A Core Strategy for Milton Keynes Preferred Options

ANNEX A TO ITEM 11

A Core Strategy for Milton Keynes

Preferred Options

Milton Keynes Council September 2007.

1 2 CONTENTS PART A KEY DIAGRAM...... 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 8 1.1 What Is a Core Strategy ...... 8 1.2 Preferred Options Document...... 9 1.3 MK Context ...... 10 1.4 National, Regional and Sub-regional policies...... 11 1.5 Local Policies ...... 14 1.6 Community Involvement ...... 15 1.7 Sustainability Appraisal ...... 16 2.0 SPATIAL VISION...... 17 2.1 Issues...... 17 2.2 Options Looked At ...... 17 2.3 Preferred Option ...... 18 3.0 SPATIAL OBJECTIVES ...... 20 3.1 Issues...... 20 3.2 Options Looked At ...... 22 3.3 Preferred Options ...... 23 PART B...... 25 4.0 DETERMINING OUR GROWTH...... 26 4.1 Issues...... 26 4.2 Set the Timescale for the Core Strategy...... 26 4.3 Identify broad directions of Growth for the City...... 28 4.4 Housing Numbers, urban and rural split ...... 32 4.5 Identify a strategy for the rural area...... 35 4.6 Monitoring Housing Delivery & Strategic Reserve Areas...... 38 5.0 MANAGING OUR IMPACTS ...... 39 5.1 Creating carbon zero communities ...... 39 5.2 Efficient management of water ...... 45 5.3 Reducing waste, landfilling and use of mineral resources ...... 49 5.4 Reducing reliance on the car and encouraging travel by bus, cycle and on foot...... 53 5.5 Encouraging healthy lifestyles ...... 56 6.0 MANAGING OUR ASSETS ...... 60 6.1 Protect and enhance the historical and cultural assets of the New Town and the towns, villages and countryside beyond...... 60 6.2 Maintain and enhance green infrastructure and open spaces ...... 63 6.3 Protect and enhance the Borough’s rural landscape...... 68 6.4 Protect and enhance the biodiversity and geological resource of the borough ...... 72 7.0 SUPPORTING THE CITY’S ECONOMY AND SUB-REGIONAL ROLE...... 76 7.1 Create a knowledge based economy ...... 77

3 7.2 Create a Learning City and Skilled Workforce Working in Milton Keynes ..80 7.3 Support Small and Creative Industries ...... 82 7.4 Enhance Central Milton Keynes as a Major Office, Retail and Cultural Location ...... 84 7.5 Create New Sporting Facilities of National Significance ...... 86 8.0 SERVING EXISTING COMMUNITIES...... 89 8.1 Increase access to services locally ...... 89 8.2 Increase housing delivery for market homes, affordable housing, and housing for minority and ethnic groups...... 90 8.3 Enhance existing areas where there are regeneration opportunities that are supported by local people ...... 92 8.4 Reduce health inequalities and deprivation in the worst ranked areas ...... 94 8.5 Ensure balanced growth of the city and existing areas and pressures...... 96 8.6 Balance growth of the city with the delivery of key infrastructure...... 97 9.0 GROWING NEW COMMUNITIES ...... 100 9.1 Ensure balanced Growth of the city ...... 101 9.2 Increase housing delivery for market homes, affordable housing and housing for minority and ethnic groups...... 104 9.3 Create flexible and supportive living space ...... 107 9.5 Create Safe Places ...... 112 10.0 IMPLEMENTATION, DELIVERY & RISK...... 116 10.1 Implementation, Delivery and Risk...... 116

4 PART A

The Key Diagram at the start of this section provides a visual representation of the major elements of the Preferred Options set out in this document.

5 KEY DIAGRAM

Milton Keynes Core Strategy

6 7 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 What Is a Core Strategy

1.1.1 The Core Strategy is the key document in the Milton Keynes Local Development Framework. Upon adoption the Core Strategy will provide the vision, objectives and strategy for the spatial development of the city. It will provide the basis for the preparation of all the other documents in the Milton Keynes Local Development Framework.

1.1.2 The Core Strategy will provide the connections with other major strategies such as: - National planning policy and guidance - Regional Spatial Strategy - Regional Economic Strategy - Milton Keynes Community Strategy - Local Transport Plan - Other strategies identified in Annex A

1.1.3 It will identify the main spatial patterns for the development of Milton Keynes over the next 15 – 20 years and set out the locational criteria for growth where it is not possible to be more specific about spatial policy.

1.1.4 This document should not be considered as a draft Plan as it provides information detailing the process undertaken to date and the feedback from consultation on the MK Growth Strategy and the Issues and Options document. The submission document will be more focussed on the strategy and a slimmer document.

1.1.5 It will not include development control criteria, though its policies may still be used to support specific decisions on planning applications. Some issues will be dealt with in other Development Plan Documents such as the:

• Development Control Policies DPD1 – setting out all the regulatory policies to guide planning decisions and preparation of planning briefs; • Area Action Plans and Borough wide allocations DPD – to provide information relating to the development of the growth areas and Borough wide site allocations ; • Proposals Map – providing the spatial dimension for the policies and proposals of all the Development Plan Documents, showing areas and links on an Ordnance Survey map base. • Waste Development Plan Document – which will identify sites for waste management facilities and include detailed policies for the treatment and disposal of waste.

1 The next review of the MK Local Development Scheme will detail the timetable for the preparation of the Development Control Policies DPD.

1.1.6 The Milton Keynes Local Development Scheme provides further information relating to the timetable for the preparation of these documents.

What is spatial planning?

There are many definitions of ‘spatial planning’ including the Governments own definition set out in PPS12. During the preparation of the Core Strategy we have found that the Planning Officer Society definition2 of spatial planning is the clearest.

This defines spatial planning as:

“A process aimed at achieving sustainable development, including good design. It is based upon a development plan that enables local planning authorities and other organisations to co-ordinate their activities, achieve agreed objectives and manage changes affecting the area”

This is different to Local Plan policy where the focus was on determining the use of land and buildings. Documents such as the Core Strategy can now join up with other policies and programmes produced by local authorities and their partner organisations. The broader remit of spatial planning, encompassing environmental, social and economic issues, enables it to contribute more effectively towards sustainable development and good design.

1.2 Preferred Options Document

1.2.1 The Preferred Options report is the first formal stage in the production of the Milton Keynes Core Strategy. It does not propose the precise wording of policies, and it is not a ‘draft Core Strategy’. The Preferred Options document focuses instead on setting the strategic direction the council is taking on the various issues, and sets out the options that are available for inclusion in the final Submission document. The Preferred Options take account of: • Comments received on the MK Growth Strategy consultation. • Comments received on the Issues and Options consultation. • Sustainability Appraisal • The MK community strategy and the Local Area Agreements • The emerging Regional Spatial Strategy • Other strategies and masterplans, including the Local Transport Plan. • Implications for Delivery and Implementation. • Ongoing technical work.

2 Policies for Spatial Plans: A guide to writing the policy content of Local Development Documents (Planning Officers Society July 2005)

1.2.2 The Preferred Options have been approved by Cabinet, but only as a basis for consultation. They provide an indication of the policies that the Council is thinking of submitting to the Government.

1.2.3 After consideration of comments on the Preferred Options document the Core Strategy will be finalised and submitted to the Government in February 2008. Once submitted to the Government there will be a further six-week period for comment. Following this, an independent Inspector will undertake an Examination into the Submission document in September 2008. It is anticipated that the Core Strategy will be adopted in March 2009. Upon adoption it will replace key strategic policies in the adopted Local Plan and will provide the framework for the future development of the city until 2026. Further guidance on the status of adopted Local Plan policies will be provided in the Annual Monitoring Report.

1.3 MK Context3

1.3.1 Milton Keynes is a key focus for growth in the South East. The growth will bring up to an additional 100,000 people over the lifetime of the Local Development Framework. MK is at the centre of the Milton Keynes and South Midlands growth area, one of the fastest growing regions in Europe.

1.3.2 The scale and pace of the city’s development is unique in the UK with thousands of new residents welcomed each year. Since new city designation in 1967 the borough’s population has grown from 60,000 to 220,000 and is set to continue on this growth trajectory over the lifetime of this Core Strategy. By 2026 it is anticipated that MK will have a population in the region of 325,000 residents4.

1.3.3 Surrounding the city is countryside, home to about 16% of the population of the Borough. The rest of the Borough comprises small villages and a number of market towns.

1.3.4 Population growth is mostly through inward migration, with a net annual gain of around 3,000 persons from elsewhere in the UK.

1.3.5 The city benefits from its excellent location midway between London and Birmingham, and its connections to the M1 Motorway and West Coast Mainline trains service. It’s position at the centre of the Oxford to Cambridge Arc offers great opportunities for the future growth of the MK economy

1.3.6 Milton Keynes was designed for easy travel by car, with high-speed roads and plenty of parking. Whilst this has been one of the strengths

3 Source: Milton Keynes Local Area Agreement (2007 – 2010) 4 Source: MKC Statistics – Borough Projections to 2031.

10 of Milton Keynes it is now beginning to experience peak hour congestion at junctions and has low levels of bus usage in comparison with similar sized towns and cities.

1.3.7 Milton Keynes is emerging as an important regional centre. There are particular strengths in logistics, retail, hotels and restaurants, banking, finance and insurance, and business services. Unemployment is low at 2% and the city offers 122,000 jobs, growing at 3,000 jobs annually.

1.3.8 One third of the working population comprises inward commuters. The resident population of Milton Keynes has an ‘average’ skills base and there are a relatively small proportion of highly skilled residents compared to the rest of the South East and also nationally.

1.3.9 The overall prosperity of Milton Keynes masks localised inequalities, notably in parts of the older towns and particular estates.

1.3.10 Alongside its economic success the Borough has areas that fall within the most deprived 10% in the UK. Without careful planning, growth will only exacerbate the divide and create a two-speed city. A major challenge is to enable the poorest areas to benefit from the city’s overall prosperity and growth opportunities.

1.3.11 The MK Local Area Agreement identifies the key issues facing the city that the Core Strategy can help address:

Addressing the socio economic disparities between our older estates and newer more affluent communities. Developing a transport system able to accommodate growth and meet environmental and accessibility demands. Delivering a mix of housing that meets the needs of a changing population and ensures that good quality homes are available to all. Ensuring community involvement and cohesion is developed as the city grows and its diversity increases. Continuing to develop and maintain a competitive economy which serves the needs of residents and the city’s hinterland.

1.3.12 The MK Core Strategy must provide the framework for addressing these key issues.

1.4 National, Regional and Sub-regional policies

1.4.1 Planning Policy Statements (PPS’s) set out the Government’s national policies on different aspects of land use planning in England. PPS1 sets out the framework for the delivery of sustainable development through the planning system.

1.4.2 This Core Strategy has been prepared in the context of the Government’s Planning Policy Statements and prepared in line with the requirements of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

1.4.3 The Government’s Sustainable Communities Plan (February 2003) identified Milton Keynes as an area for continued growth to 2031. The Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub Regional Strategy (March 2005) provides the policy framework for the development of Milton Keynes. The SRS is available at http://www.gose.gov.uk/gose/news/newsarchive/mksmSRS/

1.4.4 At present the approved Regional Planning Guidance for the South East is RPG9 (2001) and covers the period to 2016. A full review of RPG9 is underway and a draft South East Plan was subjected to Examination in Public between November 2006 and March 2007. The Panel report into the Examination in Public is due to be published in June 2007 and the Secretary of States proposed changes to the South East Plan are expected in September 2007. Upon approval the RSS will provide the context for the growth of MK and set out things such as how many homes are needed to meet the future needs, policies for the location of employment, and the safeguarding of the environment. The Milton Keynes Local Development Framework needs to be developed in conformity with the South East Plan. The Development Plan for Milton Keynes is as follows:

Table 1 – Development plan documents in Milton Keynes. Document Organisation Purpose of Document Regional Spatial Prepared by SEERA and Sets out a statement on Strategy approved by the Secretary of development specific to State regions. Milton Keynes and Prepared by the Regional Sets out the context for South Midlands Assemblies for the South East development within the Sub-Regional of England, the East of England MKSM sub-region. Strategy and the East Midlands and approved by the Secretary of State Development Plan Milton Keynes Council (Local Sets out local policy and Documents Planning Authority) specific development sites

1.4.5 The need to begin work on the replacement of the Local Plan has meant that the Core Strategy has had to be developed at the same time as the production of the South East Plan.

1.4.6 There are obviously unresolved issues around the MK Growth Strategy and the outcome of the South East Plan (SEP) Examination in Public which are of significance to the Core Strategy.

12 1.4.7 This uncertainty has been addressed in the Core Strategy by introducing a number of flexibilities and options in the document. These are to an extent limited as Milton Keynes already benefits from having an approved regional planning framework in place to 2021 through the Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy (March 2005). The Council has been working jointly with the neighbouring authorities and has committed in principle with MBDC and AVDC to take forward any planned growth through the preparation of joint Area Action Plans, should the proposed Growth be confirmed by the RSS.

1.4.8 The MKSM SRS also provides a clear indication of the growth of MK post 2021 which has enabled this Core Strategy to make assumptions about Growth to 2026. Any changes to the approved Regional Framework can be reflected in subsequent Core Strategy documents.

1.4.9 The MK Growth Strategy5, which is providing part of the evidence base for this Core Strategy, was also prepared in line with the MKSM SRS and the emerging SEP. The guidance in the MKSM SRS on the overall level of housing growth for MK and the strategic directions of growth were used as the basis for the preparation of the Growth Strategy and the Core Strategy: Issues and Options paper.

1.4.10 The following provides an overview of the anticipated South East Plan timetable:

South East Plan Timetable Draft South East Plan published for April – June 2006 consultation Nov 2006 – March Examination in Public 2007 End July 2007 Publication of the Panel Report End September Publication of the Proposed Modifications and 2007 consultation on Proposed Changes.

End February 2008 Publication of the approved South East Plan

1.4.11 For further information about the South East Plan go to http://www.southeast-ra.gov.uk/southeastplan/index.html

1.4.12 Proposed alterations to RPG have been published relating to minerals and waste - the Regional Minerals Strategy and the Regional Waste Management Strategy. These can be found at: http://www.gos.gov.uk/497648/docs/167059/422277

5 Draft MK Growth Strategy (June 2006)

13 1.4.13 The work on the Core Strategy has been supported by a number of topic papers that pull together large areas of information. Topic papers have been prepared covering Milton Keynes Housing Land Supply Delivery, Landscape Character and Rural Area Spatial Strategy.

1.5 Local Policies

1.5.1 It will take time for the complete set of documents in the Local Development Framework to be prepared. The preparation of the Core Strategy is a key stage in the replacement of the old style Milton Keynes Local Plan. The ‘saved’ Local Plan remains the basis for decision making in Milton Keynes and for the determination of planning applications until the replacement framework is in place.

1.5.2 Subsequent LDF documents and the Annual Monitoring Report will indicate which policies in the adopted Local Plan they will supersede or replace.

1.5.3 The LDF also seeks to formalise the link between the Council’s planning function and the priorities identified by the Local Strategic Partnership as set out in the Milton Keynes Community Strategy6.

1.5.4 Milton Keynes has a strong partnership culture which has a clear and distinctive vision set out in the MK Community Strategy: Our handbook for change 2004 – 2034. The Milton Keynes Community Strategy was launched in early 2005 by the Milton Keynes Local Strategic Partnership. The Community Strategy provides the vision and context in which the MK Local Development Framework is being produced.

1.5.5 The continued sustainable growth of MK is a key principle of the Community Strategy. The Milton Keynes Local Development Framework will play a key role in delivering the objectives of the Community Strategy. The LDF will have regard to and be consistent with the principles and goals in the Community Strategy

1.5.6 The LSP will also play an important role in engaging the community and local stakeholders with the LDF process and co-ordinating agencies that deliver services in MK.

1.5.7 The publication of the government’s Sustainable Communities Plan saw the creation of the Milton Keynes Partnership Committee7 as a Local Delivery Vehicle to bring forward growth and development in the new city. The MKPC has planning powers to determine major planning applications in the designated Urban Development Area (UDA), which covers land to the east, west and north of Milton Keynes for applications of:

6 MK Community Strategy – Out Handbook for Change 2004 – 2034 (2005) http://www.mkweb.co.uk/partnership-working/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=32216 7 Further information is available at http://www.miltonkeynespartnership.info

• developments of 10 or more dwellings; • office, industrial and retail developments over 1000 square metres of floor space; • any development of a site over 1 ha.

1.5.8 Milton Keynes Council remains the plan making authority for the whole of the Borough including the UDA area.

1.6 Community Involvement

1.6.1 The importance of effective community engagement in planning is emphasised in PPS1. The adopted Statement of Community Involvement (December 2006) sets out the Council’s standard for involving communities in the preparation of local development documents. The preparation of the Core Strategy: Preferred Options document has been produced in line with the requirements of the MK Statement of Community Involvement8.

1.6.2 A major feature of the production of this Core Strategy is that the process has genuinely been frontloaded with the involvement of the community, stakeholders and local interests engaged through the preparation of the MK Growth Strategy.

1.6.3 The work on the MK Growth Strategy was completed in June 2006 and the Council carried out further consultation on the draft Strategy between June - September 2006. The comments received9 through the consultation were considered and reported to Cabinet as part of the Council’s statement to the South East Plan Examination in Public on the 16 January 2007. They have also been used, and will continue to be used, in the preparation of the Core Strategy and the new planning documents that will over time replace the Milton Keynes Local Plan.

1.6.4 The engagement through the MK Growth Strategy included:

Date Stage March 2005 Project commencement August 2005 Early engagement – “Where and how MK could grow” September 2005 Publication of Direction papers for consultation November 2005 – January Publication and consultation on 6 2006 Options for growth June 2006 – September 2006 Publication and consultation on the draft MK Growth Strategy

8 MK Statement of Community Involvement (December 2006). 9 A full report on the engagement process for the MK Growth Strategy is available to view at: http://www.miltonkeynespartnership.info/document_library/MK2031/MK2031_Options_for_gro wth_annex3.pdf

1.6.5 Copies of the Core Strategy Issues and Options discussion paper were sent out to all or our ‘statutory’ consultees (listed in the Statement of Community Involvement). We also wrote to other contacts that have shown an interest in strategic planning matters previously. This included people who had previously commented on the Local Plan, and people who had responded to the Growth Strategy consultation in summer 2006.

1.6.6 In terms of publicising the Core Strategy more widely, the following activities took place between December 2006 and March 2007: • Verbal presentations; the Local Strategic Partnership Planning Task Group and the full Local Strategic Partnership, the Parish Assembly, the Milton Keynes Economy and Learning Partnership, the Central Milton Keynes Development Sub Group, and the Milton Keynes Council of Faiths. • Workshops; with parish councils (in conjunction with work on Areas of Attractive Landscape). • Published articles; LiveMK (December and February editions), the council’s Parish and Town Council Newsletter, mkweb, Milk’n’Beans website. • Posters; sent to The CentreMK and Midsummer Place (for their information boards), libraries, and parish councils (including adjoining PCs), for display in their notice boards. • CDs: sent to The Centre MK and Midsummer Place (for their information boards), and included in goodie bags at a Community Safety road show.

1.7 Sustainability Appraisal

1.7.1 The preparation of the MK Core Strategy is subject to Sustainability Appraisal as an ongoing process throughout its preparation. The overall approach used in the Sustainability Appraisal of the Core Strategy is based on the process set out in the ODPM’s guidance on Sustainability Appraisal (November 2005). The SA is being conducted to meet the requirements of the SEA Regulations.

1.7.2 Further information is available in the MK Core Strategy: Preferred Options Sustainability Appraisal that accompanies this document. The SA process has played an important role in shaping the Preferred Options document.

1.7.3 The MK Growth Strategy was a non-statutory document in terms of its status within the MK Local Development Framework but was subject to SA10 throughout its development in line with Government guidance and best practice.

10 Sustainability Appraisal in this instance also includes Strategic Environmental Assessment.

16 2.0 SPATIAL VISION

2.1 Issues

2.1.1 A key component guiding the preparation of the Core Strategy is the requirement to provide a spatial planning dimension to the Community Strategy. The Community Strategy was prepared by the MK Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) which consists of representatives of the private, public, community, voluntary and faith sectors in MK. The Community Strategy sets out the overall vision, aims and targets for the city and provides the wider context for the Local Development Framework to 2034.

2.1.2 The Core Strategy should also be prepared in conformity with the Regional Spatial Strategy, which in the case of Milton Keynes is the South East Plan. The South East Plan and specifically policies MKAV1 & MKAV 2 provide the regional planning framework for the growth of MK to 2026 and there are already several other documents that contain a vision for how Milton Keynes should grow and change in the future.

2.2 Options Looked At

2.2.1 The Issues and Options discussion paper identified several key visions that all provide the context for the development of a Core Strategy Spatial Vision. The spatial vision for the MK Core Strategy must be consistent with the spatial framework set out in the RSS, reflect the thrust of the MK Community Strategy and be cognisant of the existing MK Local Plan policy framework.

2.2.2 The responses to the Issues and Options consultation suggested that there was no consensus on a single vision to guide the development of the Core Strategy. It also showed that whilst existing visions are adequate and another vision would be confusing, no single vision provided a completely spatial Borough wide framework for the development of the MK Local Development Framework.

2.2.3 The consultation on the Issues and Options paper and the MK Growth Strategy show that there is support for Milton Keynes to become a vibrant centre of regional importance. There is support to develop cultural facilities associated with world class cities, such as a good university and a thriving arts community, which together will help to produce a very positive sense of place. This should be supported by a wide range of opportunities in education, employment and recreation.

2.2.4 Consultation has shown us that a key element of the success of the city has been its ambition and dynamism. The Core Strategy represents an opportunity to contribute to the growth of the city and provide a vision for the future of the city. A vision which, whilst

17 ensuring continued expansion, should set out a path to re-orientate future growth towards long term sustainability. Ensuring a high quality of life for all its citizens is a key thrust of the Milton Keynes Community Strategy and is therefore a key driver of the Core Strategy.

2.2.5 The 4 visions identified in the Issues and Options discussion paper provided a suitable foundation on which to plan the sustainable growth of Milton Keynes. The vision must ensure that the physical growth of MK balances the social, cultural, economic and environmental needs and aspirations of the city’s communities today, and into the future.

2.2.6 Although there was no clear consensus on a single vision through the Issues and Options consultation there was clearer support through the MK Growth Strategy summer consultation for using that vision, with some minor amendments. It is therefore suggested that the vision from the MK Growth Strategy provides the best foundation for a Spatial Vision however its focus has been amended to reflect subsequent work and deliver a strategy for the whole borough.

2.3 Preferred Option

SPATIAL VISION

Milton Keynes is: a city centre, a city, a borough, a series of towns, an area, a region…

It is our intention that Milton Keynes will be an iconic city which seeks to retain its individuality and dynamism, whilst embracing the changes in lifestyles necessary to ensure a more sustainable future.

Milton Keynes will have an international reputation as a knowledge based city with a new University at its centre and employment growth driven by innovation and technology. Its citizens will enjoy the experience of living and working in a uniquely green and landscaped city, actively participating in its rich cultural, recreation and educational activities and benefiting from an excellent quality of life.

