DOCSLIB.ORG

Duty to Cooperate Update Statement (July 2016)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Duty to Cooperate Update Statement (July 2016) Runnymede 2035 Duty to Co-operate update statement July 2016 This page has been left intentionally blank Contents page Chapter title Page number Chapter 1: Introduction 3 Chapter 2: Overarching Duty to Cooperate groups/processes 4 which cover multiple matters Chapter 3: Cooperation with other bodies and organisations 9 that do not fall under the requirements of the Duty to Cooperate Chapter 4: Housing 11 Chapter 5: Gypsies and Travellers 17 Chapter 6: Economic Development 20 Chapter 7: Green Belt 27 Chapter 8: Climate Change, Biodiversity and TBHSPA 32 Chapter 9: Transport 38 Chapter 10: Flooding 44 Chapter 11: Infrastructure- Education; Health; Utilities; 49 Community and Culture; Open Space and Recreation Chapter 12: Other strategic matters not listed in chapters 4‐ 53 11 Appendices: Appendix 1: Documentation related to the Surrey Planning Officers Association Appendix 2: Documentation related to the Surrey Planning Working Group Appendix 3: Minutes from meetings of the West Surrey Local Plans working group Appendix 4: Documentation related to the Surrey Local Strategic Statement Appendix 5: 3SC devolution material Appendix 6: Documentation related to the Heathrow Strategic Planning Group and its sub groups Appendix 7: Documentation referred to in the Housing chapter Appendix 8: early correspondence sent to duty to cooperate partners on the emerging Issues, Options and Preferred Approaches document. Appendix 9: Presentation slides and meeting minutes (including list of attendees) from the Council’s Duty to Cooperate workshop held on 22nd April 2016. Appendix 10: Documentation referred to in the Gypsies and Travellers chapter Appendix 11: Documentation referred to in the Economic Development chapter Appendix 12: Documentation referred to in the Green Belt chapter Appendix 13: Documentation referred to in the Climate Change, Biodiversity and Runnymede Duty to Cooperate update statement, July 2016 1 TBHSPA chapter Chapter 14: Documentation referred to in the Transport chapter Chapter 15: Documentation referred to in the Flooding chapter Chapter 16: Documentation referred to in the Infrastructure chapter Chapter 17: Email correspondence between RBC officers and SCC on waste and minerals matters during the preparation of the Runnymede interim SLAA, 2016 Runnymede Duty to Cooperate update statement, July 2016 2 Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 This Duty to Cooperate statement seeks to update the reader on how the Council has continued to comply with the requirements of the Localism Act (2011) which relate to the Duty to Cooperate since the publication of the Council’s Duty to Cooperate Scoping Framework in October 2015. 1.2 This update statement must be read in conjunction with this earlier scoping framework as it seeks to provide a continuous dialogue of the steps that the Council has taken to cooperate with relevant partners on strategic cross boundary matters between October 2015 and the commencement of the public consultation on the Runnymede 2035 Local Plan Issues, Options and Preferred Approaches consultation in July 2016. 1.3 For details of the steps that the Council had taken, and the outcomes achieved between the commencement of work on the Runnymede 2035 Local Plan in April 2014 and the publication of the Duty to Cooperate Scoping Framework in October 2015, this earlier document should be referred to. The scoping framework also sets out in detail the Council’s intended approach to cooperation for all cross boundary matters over the course of Local Plan preparation. 1.4 In the chapters below, each of the strategic matters highlighted in the Council’s scoping framework will be considered in turn with a commentary on: - The key issues identified in each topic area - The actions and outcomes achieved through cooperation between October 2015, up until the start of the Council’s consultation public consultation on its Issues, Options and Preferred Approaches document in July 2016. 1.5 The format in chapters 4 to 11 of this document follows that recommended by the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) in their August 2015 ‘Duty to Cooperate Statement template’1 paper. 1 http://www.pas.gov.uk/events-and-support2/-/journal_content/56/332612/6387362/ARTICLE Runnymede Duty to Cooperate update statement, July 2016 3 Chapter 2: Overarching Duty to Cooperate groups/processes which cover multiple matters 2.1 Representatives from Runnymede Borough Council attend a number of groups which engage on a range of cross boundary matters, on a regular basis. An overview of these groups is provided in the paragraphs below. The Surrey Planning Officers Association (SPOA) 2.2 This is a group for the Heads of Planning in Surrey. This comprises the 11 Boroughs/Districts and the County Council. The group meets monthly to discuss joint working opportunities, to consider matters of a cross-boundary nature, and to discuss all other matters of pan-Surrey interest. 