Archived decisions

Contact: Stuart Jarvis , ext 6126 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The County Council is statutorily required to provide advice to the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) on policies to be contained in the regional spatial strategy entitled the South East Plan, which the Assembly is now preparing. This gives the County Council an opportunity to influence the drafting of the plan and, through this process, to safeguard and promote Hampshire's interests.

2. Background

2.1 The purpose of this report is to seek Members' consideration of the guiding principles that should govern the County Council's engagement with the development of both the South Hampshire and the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley Sub-Regional Strategies, which will be reported to Cabinet at the end of October.

2.2 SEERA has agreed, following consideration of a series of sub-regional studies, to commission preparation of sub-regional strategies for those parts of the region where it is considered that major development and change is likely to take place.

3. Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH)

3.1 One of the sub-regional areas relates to South Hampshire, and the County Council is working together with the other principal authorities, Southampton City and Portsmouth City Councils, and all of the District Councils whose areas fall within the sub-region, to prepare a sub-regional strategy for submission to SEERA for inclusion in the South East Plan.

3.2 The 11 authorities involved in the South Hampshire Sub-Regional Strategy have formed a voluntary working partnership to progress this work. The Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) is the body through which the three strategic authorities will provide advice to SEERA as specified in the sub-regional strategy brief (attached as Appendix 1). The letter setting out the basis of this arrangement to SEERA from the three principal authorities is included as Appendix 2 for Members' further information.

3.3 The sub-regional strategy development process and the County Council's involvement in the PUSH are radically different from previous planning activity. The emphasis is very much on partnership working, on engaging with local communities and on delivery and implementation, as well as policy development and monitoring. Consideration of an appropriate delivery vehicle for the South Hampshire Sub-Regional Strategy will form part of the advice provided to SEERA at the end of October and is an important issue for the County Council and other Local Authorities in the South Hampshire area. Indeed the leadership role for local government is essential if local accountability and meaningful community engagement is to inform and underpin the development of the sub-region into the future.

3.4 The other sub-regional strategy which affects Hampshire covers the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley area. This area includes within Hampshire the whole of Hart District Council and Rushmoor Borough Council areas, together with part of Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council's area, including Basingstoke itself but excluding parts of the borough to the south and south-west of the town. The area also includes smaller parts of the counties of Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Surrey, together with the unitary authorities of Bracknell Forest, Reading, Slough, Windsor and Maidenhead, West Berkshire and Wokingham. The principal authorities (counties and unitaries) are charged with preparing a sub-regional strategy for submission to SEERA (brief attached as Appendix 3) and, as in South Hampshire, the principal authorities are working together with the District and Borough Councils. Unlike South Hampshire, however, there is no formal partnership in place for the sub-region. The sub-regional strategy steering group is now chaired by Councillor Glen (Executive Member for Spatial Strategy).

3.5 The South East Plan and its component sub-regional strategies are also looking at a longer time horizon than has traditionally been the case for strategic planning documents. In this context it is also important to note that the South East Plan proposals will largely in practice be aimed at the period beyond 2011, other than consolidation of and building upon existing strategic planning policies and proposals which set the framework for development up to this time.

4. Programme

4.1 The programme for this work is extremely tight, with submission of the sub-regional strategy required by the end of October and an interim progress report at the beginning of October. The development of the South Hampshire Sub-Regional Strategy work is already well underway and further technical work and policy development and discussion will take place in September and October. Arrangements have been made within the context of this extremely tight timetable to include a wider group of Members, together with social and economic partners as far as possible.

4.2 Work is less well-advanced on the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley Sub-Regional Strategy, and due to the tight timetable and complexity of the administrative arrangements, there will be more limited opportunities for wider engagement of elected Members or social and economic partners beyond strategy steering group members.

4.3 The County Council has consistently commented that the timetable is unrealistically constrained and inhibits the proper engagement of both elected Members and key stakeholders in the process. SEERA remains committed to the timetable at this stage, though there is some acknowledgement that further work will be needed on the sub-regional strategies, following the initial submission at the end of October.

4.4 In order to meet the timetable, the sub-regional strategy report from PUSH is due to be considered by the Cabinet at its meeting on 25 October, which precedes a meeting of the PUSH Steering Group (Leaders and Chief Executives) on 27 October. The Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley Member Steering Group will also be considering the draft report at a meeting on 27 October. A special meeting of the County Council will take place on 28 October to consider both sub-regional strategies alongside work on Central Hampshire, which is also being considered by Cabinet at this meeting.

5. Wider Member Engagement

5.1 Despite the constraints of this timetable it has nevertheless been possible to arrange some events for County Council Members to keep in touch with developments and to express views and opinions to be taken forward into the sub-regional work. In this context seminars were held in July and early September, with a further seminar due to take place in mid-October to provide an opportunity for further Member input prior to Cabinet's consideration of the report on 25 October.