Spatial planning will contribute to reducing our carbon emissions and reducing our impact on climate change through the adoption and promotion of sustainability. It will conserve and enhance the built and natural assets of the Borough which contribute to the area’s cultural setting and attractiveness as a place to live, work and visit.

The city’s growth will be balanced. Some new developments will focus on existing urban areas, including some rural towns, to maximise accessibility and minimise travel distances to facilities and workplaces. New neighbourhoods will also be created on the edge of the city, containing a choice of high quality housing and facilities.

New building will be innovative, well designed and constructed to the

18 best possible standards. The whole city will be linked together by a safe, modern and efficient public transport system and a strategically planned and managed network of accessible, high quality, sustainable open spaces.

Public services will be delivered effectively to all citizens in step with the growth of the city.

There will be a significant role for democratically elected town and parish councils across Milton Keynes to influence their future.

19 3.0 SPATIAL OBJECTIVES

3.1 Issues

3.1.1 The Core Strategy should contain spatial objectives that will guide and monitor the delivery of the spatial strategy for the Borough. This means having a set of objectives that guide the policies in the rest of the document. These objectives should support the aim of creating sustainable development and provide the basis for the development of the entire MK LDF.

3.1.2 A wide number of plans and strategies have been looked at to draw together a set of possible objectives for the Core Strategy. The objectives also reflect the position of Milton Keynes Council following a debate on growth at the Full Council meeting in February 2007.

3.1.3 A full list of all the Plans and Strategies that have contributed to the formation of this Core Strategy is set out in Annex A.

3.1.4 The Core Strategy is the spatial expression of the Sustainable Community Strategy and covers a wide range of policies and programmes including housing, health, education, transport, waste management and environmental protection.

3.1.5 The opportunity exists for the Core Strategy to influence the delivery of the programmes of not only the Council but also other service providers, as the Core Strategy is not restricted to programmes that are set by MKC.

3.1.6 The Spatial objectives for the MK Core Strategy have been developed in the context of the strategic objectives for Milton Keynes set out in the South East Plan and MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy. These objectives haven’t been duplicated in this document but, due to their nature and specificity, there may be some elements of overlap.

3.1.7 The work on the MK Growth Strategy underlined the need for certain key components to be incorporated into the future growth of the city. During the preparation of the MK Growth Strategy people told us there were five qualities that were key to their hopes for the future development of the city11:

• Renaissance of older areas in the city - aiming to bring vitality and life to poor quality or under-used land and attract investment back to these communities. • Environmental protection - which safeguards valuable resources, especially attractive land and parks and open space to maintain the character of the countryside, villages and city.

11 Source: MK2031 Options for Growth leaflet (November 2005).

20 • Transport and access – achieving accessibility for all and delivering more efficient and viable public transport. • New neighbourhoods where there are good local facilities within walking distance of home including health, schools, leisure and shops. • A strong, successful economy – to consider the economic requirements of a growing Milton Keynes.

3.1.8 The Strategy for the Borough needs to be judged against these qualities to make sure that Milton Keynes can grow in a way that can be sustained well into the future.

3.1.9 In February 2007 Full Council held a debate on the future growth of the city12. The outcome of this meeting was a common agreed position, supported by all political parties. This position statement provides an overview of the political support for growth in Milton Keynes and has been used as background information for shaping the development of this document. The motion set out that the growth of the city should:

• Position Milton Keynes as a major UK city with the wide range of leisure facilities, jobs and choice of housing that this entails; • Aim to achieve carbon neutrality; • Promote public transport whilst maintaining ease of car movement; • Not make changes to the existing grid road system; • Protect the green spaces and open nature of the city as they make a significant contribution to the high quality of life; • Ensure that new developments are sensitive to the impact on the identity and character of the rural areas and of the existing New City estates; • Provide sufficient affordable housing to meet local needs; • Include a significant role for democratically elected town and parish councils across Milton Keynes; • Catering for the residential needs of the people living here today and of the current MK based expanding business communities.

3.1.10 There will be a number of challenges to be addressed in delivering the spatial strategy. Chief amongst them are: • Securing community and stakeholder support for the growth proposal is important if the delivery of the Core Strategy to be successful. • Securing long term political commitment to a common vision and underlying strategic objectives. • Securing significant private sector interest in investment, not just in houses and commercial development, but also in ancillary uses and infrastructure.

12 Full Council debate: ‘Growth in Milton Keynes’ (Full Council 13 February 2007).

21 • An effective delivery mechanism that will lead the co-ordination of development opportunities with the timely provision of infrastructure in step with growth. • Recognising that significant growth brings with it a need to re-think the way that things are done in relation to areas such as delivery of public service and cross administrative boundary co-ordination of infrastructure and development standards. • The need for a ‘behavioural’ change in the city whereby more sustainable approaches to lifestyle, particularly travel, are adopted. • An effective and responsive planning system which minimises delays in decision making, ensures appropriate community involvement and secures a joined up approach across all local planning authority areas affected by the growth proposals.

3.2 Options Looked At

3.2.1 The responses to the options identified in the Issues and Options discussion paper showed that there was support for the objectives from each strategy but also that there were many areas of overlap. Some additional objectives relating to the rural area of the Borough were also suggested.

3.2.2 Most support came for the objectives set out in the MK Local Plan coupled with the objectives in the MKSM SRS.

3.2.3 The Preferred Options document has therefore drawn together a list of spatial objectives, split into broad topic areas, in order to deliver the spatial vision.

3.2.4 Having chosen a clear set of Spatial Objectives, the next logical step is to identify relevant performance indicators and targets in order to monitor how well the aims are being achieved. These indicators will be used as the basis for monitoring the Core Strategy and will be reported through the Council’s Annual Monitoring Report.

22 3.3 Preferred Options

CHAPTER Objectives

Determining • Set the timescale for the Core Strategy Our Growth • Identify broad directions of Growth. • Identify a strategy for the rural area. • Monitoring housing delivery and Strategic Reserve Areas. Managing Our • Create carbon zero communities. Impact • Efficient management of water. • Reduce waste, landfilling and use of mineral resources. • Reduce reliance on the car by encouraging travel by bus, cycle and on foot. • Encouraging healthy lifestyles. Managing Our • Protect and enhance the historical and cultural assets of the Assets New Town and the towns, villages and countryside beyond. • Maintain and enhance green infrastructure and open spaces • Protect and enhance the Borough’s rural landscape • Protect and enhance the biodiversity and wildlife resource Supporting the • Create a knowledge based economy. City’s Economy • Create a Learning city and a skilled workforce working in and Sub- Milton Keynes. Regional Role • Support small and creative industries. • Create new sporting facilities of national significance. • Enhance central Milton Keynes as a major office, retail and cultural location. Serving • Increase access to services locally. Existing • Increase housing delivery for market homes, affordable Communities housing, and housing for minority and ethnic groups. • Enhance existing areas where there are regeneration opportunities that are supported by local people. • Reduce health inequalities and deprivation in the worst ranked areas. • Ensure balanced growth of the city. • Balance growth of the city with the delivery of key infrastructure. Growing New • Ensure balanced growth Communities • Create a safe environment. • Create flexible and supportive living space. • Increase housing delivery for market homes, affordable housing, and housing for minority and ethnic groups. • Balance growth of the city and existing areas and pressures. • Balance growth of the city and necessary infrastructure.

23 Implementation, • Ensure that the Core Strategy co-ordinates and integrates Delivery and policies for the development and use of land with other policies Risk and programmes. • Ensure that infrastructure provision keeps up with the delivery of planned growth. • Provide the framework to align investment decisions made by a range of organisations in Milton Keynes.

24 PART B

The following chapters detail a series of Preferred Options that will deliver the spatial strategy.

4.0 DETERMINING OUR GROWTH

4.1 Issues

4.1.1 The scale and location of growth will need to be informed by guidance provided at the sub regional and regional level, the MK Growth Strategy and the Issues and Options discussion paper. The strategy for MK will need to deliver the spatial vision and the spatial objectives.

4.1.2 The Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-regional Strategy identifies that over the lifetime of the plan the city:

Milton Keynes:

‘will embrace its growth potential to mature as a major regional centre, particularly through the substantial development of its central area, supported by a significantly enhanced public transport system to facilitate and support growth in major development areas’.13

4.1.3 Milton Keynes must respond to these challenges and provide for the needs of a growing population and a growing local economy over the next 15 to 20 years. This includes providing for the 48,850 new homes required by the draft South East Plan (2006 – 2026).

4.1.4 This section of the Preferred Options document therefore sets out the council's preferred spatial strategy for the sustainable development of the city over this period.

4.1.5 The development of the Spatial Strategy for Milton Keynes did not begin with a blank sheet of paper as it had to reflect existing policy frameworks at a number of levels. The strategy for development up to 2011 was endorsed through the Local Plan Inquiry during 2003 & 2004. The Local Development Framework now seeks to assess what has changed since the adoption of the Local Plan (December 2005) and provide the framework for the future development of the city to 2026 and beyond.

4.2 Set the Timescale for the Core Strategy

The Issues

4.2.1 The Core Strategy should cover a 10 year period from the date of adoption. If the Core Strategy is adopted in 2009, as anticipated, then the end date could be 2019. However in terms of PPS3, the Strategy needs to provide a 10 year supply of housing land, plus it should identify a further 5 years supply (or broad directions for future supply).

13 Paragraph 15 - Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-regional Strategy (March 2005)

4.2.2 The work on the MK Growth Strategy provided a vision for the future of the city to 2031 but this goes further than adopted Sub Regional and emerging Regional guidance. The adopted MKSM Sub Regional Strategy provides an adopted framework to 2021 and by the time the Core Strategy is adopted the South East Plan will provide an approved Regional Spatial Strategy up to 2026. The Sub Regional Strategy goes further and requires us to have regard to the possibility of a further 11,850 new homes being built in Milton Keynes in the 5 year period between 2026 & 2031.

4.2.3 Options Looked At

• Set the end date of the Core Strategy at 2021, in accordance with the Sub Regional Strategy. • Set the end date of the Core Strategy at 2026, in accordance with the emerging South East Plan. • Set the end date of the Core Strategy at 2031, reflecting the work behind the Growth Strategy. • Provide strategic reserve areas that could meet possible, but as yet unforeseen, needs for any land uses or development requirements in the period to 2026 and provide flexibility should the strategy not deliver its requirements.

Public Participation Responses

• Support for an end date of 2026 in line with the end of the draft South East Plan. To go beyond this date would pre-empt any future review of that document. An end date of 2026 is also in line with the end date of the Aylesbury Vale Local Development Framework. • Support for an end date of 2031 due to the need to fully implement the Sub Regional Strategy. 2031 would allow greater certainty for infrastructure providers planning investments. • 2031 end date would make it difficult to rely on evidence to justify policies as it would be speculative in nature. • There was no support for limiting the time period of the Core Strategy to 2021.

4.2.4 Upon adoption of the South East Plan MK will have an approved statutory planning framework to 2026. Growth in the period to 2031 will need to be tested through a review of the Regional Spatial Strategy and can be addressed in future reviews of the MK Core Strategy. It is therefore considered premature at this stage to set firm housing figures for the period beyond 2026.

4.2.5 Preferred Option

The framework set out by the draft South East Plan is considered to provide sufficient certainty and strategic guidance for the production of the MK Local Development Framework. The timescales for the Preferred Option therefore run to 2026 and will provide MK with a 15 year supply of housing as required by PPS3.

Strategic Reserve Areas will provide land to meet any unforeseen needs in the period to 2026 and provide broad locations for land supply in the period post 2026.

4.3 Identify broad directions of Growth for the City

The Issues

4.3.1 The Milton Keynes and South Midlands sub-regional strategy (March 2005) sets out guidance on the scale, location and timing of development needed to achieve the vision for Milton Keynes. The provisions of the MKSM SRS limit the choice of options available in drawing up the preferred strategy for Milton Keynes.

4.3.2 Key elements of the MKSM Sub-regional Strategy for Milton Keynes require a programme of selective intensification and the renaissance of Central Milton Keynes and other urban locations, complemented by:

• Sensitively planned urban extensions to provide new homes and workplaces and reinforce public transport, while respecting local context; • Continued development and upgrading of the public transport system, and reducing dependence on car use; • Maintenance and provision of new and existing green infrastructure including parks, greenspace and water spaces within the urban area; and • The highest environmental standards in design and construction.

Options looked at

4.3.3 In November 2005 six growth options for the future development of the city were published and consulted14 upon. In developing the Options for consultation each option was required to demonstrate that it could provide the required community facilities, schools, employment land, parks, open space, etc. Additional work was undertaken and further information was also considered including: • The spatial implications of national, regional and local policy, including the Milton Keynes Community Strategy, the Economic Vision and the Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy.

14 Source: MK2031 Options for Growth leaflet (November 2005).

• The implications of the draft Directions Papers, covering the topics of city design, housing, the economy, community facilities, transport and utilities. • Existing conditions, constraints and opportunities in and around the existing city area, including important aspects of the environment, valuable agricultural land, physical landscape features and key infrastructure. • The views, opinions and ideas of the public to make sure the Options take on board the needs and aspirations of the current population in and around Milton Keynes. • The growth infrastructure needs of the city – what has to be delivered alongside with new homes.

4.3.4 The option development process was based on 5 themes: Regeneration, Environmental quality/protection of natural and historic assets, Public transport/high accessibility, Sustainable neighbourhoods, and Economic growth15. It was also subjected to risk assessment to highlight key potential barriers to the delivery of the proposals.

4.3.5 In June 2006 a draft Growth Strategy was published detailing a preferred option for the future development of the city. The Growth Strategy proposed development within the urban area, concentrated on a north / south public transport route, and sustainable urban extensions south east and south west of the city.

4.3.6 The Council, jointly with Bucks CC, undertook further consultation on the single growth option and the draft Growth Strategy to inform their respective positions at the South East Plan Examination in Public and to provide additional information for the preparation of the Local Development Framework.

Public Participation Responses

• The consultation detailed that there is most support for a balanced approach to the future growth of MK. • Various parties put forward alternative expansion proposals for the growth of the city. These included two different proposals for expansion east of the M1, on behalf of the MK Forum and Bucks CC. These were assessed and subjected to Sustainability Appraisal and have informed the development of the Preferred Option. • An independent Peer Review Group undertook a critique16 of the MK Growth Strategy to help inform the preparation of the MK Local Development Framework. The Peer Review group scrutinised the MK Growth Strategy to ensure that it formed a

15 Source: MK2031 – Options for Growth technical report (November 2005). 16 Peer Review Group paper - http://www.miltonkeynespartnership.info/dfiles/MeetingAgendas/MKPC120606AI11Ann3.pdf

sound basis for guiding the sustainable growth of the city. Some of the Peer Review Group main messages influenced the Council’s debate on Growth, the Council’s submissions to the South East Plan Examination in Public and the development of the Core Strategy.

Additional Work

4.3.7 The work on the evidence base has tried to identify all the strategic spatial choices for the next 20 years but it is still possible that we have omitted some, for example, we may not yet be aware of new initiatives that major stakeholders are hoping to undertake. The Preferred Options consultation will help to show if there are still any foreseeable options that we have overlooked.

4.3.8 Independently of the Growth Strategy partner organisations, Buckinghamshire County Council and Aylesbury Vale District Council commissioned further work17 reviewing the process which led to the production of the MK Growth Strategy and their submissions to the SEP Examination in Public. This work promoted a scenario with an increased Urban Potential for the urban area in Milton Keynes and an alternative location for a sustainable urban extension on land East of the M1.

4.3.9 This work undertaken by Buckinghamshire County Council and Aylesbury Vale District Council, and the further work18 commissioned by Milton Keynes Council has helped to fully test the options laid out in the MK Growth Strategy and provide the South East Plan Panel with all the evidence required to make an assessment of the future growth strategy for Milton Keynes.

4.3.10 This additional work and consultation on the MK Growth Strategy has strengthened the evidence base for the production of the MK Local Development Framework and has enabled the Council to formulate its position and set out a Preferred Option for the spatial strategy.

4.3.11 In considering this spatial strategy it is clear that not all land identified through the preparation of the MK Growth Strategy (and supporting studies) will be required to meet known development needs to 2026. Land identified through the Growth Strategy and subsequent studies that is not required could be identified as Strategic Reserve Areas. Section 4.6 provides further information.

4.3.12 The position provided in the Preferred Option is consistent with the Council’s submissions to the South East Plan EiP and the supporting evidence detailed in the GVA Grimleys study (February 2007). The

17 Milton Keynes Long Term Growth Strategy Review - Colin Buchanan and Partners (January 2007) 18 Critique of the Buchanan Study – relating to their review of the MK Long Term Growth Strategy (GVA Grimleys (February 2007)).

Council does not consider that development East of the M1 is required during this plan period because the evidence base details that, amongst other things:

• Sequentially there are better sites as set out in the MK2031 study. • Expansion East of the M1 would not support in terms of patronage or the development of the operating case for East- West Rail. • It would not support the regeneration of older centres such as Bletchley • Public transport proposals serving areas east of the M1 would not contribute to the overall development strategy of the city.

4.3.13 For further information please see the work undertaken in the GVA Grimleys critique of the Buchanan Study (February 2007). Should the changes to the draft South East Plan detail any amendments to this position, the MK Core Strategy will be reviewed to reflect these.

4.3.14 Preferred Option

Milton Keynes will accommodate the amount of development identified in the adopted Sub Regional Strategy to 2021, and the draft South East Plan to 2026. Growth of Milton Keynes will not be constrained by administrative boundaries.

Growth will be an appropriate balance between development in the urban area and the provision of sustainable urban extensions.

Up to 2011 development will occur in line with the adopted Local Plan strategy.

Over the period 2011-2026 there will be a focus of up to 8,500 houses in the urban area to support urban renaissance and to encourage sustainable patterns of travel. This development will principally be focussed on Central Milton Keynes, Bletchley, and Wolverton.

Sustainable Urban Extensions will be provided by: • The delivery of 7,500 homes to the South East of Milton Keynes (4,800 of which will be within the Milton Keynes administrative area, including land identified as Strategic Reserve Areas in the current Milton Keynes Local Plan). • The delivery of 7,500 homes in a Growth Area to the South West of Milton Keynes (entirely within Aylesbury Vale District).

Growth will occur in the urban area and in the sustainable urban

extensions at the same time.

Development outside of the Milton Keynes Borough Boundary will be addressed in the Aylesbury Vale and Mid Beds District Councils’ Core Strategies.

4.4 Housing Numbers, urban and rural split

4.4.1 To deliver the Preferred Option it is necessary to understand what levels of growth are already planned (through existing commitments and the Local Plan sites) and the level of new growth that the Core Strategy should be providing for. Work undertaken through the Housing Land Supply and Delivery topic paper19 identifies that the Core Strategy should detail the delivery of 21,700 dwellings over the life time of the Core Strategy (on top of existing commitments and allocations).

4.4.2 Should the changes to the draft South East Plan detail any amendments to this position, the Core Strategy includes a degree of contingency to allow for minor changes. If this is not adequate, then the MK Core Strategy will be reviewed to reflect significant changes made to the Regional Spatial Strategy.

4.4.3 In addition to providing a major contribution to the strategic housing requirements for 2011 – 2026 sustainable urban extensions will be required to incorporate other uses and provide supporting infrastructure, including new open space to meet local needs and onsite renewable energy technology. The growth areas are expected to accommodate the additional employment floorspace required in the city for the period 2011-2026. Further information relating to the city’s employment growth requirements are set out in the ‘Supporting the city’s Economy and Sub-regional Role’ chapter (section 7).

4.4.4 Any new development in the urban area will be required to support and enhance the continuing role of the settlement and help achieve urban renaissance and increase sustainable patterns of movement. Further information relating to this is in the ‘Serving Existing Communities’ chapter (section 8).

4.4.5 The establishment of an effective system of an efficient integrated public transport system in MK is central to the implementation of the MK Core Strategy. One of the key objectives of the MK Local Development Framework is to support the deliver of the actions from the actions from the MK Transport Strategy20 review and the objectives of the Local Transport Plan 2.

19 Housing Land Supply And Delivery Topic Paper (MKC – June 2007). 20 MK Transport Strategy (MKP March 2007)

Delivery

4.4.6 The detailed elements relating to the boundaries and detailed elements of the Growth Areas will be delivered through a minimum of 3 documents; Area Action Plans covering at the South East and South West growth areas respectively and a Borough wide allocations DPD. A future review of the MK Local Development Scheme will provide further information on the timeframes for the development of these documents.

4.4.7 The Spatial Strategy for MK requires the delivery of growth outside of the MKC Borough Boundary. Although the Core Strategy cannot presume to be definitive beyond the Plan boundaries it is not unreasonable for it to indicate cross boundary growth options relating to the growth of Milton Keynes that may take place on the edge of the city.

4.4.8 MKC are working with Aylesbury Vale and Mid Bedfordshire District Councils to ensure that the areas of growth outside the authority area are delivered to jointly agreed development standards and timescales.

4.4.9 The Area Action Plans will be an important mechanism for ensuring these areas of significant change will be developed at an appropriate scale, mix and quality. They will also detail phasing arrangements and help co-ordinate the requirements for new infrastructure.

Risks

4.4.10 A key risk to the delivery of the strategy is the need to increase Housing Completion rates in Milton Keynes. The Sub Regional Strategy and the draft South East Plan set out phasing over the period 2001-2026. The Council put forward an alternative phasing strategy at the South East Plan Examination in Public to provide a gradual and coordinated increase in completions that is more realistic in terms of the delivery of jobs, infrastructure and regeneration as well as new housing.

2001- 2006- 2011- 2016- 2021- Total 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 Sub Regional 7,900 15,000 11,000 11,000 44,900 Strategy Draft South East 15,000 11,000 11,000 11,850 48,850 Plan Annual rate in 1,580 3,000 2,200 2,200 2,370 SRS & SEP Re-phasing 11,000 12,000 12,800 13,050 48,850 suggested by MKC Annual rate MKC 2,200 2,400 2,560 2,610

4.4.11 Should the SEP indicate a rephrasing of the MK figures in line with the Council’s submission to the EiP, this will be reflected in the submission document. MKC and MKP have also established an officer-level Joint Housing Delivery Team to improve delivery rates. The JHDT includes representatives from the Housing Corporation and GOSE. The Annual Monitoring report contains an housing trajectory detailing the delivery of housing in MK. The AMR shows that annual housing completions have increased since the JHDT was established but are still below the annual requirement set out in MKSM SRS.

4.4.12 In the period 2001-2011 the strategy will be to develop the Local Plan allocated sites. Some Local Plan allocated sites have additional capacity after the 2011 period. This is sufficient capacity to meet the majority of the plan requirements in the period 2011-2016. Therefore the majority of the residual amount of new development that remains to be allocated is likely to be required after 2016.

4.4.13 However, to achieve annual completion rates averaging 2,500 new homes per year several areas may need to be developed at the same time. The table below sets out committed sites that have a remaining capacity of over 500 dwellings in the period after 2011, and sets out how collectively these might have sufficient capacity to realistically achieve 2,500 completions a year in the 2011-2016 period.

Area/ Site Capacity after 2011 Area Total Annual Average 2011-2016 East city 2,780 556 Eastern Expansion Area 1,900 dwellings 380 Oakgrove 880 dwellings 176 West city 4,960 992 Western Expansion 4,400 dwellings 880 Area Tattenhoe Park 560 dwellings 112 South city 850 170 Newton Leys 850 dwellings 170 Other 5,700 540 Bletchley Regeneration 600 120 Strategy Area Wolverton Regeneration 600 120 Strategy Area Central Milton Keynes 4,500* 300* 2,258

* Central Milton Keynes is assumed to have capacity to provided 4,500 dwellings over the period 2011-2026. Therefore the annual average figure for the 2011-2016 period (300 dwellings) is assumed to be annual average over that 15 year period.