2.3 As part of the work of this group, alongside Surrey Chief Executives and Council Leaders, a Local Strategic Statement (LSS) is being prepared, supported by a Memorandum of Understanding, which seeks to provide a framework for joint working across Surrey and help to align strategic spatial, infrastructure and economic priorities (more information is provided on this below). The minutes from the SPOA meetings that Runnymede has attended since October 2015 can be viewed in appendix 1. Planning Working Group (PWG) 2.4 This is a group for Planning Policy Managers in Surrey and the County Council that meets five or six times a year. Members discuss and resolve cross- boundary policy issues, share relevant information and experiences, and prepare joint responses to consultations of pan-Surrey interest. From time to time, the group is required by SPOA to carry out research or projects that are directed at improving the understanding and experience of an aspect of Planning policy. The Planning Working Group has been instrumental in progressing the Co8unty’s LSS work. The minutes from the PWG meetings that Runnymede has attended since October 2015 can be viewed in appendix 2. West Surrey Local Plan Working Group 2.5 This is a group for planning officers in the West Surrey Boroughs of Runnymede, Spelthorne, Surrey Heath, Woking, Guildford and Waverley, that meets three or four times annually in order to discuss issues affecting the authorities on the western side of the County. The group has previously sought to identify opportunities for joint working in a number of policy areas (authorities in the east of the County are represented by a similarly-constituted group). The minutes from the West Surrey Local Plan Working Group meetings that Runnymede has attended since October 2015 can be viewed in appendix 3. The Surrey Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Partnership (SSPIP) 2.6 Runnymede Borough Council has continued to work collaboratively with Surrey County Council and the other Surrey boroughs and districts in the preparation of the Surrey LSS. Since the production of the Runnymede Duty to Cooperate Runnymede Duty to Cooperate update statement, July 2016 4 Framework in October 2015 the following key actions and outcomes can be reported: Action: December 2015: Runnymede was asked to provide an officer to sit on a small working group to draft the LSS and drive the project forwards. The first meeting of the working group was held on 17th December 2015. A note of the points covered at this meeting can be viewed at appendix 4. In brief, the outcome of this meeting was that the following actions for the working group were agreed: To complete an initial draft of a Surrey-wide intro/scene setting, for discussion at PWG on 22nd January; To complete an initial draft of Surrey-wide SWOT analysis, for discussion at PWG on 22nd January; To complete an initial draft of Surrey-wide strategic objectives, for discussion at PWG on 22nd January ; To complete an initial draft of the sub-area map, for discussion at PWG on 22nd January; Discussion of proposed approach to LSS work at PWG on 22nd January; Progress update to Feb SPOA; Following agreement of sub-areas at PWG on 22nd January: o Establish working group with reps from each sub-area o Sub-areas to develop area descriptions, and area priorities Action: The LSS working group provided a presentation at the meeting of the Planning Working Group on 22nd January 2016 on the LSS. The minutes from this meeting can be viewed in appendix 2. Action: At the meeting of the Surrey Chief Executives an update report on the Surrey LSS work was considered (the report can be seen at Appendix 4). It was agreed that works could continue. Action: Meeting of the LSS working group on 17th February 2016. The outcome of this meeting was that it was agreed how the workshop style session would be run at PWG on 4th March, and who on the LSS working group would produce different pieces of material for the workshop. Action: Workshop at the meeting of the Planning Working Group 4th March 2016 on the Surrey LSS. Attendees split into the identified sub areas and a completed a template which provided: A general overview of the sub area including its general extent and main characteristics; Its main challenges; and Its specific spatial priorities to help overcome identified challenges. The outcome of the meeting was the drafting of these templates. The sub area template can be viewed in appendix 4. A discussion was also held around the vision for the LSS. The outcome was that a draft vision was agreed, and the LSS working group had gathered enough material about each sub area to draft a narrative of each for the LSS. The minutes from this meeting can be found at Runnymede Duty to Cooperate update statement, July 2016 5 appendix 2. Action: Meeting of the LSS working group on 13th May 2016. It was agreed at this meeting that the completed templates for the sub areas needed to be used by the working group to complete ‘pen portraits’ for each of the sub areas which would form part of the LSS.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Taking Britain Further Heathrow’S Plan for Connecting the UK to Growth
