DACORUM BOROUGH LOCAL PLAN INQUIRY – INSPECTOR’S REPORT – AUGUST 2002 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CHAPTER 4 – GENERAL PROPOSALS AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 4.1. GENERAL PROPOSALS: GENERAL Objections Rep No. Name Rep No. Name 4045 HCC Environment Department 4930 L English Nature Key Issues (a) Whether there should be a programme of Comprehensive Settlement Appraisals to cover Berkhamsted, Hemel Hempstead, Tring and/or other settlements. (4045) (b) Ought the Plan to include a statement to explain how the Council intends to engage local communities in dialogue about sustainable development. (4045) (c) Should the chapter on the natural environment be the first topic chapter so that it sets the context for the rest of the policies. (4930L) Inspector’s Conclusions (a) Comprehensive Settlement Appraisals (CSA’s) 4.1.1. This objection is similar to objection 5179, which I have already considered in paragraphs 2.6.1 to 2.6.3. For the reasons I have already given I do not believe it would be appropriate to delay the adoption of the Plan in order to undertake CSA’s for Berkhamsted, Hemel Hempstead and Tring at this stage. However, I would urge the Council to undertake such appraisals as part of the next review of the Plan. Since they are contained within the adopted Structure Plan I do not accept that they are of doubtful legality as is suggested by the Council. Indeed, I consider that such appraisals are likely to accord with the Government’s stated intention of encouraging greater involvement of local communities in the planning process. In my view it would be sensible for the current Plan to include a commitment to undertake these appraisals. The most suitable location for such a commitment would be in section 15 of Part 1. (b) Local communities and sustainable development 4.1.2. I accept that the Council did undertake consultation in preparation of the current Plan, although it appears that it was not entirely effective in achieving the active participation of local people. I have no doubt therefore that the development of a more inclusive process of consultation in the future would be beneficial. The development of the CSA approach would be one way of achieving this. Dialogue with local residents over the design briefs for many of the proposal sites, as the Council apparently intends, is another. 4.1.3. While the latter approach is to be encouraged, its site-specific nature is unlikely to meet the more holistic approach to settlements that is sought by the Structure Plan. This reinforces my view that the CSA approach is to be preferred in the longer term. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHAPTER 4 – GENERAL PROPOSALS AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Page 59 DACORUM BOROUGH LOCAL PLAN INQUIRY – INSPECTOR’S REPORT – AUGUST 2002 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4.1.4. I agree, however, with the objector that there needs to be more than just a general commitment to undertaking CSA’s for the 3 towns. In my opinion, the Plan should also include a statement highlighting the topics, listed in paragraph 91 of the Structure Plan Review, on which the Council considers that consultation would be helpful. 4.1.5. To my mind the Council’s proposed further change FC14 fails to adequately address this objection. Not only is it so vague as to be virtually meaningless but it gives no time scale or programme for the consultation process. I consider, therefore that a much more definitive statement is required on the consultation that will be carried out during the Plan period. This would ensure that areas of discussion can be more effectively targeted and resources properly planned. This would avoid giving an open-ended commitment, which the Council is understandably keen to avoid. (c) The location for the chapter on the environment 4.1.6. I can understand the objector’s desire to see greater prominence given to environmental policies. However, while such policies are undoubtedly of considerable importance, I am not satisfied that this justifies changing the chapter order of the Plan. In my view, it is entirely logical that the strategic policies should come first. This ensures that the other policies of the Plan are properly set in context. 4.1.7. It should be remembered that the Plan has to be read as a whole. The fact that the natural environment is dealt with in section 10 of Part 3 of the Plan does not mean therefore that it is of any less importance in development control terms. Sustainable planning is based on a holistic approach, which takes into account economic, social and environmental factors. The weight to be attached to each of these factors will depend on the particular circumstances of each case. I do not consider, therefore, that it would be appropriate to give undue prominence to environmental policies. In the circumstances, I see no need to modify the Plan to make natural environment the first topic chapter. Recommendation 4.1.8. The Plan be modified as follows:- (a) Amend Section 15 of Part 1 of the Plan to include a commitment to undertake Comprehensive Settlement Appraisals for Hemel Hempstead, Berkhamsted and Tring as part of the next review of the Plan. (b) Insert a definitive statement identifying the specific topics on which the Council intends to undertake further consultation during the Plan period. The statement should include a time-scale for the consultation process. 4.1.9. No modification should be made to the Plan in the light of objection 4930L. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHAPTER 4 – GENERAL PROPOSALS AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Page 60 DACORUM BOROUGH LOCAL PLAN INQUIRY – INSPECTOR’S REPORT – AUGUST 2002 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4.2. GENERAL PROPOSALS: SUGGESTED NEW POLICY Objections Rep No Name Rep No. Name 5173 Tring Environmental Forum 5177 Tring Environmental Forum 5174 Tring Environmental Forum 5178 Tring Environmental Forum 5175 Tring Environmental Forum 5181 Tring Environmental Forum 5176 Tring Environmental Forum 5182 Tring Environmental Forum Key Issues (a) Whether the Plan should develop an overarching sustainability strategy through the inclusion of a further chapter covering strategic policies on sustainable development. (5173, 5174, 5175, 5176, 5177, 5178, ) (b) Should the Plan include a policy that seeks an environmentally, socially and economically sustainable quantity, pattern and form of development. (5173) (c) Should all proposed developments be assessed in the light of agreed Local Agenda 21 policies. (5174) (d) Is there a need for the Plan to establish environmental assessment and monitoring procedures. (5175) (e) Whether an additional policy is required to welcome new development that does not have an unacceptably detrimental effect on the economy, communities or the environment, or the means whereby future needs will be met. (5176). (f) Should a policy on international, national and local sustainability targets be inserted. (5177) (g) Whether a policy should be added to require consideration of local capacity restrictions. (5178) (h) Should the Plan include a policy on risk and public perception. (5181) (i) Whether the precautionary principle should be applied to new development proposals. (5182) Inspector’s Conclusions (a) A Sustainability Strategy 4.2.1 As I have already stated in paragraph 2.5.2 of my report, I am not satisfied that the Plan gives sufficient prominence or weight to the concept of sustainability. It is abundantly clear from national, regional and strategic guidance that it should play a central role in the Development Plan Strategy. While the Council has clearly taken the concept of sustainability into account in developing the Local Plan strategy, I am not satisfied that it forms a key building block. I therefore agree with the objector that the Plan needs to be modified to include a clearer overarching sustainability strategy. 4.2.2 I am not convinced, however, that this warrants the inclusion of the multiplicity of policies that are advocated by the objector. The Structure Plan contains only one key strategic policy on sustainability. In my opinion, a similar approach in the Local Plan would provide an appropriate context for the remaining policies. Although the policies suggested by the objector collectively have some merit, in many cases they are unduly vague. They also have a considerable deal of overlap. I am not satisfied, therefore, that the Plan should be modified in the manner suggested by the objector. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHAPTER 4 – GENERAL PROPOSALS AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Page 61 DACORUM BOROUGH LOCAL PLAN INQUIRY – INSPECTOR’S REPORT – AUGUST 2002 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (b) A sustainable quantity, form and pattern of development 4.2.3 While the intentions