4.4.14 The Growth Strategy assumes that development in the urban area will be delivered in the period 2011-2026, the South East growth area will be phased and delivered in the 2016-2021 period, and the South West growth area will be developed in the 2021-2026 period. The table below illustrates what would be required in terms of annual completions on these sites in order to meet the phasing requirements of the draft South East Plan, and also the re-phasing suggested by Milton Keynes Council.

Area Total Capacity Annual Annual Annual Average Average Average 2011-2016 2016-2021 2021-2026 Urban Area 8,500 dwellings 557* 557* 557* South East Growth 8,000 dwellings 0 1,600 0 Area South West 7,500 dwellings 0 0 1,500 Growth Area Annual Average 557 2,157 2,057 from all areas

* It is assumed that 300 of these completions could come from Central Milton Keynes, as outlined in the previous table. This is because development at Central Milton Keynes forms part of the Growth Strategy for the urban area.

4.4.15 If the annual average from committed Local Plan sites (other than Central Milton Keynes) is added to the 2011-2016 annual average for the Growth Strategy (where 300 dwelling per annum is already assumed for Central Milton Keynes, this would bring potential completions up to about 2,500 dwellings.

4.4.16 What this shows is that the phasing in the Growth Strategy would fail to meet both the draft South East Plan annual target, and the council’s own revised target. This phasing strategy relies on a very high level of annual completions from each Growth Area in separate 5 year periods.

4.4.17 Whatever spatial strategy the Council seeks to pursue it is more realistic to plan for completions coming forward from 2 large sites, over a longer period of time to allow the co-ordination of strategic infrastructure.

4.4.18 There are no significant physical constraints in regards to Land Supply in accommodating the South East and South West Growth Areas. However delivery of these areas would depend on joint working with adjoining authorities. This is not considered to be an issue in principle but it is less straightforward than might otherwise be the case, and may take a longer lead in time to establish working arrangements.

4.5 Identify a strategy for the rural area.

The Issues

4.5.1 The SEP does not specify how much new housing should take place in the Rest of the Borough over the period 2006 – 2026. The MK Growth Strategy work focused entirely on the city and did not consider this issue. As part of the summer consultation on the Growth Strategy, MKC asked a question about how many additional homes should be built in the rest of the Borough to 2026. There was general support for a limited amount of housing development in the rest of the Borough, to support local needs and local facilities.

4.5.2 It is considered unrealistic to make no provision for additional housing in the rest of the Borough and so evidence suggests that current rates should continue and the rural area provide an average rate of 120 dwellings per year (1,800 dwellings 2011 – 2026). It is not considered appropriate for any shortfall in housing delivery in the city to be met by increasing development levels in the rural area.

4.5.3 The rural area strategy in the Local Plan is based on concentrating development in the most sustainable of the rural settlements; Newport Pagnell, Woburn Sands and Olney. These are the largest of the rural settlements and benefit from the highest level of services, facilities, and public transport choice. The villages of Hanslope and Bow Brickhill are classified as ‘Selected Villages’ where a limited amount of new development has local parish council support.

4.5.4 There have been few significant environmental, social or economic changes to the rural settlements since the Local Plan was prepared and there appears to be no specific evidence to support a departure from the spatial strategy presented in the Local Plan of Key Settlements and parish council supported Selected Villages. In particular Newport Pagnell, Olney and Woburn Sands continue to have the best level of services and facilities outside of the city.

4.5.5 The evidence suggests some correlation between the size of a settlement and the level of certain types of services, although some of the smallest settlements in the Borough still contain services such as pubs and schools. Critically most of the largest villages have retained the majority of their services and facilities, despite low levels of new development. The environmental impact of allocating significant new development to the smaller villages would be damaging, and not in line with trying to support sustainable travel patterns.

4.5.6 Further baseline information on the rural area is detailed in the Rural Area Spatial Strategy: Technical Background Paper.

4.5.7 Options Looked At • Continue with the Local Plan development strategy of Key Settlements and Selected Villages. • Focus new development in Key Settlements only. • Distribute development between all rural settlements.

• Focus new development on small settlements to increase their capacity to support services and facilities. • Consider the role of Newport Pagnell – should it remain classified as rural?

Public Participation Responses • General support for some development in the rural area. • Some concerns about the continued growth of some of the larger settlements • Some settlements were specifically advocated for further development, although the only parish council that supported some limited housing development was Sherington.

4.5.8 Preferred Options

The strategy to 2011 is to complete development that is allocated in the Local Plan at the Key Settlement of Newport Pagnell, Olney and Woburn Sands, and the Selected Villages of Hanslope and Bow Brickhill.

1,800 new homes in the period 2011-2026 will be concentrated in the Key Settlements of Newport Pagnell, Olney and Woburn Sands.

A limited amount of this new development will also be accommodated in the Selected Village of Sherington.

4.5.9 The table below summarises the Preferred Options set out in this section.

Settlement Hierarchy

Category Settlements Included Comments Focus for Central Milton Keynes, Major Growth and Change in Wolverton, Bletchley intensification / regeneration. the Urban Area. Sustainable MK city New development will be Urban concentrated on the existing Extensions MK city expansion areas and the SW and SE growth areas Key Newport Pagnell, Preferred focus for meeting Settlements Olney, Woburn Sands locally identified rural needs and support for existing services. Selected Hanslope and Bow Overall policy of Villages Brickhill (up to 2011), development restraint with Sherington small scale provision to support and improve local

facilities, where there is parish council support.

4.6 Monitoring Housing Delivery & Strategic Reserve Areas

4.6.1 The MKSM SRS requires us to have regard to the possibility of a further 11,850 new homes being built in Milton Keynes in the 5 year period between 2026 & 2031.

4.6.2 The work on the MK Growth Strategy has provided a long term view for an approach to the development of MK in this period. The MK Growth Strategy will allow assumptions to be made relating to the infrastructure, services and facilities required to support growth post 2026. It will also ensure that any development to 2026 does not prejudice growth in the following period to 2031.

4.6.3 An option available to the Core Strategy is to provide an indication of a site for a strategic reserve that could act as a first area of search to meet possible but as yet unrequired needs for any land uses or development requirements that cannot be accommodated within the current strategy. The strategic reserves could provide flexibility should the strategy not deliver its requirements.

4.6.4 The need to release such land for development would need to be fully justified and would only be allocated and development permitted as part of a formal review or alteration to the Core Strategy.

4.6.5 Two potential sites for strategic reserve areas status were identified through the work and consultation on the MK Growth Strategy.

4.6.6 The sites are broadly defined as:

• Land to the south of Newport Pagnell • Land to the south of Newton Longville

4.6.7 Preferred Options

Strategic Reserve Areas will be located to the south of Newport Pagnell and the south east of Newton Longville.

Strategic Reserve Areas will provide land to meet any unforeseen needs in the period to 2026 and provide broad locations for land supply in the period to 2031.

5.0 MANAGING OUR IMPACTS

5.0.1 This chapter of the document provides an introduction to the Council’s approach to sustainable development and highlights cross cutting issues that flow through the rest of the document. Although many of these issues are addressed in more detail in subsequent chapters of the document, it important that they are highlighted at this stage to reaffirm the Council’s awareness of the potential social, economic and environmental impacts of development and commitment to ensuring the delivery of the spatial strategy is managed in a sustainable manner.

5.0.2 Milton Keynes a quarter of a century ago was viewed as a leader in urban planning and design. As the city has evolved, so has a good reputation for innovation in low energy buildings and energy efficiency standards, partly down to the proactive approach adopted by the Council in encouraging the use of sustainable methods of construction. The city also benefits due to the innovative approach taken to planning open space provision and the strategic water management system in the early Master Plan that is in place to attenuate the flow of water into the River Great Ouse.

5.0.3 However, the legacy of the innovative original design approach in Milton Keynes means the car remains the primary mode of transport throughout the borough, having negative impacts on the environment and community. This is a major issue that the Council will seek to address through policies in the Core Strategy, alongside a continued drive to achieve the highest standards in energy efficiency. This is particularly important given the need to manage the impact of proposed growth in and around Milton Keynes up to 2026.

5.1 Creating carbon zero communities

5.1.1 The issues

5.1.2 Globally, the rate that we are consuming natural resources and altering the environment is unprecedented. During 2004 activities in Milton Keynes Borough (including fuel use, landfill and energy consumption) 21 produced 1,713,664 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions , contributing towards human induced global warming. This works out as approximately 7.9 tonnes of CO2 emitted per MK resident. If behaviour does not change, by 2026, when the population of Milton Keynes is estimated to be 325in the region of 325,000, the Borough would be responsible for emitting 2,567,500 tonnes of CO2. This is obviously an unsustainable approach, and contrary to the Government’s national commitment to cutting CO2 emissions by 20% by 2010.

21 Figure calculated using the South East Climate Change Partnership – Emissions Monitoring Group Emissions Toolkit.

5.1.3 The way people behave is one of the major contributors to CO2 emissions in Milton Keynes, with transport (27%) and domestic (28%) sources making up over half of all emissions. This can partly be attributed to the heavy use of the car within the city. The Milton Keynes Local Transport Plan 2 (LTP2) seeks to address the changing travel demands associated with growth, with an emphasis on encouraging a shift away from using the car. LTP2 encourages planning policy to influence the location, scale, density, design and mix of land uses, helping to reduce the need to travel and therefore helping to manage the impact on the environment. There are also social and economic implications of this approach. By supporting delivery of the LTP2, and subsequent LTPs, the Core Strategy can help contribute to reducing the damaging CO2 emissions associated with Milton Keynes’ reliance on the car.

5.1.4 The way materials are used also has a major influence on CO2 emissions. The Government has a target of achieving ‘zero carbon’ housing by 2016 and has introduced the voluntary Code for Sustainable Homes, which sets nationwide energy and water efficiency standards. The Government is seeking delivery of level 6 of the code, which would see ‘zero carbon’ development, by 2016. Milton Keynes is already innovative in this area, with Policy D4 of the adopted Local Plan being the first in the UK to have a policy seeking carbon neutrality from new development22. The requirements of Policy D4 are equivalent to those of Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. The Council is committed to taking forward this work23 through the Core Strategy.

5.1.5 The efficient production of energy is an essential element of delivering sustainable homes. In the recent Energy White Paper the Government set out an aspiration for 20% of energy to be provided through renewable sources by 2020. The paper also states the Government’s commitment to creating an expectation that any substantial new developments need to source a ‘significant proportion’ of their energy from on and off sites low carbon sources. This is reinforced by policy in the draft South East Plan, which encourages developers to provide at least 10% of a developments energy demand from renewable sources.

5.1.6 This is partly covered by the Code for Sustainable Homes, which identifies renewable energy provision as a key element of zero carbon homes. The Government identifies a localised approach being required for the provision of low carbon and renewable sources of energy, as opportunities and constraints will vary from place to place. The regional assessment of renewable energy potential highlights that biomass,

22 Carbon Neutrality is the term used to describe the balancing of a developments CO2 emissions through on site efficiencies and offsetting of emissions with investment in new technologies elsewhere. A development only becomes ‘zero carbon’ where it achieves neutrality without the need for an offset payment. 23 Full Council debate: Growth in Milton Keynes (Full Council 13 February 2007)

wind energy and solar power make up 95% of the south east region’s potential in the sort to long term24. In the context of Milton Keynes, the 2002 Energy Review and Energy Strategy25 highlights all three as having potential in the borough, particularly biomass, where there are opportunities to source fuel from the large areas of public open space and the surrounding natural environment.

5.1.7 The draft SEP sees growth areas, such as Milton Keynes, as having the most potential for developing efficient renewable energy schemes, due to the large scale development that will be happening and the economies of scale involved26.

5.1.8 In Milton Keynes policy D4 of the Local Plan already requires housing developments over 5 dwellings and other development over 1000 sqm to cut CO2 emissions by 25%, with 10% of the reduction provided through the provision of on site renewables. This standard is currently being successfully implemented across the borough.

5.1.9 However, the delivery of renewable energy must be viable and policy should not place an undue burden on developers by unreasonable local requirements27.

5.1.10 Options looked at

• Continue the carbon neutrality aim by use of local carbon offsetting. • Consider what additional measures will improve the actual shift away from car use. • Set best practice standards for efficient use of energy, water, materials, and waste for new buildings. • Promote renewable energy generation including requiring new development to install on-site micro renewables. • Consider standards to achieve neutrality in water. • Look at requiring the ‘future-proofing’ of new development to cope with hotter summers, increased flooding or drought.

The responses from consultation

• The aim of moving towards carbon neutral development, in line with national targets, is supported. • Ensure requirements are viable and do not restrict site coming forward for development. • Support delivery of the new Code for Sustainable Homes.

24 Harnessing the Elements- A Strategy for Renewable Energy 25 Prepared by the Milton Keynes Energy Agency in conjunction with Milton Keynes Council. 26 Emerging South East Plan p126, paragraph 11.12 27 Policy Statement 22: Renewable Energy (PPS22) and its companion guide

• Address both the need for increased energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy. • The siting of development near to existing communities will help support sustainable communities. • Plan for future changes that result from climate change. • Positively encourage the use of energy efficient design, without restricting overall delivery of housing targets.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTIONS

MI 1 - Managing environmental impacts through the location of development

Promote the adoption of sustainable lifestyles by allocating accessible sites for development that help support and develop an efficient public transport service, primarily the north/south and east/west Quality Bus Initiative (QBI) transport corridors28.

Require development sites to deliver access to key facilities (including health and education facilities, employment opportunities and day-today shopping needs) and, where possible, to support the delivery of renewable energy provision.

Delivery Strategy

5.1.11 This will be delivered through the selection process of sites for the Allocations DPD, the production of individual Area Action Plans and through development briefs where required.

5.1.12 This policy has links to the ‘Growing new communities’ and ‘Serving existing communities’ chapters.

Risks

5.1.13 It may not be possible for all allocated sites to be located in a way which supports existing priority public transport corridors and access to existing facilities - some will need new infrastructure provision. An element of risk is provided by potential conflicts between the need to meet targets for housing delivery and the timing of infrastructure delivery. The Council is committed to working proactively with partners, including the bus companies, to facilitate the delivery of required infrastructure at the appropriate times.

28 MK Transport Strategy (March 2007)

Targets and indicators

• Increase the punctuality of QBI bus routes- target 95% by 201129. • Increase in walking and cycling to school- target 30% of journeys to be made by foot or bicycle30.

These are collected through the existing LTP2 monitoring system.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

MI 2 - Managing environmental impacts through energy efficient design / Zero Carbon development

Require that energy efficiency is considered in the design, layout and orientation of new development, including heat retention, solar gain, urban cooling, natural lighting and ventilation, use of recycled materials and opportunities for combined heat and power (CHP) and district heating systems, where viable.

Require development proposals to show effective integration with the existing built environment, promote alternatives to the car, reduce physical separation of key land uses, and develop opportunities provided by individual site characteristics.

Require all housing developments to achieve level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes from 2010 and level 6 from 2014, and all other development to achieve an equivalent standard.

Set out the expected targets for CO2 reduction in new development over the Core Strategy period, requiring developers to produce a sustainability statement showing how CO2 emissions have been reduced by 44% up to 2010 (in line with level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes), rising to 100% (zero carbon) by 2014. Until development is ‘zero carbon’, the policy will continue to require payments into the MK Carbon Offset fund to achieve carbon neutrality.

Delivery Strategy

5.1.14 This would be implemented through the production of DC Policies DPD, Area Action Plans and development briefs as required on a site- by-site basis.

29 Indicator LTP5 of the Local Transport Plan 2 30 Indicator LTP4 of the Local Transport Plan 2

5.1.15 The Council will commit to a review of the existing Sustainable Construction SPD to ensure it remains up-to-date and responds to new standards as they arise.

Risks

5.1.16 An element of risk is provided by the inability of developers to viably source and implement the level of design required to achieve zero carbon development. Where, through monitoring, it can be seen that targets are not being achieved; the Council will investigate the reasons for this and make appropriate revisions to the Core Strategy (or relevant DPDs) or review existing carbon offset arrangements.

Targets and Indicators

• 44% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2010 • 100% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2014

The level of CO2 reduction will be monitored through the Environmental Statements accompanying planning applications.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

MI 3 - Managing environmental impact through renewable energy provision

Require provision of renewable energy on all new developments. Developers will be expected to show that they have explored all on-site renewable energy options, including biomass fuelled technology, to contribute towards reducing the CO2 emissions of development, and ultimately ‘zero carbon development’.

Require a significant proportion of energy needed by new development to be7 supplied from renewable sources- 20% from 2010, 50% from 2012 and 100% post 2014- to support the achievement of zero carbon development. Pre-2014, require large scale development proposals to achieve higher levels of on site renewable provision, where viable.

Support the delivery of standalone renewable energy schemes in areas where the social, economic and environmental impacts are acceptable.

Delivery

5.1.17 This would be implemented through the production of individual Area Action Plans and development briefs as required on a site-by-site basis.

5.1.18 The DC Policies DPD will provide increased detail as to the appropriate siting and design of renewable energy schemes, to ensure potentially negative visual and noise related impacts, and other social, economic and environmental impacts of renewable energy provision are considered.

5.1.19 The Council will prepare a Feasibility Study to assess the potential, viability and delivery of renewable energy across the Borough, particularly biomass fuelled provision. This will include engaging with local stakeholders, such as the Parks Trust, to assess the potential to improve the supply chain of biofuel material. This will inform the production of Area Action Plans and support the delivery of renewable energy policies in the Core Strategy and the subsequent DC Policies DPD.

5.1.20 Large scale renewable energy schemes will be investigated, negotiated and delivered through the production of Area Action Plans and through the determination of individual applications.

5.1.21 This policy has links to the ‘Managing our assets’, ‘Growing new communities’ and ‘Serving existing communities’ chapters.

Risks

5.1.22 An element of risk is provided by the inability of developers to viably source and implement technology required to provide 100% of renewable energy on site by 2014. If through monitoring this proves to be the case, the Council will investigate the reason for this and make appropriate revisions to the Core Strategy (or relevant DPDs), including potentially revising targets to reflect up-to-date knowledge.

Targets and indicators

• 20% onsite renewable production by 2010 • 50% onsite renewable production by 2012 • 100% onsite renewable production by 2014

The level on onsite renewable energy provision will be monitored through the Environmental Statements accompanying planning applications.

5.2 Efficient management of water

The issues

5.2.1 The growth of Milton Keynes will have implications for the Borough’s water resources, both in terms of increased demand and flood management issues.

5.2.2 Large new balancing lakes were a key feature of the original master plan for Milton Keynes. A strategic approach to flood mitigation, with new balancing lakes being multi-purpose – that is to say public assets with recreation, wildlife and amenity value as well as flood storage - was adopted. This approach is now an integrated part of the city and sits well alongside the approach advocated in PPS2531. A Drainage Strategy for Milton Keynes (2004) provides guidance for developers on the areas of flood risk in the borough and the required strategic and local measures to allow future development to go ahead. This Strategy provides for the growth of Milton Keynes up to 2011. The Growth Strategy, which informed the development of the Spatial Strategy, considered flood risk as one of the constraints when developing the potential areas of growth. This has ensured flood risk has been kept to a minimum, in line with the approach of PPS25.

5.2.3 The Council has commissioned work on a Water Cycle Strategy (WCS). The Scoping Study will indicate what the requirements are for future flood management in Milton Keynes, given proposed growth levels up to 2026. The effective past management of Milton Keynes’ flood waters, with new strategic flood control lakes, means that there is capacity for long term development within the city and existing expansion areas. However, changes in the level of development, activity and climate change have the ability to alter this. To this end, the River Great Ouse and its tributaries are the main source of any potential flooding in the Borough, with the area around Newport Pagnell the most susceptible to any unexpected changes in flood patterns.

5.2.4 Demand for water will increase in Milton Keynes as the population rises, intensifying pressure on resources. This pressure is likely to increase in future years as the effects of climate change make it more difficult to collect and store water, and demand increases due to warmer temperatures. The WCS will investigate the potential benefits of demand management measures which could help address this, together with the issues of risk in ensuring water supply in the long term.

5.2.5 Policy D4 of the Local Plan already addresses the water efficiency of new development, with targets for the expected level of water use, the collection and reuse of water and sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDs)32 established. The Code for Sustainable Homes also includes targets for water efficiency, encouraging new development to limit the consumption of drinkable water per person. It is understood that that the water company do not plan on the basis of reduced demand but the Council will aim to evidence this change in behaviour through the AMR.

5.2.6 Options areas considered

31 PPS25- Development and Flood Risk. 32 SUDs mimic natural systems for draining surface water. They include porous surfaces, purpose built ponds and other measures to reduce the impact of flow on watercourses. SUDs can also contribute to the amenity and wildlife value of a site.

• Set best practice standards for efficient use of energy, water, materials, and waste for new buildings. • Consider standards to achieve neutrality in water. • Look at requiring the ‘future-proofing’ of new development to cope with hotter summers, increased flooding or drought.

Responses from public participation

• Ensure requirements are viable and do not restrict sites coming forward for development. • Plan for future changes that result from climate change. • New development will result in an increased risk of flooding.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTIONS

MI 4 - Managing our impact on local water resources

Implement the findings of the Water Cycle Strategy, to ensure the effective flood risk provision of MK post 2011 and deal with water supply, waste water treatment and surface water drainage issues associated with growth.

Require development to be located away from flood risk areas to avoid passing on effects to areas further down stream. Where minor development is required within an area of flood risk (to support other spatial objectives) require the production of a Flood Risk Assessment to demonstrate how the development will contribute to reducing or managing flood risk and full justification of how the development helps to meet the wider sustainability objectives of the Core Strategy.

Delivery strategy

5.2.7 The Council will work with partners, including the Environment Agency, water companies and Milton Keynes Partnership, to continue the review of Milton Keynes’ water management, through the Water Cycle Strategy, to inform the approach to future development. The first stage of the WCS will inform an increased level of detail in the final Core Strategy submission. The strategic element of the Strategy will inform the production of the Allocations DPD and future Area Action Plan documents.

5.2.8 The Council will liaise with water companies to ensure that their business plans take into account the need for effective water management in light of growth.

5.2.9 Policies on ‘Growing New Communities’ and ‘Managing our Assets’ will take into account the policy on water management.

Risks

5.2.10 An element of risk is provided by the potential slippage in delivery of the final Water Cycle Strategy. The Council is committed to working closely with the Environment Agency and the consultants to prevent this from happening.

Targets and Indicators

• Reduce the amount of new development permitted within floodplain (hectares):- target 0% by 2016

This will be monitored through existing MKC systems.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTIONS

MI 5 - Managing demand for water

Seek water neutrality in all new housing developments over 5 dwellings and other development over 1000 sqm. Encourage developers to minimise water consumption through efficient design, with any increase in pre-development water use levels, being offset by a payment into a Water Offset Fund. This fund will be used to reduce water use elsewhere in MK in a similar way to the existing carbon offset mechanism.

