Executive Council Confidential

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

CONFIDENTIAL

Title of Report: Development Plan Consultation

Paper Number: 70/14

Date: 9th April 2014

Report of: Head of Environmental Planning

1.0 Purpose

1.1 This paper sets out the proposed content for, and approach to, public consultation on the headline issues in relation to the Development Plan (DP), which comprises the Stanley Town Plan and the Falkland Islands Wide Structure Plan.

1.2 This consultation work may also provide helpful context for the production of the National Infrastructure Plan (NIP), and so has been prepared with the appropriate input from those leading on the NIP.

2.0 Recommendations

2.1 It is recommended that Executive Council approve:

• the Non-Technical Summary included at appendix 1; • the Main Consultation document included at appendix 2; • draft response form included at appendix 3; • the draft Town Plan map (annex 1); and • the broad approach to the consultation (as set out in section 6 of the report).

3.0 Additional Budgetary Implications

3.1 None

4.0 Background

4.1 In January 2014 Executive Council considered a scoping paper in relation to the Development Plan and National Infrastructure Plan (the content in relation to the former being based on a scoping report which Planning & Building Committee had considered in December 2013). The scoping paper set out an overall approach, including content and timescales. A key stage was a joint

public consultation in autumn 2014 on the headlines issues and broad approach.

4.2 This paper sets out the proposed approach to that public consultation. It is envisaged that, subject to Executive Council approval, consultation will commence in the first half of April to the end of May 2014 (approximately 7 weeks).

4.3 Given the timescales and approach to identifying priorities for capital funding, the proposed consultation focuses more on broad approaches, housing supply and planning issues. Further specific consultation on infrastructure priorities may be appropriate later in the year, and further details planning consultation will also be required in accordance with the requirements of the planning ordinance (as set out in the scoping paper).

5.0 What will be consulted on?

5.1 A main consultation document has been prepared which sets out the context and some key issues about scale of growth. This document has been informed by the ongoing work from the David Smethurst Consultancy, and the interviews/workshops undertaken in January 2014. The consultation also includes questions in relation to the Rural Development Strategy and Rural Enterprise Zones, and hence subsumes the requested consultation by the Policy Unit on these issues. Finally, the document also sets out assumptions to be made to inform the production of the Development Plan. By including them in the consultation, it will provide an opportunity to test that they are appropriate. These assumptions have been endorsed by Planning & Building Committee.

5.2 The previous Scoping Report had indicated that the consultation material would include a summary of the current social, economic and environmental situation existing key strategies and policies and the key issues and challenges arising from these. This is included within the introduction of the main consultation document.

5.3 The main document will be accompanied by:

• a non-technical summary; • a consultation response form; and • a working draft Stanley Town Plan (map showing broad allocations for development).

5.4 Although the main consultation document includes detail of potential development sites, it is considered a key part of the consultation to make a draft Stanley Town Plan map available to inform discussion. The draft map forms annex 1 to this report and has been discussed informally with the members of Planning and Building Committee (3rd March) and MLAs (4th March).

5.5 The Scoping Report had indicated that the consultation material would include indicative detail for detailed policies. However, rather than setting out proposed material for this, it is suggested that it may be more constructive to tease out these issues through the workshops (through a discussion about what development in each of the zones might look/feel like and how/to what extent it should be controlled).

6.0 How will the consultation be undertaken?

6.1 It is envisaged that the consultation which will take place in April and May period. The broad approach to the consultation has been endorsed by Planning & Building Committee and will include the following aspects (as discussed in detail below):

• making documents available; • press & media; • topic and public workshops in Stanley; and • a tailored approach to Camp.

6.2 Making Consultation Documents Available: All of the consultation material will be made available electronically and hard copy (to view) in the EPD Offices, the library and the post-office.

6.3 Publicity: There will be a press release and formal public notices will be placed in the Penguin News. Relevant staff could be asked to include a note at the bottom of all e-mails publicising the consultation.

6.4 Workshops: During the consultation it is envisaged that there will be a number of topic based workshops which will focus on a specific issue (such as housing, industrial/commercial developments and/or retail and service developments) and the relevant key stakeholders will be invited. Positive feedback was received on the format of a recent workshop in relation to Waste Management and so this format could be used again.

6.5 In addition a number of public workshops are planned. Rather than a presentation and Q&A approach, it is envisaged that these will be drop-in sessions with self-explanatory material available so people can easily and quickly give their views. Relevant staff will be on hand to facilitate and engage in more detailed discussions.

6.6 It is proposed that towards the end of the consultation period (i.e. mid May) workshops are held in Goose Green and Fox Bay to update on the NIP/DP work and also related activity (such as work on Environmental Impact Assessment and Permitted Development Rights).

7.0 Financial Implications

7.1 The use of David Smethurst Consultancy to progress the infrastructure work and the costs of this has already been agreed and therefore this report has no net implications on the resources required for this work. Similarly,

progressing the review of the Development Plan is a key piece of work for the Environmental Planning Department and will be partly resourced through existing budgets. Additional resource for the department (1 temporary post for 2 years) has already been agreed through the 2013/14 oil budget, and part of this capacity will contribute to the development plan review. Again, as this has already been agreed this report has no net implications on the resources required for this work.

8.0 Legal Implications

8.1 The process for reviewing the development plan must comply with the relevant requirements as set out in the Planning Ordinance and relevant legislation. These have been taken into account in the production of this report.

