SESPLAN JOINT COMMITTEE 13 MARCH 2017 FOR DECISION ITEM 6 – STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2 SUBMISSION Report by: Alice Miles, Acting SDP Manager Purpose This Report seeks Joint Committee approval of the Strategic Development Plan Authority’s response to the representations received on the second Proposed Strategic Development Plan (the Proposed Plan), agreement that no modifications should be made to the Proposed Plan in response to these representations and approval of the Proposed Plan for submission to Scottish Ministers for Examination. Recommendations It is recommended that the SESplan Joint Committee: 1. Approve the Summary of Unresolved Issues and note the representations received set out within the Schedule 4s referred to in Section 2 below and attached as Appendix 1 to this Report; 2. Agree that no modifications are made to the Proposed Plan published in October 2016; 3. Delegate authority to the SDP Manager and Chair of the Project Board to undertake editorial changes and finalise the Schedule 4s and related material for submission to Scottish Ministers for Examination as set out in Section 3 below; 4. Approve the Report of Conformity with the Participation Statement attached as Appendix 2 to this Report; and 5. Approve the unmodified Proposed Plan for submission to Scottish Ministers by no later than 27 June 2017. Resource Implications As set out below. Legal and Risk Implications As set out below. 1 Policy and Impact Assessment No separate impact assessment is required. 1. Background 1.1 The first Strategic Development Plan (the current SDP) was approved by Scottish Ministers on the 27 June 2013. The Planning etc. Scotland (Act) 2006 Section 10(8) requires that a second proposed Strategic Development Plan (the Proposed Plan) must be submitted for Examination within 4 years of the approval of the current SDP i.e.no later than 27 June 2017. 1.2 As set out in the published Development Plan Scheme and reported to Joint Committee, work on the Proposed Plan began with early awareness raising in April 2014. This was followed by the preparation of a Main Issues Report which was published for a 10 week consultation on the 21 July 2015. A total of 240 consultees responded raising 2,765 comments. 1.3 These comments fed into the preparation of the Proposed Plan which was approved for publication by the SESplan Joint Committee on the 20 June 2016. Following ratification by each of the six member authorities, the Proposed Plan was published for a six week period for representations on the 13 October 2016. A total of 802 representations were received from 168 representees. As shown in Figure 1 below, the majority of representees (40%) were developers, landowners and or property interests. This was followed by individuals (20%) and community councils (17%). 1.4 As shown in Figure 2 below, 25% of representations raised comments on the Place for Communities chapter within the Proposed Plan which covers housing, town centres and green networks. Around 17% related to a Place to do Business (locations for investment, responsible resource extraction and zero waste), 15% related to a Better Connected Place (supporting non car travel, strategic transport improvements and funding transport infrastructure) and 14% related to the key areas of change in the South East, Edinburgh and West, Scottish Borders and Fife. 2 Figure 1 – Breakdown of Proposed Plan Representations by Consultee 2% 14% 17% Community Council Developer/Landowner/Property Interest 7% Individual Key Agency/Government Organisation Local/National Interest Group 20% 40% Other Figure 2 – Breakdown of Proposed Plan Representations by Theme 7% 6% 11% The Vision 15% The Strategy 5% Placemaking Key Areas of Change A Place to do Business 14% A Place for Communities A Better Connected Place 25% Other 17% 1.5 All representations received on the Proposed Plan are available to view on the SESplan Consultation Portal. 2. The Issues 2.1 Following the close of the period for representations in November 2016, the 802 representations received have been analysed. Paragraph 106 of Circular 6/2013 (Development Planning) states that in preparing a Plan for Examination, the planning authority must prepare a summary of unresolved issues. This summary is to group the representations into a smaller number of issues. It is to: 3 Number and list all the unresolved representations and name the people making the representations; Include a summary of the issues raised in the representations, in the form of a Schedule 4, with a separate Schedule 4 used for each group of unresolved issues; and Include the authority’s reasons for not modifying the Plan. 2.2 On this basis 17 issues have been identified. These are set out within 25 Schedule 4s attached as Appendix 1 to this Report: Issue 1 – The Vision; Issue 2 – The Strategy; Issue 2.1 – The Spatial Strategy; Issue 2.2 - Green Belt and Related Designations; Issue 2.3 – Brownfield Land; Issue 2.4 – Prime