Delivery

5.2.11 The Council will undertake additional work to establish the detail needed to implement the policy effectively. This will include working with partners, such as the Environment Agency, and assessing the impact of ongoing work at a national level. Additional detail on how water consumption should be minimised will be provided in the DC Policies DPD.

5.2.12 New monitoring arrangements will be established to assess the delivery of existing and emerging water management policies. The Council will engage with the water companies to source the data required to monitor the effectiveness of the policy requirements.

Risks

5.2.13 There is a possibility of development viability being compromised by over onerous demands. The Council will seek to avoid this by monitoring and working closely with partners to ensure any design requirements and offset payments are set at a realistic level.

5.2.14 There is also a risk that monitoring data will be flawed if water efficiency mechanisms in new developments, such as water butts, are not used as intended. The Council plans to engage with the water companies to gain additional data on water use per household to ensure monitoring is effective and informative.

Targets and indicators

• 100% water neutrality in all new development over 5 dwellings or 1000sqm

The level of water efficiency will be monitored through the Environmental Statements accompanying planning applications.

5.3 Reducing waste, landfilling and use of mineral resources

The issues

5.3.1 The Council submitted its Waste Development Plan Document to the Government Office in January 2007. This includes the Councils Waste Core Strategy, which sets out the approach to meeting the waste management requirements of the borough up to 2026. The Strategy looks at managing the increased level of waste associated with growth, encouraging minimisation and reduction of waste production and increasing recycling. The WDPD will be subject to its own examination in October 2007. The WDPD, containing the Waste Core Strategy, can be seen at www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/planning-policy.

5.3.2 In terms of minerals, sand, gravel and limestone for aggregates (used in the construction industry), building stone and brick clay are all present within the Borough of Milton Keynes. These resources are finite and they can only be worked where they exist, which is primarily to the north of the city, in the Ouse Valley area.

5.3.3 Milton Keynes is required to maintain a landbank33 of seven years worth of land to be worked for mineral extraction, sufficient to provide for 0.12 million tonnes per annum34. The existing Minerals Local Plan, which is ‘saved’ until April 2009, includes provision to 2011. The mineral reserves are monitored on an annual basis. When the reserves in the landbank start to reduce, new sites may need to be identified, or existing sites extended. Having this landbank in place ensures that the demands of the industry and the economy can continue to be met.

33 A landbank is a stock of valid planning applications from which the required level of supply can be provided. They are needed as developing minerals can often be a long and expensive process. 34 This figure is the regional apportionment set out in the emerging South East Plan

5.3.4 However, it is also important to recognise that granting permission to work new sites has to be balanced against the impact on the environment and nearby communities. For this reason, the use of ‘buffer zones’ is advocated around mineral extraction sites in the emerging SEP35 and the Bucks and Milton Keynes Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), an approach which is already adopted in the Minerals Local Plan.

5.3.5 Due to their finite nature, it is important to safeguard reserves and to protect them from sterilisation by other development. In some cases where known mineral deposits could be sterilised it may be appropriate to allow them to be removed to allow permanent development to take place. It is also important to safeguard rail depots, which import aggregate from Derbyshire and Leicestershire, to help ensure local demand can be met.

5.3.6 National and Regional policy, including the emerging SEP, is to increase the use of secondary and recycled materials as substitutes for natural minerals36. The use of these materials reduces the need for new aggregate to be used. This is partly covered by the earlier policy direction on efficient design.

5.3.7 The emerging SEP requires Milton Keynes to provide facilities to allow 0.2 million tonnes per annum of recycled and secondary aggregates to be provided. The importance of improving the efficient use of resources is supported by it’s inclusion as an issue in the Code for Sustainable Homes, which awards points for committing to sort, reuse and recycle construction waste. The emerging WDPD is already seeking to minimise the use of primary aggregate in new build development by requiring a Waste Management Plan for all development over 5 dwellings or 1000sqm (in the case of other development).

5.3.8 In the past some mineral extraction sites have either been restored as lakes, as agricultural land or by filling in the void with waste to restore to existing or raised land levels. Opportunities exist to create new wildlife habitats in line with the Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes BAP 2000 –2010 (November 2000) as do opportunities for local communities to become involved with restoration and to benefit from the final restoration schemes.

5.3.9 Since the brickworks closure at Newton Longville, it is unlikely that any outstanding permissions will be used to extract brick clay. Building stone will be required for conservation and restoration schemes. Stone quarries are generally smaller than other mineral workings and have low outputs in volume terms. There is small limestone quarry at Weston Underwood used to supply building stone. Their location is

35 Draft South East Plan p162, paragraph 20.7. 36 The Government has set a target of increasing the level of construction and demolition waste being recycled to 60% by 2025.

tied to geology and can be of very localised occurrence, so they may need to be located in visually intrusive areas where quarrying would not normally be allowed, if the demand for stone is great.

The option areas considered

• Continue to protect Areas of Attractive Landscape from mineral extraction. • Consider an alternative approach to balancing the conservation of the landscape with the need for mineral extraction. • Consider what options there are for the restoration of land after mineral extraction. • Continue with the approach to buffer zones around minerals working, as set out in the Minerals Local Plan.

Responses from consultation

• Ensure adequate mineral resources are protected to support future growth. • Consider how to encourage recycling of material to avoid the need to extract more. • Restoration of mineral sites should aim to enhance or recover wildlife resources.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTIONS

MI 6 - Managing mineral reserves

Protect all areas identified as having potential for mineral extraction from non-mineral development to avoid sterilising local resources and to allow the allocation of the required sites to meet Milton Keynes’ regional apportionment.

Maintain Minerals Local Plan buffer zones around existing mineral sites and potential sources of mineral supply to:

• Minimise negative impacts on existing and future local communities, in terms of noise and dust • Prevent sterilisation of supply • Protect significant natural and historical features

Minimise the use of local primary aggregates by encouraging the recycling and reuse of construction material, through the policy on energy efficient design, and by facilitating the delivery of appropriate sites for recycling construction waste.

Safeguard aggregate rail depots at Bletchley and Old Wolverton, to allow the continued importation of aggregate to support local growth.

Where new mineral workings are required, control their impacts by considering the level of need, their impact on the environment, local communities and transport.

Require the restoration of sites to be in line with the priority habitats in the Bucks and Milton Keynes BAP and in consultation with the local community.

Delivery

5.3.10 The allocation of sand and gravel extraction sites and sites for recycled aggregates will be progressed as part of a Minerals Allocations DPD, which will deal with the allocation of specific mineral extraction site(s) required to meet the required regional apportionments. Mineral Officers will be consulted on any development on or within 250m of existing or safeguarded mineral related sites to protect the integrity and deliverability of sites.

5.3.11 The production of the DC Policies DPD will provide an increased level of detail around criteria for protecting amenity and restoration of sites.

5.3.12 The Council will work with partners to deliver restoration of sites in line with the Bucks and Milton Keynes BAP and other local priorities. This will include updating the existing Minerals Code of Practice to encourage more involvement between local communities and the mineral industry.

5.3.13 Policies on ‘managing our assets’ and ‘growing new communities’ will take into account the requirements of minerals policies.

Risks

5.3.14 Being unable to find appropriate sites for aggregate recycling facilities is a risk because a certain type of facility is required, and there are limited sites of this type in Milton Keynes. If appropriate sites cannot be located the Council will investigate other options to enable the facilities to be provided, including searching for sites in the rural area, close to existing mineral extraction sites, which are restricted by landscape protection policies.

5.3.15 There is also an element of risk in safeguarding the Bletchley rail aggregates depot as the site lies within the Bletchley regeneration area. If the rail depot becomes part of a wider regeneration proposal for the area, Minerals Officers will work with the planning and urban design teams and the site operators to determine if appropriate alternative provision could be made elsewhere or whether mitigation measures could be taken to enable both regeneration to occur and the rail depot to remain operational.

Targets and Indicators

• To meet SEP apportionment targets for the provision of recycled and secondary aggregates and supply of primary aggregates. • Year on year decrease in the number of applications without a Waste Management Plan containing a commitment to sort, reuse or recycle construction waste. • Number of applications for non-mineral related application on safeguarded sites. • Year on year increase in the number of sites restored in line with Biodiversity Action Plan targets. • Year on year decrease in complaints regarding mineral extraction sites.

The Waste DPD has its own set of targets and indicators which will be monitored through the Annual Monitoring Report.

5.4 Reducing reliance on the car and encouraging travel by bus, cycle and on foot

The issues

5.4.1 The environmental impacts of transport have already been addressed earlier in this chapter. However, it is also important to consider the other impacts of an effective sustainable transport and movement network. It could see an improvement in the local economy, by making Milton Keynes a more viable and attractive investment location. It could also improve residents’ health, by encouraging more physical activity and movement, and improve people’s quality of life by providing a level of accessibility that give all residents equal opportunities to good quality services. This approach is supported by national planning guidance on transport37.

5.4.2 Milton Keynes has adopted an innovative and evolving approach to encouraging walking, cycling and public transport use. The redway system continues to be developed in new areas of the city and new developments continue to be provided with local centres, providing accessible key facilities. However, the nature of Milton Keynes makes the use of redways and viable bus routes a problem, with the car continuing to be the most convenient method of transport throughout the city. This puts those citizens that do not have access to a car at a social and economic disadvantage from the outset. Recent Development Frameworks for the eastern and western expansion areas have attempted to address this by developing a new ‘city streets’ approach, where the design principles of Milton Keynes have been

37 PPG13: Transport

adapted to support the viability of public transport, walking and cycling routes.

5.4.3 Delivery of the first Milton Keynes Local Transport Plan (LTP1) has already seen some progress, with an increase of 20% in the number of cycles parked in CMK between 2000/01 and 2004/05. The current LTP2 continues to seek this type of improvement through its Delivery Plan and Accessibility Strategy, and by supporting delivery of the Council’s cycling and walking strategies- a challenge the Core Strategy can help deliver.

5.4.4 The LTP2 Accessibility Strategy acknowledges that the quality of services is important, but places equal importance on how conveniently services are located. It also notes that one of the main challenges is identifying the links between deprivation and accessibility and initiating the change needed through the provision of transport and services. The Core Strategy will need to take forward this challenge.

5.4.5 To support any shift away from the car use and reduce traffic generation using demand management. These can utilise travel plans for developments, schools and major business employers. The measures can also include the use of car clubs, car sharing and revising CMK car parking layouts and charges. The modal shift away from the car should also be supported by effective public transport, which forms part of the integrated public transport system. It is likely that public transport, particularly bus travel will be the most significant sustainable transport mode to be used instead of the car. It is vital that all theses measures are integrated because without this behavioural change will not occur.

5.4.6 Option areas considered

• Consider applying a different approach to development in areas close to services and centres as opposed to those areas some distance away. • Look at increasing parking charges to finance improvements in public transport. • Consider reducing parking standards where there are good, easily accessible quality public transport routes.

Responses from public consultation

• Acknowledge the need to promote a step change in the way people travel around Milton Keynes. • Note that to restrict use of the car, without having a realistic and viable alternative in place beforehand, could damage the attractiveness and functioning of the city.

• Promote the improvements to the way train stations are utilised and the role of new public transport ‘hubs’ as a focus for new development. • Acknowledge that the issue is ‘cross cutting’ with influences on site allocation, design, climate change and the environment. • Concern that the growth of Milton Keynes will lead to increased traffic problems in rural areas. • Need to consider hard and soft measures to reduce car usage.

Preferred policy directions

MI 7- Managing movement patterns

Promote the siting of health, education and key day-to-day facilities, in accessible areas, which are well related to existing communities, well connected by public transport and, where required, support the regeneration of the city.

Require the designation of new employment sites in areas that are well served by public transport and that have access to Milton Keynes’ major transport routes. Town centres, including Wolverton and Bletchley, will be identified as the most appropriate, sustainable locations for town centre type uses, supporting the role of CMK, which will accommodate the majority of large new office development and service sector jobs.

Provide an adaptable approach to housing density with higher densities required in accessible locations to support an efficient public transport system and the viability of key facilities.

Encourage the delivery of demand management measures across the Borough that support the delivery of a sustainable transport network, and aim to provide new public transport as soon as new developments are occupied.

Delivery

5.4.7 The Council is producing a Transport Supplementary Planning Document to support delivery of the Accessibility Strategy and set out the Planning Obligation requirements for transport needed to support this. The SPD will be designed to compliment the work on the MK tariff.

5.4.8 The policy will be used to inform the designation of sites within the Allocations Document and the development of Area Action Plans.

5.4.9 The DC Policies DPD will provide guidance on appropriate demand management measure to be sought from new development.

5.4.10 The Council will continue to support the role of Placechecks38 in identifying residents’ accessibility concerns.

5.4.11 Policies in ‘Serving existing communities’, ‘Growing new communities’ and ‘The city economy’ chapters will provide additional guidance on accessibility that will be underpinned by this policy.

Risk

5.4.12 There is a risk that the car will continue to be the primary mode of transport for all journeys in the Borough due to the convenience it provides. If this is identified through monitoring, the Council will look at how increased demand management measures can be introduced to help meet sustainability objectives and if the design approach adopted in the Core Strategy and future DPDs needs to be adjusted further to facilitate a shift towards sustainable transport.

5.4.13 The LTP2 identifies the risk of bus operators cutting or withdrawing services which are essential to achieving a sustainable movement network. The LTP2 makes a commitment to work with bus operators to ensure their continued cooperation.

Targets and indicators

• Targets will be developed from those prepared to monitor delivery of the LTP2, including targets to increase bus patronage, increase cycling trips and changes in peak travel flow to urban centres.

5.5 Encouraging healthy lifestyles

The issues

5.5.1 The health of Milton Keynes’ residents compares well to national figures. It is important that healthy lifestyles are promoted to ensure that this continues to be the case as the current high proportion of young in the city start to get older. The increase in physical activity that will be encouraged by the spatial distribution of development, outlined in the previous sections, goes someway to supporting this. However, it is important that the Core Strategy goes further by reinforcing the spatial needs of the health and social sectors, who are key to ensuring the continued well being of the residents of Milton Keynes.

5.5.2 The Milton Keynes South Midlands Health and Social Care Group has been established to develop proposals with partners, which work towards evolving an appropriate local health and social care

38 Placecheck is a method of assessing the qualities of a place, showing what improvements are needed, and focusing people on working together to achieve them.

infrastructure, in support of growth. As part of their role the Group commissioned a document entitled, ‘Healthy Sustainable Communities: A Spatial Planning Checklist’ to ensure that new developments in the growth area are sustainable and health promoting.

5.5.3 The Checklist acknowledges that there is more to managing healthy communities than simply providing opportunities to exercise, with health being dependent on the relationship between a number of key factors. It highlights links between a sense of community and well being, the need for ‘safe’ environments with well managed public spaces, the provision of appropriate facilities (both health and community), the importance of green infrastructure, and access to employment opportunities as all being an influence on healthy lifestyles. It also highlights the potential impact of stress on the quality of people’s lives, with issues such as noise and air pollution, potentially having a negative impact on health.

5.5.4 Noise hotspots are generally found at main road networks and locations such as railways. The predicted growth in MK’s traffic would have an impact on these noise hotspots. MK does not currently have any Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) as no housing development is currently affected by high pollutant levels. There are areas around the M1 where Nitrogen Oxide levels exceed the allowed national limit, so as development gets closer to the motorway, this may become an issue39.

5.5.5 The importance of local food production in healthy, sustainable communities has been raised by the Food Train40. They have prepared an action plan which aims to ensure the benefits of local food solutions are integral parts of future policy

5.5.6 Many of the issues raised above are dealt with on an individual basis elsewhere in the document, but it is important that consideration is given to the overall impact of development of citizens’ health and that a policy position is established that places healthy lifestyles at the centre of future development.

5.5.7 The options considered

39 Draft South East Plan p124, paragraph 10.1 – 10.5. 40 Food train are a social enterprise established to run community food projects in and around Milton Keynes

• Consider an alternative level of open space and green infrastructure in development that comes about through regeneration within the existing city. • Look at whether the Core Strategy can support principles of a local food policy. • Consider how to support the development of healthcare in Milton Keynes.

Responses from public consultation

• Access to both formal and informal open space can help people’s health and well being. • Need to ensure that adequate, accessible health facilities are provided. • Need to encourage physical activity to improve health.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTIONS

MI 8- Promoting a healthy environment

Encouraging healthy lifestyles will be at the heart of the approach to open space provision, biodiversity, urban design and transport provision. Access to primary health care facilities will be promoted within local communities.

Consider potential local air and noise pollution issues and opportunities to address areas associated with crime in the allocation of development sites.

Promote the protection of existing allotment space and seek to support the development of other local food initiatives within Milton Keynes’ green infrastructure network and urban environment.

Delivery strategy

5.5.8 The policy will ensure that health implications are considered in the production of policies in the Core Strategy. The outcomes will be delivered through the Allocations Document and the production of Area Action Plans, where consideration will be given as to how the design process can support the continuation of sustainable elements of the city, including the linear parks and the redways.

5.5.9 To inform the production of the Allocations DPD, the Council will work with local stakeholders to identify sites within the existing urban area where redevelopment would support the development of a healthy, sustainable environment. This process will also identify those sites which make a significant contribution to the liveability of estates for health, amenity and biodiversity reasons.

5.5.10 The Council will engage with the MK Primary Care Trust (PCT) to help deliver the types and level of service they need to support the growing population in a sustainable manner. Engagement with the PCT will also seek to deliver behavioural change by encouraging and supporting the PCT in making use of Borough’s environment as a healthy resource.

5.5.11 The Council will continue to be part of the Food Train stakeholder group to bring forward, where viable, initiatives to support the local food economy.

5.5.12 The preferred policy direction has specific links to the ‘growing new communities’, ‘serving existing communities’ and ‘managing our assets’ sections.

Risks

5.5.13 Improvements in noise and pollution conditions are dependent on transport and industrial activities around Milton Keynes, as well as the suitable allocation of sites. There is a risk that if car use continues to rise and the economy demands more industrial based activity in the future, managing pollution and noise levels could become more difficult. If this occurs future revisions to the Core Strategy and other DPDs will take measures to minimise residents exposure to the sources of pollution and investigate what opportunities exist to mitigate pollution at source.

Targets and Indicators

• Increase the provision of recreation space per 1000 people:- target 9.5ha per 1000 population by 2011 • Reduce the proportion of the borough exceeding the national air quality limits for nitrogen dioxide:- target 0%

These indicators will be monitored through existing MKC systems.

6.0 MANAGING OUR ASSETS

6.0.1 One of the key challenges facing us as we plan for further growth is how to manage the impact of new development on the Borough’s built and natural assets. These assets provide us with an existing strategic framework within which to plan the location of new development. They also represent a finite resource that will need protection from the adverse impact of development whilst, at the same time, capturing the opportunities for enhancement that a well-managed development process can provide.

6.0.2 As detailed previously, the MK Growth Strategy (June 2006) is a key document that has provided much of the evidence base for the preparation of the Core Strategy. One of the underlying objectives of the Growth Strategy is to protect and enhance the natural and built assets of Milton Keynes.

6.0.3 The consultation on the Growth Strategy carried out by MKC and Bucks County Council in June-September 2006 showed that residents living outside the city were concerned about the encroachment of the urban area on the surrounding countryside. There was support for the creation of a green belt and/or a long-term boundary to the city, to protect villages and prevent urban sprawl. Many respondents are worried that villages will lose their identity if the city expands.

6.0.4 Some responses from the development industry disagreed with the landscape designations in the Growth Strategy whilst others felt that too much weight had been given to the protection of green spaces.

6.1 Protect and enhance the historical and cultural assets of the New Town and the towns, villages and countryside beyond.

The Issues

6.1.1 Long-term protection will continue to be afforded to international, national and local designations such as World Heritage Sites, listed buildings, conservation areas and scheduled ancient monuments. There are no World Heritage Sites within the Borough although the Council has proposed to English Heritage that Bletchley Park should be put forward for inscription as a World Heritage Site. Decisions on such designation are the responsibility of UNESCO, an international organisation.

6.1.2 The Government is currently consulting on proposals in the Heritage White Paper – “Heritage Protection for the 21st Century” aimed at streamlining and simplifying the designation regime for the historic environment. As well as creating a new national programme of designation, the White Paper supports the local listing of buildings by local planning authorities and states that it will provide local planning

authorities with new tools to protect locally designated buildings from demolition. Whilst the outcome of consultation on the White Paper is awaited there is some uncertainty as to the direction that policies in the LDF should take. Within the Borough there is a rich heritage of ancient historical sites, buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest, and a number of historic parks and gardens. They represent an irreplaceable record that contributes to the sense of local distinctiveness that is so important an aspect of the character and appearance of our towns, villages and countryside.

6.1.3 What we also have is a unique twentieth century New Town architecture in the city of Milton Keynes but there is an urgent need to identify and catalogue this resource in order to identify those parts of the twentieth century built environment that represent the best and most valuable examples. There is concern that the proposed levels of future growth will lead to greater pressure on these buildings and could ultimately lead to the fragmentation and loss of this recent historical resource.

6.1.4 Responses to the recent consultation on the Growth Strategy show that whilst there is concern about the impact of future growth it is clear that local people value the layout and the design of the original city and wish to see key elements of that retained.

Responses from Public Participation:

• The importance of protecting the historic environment of Milton Keynes was recognised. There was an acknowledgement that this should include some of the more modern aspects of the new city. • Given the level of development in Milton Keynes, the recording and monitoring of information relating to the historic environment was seen as being important, to ensure the history of Milton Keynes is not lost and also to ensure decisions are properly informed with regards to their potential impacts on the historic environment. • The design and location of new development was seen as a way of protecting areas of importance and it was noted that design policies could actively mitigate potential conflicts, such as density.

6.1.5 Option areas considered

• Continue to protect and enhance the historic environment where there are already statutory designations. • Consider protecting the unique twentieth century New Town environment as well as the more historic environment. • Consider making greater use of Conservation Area statements and management plans. • Develop key design principles to assess development proposals against, similar to those in the Local Plan.

• Consider making use of the concept of testing development proposals on the “good enough to approve” rather than “bad enough to refuse” principle. • Look at making greater use of Village Design Appraisals.

Preferred Policy Directions

MOA 1 - Protect and enhance the character, diversity and cultural significance of the Borough’s historic assets by:

• Conserving and enhancing the character, appearance and setting of buildings, structures, areas and landscapes of historic, architectural, cultural or archaeological interest. • Providing a framework for recording the historic environment and producing more detailed Conservation Area character statements and management plans. • Depending on the outcome of the Heritage White Paper, consider developing an approach to local listing of buildings to protect local distinctiveness. • Setting high standards of design which respond to and enhance local character and distinctiveness.

Delivery Strategy

6.1.6 This would be implemented through: • the Development Control process; • the preparation of a series of Conservation Area character statements and management plans; • working with stakeholders including local heritage societies and parish councils on Conservation Area Statements / local listing etc.

Risks to delivery

Risk to Delivery Possible Mitigation Through Spatial Planning • Lack of resources to prepare Prioritising conservation areas Conservation Area character requiring advice and guidance in statements within the Design relation to likely pressures arising and Conservation Team due from the spatial strategy. to the need to react to and provide responses to planning applications

Targets and Indicators

Indicator Possible Target • Number of conservation

areas • Number of buildings on the ‘at Reduction in the number of risk’ register buildings at risk. • Number of conservation 100% areas with an up to date character appraisal • Number of conservation 100% areas with published management proposals • Success at appeal on design See to have the majority of grounds. planning appeals upheld on design grounds.

