30-9-2014 Amber Valley Local Plan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Public Agenda Item No. 4(h) DERBYSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING OF CABINET MEMBER – JOBS, ECONOMY AND TRANSPORT 30 September 2014 Report of the Strategic Director – Economy, Transport and Environment CONSULTATION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE AMBER VALLEY LOCAL PLAN PART 1 CORE STRATEGY (1) Purpose of the Report To agree the County Council’s response to Amber Valley Borough Council’s (AVBC) public consultation on its Proposed Changes to the Amber Valley Local Plan Part 1 Core Strategy (Proposed Changes). (2) Information and Analysis The Amber Valley Local Plan Part 1: Submission Core Strategy (Submission Core Strategy) was submitted to the Secretary of State by AVBC on 20 December 2013. An Examination in Public (EIP) of the Plan was subsequently conducted by a Government Inspector (Roy Foster) between April and May 2014, on a number of key soundness issues identified by the Inspector, particularly that the housing target for both the Borough and wider Derby Housing Market Area (HMA) was too low and should be increased to meet the objectively assessed housing needs (OAHN) of both areas. He also raised concerns about the deliverability of the sites identified by AVBC in its five-year housing land supply. Specific issues and concerns relating to the Strategic Growth Sites in the Plan were also examined, particularly the proposed large urban extension sites north of Ripley and East of Codnor, and the need for the associated A610 Relief Road. The Inspector published his conclusions and recommendations on the EIP hearing sessions on 14 May 2014, and (particularly) recommended suspension of the EIP for a period of six months to allow AVBC further time to address his soundness concerns on these matters, with further evidence and collaborative working. Derbyshire County Council made extensive Member and officer technical comments on the Amber Valley Local Plan Part 1 Pre-Submission Core Strategy (Pre-Submission Core Strategy) which were reported to, and agreed at, the Cabinet Member Meeting on 21 January 2014 (Minute No. 10/14 refers). Derbyshire County Council’s comments were considered by the Inspector through the EIP process and officers appeared at the EIP to address H:\H9\JET220.doc 1 30 September 2014 Public the Inspector’s more detailed examination of the issues, particularly the Ripley-Codnor urban extensions and need for the proposed A610 relief road. AVBC has published its Proposed Changes which seek to meet the requirements of the Inspector to provide further evidence on his soundness concerns. In particular, it has identified 14 proposed new large-scale housing allocations in the Proposed Changes to supplement those already identified in the Submission Core Strategy, to meet the future housing requirements of the Borough of 10,100 new dwellings between 2011 and 2028, and its contribution to meeting the housing needs of the wider Derby HMA of 33,390 new dwellings over the same period as recommended by the Inspector. The 14 proposed new housing allocations also seek to identify sufficient additional new land to help meet the Borough Council’s five year housing land supply requirements of just over 1,000 dwellings per annum (pa). The proposed housing allocations are detailed in Appendix 2 of this report. Following his consideration of the proposed A610 relief road and strategic growth sites in Codnor and Ripley, the Inspector concluded that there was a need for a new stand-alone statement of evidence to be provided by AVBC about the current perceived need for the provision of a new A610 link road between Ripley and Codnor. AVBC’s consultants have therefore produced a Draft Technical Note to support the need for a new A610 relief road, which is based on additional independent traffic surveys and provides further details relating to existing conditions on the local road network, in particular, junctions on the A610 corridor through Ripley and Codnor. This Draft Technical Note was forwarded to Derbyshire County Council for comment and details of Derbyshire County Council’s initial Officer response are included in the Proposed Changes document. The Proposed Changes indicate that, in order to establish whether there is clear and robust evidence in relation to the need for a new A610 link road and to enable AVBC to confirm its position on this matter, in advance of the re-convening of the examination, further discussions need to be undertaken with Derbyshire County Council as the Highways Authority for the area. Further details of progress on this matter are provided below and in Appendix 2 to this report. Derbyshire County Council was required to submit its comments on the Proposed Changes to AVBC by 8 September 2014. At the time of drafting this report to the Cabinet Member, draft comments were being finalised by officers to establish a detailed submission to AVBC to meet its deadline for responses. This report and the accompanying appendices summarise the key issues and concerns contained in the 8 September draft Officer response; the Cabinet Member is now requested to