5.2 The PUSH Group has also arranged a series of workshop/seminar events to obtain wider political and stakeholder involvement. The first workshop took place on 6 September in Portsmouth to consider quality of life and constraints and opportunities. The second workshop took place in Winchester on 14 September with a transport theme, and the final seminar will take place in Southampton on 27 September to consider spatial options. In addition to representatives from local authorities, social and economic partners, SEERA, the Government Office for the South East, the South East Economic Development Agency and the local strategic partnerships within Hampshire have also been invited to the workshop events.

6. National Context

6.1 Members will be familiar with the broad national context in which the sub-regional strategies are being developed. Issues around housing numbers and housing need in the South East have received a very high national political profile following the publication of the Barker Report and the Sustainable Communities Plan promoted by the Government. SEERA has to prepare the regional spatial strategy in the context of national policy guidance and there is a clear expectation of future development and growth within the South East at levels above those achieved in recent years.

6.2 Against this background the PUSH authorities have acknowledged that in South Hampshire there is a need to carefully test and evaluate whether managed growth can provide an opportunity to address the significant strategic issues which the area faces (eg inadequate and overstretched transport infrastructure, increasingly unaffordable housing and lack of access to housing for increasing sections of the community, pockets of social and economic deprivation and a widening gap in economic performance between South Hampshire and the South East average). The PUSH authorities believe that a managed growth strategy which focuses on regeneration of the cities and older urban areas offers the potential to ensure that existing problems are tackled and addressed whilst there is a move to more sustainable communities and maintaining and improving the environment, and the cultural and heritage values of the sub-region. The PUSH authorities also consider that it is preferable for local authorities to seek to manage and lead the process of policy development than for it to be imposed from outside. This underpins the determination of the authorities to drive the sub-regional strategy process forward through PUSH.

6.3 The concerns over infrastructure deficit, unaffordable housing and quality of life issues and impacts from growth are shared by the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley authorities.

7. Regional and Local Context

South Hampshire

7.1 Members will also be broadly familiar with the more detailed background to the South Hampshire area, particularly in respect of the economy, which was considered by Cabinet in February of this year in the context of the South East Hampshire Area Investment Framework (AIF). The report on the South East Hampshire AIF clearly highlighted some of the significant economic issues affecting the area, such as the relatively poor performance on economic output relative to the South East average, the fact that six wards within the area are in the top 20% most deprived wards in England and Wales, economic growth sectors are under-represented in this economy and constraints such as low skill levels, transport congestion and shortage of good industrial premises and sites. The AIF strategy identified six main themes for the area:

(i) competitive and diverse economy;

(ii) workforce skill development;

(iii) social inclusion;

(iv) creating quality urban places;

(v) transport; and

(vi) cultural capital.

7.2 The AIF strategy also highlighted the clear linkages which would be needed with the South East Plan and sub-regional policy development. It is also clear that many of the issues which affect the South East Hampshire AIF are equally relevant to the Southampton area.

7.3 Whilst there has been a significant improvement in recent years in the bringing forward of sites for redevelopment within the main urban areas and higher levels of housing on urban brown field sites are being realised, there nevertheless remains a significant challenge to secure high quality urban regeneration of the older urban areas and the two cities in ways which ensure a balance between employment and housing provision across the sub-region as a whole. The redevelopment of former employment sites and land for mixed used or exclusively housing uses is an issue which must be carefully balanced within the overall strategy framework.

7.4 The South East Dorset South Hampshire and Isle of Wight Sub-Regional Study also considered the sub-regional strategy area in more detail, providing a full examination of the planning context within which the sub-regional strategy should be developed. In particular, with regard to housing development, there is a real need to ensure that the overall level of growth planned for within the sub-regional strategy preferred option is soundly based on real evidence from demographic and needs based assessment sources. The current Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) rate rolled forward for the sub-regional strategy period would indicate a requirement for 68,000 units, whilst suggested RPG +40% would require some 95,000 units in the same period. Existing plans and urban capacity studies indicate that around 40,000-45,000 units could be accommodated leaving a balance to be found on new green field allocations within the strategy.

7.5 In addition to these considerations, Members will also be aware of the significant decisions affecting this area which have been made in recent months concerning Dibden Bay and the designation of the New Forest National Park and the boundary decisions associated with it. The issues raised by these decisions and the most recent Government decision not to confirm funding for the first phase of the South Hampshire Rapid Transit System will all need to inform the development of the sub-regional strategy options.

Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley

7.6 Members will be broadly familiar with the context for the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley Sub-Regional Strategy from the studies which were completed earlier this year. There are differences with South Hampshire, particularly in respect of the economy, which has consistently been identified as one of the top performing areas nationally outside London, and where the concerns relate to over-heating rather than under-performance (as in South Hampshire). Indeed the `Western Sector' (broadly the same as the current sub-regional area) was down-graded from a major regional growth area to an area where "... a reducing rate of economic and housing development is appropriate" as long ago as 1994 (Regional Planning Guidance). This reflected the pressure on services, infrastructure, labour force and quality of life issues generally, which resulted from the sustained growth and development during the 1980s and early 1990s.

7.7 The transport infrastructure, which was part of the attraction of the sub-region for development and economic growth, has also been stretched by the levels of demand resulting from this sustained period of growth. Congestion and severe overloading on local and strategic road routes, and on the rail network, have significantly reduced the level of service offered by the transport infrastructure within the area. The sub-regional studies also identified the problems over lack of north-south routes (road and rail) as an issue in the Western Corridor area, while the Blackwater Valley area suffers most from peak-time congestion, and rail services which are poorly integrated and mainly serve longer distance commuting into and out of the area, rather than local travel needs within the Blackwater Valley itself.

7.8 Housing markets in both areas suffer from affordability issues, with most parts of the sub-region exhibiting above average house prices. The lack of affordable housing has the potential to damage the economic performance in the area, where labour supply is already a concern, and the economy is increasingly reliant on in-commuting.

8. Outcomes and Feedback from Member Engagement

8.1 The purpose of this section of the report is to briefly outline conclusions which emerged from the PUSH Members Seminar held on 6 September and the County Council Members Seminar on 8 September. The main theme which emerged from these seminars concerned quality of life issues and the principles which Members felt should provide a focus for consideration of the developing spatial options for the sub-regional strategy. The Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley sub-regional work on this issue is being carried out through a survey which concludes on 21 September. The survey is based on the same material as the South Hampshire workshop.

8.2 The quality of life framework prepared by SEERA (Integrated Regional Framework or IRF) sets out a number of objectives against which all regional and sub-regional policies and plans may be assessed for adherence to and delivery of more sustainable communities. The PUSH Member workshop in particular focussed on how the objectives of the Integrated Regional Framework could be used as an evaluation tool for testing the emerging spatial policy options. Members were asked to weight and prioritise the objectives on the basis of desired outcomes and relevance to delivery through a spatial plan. The result of these deliberations, which were echoed in the comments received at the County Council Members Seminar, have been used to provide the template for the guiding principles recommended for Cabinet endorsement at the end of this report.

9. Guiding Principles

9.1 The County Council has supported the exploration of managed growth as a policy response to these issues. The authority has been equally clear that managed growth cannot and will not be accepted at any price. There are a number of critical tests which must be met in order for a managed growth strategy to be successful or acceptable. Cabinet is invited to endorse these critical success factors:

(i) development to be supported by timely and comprehensive provision of infrastructure;

(ii) a proper and continuing balance between economic, housing and other development to be struck and maintained throughout the process;

(iii) development and growth to be based on addressing current and future social and community needs of the sub-regions;

(iv) development to be of a consistently high quality to enhance the quality of urban and rural areas within the sub-regions; and

(v) development to be of a scale, nature, location and quality which makes efficient use of resources such as land, and does not compromise the quality and character of the sub-regions' environments.

9.2 In the context of these critical success factors Cabinet is further invited to endorse the following guiding principles which should inform the County Council's engagement with the PUSH authorities in developing the South Hampshire Sub-Regional Strategy and its engagement in the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley Sub-Regional Strategy. These guiding principles reflect deliberations of the Members' seminar in respect of the significance felt appropriate for the various factors:

(i) improved accessibility to tackle social and economic exclusion;

(ii) to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to live in a decent, sustainably constructed and affordable home;

(iii) to conserve and enhance the region's rich environment, including biodiversity, water and air quality, and landscape;

(iv) to sustain economic growth and competitiveness across the region and to develop a dynamic, diverse and knowledge-based economy that excels in innovation with higher value, lower impact activities;

(v) to reduce the risk and impact of flooding through future development patterns;

(vi) to improve efficiency in land utilisation (eg through the re-use of previously developed land and appropriate densities in new developments to deliver Urban Renaissance);

(vii) to protect, enhance and make accessible the region's countryside and historic environment;

(viii) to protect and enhance the sub-region's natural resources (eg through sustainable water resources management, use of recycled construction materials and promotion of energy conservation and renewable energy sources);

(ix) to stimulate economic revival in priority regeneration areas, and to create vibrant and sustainable communities;

(x) to improve the health and well-being of the population and reduce inequalities in health; and

(xi) to reduce the growth in road congestion and pollution levels by improving travel choice, and reducing the need for travel by car/lorry.

Recommendation

That the Cabinet endorse the guiding principles set out in section 9 of this report, as a basis for the County Council's engagement in both the South Hampshire and the Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley Sub-Regional Strategies.