    VOLUME 1 Taking Britain further Heathrow’s plan for connecting the UK to growth #BritainsHeathrow Disclaimer This document has been prepared by Heathrow Airport Limited solely in response to an invitation from the Airports Commission. It should not be used for any other purpose or in any other context and Heathrow Airport Limited accepts no responsibility for its use in that regard Contents Volume 1 - Technical submission Contents ........................................................................................................................ 3 Foreword ....................................................................................................................... 8 Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 11 Connecting for growth ................................................................................................................... 12 Listening to what our stakeholders say ........................................................................................... 18 Our vision for a world-class hub airport ........................................................................................... 20 Connecting all of the UK ................................................................................................................ 24 Building a sustainable Heathrow ..................................................................................................... 29 The deliverable solution .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow Airport
    Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport GLA September 2006 Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport Contents Page FOREWORD I SUMMARY II Background ii Methodology ii Main Findings ii 1. INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Background 3 1.2 Objective of the study 3 1.3 Methodology 4 1.4 Structure of report 4 2. TRANSPORT COSTS AND BENEFITS 5 2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 General Assumptions 5 2.3 Passenger Demand Forecasts 7 2.4 Capacity Constraint 8 2.5 Benefits 10 2.6 Costs 12 2.7 Government Revenue 12 2.8 Conclusions 13 3. WIDER ECONOMIC BENEFITS 14 3.1 Introduction 14 3.2 Employment and regeneration 14 3.3 Agglomeration (Productivity and Business) 15 3.4 Tourism 15 3.5 Conclusion 15 4. EFFECTS ON THE SCALE OF CAPACITY REQUIRED 17 4.1 Introduction 17 4.2 Transport appraisal 17 4.3 Making more efficient use of existing capacity 17 4.4 Conclusion 20 5. EFFECTS ON THE CHOICE OF LOCATION 21 5.1 Introduction 21 5.2 Transport benefits 21 5.3 Environmental issues 22 5.4 The need for a transport hub 22 5.5 Conclusion 23 6. IMPACT ON THE AVIATION INDUSTRY AND REGIONS 24 6.1 Introduction 24 6.2 The impact of a third runway at Heathrow compared to an additional runway elsewhere in the South East 24 6.3 The impact of providing additional capacity in the South East compared to constrained capacity 24 Heathrow Economics Study Expansion of Heathrow airport 6.4 Conclusion 25 7.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of BAA
    House of Commons Transport Committee The future of BAA Fourth Report of Session 2007–08 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 5 March 2008 HC 119 Published on 14 March 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Transport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mrs Gwyneth Dunwoody MP (Labour, Crewe and Nantwich) (Chairman) Mr David Clelland MP (Labour, Tyne Bridge) Clive Efford MP (Labour, Eltham) Mrs Louise Ellman MP (Labour/Co-operative, Liverpool Riverside) Mr Philip Hollobone MP (Conservative, Kettering) Mr John Leech MP (Liberal Democrat, Manchester, Withington) Mr Eric Martlew MP (Labour, Carlisle) Mr Lee Scott MP (Conservative, Ilford North) David Simpson MP (Democratic Unionist, Upper Bann) Mr Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Manchester Blackley) Mr David Wilshire MP (Conservative, Spelthorne) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/transcom. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Tom Healey (Clerk), Annette Toft (Second Clerk), Richard Ward (Assistant Clerk, Scrutiny Unit), David Davies (Committee Specialist), Tim Steer (Committee Specialist), Alison Mara (Committee Assistant), Ronnie Jefferson (Secretary), Gaby Henderson (Senior Office Clerk) and Laura Kibby (Media Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the Iog Option Based on KPMG’S Analysis
