each study will analyse the linkages between the study area and adjacent areas and will draw up options for the amount of economic and housing development, and their broad spatial implications. The studies are to be completed by March/April 2004. They will help SEERA to decide whether a sub-regional strategy is needed for the area concerned and, if so, the geographic boundaries of the strategy.

4. Blackwater Valley

4.1 The Blackwater Valley covers the towns of Aldershot, Camberley, Farnborough, Farnham and Fleet and smaller settlements including Ash, Frimley Green, Blackwater, Sandhurst and Yateley.

4.2 In 2002 the Blackwater Valley Network, a long established grouping of the nine county, unitary and district councils in the area, commissioned consultants Atkins/Ancer SPA to undertake a study of the Blackwater Valley. The purpose of the study was to inform and influence the preparation of the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) and future development plans and strategies including Local Transport Plans and the proposed Local Development Frameworks. The study formulated three scenarios of the future and set out their spatial implications. Public consultation took place on the study in the summer of 2003.

4.3 The Blackwater Valley Network is now focusing on SEERA's request that a further study be prepared to help inform the RSS, which will include a review of the above Atkins/Ancer SPA study. A Project Brief for SEERA's study has been agreed by the Network which sets out work needing to be undertaken in order to help determine whether a sub-regional strategy is appropriate for the Blackwater Valley.

4.4 The report for SEERA considered the following issues:

(i) The characteristics of the Blackwater Valley study area including how it functions as a sub-region and the functions of the individual towns within it. There will also be an assessment of the economic and transport linkages between the study area and adjoining areas.

(ii) A commentary on whether the Blackwater Valley is a clear sub-region which has a set of core problems or needs which are distinctive and require collaborative action, and what the key factors are which make this sub-region different from the rest of the region.

(iii) Conclusions on what the sub-regional policy would be and what it would do that regional policies cannot. This section will be based on growth scenarios including those suggested by Atkins/Ancer Spa, together with higher growth options. The implications of each option will be considered including their effects on planning and environmental constraints, and transport and other infrastructure considerations.

(iv) Clear advice on whether a sub-regional strategy is required and if so the extent of the area and of the policy coverage.

(v) Technical annexes including a comparison of the findings of the Atkins/Ancer Spa report and the Blackwater Valley Mass Transit Study undertaken during 2002.

4.5 The report was prepared in draft by the Blackwater Valley Officers' Steering Group and considered by the Blackwater Valley Members' Steering Group on 19 March. It will now be forwarded to SEERA, subject to endorsement by the Members' Steering Group.

5. Western Corridor

5.1 The Western Corridor extends along the Thames Valley from Heathrow Airport to the edge of Swindon, and from Didcot and High Wycombe in the north to Basingstoke Fleet and Farnborough in the south.

5.2 There is no existing technical analysis for this area as a whole, but recent studies have been prepared for parts of the area including the Thames Valley Multi Modal Study.

5.3 A brief for a sub-regional study for this area has been agreed between SEERA and the 22 county, unitary and district councils which comprise the Western Corridor. The brief anticipates submission of a preliminary report to SEERA this month, with a fuller report by the summer to help influence the emerging Regional Spatial Strategy. These reports will draw together key conclusions and advice on whether a sub-regional strategy may be required and if so the geographical extent of the area.

5.4 A Member level steering group has been established to oversee the study, which is supported by an officer group led in terms of overall responsibility by the Berkshire authorities Joint Strategic Planning Unit.

5.5 The preliminary report addresses the following key issues:

(i) The opportunities for achieving sustainable long term economic growth in the area.

(ii) The broad amounts and sustainable distribution of employment and housing development to meet economic and social needs.

(iii) The key economic and transport linkages within the study area and between adjoining areas, including planned and possible additional growth at Heathrow Airport.

(iv) The need for a higher proportion of affordable housing and the mechanisms for achieving this.

(v) The implications of growth options on the environment and quality of life criteria.

5.6 At the Members' meeting on 8 March consideration was given to a draft of the preliminary report to be submitted to SEERA, which drew together sections on the economy, transport, options for the distribution of housing, the environment and quality of life. An oral update on progress will be given to the Panel.