6.2 Maintain and enhance green infrastructure and open spaces

The Issues

6.2.1 The importance of green infrastructure (GI) has been endorsed in the Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub Regional Strategy by including specific references to GI as an integrated approach to master planning, design and development.

6.2.2 GI includes recreational and sports facilities, pathways and routes, natural and historical sites, canals, areas of water and accessible countryside.

6.2.3 The MKSM Environment and Quality of Life Sub-Group has published a Green Infrastructure Guide41 to address the GI planning and delivery needs. The guide includes a checklist of GI planning and delivery principles and relevant best practice case studies. The guide explains that GI can be:

“delivered through a planned network of multifunctional greenspaces and interconnecting links which are designed, developed and managed to meet the environmental, social and economic needs of the communities across the SubRegion. It is set within and contributes to a high quality natural and built environment and is required to enhance the quality of life for present and future residents and visitors and to deliver “liveability” for sustainable communities”.

6.2.4 Neighbouring local authorities are already undertaking work on GI: Northamptonshire recently published its “Environmental Character and Green Infrastructure Suite” and the “River Nene Regional Park”. This is regarded as a new concept in the approach to GI and perhaps a

41 “Planning Sustainable Communities - A Green Infrastructure Guide for Milton Keynes & the South Midlands”.

“model” which may potentially offer benefits for Milton Keynes and its neighbours.

Bedfordshire and Luton established a Green Infrastructure Consortium [GIC] through a partnership of local authorities, government agencies, countryside and community related organisations. The GIC has led the production of a Green Infrastructure Network Plan for the County which was published as a draft plan for consultation in 2007 (see web link below). http://www.seco.org.uk/bedford_and_luton_green_infrastrcuture_conso rtium.html?PHPSESSID=30dfa9a4b319b7966454bdc7067cdd22

Buckinghamshire has appointed consultants to carry out work on GI. A Stage 1 GI consultation document was published at end of October 2006. A Stage 2 document of enhanced data, further analysis and consideration of matters arising through consultation was published in January 2007.

6.2.5 Milton Keynes now has a Green Infrastructure Group which has started work on a “Strategic Green Infrastructure Plan” for Milton Keynes [MKGIP] that will set out a clear vision and direction for green infrastructure within the Borough and which will compliment and co- ordinate with emerging green infrastructure plans currently being undertaken in the adjacent counties and the Milton Keynes Open Space Strategy. The Plan is due for completion by mid-September 2007.

6.2.6 The vision for the project is for it to produce a strategically planned and managed network of accessible, high quality, sustainable and linked open spaces which provide a wide range of recreational benefits for both the existing and future communities of Milton Keynes. The plan will identify potential opportunities for GI links into adjoining areas beyond the administrative boundaries of Milton Keynes. The study will consider a number of broad themes: • Landscape Character; • Historic / Archaeological Heritage; • Wildlife and Biodiversity; • Public Access and accessibility; • Community Greenspace/Involvement opportunities.

6.2.7 The work on the Strategic Green Infrastructure Plan will feed into work also currently underway on the preparation of an Open Spaces Strategy for the Borough.

6.2.8 The New City of Milton Keynes has a well founded reputation for its open spaces which have been provided mainly through development for over 35 years and by a variety of agencies including the former Milton Keynes Development Corporation (MKDC) and the Commission for the New Towns, [both of which are now succeeded by English

Partnerships], the recently established Milton Keynes Partnerships and Milton Keynes Council.

6.2.9 The longer term management and maintenance of open spaces within the City is undertaken by Milton Keynes Council and the Parks Trust and with smaller inputs from Parish and Town Councils. An open space “hierarchy”, including lakes and dry ‘balancing’ areas for flood water management, was established by MKDC and this remains as the principal guide in the provision of new open spaces as development proceeds.

6.2.10 The Milton Keynes Open Spaces Strategy (OSS), when published, will recommend guidance for the future delivery, management and direction of both the existing open space estate and new open spaces and the means to achieve and sustain improvements and benefits for the whole Milton Keynes community. The Strategy seeks to use recent national guidance and best practice but recognises also that Milton Keynes is not typical of British towns and cities and therefore requires particular measures to address the challenges and opportunities ahead. For example there is approximately 9.3 hectares of recreation open space per 1,000 population in Milton Keynes. This is much higher than the 2.4 hectares standard prescribed by the National Playing Fields Association. To guide the implementation of the OSS a series of policy papers will be prepared – including the Green Infrastructure Plan.

Long term boundaries

6.2.11 The Growth Strategy endorses the need for detailed development boundaries to be identified in LDDs and defines some key principles including that they should be long term and enduring.

6.2.12 The MKSM EiP Panel concluded that ‘the case for a green belt is not strong’ (7.31) in MK. The MKSM SRS identified that the expansion of Milton Keynes would have to take account of the need to avoid coalescence with any existing settlements. The MK2031 work did not conclude that there was a strong case for defining a long term boundary to the city, although it did identify some areas around the edge of the city of ‘high landscape and visual quality that should be protected’.

6.2.13 The avoidance of coalescence is a key strategic aim of the MK Growth Strategy and there is support from some areas for a green belt or other form of protection to be drawn tightly around existing settlements - e.g. Aspley Guise and Woburn Sands. Mid Beds DC are promoting a green belt extension through their Core Strategy process but MKC consider that a statutory ‘green belt‘ is not required around the city. We would prefer to use more local designations that would act as green buffers between settlements while allowing a greater variety of

recreational and other uses, accessible to local residents, than is acceptable in green belt but still provides the long term certainty.

6.2.14 The city is already well served by linear parks, mostly along the river valleys that run through and along the edge of the city. These are multifunctional areas that provide flood water storage, recreational facilities, ecological resources and attractive settings for development. Extensions to the linear parks have already been designated in the adopted MK Local Plan and these could form the model for further links into and beyond the new growth areas - not necessarily only along river valleys but also linking existing areas of woodland (e.g. in the Whaddon Chase area; the Brickhill Woods; Marston Vale Community Forest).

6.2.15 It should be left for the LDF process to establish the location and boundaries of this green infrastructure and future development boundaries in the most sensitive areas surrounding the city. The current work on a strategic green infrastructure study will provide the means by which this will be achieved.

Responses from Public Participation:

• In both urban and rural areas, the importance of open space in defining character and contributing to the day-to-day lives of residents was acknowledged. • It was widely accepted that a comprehensive plan for the approach to open space and green infrastructure, needs to be included in the Core Strategy. • In the urban area, the importance of the grid road corridors, as a source of open space for wildlife movement and in terms of defining the character of Milton Keynes, was highlighted. • The linear park structure received support, with its continuation into expansion areas advocated. Its potential role in linking rural areas to the city as well as providing a green buffer to areas such as Bow Brickhill was seen as important to supporting the vitality and attractiveness of the rural areas. It was noted, however, that the Core Strategy should avoid being prescriptive in the location of any such designations, as this was for later documents. • The biodiversity importance of urban green spaces can sometimes outweigh that of greenfield sites. • Responses also highlighted that redevelopment of useful urban green spaces should be resisted as they are important to maintaining the quality of life for residents. It was felt that development of urban open spaces should only occur on unused or marginal areas, where development has the potential to improve the quality of the environment and achieve a net gain in biodiversity. Open areas that make a contribution to day-to-day living or that have help define the character of an area, should be protected. • The identification of permanent defensible boundaries to the

city received some support, with links to the protection of rural identity highlighted. Suggested boundaries included the Ouse to the north of the city and the Bletchley to Bedford railway line to the east.

Options Looked at

• Retain the adopted Local Plan standards for the provision of linear, district and local parks and public open space in all new developments. • Consider new ways of providing and maintaining urban landscape and open space in new developments. • Consider an alternative level of open space and green infrastructure in development that comes about through regeneration within the existing city.

Preferred Policy Directions

MOA 2 • Implement the findings and recommendations of the Strategic Green Infrastructure Study. • Protect and enhance existing green infrastructure. • Improve the management of existing green infrastructure. • Provide for the creation and management of new green infrastructure that functions aesthetically and recreationally, meeting the needs of existing and future residents, achieving a net gain in biodiversity, and improving the management of flood risk.

MOA3 • Provide open space in line with the Council’s high standards and reflecting the characteristics of the growth areas.

MOA4 • Identify green buffers around the city and adjacent settlements, possibly through the extension of the city’s existing linear parks, in order to prevent coalescence and at the same time provide for a range of recreational, flood risk, and aesthetic functions.

Delivery Strategy

• The Council will work with its partner organisations on the MK Green Infrastructure Group (GIG) and with GIGs in neighbouring

authorities to protect, enhance and manage green infrastructure and, as appropriate, to identify important green wedges/corridors/ structurally important green areas including strategic green buffers. • Strategic green infrastructure will be identified in site allocations DPDs and on the Proposals Map. • Standards of provision of open space will be developed in conjunction with Sport England, the NPFA and other service areas within MKC and would be supported through SPD where necessary. • The Development Control process will be used to ensure that standards are implemented.

Risks to Delivery

Risk to Delivery Possible Mitigation Through Spatial Planning • Successful implementation of Include strategic green green infrastructure and the infrastructure and standards for Open Spaces Strategy will open spaces in the spatial require considerable strategy. Require provision as an resources and funding above integral part of development. that which is currently identified in the Tariff.

Targets and Indicators

Indicator Possible Target • Number of new community open spaces provided • % satisfied with local parks BVPI 119 target for 2006/07 is 88% satisfied. Longer term target 95% • Loss of green space Seek net gain in green space designations to development provision overall

6.3 Protect and enhance the Borough’s rural landscape

The Issues

6.3.1 In overall terms, the rural landscape of Milton Keynes borough retains an unspoilt character. The framework of grid roads together with the linear parks reduces the impact of the New Town on the surrounding countryside. However, parts of the urban area are now clearly visible from the rural areas including industrial and commercial buildings on the urban fringes and landmark buildings such as Xscape and the Theatre.

6.3.2 The level of growth planned for the Milton Keynes area has implications for the rural landscape. Although the emerging spatial strategy directs

growth to the south-east and south-west of the city, with further intensification within the urban area itself, the process of change is likely to have an impact on the character of the adjacent rural areas for a variety of reasons including increased urban densities; pressure for development in rural villages and an increasing demand from the urban population for countryside recreation and open space.

6.3.3 The overall spatial strategy for the Borough sets out a settlement hierarchy. Outside Milton Keynes city, development is directed to the key settlements and to a lesser extent to a few selected villages. Elsewhere, within the settlement boundary of villages some limited infilling is acceptable whilst development in the open countryside is restricted to that which is essential for agriculture, forestry, countryside recreation or other development which is wholly appropriate to a rural area and cannot be located within a settlement. Minerals, for example, have to be worked where they arise. The issue is how to balance the need for these forms of development with the protection of locally important landscapes.

6.3.4 As explained in the Landscape Character Technical Background Paper (April 2007), the draft Landscape Character Assessment provides a detailed description of the key features of each of seven landscape areas and provides development and management guidelines which can be used in criteria-based policies. These guidelines can be used when considering planning applications to judge the likely impact of the proposals on the local landscape. This is consistent with the approach in the adopted Local Plan under Policy NE4, where the Landscape Character Areas are also identified. Where development proposals are permitted the landscape character assessment guidance provides advice for appropriate landscape restoration and management.

6.3.5 It is also considered that there are some areas of landscape locally that are of particularly good quality and are valued by local people – additional protection should be given to these areas where justified in order to retain their condition and character.

Responses from Public Participation:

• There were mixed responses in terms of the approach taken to addressing landscape character. Some responses supported the complete protection of all Areas of Attractive Landscape (AAL) others felt that development within the open countryside was acceptable, as long as it was carried out in a sensitive manner. • The importance of a Landscape Character Assessment in informing any decisions made was highlighted as important. • It was noted that the general growth of Milton Keynes has the ability to erode landscape character, with the required infrastructure and other permitted development, such as masts, lowering the quality of the landscape. • The role of surrounding landscape in protecting the character of

rural settlements was highlighted, as was its importance as a valuable and free recreation space for Milton Keynes.

Options Looked at:

• Continue to protect the Ouse Valley and Brickhill Areas of Attractive Landscape. • Consider whether there are other areas of landscape in rural and urban areas that have special qualities and character, and the management of such areas. • Move away from the use of local landscape designations (like the AAL) and rely on general countryside protection policies (such as those in the Local Plan). • Look at a different policy approach to the protection of existing landscape features and the encouragement of appropriate management of the rural and urban landscape. • Continue to protect the AAL from mineral extraction. • Consider an alternative approach to balancing the conservation of the landscape with the need for mineral extraction, including scope for creating new wildlife habitats. • Consider what options there are for the restoration of land after mineral extraction.

Preferred Options

MOA5 Identify those special areas of landscape which, because of their condition, strength of character, local value and Borough-wide importance require additional protection and management.

MOA6 Develop a criteria based policy approach covering the whole of the Borough’s rural landscape.

MOA7 Proposals for minerals extraction and restoration will be judged against the development and management guidelines for the relevant local character area and the likely impact of the proposals on the landscape and habitat creation. Minerals extraction will be resisted in those areas designated as requiring additional protection.

Delivery Strategy

• Further public engagement will be used to supplement the findings of the draft Landscape Character Area in order to identify areas that should benefit from additional protection. • The draft Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) will be used to identify the seven broad landscape character areas covering the rural landscape of the Borough. The particular characteristics of each of those areas that need to be protected, enhanced and managed will be identified. • Criteria-based policies will be developed, (in a future Development Control policies DPD) including management principles for each area based on the Condition and Strength of Character matrix in the LCA, in order to provide guidance and clarity when considering new development. • The detailed Landscape Character Assessment will be progressed as SPD. • The landscape policies will be implemented through the development control process and will be reflected in site allocations DPDs.

Risks to Delivery

Risk to Delivery Possible Mitigation Through Spatial Planning • Further public consultation If a local landscape designation fails to identify landscapes policy cannot be justified, criteria- that are highly valued locally. based policies will have to provide the necessary policy framework.

Targets and Indicators

Indicator Possible Target • Improvements to the strength In a future review of landscape of character and condition of character, improve those the different landscape landscapes judged to be poor character areas. condition and weak in character through the agreement of management plans. • Feedback from quality Successfully maintain all reviews of developments in landscapes currently judged to be sensitive environmental in good condition and strong areas. character.

6.4 Protect and enhance the biodiversity and geological resource of the borough

The Issues

6.4.1 One of the key issues affecting the natural environment locally is how to balance the need to protect its quality and diversity whilst enabling the sustainable growth and development that is planned for the Borough.

6.4.2 Existing biodiversity and geology conservation policies in the adopted Milton Keynes Local Plan are based on a hierarchy of designated sites in line with national guidance in PPS9 (August 2005). In terms of national designations, we have two Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a third partially in the Borough. There is one Local Nature Reserve in the Borough and three categories of local designations:

• 16 Milton Keynes Wildlife Sites (to be renamed Local Wildlife Sites) and Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS) which are designated at a County level and meet a set of agreed criteria; • Wildlife corridors which are important linear pathways containing habitats which encourage the movement of animals and plants; • Local wildlife sites (to be renamed – these are Biological Notification Sites) there are around 200 of these small sites in the Borough and details of them are held by the Bucks and Milton Keynes Environmental Records Centre (BMERC).

6.4.3 As a planned New Town, Milton Keynes has benefited from a structured approach to the provision of green space. It is a valuable element, which makes Milton Keynes so distinctive and different to ‘organic’ towns and cities. The framework of linear and district parks together with other public open space provide key features defining the character of the City’s landscape and creating important wildlife habitats and movement routes linking into wildlife corridors and promoting biodiversity. They also contribute to the overall quality of life

of our residents and by providing opportunities for formal and informal recreation contribute to health and well-being. Standards for providing new parks and open space are set out in the adopted local plan. Work underway on the Strategic Green Infrastructure Plan and the Open Spaces Strategy (see Section 6.2 above) will consider further the theme of wildlife and biodiversity.

6.4.4 The adopted Local Plan already seeks to achieve positive gains for biodiversity and geology on new development (Policy NE3). Measures to enhance biodiversity can also bring positive benefits to mitigate the effects of climate change – elements such as green roofs and climbing plants provide cooling, insulation and microclimate moderation. New woodland can also absorb air pollution and locks up carbon to prevent global warming. Policy D4 in the adopted Local Plan aims to reduce the carbon footprint and this is highlighted in Chapter 5 (Managing Our Impact).

6.4.5 The Bucks and Milton Keynes Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) covers the period 2000–2010 and is currently under review. The aim of the BAP is to conserve the County’s wildlife habitats and associated species as a contribution to conserving the diversity of life on earth. Over the last few years there has been identified a need for a new approach to delivering enhancements for biodiversity. The new approach involves looking at enhancements across the entire landscape – rather than just in designated nature reserves, creating whole areas that can support biodiversity.

6.4.6 In response to this new approach, the Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes Biodiversity Partnership (BMKBP) has identified a number of areas, called ‘biodiversity opportunity areas’ for Buckinghamshire & Milton Keynes which provide a spatially-based tool for identifying where environmental enhancement could or should be delivered in the future and which represent a spatial expression of BAP targets. Six of these ‘biodiversity opportunity areas’ are wholly or partially in Milton Keynes and the aim is for the BAP Priority Habitats within those areas to be targeted for protection, restoration and creation. Some opportunity areas also overlap with areas permitted for mineral extraction and areas of search for future mineral extraction identified in the adopted Minerals Local Plan. The management and delivery of projects contributing to BAP targets in the Opportunity Areas wil be overseen by working groups co-ordinated by the Bucks and MK Biodiversity Partnership.

6.4.7 The Bucks and MK Biodiversity Partnership is also proposing to produce a template biodiversity guidance document for use by local planning authorities and the development industry. The intention is to produce a template document into which individual local authorities can add locally relevant information. This could, in due course be developed further into SPD. It could also strengthen the linkage between minerals planning and habitat creation.

Responses from Public Participation:

• The consultation highlighted the importance of ensuring that the need to protect important habitats and species is integral to the Core Strategy. • Issues that were seen as particularly important in the context of growth and development included the potential fragmentation of habitats, buffering of vulnerable habitats and the creation of appropriate new habitat areas to support biodiversity. • As mentioned above, the grid road corridors were noted as being of particular importance for wildlife movement. It was felt that any development of these areas could be detrimental to the green network that supports Milton Keynes’ biodiversity. • The cross cutting nature of the open space and biodiversity was noted, with links to recreation and human health important. • Also, the need to consider the importance of open spaces in the urban area in supporting local wildlife, was highlighted as being integral to the selection of development sites. • The need for the Core Strategy to consider how the Council meets the requirements placed on it by various Acts, such as the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and most recently by the NERC Act, was also raised.

Options Looked at

• Continue to protect and enhance the hierarchy of nature conservation sites identified in the Local Plan. • Consider how to require the creation of new and enhanced habitat areas in order to reduce the overall impact of development. • Consider how to enable wildlife habitats and species to adapt to the changing climate. • Integrate habitat creation with the need to manage flood risk.

Preferred Options

MOA8 • Protect and enhance the hierarchy of nature conservation sites identified in the Local Plan as well as BAP Priority Habitats and species with the highest level of protection given to nationally and internationally designated sites; • Enhance the biodiversity and geological resource by ensuring that where damage is unavoidable it is minimised through mitigation; • Seek habitat enhancement and creation in development and new green infrastructure to help buffer the impact of climate change on species.

Delivery Strategy

6.4.8 Policies will be delivered by: • joint working with the Bucks and MK Biodiversity Project Officer and the Management Groups (including landowners) that are being formed for the Biodiversity Opportunity Areas within the Borough to identify appropriate protection and enhancement of the biodiversity resource. • development of further biodiversity guidance for planners and developers. Such guidance might eventually be taken forward as SPD. • the development control process.

Risks to delivery

Risk to Delivery Possible Mitigation Through Spatial Planning Lack of funding to support the Seek developer contributions from implementation of the BAP relevant planning applications to projects in the Opportunity Areas. support the BAP work .

Targets and Indicators

Indicator Possible Target • Extent of local nature English Nature’s ‘Accessible reserves per 1000 Natural Greenspace Standards’ population. suggest the need for at least 1 hectare of LNR per 1000 population. • Extent of BAP Priority Seek increase or at very least Habitats. status quo. • Extent of Milton Keynes Seek increase or at very least Wildlife Sites. status quo. • Implementation of biodiversity action plans actions.

7.0 SUPPORTING THE CITY’S ECONOMY AND SUB- REGIONAL ROLE

7.0.1 The continuing role of Milton Keynes in the economy of the South East, and its influence over neighbouring areas in the Eastern and East Midlands regions is supported in the South East of England Development Agency Regional Economic Strategy. In 2001 the resident population of Milton Keynes was about 207,000 people, with some 113,000 of these people economically active. In 2001 there were 115,600 jobs in the Borough – more than the number of economically active residents. The growth of jobs has continued at a higher rate than housing development at around 3,000 jobs per year.

7.0.2 The continued growth of the city is intended to be ‘economy-led’. That is to say that that the Sub Regional Strategy and the draft South East Plan consider that delivering the level of housing growth proposed for Milton Keynes is important to its economy. Both documents intend to monitor the level of housing development in Milton Keynes against an increase in employment numbers, which is proposed to be equivalent to the number of houses proposed.

7.0.3 This means creating one new job for every new house that is built. So between 2006 and 2026 there should be 48,850 new jobs created, in line with the housing figures in the draft South East Plan.

7.0.4 The Economic Vision for the city adopted by the Milton Keynes Economy and Learning Partnership42 is as follows:

‘In 2034 Milton Keynes will be a major free standing City with a diverse high value business base offering well paid employment opportunities to all those living within the City’.

7.05 The Economy and Learning Partnership have produced the Economy and Learning Strategy to support delivery of the Economic Vision.

7.06 Milton Keynes Council and Milton Keynes Partnership, including InvestMK (the team leading inward investment in Milton Keynes), have undertaken an Employment Land Study (completed in June 2007), which investigates in detail the spatial implications of delivering the Economic Vision and supporting the growth of the city economy.

7.07 The sub regional role of Milton Keynes is about more than just providing employment. The council supports Milton Keynes’ ambition

42 The Economy and Learning Partnership was formed in 2004 following the merger of the MK Economic Partnership and the MK Lifelong Learning Partnership. The remit of MKELP is ‘To promote and develop a prosperous community, underpinned by a strong economy with employment and learning opportunities for all’.

to become a major UK city with the wide range of leisure facilities, jobs and choice of housing that this entails43.

7.08 The Council adopted its Cultural Strategy in November 2006 reflecting the importance of culture and cultural development in the growth and development of the city. The strategy’s vision is that by 2012 Milton Keynes will be recognized as a leading European city for creativity, excellence and participation in cultural activities. It provides an over- arching framework for culture aimed at achieving a better quality of life with the capacity for all to share in its benefits and a series of actions for implementation designed to increase and improve the attractiveness of Milton Keynes and promote its standing as a place for people and businesses.

7.1 Create a knowledge based economy

The Issues

7.1.1 The 2007 Employment Land Study confirms that in order to support a knowledge-based economy linked to the Oxford to Cambridge Arc (O2C) then in simple terms we will need to focus on:

• More office and technology space; • Reducing reliance on warehousing and logistics activity; • Promoting the city; • Achieving higher development densities on employment sites; • Strengthening the employment role of Central Milton Keynes and other centres.