Agricultural Land; Issue 2.5 – Key Area of Change South East; Issue 2.6 – Key Area of Change Edinburgh and West; Issue 2.7 – Key Area of Change Fife; Issue 2.8 – Key Area of Change Scottish Borders; Issue 3 – Placemaking Principles; Issue 4 – Investment and Employment; Issue 4.1 – Investment and Employment; Issue 4.2 – Rural Economy; Issue 5 – Responsible Resource Extraction; Issue 6 – Zero Waste; Issue 7 – A Low Carbon Economy; Issue 8 – Increasing Housing Delivery; Issue 9 – 2018 – 2030 Period and Five Year Land Supply; Issue 10 – Affordable and Specialist Housing; Issue 11 – Thriving Town Centres; Issue 12 – Enhanced Green Networks; Issue 13 – Supporting Non Car Travel; Issue 14 – Strategic Transport Improvements; 4 Issue 15 – Funding Transport Infrastructure; Issue 16 – Other Infrastructure; and Issue 17 – Other Issues. 2.3 No representations have been received which would require a change to the Proposed Plan’s strategy and / or themes around the Vision, Spatial Strategy, a Place to do Business, a Place for Communities and a Better Connected Place. It is therefore recommended that no modifications are made to the Proposed Plan. 2.4 A summary of the issues is set out below. The Vision 2.5 Around 50 representations were received on the Vision. These are considered within Issue 1. Representations considered amongst other matters that the Vision statement is too generic, not specific to the SESplan area, that it should be modified to make more specific reference to Edinburgh’s role in driving successful economic growth of the City Region. In response, the Vision statement is intended to be a broad statement which sets out the overarching objectives of the whole Proposed Plan area. Economic growth is a fundamental element of the plan and is dealt with further under the Spatial Strategy and a Place to do Business section of the Plan. 2.6 Other representees considered that named policies should be reintroduced to the Plan. In response, the Proposed Plan has made a deliberate shift away from the fifteen policies contained in the current Plan. This was an intentional move to make the Proposed Plan more accessible and give the entire document greater relevance. Decision makers must have regard to all provisions of the Plan, not just named policies and clear, specific directions to member authorities and Local Development Plans (LDP) have been highlighted throughout the plan in bold in the interests of clarity. The Spatial Strategy 2.7 Around 240 representations were made on the Spatial Strategy, Placemaking and Key Areas of Change sections of the Proposed Plan. 5 2.8 These are considered within Issues 2.1 (The Strategy), Issue 2.2 (Green Belt and Related Designations), Issue 2.3 (Brownfield Land), Issue 2.4 (Prime Agricultural Land), Issue 2.5 (Key Area of Change South East), Issue 2.6 (Key Area of Change Edinburgh and West), Issue 2.7 (Key Area of Change Fife), Issue 2.8 (Key Area of Change Scottish Borders) and Issue 3 (Placemaking Principles). 2.9 In terms of the Strategy there were a wide spread of representations from support for the principle of long term growth corridors to cautioning against over reliance on the city of Edinburgh in meeting housing needs of the wider city region. It was also considered by some representees that the long term growth corridors will accelerate the removal of farmland when the many advantages of dispersal, that would allow economic development to be promoted more evenly across the SESplan area, are ignored. There were also concerns that the required transport and community infrastructure will not be delivered to prevent development along the long term growth corridors becoming car based dormitory suburbs and that existing public transport infrastructure lessens with distance from Edinburgh. 2.10 In response to these representations the Proposed Plan strategy has been developed from the options consulted upon at Main Issues Report stage. The Spatial Strategy concentrates most new development in and around existing settlements, particularly Edinburgh. Strategic growth is also proposed for the rural growth areas in Scottish Borders, in the settlements of East and West Lothian and in Fife. 2.11 The strategy also identifies green belt and areas for improvements to green networks, including where these cross member authority boundaries. Much of the strategic growth forms long term proposals that are already identified in adopted and proposed LDPs. The settlement focus does not constitute ribbon development, as some respondents have suggested. Instead it reflects a strategy that concentrates the majority of new development in the settlements with the largest concentrations of people, jobs, services and facilities. As such this strategy promotes the reuse of previously developed land and buildings, reduces the need to travel and protects the countryside. The strategy ensures that homes are built close to employment. This strategy therefore avoids ribbon development.