6. Regional Transport Strategy

6.1 The draft Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) for the South East was subject to public consultation towards the end of 2002. The County Council's comments on the document were reported to the Executive Member for Environment in April 2003 and subsequently forwarded to SEERA. In July 2003 the County Council was invited to appear at the Public Examination of the draft strategy and following consideration of issues at that meeting the Inspector's Report, which includes proposed modifications to the strategy, was published in November 2003. A revised draft of the RTS, taking into account these proposed revisions, will be published for a further round of limited consultation early in 2004. The final revised version of the strategy will be published later in 2004 and form part of the Regional Planning Guidance for the South East.

6.2 Further information on the content of the RTS and the effect on each Panel's strategies will be given when the RTS has been finalised. It will form part of the guidance framework for the next Local Transport Plan, on which the Panels will also be fully consulted.

7. Multi-Modal Studies

7.1 Previous reports to Panels have provided details on the progress and recommendations of the multi-modal studies that were important to movement on the strategic rail and trunk road routes into and around Hampshire.

7.2 Following the announcement by the Secretary of State for Transport on a number of multi-modal studies on 9 July 2003, the Department for Transport gave local authorities the opportunity to submit an additional supplementary bid for funds as part of the Local Transport Plan process, where these are intended to cover costs of actions specifically invited by the Government.

7.3 Three multi-modal studies addressed in the Secretary of State's announcement had an impact upon Hampshire. The County Council reviewed the announcement and considered that in relation to the recommendations for ORBIT and the Thames Valley Multi-Modal Study, Hampshire's role is primarily to support the initiatives of others and therefore the County Council did not bid for any additional funds. However, with regard to the South Coast Corridor Multi-Modal Study (SoCoMMS), Hampshire has a far more central role to play in delivering the key recommendations of the study as part of Solent Transport and in developing sub-regional initiatives as part of the RTS in partnership with SEERA. The County Council therefore submitted a bid as an integral part of delivery of the transport strategy for South Hampshire for the A27 Southampton to Fareham corridor, which was accepted.

8. A34 Scoping Study

8.1 GOSE and SEERA have recently appointed consultants to undertake a scoping study of the A34 corridor between Southampton and the M40 North of Oxford. This scoping study will determine alternative options for the form of the study (originally envisaged as a tranche 3 Multi-Modal Study), ranging from no further study to a full corridor study, and indicating the complexity of modelling and appraisal work that may be required. Following completion of this work in April 2004, Government will consider how to take forward the strategy for this corridor, which in addition to the A34 also includes the M3 between junction 9 and its junction with the M27. This study will take into account the Route Management Strategy being prepared for the Highways Agency (see later section).

9. Bristol/Bath to South Coast Study

9.1 Although not a multi-modal study, the scope of this study is broadly similar. The overall objective is to examine the strategic transport movements on the north-west to south-east axis for both road and rail links over an area stretching from Southampton and Poole to the M4 junctions 15 to 19 and bounded by the A37 in the west and the A34 in the east.

9.2 The Secretary of State has made the decision to detrunk the A36 and remove it from the `core' national trunk road network. However, the road currently remains part of the Trunk Road network with responsibility for its maintenance and operation resting with the Highways Agency. The Agency is consulting affected highway authorities over the details of the proposed detrunking arrangements, for which a date has not yet been set. The Bristol/Bath to South Coast Study focuses on how the corridor is treated when it is detrunked, rather than re-visiting the case for detrunking.

9.3 The study is being managed by a Steering Group led by the Government Office for the South West. Hampshire County Council is a member of this Steering Group. The study commenced in June 2002 and the consultants' final report was received in February 2004. A key issue considered was the suitability of alternatives to the A36/A46 corridor for both road and rail. The Study has concluded that the A36/A46 is not a `trunk' route, carrying large numbers of longer distance traffic between the regions, but rather functions as an intra-regional route connecting parts of the region as well as meeting local needs. The South West Regional Assembly sought the County Council's views on the Study in a recent consultation. The County Council responded in March 2004 giving broad agreement to the main principle of the study, that the A36/A46 is not a trunk route, but also highlighting some areas for improvement in terms of the future role of public transport and rail freight.

