DOCSLIB.ORG

Strategic Transport Infrastructure Programme

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Strategic Transport Infrastructure Programme STRATEGIC TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME PART OF DARTFORD’S LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK February 2011 BOROUGH COUNCIL CONTENTS 1. Introduction 3 2. The Programme 3 3. Recent Changes 4 4. Proposed Way Forward 5 Appendices A. Key Milestones in the Kent Thameside Transport Programme 8 B. Evidence Base 9 C. Kent Thameside Strategic Transport Programme: Initial Programme for Delivery 11 D. Reports to Dartford Council on the Transport Tariff 18 E. Transport Contributions Received/Committed 43 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This paper has been produced to support Dartford’s Core Strategy Submission document, in particular, Policy CS 16, Transport Investment. It addresses the delivery and implementation mechanisms for the transport schemes necessary to achieve the planned level of development. 1.2 The Proposed Submission evidence base contained a number of documents1 which assessed and defined the requirement for increased capacity to the transport network, as well as a mechanism for the funding and delivery of the schemes. The approach adopted is referred to as the Kent Thameside Strategic Transport Infrastructure Programme (STIP), a comprehensive package of schemes to support planned development in both Dartford and Gravesham Boroughs. Policy CS 16 refers to this programme. 1.3 Work with partners on the development of the Programme commenced in 2006. Early work focused on modelling of transport impacts arising from planned development and identifying mitigation schemes2 . The has seen a concentration on identification of funding sources, later period mechanisms for the delivery of the Programme3 and working arrangements between the partners. The core partners working together on the Programme are Dartford Council, Gravesham Council, Kent County Council, Kent Thameside Regeneration Partnership, the Highways Agency, Department for Transport and the Homes and Communities Agency. Private sector partners have been involved in developing the Programme at appropriate points in time. 1.4 Whilst the rationale for the Programme remains relevant, the mechanism for the funding and delivery of schemes is undergoing review. This paper provides an update on the situation and outlines how the Council proposes to work in partnership to deliver the programme. 2. THE PROGRAMME 2.1 The STIP was devised in response to the difficulties which were encountered when attempting to agree with developers separate mitigation packages for each site which came forward for development.4 This approach appeared likely to result in a mixture of grampian conditions, planning obligations and other planning agreements which, while relevant to the site in question, would not amount to a coherent programme for the orderly and timely provision of infrastructure addressing the cumulative impacts of development in Kent Thameside viewed as a whole. In particular the site-by-site approach did not 1 See Appendix A 2 See Appendix B for details of evidence base documents. 3 See Appendix D for reports to Dartford Council’s Cabinet regarding implementation of a tariff mechanism for seeking developer contributions. 4 See Appendix D, Report to Cabinet July 2007 for further background on the rationale of the Programme. 3 provide the Highways Agency with the confidence to agree individual developments in the area, and development in the Ebbsfleet Valley became stalled as a result. 2.2 The key features of the STIP are: i) a transport investment programme which addresses the cumulative impact of developments taken together, based on a once-and-for all assessment; ii) the cost of implementing the programme to be met from a pooled fund of public and private sector contributions administered by Kent County Council, as the highways authority; iii) developer contributions to the programme to be equitably apportioned, whether by a set metric or by reference to impact assessments; iv) schemes in the programme to be delivered in step with development; v) legally binding obligations between the partners, providing a reliable delivery framework; vi) formal monitoring and review arrangements. 2.3 It is only with these arrangements in place that the local planning authority, the highways authority (Kent County Council) and the Highways Agency can be satisfied that the strategic transport impacts of planned development will be addressed. The additional proviso is that a sustainable transport approach is adopted within each site as set out in proposed Policy CS15. 3. RECENT CHANGES 3.1 Whilst partners are committed to the principles of the Strategic Transport Infrastructure Programme, its means of implementation is undergoing review in response to legislative and economic changes. 3.2 The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (March 2010) introduced CIL as a new mechanism for funding infrastructure. The legislation envisages that CIL will, to a large extent, replace the need for S106 contributions. In accordance with government’s objective to limit the scope of S106’s, the regulations (122) clarified the criteria governing S106 agreements and made these a legal requirement. They also limited the potential for seeking pooled contributions from S106’s in the future. From 2014, or from the time that a Community Infrastructure Schedule is put into effect, it will not be possible to seek contributions towards a specific item of infrastructure from more than five developments. The effect of these changes is that in the short-term, in advance of introducing CIL, it will be more difficult to operate a tariff-type system for transport contributions across as a wide area as Dartford and Gravesham, as had been previously proposed. 