    Inner Thames Estuary Feasibility Study Response to Airports Commission Call for Evidence The Mayor of London’s Submission: Supporting technical documents 23 May 2014 Title: Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the IoG option based on KPMG’s analysis Author: Ernst and Young (EY) Purpose of paper: To identify the key assumptions used in the Airports Commission’s / KPMG’s analysis of the commercial viability of an Inner Thames Estuary hub airport, and adjust this analysis in light of market practice and precedents of regulated airports and other utilities. Key message: The threefold increase in landing charges claimed by the Airports Commission is a significant overestimate, and based on flawed financial and commercial assumptions. Isle of Grain Hub Airport Supplementary Report: Commercial and Financial Analysis of the IoG option based on KPMG’s analysis 22 May 2014 Ernst & Young LLP Ernst & Young LLP Tel: + 44 207 951 2000 1 More London Place Fax: + 44 207 951 1345 London ey.com SE1 2AF Tel: 023 8038 2000 Transport for London 22 May 2014 Windsor House 42-50 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0TL Dear Sirs, A new Hub airport – the required increase in aeronautical charges In accordance with our appointment to provide services under the terms and conditions of our Framework Agreement with TfL (reference number TfL 90400), we have prepared this supporting document as per TfL’s instructions to perform a high level financial analysis to identify the key assumptions used in AC/KPMG’s analysis of the commercial viability of the IoG Hub. Then, based on market practice and precedents of regulated airports and other utilities, adjust AC/KPMG’s analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • 77321 River Thames Travel Leaflet V4.Indd
    TRAVEL TRADE GUIDE TO The River Thames Oxford Cotswolds Abingdon Lechlade Marlow London Cricklade Wallingford Heathrow Henley Airport Teddington Richmond upon Thames Windsor Goring & Streatley Reading Runnymede www.visitthames.co.uk/traveltrade Delightful riverside towns and villages The towns and villages along the River Thames are ready to welcome your customers The riverside, Marlow Here’s a selection to include in your itineraries. HENLEY ON THAMES LONDON AND GREENWICH This 13th century market town is one of the most The Thames fl ows through London and provides a beautiful towns in England. Henley enjoys a wonderful stunning backdrop to many of the city’s top tourist stretch of river with delightful independent shops, brilliant attractions. The 2,000-year-old river harbours much pubs and great restaurants. It hosts internationally of London’s history, as well as providing a host of renowned sporting events and festivals. Henley-on- sporting and leisure. Discover London on sightseeing Thames, aka Causton, In Midsomer Murders, has river tours with City Cruises; hop-on/hop-off tickets appeared in numerous episodes. The Henley Royal and great special packages combining a tour and visits Regatta takes place early July and is the most famous in to top London attractions. Cruises depart every 30 the world. minutes to Greenwich. GREENWICH is where to fi nd 01491 578 034 the Meridian Line, the famous tea clipper Cutty Sark, the [email protected] Royal Observatory, National Maritime Museum, the Old www.visit-henley.com Royal Naval College including the Painted Hall, The O2, London’s cable car and plenty more.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Airport for London
    November 2011 A new airport for London Part 2 – The economic benefits of a new hub airport Greater London Authority November 2011 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 Cover photograph © BAA Limited Contents 3 Mayor’s foreword 4 Executive summary 6 Introduction 20 1: The London economy 22 2: The benefits of aviation 26 3: The implications for airport capacity requirements 48 4: Requirements of an efficient national hub airport 64 5: The limitations of Heathrow 68 6: Future hub airport demand 78 7: Hub airport benefits 92 8: Meeting the Government’s growth agenda 98 9: Key findings 101 Appendices A: ‘Hubbing’ at Heathrow 105 B: Forecasting methodology 113 C: Other cities’ strategies 115 Footnotes and references 125 4 Mayor’s foreword Next summer, the eyes of the world will be on London as the setting for a contest on an epic scale. In many ways, London is involved in a less well known but nonetheless epic contest of its own – one for connectivity with the rest of the world. We cannot afford to lose. A host of up-and-coming competitors want to beat London at the things we have until now done best. By emulating and then leap-frogging London in terms of its aviation links, they hope to usurp us in terms of all the things aviation has enabled: a dynamic economy, a vibrant, international population and the cornucopia of cultural riches this brings with it, and much more besides.