9.0 Human Resources Implications

9.1 None for the purposes of this paper

10.0 Background Papers:

• Executive Council Report 21/14 Development Plan and National Infrastructure Plan Scoping Report (January 2014)

• David Smethurst Consultancy (2013) - Towards an Infrastructure Delivery Plan

• Regeneris Consulting (2013) Socio-Economic Study of Oil and Gs Development in the Falklands

• Executive Council Report 201-13 Your Future – Your Say Consultation, Next Steps (August 2013)

• Executive Council Report 200-12 Development Plan Review and Alteration (August 2012)

Appendix 1: Non-Technical Summary

Development Plan Consultation Non-Technical Summary

April 2014

What is the purpose of this consultation? 1. This is a summary of the Development Plan Initial Consultation Document. The main document sets out the emerging approach to the review of the Falkland Islands Development Plan. The Falkland Islands Development Plan is currently made up of the Structure Plan and Stanley Town Plan. This document should be read alongside the draft Stanley Town Plan Map. A separate response form is available to provide comments.

2. The results of this consultation will be used to help produce detailed amendments to the Structure Plan and Town Plan. There will be a separate consultation on the Structure Plan and Town Plan in late 2014. It is hoped that the new plans will be formally adopted towards the middle of 2015.

Key Characteristics 3. Some of the key characteristics of the Falkland Islands which need to be considered in the production of the plan are:

• the Falklands is a small scale and very remote community; • the town of Stanley is the economic centre, but the sustainability of Camp is a high priority; • the Falklands has a limited economic and business base, reflecting its size (public services, fisheries, agriculture, tourism and construction are key sectors, and recently there has been oil-related activity); • residents are hard-working and resourceful; • housing in Stanley is mainly made up of low density detached homes, and few are empty; and • the Falklands is a diverse but well-integrated community.

Policy Context 4. The Islands Plan highlights that economic development has historically been constrained by isolation – both physical and political – and by the size of the resident population. The Islands Plan seeks to address these constraints so as to improve transport linkages with the rest of the world, and to ensure that the Islands have a stable population and labour force.

5. Executive Council has agreed that a National Infrastructure Plan will be produced, to identify key economic, transport and social infrastructure priorities (i.e. ‘what’ and ‘when’). The spatial dimension of this (the ‘where’) is provided by the Development Plan. It is therefore important that the

Development Plan sets out broad locations for different types of infrastructure, but is not too rigid. With that in mind, this consultation does not discuss specific infrastructure requirements. These will be the subject of a separate consultation exercise later in the year.

Assumptions 6. There is a substantial degree of uncertainty about what changes may be ahead therefore it is proposed to make a number of assumptions to allow enable work on the Development Plan to progress. These assumptions are set out below.

• The Plan should look forward 15 years from the date of anticipated adoption (if the plan is adopted in 2015 it would run until 2030). • Housing land sufficient for an additional 450 houses should be planned for. • A deep water port will be developed outside of Stanley at Port William, to service oil, fishing, cruise liners and other industries. To make this viable associated employment land may need to be developed on adjacent land benefiting from a new link road. • The permanent development of oil-related activity within the main part of Stanley will not be permitted (as per current Executive Council policy) and development will instead be directed towards the deep-water port. • In addition to land for oil related development, additional commercial land is required for other day-to-day business above and beyond existing industrial/commercial land at Gordon Lines, Megabid, Hillside, Lookout and Kiel Canal Road. • The broad extent of Stanley Common should be retained. • It is necessary to carefully control development within Stanley, whilst supporting local residents and business and avoiding unnecessary regulation. • The level of controls within Camp should be minimal, to support the Rural Development Strategy aim of making it as easy as possible for people to live and work in Camp. However, increased controls may be necessary in relation to significant development, particularly where related to Oil & Gas development.

Vision 7. To help direct consideration of detailed issues, it is helpful to first think of the broad approach – what in broad terms are we trying to achieve over the next 15 years? A draft vision is included below.

By 2030 the Falklands will have a reputation as a favourable place to do business, where the environment is respected and enhanced and where there is realistic provision of infrastructure.

Stanley will remain a single coherent settlement with substantial housing and employment growth being well related to existing areas. Within a well maintained historic core, a modern and attractive retail, office and hotel hub will respect the wider setting and facilitate a positive visitor experience to the town. Key strategic infrastructure to facilitate the development of oil/gas, tourism and fishing will be in place, alongside the utilities and social infrastructure to meet the needs of a growing population. The town will be a safe, attractive and convenient place to live, providing

6 opportunities for healthy lifestyle and a range of recreational activities. Appropriate access to the countryside, including Stanley Common, will be facilitated whilst maintaining a focus on nature conservation within key sites and areas.

Camp will be a thriving and diverse place, offering a viable alternative location to Stanley for living and working. Its diversified economy will benefit from a modern agricultural sector, growth of land based tourism and fit for purpose infrastructure and services. The built and natural heritage will be respected and enhanced, including protection of our internationally important wildlife.

Housing 8. An adequate supply of general housing to meet the needs of the future population is one of the most fundamental elements of Spatial Planning. There are three related areas.

• How much housing will be needed, and by when? • What types of housing will be needed? • Who should provide the necessary housing?

Stanley Town Plan 9. Stanley itself has a distinct character, much of which is a particular asset for both the resident population and tourism. A degree of control (greater or lesser to the existing) could help to protect and enhance this. The Town Plan provides the basis for part of that control, and there is now an opportunity to review its content. The current plan tends to focus on restrictions to development (many of which may need to be retained), but the future plan has the opportunity to take a more strategic approach, which helps to lead and direct change, in a more supportive and pro-active manner.

For more information please contact us:

Post: Environmental Planning E-mail: Phone: Department [email protected] 00 500 St. Marys Walk, Stanley 28481

Appendix 2: The Main Consultation Document

Development Plan Initial Consultation Document

April 2014

Work is getting underway to review the Development Plan (Falkland Islands Structure Plan & Stanley Town Plan) to provide a spatial vision, informing where and how things happen.

As these documents will help shape the future of our Islands, it is vital that we hear what you think should (or should not) be in this plan…

WE NEED YOUR VIEWS!