agree this report as the basis for Derbyshire County Council’s formal response. Full details of the Proposed Changes can be viewed at the following link: http://www.ambervalley.gov.uk/environment-and- planning/planning/community-planning/community-planning-latest-news.aspx H:\H9\JET220.doc 2 30 September 2014 Public Local Member Comments Local County Councillors with electoral divisions in Amber Valley Borough and South Derbyshire District have been consulted on the Proposed Changes. Extensive comments have been provided by Councillor Steve Freeborn, Local Member for Ripley East and Codnor, Councillor Steve-Marshall Clarke, Local Member for Alfreton and Somercotes, and Councillor John Owen, Local Member for Belper. Their comments on the proposed changes are provided in Appendix 1. Members’ comments, in particular, relate to the 14 new proposed housing allocations and those located within their electoral divisions; the broad scale and distribution of the proposed housing sites, particularly that more land should be identified on the fringe of Derby to meet the City’s housing needs; and that housing land should be identified in Belper to help meet the City’s needs. Members have also expressed significant concerns about the implications of the housing sites for school places, their potential highways impacts, the lack of justified need for the proposed A610 relief road, and impacts on Green Belt, the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site (DVMWHS) and other environmentally important areas. Although Councillor Paul Smith, Local Member for Alfreton and Somercotes, has not provided detailed comments, he has expressed his concerns to officers that he is strongly opposed to the housing site at Amber Valley Rugby Club at Lower Somercotes, due to the extensive history of the tipping of toxic waste on the site. Officer Comments In commenting on the Pre-Submission Core Strategy, Derbyshire County Council’s comments identified various strategic infrastructure issues and concerns that remained outstanding which, at that time, required further cooperative working between the County Council and AVBC, and the provision of further evidence. These issues particularly related to the potential highway impacts of the strategic housing and employment sites identified in the Plan, and the need for extensive transport modelling works to be carried out for the sites, the school place planning needs associated with the proposed strategic housing sites, and other infrastructure requirements, such as Greenways and Public Rights of Way. At the time of writing this report, those infrastructure issues are still the subject of on-going collaborative working between Derbyshire County Council and AVBC, particularly on transport impacts and education provision. The 14 new housing and employment sites proposed for allocation in the Proposed Changes have not previously been subject to any detailed investigation and assessment by Derbyshire County Council’s officers for their highways impacts and school place planning needs. The full range of infrastructure impacts and requirements of these 14 new sites are, therefore, currently being considered by Derbyshire County Council’s officers alongside those sites H:\H9\JET220.doc 3 30 September 2014 Public already identified in the Submission Core Strategy. In some cases, the cumulative impact implications of the new sites and those already included in the Submission Core Strategy could be significant on highways and education provision and require particular detailed assessment by Derbyshire County Council’s officers. Those investigations are still on-going. Derbyshire County Council will, therefore, be providing further comments to AVBC when the outcomes of the assessment works are complete. A report on the proposed A610 relief road was considered by Cabinet at its Meeting on 9 September 2014. As recommended in that report, it resolved to note the observations in that report on the ‘need’ for a bypass scheme and to authorise the Strategic Director – Economy, Transport and Environment to formulate a response to evidence on a possible bypass scheme in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Jobs, Economy and Transport (Minute No. 307/14 refers). This enables the Strategic Director to provide Derbyshire County Council’s comments on the transport modelling works and further evidence to be provided by AVBC’s consultants on the need for the new A610 relief road, when this evidence is made available in the coming weeks. At its meeting on 21 January 2014, Cabinet considered a joint report of the Strategic Director – for Children and Young Adults and the Strategic Director – Economy, Transport and Environment on the implications for education on housing growth in South Derbyshire. Cabinet resolved to note the requirement to expand education provision in the areas of the Derby HMA affected by housing growth proposals being put forward in the emerging local plan core strategies of the three HMA authorities authorised officers, to seek funding from developers to meet capital costs, and authorised feasibility studies and informal consultations with schools on potential changes.