    [Show full text]
  • Watchdog Probes
    ANOTHER BAD DAY FOR THE FTSE AS COVID-19 TAKES A TOLL P3 BUSINESS WITH PERSONALITY FRIDAY 28 FEBRUARY 2020 ISSUE 3,566 CITYAM.COM FREE Poor health: Watchdog GLOBAL BRITAIN: probes NMC ANNA MENIN @annafmenin NMC HEALTH had another torrid day yesterday. Trading in the FTSE 100 healthcare operator’s shares was suspended, the Financial DELAYED. Conduct Authority (FCA) HEATHROW EXPANSION HALTED AFTER COURT JUDGMENT launched an investigation into the company, and a major shareholder criticised its handling of an internal inquiry of its finances. News of the FCA probe came a day after the UAE-based hospital operator fired its boss and placed its finance chief on extended sick leave following its own probe into its finances. NMC said it would fully cooperate with the City watchdog. The FCA said earlier this month it was “making enquiries” into NMC after questions were raised over the size of major investors’ holdings in the firm. NMC shares have lost almost two-thirds of their value since December, when US shortseller Muddy Waters published a STEFAN BOSCIA Keith Lindblom found the policy Grant Shapps] has taken a review of it,” A separate legal challenge to the policy report questioning its finances @Stefan_Boscia statement written by the Department Lindblom said. statement by Heathrow Hub, authors of and governance. NMC denied for Transport (DfT) did not take account The challenge — brought forward by a rival airport extension bid, was wrongdoing. THE HIGH Court of Appeal put the skids of the UK’s Paris Climate Agreement mayor of London Sadiq Khan, similarly unsuccessful. On Wednesday, NMC fired on Heathrow airport’s third runway commitments and needed to environmental groups, several local Speaking outside the Royal Courts of chief executive Prasanth bid yesterday, ruling the plans as be re-written.
    [Show full text]
  • Woking Economic Development Strategy 2017-2022
    Woking Economic Development Strategy 2017-2022 Version Date Comment Changes by 1.0 10/03/17 Final Draft Simon Matthews 1.1 15/06/17 Map update/minor corrects Simon Matthews Contents Theme 5: Place Making: Summary of Strengths, Challenges & Opportunities ..................................................................................... - 39 - Our vision ................................................................................................. - 3 - Place Making: Priorities for action - summary ................................... - 40 - Our aim ..................................................................................................... - 3 - A Vision for Woking 2050 ........................................................................... 41 1. Introduction .......................................................................................... - 3 - A 2050 Vision for Woking’s Economy ......................................................... 42 2. Our achievements ................................................................................ - 4 - Introduction ........................................................................................... 42 3. The strategic framework and its themes .............................................. - 4 - 1. Population growth and urban living ................................................... 42 Theme 1: Economic dynamism: enterprise, innovation and 2. Transport Infrastructure and Peak Oil ................................................ 44 entrepreneurship ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Runnymede Community Engagement Plan
    Southampton to London Pipeline Project Community Engagement Plan Revision No. 2.0 June 2021 Runnymede Borough Council Southampton to London Pipeline Project Community Engagement Plan – Runnymede Borough Council Contents 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................1 2 Scope ............................................................................................................................................2 3 Overview of the Project................................................................................................................3 4 Community Engagement Team ...................................................................................................4 5 Community Stakeholders ............................................................................................................5 6 Core Engagement Channels ........................................................................................................6 7 Frequency of engagement ...........................................................................................................8 8 Core Engagement Topics ............................................................................................................9 9 Within Runnymede Borough ..................................................................................................... 10 10 Location-Specific Tactical Communication Plans ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Peer Challengepeer Challenge Report
