Inspector’s Preliminary Questions – Matter 1 (Duty to Cooperate) Evidence in support of the Council’s Response: Question 17 Evidence in this section: Q17e DCLG response on new garden cities March 2015 Q17e WHBC letter to DCLG on new garden cities January 2015 Q17f Hertfordshire Leaders Group presentation – ‘Joining up the dots’ Q17f HIPP Planning for Herts beyond 2031 – January 2017 Q17f HIPP Planning for Herts beyond 2031 – March 2017 Q17f Herts Planning Group Minutes September 2016 Q17f Report to Herts Planning Group – Growth beyond 2031 Q17f WHBC presentation to Herts Planning Group May 2017 432 433 Cllr Roger Trigg Executive Member for Planning Reply to: address as below Date: 7 January 2015 Direct Tel: 01707 357239 Email: [email protected] Eric Pickles / Brandon Lewis / Grant Shapps / Bob Kerslake Department for Communities & Local Government 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Dear xxx New Garden Cities and New Towns I am writing to let you know that Welwyn Hatfield is working hard in accordance with NPPF guidance to prepare a Local Plan for the borough that seeks to meet the development needs of the area. Over the last few months we have presented housing and employment evidence to our Planning Panel which indicates an objective need for about 12,500 dwellings and 12,000 new jobs by 2031, plus further growth in our wider housing market area. We anticipate that about 4,900 homes can be built on brownfield sites which means that up to 7,600 may have to be directed to green belt locations. We have hosted two very well attended Panel meetings to consider all of the urban and green belt sites that have so far been promoted for inclusion in the forthcoming Local Plan. It was at these meetings that councillors and members of the public queried the potential for new Garden Cities or New Towns as a preferable way of meeting housing needs, rather than the continuous expansion of towns and villages into valuable and much-loved green belt land. Expansion of our towns inevitably makes them less sustainable as they sprawl outwards and in fact conflicts with Garden City ideals. There is increasing frustration within our communities but the reality is that we have no genuinely alternative growth options. Welwyn Hatfield has the experience of both Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield New Town as a way of providing high quality homes, job opportunities and associated infrastructure and services all with green and pleasant environments. The desirability of these communities as places to live and work indicates their merit as a development model, and is indeed recognised by the NPPF. The Council appreciates the Government’s view that new Garden Cities should be “locally led” but is constrained by the fact that there are no local aspirations or site opportunities within this area to accommodate a new community of sufficient critical mass. We also have strong doubts about the planning and political ability to deliver new settlements through co- operation with surrounding authorities. The nearest plausible locations are outside of our housing market area and would very likely be unsupported by the relevant local authority. 434 We consider that new communities can only be delivered if the Government takes a prominent and pro-active role in partnership with local authorities, statutory bodies and all other interested parties. We note for example recent announcements for Garden Cities at Ebbsfleet and Bicester. Given we have within our borough what is widely regarded as the finest Garden City in existence, we are willing and able to offer experience to help ensure that any new Garden Cities are exemplar 21st century interpretations of the concept. We now look to the Government to help us facilitate this. Yours sincerely Cllr Roger Trigg Executive Member for Planning, Housing and Community cc: Rt Hon Eric Pickles Brandon Lewis MP Grant Shapps MP Sir Bob Kerslake 435 Joining-up the Dots Hertfordshire Beyond 2031 Cllr Mandy Perkins Chair of Herts Infrastructure & Planning Partnership 436 Planning for Hertfordshire beyond 2031 437 Purpose of the presentation HIPP was tasked by Leaders Group to look at long term Planning issues… Current issues with Planning across Hertfordshire Future challenges A better way forward 438 Hertfordshire Polycentric county of some 30 distinct towns/villages Mid-order facilities but no dominant settlement, so defers somewhat to London and to a lesser-extent Cambridge for higher-order jobs and facilities Strong radial road and rail routes enable concentric patterns of commuting, but weaker east-west routes create congestion hotspots Leafy suburban image and cautious mindset that favours limited, incremental, proportionate growth Delivered two gardens cities and three new towns in 20th