Examination of the Chiltern and South Bucks Local Plan
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
EXAMINATION OF THE CHILTERN AND SOUTH BUCKS LOCAL PLAN SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN RESPONSES: Matter 1, Issue 1, - DUTY TO COOPERATE By Dennis Elsey Inspectors’ Agenda Questions I have used the South Bucks D.C. Local Plan web site Duty to Co-operate web pages which only list 4 MOUs, 2 Statements of Common Ground with the Environment Agency, 1 Position Statement by C&SB Councils, and 1 Response to Aylesbury Vale. It also lists 7 documents regarding Slough. Because the NPPF February 2019 Pg 10, Maintaining effective cooperation paragraphs 24 to 27 says:24. Local Planning Authorities and County Councils are under a duty to cooperate with each other, AND WITH OTHER PRESCRIBED BODIES, ON STRATEGIC MATTERS THAT CROSS ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDRIES. Para 25 says : Strategic policy-making authorities should collaborate to IDENTIFY RELEVANT TO IDENTIFY THE RELEVANT STRATEGIC MATTERS TO ADDRESS IN THEIR PLANS. They SHOULD ALSO ENGAGE WITH THEIR LOCAL COMMUNITIES, AND RELEVANT BODIES INCLUDING…. INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDERS…. Para 26 says : EFFECTIVE AND ON-GOING JOINT WORKING BETWEEN STRATEGIC POLICY- MAKING AUTHORITIES AND RELEVENT BODIES is INTEGRAL TO THE PRODUCTION OF A POSITIVELY PREPARED AND JUSTIFIED STRATEGY . Para 27 says: In order to demonstrate effective and on-going joint working strategic policy-making authorities should prepare and MAINTAIN one or more statements of common ground documenting the cross-boundary matters being addressed and progress in cooperating to address these. These should be produced……AND BE MADE PUBLICALLY AVAILABLE through out the plan-making process to provide transparency. Inspectors’ Agenda item Issue 1 – Duty to Cooperate, bullet point 4 is : Have the Councils prepared statements of common ground with neighbouring authorities documenting the cross boundary matters being addressed and progress in cooperating to address these ? Have they been made publically available throughout the plan making process as required by paragraph 27 of the Framework ? The answer is clearly NO, not in accordance with NPPF “Maintaining Effective Cooperation” paragraphs 24, 25, 26, & 27, on several of the major critical themes affecting Slough, South Bucks, Windsor & Eton Borough , and Wycombe District. South Bucks appears to be clearly deceptive or utterly incompetent on Air Quality. Traffic is also clearly logically flawed and understated. A. Heathrow Airport and its road and air traffic including the Civil Aviation Authority, B. Road Traffic , C. Air Quality, D. Green Belt/Green space/ Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. A. Heathrow Airport : 1. The Heathrow (HRW) Expansion Consultation contained background information other than that relating to expansion which is critical to the Local Plan 2036 and the on-going Duty of Cooperation and Sustainability Assessment including : Air Quality, Public Health, Road Traffic, Noise and Climate Change. This information was new for the public but if South Bucks, Slough, Wycombe Councils had followed their Duty of Cooperation with Heathrow then the public would have known and so their Duty of Cooperation is Unsound and breaks NPPF Feb. 2019 paras 31, 32 and footnote 17, and paras 35 & 36 – Examining Plans. 2. Because it was previously available to SBDC in June 2019 before Approval and Release of the Local Plan, and the information therein available probably years previously if Duty of Cooperation obligations were Effective, then SBDC’s and Slough’s negligence in Not Addressing these issues of national and Bucks wide major significance clearly appears to be a critical flaw in the Local Plan process of Cooperation, Sustainability and Strategic Assessment being Unsound. 3. It is Not Effective because there is No Agreement with Heathrow, CAA or Slough that addresses these issues. Indeed their discussions on allowing Slough to expand northwards would significantly exacerbate these issues and remove green space / belt which is the major Air Qualityreduction mechanism SBDC has a long standing Air Quality Management Area 2 next to Heathrow now, and so is clearly aware of the threat, as does Slough with 3 such AQMs. 4. It is Not Consistent with National Policy because the NPPF 19/2/19 Revision stresses consideration of Air Quality at plan-making stage which “ can ensure a strategic approach to Air Quality and help secure net improvement.” Plan makers are advised to take account of “trends” in air quality and plans are expected to identify opportunities to “improve air quality or mitigate impacts” such as “ travel management (including aeroplanes) and Green infrastructure Provision.” Which of course should be proportionate with the degree of the threat which is major to both Districts’ territories. 5. For example according to the DEFRA 2.5 mcg Particulate map covers at least some 66% of Buckinghamshire. 