7.1.2 With a knowledge-based economic scenario the Employment Land Study estimates that there will need to be a supply of up to about 300 hectares of employment land in the 2006-2026 period.

7.1.3 The majority of this land should be for office and technology uses. Locations for this space would need to be within Central Milton Keynes, on other employment sites in the city, and within dedicated science, technology and business parks.

7.1.4 The towns within the city and in the rural part of the Borough also have a role to play in accommodating new employment development.

7.1.5 Options Considered • Continue to protect all existing employment land in Milton Keynes • Look at redevelopment of employment sites and premises that didn’t score very highly in the Employment Land Study. • Consider how to encourage the growth of businesses on existing sites to limit the need for more employment land

43 Full Council debate: ‘Growth in Milton Keynes’ (Full Council 13 February 2007)

• Consider allocating new employment sites in line with the Employment Land Study. • Look at targeting new employment development only in accessible locations especially CMK and town centres, to reduce car travel. • Look at identifying specific locations to encourage particular employment uses. • Consider being flexible about what industries can use employment land.

Public Participation Responses

• Do not retain employment land if it is no longer fit for purpose or if it can be shown there is no employment demand for it. Could use such sites to deliver the required housing numbers. • Note the objective to move towards a knowledge-based economy. • Continue to provide for large warehouse developments. • Continue to maintain a spread of employment types and do not rely on the continued success of one particular industry. • Need to attract high quality jobs to the area. • Support specialist developments - such as a Technopole. • Accessibility to employment sites is key. • Encourage businesses to grow on their existing sites. • Provide employment sites as part of strategic growth areas located near to the A421 and the M1.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

ESRR 1 Ensure a supply of approximately 300ha of employment land in the period 2006-2026. This should be focused on supplying a trend towards office, science and technology uses, in locations that encourage sustainable movement.

Employment sites identified in an employment land Development Plan Document (for the city and the Key Settlements) will be protected from redevelopment to other uses.

New employment development and redevelopment of sites will occur at higher employment development densities.

Development for manufacturing and warehouse/ logistics uses will be planned for at a lower growth rate than past trends.

Delivery 7.1.6 Prepare an allocations DPD for new employment sites based on the spatial principles in the Core Strategy policy and the types of uses identified in the Employment Land Study.

7.1.7 Work with English Partnerships and Development Control to consider parking, landscaping and other design factors that will increase development densities on employment sites. This should become part of a Development Control policy.

Risks

Risk to Delivery Possible Mitigation Through Spatial Planning • Downturn in national Little control over this at a local economic cycle in terms of level, but can continue to plan knowledge based positively for employment growth. industries. • Failure of office market in Look at other methods of controlling CMK. employment development outside of CMK, if this is a contributor to market failure. • New companies choose not Ensure that there is sufficient supply to relocate to Milton of employment land. Other factors Keynes. such as the housing and labour market also need to be controlled, as described elsewhere in this document. • Planning for higher Integrate new employment areas densities may mean less closer to public transport provision parking provision and and green infrastructure. landscaping, reflecting on character of employment areas.

Targets and Indicators

Indicator Possible Target • Annual growth in jobs. Jobs per year, based on the Sub Regional and draft Regional Spatial Strategy monitoring target. • Annual growth in service Higher trends in service sector jobs, jobs compared to other year on year, and lower trends in sectors (service sector other sectors. industries also require less land). • Loss of employment land to No loss to other uses, without other uses. replacement elsewhere. • Jobs per hectare in new Higher than those identified during development. the course of the Local Plan.

7.2 Create a Learning City and Skilled Workforce Working in Milton Keynes

The Issues

7.2.1 The Economic Vision for Milton Keynes is to have knowledge based economy. However the resident population currently has an ‘average’ skills base. There are a relatively small proportion of highly skilled residents compared to the rest of the South East and also nationally. In addition there are more jobs in Milton Keynes than there are workers that live here. This means that people commute into Milton Keynes to work. A closer look at the figures suggest that a much higher proportion of people commute in to work in Milton Keynes than in neighbouring towns such as Northampton and Luton.

7.2.2 If most new jobs are to be created in the knowledge economy and if Milton Keynes is to retain new and existing employers, the skills of the workforce are crucial. The new University for Milton Keynes in Central Milton Keynes and the expansion of existing higher education institutions will help to create a learning city and support a knowledge based economy. It is vital that local business is closely allied to educational proposals so knowledge based industries continue to create opportunities for the wider community.

7.2.3 Whilst the proposals for the University are taking shape, there needs to be more direction about the spatial requirements of higher education in Milton Keynes. The Economy and Leaning Strategy has a policy to review and update the MK College accommodation strategy, however no formal spatial strategy for this has yet emerged.

7.2.4 Likewise, the Three Year Plan for Adult Education identifies potential to deliver Adult Continuing Education services through schools and libraries, although no overall strategy or spatial requirements have been produced. Clearly in this instance there are issues in trying to deal with growth in the long term through a short-term plan.

7.2.5 There is a proposal to create a ‘Technopole’ for Milton Keynes. InvestMk consider that this would be a principal driver of the knowledge economy for the city linked with the University Centre. The Technopole would supply both business and learning space. The Technopole need not be limited to one specific site; it could in time relate to a number of sites that support technology based operations. Ultimately it could be used to describe the whole City (or sub-region) where technology based sites and services have located. In the first instance though a business plan for an area close to the Open University is currently being investigated as a basis for a Technopole in Milton Keynes.

7.2.6 The delivery of new housing to support the economy will help to increase labour supply. The Local Transport Plan states that about 80% of the resident workforce remain in Milton Keynes to work –

meaning that 20% travel to work elsewhere. However it is the employment offer and relative skills of the workforce that will determine how many of the labour force choose to work in Milton Keynes.

7.2.7 Options Looked at

• Look at identifying a location or locations to combine learning and knowledge-based employment opportunities. • Consider how to support the needs of MK College and activities like Adult Continuing Education.

Public Participation Responses

• The provision of enhanced training and education opportunities is fundamental to the future success of Milton Keynes. • Increase opportunities for the local population to improve their skill levels to help drive the economy forward and ensure that local residents benefit from the opportunities provided by growth.

Preferred Policy Direction

ESRR 2 Support the new university development in Central Milton Keynes, which may include development other than ‘learning’ accommodation.

Require the longer term strategic needs of other higher education establishments and Adult Continuing Education to be established so that any spatial needs can be addressed.

Support the establishment of a Milton Keynes Technopole.

Delivery

• Work with the Economy and Learning Partnership to establish spatial needs of the University and other higher education establishments. • Encourage the Adult Education service to consider its spatial requirements beyond a 3-year period. • Work with InvestMK to establish spatial requirements of a Technopole.

Risks

Risk to Delivery Possible Mitigation Through Spatial Planning • Failure of the University to Facilitate the provision of support attract students. facilities, such as accommodation, if the lack of facilities is a contributory factor.

• Lack of engagement in the Actively seek engagement with planning system from higher these parties, through meetings. and further education establishments. • Failure of the Technopole Limited mitigation through spatial Business Plan. planning.

Targets and Indicators

Indicator Possible Target • Engagement with higher and Accommodation strategy from the further education providers. relevant bodies. • Establishment of a Milton Reflection of spatial needs in an Keynes Technopole. Employment Development Plan document.

7.3 Support Small and Creative Industries

The Issues

7.3.1 Creative industries include architecture, arts and antiques, crafts, design, fashion, software, publishing, performing arts, media, and music, plus associated sectors. That is to say they are all industries whose core focus is the development of original ideas, thoughts and concepts. They are a fast growing sector and are becoming increasingly important to the local economy.

7.3.2 It is recognised that key to encouraging the creative sector is providing suitable and affordable workspace that can house individuals and companies as well as act as a resource for creative industries located elsewhere across Milton Keynes. Go CREATE, a three-year project to develop creative industries in Milton Keynes involving Milton Keynes Council, Arts Council England and Business Link Solutions, has helped to plan for some suitable workspaces, including the refurbishment of the former World Vision building at 599 Avebury Boulevard, Central Milton Keynes.

7.3.3 There may be scope for a stronger relationship between local creative industries and higher education establishments. Local businesses could provide advice and a teaching resource, and education establishments could sponsor facilities on the ground, such as workshop space.

7.3.4 Milton Keynes has always generally lacked affordable accommodation for small businesses. This is largely to do with the nature of the new town, with most accommodation being developed for larger occupiers, as part of large employment areas. Smaller and older centres (both inside the city and in the rural area) already play an important role in providing small and affordable accommodation.

7.3.5 Options Looked at

• None specifically in the Issues and Options discussion paper in relation to creative industries and small businesses. However the issue has arisen more generally out of the question of identifying specific locations to encourage particular employment uses. • The adopted Local Plan has a policy to protect small business space, and encourage the development of small business units as part of the redevelopment of any existing employment land.

Public Participation Responses

• Comments received focused on the need for small and cheap (craft workshop) accommodation.

Preferred Policy Direction

ESRR 3 Continue to protect existing small business units at a Borough level.

Require the provision of new small business units as part of: • Schemes to redevelop any existing employment land; and • Any significant new development, within the city, the Growth Areas, or Key Settlements.

Delivery

• Through Core Strategy policy at a strategic level. • Liaise with the Creative Industries Development Officer (or their successor), the Arts Council England, and Business Link Solutions regarding particular building requirements as part of Development Control negotiations.

Risks

Risk to Delivery Possible Mitigation Through Spatial Planning • Mismatch of the needs of More engagement with those occupiers with the space representing small business provided. interests in the Development Control process. • Pressure on sites/ buildings Some control through from other uses. Development Control decision making.

Targets and Indicators

Indicator Possible Target • Amount of small business None, without replacement floorspace that is redeveloped. elsewhere. • Amount of small business A percentage of schemes over a floorspace provided as part of certain size threshold. new developments

7.4 Enhance Central Milton Keynes as a Major Office, Retail and Cultural Location

The Issues

7.4.1 The Council’s replacement Local Plan adopted in December 2005 sets out the overall framework for the development of Central Milton Keynes (CMK) and remains the most important document for the consideration and determination of planning applications. It incorporates the main elements of the CMK Development Framework produced in 2001, which envisaged the development of CMK including Campbell Park taking place over a 20-30 year period.

7.4.2 The redevelopment of CMK Station and the introduction of high-speed trains on the West Coast mainline (bringing central London to within 35 minutes of CMK) have created new opportunities for CMK and the city to capitalise on its location and accessibility and develop as a regional centre. However, as CMK grows and traffic congestion increases, in order to maintain and improve the accessibility and attraction of CMK for retailers and businesses, and the environment and quality of life for the growing residential population of CMK, it will be necessary to invest in public transport, cycling, pedestrian and highway schemes to provide a demand management process and reduce carbon emissions into the environement. Additionally, multi-storey car parks to replace those parking spaces, which are lost as existing surface level car parks are developed, will also be needed. The contribution of CMK’s high quality public realm and features such as its landscaping to the attraction of the city centre should not be ignored.

7.4.3 CMK has great potential to accommodate additional hotel, office, cultural and other forms of development and the Employment Land Study suggested measures how this might be achieved. The support of English Partnerships will be required if office development is to focus on Central Milton Keynes and not in out-of-centre business locations It is important that a balance is struck between increasing development rates in the city centre and not flooding the market with development.

7.4.4 CMK is the main retail, leisure and employment centre for Milton Keynes and an important location for the image of the city, nationally and internationally. In an increasingly globalised world perceptions of Central Milton Keynes by external investors need to change if Milton Keynes is to compete successfully with other centres and attract new

inward investment. An important issue to be resolved through the Council’s forthcoming Retail Capacity Study is how much additional retail floorspace in Milton Keynes is needed in the next 5-10 years over.

7.4.5 The Council considers that as part of the growth process, its major cultural attractions in CMK, such as the Theatre and the Gallery, should be complemented and developments should include expansion of both the Theatre’s facilities, to include a multi-use area, and of the Gallery to provide greater opportunities for artists and visitors44.

7.4.6 Options Looked at

• Consider the best way of forecasting and reviewing retail capacity within the Borough over the period of the Core Strategy. • Look at focusing new shopping development on Central Milton Keynes and local centres in new estates up to the year 2016. • Consider whether there should be a change of focus from Central Milton Keynes to other centres. • Consider if there is a need to change the main objectives for development within Central Milton Keynes. • Look at identifying Milton Keynes cultural assets and how we can capitalise on them. • Consider how the Core Strategy can support the role of tourism.

Public Participation Responses

• Support for Central Milton Keynes developing as a regional centre and the main retail, leisure and office focus of the city. • Encourage the diversification of Central Milton Keynes offer, and support the establishment of a critical mass of activity to help improve the centre as a visitor destination

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

ESRR 4

Base future decisions on retail capacity in Central Milton Keynes and elsewhere on the findings of the Retail Study that is currently being produced.

Increase the focus on Central Milton Keynes as an office location by making it the primary location for schemes over 1,000m2.

Support the expansion of major cultural facilities that already exist in Central Milton Keynes.

44 Full Council debate: ‘Growth in Milton Keynes’ (Full Council 13 February 2007)

Support for Central Milton Keynes developing as a regional centre and the main retail, office and cultural focus of the city.

Delivery

• Through the Core Strategy at a strategic level. • Through the Development Control process. • Working with key stakeholders to raise the profile of CMK and the City as a great place to live and work

Risk to Delivery Possible Mitigation Through Spatial Planning Other locations prove more The city’s strengths such as good attractive for inward investment location and communications, than CMK ability to expand and accessibility to large numbers of people mean MK retains its competitive edge over other locations.

Lack of resources and With improvements in its public investment for the maintenance transport offer and creation of new and upkeep of the public realm high quality public spaces etc, the and provision of transport attraction of CMK as a regional infrastructure and facilities lead centre overcomes difficulties such to CMK being an increasingly as increasing inaccessibility of unattractive environment, with CMK due to traffic congestion, consequences for jobs and difficulty in parking and any investment. deterioration of the public realm.

Targets and Indicators

• Amount of inward investment secured • Number of jobs created • Amount of floorspace constructed • Public opinion surveys on satisfaction of resident and shoppers with CMK • Number of visitors to CMK

7.5 Create New Sporting Facilities of National Significance

The Issues

7.5.1 Milton Keynes is already the home of the National Badminton Centre and the National Hockey stadium. The stadium is currently the temporary home of the MK Dons, who will be relocating to a new stadium at Denbigh North in mid 2007. If sufficient public and private finance is available, the growth of the city, its flexibility to accommodate

new development, and the Olympic games in London in 2012 may provide opportunities to attract new sporting facilities over the plan period.

7.5.2 The Council supports the establishment of a new national cricketing venue of international quality and centre of excellence/ academy45 and is currently considering a planning application for a 50-metre swimming pool at Wolverton.

7.5.3 Open space (much of which is managed in the city by the Milton Keynes Parks Trust) has a vital role to play in the urban fabric of Milton Keynes and is an important resource for leisure, relaxation and health. It is also a key feature for the ecology and bio-diversity of the Borough. The Council is currently preparing an Open Space Strategy to manage this resource. As the city develops there will be a need to provide additional local facilities and areas of open space as well as maintaining the quality and fabric of existing public spaces.

Options Looked at

• Focus for major sporting facilities should be at the most sustainable locations.

Public Participation Responses

• Public responses regarding the approach to sporting facilities were limited. However, the vital role of planning system and the Core Strategy in providing and promoting sport and active recreation was acknowledged.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTIONS

ESRR5

Support for the provision of major sporting facilities at the most sustainable locations Improve public access to sport and recreation.

Delivery • Through the Development Control process • Partnership working with health agencies, transport providers and public and private agencies in sport and recreation

Risks • Can the Council identify parties interested in providing new sports facilities in Milton Keynes?

45 Full Council debate: ‘Growth in Milton Keynes’ (Full Council 13 February 2007)

• Does the Council have sufficient resources to provide and operate major new sporting facilities within Milton Keynes?

Targets and Indicators

• Establish a base line and monitor if new sporting facilities are developed in Milton Keynes over a particular time period.

8.0 SERVING EXISTING COMMUNITIES

8.1 Increase access to services locally The Issues

8.1.1 Access to services such as health, education, shops etc is particularly important to people’s quality of life. Not everyone has access to a car. Spatial planning has an important role to play in designing sustainable communities, which maximise people’s opportunity to access the services they need for their day-to-day living.

8.1.2 In the rural part of the Borough the influence of the major towns of Milton Keynes, Bedford and Northampton means that many rural inhabitants are dependent on the urban areas for work and facilities. This, together with the relatively small size of some of the rural villages can also make it more difficult to provide access to all of the important services. The Milton Keynes Local Area Agreement (LAA) produced in 2007 sets out agreed priorities between the Government, the Council, and its partners for the local area, it notes that the countryside surrounding the city includes a number of “economically fragile market towns”. A possible future priority for a refresh of the LAA has been identified as one of increasing the economic vitality of market towns such as Newport Pagnell, Olney and Woburn Sands.

8.1.3 The Development Strategy for the rural part of the Borough in the adopted Local Plan is based on the principle of concentrated, rather than dispersed, growth. Concentrating new development on the key settlements of Newport Pagnell, Olney and Woburn Sands could enhance the range of economic and social facilities they are able to offer.

Options Looked at • Co-location of services to maximise accessibility of services to the public

Public Participation Responses:

• There were no responses that suggested a fundamental change in the way that community facilities are delivered or would be needed. • Support for the existing principle of locating all development within 500 metres of a local centre- although it was questioned whether this approach enables the development of viable centres, given their relatively small size? • There were a number of differing views as to how rural settlements should be treated. Some respondents proposed development sites to support existing rural facilities and provide affordable housing. It was also noted that the continuation of rural services was integral to

protecting the character of settlements where local shops and facilities are often key elements of a settlements history. • However, the alternative view was also expressed that any development in rural centres would put increased pressure on local facilities and infrastructure, rendering it unviable. There was also concern that new development would be out of keeping with the existing character of rural areas. It was felt that if rural development were to occur, there would be a need to control style and density, as well as ensuring that limited development would not lead to further ‘sprawl’ in the future.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

SEC1 Press for the inclusion of a new priority when the LAA is refreshed, to increase the economic vitality of market towns.

A policy will be developed in conjunction with the MKCVO and other service providers (for example parish council, libraries, health, police and the voluntary sector) to use co-location to safeguard and improve the provision of rural services in rural towns and villages.

Maintain policies that seek to protect existing community facilities, village’s shops, pubs and post offices.

Delivery Strategy • Work with the MKCVO and other service providers including the co- location working group within MKC to identify and implement opportunities for co-location of services within rural centres. • Use the development control process to implement policies.

Risks to delivery • Funding / resources. Decisions taken at a national level (e.g. closure of around 2500 post offices by 2009 announced by the Government in May 2007 actions of larger breweries to close rural pubs).

Indicators • Establish a base line on the number of pubs, shops etc in villages and rural areas and monitor changes in their number.

8.2 Increase housing delivery for market homes, affordable housing, and housing for minority and ethnic groups.

The Issues 8.2.1 Although MKC and MKP are seeking to encourage the delivery and provision of new housing development, neither organisation is immune from national trends such as a downturn in the national economy. Although more affordable housing is provided in Milton Keynes than anywhere else in the South–East region, the increasing price of property, particularly for first time buyers, means more and more people are priced out of the housing market and are dependent upon the provision of affordable housing.

8.2.2 As housing has got more expensive and rental investor market has grown, there has been a rise in the number of houses in multiple occupation. (HiMO) These are dwellings shared by more than one household. These dwellings are a valuable source of providing accommodation to those on lower incomes. However, there are concerns that in some areas there is an over-concentration of these properties, and that this detrimentally affects the established character of residential areas. Many HiMOs operate without the relevant permissions needed. Given the cost of housing, it is likely that there will be a continued demand for HiMOs to meet housing needs. Positively planning for this type of accommodation in new developments could help reduce some of the problems that these dwellings sometimes generate, e.g. lack of refuse storage, increased parking pressure and lack of routine maintenance. Including HiMOs, 12% of all properties within the Borough are privately rented. Some of these properties are managed well some are not. With continued rises in property prices outstripping growth in incomes and substantial investor appetite still existing, the growth of this sector is likely to continue. There is also potential to positively plan for this type of accommodation so that it could be more attractive to institutional investors, bringing with it suitable design of properties and proper levels of management.

8.2.3 Infill development on vacant and derelict land within settlements can make a valuable contribution to increasing the supply of new dwellings as well as reducing the need to develop Greenfield sites. The demand for housing and the type of housing required in Milton Keynes will change over time with the changing demographic profile of the population but as the existing stock of public and private housing ages there will be an increasing need to renovate it to bring it up to Decent Homes standard.

Options Looked at

• Council’s housing needs study has investigated the demand and need for different housing types and tenures across the population.

Public Participation Responses:

• Mixed views if development was provided on greenfield sites

• Support for more affordable housing. • It was widely accepted by respondents that the total number of homes to be delivered in Milton Keynes would be determined by the outcome of the South East Plan Examination in Public.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

SEC2 High quality well designed housing to meet identified targets for Milton Keynes set out in the South East Plan.

Housing that helps meet affordable and special needs, and that addresses the needs of ethnic minority groups.

Identification of appropriate sites for gypsies and travellers and show people.

Market housing provided reflects the demand profile of households.

Work with the Council’s Housing, Environmental Health, Street Care and Safer Communities Unit and other organisations to positively plan for HiMOs and rented housing.

Delivery strategy • The Council and its partners have created new administrative structure such as the Joint Housing Delivery team (JHDT) to facilitate the delivery of new housing.

Risks to delivery • National economic trends. • Funding and resources available for the provision of affordable and special needs housing • Delays in the servicing of land for new housing.

Targets and Indicators • Number of dwellings constructed • Type of dwellings constructed

8.3 Enhance existing areas where there are regeneration opportunities that are supported by local people

The Issues 8.3.1 Urban Regeneration46 is a new challenge facing a new town such as MK as the vast majority of the City has been completed in the last 40

46 Defined as a comprehensive and integrated vision and action which leads to the resolution of urban problems and which seeks to bring about a lasting improvement in the economic, physical, social and environmental condition of an area that has been subject to change.

years. The Council is committed to the regeneration of the more deprived areas of Milton Keynes identified in the MK social atlas, much of which lies broadly along the line of the V7 corridor, but agrees that it must be driven by local residents, and not imposed from above47. Community consultation and engagement (including balloting local residents where any regeneration schemes come forward from the community in appropriate cases) will be central to this process, with consensus building on agreed priorities at a city-wide and local level of paramount importance.

8.3.2 The need to retain and enhance the economic viability of market towns and the existing stock of green infrastructure has already been acknowledged in the ‘managing our assets’ section. Within the older established communities such as Wolverton and Bletchley, which are currently a focus for regeneration activity, there are additional opportunities to revitalise these areas by re-using redundant or underutilised land. The Council may prepare development frameworks in line with agreed priorities to encourage development within these areas. In some parts of the Borough regeneration may involve re-using limited areas of open space subject to community agreement.