3.3 Secondly, the outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review in October 2010 (see Appendix C) has seen the withdrawal of provisional commitments to the strategic transport programme. £13m of funding to be delivered through the 4 Homes and Communities Agency, however, remains a commitment, with spending programmed to start in the 4th Quarter of 2010/11. 3.4 The downturn in the housing market has had an impact on S106 contributions from private development. Some funding has been collected towards strategic transport infrastructure and further S106’s have been signed5. However, funding committed in S106’s will not be delivered until the schemes commence on site. The anticipated slower build out rates in the short to medium term will result in contributions coming forward at a slower rate. The greatest impact arises from the Eastern Quarry S106 contribution. The phasing agreed as part of the S106 on the £40m transport contribution related to a faster development programme. With a much longer build-out, the proposed phasing is no longer considered viable by the developer. Negotiations are taking place to agree a settlement that is acceptable to the developer, whilst also ensuring that the integrity of the programme is not undermined. 4. PROPOSED WAY FORWARD 4.1 The changes outlined above indicate that in the current economic climate and economic restraint in both public and private sectors, funding for the Strategic Transport Programme will come forward more slowly. There is likely to be less certainty about the timing and amount of the future funding stream. This suggests a need to move away from a pre-planned, fully-costed and comprehensive strategic transport programme across Kent Thameside, to one which addresses transport impacts and mitigation schemes on a more local basis and is more sensitive to the timing of housing delivery and the availability of funding at a given point in time. 4.2 A locally-based or zonal approach is well-suited to current circumstances as it can enable a more focused approach to spending and accommodate funding made available in smaller tranches. Central government’s objective is to maximise the effectiveness of spending by linking funding to delivery. This can be achieved by a focus of public sector spending on those local areas or zones which look likely to bring forward the earliest development. Such an approach will facilitate the levering of private sector funding, improve viability of schemes and allow early delivery. 4.3 In advance of a Community Infrastructure Levy, the restrictions on S106’s require that a clear relationship is demonstrated between the impact of a development and a mitigation scheme. Any contribution must be proportionate to the impact. In this context, a flat rate tariff contribution towards a Kent Thameside-wide transport programme is no longer feasible. Nonetheless, the difficulties in operating contributions towards strategic transport infrastructure on a scheme-by-scheme, which led to the development of the Strategic Transport Programme, still remain. Pooling of contributions between more than one development is necessary to provide mitigation schemes which treat 5 See Appendix E for details 5 all development equitably and in a way which does not constrain development through viability issues. 4.4 Again, the local area or zonal approach allows a more appropriate response to the S106 restrictions in advance of CIL introduction. The outputs from the Kent Thameside model enable the apportionment of impacts between development schemes within the relevant local area. This can be used to derive an apportionment of costs for each mitigation scheme. The more localised basis of pooled contributions, with a clear evidence base demonstrating the link between a development and a mitigation scheme ensures compliance with Regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations. 4.5 In the short-term, therefore, the Council is working with its partners
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Local Government Boundary Commission for England Report No
    Local Government Boundary Commission For England Report No. Principal Area Boundary Review Borough of Gravesham/Borough of Dartford/District of Sevenoaks LOCAL GOVEHNICWT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND HEK)hT NO. LOCAL GOVKRflUEJlT BOI'NJJAHY COMMISSION FOR CHAIRMAN Mr C J Ellerton CMC MB1C Mr J U Powell PRICE FGV* Lady Aoknur lir T Brockbank DI^ Professor G E Cherry Mr K J L Newell Me B Qcholee QBE THE RT. HON. PATRICK JENKIN MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT 1. At present the New Barn residential area is split between Dartford Borough, Sevenoaks District and Gravesham Borough; the part situated in Dartford is in the parish of ^outhfleet; the part in Sevenoaks is in the parish of Longfield, whilst the part in Gravesham is unparished. On 30 November 1979» Gravesham Borough Council requested ue to review the boundaries between the districts of Gravesham, Dartford and Sevenoaks in the vicinity of New Barn. Their request was in response to representations from the New Barn Ratepayers Association for the whole of the New Barn residential area to be incorporated within Gravesham Borough. The Association based their representations on a survey of opinion which they carried out in 1978 among the residents of New Barn on the question of whether the area should be under one authority, and if so, which one. The results indicated that a majority (8?#) of residents indicating a view preferred to see New Barn under one authority and a large proportion (6990 of these considered that this should be Gravesham. 2. We noted that Kent County Council, Dartford Borough Council, Sevenoaks District Council, and Longfield Parish Council were all opposed to a review beinp undertaken at that time, although Kent County Council and Dartford BOrough Council did a^ree that the current boundaries in the New Barn area were not wholly satisfactory.