    Corporate Peer Challenge Runnymede Borough Council 9 th-11th October 2019 Feedback Report 1. Executive Summary The Borough of Runnymede is a largely prosperous district in North West Surrey with a population of population of 88,0001 . It covers 7,804 hectares, of which 6,136 hectares is Green Belt. The Council has an emerging local plan ‘Runnymede 2030 Local Plan’ and has adopted a strong commercial approach to deliver financial sustainability and progress regeneration of its main towns. The Council is one of 11 districts and boroughs in Surrey and has a strong working relationship with the County Council and its neighbouring boroughs. The Council has taken bold decisions to invest in commercial property in order to manage the challenges of falling revenue support grant and other funding sources. It has moved faster than many councils of its size in doing so. Consequently, the Council is in a more financially sustainable position than many other district councils and has taken a clear political decision not to cut customer facing services. The Council has a positive reputation with partners; is well respected; and its strong financial position has afforded it the opportunity to deliver services and, in some instances, take on new services for partners. The Council has clear ambition to extend this further and redefine its role as a place shaper, local service provider and system leader. The Council has demonstrated confidence in taking bold decisions and is now in a position where it needs to invest in enhancing its strategic capacity to channel its ambition on place leadership and identify the next phase for the Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Common Ground Surrey Waste Local Plan
    Town & Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Statement of Common Ground Concerning Strategic Planning Policies for Waste Management in Surrey June 2019 Statement of Common Ground between the county council and the boroughs and district councils within Surrey concerning strategic planning for waste management – FINAL v 3.15 - 17 June 2019 Page 1 of 27 Version Amendments Date FINAL v 1.0 27 March 2019 Additional text added: Section 6.4 Reigate & Banstead. Other subsequent Sections FINAL v 2.0 01 April 2019 renumbered. FINAL v 3.0 Confirmation of Mole Valley DC signature 02 April 2019 FINAL v 3.1 Additional bullet under para 6.6 – Oakleaf Farm - Action to resolve disagreement 02 April 2019 Confirmation of Reigate & Banstead BC Signature. Confirmation of Epsom & Ewell BC Signature FINAL v 3.2 08 April 2019 Additional text added: Section 6.9 Waverley Borough. Woking Borough Section renumbered. Amending wording in Section 6.1 - Elmbridge Borough Council - Action to be taken to FINAL v 3.3 08 April 2019 resolve disagreement. FINAL v 3.4 Confirmation that Mike Goodman has signed for Surrey County Council 09 April 2019 FINAL v 3.5 Current status for submission 12 April 2019 FINAL v 3.6 Confirmation of Runnymede BC signature 23 April 2019 Para 5.2.5 - text amended to make it clear that general agreement to ILAS is subject to FINAL v 3.7 25 April 2019 the particular areas of disagreement and points of clarification in Section 6. Confirmation of Tandridge DC signature FINAL v 3.8 29 April 2019 Appendix amended re Woking Core Strategy Confirmation of Woking BC signature FINAL v 3.9 30 April 2019 Confirmation of Guildford BC signature FINAL v 3.10 Minor amendments to para 6.9 1 May 2019 Confirmation of Spelthorne BCsignature FINAL v 3.11 Amendment to Para 6.1 Elmbridge Borough – Action being taken to resolve 22 May 2019 disagreements FINAL v 3.12 Further amendment to Para 6.1 – Action being taken to resolve disagreements 28 May 2019 FINAL v 3.13 Confirmation of Waverley BC signature 5 June 2019 FINAL v 3.14 Confirmation of Surrey Heath BC signature.
    [Show full text]
  • Therunnymede Boroughcouncil Responsetothe Thorpe
    The Runnymede Borough Council response to the Thorpe Neighbourhood Plan at Regulation 16 Consultation Sukhpreet Khull, Principal Planning Officer [email protected] Phone: 01932 42 5267 DATE 24 August 2020 1. The purpose of this document The purpose of this document is to set out supporting information for the examination of the Thorpe Neighbourhood Plan and to provide a statement from Runnymede Borough Council. 2. Legal requirements Runnymede Borough Council officers have reviewed the submitted documents against the requirements of Regulation 15 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 (as amended) and relevant legislation and are satisfied that the required documents have been submitted, and that the requirements of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) have been met. 3. Statement from Runnymede Borough Council Runnymede Borough Council welcomes the opportunity to comment on the Thorpe Neighbourhood Plan under Regulation 16. The Borough Council strongly supports and advocates the Neighbourhood Planning Process and has a number of plans being drafted in its own administrative area, together with the formation of new areas and forums. Council Officers have worked closely with the Thorpe Neighbourhood Forum (TNF) to assist them in reaching this stage of the Neighbourhood Planning process. An immense amount of time, effort and hard work has gone into the preparation and revision of the neighbourhood plan (since Regulation 14) that supports the community’s ambitions for the Thorpe Neighbourhood Area; and as such the Council commends the work of the Neighbourhood Forum. Policy TH4 At the Regulation 14 pre-submission consultation stage of the TNP, officers commented on Policy TH4 (Housing Mix and Type, including affordable housing) wording, recommending that it should be clearer and more precise in its policy requirements to ensure it is consistent with the (then) emerging Local Plan Policy SL20 and that the TNP policy does not conflict with (emerging) strategic policy.
    [Show full text]