century Accusations of economic complacency as investment leapfrogs further north General prosperity masks pockets of deprivation and challenges around quality of life, viability and housing affordability Currently 1.1 million people in county -439rising to 1.4 million by 2031 Where are we now? Most councils have reached at least pre-submission stage of Local Plans to 2031 Some have started early Reviews to 2036 93,500 new homes and 92,000 new jobs proposed up to 2031 Forecast 20% increase in traffic by 2031 For whatever reason, nationally some councils have failed Duty to Co-operate … and the process is going to get harder 440 Current local plans Broxbourne Target for 7,100 homes to 2031. Aiming to submit in 2017. Dacorum Core Strategy target for 11,300 homes to 2031. Early review. East Herts Target for 16,400 homes to 2033. Aiming to submit in 2017. Hertsmere Core Strategy target for 3,400 homes to 2027. Early review. North Herts Target for 15,950 homes to 2031. Aiming to submit in 2017. St Albans Target for 8,720 homes to 2031. Legal appeal re duty to co-operate. Stevenage Local Plan target for 7,600 homes to 2031. Examination underway. Three Rivers Core Strategy target for 4,500 homes to 2026. Early review. Watford Core Strategy target for 6,500 homes to 2031. Early review. Welwyn Hatfield Target for 12,000 homes to 2032. Aiming to submit in spring 2017. Total 93,470 homes 441 WH W 3R S St A NH H EH D B Duty to Co Duty to Broxbourne Dacorum East Herts Hertsmere North Herts St Albans Stevenage - Three Rivers links operate Watford Wel Hat HPG and HIPP Herts CC NHS & CCGs Herts Police Herts LEP Central Beds Luton South Cambs Uttlesford Harlow Epping Forest Enfield Barnet Harrow Hillingdon Chilterns Aylesbury vale Essex CC Bucks CC GLA 442 South Cambs 19,000 Housing Numbers in adjacent Authorities to 2031 Central Bedfordshire 26,000 Uttlesford 11,000 Aylesbury Vale Luton 28,000 7,000 Harlow 6000 Chiltern 4,000 Enfield 14,000 Barnet Harrow 31,000 10,000 Hillingdon 11,000 443 Our experience Producing a Local Plan is a tough process politically - for communities, residents and councils - and still not over! It costs a lot: average £350,000 per authority per year Legislation, policy and the numbers keep changing Significant infrastructure implications Loss of greenfield and green belt Higher densities Viability and affordability challenges Developer and landowner challenges If this time around was difficult… where next? 444 Future options Very little co-ordinated thinking about local planning beyond 2031 New ways of working are needed to avoid having to pick from ever-decreasing menu of future growth options: . continue as we are - joint attempt to resist major growth . reliance on much taller buildings and higher densities . urban extensions, including previously rejected schemes . merging of distinct settlements . expansions and transformation of existing settlements . entirely new settlements 445 Future challenges National agenda on growth and housing delivery Planning system - more changes coming Housing affordability London Plan Oxford - MK - Cambridge corridor Luton and Central Beds London - Stansted - Cambridge corridor Growth at Stansted and Luton airports Some authorities will have no growth options in their area beyond 2031 446 Future challenges Housing and job numbers for 2031-2050 Quality of life issues Political pressures and pressure groups Further loss of green belt Access to services Infrastructure funding Length of time to build infrastructure Costs of producing plans 447 Is there a better way? Need to preserve what is special about Hertfordshire Need a strategic view to identify the best locations for future growth Need a more joined up approach to infrastructure planning Need to be better at getting funding for critical infrastructure Need to respond to pressures from elsewhere Need to keep local government in control of the planning agenda 448 Growth corridors O – MK – C corridor L-S-C corridor M1 A1(M) A414 M25 London Plan 449 Joint working options General engagement What’s in it for me? HPG and HIPP Duty to co-operate Joint site masterplans Joint planning documents Joint planning teams What’s in it for us? Joint local plans Joint committees Combined authorities 450 Benefits A better planned Hertfordshire Share the pain, but also the benefits A united voice for lobbying - for investment and funding A stronger position in eyes of central government More cost effective Retains public sector control 451 Decisions for today Are there shared concerns about the future challenges? Is there recognition that the current approach is not tenable in the future? Is there appetite for joint working on a longer term vision and a different approach to plan making? What are the limits on the ladder of options? What is a step too