    [Show full text]
  • Thames Gateway Risk Profile
    Review of Emergency Response Provision: Thames Gateway Cluster Risk Profile RERP - Thames Gateway Cluster Risk Profile Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 4 Description of Cluster ............................................................................................................ 5 Cluster Demographics and Population Risk Factors.............................................................. 6 Deprivation .......................................................................................................................... 10 Overall Cluster Risk ............................................................................................................ 11 Dwellings ......................................................................................................................... 11 Special Service ................................................................................................................ 12 Geodemographic Segmentation .......................................................................................... 13 Cluster Geodemographic Segmentation .......................................................................... 14 Building Usage as a Risk Identifier ...................................................................................... 16 Other Building Risk ............................................................................................................. 17 Sleeping Accommodation
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Air Quality Annual Status Report (ASR)
    DARTFORD Dartford Borough Council BOROUGH COUNCIL 2016 Air Quality Annual Status Report (ASR) In fulfilment of Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 Local Air Quality Management LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 Dartford Borough Council Local Authority James Fox Officer Department Environmental Health Address Dartford Borough Council Telephone 01322 343434 E-mail [email protected] Report Reference DBCASR16 number Date January 2017 LAQM Annual Status Report 2016 Dartford Borough Council Executive Summary: Air Quality in Our Area This report fulfils the requirements of the Local Air Quality Management as set out in Part IV of the Environment Act (1995), the Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland 2007 and the relevant Policy and Technical Guidance documents. Air Quality in Dartford Borough Air pollution is associated with a number of adverse health impacts. It is recognised as a contributing factor in the onset of heart disease and cancer. Additionally, air pollution particularly affects the most vulnerable in society: children and older people, and those with heart and lung conditions. There is also often a strong correlation with equalities issues, because areas with poor air quality are also often the less affluent areas1,2. The annual health cost to society of the impacts of particulate matter alone in the UK is estimated to be around £16 billion3. The main source of air pollution in the borough is road traffic emissions from major roads, notably the M25, A282, A2, A226, A296 and A206. Dartford suffers from significant congestion, especially on the A282 Dartford Tunnel Approach Road, A2 Bean Interchange for Bluewater and main approach roads into Dartford town centre.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Medway Council Sports Facility Strategy and Action Plan
    MEDWAY COUNCIL Sports Facility Strategy and Action Plan November 2017 DOCUMENT CONTROL Amendment History Version No Date Author Comments 5 24/11/17 Taryn Dale Final Report Sign-off List Name Date Comments Tom Pinnington 24/11/17 Approved for distribution to client Distribution List Name Organisation Date Bob Dimond Medway Council 24/11/17 Medway Council 2 Sports Facility Strategy and Action Plan CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 5 1.2 Project Brief ............................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Methodology and Approach ...................................................................................................... 6 2 BACKGROUND AND POLICY REVIEW ...................................................................................... 7 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.2 National Context ........................................................................................................................ 7 2.3 Local Policy Context ................................................................................................................ 12 2.4 Demographic Profile ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Dartford Borough Council Council Size Submission