A Non-Technical Summary of this document is available separately

CONTENTS

1. Introduction

• Purpose of this document • Current Situation • Policy Context

2. Broad Approach

• Scale of Change • Assumptions • Vision & Objectives • Balance between Stanley and Camp

3. Housing and environment

• How much housing will be needed, and by when? • What types of housing will be needed? • Who should provide the necessary housing? • Environment • Stanley Environmental Issues

4. Stanley Town Plan

• Providing new housing

• Central Urban Area • South of Stanley Bypass • Gordon Lines and the eastwards limits of Stanley • Port facilities and the south side of the Camber

1. INTRODUCTION

Purpose of this document 1.1 This consultation document sets out the emerging approach to the review of the Falkland Islands Development Plan, which currently comprises the Structure Plan and Stanley Town Plan. It should be read in conjunction with the draft Stanley Town Plan Map. A separate response form is available to provide comments. Although questions are included throughout this document, comments and suggestions are welcome on any aspect of this work. Where comments are made, we would be grateful if reasons could be given to help us understand the comments. If concerns are raised, we would welcome suggestions as to what could be changed. If support is given, we would welcome clarification of any caveats or safeguards that you would still expect.

1.2 The Development Plan provides a framework for the future spatial development of the Islands. It is a statutory document and the basis for the determination of planning applications. The current version of the development plan was produced some time ago (adopted in 2004, although with a partial review in 2009) and was the first such plan prepared for the Falkland Islands. However, there is a pressure to review the plan to better take account of the emerging potential for oil-related development and to improve those areas where lessons can be learnt from the plan’s implementation so far. Overall, the plan could be made simpler, more forward looking and used to provide a proactive strategy for what will be supported where.

1.3 The results of this consultation will be used to inform the production of proposed detailed amendments to the Structure Plan and Town Plan. As required by the Planning Ordinance, these proposed detailed amendments will then be subject to formal consultation, which it is envisaged will be in late 2014. A formal process will follow, including the results of the formal consultation being considered by Planning & Building Committee and then Executive Council. It is envisaged that the new plans will be formally adopted towards the middle of 2015.

Current Situation 1.4 The Islands face many pressures for change. In addition to the influences of a rapidly changing global economy and technological advances, the discovery of oil and the progress towards its exploitation, coupled with the prospects of major oil revenues in the future, clearly have major implications for the Islands. Whether or not, and when, hydrocarbons are exploited; there will be major challenges ahead if the distinctive Islands’ character and culture are to be maintained.

1.5 Not least as a result of the increasing oil exploration activities, the Falkland Islands have been much studied in recent years. There is a wealth of information available about the current situation, and much effort expended to consider likely future trends, taking account of possible levels of oil and gas exploitation. Much of this analysis has been commissioned or supported by the Falklands Islands Government.

1.6 Key elements drawn from these reports are summarised below to try to provide an overview of the unique geographical and socio-economic context of the Islands.

• The Falklands is a small scale and very remote community - with a large surface area of 12,000 square kilometres, but having a usual resident population (excluding MPA contractors) of only 2,562 (Census 2012).

• The town of Stanley is the economic centre – however the sustainability of Camp is a high priority - 2,121 people (86 %) live in the capital, which is the centre of virtually all economic activity, apart from agriculture and some tourism in Camp. The economic pull of Stanley has led to depopulation of Camp settlements in recent years: the population now standing at 351 (14%). Maintaining economic and social life in Camp is a clear Falkland Islands aim.

• the Falklands has a limited economic and business base, reflecting its size - public services, fisheries, agriculture, tourism and construction are the five key sectors, amounting for 85% of GDP, and 2/3 of all jobs, and latterly oil-related activity is of growing importance);

• Residents are hard-working and resourceful - the working age employment rate is 89.5%, with only 1.4% unemployed: there is virtually no spare capacity in the labour market. About a quarter of Islanders supplement their income with a second job.

• Housing in Stanley mainly comprises low density detached homes, and few are empty - of some 1,200 homes in the Islands, around 1,000 are located in Stanley. Around 20 new houses per year are constructed, mainly detached houses in their own plots, at a fairly low density. Very few are empty. Hotel accommodation within Stanley is currently around 50 rooms, with an additional 38 planned. Various types of lodge/self-catering accommodation are is available within Camp. Despite an almost static total population, the latest 2012 Census indicates that the number of households (and thus need for accommodation) has grown by 12% since 2006. Comparison with the 2006 Census also shows that recent trends are towards an ageing population with people over the age of 65 (11% of the overall population) having increased by almost 14%, whilst the numbers under 15 have remained constant.

• The Falklands is a diverse but well-integrated community - most of the population describe their nationality as Falkland Islander or British, but with significant minority groups from Chile and St. Helena. The economy relies heavily on in-migrant workers, with 17% of the workforce on temporary work permits. Crime and anti-social behaviour are very low, reflecting the small population which has high levels of familiarity and a strong sense of community.

Policy Context 1.7 The new Islands Plan highlights that economic development has historically been constrained by isolation – both physical and political – and the size of the resident population. It seeks to address these constraints so as to improve

transport linkages with the rest of the world, and to ensure that the Islands have a stable population and labour force.

1.8 Executive Council has agreed that a National Infrastructure Plan will be produced, to identify key economic, transport and social infrastructure priorities (i.e. ‘what’ and ‘when’). The spatial dimension of this (the ‘where’) is provided by the Development Plan. It is therefore important that the Development Plan sets out broad locations for different types of infrastructure, but is not overly prescriptive. This consultation document therefore does not discuss specific infrastructure requirements. These will be the subject of a separate consultation exercise later in the year.

1.9 The Islands Plan sets out a commitment to prepare a Housing Strategy for the Islands, including a re-examination of the role of Government in the Islands’ housing market in order to ensure that all persons have access to housing to meet their reasonable needs, and that there is sufficient housing supply to meet growth ambitions. It acknowledges a need to facilitate an acceleration of house building activity in the Islands to eliminate current shortages, and to accommodate future growth. This has clear implications that need to be picked up in the Development Plan.

1.10 The Economic Development Strategy (2010) recognises the narrow concentration on the three sectors of fisheries, agriculture and tourism. It aims to expand growth potential by broadening and deepening the productive capacity of these sectors whilst also supporting economic diversification. It also aims to provide a supporting environment for the economy – which includes provision of the necessary infrastructure, removing barriers to business growth, improving the tourism offer and proactively planning for oil.

1.11 Part of the improvement of the tourism offer is the implementation of the Waterfront Masterplan (2012). There has already been extensive public consultation on this, and a preferred approach identified, which provides for improvements which include better cruise passenger landing facilities, mixed use developments including restaurants, retail uses and hotels, cultural facilities and improved public spaces. The Development Plan will therefore need to provide support for this work.

1.12 The Islands Plan stress the need to create the conditions to ensure the successful development of an oil and gas industry in the Falkland Islands, providing clear policy and legislative frameworks, and implementing policies to ensure the industry develops in a way that ensures its commercial success and the delivery of sustainable economic and social benefits to the Islands.

1.13 In land use terms this means that additional, deliverable land is available for a range of employment uses and that proactive policies are set out which identify the types of development that will be supported, and provide the necessary safeguards, without stifling investment or innovation.

1.14 A number of critical policy decisions have been taken recently which provide fundamental elements of the context within which the Development Plan review will be undertaken:

• Port William: new deep water port - the decision to work towards development of a new deep water port at Port William sound was taken by Executive Council in October 2012; • Interim Land Disposal Policy – March 2013 - in the light of Executive Council’s decision not to allow permanent development of oil related industry in or around Stanley Harbour, a set of policy principles has been established to guide interim land disposals (particularly at Gordon Lines), to ensure that further oil related developments will only be permitted on a temporary basis (linked to the duration of any temporary port facilities in the Harbour); • Port Location & Oil Infrastructure Policy Principles – July 2013 - a statement was agreed by Executive Council in July 2013 which reaffirms the principle that there will be no permanent off-shore or on-shore port related oil development in Stanley Harbour, or Stanley Town including peripheral areas, and also that the site of permanent development will be Port William. Further improvements to FIPASS will be advanced (for traditional industries only) and other jetty facilities will be accepted in the Harbour on a temporary/interim basis.

1.15 A Rural Development Strategy was produced in 2012 and identified a number of significant issues and opportunities, which include:

• the declining population of Camp lacks the “critical mass” to support private sector enterprises – and there is thus the need to improve the delivery of essential services through growth in private consumer services such as health and tourism; and • underdeveloped infrastructure in Camp discourages new investment and new business formation – and thus improved provision is necessary in efficient, reliable and affordable premises, utilities and communications, if new businesses and industries are to be established.

1.16 The Biodiversity Strategy, adopted in December 2008, provides the policy response to issues identified in the State of the Environment report. The latter identified 15 processes that threaten the biodiversity of the Falkland Islands, some needing to be addressed more urgently than others, and the development and implementation of the Biodiversity Strategy prioritises the required actions to address the critical threats. The review of the Development Plan will need to take full account of these proposals, and seek to support them where possible.

1.17 In relation to waste, whilst existing solutions (mainly continued land fill at Eliza Cove, with some limited alternative disposals of non municipal solid waste) may well suffice for the short term, initial discussions have taken place, through the Environmental Mainstreaming Group, about the potential for new approaches. This ongoing work will need to feed into the Development Plan.

1.18 Energy policy options were considered by Executive Council in September 2011, and energy is part of the terms of reference for the Environmental Mainstreaming Group. A general policy approach was taken which seeks in particular to reduce consumer operating costs through energy conservation and good practice, and reduce reliance upon imported fossil fuels through continued development of the Sand Bay Wind farm (related to Stanley) or further wind power systems at larger farms (in Camp).

2. BROAD APPROACH

Scale of Change 2.1 Fundamental to the Development Plan is the overall scale and pace of change which is envisaged. This has a number of dimensions, embracing for example what scale of change or growth is desirable, necessary, or achievable. Considerable work has been undertaken to assess the possible implications of differing levels of oil and gas exploitation, and in particular the Regeneris Study (2013) provides different contextual scenarios which identify likely requirements for housing and other infrastructure.

2.2 However, we can’t simply sit back and wait for things to happen. Staying in control of these changes needs a comprehensive, co-ordinated approach to long term planning. We need to deal directly with the uncertainties, rather than waiting for answers which may not come for a long time. Therefore we need to decide what our approach should be to change, as this will inform our approach to other areas.

Question 1: How should we respond to change?

a) Try and reduce changes, to keep the Falkland Islands as near as possible as they are today; b) Accept change, but control it to levels we can manage; c) Go for growth, and encourage expansion; or

d) Accept that change may happen, but neither try to restrict nor encourage it

Assumptions 2.3 There is a substantial degree of uncertainty about what changes may lay ahead, therefore it is proposed to make a number of assumptions (below) to enable work on the Development Plan to progress. These are based on the information to hand and the wider policy context.

• The Plan should look forward 15 years from the date of anticipated adoption (based on adoption in 2015 plan would run to 2030).

• Housing land sufficient for an additional 450 houses should be planned for (see section 3).

• A deep water port will be developed outside of Stanley at Port William, to service oil, fishing, cruise liners and other industries. To make this viable

associated employment land may need to be developed on adjacent land benefiting from a new link road.

• The permanent development of oil-related activity within the main part of Stanley will not be permitted (as per current Executive Council policy) and development will instead be directed towards the deep water port.

• In addition to land for oil related development, additional employment (industrial/commercial) land is required for other day-to-day business above and beyond existing sites at Gordon Lines, Megabid, Hillside, Lookout and Kiel Canal Road.

• The broad extent of Stanley Common should be retained.

• It is necessary to carefully control development within Stanley, whilst supporting local residents and business and avoiding unnecessary regulation.

• The level of controls within Camp should be minimal, to support the aims of the Rural Development Strategy of making it as easy as possible for people to live and work in Camp. However, increased controls may be necessary in relation to significant development, particularly where related to Oil & Gas development.

Question 2: Do you think these assumptions are appropriate?

a) Yes b) Yes, subject to some changes (please state) c) No (please suggest alternatives)

Vision & Objectives 2.4 To help direct consideration of detailed issues, it is helpful to first think of the broad approach – what in broad terms are we trying to achieve over the next 15 years? A draft vision and objectives are included below for comment.

Draft Vision

By 2030 the Falklands will have a reputation as a favourable place to do business, where the environment is respected and enhanced and where there is realistic provision of infrastructure.

15 access to the countryside, including Stanley Common, will be facilitated whilst maintaining a focus on nature conservation within key sites and areas.

Question 3: Do you think this vision is appropriate?

a) Yes b) Yes, subject to some changes (please state) c) No (please suggest alternative vision)

Suggested Development Plan Objectives

1. To facilitate sustainable economic growth over a range of sectors, and to ensure that our communities have the skills and opportunities to contribute to, and benefit from, this growth.

2. To increase the provision of adequate housing throughout the islands, to meet both existing local needs and our longer term aspirations, and associated services.

3. To support all our communities in living healthy lives, in an attractive, safe and clean environment which facilitates walking and other outdoor pursuits.

4. To value, protect and enhance our built and natural heritage, ensuring new developments are sustainable contribute to, rather than detract from, these assets.

5. To maximise the efficient use of resources, take into account the potential long term impacts of climate change and safeguarding the health of our air, water, soils and ecosystems

6. To make efficient use of our existing infrastructure, and to ensure that improved or new infrastructure is cost effective and will provide the best possible long term benefit

Question 4: Do you think these objectives are appropriate?

a) Yes b) Yes, subject to some changes (please state) c) No (please suggest alternatives)

Balance between Stanley and Camp 2.6 The Rural Development Strategy (RDS, 2012), reflecting the Islands Plan and the Economic Development Strategy 2010, identifies its vision as “to maintain Camp in order to encourage a well-populated, economically and socially sustainable community, integrated with the national economy”.

2.7 A critical issue to consider is what is meant by the idea contained in the RDS vision of a “well-populated” Camp? What is the desirable (and achievable) scale of the population and how might that population best be distributed across the Islands? Key considerations are clearly how the level of population impacts on the quality of life of Camp – not just because of the primary concerns of those already living there, but also because attracting more people to live in Camp is heavily influenced by the quality of life on offer. One of the ways that the quality of life might be improved is by increased levels of services and facilities, which could well be influenced by the scale of individual settlements, and the way in which settlements of any scale are distributed over the Islands.

Question 5: Which of the following, in relation to infrastructure and development, do you think is most important to sustain Camp life?

a) Invest in infrastructure in individual farmsteads b) Invest in infrastructure in selected settlements c) Invest in transport infrastructure, connecting settlements and linking to Stanley d) Consider what FIG operations currently in Stanley could be diverted to locations in Camp e) Other (please state)

2.8 One of the ways that the quality of life in Camp might be improved (and so more people attracted to live there) is by providing increased levels of services and facilities in bigger settlements. This raises the concept of “critical mass”, which has been recognised in the RDS.

2.9 Fox Bay has been identified as the location of the first Rural Enterprise Zone (REZ) for the Falkland Islands. This will mean it will be a focus for FIG investment, and will benefit from additional incentives to encourage business growth and business creation in an effort to grow the population and develop a more sustainable community with improved access to a wider range of services. Critical to the success of any REZ will be investment in infrastructure (whether this be housing, business premises, water and power supply and others) – the scale of investment may be significant and decisions will need to be made on how to make best use of the Government’s limited resources.

Question 6: To what extent should FIG pursue Rural Enterprise Zones?

a) Focus on Fox Bay as a focal point for FIG investment in infrastructure and services in the first instance? b) Designate additional Enterprise Zones sooner rather than later, spreading investment across multiple locations? c) Only designate additional Enterprise Zones once needs have been met in Fox Bay? d) Other (please specify)

Question 7: In considering the designation of additional Enterprise Zones what are the factors that you think should be taken into account in deciding where such zones should be located?

a) Current population size? b) Areas where there is already some level of critical mass in terms of services c) Proximity to Stanley/MPA? d) Areas where the need for infrastructure investment will be minimised? e) Areas where the need for purchase of private sector land/assets will be minimised? f) Areas where there will be a need for minimal investment in water and power supply? g) Other factors? (please specify)

Please use the “Reasons/Comments/Suggested Changes” column of the response form to rank these in order of priority, and also to explain your views.

Question 8: If an additional Enterprise Zone were to be established, where would you locate it?

a) Goose Green b) North Arm c) Fitzroy d) Hill Cove e) Port Howard f) Somewhere else (specify)

Please provide reasons for your choice on the response form.

Question 9: Which of the following is most important for areas where development is focused? a. Encourage more house building in the identified settlements b. Ensure that these settlements receive priority for infrastructure investment c. Try to divert “footloose” activities and functions from Stanley to these locations d. Prioritise investment to make these locations hubs in the transport system e. Other (please state)

3. HOUSING AND ENVIRONMENT

3.1 An adequate supply of general housing to meet the needs of the future population is one of the most fundamental elements of Spatial Planning. There are three related areas (each of these is considered in turn below).

• How much housing will be needed, and by when? • What types of housing will be needed? and • Who should provide the necessary housing?