Options Looked at • The opportunities presented by the growth of the city for the regeneration of the existing urban area

Public Participation Responses:

• Growth of the city should contribute to the regeneration of the existing urban areas. • Sites in existing towns are important in supporting sustainable communities and that vacant and under utilised employment sites should be seen as suitable locations for housing growth. By providing for niche markets that cannot be effectively accommodated in CMK (due to cost, unit size etc.), retail could aid the regeneration effort in Bletchley and Wolverton. • Need to protect the integrity and liveability of urban areas was seen as important, loss of green spaces on inner city estates and overdevelopment of sites should be avoided. • Community consultation should be integral to all development in the existing urban area to ensure existing communities are involved in ‘managing’ regeneration at a local level. • The Council needs a long-term co-ordinated approach to regeneration across Milton Keynes, establishing priorities and helping to provide a framework for wider investment and other benefits

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

47 Taken from the ‘Growth in Milton Keynes’ decision by Full Council 13 February 2007

SEC3 Undertake regeneration where there is support from the Community.

Delivery mechanism • Partnership working by MKC and MKP with the public and other key stakeholders to identify and implement opportunities for regeneration. • Prepare development frameworks in line with agreed priorities to encourage development. • MKC and key stakeholders to adopt an agreed strategy on regeneration within the Borough.

Risks to delivery • Funding/resources, lack of an agreed strategy and consensus on regeneration priorities. Targets and Indicators

These could include the following: • Number of jobs created • Number of dwellings/ amount of floorspace constructed • Amount of land reclaimed • Numbers of trees and shrubs planted • Amount of inward investment secured

8.4 Reduce health inequalities and deprivation in the worst ranked areas

The Issues

8.4.1 Despite the economic success and general affluence of Milton Keynes as a whole, significant numbers of Milton Keynes’ residents rely on benefits, have a lower standard of education and live in an environment with higher crime and less opportunity than nationally. Although health has improved over the past 70 years inequalities in health have risen. The highest death rates and lowest life expectancy are to be found in those parts of Milton Keynes that are the most deprived, as classified by the Government’s Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD48.) 8.4.2 The Council is committed to reducing inequalities and to increasing social inclusion49. One of its ten priorities is to 'promote equality and social inclusion and improve health'. The Council’s focus will be on working within the 13 lower Super Output Areas (SOA) identified by the Government’s Office of National Statistics as the most deprived parts of

48 Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004 49 Taken from the Local Area Agreement (January 2007)

the Borough. These areas are already the focus of a three-year Area Programme funded by SEEDA (£1.7m) concentrating on four key themes: Community capacity building; skills development and access to employment; enterprise development and corporate social responsibility. A locality-based programme of intervention is also being piloted in two areas within Milton Keynes to tackle the multiple problems experienced by some of those most in need.

Options Looked at • Reducing health inequalities and deprivation as and when development opportunities arise. • Support for Area Agreements delivered through the SIHI Strategy and Action Plan

Public Participation Responses:

• It was recognised that there are areas in Milton Keynes where work needs to be done to support the local population, particularly in terms of affordable housing, access to key facilities and social cohesion. • The link between deprivation and health was acknowledged. It was felt important that within any development proposals access to quality open space and leisure facilities should be maintained.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

SEC4 Support for the measures contained within the Milton Keynes Social Inclusion and Health Inequalities Strategy and Action Plan 2006-2009 and successor documents.

Delivery strategy

8.4.3 Reducing health inequalities and deprivation requires co-ordinated and joined up actions across a broad front by a wide variety of key stakeholders. This work covers not just health and social care provision, but all services that impact on the determinants of health. People should be empowered to manage their own health more effectively. Alongside maximising people’s opportunity to access the services they need for their day-to-day living referred to earlier, spatial planning has a key role to play in reducing health inequalities and deprivation by: - • Providing and creating safe, sustainable and attractive environments. • Encouraging the provision of affordable housing

• Working with local residents to design out opportunities for crime and anti-social behavior Risks to delivery • Funding/resources, awareness and ignorance of problems, lack of co-ordination and joined up actions by key stakeholders over a sustained period of time. Targets and Indicators

Indicator Possible Target • Health Inequalities Increased life expectancy and reduced death rates (including infant mortality) • Indicators of Multiple Indicators of multiple deprivation Deprivation set out in the Council’s Social Atlas.

8.5 Ensure balanced growth of the city and existing areas and pressures.

8.5.1 To avoid a two speed city there needs to be a balance between the growth of new housing areas (largely on greenfield sites) and the regeneration of older parts of the city. The widespread availability of easy to develop Greenfield sites can cause problems in redeveloping and regenerating older areas. To maintain a supply of housing land throughout the plan period and to achieve an orderly and logical sequence of development well related to existing development and the provision of infrastructure and facilities, it may be necessary to phase the development of land through planning conditions and /or legal agreements.

8.5.2 Additionally, MKC and its partners may need to be more interventionist in the future in local land and property markets if sites need to be assembled to facilitate regeneration/redevelopment or in the provision of essential infrastructure and facilities for the growth of the city. Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) powers will be used where necessary (although normally this will be only be undertaken once all other avenues have been exhausted).

8.5.3 Easy access to employment sites and employment opportunities is particularly important for those people living in areas in need of regeneration. Issues around the provision, location and timing of additional retail floorspace in Milton Keynes have been referred to in the section ‘Supporting the city’s economy and sub-regional role’.

Options Looked at • Scope for existing communities to accommodate new development

Public Participation Responses

• There was recognition that development in the existing urban area is important, but also that Greenfield development would be inevitable due to the nature of the city.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

SEC5 A balance needs to be achieved between the peripheral growth of the city and the development of the existing areas to avoid a two–speed city to achieve an orderly and logical sequence of development well related to existing development and the provision of infrastructure.

Delivery mechanism • Partnership working by MKC and MKP with the public and other key stakeholders

Risks to delivery • Funding/resources.

Targets and Indicators • Monitoring to see the proportion of new development, which occurs on brownfield sites as opposed to Greenfield sites.

8.6 Balance growth of the city with the delivery of key infrastructure.

The Issues

8.6.1 Ensuring that the right infrastructure is delivered in the right place at the right time is one of the most significant challenges facing Government, the Council and the Milton Keynes Partnerships. The development of the city is inevitably a long term and complex process and the co- ordination and delivery of necessary infrastructure alongside (and often in advance) of new development is crucial, if a high standard and quality of development is to be achieved. Good communication, co- ordination and partnership working between all key stakeholders will be essential, if problems are to be avoided. The MK Business Plan will play an integral role in the delivery of the Core Strategy as it identifies key projects that underpin the strategy, when they need to take place and which body is responsible for action. The recent signing of the Milton Keynes tariff is expected to facilitate development as private sector contributions of over £300 million will help fund the provision of essential infrastructure. As an identified growth point for the UK, the Council will continue to lobby the Government for adequate ring-fenced resources to ensure the delivery of necessary infrastructure within the city.

8.6.2 The Council’s future development strategy needs to be flexible enough to allow for some facilities and infrastructure to be redeveloped or altered in order to cater for changing needs over the plan period. New models of provision by service providers with bigger and fewer facilities could not only undermine the existing pattern of service provision within the Borough but also result in people having to travel further to access those facilities.

8.6.3 The Council of Faiths have specifically raised the issue of the emerging needs of the Black and Minority Ethnic community, and in particular, those of the faith communities. They identify a requirement for land that faith groups can utilise to build places of worship, and the need to use funds identified for community facilities to support the establishment of places of worship.

Options looked at • Improvements to the existing city going hand in hand with growth.

Public Participation Responses

• The provision of infrastructure was perceived as being essential if the growth plans for Milton Keynes contained within the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) and the MK and South Midlands Sub- Regional Strategy (SRS) were to be achieved. • Specifically identify the needs of faith communities.

Preferred Policy Direction

SEC6

Manage the growth of the city so that the provision of infrastructure and facilities are delivered in the right place at the right time, including the needs of faith communities.

Delivery mechanism

• Partnership working by MKC and MKP and other key stakeholders, specifically the Council of Faiths in terms of faith community needs. Additionally, the Council and its partners have created new administrative structures and produced a Business Plan to facilitate the delivery of new development and infrastructure.

Risks to delivery • Funding and resources.

Targets and Indicators

• Details of the infrastructure and facilities required for the growth of the City and the timing of its provision are set out in the MK Business Plan for the period up to 2011. Subject to future

arrangements it is anticipated that similar Business Plans will be prepared, at regular intervals, setting out arrangements for the future delivery of infrastructure up to the year 2026.

9.0 GROWING NEW COMMUNITIES

9.0.1 The ‘Determining our Growth’ section sets out a preferred option for the delivery of new development and highlights broad locations where it is anticipated that it will go. It also identifies some of the key aims for the population that growth should aspire to attain. The amount of development anticipated in association with the growth of Milton Keynes means that there will be significant areas of new communities. These will be both within the existing fabric of the city and through urban extensions.

9.0.2 The number of dwellings within the urban extensions, the employment space that is needed to match the jobs required and the other necessary social infrastructure provides the opportunity for choices about the form that new areas should take. The areas could range from what might essentially be seen as district neighbourhoods through to many smaller neighbourhoods. There are also choices about the extent to which they are self sufficient in terms of environmental, economic and social infrastructure and their relationship with, and connections to the rest of Milton Keynes and adjoining settlements.

9.0.3 The choices on the type of development solution can be assessed in relation to the location of the proposed development relative to the rest of Milton Keynes and the surrounding settlements. The engagement as part of the evidence base and the responses of public consultation show some key features stand out as being desirable for these new communities to incorporate. These will be critical to ensuring success in their form and function, whatever their location.

9.0.4 Part A of the core strategy identifies key things that a truly successful growing city must have. Overall people within the new communities should have the opportunity of enhanced life prospects, without having an overall detrimental impact on the environment.

Preferred Policy Direction

NC1 - Key Criteria for New Communities:

The choice of locations set out by the spatial strategy and the acceptability of new developments should be guided by criteria based policy that highlights some of the essentials that new communities associated with the growth of Milton Keynes should do, including the ability to:

Create an environment that enhances the quality of life for its occupants, both initially and into the future;

Have high design quality, with the highest standard of environmental performance and best practice to create a

100

townscape with a strong identity and sense of place, rich, varied and sympathetic to its environment;

Contain a mix of dwelling sizes, types and tenures to provide housing choice; integrated within a variety and a balanced mix of land uses with accessibility to sufficient social infrastructure and provision of services such as schools, commercial and community facilities and smaller scale ‘good neighbour’ employment opportunities;

Create strong links with the existing settlement. Transport facilities within and linking with surrounding areas and the rest of the city will reduce reliance on car based transport;

The most sustainable forms of movement such as safe and convenient walking and cycling routes will be promoted; there will be particular emphasis on good public transport;

Occur within high quality landscaping within a network of open space, creating an attractive and safe environment in which to live and work, that effectively links in with existing open space assets, and

On the edges of the city create a clear and sympathetic green buffer (as set out in the managing our assets section.)

9.1 Ensure balanced Growth of the city

The Issues

9.1.1 The amount of development that has to be achieved by 2026 means that many developments on the edges of the settlement will have to be built at the same time as development within the settlement. This split of infill and urban extensions is considered to be an appropriate balance. It takes into account the opportunities that exist in the existing settlement. It ensures that land within the existing urban area could be better used and limits the need for additional land take of the countryside surrounding Milton Keynes.

9.1.2 The role and function of the city will change with its growth to reflect its status as one of the larger settlements in England. This will mean changes to the existing fabric of the city.

9.1.3 With the development of new communities on the edge of the city there will have to be a balancing act to ensure they have enough facilities for those living and working but should not be detrimental to the role of existing district and neighbourhood centres. There may be opportunities to enhance currently poorer performing centres on the back of new growth. The new communities also will have to have their

101

own sense of place and identity, but must also be integrated into and regarded as part of Milton Keynes. Existing settlements around the edge of Milton Keynes expressed a strong desire to avoid coalescence with the new development proposed.

Responses from Public Participation:

• Development to the east of the M1 motorway has not been appropriately considered. Development should not occur to the south east and south west of the city. • More development should occur on brownfield sites, or within the existing city boundary. • Avoid coalescence with existing settlements on the edge of Milton Keynes

Options considered

9.1.4 As detailed in section 4, the MK Growth Strategy assessed options for growth outside of the city, to the south, south-west, south-east and also the east across the motorway. The choice of the two areas allows sufficient critical mass of population for a wide range of facilities to be provided at a local level. It also takes advantage of the proximity of the east-west rail line to provide more sustainable transport options for the population whilst adding to the business case for re-instatement of the line to the west of Milton Keynes and also on from Bedford to Cambridge.

9.1.5 The delivery targets in the South East Plan are challenging. There will be long lead in times associated with the larger development sites that will be developed. It is therefore unlikely that there will be any phasing designed to halt the release of greenfield sites to encourage the re-use of brownfield land. There is however likely to be phasing on individual sites related to their development in a logical order and consistent with the necessary amount of physical and social infrastructure being in place. Given the amount of development outside the existing settlement, the Council and partner agencies will have to work a lot harder to ensure that new investment occurs in areas that need regeneration.

9.1.6 The growth of the city towards existing settlements such as Woburn Sands, Aspley Guise and Newton Longville is likely to have a change on their physical, social and economic characteristics. Coalescence with Milton Keynes can physically be prevented by a green buffer around these settlements. However, there is an opportunity for these settlements to gain more social infrastructure and facilities as a result of adjacent development, or conversely the threat that such facilities may be lost, due to its provision in new areas. The role of these areas in relation to the expansion of Milton Keynes will need further consideration.

102

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

NC2 Seek to prevent coalescence with existing settlements of the expansion of Milton Keynes.

Work with adjoining authorities to ensure that the future role that existing settlements will have in relation to growing communities is adequately planned for.

Delivery Strategy.

9.1.7 The Core Strategy sets out the broad locations for development of the major urban extensions and the amount of housing that should be delivered within the existing settlement. Area Action Plans will provide further detail on the form of development that it is expected the expansion areas, and large sites within the existing urban area will take.

9.1.8 Working in association with existing communities and also being informed by evidence such as landscape characteristics, the Core Strategy sets out areas for ‘green wedges’ or a similar policy tool to prevent the coalescence of existing settlements with expansion areas, in Chapter 6.

9.1.9 Depending on the outcome of the SE Plan Examination in Public, it is anticipated that the Council will work with adjoining authorities that have to accommodate growth to work on a Joint DPD to cover the urban extensions and their relationship with existing settlements.

Risk

9.1.10 A substantial amount of work has been undertaken to identify the opportunities and constraints associated with growth and the preferred option for growth. There may be issues that arise as more detailed technical work is undertaken in bringing forward the sites for development. However, it is not considered that these would be of the magnitude to be ‘show stoppers’. The main risk at the moment is the uncertainty provided by the South East Plan not yet being at a position which gives a strong policy direction on the amount of dwellings required, their broad location and the number within each local planning authority area. This limits the extent to which adjoining local authorities are willing to work with MK Council to plan for the additional development required.

Targets and Indicators

9.1.11 The main target will be the extent to which housing delivery is consistent with the numbers set out in the South East Plan.

103

9.2 Increase housing delivery for market homes, affordable housing and housing for minority and ethnic groups.

The Issues

9.2.1 As described above, Milton Keynes will have to provide many more dwellings. However, according the Council’s latest Local Housing Assessment, the supply of housing, both market and affordable, including specialist housing such as supported accommodation is less than required to meet identified demand and need. Lack of supply is a contributory factor in increasing prices. For many people, the cost of housing reduces their ability to meet their housing needs through market housing. This, together with the lack of affordable housing, can push people into housing that is inappropriate for their needs. The impact of this can range from minor inconvenience through to significant adverse impacts on quality of life and future life chances.

9.2.2 Although the South East Plan will set the targets for the amount of housing that has to be delivered in Milton Keynes and the surrounding areas to 2026, a Strategic Housing Market Assessment will provide detail on the types of housing required, for example for private dwellings the size of properties needed, and for affordable or special needs housing, the amount and mix. The Council’s Housing Strategy sets out the Council’s priorities with regards to housing over a three year period and is updated periodically.

9.2.3 Although the Strategic Housing Market Assessment will provide evidence of the need and demand for market housing, Government guidance is unclear on the extent to which Councils will be able to influence the type and size of these dwellings. However, there will be a role for planning documents to identify the amount and tenure of affordable housing and policies to support specialist housing, for example older people’s or wheelchair access housing. The Council’s Housing Assessment showed a significant need of 1243 affordable dwellings per annum. This represents significantly more dwellings than the current Local Plan’s policy position of 30% new dwellings needing to be affordable, which equates to approximately 580 affordable dwellings each year. The Council will have to review the extent to which the 30% should be maintained in the future, or rises.

9.2.4 The Housing Assessment identified that many people were unlikely to want to live in an apartment and that in order to create sustainable communities there is a need for small houses as well as apartments. Whilst perhaps not suitable in very high density locations such as town centres, an approach might be to provide more of the one and two bedroom properties in non-town centre locations as houses. The provision of balconies, high quality communal private open space, or high quality public open space may also increase the acceptability of apartment living outside more central locations. There is also likely to

104

be a requirement for larger dwellings to accommodate the ethnic groups characterised by extended families.

9.2.5 New housing development could assist in bringing more homes up to ‘Decent Homes’ standard. For instance, developer contributions to offset the potential adverse environmental impacts of new dwellings might be able to assist in some of the standards .e.g. carbon-offset, providing energy efficiency measures. Opportunities might also exist in areas that support the replacement of non-decent stock with new housing.

Responses from Public Participation:

• There needs to be a whole range of housing to meet needs including sufficient market housing to meet demand and some small scale provision in rural areas. • There should be flexibility in the document to allow the findings of the SE Plan to be incorporated. • Housing growth must be done in tandem with housing renewal. • Brownfield land for housing supported. • Lower/higher densities needed. • There is an affordable housing need at prices that are affordable. • There needs to be flexibility on affordable housing tenure to ensure viability. • Need to engage with private rented sector and plan for HIMOs. • Move more towards developing houses rather than flats. • The market, not planning authorities should shape the type and size of housing built • Older people’s housing needs to be planned for. • The logic of increasing housing supply to reduce prices is flawed.

Options considered • Amending policies in light of detailed evidence of the demands and needs for different housing types and tenures across the population. • To amend policies with regards to the amount of affordable housing sought. • To provide more detail on the amount of special needs housing required and include policies that provide opportunities within housing developments for these needs to be met, e.g. a certain percentage of the properties being built to wheelchair standard. • To be more specific on dwelling types to be sought within specific areas, e.g. encourage smaller dwellings within sub-urban areas to be provided as houses, rather than apartments. • Plan for HiMOs and rented accommodation within new developments. • The preferred policy here repeats that set out in the previous chapter because the issues apply to both existing and new communities.

Preferred Policy Direction

105

NC3 – Delivery of Housing • High quality housing to meet identified targets for Milton Keynes set out in the South East Plan. • Housing that helps to meet affordable and special needs, and that addresses the needs of ethnic minority groups. • Identification of appropriate sites for gypsies and travellers. • Market housing provided reflects the demand profile of households. • Work with the Council’s Housing, Environmental Health, Street Care and Safer Communities Unit and other organisations to positively plan for HiMOs and rented housing.

Delivery Strategy

• Deliver the amount of housing needed within the South East Plan • Set the broad framework to address affordable and special needs housing in new developments. • Produce a DPD that sets out the proportion of affordable dwellings required as part of new housing developments and other special needs. Contain a criteria policy within a Development Control DPD for travellers and gypsy sites and identify appropriate sites for travellers and gypsy sites within Area Action Plans. • Set out a criteria policy within a Development Control DPD for HiMOs.

Risk

9.2.6 Of concern is the development industry’s appetite to supply the amount of housing needed on an annual basis and its capacity to deliver it. The highest annual rates of housing delivery have only been achieved in Milton Keynes when a significant proportion of housing has been built by the Development Corporation, primarily for subsidised tenures. It is unlikely that the amount of subsidised housing will be as high in the future, partly due to need and also lack of financial support from central government.

9.2.7 There is uncertainty of the extent to which the Council can make the market housing provided better meet needs, if it is shown to be diverging from that shown to be required in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment.

9.2.8 The lack of subsidy to provide affordable housing, either by the state or the developer/landowner, when combined with all the other planning obligations could be a concern if the amount of affordable housing needed continues to rise. This could restrict the ability to meet affordable housing needs through the new communities created.

106

9.2.9 There is a risk that the level of acceptable concentration of HiMOs is set too low, limiting the supply of this type of housing and therefore limiting people’s housing options.

9.2.10 The extent to which new communities bring existing homes up to Decent Homes standards could be limited by financial obligations being spent on other items and the replacement of existing dwellings being rejected by communities.

Targets and Indicators • The main target will be the extent to which housing delivery is consistent with the numbers set out in the South East Plan. • The amount type and tenure of housing built on an annual basis will be set out in the Annual Monitoring Report.

9.3 Create flexible and supportive living space

9.3.1 The ability for a community and development to adapt over time to changing circumstances is a key feature that ensures its long term sustainability. Without it, areas can suffer from severe decline which can eventually lead for the need for wholesale renewal. This can be a very resource intense process, both in terms of the measures associated with reducing the effects of decline, during the decline process and possibly eventually the wholesale renewal. The need for flexibility and ability to for a development to change relates not only to individual buildings, but also the pattern of development that occurs and the land uses within areas.

9.3.2 In terms of ability for change, there are ways in which buildings can be designed to accommodate change more easily from the outset. Standards such as Lifetime Homes promoted by the Joseph Rowntree Trust set out specifications for residential properties that allow easy adaptation for dwellings to be suited to occupiers needs throughout their lifetime. Larger terrace properties also have endured particularly well through the ability of occupiers to join or split buildings horizontally or vertically over time. Development at Tattenhoe Park is further testing the delivery of the concept of flexible homes, with features that allow them to be easily adapted, which if successful could be sought in future design codes and development frameworks50.

9.3.3 The provision of a wide range of accommodation can allow residents to take advantage of their changing needs over their lifetimes, or allow different generations of family to live close to each other, encouraging the possibility of a stronger community. A wider variety of accommodation also ensures the potential for a larger range of local facilities and that need for these facilities is more consistent over time.

50 Tattenhoe Park Development Framework September 2006

107

9.3.4 Successful places also have to be the necessary physical and social infrastructure. These ensure that people want to move in or stay there and improve the life chances of the population, reducing the likely incidences of deprivation. Together with opportunities for local interaction/commerce, these help to promote opportunities for strong and cohesive communities.

9.3.5 Whilst it may be considered desirable to have such facilities close by, this may prove difficult with the trend towards smaller household sizes. Many service providers also are pushing for larger minimum sizes at which facilities are viable. This is a trend that is occurring in both the public and private sector. These trends make provision of local facilities in areas with relatively low levels of density increasingly difficult. A solution would be to generate sufficient density of development to sustain the capacity for a wider range of services and facilities at a local level. The communities also need to be of a size that allows them to create the population catchments to sustain facilities near by. A key determinant of the minimum size preferred for the expansion areas supported in the adopted Local Plan was that they should be of a size that could create a critical mass of pupils to support a secondary school.

Responses from Public Participation:

• Terraced and semi-detached properties provide more flexibility in the future. • Communities should have a mix of housing sizes and types and contain a wider variety of uses. • Most houses should be within 500 metres of a range of facilities. • The local centres need to be more commercially attractive/successful and contain a wider range of commercial and community facilities.