    Dartford Borough Council Council Size Submission EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An electoral review of Dartford Borough Council has been triggered by the Local Government Boundary Commission as 41% of the Council’s current wards have an electoral variance of more than 10% from the average. Whilst the initial stage of the review is limited to determining the number of elected members required to deliver effective and convenient local government to this community (Council Size), the Council’s Leadership committed itself at an early stage to take the opportunity of the review to embed wider and positive change of its own. Like all Councils, Dartford has adopted patterns of working practice over the years that have not, in themselves, always required changes to committee structures or a public reassertion of the culture of the Council and the positive way it does business. The clear focus of the review, and the deadlines which drive it, are seen as a great opportunity to ‘reset’ the Council and prepare it for the huge challenges of providing community leadership to a Borough experiencing unprecedented growth and change. To that end, the Leader established a fully‐cross‐party Working Group bringing together senior Members of not only the leading Conservative Group (of which there are 34 Members) and Labour opposition (7 Members) but the Council’s minority Independent group (3 Members) too. Usual proportionality was abandoned so that each group had equal representation in order to fuel open and frank conversation. The Working Group’s conversations were as interesting as they were productive. At the heart was a clear desire to rebalance the role of Members as truly empowered community advocates and ambassadors with the traditional committee roles at the Civic Centre.
    [Show full text]
  • Riverside Energy Park, Belvedere, South East London PINS Reference: EN010093 Section 46 Notification Under the Planning Act 2008 (The 2008 Act)
    Peter Brett Associates LLP Our ref: EN010093 33 Bowling Green Lane London EC1R 0BJ 12 June 2018 T: 0330 838 4254 The Planning Inspectorate E: [email protected] National Infrastructure Directorate Temple Quay House Temple Quay Bristol BS1 6PN FAO: Ewa Sherman Dear Ms Sherman RE: Riverside Energy Park, Belvedere, South East London PINS Reference: EN010093 Section 46 Notification under the Planning Act 2008 (the 2008 Act) The Secretary of State is hereby notified that Cory Environmental Holdings Limited (trading as Cory Riverside Energy) (‘the Applicant’) intends to make an application under Section 37 of the 2008 Act for a Development Consent Order (‘DCO’) to authorise the construction, operation and maintenance of an integrated energy park, known as Riverside Energy Park, at Norman Road in Belvedere in the London Borough of Bexley and an Electrical Connection to the Littlebrook substation located in the Borough of Dartford ('the Proposed Development'). The Proposed Development would comprise: . the Riverside Energy Park, located to the north of Belvedere off Norman Road; . the Electrical Connection, running underground between the Riverside Energy Park site and the Electrical Connection Point at Littlebrook substation into an existing National Grid building in Dartford; . the Main Temporary Construction Compounds located to the south of the Riverside Energy Park site and west of Norman Road; and . Other Cable Route Temporary Construction Compounds required to support the construction of the chosen Electrical Connection route. The primary components of Riverside Energy Park, with a nominal rated electrical output of up to 96 MWe, comprise: . an Energy Recovery Facility (ERF); . an Anaerobic Digestion facility; .