How much housing will be needed, and by when? 3.2 The scale of housing growth is inextricably linked to fundamental questions about the scale and timing of change in the Islands. The Regeneris Study (2013) provides a range of contextual scenarios for housing requirements in Stanley, but to enable the production of a draft plan, an indicative target of 450 houses is proposed.

3.3 The population in 2012 in Stanley was 2,120 people. Taking a rough mid point between the scenarios mentioned above, a population increase of 1000 people by 2030 is assumed. If the average occupancy remains as it was in 2013 (2.31 people per house), this would suggest a need for 1350 houses in total. There are already approximately 1000 houses in Stanley, suggesting the need for approximately 350 additional houses. However, there are approximately 50 names (i.e. heads of household) on the housing waiting list, which may increase over time (and the trend is for reducing average occupancy levels). It is therefore suggested that an additional 100 houses may be required to respond to this. This gives a total target of 450 additional houses.

Question 10: Do you think the proposed housing target is appropriate? a. Yes b. No, it should be higher (please suggest alternative target) c. No, it should be lower (please suggest alternative target)

What types of housing will be needed? 3.4 There has been a limited range of houses built in recent years. At least in part this reflects the dominance of FIG in providing most housing (which might well continue, if the Sapper Hill development continues to provide the vast bulk of new housing). Requirements are clearly diversifying however – including for example short term catered or hostel type accommodation. Furthermore, some contract workers, and the majority of temporary oil industry workers, will be single adults and so may not always require large properties with generous gardens. This would suggest a potential market for smaller properties. However, larger properties do provide more flexibility as they can be used to house adults, couples or families. In addition, some people are permanently housed in mobile homes – these provide a relatively quick and cheap solution to housing shortages, and the initial response to the

additional plots at Murray Heights has suggested a demand for this type of accommodation (permission was granted in 2013 for laying out 60 additional plots at Murray Heights).

3.5 As the Economic Development Strategy recognises, a housing needs analysis is required. This will develop understanding of the range and type of housing which will be needed in the future, and allow consideration of how to make provision for new housing.

Question 11: What type of houses do we need? a. More of a similar type (e.g. detached homes on relatively large plots) b. Broader range of houses, including apartments and smaller houses c. Other (please state)

Question 12: What should the role of mobile homes be? a. There should be provision for additional mobile homes (beyond that planned at Murray Heights and the adjacent private development), and these should form a key part of Stanley’s supply of long-term housing. b. There should be a limited supply of Mobile Homes as an interim measure, with the long term aim of the population being housed in more permanent accommodation. c. Other (please state)

3.6 In addition to short term accommodation to meet expected economic pressures, there is likely to be a particular specialised need to provide for temporary workers’ accommodation – perhaps a construction workers’ camp (or camps). These would need to be determined in conjunction with the eventually selected deliverer of major projects such as a new deep water port and its access road – and might be located close to the development site, or conversely closer to Stanley (where the post-construction use of the site would also need to be considered). The need for these facilities will have to be addressed when the extent of oil related infrastructure developments and the timing of deep water port construction are resolved.

Question 13: How do you think temporary workers accommodation should be provided? a. Temporary Camps located with the construction project they serve b. Temporary Camps located as close to, or within Stanley, so that the workers can use local facilities c. Other (please state)

Who should provide the necessary housing? 3.7 FIG currently provides the majority of land for housing (usually in the form of serviced plots) although a considerable amount of infill housing also forms a significant part of the supply of new houses. In terms of future provision, and linked to the potentially greater scale of housing (point 1 above) and the

potential greater diversity of needs (point 2), it may well be more appropriate to promote as much diversification in the housing market as can be achieved.

Question 14: Who should deliver new housing? a. FIG should only provide serviced plots b. FIG should explore opportunities to allow 3rd parties to layout and develop FIG owned land c. FIG should seek to encourage private sector housebuilding? d. FIG should stop any direct involvement in the provision of new housing e. Other (please state)

The above options are not necessarily mutually exclusive, therefore please select more than one if appropriate.

Environment 3.8 Significant areas of the Falkland Islands have intrinsic natural environmental value which needs to continue to be recognised, and protected or managed to secure their long term potential. This is an objective of the Biodiversity Strategy and will also need to be addressed in the Development Plan Review. It also links closely to the objective of maximising the tourism potential of Camp, which is in large measure orientated towards experiencing the rich natural environmental assets of the Islands.

3.9 The area around Stanley is a key local resource for recreation, and also has some important natural environmental assets. Sometimes this results in conflicts, and we might be able to secure better management of Stanley Common in general, and Cape Pembroke in particular, in ways that provide a more appropriate balance of uses, and greater protection for environmental assets where necessary. The Development Plan Review needs to consider these matters spatially (for example in terms of the boundaries of these areas).

Question 15: How should we respond to recreation & environmental conflicts near Stanley? a. Review environmental issues and human activities – and develop a management plan to balance uses b. Don’t intervene: let the balance determine itself c. Other (please state)

3.10 There are limited outdoor and indoor sports facilities within Stanley. A particular need has been identified for a multi-use games area (all weather pitch), and for more (and larger) indoor facilities than the FICS leisure centre. Various physical locations have been discussed. There are also opportunities to improve the amount and quality of public greenspace (play areas etc.) throughout Stanley. More generally, there may be opportunities to improve the quality and coverage of green corridors/walking and cycle lane provision to make Stanley easier to navigate by means other than cars/land rovers.

Question 16: Which of the following is the most important? a. Ensuring new significant housing developments contain on-site public open space provision; b. Providing larger centrally located facilities; c. Generally improving the potential for walking/cycling around Stanley d. Other (please state)

3.11 Traditionally plots of land in the Stanley area have been large enough that many people have maintained their own gardens (including growing vegetables etc.). However, growing land pressures mean that for some individuals this is becoming increasingly difficult. To respond to this, there may be potential for FIG to consider provision of allotments (via encouraging a relevant private sector partner to provide allotments or alternatively may be via direct provision by FIG). The amount and nature of provision (including plot size) is yet to be determined and would need some calculation, informed by this public consultation. However, it is suggested that an average size could be around 80-100 square metres. This would allow production for domestic use, but not on a commercial scale.

Question 16b: Which of the following most closely reflects your views? a. I would support allotment provision and would be interested in taking one on b. I would support allotment provision in principle, but would not be interested in taking one on myself c. The focus should be on ensuring that housing plots are big enough for people to grow vegetables etc. rather than providing separate allotments d. This is not an important issue (compared to other issues) and no action from FIG is required e. Other (please state)

4. STANLEY TOWN PLAN

4.1 Stanley itself has a distinct character, much of which is a particular asset for both the resident population and tourism. A degree of control (greater or lesser to the existing) could help to protect and enhance this. The Town Plan provides the basis for part of that control, and there is now an opportunity to review its content. The current plan tends to focus on restrictions to development (many of which may need to be retained), but the future plan has the opportunity to take a more strategic approach which helps to lead and direct change, in a more supportive and pro-active manner.

A draft updated Town Plan Map is available as part of this consultation, and the following section should be read with reference to this map. The map identifies proposed allocations (land uses) – based on what we want to achieve rather than simply mapping the current situation, whilst also being realistic about what might be achieved.

It should be noted that this is not necessarily a plan of what will happen, or what Government is proposing to build, not least as its main function will eb to guide the determination of planning applications, the majority of which are submitted by private companies or individuals.

Your comments are sought in relation to the proposed allocations – are there any you particularly support (or support subject to caveats and safeguards), and are there any you particularly object to (in which case, why and what should we change?). Although the following section does not include many questions, points are highlighted which you may wish to consider in responding.

Providing new housing 4.2 There are two areas which are currently being developed:

• a FIG proposal next to Murrary Heights and a smaller private site in the same area have the potential to accommodate approximately 60 mobile homes; and • the first four phases of Sapper Hill have outline planning permission for 120 units and cover an area of 14 hectares (8.6 per hectare).

4.3 These will provide a supply in the interim, suggesting a need for a further 270 houses on another site(s) in the medium to long term (although the long term aspirations in terms of the role of mobile homes as part of the housing supply may need to be considered in more detail – see section 3).

4.4 There are also a number of developments ‘in the pipeline’ (for example Dairy Paddock – see below) which suggests that no additional land is theoretically required to meet the housing target. However, to achieve the housing target it will be necessary to over-allocate land, given the deliverability/viability questions relating to some of the sites ‘in the pipeline’ coupled with the need to increase the annual build rate (e.g. a site which could accommodate 100 houses may only result in 5 houses being built in each year, so would not be fully built out during the plan period, particularly if development does not start until part-way through the plan period).

4.5 Sapper Hill Road, West (Existing Housing Allocation H5) - The total area of the existing Sapper Hill housing allocation in the Town Plan is 72 hectares and (assuming the same density) therefore has the potential to accommodate somewhere in the order of a further 500 dwellings (i.e. the whole target). However, there will be a limit to how quickly one site can be built out (and resulting risks to the delivery of the plan), and the layout of the site together with aspirations for areas to be retained for amenity/commercial uses and some lower density housing areas, means the overall capacity would be reduced.

4.6 The Plan review offers the opportunity to reconsider whether this is the optimum location for such a large proportion of the likely future housing supply. One possibility is to limit development for the time being to that already commenced, and hold back development of the remainder of the site, perhaps retaining this for possible long term development, or for a later phase. Should the completion of the proposed link road down from Darwin Road to

Ross Road West, through the site, nonetheless be advanced in the short term (linking to other future possible development areas)?

4.7 Dairy Paddock (Existing Housing Allocation H4 - 14.5 Ha) - Outline planning permission for workers camp or up to 350 houses at Dairy Paddock has been granted, although has not been implemented

4.8 Beyond the major opportunities offered by Sapper Hill and Dairy Paddock, should the main future direction of growth for Stanley be westwards along Harbour, to the south of Ross Road West? There are potentially attractive housing sites in this direction, which would also accord well with possible future road infrastructure (ie. the proposed link road through Sapper Hill from Darwin Road to Ross Road West, which is proposed to be surfaced, linking at Moody Brook to the proposed access road to the new deep water port). However this would further attenuate the linear shape of Stanley – which might suggest that some commercial development (e.g. a local centre) might be desirable in any extensive westwards development.

4.9 Bennetts, Paddock, Moody Brook Road (Existing Housing Allocation H3 - 13 Ha) could accommodate a significant number of houses potentially around 110 units. The plan review indicates that satisfactory waste drainage measures would be required. This site would partially ‘fill in’ the gap between the Mink Park development to the West and Sapper Hill to the South. Also, outline permission has been granted on the Old Butchery Site to West of Mink Park (FIC) for approximately 20 units (although since lapsed).

4.10 Other potential sites, including those associated with the redevelopment of key sites within the centre of town (for example planning permission has been granted for 26 apartments at Fitzroy Road Place, although no works other than site clearance have commended).

Do you think these are the best sites for new housing? Are there others that should be considered? How quickly should they be developed? Are there key design features or services you think are required? Please use the, “Comments on Draft Revised Town Plan” box on the response form to give us your views.

4.11 Furthermore, there has been a significant amount of other development outside allocated housing sites (e.g. infill within Stanley) and it is not counted in the above. To focus on strategic issues it is not proposed to allocate housing sites of less than 1 hectare (i.e. approximately 8 units based on a similar density to Sapper Hill). Such suitable sites within Stanley will be washed over as Residential Area, thus housing development will be supported on them in principle, as windfall sites. This approach builds flexibility into the plan and allows for smaller developments to take place, where they are in compliance with detailed policy (e.g. design and access) considerations. Similarly housing allocations which have now been developed would become residential policy area.

4.12 This would mean the existing Town Plan housing allocations set out below would be considered for becoming either Residential Policy Area or Greenspace.

• H1 Adjacent to Race Course (0.9 Ha) – part greenspace part residential policy area • H2 Anderson Drive (0.2 Ha) – residential policy area (as currently being developed) • H6 Davis Street East (0.2 Ha) - greenspace • H8 Goss Road (0.4 ha) – part greenspace part residential policy area • H9 Leading Lights, East Stanley (1.1 Ha) - residential policy area (as already developed) • H10 Old Balloon Site (0.4 Ha) – residential policy area (as currently being developed) • H11 Old Oil Depot – potential residential policy area (FIC owned but not currently being developed) • H12 Snake Hill/Kent Road (0.5 Ha) – residential policy area (as already developed)

Within the wider urban area there is continued pressure for infill housing – should it be encouraged, resisted or controlled? If controlled, what aspects and principles are important?

We would welcome your views on infill housing – including to what extent and how it should be controlled.

Conservation Area and Central Stanley 4.13 The existing Town Plan identifies a Conservation Area boundary, which stretches along Ross Road from the Battle Memorial in the East to the Cemetery in the West and as far south as Callaghan Road. Work is required as part of/alongside the Development Plan Review to carry out a detailed assessment of this, to clearly set out what makes it important, and to identify mechanisms to protect and improve its special character.

We would welcome your views on whether the Conservation Area boundary is correct and what makes it the Conservation Area special.

4.14 A masterplan has been developed for the Stanley Waterfront, and has been well supported through public consultation. It includes provision for tourists (such as cafes and hotels, improved jetty facilities, and the relocation of the museum) and social facilities such as mixed used development such as new restaurants. To enable this to be delivered and avoid overly prescriptive detail a broad ‘Central Stanley’ designation is proposed (which would contain a mix of shops, pubs, restaurants, civic buildings, social infrastructure, public realm and residential uses). This approach is intended to provide flexibility to allow enable different delivery mechanisms to be explored and implemented

We would welcome your views on whether this is the correct approach, and any points of detail about how you would like to see this area developed (including the features you would wish to see retained, as per the previous point).

South of Stanley Bypass 4.15 Stanley is clearly a very linear settlement, and one of its main spatial features is the Bypass running to its south. This has proved to be an effective limit to growth, particularly for housing (notwithstanding a mobile homes development that has recently been located to its south), although a number of offices and other uses have located along its length, to the south.

Key issues to address in the Town Plan will therefore include the following. - What should be the strategic approach to the development of Stanley southwards? - Should we allow new housing to the South of the bypass, and if so where? - Should we promote developments fronting the Bypass to its south for commercial, office and other specialist uses – for example a new power station, prison, emergency services, indoor recreation, and other offices?

Gordon Lines and the eastwards limits of Stanley 4.16 This area currently provides the main location for industrial activities in Stanley. Its future – whether uses are retained or relocated – is heavily dependent on the proposals for the new deep water port, which has considerable opportunity for the adjacent location of associated laydown and other industrial uses. Considerable investment has been made in developments in the Gordon Lines area, which needs to be recognised – and suggests that preferences for continuing use would exist whatever the deep water port situation. However there are also general concerns about the untidy and disorganised forms of development in this area.

Key issues to address in the Town Plan will therefore include the following. - What should be the future of the Gordon Lines area? - How far should development of Stanley be permitted to expand further to the east? - What scope is there to rationalise uses in this area, and make the land uses more efficient and environmentally acceptable?

Port facilities and the south side of the Camber 4.17 Outside Stanley itself, but very visible from the town, the possibility of future use of the south side of the Camber ridge (the opposite side from the deep water port site) is also a spatial decision which should be raised at this time, which raises the questions of:

• whether redevelopment and re-use of the disused Camber dock should be encouraged– for example for fishing vessel use (or perhaps pleasure yachts); and

• how far would a road along the north side of Stanley Harbour to access such development be acceptable (if of low impact design) and what safeguards would need to be put in place.

4.18 Many of the issues associated with this are outside the remit of the Development Plan. However, if a new port does go ahead at Port William, its location and associated development are key strategic elements which need to be embraced in the future spatial planning of Stanley. This includes in particular taking account of the proposed access road and strategic spatial issues elsewhere in Stanley Harbour may need to be considered, including the future potential and roles of the public jetty, FIPASS and additional temporary docks, and the Camber Dock.

Assuming Port William is developed as a new deep water port, we would welcome your views on what safeguards would be required and what sort of associated development (e.g. industrial, housing) might be appropriate to the West of the Port along the link road.

Appendix 3: Response Form

RESPONSE FORM

Development Plan Initial Consultation

March 2014

We would like to hear your views on the emerging Development Plan Review.

The consultation documents can be viewed in hard copy during normal opening hours at the Environmental Planning Offices (St. Marys Walk, Stanley), the Public Library or the Post Office. They can also be viewed electronically on-line at www.fig.gov.fk/policy/index.php/consultations

To help us consider and process your comments, please complete and return this form. Please note that your comments must be received no later than the XXXX. It may not be possible to take into account any comments received after this date.

Your Details Name Organisation Address

Telephone number Email address

If you are an agent acting on behalf of a client, please complete the boxes below. Client’s Name Organisation Address

Telephone number Email address

How to return completed forms: When you have completed your response form, please return it to us by post or e-mail.

Post: Environmental Planning E-mail: [email protected] Department St. Marys Walk Stanley

Alternatively, completed forms can be put into the responses boxes available in the Library and Post Office.

For more information, please contact us via the details above or call: 00 500 28481

Your comments

If you want to comment on the detail within one of the consultation documents please complete the table below (please fill in a new row for each comment, attaching additional pages as required)