6. Because Heathrow is THE UK’s LARGEST POLLUTER and is immediately down prevailing wind of SBDC with current and escalating habitat and public health detrimental effect. The prevailing wind blows all pollutants into Bucks including NOX and particulates and as the aircraft are at the low altitude of some 4,000 feet [see Heathrow Expansion Noise Map] pollutant densities are high. 7. Heathrow is the UK’s LARGEST AIRPORT and UK’s biggest source of CO2 at 16,584 kilo- tonnes and the worst internationally{ aef.org.uk/ClimateChange } 8. Heathrow is thus a critical Infrastructure provider of Strategic Importance. The SA provides an example of clear evidence and specifies Burnham Beeches SAC is already dying now from 20% nitrous overload , and it says 16% of which is coming from aircraft, and so this is a real current problem causing destruction now, not a possible one in future. This of course will apply across a wide swathe of South Bucks, Slough and Windsor. The Duty of Cooperation has NOT included this and is thus UNSOUND. 9. The worst aircraft pollution occurs on Take Off and Initial Climb and Turn { Heathrow (HRW) Expansion – Preliminary Environmental Report Ch 7 , App. 7.1} 10. At Heathrow 70% of these occur taking off in a westerly direction { heathrowconsultation.com/topics/direction-preferment } as can be seen rising and turning over Maidenhead, many turning to the north – Bucks. See below: 11. 12. Local Plan - Heathrow Flight Patterns over 1 month: Green = Take Off . Source : webtrak_Heathrow 13. Many flights turn to head between north and to east over Bucks and thereby pollute south Bucks and Slough twice – on Take Off and subsequent overflight. 14. This increasing major Air Quality issue is NOT DEPENDENT on HEATHROW EXPANSION. Although Heathrow Expansion may occur in 2028 following the CAA’s refusal of pre- approval spend, BUT HEATHROW HAS ALREADY EXPANDED FOR 9 YEARS. It had its 9th successive year of traffic growth in 2019 , with 3.1% growth, = 2.5 million to 80.9 million passengers in larger (A380} and fuller aircraft [Times 14/1/20] which are more polluting as are associated additional passenger’s ROAD TRAFFIC transport to/from airport. So this problem HAS ESCALATED during the development of this LOCAL PLAN and is unrecorded in COOPERATION AGREEMENTS with HEATHROW and between SLOUGH & SOUTH BUCKS, previously and now and into the LOCAL PLAN’s future. B. ROAD TRAFFIC & C. AIR QUALITY : Slough which is industrial and according to “Centre for Cities” is as polluted as London is also down prevailing wind and adjacent to South Bucks, and is also a source of Air Pollution as the SA on Burnham Beeches also testifies with clear evidence. The NPPF Feb . 2019 SPECIFIES that AIR QUALITY HAS TO BE TREATED STRATEGICALLY. The NPPF Revision February 2019 makes this very point : The Local Plan is Not Consistent with National Policy because the NPPF 19/2/19 Revision stresses consideration of Air Quality at plan-making stage which “ can ensure a STRATEGIC approach to Air Quality and help secure net improvement.” Plan makers are advised to take account of “trends” in air quality and plans are expected to identify opportunities to “improve air quality or mitigate impacts” such as “ travel management (including aeroplanes and road vehicles) and Green infrastructure Provision.” One big Duty of Cooperation fundamental flaw is that it does NOT strategically recognise that with : M25, M4, A4; M40 and its junctions, slip roads and service station;, A40, Heathrow, SW Mainline and diesel trains of Chiltern Rail, Wycombe industry plus Slough industry and their A roads going north, then traffic is congested and with a prevailing wind for 44% of time coming from the south, southwest and west (says Met. Office), this is already seriously damaging the entire south of the County with traffic congestion and air pollution, which will be significantly increased by 2 to 4+ times says Jacobs traffic report by the Local Plan’s development, and traffic across Wycombe , Amersham, Chesham and all motorway junctions, and the north western quadrant of the M25. This transport corridor effect continues going north with the busy A413 and A41 links between the M40 and the M25 at Amersham and Chesham plus the other Chiltern Rail branch of diesel trains. Therefor the DUTY of COOPERATION and the STATEMENTS of COMMON GROUND are UNSOUND. This is NOT affected by the Habitats RA Update Feb. 2020 by the Councils provided on 4/3/2020 because this document is UNSOUND. It draws conclusions from a one month of November 2019 Traffic Survey. The Local Plan extends to 2036 or 16 years or 192 months from now and so 1 MONTHS TRAFFIC STATS IS ONE HALF OF 1% of the Local Plan period and thus statistically and UNSOUND SAMPLE. Furthermore the country was undergoing difficult National General Elections in December and for the quarter Sept./ Nov. & Dec 2019 national gross domestic product growth (GDP) was ZERO as business paused to see the outcome. The HRA Update also references old studies and modelling of reducing pollution from vehicles because of the Vehicle Fleet is renewing with lower polluting vehicles from EU regulation.