    [Show full text]
  • Dartford Unit 2 Banks Place, Market Place Da1 1Ex
    DARTFORD UNIT 2 BANKS PLACE, MARKET PLACE DA1 1EX TO LET – RETAIL / BUSINESS PREMISES - APPROX 796 SQ.FT (74 SQ.M) Location Dartford is the principal town in the Borough of Dartford, Kent and is located 9 miles South-East of London. The town enjoys good road connections being less than a mile from the intersection of the A2 and M25 motorway. The Dartford Crossing is approx. 1 mile to the North. Dartford Train Station is a short distance away and provides direct and regular services to London Bridge, Charing Cross, Cannon Street and London Victoria. The property is situated in a prominent position off of Market Street and close to the junction with the High Street. Accommodation Surrounding occupiers include Primark, Boots & Iceland. (with approximate dimensions and floor areas) Description Internal Width: 15’7” 4.8m Total Depth: 44’6” 13.6m Total Floor Area: 796 sq.ft 73 sq.m The property comprises a self-contained Store ground floor retail/business unit situated Kitchenette & WC within a mixed-use building. The accommodation is currently arranged to provide an open plan office suite with Terms glass partitioned meeting room, storeroom, kitchenette & WC. The premises are available to let on the basis of a new full We believe the premises would be repairing and insuring lease for a term of years to be agreed at suitable for a wide variety of business a commencing rent of £20,000 (Twenty Thousand Pounds) per including retail and/or financial and annum exclusive. Rents payable quarterly in advance. professional services. THE PROPERTY MISDESCRIPTIONS ACT 1991 The agent has not tested any apparatus, equipment, fixtures and fittings or services and so cannot verify that they are in working order of fit for the purpose.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Recommendations for Kent County Council 42
    Draft recommendations on the new electoral arrangements for Kent County Council Electoral review May 2015 Translations and other formats For information on obtaining this publication in another language or in a large-print or Braille version please contact the Local Government Boundary Commission for England: Tel: 0330 500 1525 Email: [email protected] The mapping in this report is reproduced from OS mapping by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Licence Number: GD 100049926 2015 Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 2 2 Analysis and draft recommendations 4 Submissions received 4 Electorate figures 5 Council size 5 Division patterns 6 Detailed divisions 6 Ashford Borough 8 Canterbury City 10 Dartford Borough 14 Dover District 16 Gravesham Borough 18 Maidstone Borough 20 Sevenoaks District 22 Shepway District 25 Swale Borough 28 Thanet District 31 Tonbridge & Malling Borough 33 Tunbridge Wells Borough 35 Conclusions 37 Parish electoral arrangements 37 3 Have your say 40 Appendices A Table A1: Draft recommendations for Kent County Council 42 B Submissions received 50 C Glossary and abbreviations 52 Summary Who we are The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) is an independent body set up by Parliament. We are not part of government or any political party. We are accountable to Parliament through a committee of MPs chaired by the Speaker of the House of Commons. Our main role is to carry out electoral reviews of local authorities throughout England.
    [Show full text]
  • 3094 the London Gazette, 26Th March 1965
    3094 THE LONDON GAZETTE, 26TH MARCH 1965 The Revised Map and Statement in definitive form substantially prejudiced by a failure to comply with may be inspected at the .offices of the County any such requirement as aforesaid, may make an Surveyor, County Offices, Aylesbury, at all reasonable Order declaring that, notwithstanding anything con- hours. A copy of so much of the Revised Map tained in the said Part IV, the definitive map shall and Statement in definitive form as relates to each not be conclusive evidence of any such matter as borough, urban district and rural district may be may be specified in the Order. inspected at all reasonable hours ait the following R. E. Millard, Clerk of .the Bucks County addresses: Council. Aylesbury Borough. The Town Clerk's Office, County Hall, Aylesbury. Municipal Offices, Aylesbury. Buckingham Borough. The Town Clerk's Office, 26th March 1965. Town Hall, Buckingham. (383) Blatch'ley Urban District. The Office of the Clerk of the Bletchley Urban District Council, Council Offices, Bletchley. Linslade Urban District. The Office of the Clerk KENT COUNTY COUNCIL of the "Wing Rural District Council, Brooklands, Leighton Road, Linslade. National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act, Newport Pagnell Urban District. The Office of the 1949 Clerk of the Newport Pagnell Urban District Provisional Map of Public Rights of Way Council, 60 High .Street, Newport Pagnell. Notice is hereby given that in accordance with Wolveitton Urban District. The Office of the Clerk section 30 of the National Parks and Access to the of the Wolverton Urban District Council, Market Countryside Act, 1949, the Kent County Council Square, Stony Stratford.