10. Route Management Strategies

10.1 The Route Management Strategy (RMS) process has been developed by the Highways Agency to help it focus on local needs and in considering how roads planning can be integrated with other transport and planning decisions. RMSs are being developed for the whole of the Highways Agency's network across the country, and represent its understanding of the function of each route and the problems and issues along it.

10.2 RMSs are designed to take a strategic approach to the maintenance, operation and improvement of the network, and also involve regional stakeholders and the public in the decision-making process. Each RMS will lead to the adoption of a ten-year strategy and a three-year investment plan for each of the routes comprising the strategic road network.

10.3 The RMSs that have an impact on Hampshire, which the County Council have been involved in, are listed below together with a brief outline of their current status.

A303/A30 (M3-Honiton) RMS

10.4 This RMS commenced in spring 2003 and is due to be completed in spring 2004. The A303/A30 trunk road between M3 and Honiton is a strategic route and is a mix of single and dual carriageways passing through rural areas. The route within Hampshire is of dual carriageway standard throughout and runs from the M3 to the county boundary near Shipton Bellinger. It is subject to high seasonal variation in traffic flows, with particularly high traffic volumes throughout the summer months.

10.5 The section of the A303 in Hampshire should be examined, particularly from Andover eastwards, to see whether safety improvements are required to alignment and junctions which may not be consistent with the standards to be provided elsewhere on the route. This would be particularly relevant if the route is to be promoted as an alternative to the M4/M5 between the south-east and south-west.

A34 RMS

10.6 This strategy commenced in winter 2002 and consultation recently concluded in February 2004. The County Council submitted a response, which highlighted the strategic nature of the road within Hampshire as well as the need to consider proposed developments that could affect movements along the corridor.

10.7 The County Council also recently consulted on proposals for minor improvements to junction 9 M3/A34 as part of the Easton Lane Cycle Route, which is part of the National Cycle Network. The Highways Agency has therefore been asked to be mindful of this proposal in drawing up its final strategy. The final strategy will also depend on the conclusion of the A34 Scoping Study identified above.

M3(J1-13)/A316 (London-Southampton) RMS

10.8 Work on this RMS commenced in spring 2002 but has been delayed pending the conclusion of the multi-modal studies. It has recently recommenced and is due to be completed later this year. The County Council was invited to submit initial comments and suggestions in advance of the strategy being drawn up.

10.9 These comments highlighted that as well as being a key strategic link between London and the South Coast, the M3 also has a vital role to play as part of the local road network, particularly at its southern end serving cities and towns such as Southampton, Winchester and Eastleigh. In this area there are a number of junctions, spaced closely together, which attract a significant proportion of local traffic. This RMS also needs to fully take into account the implications for traffic movements of Solent Transport together with existing and emerging land use plans for the area.

10.10 The County Council has also been holding regular informal discussions with the Highways Agency on both M3 noise and other matters involving the impact of the motorway on Hampshire's environment. As a consequence the Council is seeking to bring forward the date for resurfacing of the M3 with a low noise surface, particularly between junctions 4 to 4A and 10 to 13 as well as any other seriously affected section.

11. Implications of the Route Management Strategy Studies on North Hampshire

11.1 The extent of the area covered by North Hampshire means that all of the studies identified above have some impact upon travel in the area, particularly for longer distance and strategic journeys. The role and usage of the A34 are important for travel in the western part of the area, forming a vital north-south link. The M3 is also considered or impacted by all the other studies.

11.2 The development of the transport strategy for North Hampshire in the second Local Transport Plan will need to consider carefully the impact of strategic traffic movements in the area. There will be a need to strike a balance between protecting the many environmentally sensitive parts of this area, whilst ensuring that the residents of North Hampshire have good accessibility to the services they need. The conclusions of these studies will be an important element feeding into this process.

Recommendation

That this report be used by officers and Members as a background document to the preparation of the next Local Transport Plan.

8679/SR/KT

APPENDIX

SEERA'S CURRENT TIMETABLE FOR THE REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY