Statement of Availability

Plymouth Council Local Development Framework

Document available for consultation

Submission Statement Of Community Involvement.

This document is available for consultation for six weeks for people to make representation in support or objecting to the Sectary of State, from 8th March to the 19th April, during this time copies of this document and its response form will be available to view at these locations

Location Time documents can be viewed Planning Desk Monday-Friday office hours Civic Centre Windsor House Monday-Friday office hours Deriford Plymouth Central Library Monday-Friday office hours Drake Circus Plymouth Library Monday: 9am - 7.15pm Cross Park Road Tuesday: 9am - 5.30pm Crownhill Wednesday: 9am - 1pm Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 5.30pm Friday: 9am - 7.15pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Sunday: closed Devonport Library Monday: 2pm - 6pm Devonport Guildhall Tuesday: closed Ker Street Wednesday: 10am - 12noon Plymouth 2.30pm - 5pm

Thursday: closed Friday: 2pm - 5pm Saturday: 10am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Library Monday: 1pm - 7pm Efford Lane Tuesday: 9.30am - 12noon Efford 1pm - 5.30pm Plymouth Wednesday: closed Thursday: 9.30am - 12noon 1pm - 5.30pm Friday: 1pm - 5.30pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Eggbuckland Library Monday: 3pm - 5.30pm Eggbuckland Community College Tuesday: closed Westcott Close Wednesday: 3pm - 7pm Eggbuckland Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 3pm - 5.30pm Saturday: closed Sunday: closed Ernesettle Library Monday: 2pm - 5.30pm Duxford Close Tuesday: closed Ernesettle Wednesday: 2pm - 5.30pm Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 2pm - 7pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Estover Library Monday: 3pm - 5.30pm Estover Community College Tuesday: 3pm - 5.30pm Miller Way Estover Wednesday: 3pm - 5.30pm Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 3pm - 7pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Laira Library Monday: 2pm - 5pm 240 Old Laira Road Tuesday: closed Laira Wednesday: 2pm - 5pm Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 9am - 12.30pm 2pm - 6pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed North Prospect Library Monday: 2pm - 5pm Wolseley Road Tuesday: closed North Prospect Wednesday: 2pm - 5pm Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 9am - 12.30pm 2pm - 6pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Peverell Library Monday: 9am - 7pm 242A Peverell Park Road Tuesday: 9am - 5.30pm Peverell Wednesday: closed Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 5.30pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Sunday: closed Library Harewood Monday: 9am - 7pm Plympton Tuesday: 9am - 7pm Plymouth Wednesday: 9am - 1pm

Thursday: 9am - 7pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 5pm Sunday: closed Plymstock Library Monday: 9am - 7pm Horn Cross Road Tuesday: 9am - 7pm Plymstock Wednesday: 9am - 1pm Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 7pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 5pm Sunday: closed

St. Budeaux Library Monday: 9am - 7pm The Square Tuesday: 9am - 6pm Victoria Road Wednesday: 9am - 1pm St Budeaux Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 6pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 5pm Sunday: closed Library Monday: 9am - 7pm 351 Southway Drive Tuesday: 9am - 6pm Southway Wednesday: closed Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 6pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Sunday: closed Stoke Library Monday: 2pm - 7pm 21 Albert Road Tuesday: 9.30am - 1pm Stoke 2pm - 5.30pm Plymouth Wednesday: closed Thursday: 9.30am - 1pm 2pm - 5.30pm Friday: 2pm - 7pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed West Park Library Monday: 2pm - 7pm 423 - 425 Crownhill Road Tuesday: 9am - 5pm West Park Wednesday: 9am - 1pm Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 5pm Friday: 2pm - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Sunday: closed North Prospect Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45- 91/93 North Prospect road 12.30 then 1.30- 4.30 North Prospect Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30 -4.00 Plymouth Ernesettle Housing Office Monday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.30 7 Warmwell Road Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Ernesettle Plymouth Whitleigh Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then 101 Whitleigh Green 1.30-4.30 Whitleigh Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Southway Housing Office Monday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.30 65 Rockfield Avenue Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Southway Plymouth Honicknowle Housing Office Monday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.30 18 Honicknowle Green Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Honicknowle Plymouth Devonport Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then 10 Granby Way 1.30-4.30 Devonport Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Estover Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then Leypark Walk 1.30-4.30 Estover Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Efford Housing Office Monday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.30 21D Torridge Way Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Efford Plymouth

The Document will also be available to view at Plymouth City Councils Web page www.Plymouth.gov.uk In the Planning Section.

Representations on the document can be return to:

By Post Strategy Unit Planning and Regeneration Plymouth City Council The Civic Centre Plymouth PL1 2EW

By Email [email protected]

Representations must be received with in the six week consultation period running from 8th March to the 19th April. Only those representations received during the consultation period can be considered and should be on the representation forms provided.

For any further information or if you would like any document to be available in brail, audio form or in any other language please contact the Strategy Unit, Planning and Regeneration, Plymouth City Council, The Civic Centre, Plymouth, PL1 2EW Statement of Proposal Matters

Plymouth City Councils Local Development Framework

Statement of Community Involvement

The following details relate to the submission stage of the Statement of Community Involvement and comply with The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) () Regulations 2004, Regulation 28.

Proposed title of Proposed subject Matter: Geographical Consultation Coverage Document: Statement Of The guidelines for community City of Community Involvement consultation for the Local Plymouth Development Framework and consultation on Planning Applications The Consultation Period for this document is six weeks and will run from March 8th to the 19th April 2006, 5pm, all representation must be received in this time.

Representation should be sent

By Post to: The Planning Policy Manager By Email to: Strategy Unit [email protected] Planning and Regeneration Service Plymouth City Council The Civic Centre By Fax to: Plymouth 01752 304294 PL1 2EW

Request to be notified, if you would like to be notified when the Planning Inspectors recommendations are published following his/ her independent examination of the document on behalf of the Sectary of State or to be notified of the adoption please complete the form below.

Please notify me when the Planning Inspector’s recommendations are published following his/ her independent examination of the document on behalf of the Sectary of State or to be notified of the adoption of the Statement of Community Involvement (please tick as required)

Publication of Adopted recommendations Statement of Community Involvement Name: Address: Postcode: Email address: Signature

Please return this form to The Planning Policy Manager, Strategy Unit, Planning and Regeneration, Plymouth City Council, The Civic Centre, Plymouth, PL1 2EW

CITY OF PLYMOUTH

Subject: Plymouth Local Development Framework: Submission Document - Statement of Community Involvement. Committee: Cabinet

Date: 20th December 2005 Cabinet Member: Councillor Mrs Nelder

CMT Member: Director for Development Author: Mike Palmer Strategy Manager Contact: Tel: (01752 (30)4360 e-mail: [email protected] Ref: SU/MDP. C74 05/06 Part: I

Executive Summary:

The report brings before Cabinet the first of the emerging Local Development Framework (LDF) documents, the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), seeking approval for its submission to the Secretary of State for progression through an independent examination to final adoption.

The purpose of the SCI is to set out the local planning authority’s strategy for involving the community in the preparation and revision of Plymouth’s LDF and in the consideration of planning applications. Its intention is to improve the planning process by ensuring everyone’s views are taken into account.

The requirements for the preparation and adoption of the SCI are set out in the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Order Act 2004, and its associated regulations. When adopted, the SCI will have the status of a Development Plan Document within the new Plymouth Local Development Framework. This means that the consultation stages for all planning policy documents and planning applications must comply with the standards set out the SCI. If these commitments are not met, then the decision can be regarded as failing the ‘test of soundness’, and further consultations will have to be held.

As with all other Development Plan Documents, before it is adopted, the SCI must be submitted to the Secretary of State for ‘independent examination’. The purpose of the examination will be to test whether it is ‘soundly based’. The Government sets out, in Planning Policy Statement 12, ‘Local Development Frameworks’, the nine tests of soundness which local planning authority’s must demonstrate their SCI satisfies.

The process for the preparation and adoption of the SCI has included the following stages:- • An Interim SCI, reflecting the government’s minimum standards for community consultation, was published in July 2004. • Consultation on the Interim SCI was carried out as part of the wider LDF Issues/Options consultation stage during March /April 2005. • To help develop the SCI, a Task Group of community representatives and members of the public (including hard to reach groups) was set up. The Task Group met nine times between the period February 2004 – August 2005, as well as holding a final ‘sign off’ meeting in November 2005. • A further consultation on the Draft SCI was undertaken at the wider LDF Preferred Options stage during August /September 2005. • At the Preferred Options stage, (September 2005), a separate consultation event was held to establish the views of so-called “hard to reach groups” on the SCI. • The process of revising the SCI, to reflect the comments received during the above stages, has been reported to the Sustainable Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel at their meetings on 29th September 2005 and 26th October 2005.

The outcome from all these consultation initiatives have been addressed in the latest version of the published Statement of Community Involvement. (A summary report of the comments made on the SCI at the Preferred Options Stage will be published on the PCC Web page as a background report to the submission document.)

Cabinet approval in now sought for the SCI’s formal submission to the Secretary of State, to be progressed through an independent examination to final adoption.

Corporate Plan 2004-2007:

The Corporate Plan identifies publication of the LDF as a key element of delivering the objective of providing “a strong strategic framework to promote investment, guide development and safeguard our built and natural environment”. It includes a series of targets relating to core LDF documents.

The SCI forms a statutory part of Plymouth’s LDF and will, by helping to improve the planning process - ensuring everyone’s views are taken into account, contribute directly to other objectives and targets of the Corporate Strategy, most notably: • Delivering the Mackay Vision and improving the quality of design across the city, through appropriate spatial planning and design policy frameworks. • Improving development control performance, through providing an up to date and robust policy framework. • Working with developers to bring forward key developments at City Centre and waterfront sites and Strategic Opportunity Areas and Sites, through provision of supportive general and site-specific policy frameworks and enabling powers such as Compulsory Purchase Orders to be used effectively. • Providing clear plans for future investment that helps secure Government and other funds for transport priorities, through identifying strategic infrastructure needs in association with the spatial planning strategy. • Ensuring an adequate level and choice of employment land and premises, through land use allocations. • Implementing a £38m PFI for schools, through appropriate land use allocations. • Ensuring an adequate supply of affordable housing to meet Plymouth’s housing needs, through land use allocations and policies. • Making the best use of the Council’s land and buildings, through providing a planning policy context to support delivery of services and corporate strategies.

Implications for Medium Term Financial Plan and Resource Implications: Including finance, human, IT and land

The financial implications of progressing the SCI to adoption have already been covered in a separate report to Cabinet (dated 12th July 2005), which considered the overall financial implications of meeting on Plymouth’s Local Development Scheme.

Other Implications: e.g. Section 17 Community Safety, Health and Safety, Risk Management, etc.

The LDF will directly support the promotion of community safety through the provision of policies to influence the design and nature of physical development.

Recommendations & Reasons for recommended action:

It is recommended that the Cabinet:

1 Approve the Statement of Community Involvement for submission to the Secretary of State for progression through an independent examination to formal adoption.

Reason: To meet the publication targets set out in the approved Local Development Scheme.

2 Delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Regeneration to agree the final publication format of the Statement of Community Involvement, subject to any significant changes to the content of the documents being agreed with the Strategic Planning Policy Portfolio Holder before their publication.

Reason: To comply with the new planning legislation and enable the City Council to proceed towards a Local Development Framework at the earliest opportunity in accordance with the performance standards set out in BVPI 200.

Alternative options considered and reasons for recommended action:

The only real options for the Council relate to its content and to the timing of its submission. There is a statutory requirement to prepare and adopt an SCI, setting out the local planning authority’s strategy for involving the community in the preparation and revision of Plymouth’s LDF and in the consideration of planning applications.

While the Local Planning Authority can work to government’s minimum standards for community involvement, as set out in their guidance, as an interim measure, the preparation and adoption of its own SCI has to be undertaken at some stage, preferably before any of the Policy documents that will make up the LDF are subject to their final consultation stage prior to submission to the secretary of state.

Officers have prepared this SCI on the basis of their professional evaluation of the issues and evidence, taking into account the views expressed by the public, and recommend its submission to the Secretary of State in line with the current LDS timetable.

Background papers:

City of Plymouth Local Plan, adopted 1996.

Community Planning Studies for Plymouth and wards, May 2001.

City of Plymouth First Deposit Local Plan, December 2001.

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 13th July 2004: Plymouth Local Development Framework (Local Development Scheme and Statement of Community Involvement).

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 9th November 2004: Sustainable Communities Plan for the South West.

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 14th December 2004: Plymouth Local Development Framework: Local Development Scheme, Status of Existing Policies, and Safeguarding Issues.

Local Development Scheme. Submitted. January 2005 (this document includes a detailed list of the evidence base for each LDD).

Preliminary Sustainable Appraisals for LDDs. March 2005.

Plymouth, SE Cornwall and SW to 2026 consultation leaflet, March 2005.

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 15th March 2005: Plymouth, South East Cornwall and South West Devon Sub Regional Strategy: Sustainable Growth Options.

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 14th June 2005: Regional Spatial Strategy: Informal policy proposals for the Plymouth, SE Cornwall and SW Devon Joint Study Area.

Report of Director for Life Long Learning to Cabinet, 14th June 2005: School Implementation Plan 2005-2015.

Responses to LDF Issues and Options consultation, June 2005. (Summary report of consultation).

Minutes of the Sustainable Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel at their meetings on 29th September 2005 and 26th October 2005

Royal Town Planning Institute, November 2005, Guideline on Effective Community Involvement and Consultation.

Sign off: Fin DF560023 Leg JR HR N/a AM N/a IT N/a Originating CMF Member 1 BACKGROUND

1.1 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 received Royal Assent on 13th May 2004. Its provisions relating to development planning came into effect on 28th September 2004.

1.2 The Act, and its associated regulations, provide for the preparation of Local Development Documents (LDDs) which together will constitute Plymouth’s new Local Development Framework (LDF).

1.5 This report is concerned with the submission to the Secretary of State of the first of Plymouth’s emerging LDF documents – the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI).

1.6 The Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) sets out a proposed framework and standards for community involvement in the LDF and development control process. Its intention is to improve the planning process by ensuring that mechanisms are in place to enable everyone’s views on planning matters to be taken into account.

1.7 The requirements for the preparation and adoption of the SCI are set out in the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Order Act 2004, and its associated regulations. When adopted, the SCI will have the status of a Development Plan Document within the new system of planning documents for Plymouth known as the Local Development Framework. This means that the consultation stages for all planning policy documents and planning applications must comply with the standards set out the SCI. If these commitments are not met, then the decision can be regarded as failing the ‘test of soundness’, and further consultations will have to be held.

1.8 As with all other Development Plan Documents, before it is adopted, the SCI must be submitted to the Secretary of State for ‘independent examination’. The purpose of the examination will be to test whether it is ‘soundly based’. The Government sets out, in Planning Policy Statement 12, ‘Local Development Frameworks’, the nine tests of soundness which local planning authority’s must demonstrate their SCI satisfies.

2. PROCESS

2.1 The process for the preparation and adoption of the SCI is set out in statutory regulations. It includes the following key stages: • Preparation. Authorities are expected to consult with communities and stakeholders as part of the scoping / preparation of the draft SCI. • Preferred Options. A Draft SCI must be published and subject to a 6 week period during which formal representations can be made. • Submission. The SCI should then be amended and formally “submitted” to Government. • Independent examination. An independent examination will be held, over seen by a Planning Inspector, whose report will be binding on the Council. • Adoption. Following receipt of the inspector’s report, which may require changes to the SCI, following which the Council can formally adopt the SCI.

2.2 The Preparation / scoping stage for the SCI, took place between July 2004 and July 2005. This involved publishing an initial draft SCI as a basis for engaging with all interested parties, as well as a more formal consultation period during the LDF Issues /Options stage. The length of this preparation period reflects the fact that, while Plymouth made a timely start to preparing its LDF documents, this initial period has seen a number of government publications providing further detailed LDF guidance, which has necessitated adjustments to the content of the SCI and other LDF documents. However, this extended initial preparation period has enabled a wide range of views to be sought and incorporated into the final document. This initial preparation /scoping stage has included: • Approval by Cabinet in July 2004, for consultation purposes, of an initial draft SCI. This document was made available on request, and could be viewed on the city council web site, providing a basis for discussion with interested parties so as to evolve the SCI to the next stage. • A formal consultation period, during the LDF Issues/Options consultation period of March /April 2005, when the SCI was advertised for public comment. There was only one formal comment at this stage, which requested that the respondent be identified as a non statutory consultee in the SCI. (They have subsequently been included on the LDF mailing list.) • During this period an SCI Task Group was established, to advise the City Council on its SCI preparation. This group was made up of both representatives from community partnerships, as well as representatives from the ‘hard to reach groups’. It also included members who responded to the request for volunteers for the Task Group, which was made at the Issues /Options launch of the LDF. The Task group met 9 times during the period Feb.2004 – Aug. 2005, making a significant contribution to the evolution of the SCI.

2.3 The Preferred Options consultation stage took place during the six week period 29th July to 9th September 2005. This involved publishing a revised draft SCI, as a basis for further formal public consultation. This revised document reflected both the comments received during the preparation stage, as well as changes to reflect the latest government guidance. As part of this consultation process a specific consultation event was held, in conjunction with the Local Transport Plan consultation, specifically to listen to the views of so-called “hard to reach groups”. The events were facilitated by Corporate Diagnostics on behalf of PCC, carried out during Sept. 2005, and specifically targeted the Young, Older People, Disabled, & Black Minority Ethnic groups. Plymouth Pride Forum requested to simply be forwarded all the consultation material.

2.4 The SCI Preferred Options report included the following key elements / provisions: • It set out the Council’s objectives for community involvement in the LDF and planning applications. • It identified key principles of community involvement in the planning process, including the “front-loading” principle concerning the need for early engagement of people in the planning process. • It identified a range of consultation processes and methods that may be used at different stages of the plan-making process. • It also set a framework for consultation on planning applications, including the need for pre-application consultation by applicants in respect of significant development control proposal.

2.5 The SCI was generally well received at this Preferred Options stage, although a number of concerns were raised. All respondents were asked, through a structured questionnaire, to both express a view as to whether the draft SCI met each of the government’s nine ‘tests of soundness’, as well as given the opportunity to make further comments on the SCI itself. From a total of 39 responses from organisations and individuals, there were more than twice as many supports than concerns raised, in a general ratio of 2.5 supports to every one concern raised. On average, most respondents were satisfied that the Draft SCI met the governments nine ‘tests of soundness’. In general 30%– 40% of the responses were satisfied, compared to the 10% - 20% of responses which queried whether it met one or more of the ‘tests of soundness. However, these figures need to be seen within the context that there were a significant number of responses where the respondent chose not to express a view one way or the other, but simply raised a matter to be considered in revising the draft SCI.

2.6 The process of revising the SCI, to reflect the comments received during the above stages, has been reported to the Sustainable Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel at their meetings on 29th September 2005 and 26th October 2005.

2.7 A background report summarising the issues raised at this stage will be published on the Council’s web site, but the key issues arising fall within the following broad areas: • There is a need for greater clarity within the document through the use of Plain English and avoidance of technical jargon, as well better formatting. • There is a need to highlight the relevance of the SCI to individuals. It needs to demonstrate how the adoption of the SCI is going to make a difference. • There is a need to develop more effective consultation methods. For example the greater use of DVDs, TV, Radio, as well as giving talks / presentations to schools and other groups. • There needs to be a clear commitment to provide sufficient financial resources to ensure the city’s aspirations to involve everyone can be effectively met. • There is a need for longer consultation timescales, with better notification as to when they are going to take place. • There is a healthy scepticism of whether the Council will act on the responses it receives from consultation events, but a recognition that overcoming this will take time. There is a need to build trust, and provide more ‘feedback’ and how the Council has responded to the public’s views.

3 NEXT STEPS.

3.1 Following submission of the SCI to the Secretary of State, it will be published, (along with a number of supporting documents), allowing a 6 week period during which formal representations on the SCI can be lodged with the Council. Following this there will be a further 6 week period during which all the representations made will be published, enabling further representations to be made. Assuming that there are representations to be heard there will an inquiry chaired by an independent inspector, whose report will set out any changes that have to be made to the SCI before it is finally adopted by the Council.

Appendix A - Detailed List of Consultees

3G Child Support Agency Academy Variety Workshop Children & Young People's Strategic Partnership Activ8 Communities Ltd Chinese Cultural Development Centre Adelaide Street Surgery Church Commissioners for England Aggregate Industries Church View Surgery AHIMSA Civil Aviation Authority Alder King Cleanaway Ltd All Saints House Coastal Waste Allsop Matcham Colebrook Housing Society Antony Parish Council Colin Buchanan Armada Surgery College of St Mark and St John Ashtorre Rock Community Centre College Road Primary School Associated British Ports Collings Park Medical Centre Association of Barbican Businesses Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment Asylum Seekers & Refugee Service Commission for Racial Equality Austin Farm Community Primary School Commnet AZ Urban Studio Common Purpose Barbican Association Community Fund Barn Owl Trust Compton Church of England Primary School Barne Barton Community School Connexions Barton Surgery Conservative party Barton Willmore Planning Partnership - Western Constituenacy Office BBC South West Contracts Management Section BDA Consulting Coombe Dean School Beaumont Villa Surgery COPTE Belliver Tenants & Residents Association Cornwall Centre for Volunteers Bettison and Co Cornwall County Council Bevan Ashfords Cornwall Paper Company Bickleigh Parish Council Corporate Director for Housing Services Biffa Waste Services Ltd Cory Environmental Services Ltd Bikeaway Countryside Agency Bond Pearce Countryside and Leisure Service Boringdon Primary School County Environmental Services Ltd Bovis Homes Limited Courtlands Brake Farm Ltd CPR Regeneration British Telecom CPRE Devon Brittany Ferries Crownhill Estates Ltd Brixton Parish Council Crownhill Library Budshead Health Centre Crownhill Surgery * Budshead Trust Cumberland Surgery * Bull Point Community School Cyclist Touring Club Business In The Community D & C Learning & Skills Council Business Link Devon & Cornwall Dartmoor National Park C/o Morris Baptist Church Dean Cross Surgery C/o PGVS Defense Logistic Organisation Cable and Wireless Department for Constitutional Affairs Callington Community Centre Department for Culture Media and Sport Callington Health Centre Department for Education and Skills Callington Library Department for Transport Callington Town Council Department of Trade and Industry Calstock Parish Council Department of Work and Pensions Estates Cann Estate Derriford East, Birdgage Residents Association Capital Planning Devon & Cornwall Housing Association Caradon District Council Devon & Cornwall Police Care & Repair Devon & Cornwall Probation Service Carlton ITV Westcountry Devon & Cornwall Refugee Support Council Cathedral School of St Mary Devon and Cornwall Business Council Harbour Commissioners Devon and Cornwall Constabulary CBI Devon and Cornwall Housing Association Cerco Property Consultants Devon Community Foundation Chaddlewood Farm Community Centre Devon Conservation Forum Chaddlewood Infant School Devon Co-operative Development Agency Chaddlewood Junior School Devon County Council Chard Road Surgery Devon Fire and Rescue Service Chaucer Primary School Devon Waste Management Chesterton Devonport and Western Area Health and Safety Group Appendix A - Detailed List of Consultees

Chief Ambulance Service Devonport High School for Boys Devonport High School for Girls Greenbank Neighbourhood Office Devonport Library Groundwork Trust Devonport Management Ltd Guild of Voluntary Services Devonport Regeneration Community Partnership GVA Grimley Devplan UK Halcyon Centre DIAC Ham Drive Nursery School Dialogue Communicating Planning Hamoaze House Disability Rights Commission Hanover Housing Association Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee Harbour Centre Downham Special School Health and Safety Executive Drake Primary School Hearing & Sight Centre Duchy of Cornwall Hele's School Dug and Alcohol Action Team (DAAT) High Street Primary School Dunstone Community Primary School Highfield Primary School Durnford Society Highways Agency East End Partnership Hillside EAZ HM Land Registry Ecological Sciences Ltd HM Naval Base Eddystone Trust Holy Cross Catholic Primary School Efford Library Home Office Efford Surgery Homelessness Strategy Implementation Group Efford Youth and Community Centre Honicknowle Commnet Eggbuckland Community College Honicknowle Green Med. Centre Eggbuckland Library Hooe Primary School Eggbuckland Vale Primary School House Builders Federation Elburton Primary School Housing Corporation Elm Surgery Housing for People Office Employment Service Housing Strategy and Development English Fund Hyde Park Infant School English Nature English Partnerships Hyde Park Surgery Environment & Sustainability Partnership Ian Penrose Architects Environment Agency Imery's Minerals Ltd, Estates Environmental Sealand Services Ltd Independent Party Equal Opportunities Commission Inland Revenue Ernesettle Family Centre Institute of Directors Plymouth Centre Ernesettle Green Surgery Integrem Limited Ernesettle Infant School Ivybridge Town Council Ernesettle Junior School Jan Cutting HLC Ernesettle Library Job Centre Plus Estover Community College John Kitto Community College Estover Library Jones Day Estover Primary School Jubb Consulting Engineers Ltd European Metal Recycling Keyham Barton Catholic Primary School Evening Herald Keyham Community Partnership Family and Parent Learning Service King Strurge & Co Federation of Small Businesses King Sturge First Group Kingdon House Community Centre Floor 2 Kings Wharf Foot Anstey Sargent Kinnfylde Residents Association Ford Primary School Knight Frank Forestry Commission Knowle House Surgery Form Design Group Architects Knowle Primary School Fortress Credit Union KPMG Fosca Services (UK) Ltd Labour Framptons Chartered Town Planning Consultants Lacey Hickie Caley Frederick Street Centre Laira Green Primary School Freedom Health Centre Laira Library Friary House Surgery Laity House FROST Land Securities Properties Ltd Gervas Property Landulph Parish Council Glen Park Primary School Langley Infant School Glenside Medical Centre Langley Junior School Golden Girls & Boys Lanteglos Parish Council Goosewell Primary School Learning & Skills Council Appendix A - Detailed List of Consultees

Government Office for the South West Leigham Primary School Granby Island Community Centre Leigham Residents Association Lennon Planning PHDU Levvel Consulting Ltd Pilgrim Primary School Leypark Surgery * Pillaton Parish Council Liberal Democrat Pirate FM Linkinhorne Parish Council Plaistow Hill Infant School Community College Plym River Practice Lisson Grove Medical Centre Plym View Primary School Longcause Community Special School Plymbridge Nursery School Maker with Rame Parish Council Plymouth & District Disabled Fellowship Manadon Vale Primary School Plymouth & South West Co-operative Society Surgery Plymouth & West Devon Talking Newspaper Marine South West Plymouth 2020 Partnership Maritime Plymouth Plymouth Access To Housing Marlborough Primary School Plymouth Age Concern Marlborough Street Surgery Plymouth Architectural Trust Mary Dean's Church of England Primary School Plymouth Central Library Maze Consulting Plymouth CFE Meadowlands Leisure Pool Plymouth Chamber of Commerce Midas Construction Plymouth Citizens Advice Bureau Mill Ford Community Special School Plymouth City Centre Partnership Millbay Advisory Forum Plymouth City Council, Housing Services Millbrook Parish Council Millfields CEDT Plymouth Civic Society MoD Defence Estate Organisation Plymouth College of Art and Design Montpelier Infant School Plymouth College of Further Education Montpelier Junior School Plymouth Community Network Morice Town Primary School Plymouth Community Partnership Mount Gould Neighbourhood Association Plymouth Community Safety Partnership Mount Street Primary School Plymouth Deaf Association Mount Tamar School Plymouth Education Action Zone Mount Wise Primary School Plymouth Environment Forum National Grid Transco Plymouth Excellence Cluster National Playing Fields Association Plymouth Family Support Services National Trust Plymouth Guild of Voluntary Service NCH Action for Children Plymouth High School For Girls Neighbourhood Voluntary Visiting Service Plymouth Hospital School Network Rail Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust New Earth Solutions Plymouth Learning & Work Partnership North Plymouth Playschemes Plymouth Learning Links North Prospect Community School Plymouth Library Services North Prospect Garage Project Plymouth Manufacturers Group North Prospect Library Plymouth MENCAP Society North Prospect Partnership Plymouth Mencap Society North Prospect Regeneration Forum Plymouth Mental Health Forum North Road West Med Centre Plymouth MIND North Road West Tenants & Residents Association Plymouth Money Advice Group Northern Networks Plymouth Muscians Cooperative Notre Dame Roman Catholic School Plymouth Network Consortium Nova Surgery * Plymouth PCT O2 Plymouth Pride Forum Oakside Surgery * Plymouth Primary Care Trust Office of Government Commerce Plymouth Racial Equality Council Office of the Vice Chancellor Plymouth Relate Old Priory Junior School Plymouth Religious & Cultural Resource Centre on behalf of Devon Stone Federation Plymouth Shopmobility & Community Transport Orange Plymouth Tuition Service Oreston Community Primary School Plymouth Women's Aid P & O Properties Plymouth Women's Refuge Paper Converting Plymouth YWCA Park View Surgery * Plympton Library Parkside Community Technology College Plympton St Mary's Church of England Infant School Pathfields Practice Plympton St Maurice Primary School Pennycross Primary School Plymstock Forum Penrilla Consultants Plymstock Library Appendix A - Detailed List of Consultees

PETRA Plymstock School Peverell Library Police Authority Peverell Park Surgery Pomphlett Primary School Port of Plymouth Marine Liaison St Budeaux Foundation Church of England Junior School Powergen St Budeaux Library Prestige Design and Build Ltd St Cleer Parish Council Prince Rock Primary School St Dominic Parish Council Prosper St Edward's Church of England Primary School PYPA 21 St George's Church of England Primary School Queens Harbour Master Plymouth St Joseph's Catholic Primary School R Cundy & Sons (Farms) Ltd St Neot Parish Council Racial Equality Council St Neots Surgery Radio Devon St Paul's Roman Catholic Primary School Rapleys LLP St Peter's Church of England Primary School Really Useful Knowledge Consultants St Peter's Roman Catholic Primary School Rees Youth & Community Centre St Peter's Vicarage Refugee Action St Veep Parish Council RIBA Community Architecture Network St Winnow Parish Council Ridgeway Practice St. Barnabas Surgery * Ridgeway School St. Budeaux Health centre Roborough Surgery Stagecoach Devon Rockeagle Ltd Stoke Damerel Community College Routeways Stoke Damerel Primary School RPB Autosalvage Stoke Library Rural Community Council of Devon Stoke Surgery Salisbury Road Infant School Stonehouse ACTION Salisbury Road Junior School Stonehouse Playspace Association Salisbury Road Surgery Stonham Housing Association Ltd Saltash Road Surgery Strategic Rail Authority Saltash Town Council Stratton Creber Commercial Salvation Army Strutt and Parker Sanctuary Housing Association Stuart Road Primary School Savills Sure Start Keystone Scott Wilson Sure Start Plus/Teenage Pregnancy Service Seaton Area Residents Association Sure Start Tamar Folk Secretary of State for Health SUSTRANS Seven Hills Community Network Sutherland Road Surgery Severnside Waste Paper Co Ltd Sutton Harbour Company Shaugh Prior Parish Council SW RDA Shekinah Mission SW Skills for Life Unit SHIP Hostel SWEB Energy Sid Knowles Waste Ltd T Mobile Signpost Housing Association Tactic Consultants Simsmetal UK (Wessex) Ltd Tamar Bridge and Tamar Ferry Joint Committee Sir John Hunt Community College Tamar Development Trust Skills For Life Unit Tamar Education Business Partnership Social Security Office Tamar Housing Society South Dartmoor Leisure Centre Tamar Science Park South Devon AONB Unit Tamar View Residents Association South Hams District Council Tamarside Community College South Hill Parish Council Village Conservation Sociaty South Trelawny Primary School Tamerton Vale Primary School South West Peninsula Strategic Health Authority Bus Station Kiosk South West Public Health Group Telewest coms South West Region, Learning and Skills Council The Architects Design Group South West Regional Assembly The Architects Design Group South West Regional Committee of Jehovah's Witness The British Wind Energy Association South West Water The Foyer Southway Information Centre The Gypsy Council Southway Library The Monitoring Group - Rural Racism Project Southway Primary School The Phoenix Centre Southway Surgery The Surgery Sovereign Housing Association Thornbury Primary School Sparkwell Parish Council Tomorrow's People Sport England Torbay Borough Council SRB Board Member Torpoint Chamber of Commerce Appendix A - Detailed List of Consultees

SRB Board Member Torpoint Library SRB Company Treasurer Torpoint Town Council St Andrew's Church of England Primary School Toshiba Ltd Audio & Magnetron St Boniface's Roman Catholic College Tothill Library Tothill surgery Westbury Homes (Holdings) Ltd Transport 2000 Westcountry Housing Association Trelawney Community Centre Westcountry Publications Trelawny Surgery * Westcountry Tourist Board Trevorder Family Centre Western Power Distribution University of Plymouth Weston Mill CP School Urban Splash South West Whitleigh CP School Urban Village Widewell Primary School Vickery Holman Widewell Residents Association Victim Support Devon Widey Court Primary School Victoria Road Primary School William Sutton Trust Viner Fulfords Wolseley CEDT Virgin Cross Country Wood Yew Waste Virgin Mobile Woodfield Primary School Viridor Waste Management Ltd Woodford Infant School Vodafone Woodford Junior School Voice of Plymouth Schools Woodlands Warleggan Parish Meeting Working Links Waterloo & St Levan Surgeries Wrescombe Court Welcome Hall Ltd Wyclifffe Surgery Wembury Parish Council Wykeham Securities West Devon Borough Council Yealmpstone Farm Primary School West Hoe Surgery Youth Enquiry Service West Park Library Youth of the Nations West Park Primary School Youth Offending Team

Title First Last Name Company Response Name/Initia l Mr John Baker Plymouth City Council Apologies Mr Richard Bayly Government Office South West Apologies Mr Martin Berkien University of Plymouth Apologies Mr Bob Bewley English Heritage Apologies Mr Adam Broome Corporate Director for Corporate Resources Apologies