Options Areas Considered.

• Continue to plan so that the majority of new housing is within 500 metres of a local centre. • Design buildings and areas of development in a satisfactorily robust way to provide sufficient flexibility for change to occur over time. • Ensure that access to facilities that are not provided at the local level is improved.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

NC4 – Flexible and supportive living space.

108

Encourage a range of densities of development, but also ensure that densities are sufficient to make the majority of people within 500 metres walking distance of a relatively wide range of services.

Make developments robust and sufficiently flexible in terms of the design and construction of the individual buildings, the mix of land uses it accommodates and its urban form for it to be able to adapt to change over time.

Delivery

• Set out in the levels of expected housing density that developments in various parts of the Borough should attain in order to sustain the aim of ensuring that most dwellings are within 500 metres walking distance of a relatively wide range of services. • Within development plan documents, such as Area Action Plans, set out the level of infrastructure that is expected to be provided to ensure effective communities. • For development frameworks and design codes to set out the type of flexibility sought within buildings and layouts to ensure that relatively easily adaptable to future change.

Risk

• A risk is the extent to which organisations seek to rationalise their facilities to more efficient models, which generally means reducing their number and making them serve a larger population.

• A risk is that the need for appropriate space for certain types of local facilities is not identified early enough to be incorporated within site specific planning documents, such as Area Action Plans.

Targets and Indicators

• Proportion of dwellings built within 500 metres walking distance of a local/neighbour/district/town shopping centre.

• Proportion of dwellings within 400 metres walking distance of a bus stop with an acceptable level of bus service.

9.4 Balance growth of the city with the delivery of Key Infrastructure.

The Issues

9.4.1 Within Milton Keynes there will be additional physical and social infrastructure required to serve the needs of the community. This will not only apply to facilities considered necessary to ensure thriving communities at a neighbourhood level, but should also be provided for a city that towards the end of the Core Strategy period in 2026 will be

109

one of the largest in England. The range and type of facilities will need to reflect the demographics of the population which as well as getting larger, will be getting older and have a higher proportion of ethnic minorities. Section 8 refers specifically to the needs of faith communities. The infrastructure will need to be provided in the right place at the right time. This relates not just to physical infrastructure requirements, but also social infrastructure.

9.4.2 Government sets out the rules which give an indication of the scope of contribution that it anticipates developers to make to infrastructure associated with development in Circular 05/05. It is currently assessing the possibility of creating a more standardised approach to developer contributions through a Planning Gain Supplement. This could take a percentage of the uplift in value of a development site as a result of planning permission, with the Council also being able to seek the provision of appropriate infrastructure on site. There is some uncertainty about whether the Supplement will be taken forward by Government.

9.4.3 Milton Keynes has a recent history of innovation with regards to the method to obtaining contributions to infrastructure required as a result of new developments through the MK Tariff. This involves a standard contribution towards a range of strategic and local infrastructure from housing and employment development. The MK Tariff and Milton Keynes Partnership Business Plan and associated Delivery Plan provide a model for collecting developer contributions, identifying the necessary infrastructure associated with expansion, where funds are expected to come from and the timing of the infrastructure’s delivery.

9.4.4 The projects identified in the Delivery Plan have been compiled in consultation with potential delivery agencies within Milton Keynes, including: Milton Keynes Council, English Partnerships, the Highways Agency, Department for Transport – Rail, MK NHS Hospital Trust, MKC Primary Care Trust, Two Shires Ambulance Trust, Universities for Milton Keynes, Milton Keynes College, Council for Voluntary Organisations, Police and Bucks Fire and Rescue Service. Co- ordination of these agencies has been maintained and enhanced by their representation on Joint Delivery Teams, established to manage project delivery. The Joint Housing Delivery Team, Joint Transport Delivery Team, Joint Community Infrastructure Delivery Team, Joint Utilities Delivery Team, Environment Partnership, MKP Inward Investment Team cover the range of infrastructure areas and projects relevant to the Delivery Plan.

9.4.5 The Delivery Plan provides an action plan for the proposed projects for the forthcoming 5 years and is updated annually. It allows the strategic planning of infrastructure and ensures that it is properly aligned with housing and employment development, and is amended if there are anticipated changes in the pace of growth. Projects with anticipated start dates beyond the first five years are included in the ‘Future

110

Projects’ section. These are incorporated into the five year programme at the appropriate time as growth and delivery progresses. Project plans and risk assessments for the individual projects are undertaken by the relevant project managers. It is anticipated that this structured and co-ordinated approach to delivery will continue.

9.4.6 Landowners and developers will be expected to contribute to the infrastructure required in association with new development. However, it is likely that these contributions will represent a small proportion of all infrastructure required. There will be a significant role for the state in supporting the additional resource required for these facilities.

Responses from Public Participation:

• There should be provision of sufficient infrastructure at the right time in association with new development. • Consider the Race Infrastructure Review. • East/West Rail is a key infrastructure need and a catalyst to bringing forward urban extensions. • S.106 contributions should be collected and may need to be used on major projects outside the Borough. • The issue of social infrastructure has not been satisfactorily addressed in the Community Strategy. • Necessary infrastructure needs to be identified now to set the context for funding. • Consider specifically the needs of Black and Minority Ethnic groups, particularly faith communities.

Options considered

• Continuing with a range of documents, such as Supplementary Planning Documents and service delivery plans, related to individual services to highlight the range of infrastructure required, or providing advice in one strategic document.

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTIONS

NC5 – Growth and key infrastructure Set out key strategic infrastructure that will be sought.

Have a policy that will seek sufficient infrastructure to be provided in association with new development.

Identify with others through a Business Plan the type and amount of infrastructure required and the times at which it needs to be provided, those responsible for its provision and the funding sources required for it to be delivered.

111

Delivery

• Set out within the Core Strategy, the details of the major pieces of infrastructure required to 2026 and the need for appropriate levels of physical and social infrastructure to be provided in association with new development. • Set out within a tariff/infrastructure DPD/SPD standards of provision of infrastructure anticipated in association with new developments. • Work with Milton Keynes Partnership and other organisations to identify the infrastructure required in a schedule, such as the Milton Keynes Business Plan and its associated delivery management structures provide a strong basis on which to continue to see that the requisite infrastructure is provided into the future.

Risk

• There is a risk that organisations that will provide infrastructure have not identified the right amount of infrastructure required, or the locations in which it should go. • The lack of clarity about the funding available to provide the infrastructure required. Overspend on significant pieces of physical infrastructure could reduce the amounts available to a wide range of smaller infrastructure projects. • A focus on capital spend could mean that ‘softer’ social infrastructure projects do not receive the necessary funding. Sufficient thought also needs to be given to the sustainability of assets through having acceptable long term management and revenue streams in available.

Targets and Indicators

• The infrastructure required and its timing will be set out in the Business Plan.

9.5 Create Safe Places

The issues

9.5.1 The origins of modern town planning in this country were primarily built around improving the built environment in order to create safer places to live. At the turn of the 20th Century this primarily revolved around removing the threat caused by pollution and unsanitary living and working conditions. Although the threats may not be the same as those that existed previously, other risks exist and planning still has a significant role to play in their reduction. Risk factors in Milton Keynes amongst other things will include flooding, and noise and emissions pollution from transport, and ‘bad neighbour’ uses.

112

9.5.2 The Community Safety Strategy 2005-2008 highlighted people’s concerns about the need to protect people and property from crime. There is a significant fear of the potential for crime to occur which inhibits the activities that people might want to undertake in their everyday lives. The fear of crime is highest amongst the over 55’s, although statistically this group is less likely to be a victim of crime than the under 35s.51 The uses of buildings, their relationships to each other and the spaces between them can have a significant impact on criminal activity and the fear of crime.

Responses from Public Participation:

Crime: • Additional resources should be put into crime prevention and a more visible deterrent through a visible neighbourhood police presence. • Areas should be designed to reduce the risk of and fear of crime.

Environment: • New development should be located away from areas of environmental risk, e.g. air pollution, noise, floodplain and should ensure that it does not cause risk to others, e.g. water run-off. • Concern that global warming will increase the health risks associated with hot weather. • Concerns about traffic speeds and the safety of pedestrians and cyclists, particularly with the move away from redways towards integrated streets.

Options Areas Considered:

9.5.3 Crime:

• The opportunities for crime and the fear of crime could be reduced through a mixture of the suitable design and layout of the development. This can be achieved by increased overlooking, delineating clearly between public and private space, creating defensible space, positioning development to provide natural surveillance and encouraging activity throughout the day ‘eyes on the street’. Security of building and their plots could be increased by adopting standards such as ‘Secured by Design’. Perceived threatening environments, for example subways, could be designed out by using other solutions to enable safe pedestrian movement. • Management systems need to be in place to ensure that public space is suitably maintained to assist in creating a sense of pride in the environment and reducing the fear of crime caused by potential

51 Milton Keynes Community Safety Strategy 2005-2008 Milton Keynes Community Safety Partnership (Page 9).

113

degradation of the environment, for example through ‘community caretakers’. There could be greater community participation and responsibility through promoting ‘ownership’ that space through locally devolved management structures and involvement of local communities, e.g. involvement of local schools and community planting schemes. • The police force and others associated with community safety need to consider the extent to which a visible presence in these areas is maintained, if not through police officers, then Community Safety Wardens.

9.5.4 Environment risks:

• The section on ‘Managing our Impact’ goes into some detail on the fact that the Council will be commissioning a Water Strategy Study, incorporating a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. This will assist in locating development away from flood risk, ensuring that risk to others is also minimised as a result of new development, and co- ordinating development with the programme for additional water supply. • Other environmental risks such as air quality and noise, primarily associated with major transport infrastructure will also be minimised by ensuring that development is not located in inappropriate locations, or has adequate mitigation measures. In addition adequate controls will be placed on activities granted consent to ensure that emissions and noise are within acceptable limits, e.g. minerals workings (see Managing Our Assets section).

PREFERRED POLICY DIRECTION

NC6 – Create safe places Encourage developments that have a range of uses and sufficient density to provide a reasonable level of activity throughout the day.

Develop frameworks and design codes that seek a large degree of natural surveillance where property and public space is overlooked and where necessary has strong defensible boundaries.

Work with the Police and Safer Communities Unit Streetcare, Parish Councils, Milton Keynes Council of Voluntary Organisations and other organisations with strong presence to review other factors that might affect crime or the fear of crime, e.g. schools to review possibility of encouraging greater community participation and ownership of local assets.

Work with organisations such as the Internal Drainage Board and the Environment Agency, Health and Safety Executive to locate

114

development away from environmental threats e.g. noise corridors, pollution areas, flood plains, hazardous installations and ensure environmental risks to other areas are reduced, e.g. water run-off.

Delivery.

• Prepare DPDs that set out levels for housing density that developments in various parts of the Borough should attain. • In association with the Council’s Urban Design section, prepare DPDs that outline the principles of good design and that seek design statements and codes in association with large developments. Use forums such as the ‘Place Making Group’ to analyse frameworks, codes undertaken with new developments. • Work with the Community Safety Partnership and the Police’s Architectural Liaison Officer to provide guidance to developers on reducing the risk of crime and encourage developments to seek the Secured by Design standard. Work with the Parish Liaison Forum and Milton Keynes Council of Voluntary Organisations to assess the extent to which Parish and Town Councils, community groups and local people can take a more pro-active approach to the management and ownership of space and community assets. • Undertake appropriate assessments in association with other organisations to identify environmental risks prior to the identification of development sites in DPDs.

Risk

• In relation to crime, there is risk that in an attempt to create more secure environments that the fear of crime might increase if there is the perception that areas are more subject to crime than they actually are, e.g. through the use of solid steel shutters, etc. • With regards to the environment, the amount of growth brings with it the risk of additional traffic congestion which could reduce air quality, thereby potentially adversely affecting existing built areas. • There is a risk that flood mitigation measures required to off-set climate change factors and the run-off associated new development, will reduce the opportunities available for new development within the existing settlement boundaries.

Targets and Indicators

• Crime by type per 1000 population and 1000 households by area. • Number of dwellings within areas of significant flood risk. • Number of air quality management areas and dwellings within those areas.

115

10.0 IMPLEMENTATION, DELIVERY & RISK

10.1 Implementation, Delivery and Risk.

10.1.1 To take the Preferred Options forward, each previous section has identified the preferred strategies for implementation, the potential risks associated with their delivery and the indicators that will be used to measure the success of the approaches taken. It is clear that in order for the core strategy to be successfully delivered; many organisations and individuals both within the borough and outside will have to contribute through their policies, actions and investments, for example transport, health and social care, education, cultural development, economic development and environmental infrastructure.

10.1.2 Further work will be needed to gain a fuller understanding of infrastructure requirements and delivery of the growth proposals up to 2026, this will occur as part of the process of firming up the Core Strategy and its implementation through Site Allocation documents. Some examples of the more major pieces of infrastructure required and the development delivery times identified as part of the MK Growth Strategy are shown in the table below.

10.1.3 In terms of identifying the amount of infrastructure required, the anticipated timing of its delivery, its funding, the agencies involved in its delivery, the Milton Keynes Partnership (MKP) Business Plan 2006- 2010 and associated Delivery Plans are a good model that can be continued to be used for ensuring a consistency of approach within the period covered by the Core Strategy (i.e. 2008-2026) building upon the current plans and programmes. The Delivery Plans provide a target for infrastructure delivery over the next five years, in line with predicted housing and employment land development. They currently cover the areas of Housing, Employment Land, Schools and Education, Transport, Cultural Facilities, Leisure and Community Facilities, Libraries and Lifelong Learning, Landscape and Open Space, Higher and Further Education, Healthcare, Social Care, Emergency Services, Crematoria and Burial Grounds, Collection and Waste Facilities. This model can be supplemented by information related projects in the rest of the Borough as well as the growth areas. Project delivery in relation to items identified in the Delivery Plan has been owned and managed by Joint Delivery Teams (JDTs). Management of the programmes has been assigned to the Teams as follows:

• Joint Housing Delivery Team (JHDT): Housing • Joint Transport Delivery Team (JTDT): Transport • Joint Community Infrastructure Delivery Team (JCIDT): Schools & Education, Higher and Further Education, Healthcare, Social Care Facilities, Leisure & Community Facilities, Libraries &

116

Lifelong Learning, Crematoria & Burial Grounds, Cultural Facilities, Voluntary Sector, Emergency Services, Waste Facilities (social elements). • Joint Utilities Strategic Delivery Group (JUSTDG): Collection & Waste Facilities, Energy Provision and Water • Environment Partnership: Carbon Offset, Landscape & Open Space and Flooding & Drainage • MKP Inward Investment Team: Inward Investment and Employment.

10.1.4 The JDTs are key decision makers, providing project management functions such as: • Taking ownership of and driving forward project delivery timetables; • Prioritising projects; • Overseeing Project Briefs and Businesses Cases; • Coherent project organisation structure; • Monitoring and controlling project progress; • Developing a project risk register, tracking and managing risk as effectively as possible; • Providing direction, management and accountability for project success; • Ensuring adequate resources are available and regularly reviewing and reporting back on progress;

10.1.5 The majority of projects currently listed in the Delivery Plans are to be delivered by delivery agencies, such as MK Council, MK General Hospital NHS Trust, MK PCT, and the voluntary and higher/further education sectors. The majority of projects will be funded from a variety of sources including delivery agency’s capital programmes, S106 tariff contributions, other S106 Agreements, Government funding streams and other external sources.

10.1.6 Prior to expansion occurring outside the Borough boundary and MKP’s Urban Development Area boundary there will need to be close working with, and agreement on, the approach to delivery with the adjoining authorities (Aylesbury Vale District Council, Mid Bedfordshire District Council, Buckinghamshire County Council and Bedfordshire County Council). This agreement would apply to a common set of principles based around development standards, levels of S.106/tariff funding and phasing of infrastructure.

10.1.7 In addition to the above elements of project management, the list of indicators identified in the previous sections will be used to assess the effectiveness of the Core Strategy. These indicators will be monitored on an annual basis within the Annual Monitoring Report. The indicators used for the Sustainability Appraisal will also be included within the Annual Monitoring Report to measure the extent to which sustainability objectives are being met.

117

10.1.8 This approach will highlight whether there are deviations from expected Core Strategy or Sustainability Appraisal outcomes, and therefore whether actions need to be undertaken to rectify the situation. The resultant solution will be dependent on the impact on the strategic objectives of the Core Strategy. It could range from a different approach to project management to ensure that desired outcomes are met, reviewing the Local Development Scheme to reprioritise Local Development Document production, or in extreme cases, through review of a particular element of the Core Strategy.

10.1.9 The AMR will be an important document to ensure that the Core Strategy is delivering the intended outcomes. Monitoring will detail when the Core Strategy and other aspects of the Local Development framework will require review.

118

Milton Keynes Growth Area Infrastructure Requirements and Phasing Delivery of Major Development

Sub-Regional Theme Outcome Lead Cost Funding 2006- 2011- 2016- 2021- Authority (£m) Source 2011 2016 2021 2026 Transport Road M1 Junction 14 Area Improvements Improvements to M1 Junction 14, LA / HA 10.9 TPI/DFT/ CIF/ Improved Park & Ride and Interchange Local Tariff facilities at Coachway coupled with Improvements to the local highway network A421 Dualling from M1 Junction 13 to Reduced congestion levels along A421 MKC / BCC 33 LTP/RFF/Local Milton Keynes corridor coupled with safety Tariff improvements. Links into M1 widening / A421 Improvements (East of M1) M1 Widening Junction 10 to13 Widening of M1 to D4 standard between HA 382 TPI Junction 10 and 13 A421 Dualling (M1 Junction 13 to Dualling of A421 east of the M1 HA 171 TPI Bedford) motorway including full grade separation at M1 Junction 13 A5 Junction Improvements Interim Scheme only (developer funded) MKC 5.1 TBC

Further A5 Junction Improvements Additional capacity enhancements likely MKC / HA Up to 35 TBC to be required A421 Improvements West of MK Link to A43 / M40 BCC TBC LTP/RFF/Local Tariff A421 Corridor Public Transport and MKC 4.2 TBC Highway Junction Improvements A422 Corridor Public Transport and MKC 4.2 TBC Highway Junction Improvements Extensions to H6 and H7 Grid Roads Extensions to existing H6 and H7 to MKC / BCC 7.5 Developer provide additional access to the South- Funded West Development Area off the A421 Rail East-West Rail – including improvements Public transport (Rail) to support growth NR 65-125 DFT/ NR/ CIF/ to existing stations east of Bletchley and along the Oxford to Cambridge Arc Local Tariff

119

Milton Keynes Growth Area Infrastructure Requirements and Phasing Delivery of Major Development

Sub-Regional Theme Outcome Lead Cost Funding 2006- 2011- 2016- 2021- Authority (£m) Source 2011 2016 2021 2026 possible new stations. (potentially including a double track section west of Bletchley with new chord and additional running line to MK and dedicated platform at CMK) Milton Keynes Central Station and Rail infrastructure enhancements at NR 115 NR/CIF Wolverton Station Milton Keynes Central and Wolverton stations coupled with enhanced passenger facilities at Wolverton station East-West rail station at Newton New East – West rail station (other NR DFT Longville locations to be considered) Park and Ride M1 Junction 14 Area Improvements Improvements to M1 Junction 14, Park & See above See See above Ride and Coachway Access above Extension of existing Park & Ride Service Additional P&R sites at: MKC 4-16 TBC to four additional sites - A508 / A5 Stoney Stratford - A421 / M1 Junction 13 - A421 / Newtown Longville - A5 / A4146 sth of Bletchley Other Central MK Traffic Management and Bus Traffic management and Bus Priority MKC 6.3 (Jan Growth Area Priority Scheme measures within CMK 04) Fund Central MK Public Transport Access Priority measures for Public Transport MKC 5.8 Growth Area Improvements Schemes within CMK Fund Bletchley Scheme New Public Transport access corridor MKC 9.7 LTP into central Bletchley coupled with local junction improvements and extensions to the existing Redway network MK Public Transport (linking Eastern EA,, Improved Public Transport network MKC 5.0 Growth Area Western EA, CMK and MK General serving the new growth areas and Fund Hospital) accelerating housing delivery, reducing congestion and improving safety Milton Keynes ‘Diameter Route’ Bus Quality public transport services on east- MKC 11 TBC Infrastructure west and north-south corridors in Milton Keynes

120

Milton Keynes Growth Area Infrastructure Requirements and Phasing Delivery of Major Development

Sub-Regional Theme Outcome Lead Cost Funding 2006- 2011- 2016- 2021- Authority (£m) Source 2011 2016 2021 2026 Public Transport Subsidy and Patronage MKC 15 TBC Scheme CMK Public Transport and Highway MKC 8.6 TBC Junction Improvements Western Flank Public Transport and MKC 8.6 TBC Junction Improvements Other Public Transport and Junction MKC 9.4 TBC Improvements Development of Mini-Interchanges Introduction of mini-transport hubs at MKC 5 TBC district centres plus other key locations such as Open University and General Hospital Demand Management Promotion of ‘Soft Factor’ Demand Expansion of: MKC 1 per TBC Management - Workplace Travel Plans annum? - School Travel Plans - Remote working - Car Clubs / Car Sharing - Information Provision Housing Affordable Housing Significant increase in provision of More affordable housing LA/RHB RHB affordable housing in line with MKSM sub-regional strategy targets Build out of east and west expansion Development Plan MKPC Developer areas in Milton Keynes Funded Urban regeneration To address deprivation needs and MKPC/ Developer housing requirements RSL’s/LA’s funded Realisation of Central MK Masterplan Development Plan MKC Developer funded Education Primary education Additional capacity LA DFE/LEA’s’ Developer funded

121

Milton Keynes Growth Area Infrastructure Requirements and Phasing Delivery of Major Development

Sub-Regional Theme Outcome Lead Cost Funding 2006- 2011- 2016- 2021- Authority (£m) Source 2011 2016 2021 2026 Secondary education Additional capacity LA DFE/LEA’s’ developer funded Higher and Further education Additional capacity (including new MKC HEFCE/LSC/ University and nurses training college) SEEDA/ developer funded Other Education Additional Capacity MKC TBC Health Primary health care Expansion and modernisation of primary, NHS, MKPCT social and community healthcare Acute care Expansion and modernisation of NHS, MK secondary healthcare facilities Hospital Trust, DCLG Public Services Proportionate increase in Fire, Police and Review facilities in light of growth BFRS/TVP/ TBC Ambulance services proposals TSAT

Key for Lead Authority Key for Funding Source BCC – Buckinghamshire County Council CIF – Community Infrastructure Fund HA – Highways Agency DCLG – Department for Communities and Local Government LA – Local Authority DFE – Department for Education MKC – Milton Keynes Council DFT – Department for Transport MKPC – Milton Keynes Partnership Committee LSC –Learning and Skills Council NR – Network Rail HEFCE – Higher Education Funding Council for England RHB – Regional Housing Board LEA’s – Local Education Authorities RSL’s – Registered Social Landlords LTP – Local Transport Plan UMK – University for Milton Keynes MKPCT – MK Primary Care Trust BFRS – Bucks Fire & Rescue Service NR – Network Rail TVP – Thames Valley Police RHB – Regional Housing Board TSAT – Two Shires Ambulance NHS Trust SEEDA – South East of England Development Agency TPI – DFT Transport Programme of Improvements

122