    [Show full text]
  • LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT REF: 6.2 9.B C5 – Tilbury Marshes Pylons and Power Lines Emerges North from the Power Station Across Tilbury Marshes LCA
    PLANNING ACT 2008 INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING (APPLICATIONS: PRESCRIBED FORMS AND PROCEDURE) REGULATIONS 2009 REGULATION 5 (2) (a) PROPOSED PORT TERMINAL AT FORMER TILBURY POWER STATION TILBURY2 TR030003 VOLUME 6 PART B ES APPENDIX 9.B: LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT REF: 6.2 9.B C5 – Tilbury Marshes pylons and power lines emerges north from the power station across Tilbury Marshes LCA. Key Characteristics Evaluation • Low lying, level landscape. • Horizontal landform. Sensitivity to very large-scale urban development – High • Large scale landscape. Very large-scale development would result in extensive degradation of the • Network of linear ditches. large-scale low-lying character of Tilbury Marshes LCA. • Southern skyline of dock cranes, chimneys, pylons and power lines. Sensitivity to substantial-scale urban developments – Moderate • Close proximity of residential areas. The character area is strongly influenced by urban areas and utilities infrastructure. The addition of development of this scale, if sited Overall Character appropriately would not degrade the overall character of the LCA. The character area is located in the south east of Thurrock adjacent to the Sensitivity to small-scale urban developments – Low River Thames. To the north the area is bounded by the Chadwell Small-scale development would result in only limited degradation of the Escarpment Urban Fringe LCA which rises abruptly from the level elements that together combine to give the area’s open, exposed character. marshland landscape. A broad wedge of the character area penetrates the Urban Landscape between the settlements of Chadwell St Mary and Key Qualities Desirable to Safeguard: Tilbury. In general Tilbury Marshes LCA consists of level, low lying, • The setting to Historic Tilbury Fort.
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Cabinet, 27/10/2016 19:00
    CABINET Thursday 27 October 2016 AGENDA 1. Apologies for Absence 2. Declarations of Interest To receive declarations of interest from Members including the terms(s) of the Grant of Dispensation (if any) by the Audit Board or Managing Director. 3. Confirmation of the Minutes of the Meeting held on 8 September 2016 (Pages 1 - 10) 4. Urgent Items The Chairman will announce his decision as to whether there are any urgent items and their position on the agenda. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION IN PUBLIC 5. To receive the Minutes of the Cabinet Advisory Panel held on 24 October 2016 To follow 6. References from Committees None at this stage. 6A. Traffic Congestion in Dartford: Reference from Joint SD (IS) Transportation Board (Pages 11 - 12) Summary: This report presents a reference from the Joint Transportation Board drawing the Cabinet’s attention to the ongoing issue of traffic congestion in the Borough, the implications of this for residents and businesses and asks that pressure is brought to bear on the relevant bodies to alleviate the situation. Recommendation: That the ongoing issue of traffic congestion in the Borough and the associated implications be considered and that Cabinet consider the options available to the Council with a view to ensuring that pressure is brought to bear on the 1 relevant bodies to alleviate the situation. 6B. New Cricket Pavilion in Hesketh Park, Dartford: Reference SD (IS) from the Scrutiny Committee (Pages 13 - 16) Summary: At its meeting on 13 September 2016 [Min. No. 8 refers] the Scrutiny Committee resolved to refer to Cabinet for consideration; its concerns over the lack of clear and measurable outcomes in terms of meeting Corporate Plan Objectives, following the decision by Cabinet to invest £1M for the construction of a new cricket pavilion in Hesketh Park, Dartford [Cabinet Report of 12 June 2014 and Cabinet Mins.
    [Show full text]
  • GREEN BELT Background Paper
    Regulation 18 Stage 2 Consultation GRAVESHAM GREEN BELT Background paper OCTOBER 2020 Delivering a Gravesham to be proud of Contents 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 3 2.0 National Policy and Guidance ............................................................................................... 4 Importance placed on meeting development needs in plan making ......................................... 4 National policy on Green Belt and the release of land for development ................................... 5 Setting new boundaries where Green Belt land is released ..................................................... 8 3.0 The Changing Extent of the Green Belt in North West Kent .................................................. 9 4.0 The Situation in Other Areas ............................................................................................... 13 Part 1 Principles guiding the identification of exceptional circumstances. .............................. 16 Runnymede ....................................................................................................................... 17 Guildford ............................................................................................................................ 17 Calverton Parish Council ................................................................................................... 18 Part 2: Draft considerations contributing to Gravesham’s exceptional circumstances
    [Show full text]