Mr Jim Caley Lacey Hickie Caley Apologies Ms Prue Chalker North Prospect Partnership Apologies Ms Lesley Chalmers English Cities Fund Apologies Inspec tor Paul Chudley Devon & Cornwall Constabulary Apologies Mr Jason Collard Urban Splash South West Apologies Ms June Crossland National Trust Apologies Counci llor Susan Dann Apologies Mr Andrew Davies Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust Apologies Ms Barbara Dove Plymouth Age Concern Apologies Mr Bob Dow Business Link Devon & Cornwall Apologies Mr Drennan Sport England Apologies Mr Colin Greenwell Associated British Ports Apologies Mr Nick Harrington SW RDA Apologies Mr Peter Harrison Institute of Directors Plymouth Centre Apologies Mr Nick Heath MoD Defence Estate Organisation Apologies Ms Bryony Houlden Chief Executive, South West Regional Apologies Assembly Cdr Ian Hugo Queens Harbour Master Plymouth Apologies Mr Duncan Innes English Partnerships Apologies David Jamieson House of Commons Apologies Mr Tim Jones Devon and Cornwall Business Council Apologies Mr Barry Keel Plymouth City Council Apologies Ms Bronwen Lacey Plymouth City Council Apologies Ms Deborah Lapthorne Corporate Director for Public Health Apologies Profes sor Roland Levinsky University of Plymouth Apologies Mr David Lobban Penrilla Consultants Apologies Mr Longden Brittany Ferries Apologies Mr Murdo Mace Midas Construction Apologies Sir Roy McNulty Chair, Civil Aviation Authority Apologies Mr Ian Miller First Group Apologies Sir John Parker National Grid Transco Apologies Mr Ian Parsons Highways Agency, Network Strategy Team Apologies

Counci llor Chris Pattison Apologies Mr Ian Potts The Architects Design Group Apologies Mr Mike Robinson Plymouth City Council Apologies Mr Chas Shaw PETRA Apologies Counci llor Peter Smith Apologies Mr Garvis Snook Rockeagle Ltd Apologies Mr John Steven Wykeham Securities Apologies Gary Streeter House of Commons Apologies Mr Clive Turner Corporate Director for Housing Services Apologies Mr Mark Vincent Plymouth City Council Apologies Mr Morris Watts Devon & Cornwall Police Apologies Counci llor George Wheeler Apologies Mr Richard Willoughby Plymouth City Council Apologies Mr Colin Yelland Aggregate Industries Apologies Sir/Ma Scott Wilson Apologies dam Mr Bert Massie, Disability Rights Commission Apologies CBE Mr John Ackroyd Plymouth Citybus Attending Mr Garth Allen Really Useful Knowledge Consultants Attending Mr Don Allen Transport 2000 Attending Mr Hamish Anderson Chief Ambulance Service Attending J Andrews Carlton ITV Westcountry Attending Ms Kate Baber Attending Mr Tim Bacon Sutton Harbour Attending Mr Richard Bara Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Paul Barnard Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Barry Barrett Chief Ambulance Service Attending Mr Jonathan Bell Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Simon Betty Gervas Property Attending L Blake Evening Herald Attending Counci Derick Bray Attending llor Ms Cathy Brodribb King Sturge Attending Mrs Georgina Browne Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Andrew Burns Countryside Agency Attending Mr Richard Burra Plymouth City Council Attending Counci llor Dennis Camp Attending Mr Malcolm Carmicheal Devon and Fire Rescue Service Attending Mr James Carter Plymouth & South West Co-operative Attending Society Captai Tim Charleswort Cattewater Harbour Commissioners Attending n h Mr Martin Clay North Prospect Partnership Attending Mr Will Collier Plymouth City Council Attending Ms Georgie Constable Plymouth Network Consortium Attending Mr Matt Coombe Plymouth City Council Attending Ms Christine Coonan Devon and Cornwall Housing Association Attending

Mr James Coulton Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Richard Crocker Stonehouse ACTION Attending Mr Duncan Currall Westcountry Publications Attending Mr Chris Davis English Nature Attending Ms Tara Dickenson Government Office South West Attending Mr Bruce Duncan BDA Consulting Attending Mr John Ellis English Cities Fund Attending Counci llor Tudor Evans Plymouth City Council Attending Mr David John Every Plymouth Community Network Attending Mr Robin Falle Stratton Creber Commercial Attending Mr Pete Ford Plymouth City Council Attending Counci Wendy Foster Attending llor Counci Ken Foster Attending llor Mr Bernie Foulkes Kings Wharf Attending Counci Garton West Devon Borough Council Attending llor Linda Gilroy House of Commons Attending Ms Emma Green Maze Consulting Attending Ms Kath Hadrell Government Office South West Attending Ms Eunice Halliday Plymouth Community Partnership Attending Mr Keith Halsey Plymouth Community Safety Partnership Attending Mr Mike Hardaway College of St Mark and St John Attending Mr Paul Harris Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Ian Harrison Devon County Council Attending Mr Peter Hayward Midas Construction Attending Mr Brian Hegarty Ashfords Attending Mr Darryl Hendley Fulfords Land and Planning Attending Ms Claire Hill Stonehouse ACTION Attending Mr Alan Hindley Fulfords Land and Planning Attending N Holman Vickery Holman Attending Mr Jason Hooper Fulfords Land and Planning Attending Ms Jac Houslander Plymouth City Council Attending

Mr John Howard Maritime Plymouth Attending Mr Charles Howeson Crownhill Estates Ltd Attending Mr Alex Huke Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Grant Jackson Plymouth City Council Attending Ms Ann James Primary Care Trust Attending D Jenner Plymouth Sound Attending Nova Johns Budshead Trust Attending Miss Marion Jones Plymouth City Council Attending Ms Irene Kearney Plymouth Community Partnership Attending Mr Charles Kislingbury King Strurge & Co Attending Mr Andrew Kitchener Fulfords Land and Planning Attending Mr Ray Knight P & O Properties Attending Counci Michael Leaves Attending llor Counci Levack Caradon District Council Attending llor Mr Stephen Lobb Chesterton Attending Mr Graham Lobb Form Design Group Architects Attending Counci Ernest Lock Attending llor Mr Shaik Madussar Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Alex Marsh Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Paul Martin Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Stephen Matcham Allsop Matcham Attending Ms Caroline Mather Guild of Voluntary Services Attending Mr Peter McNamara Devonport Regeneration Company Attending Ms Hannah Metson Plymouth City Council Attending Ms Sunita Mills Highways Agency, Network Strategy Team Attending

A Miranda Plymouth Civic Society Attending Mr Phil Mitchell East End Partnership Attending Mr Casey Mitchell Honicknowle Commnet Attending Mr Marc Nash The Architects Design Group Attending Counci llor Jean Nelder Attending Mr Chris Nelson Devon and Fire Rescue Service Attending Counci Patrick Nicholson Attending llor Miss Fiona Northcott Plymouth City Council Attending Dr Peter O'Neill Environment & Sustainability Partnership Attending Mr Richard Ormerod Government Office for the South West Attending D Orton Ortomatic Attending J Osborne Carlton ITV Westcountry Attending Mr Mike Palmer Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Steve Parissien University of Plymouth Attending Ms Liza Parker Plymouth Community Partnership Attending Ms Alison Hernandez Plymouth 2020 Partnership Attending Mr Chris Parsonage Attending Mr Julian Payne Environment Agency Attending Mr Mark Pearson CPR Regeneration Attending Mr Ian Penrose Ian Penrose Architects Attending Mr David Percival Plymouth College of Further Education Attending Mr Nigel Pitt Plymouth City Council Attending

Mr George Plenderleith PGVS Attending Robert Plumb Plymouth City Council Attending Miss Helen Plymsol Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Peter Prescott Devon and Cornwall Housing Association Attending

Counci llor Pauline Purnell Attending Mr Alan Qualtrough Evening Herald Attending Mr Martin Roberts Federation of Small Businesses Attending Mr Andy Roberts Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Roger Sands Foot Anstey Sargent Attending Mrs Eilis Scott Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Jonathan Selman Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Nalin Seneviratne Attending

Counci Graham Shears Attending llor J Slaven Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Phil Smith Plymouth Citybus Attending Mr Roger Smith Westbury Homes (Holdings) Ltd Attending Mr Peter Strawbridge Devon & Cornwall Police Attending

Mr Dave Taylor Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Charles Tharnthong Jubb Consulting Engineers Ltd Attending

Mr William Tuckett Cann Estate Attending Mr Jon Turner Sutton Harbour Attending Mr Nigel Twinn Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Derek Unitt Attending A Vallantyne Pirate FM Attending Mr Ali Wagstaff Plymouth City Council Attending Ms Joan Walsh Attending Mr Julian Warington- Rokeagle Attending Smyth Counci llor David Alan Weekes Attending Ms Tina West Enterprise Plymouth Ltd Attending Ms Jan West Tamar Development Trust Attending Miss Nicki Western Plymouth City Council Attending C Whipp Radio Devon Attending Counci Nicky Wildy Attending llor Counci Tom Wildy Attending llor R Wilkshire Ortomatic Attending Mrs Olivia Wilson Plymouth City Council Attending Mr Colin Woodman Cyclist Touring Club Attending Sir/Ma SUSTRANS Attending dam Counci Mary Aspinall Attending - llor poss? Counci Attending - llor Mark King poss? Counci Chris Mavin Attending - llor poss? Ms Catherine Jackson Lennon Planning Attending on bahalf of Urban Splash

Mr Mathew Arthur Imery's Minerals Ltd, Estates Mr Martin Berkein Mr Lee Bray South Hams District Council Mr Ian Brokenshire

Dr Sue Brownlow SW RDA Mr Chris Byers Ms Susie Byrne House Builders Federation Ms Rachel Crozier Plymouth Environment Forum Mr Cummins Land Securities Properties Ltd Mr Andy Dart Mr Chris Dunford West Devon Borough Council C Gates Mr Nigel Godefroy Sutton Harbour Company Mr Mike Green South West Water Miss Helen Guard Knight Frank Mr Nigel Halford Tamar Science Park Ms Lucy Hamilton Mr Martin Harradine AZ Urban Studio Mr Roger Harris Mr Paul Harvey Plymstock Forum Counci David James llor Ms Janet Johnson Mr Peter Jones Devonport Management Ltd Mr Neil Judge Rail Track Property Mr Ray Lacey Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust Counci Martin Leaves llor Mr David Mackay Mr Matthews Westcountry Tourist Board Ms Jo McAren Ms Hannah Metson Plymouth City Council Mr Adrian Mitchell Mr David Morgan English Heritage Mr Matthew Morris GVA Grimley Mr John Oakes South Hams District Council Mr Alan Partridge Housing Corporation Counci llor Vivien Pengelly Ms Linda Robinson Plymouth MIND Mr Geoff Roughton Caradon District Council Ms Rona Smith Plymouth Excellence Cluster Counci Bill Stevens llor Mr Roger Stevens Mr Geoffrey Sworder CPRE Devon Mr Gerald Taylor First Devon and Cornwall Mr Gerald Taylor Mr Jon Turner First Group G Walker Mr Maurice West Ms Ann Wilkinson Plymouth Racial Equality Council Counci Richard Yonge South Hams District Council llor Sir/Ma Alder King dam Sir/Ma BBC South West dam Sir/Ma Carlton dam Sir/Ma Crown Estate dam Sir/Ma Network Rail dam Sir/Ma Plymouth Architectural Trust dam Sir/Ma Vickery Holman dam Sir/Ma Viner Fulfords dam

PLYMOUTH DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

SEPTEMBER 2004

1 PLYMOUTH’S DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

THE PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT

This Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) sets out how the City Council intends to involve the community in the preparation of Plymouth’s new Local Development Framework (LDF). It also explains how individuals and communities can be involved in decisions on planning applications for major development.

The approach to community involvement being advocated by the Government is entirely consistent with the City Council’s own objectives for encouraging and equipping people and communities to participate in decisions that affect them, and the city as a whole.

To understand fully how you can be involved, this document needs to be read in conjunction with the Local Development Scheme (LDS), which sets out in detail what documents are going to be produced, when, and how they will define the city’s planning policies and proposals.

The SCI sets out the minimum standards of community involvement the City Council intends to meet, in relation to the preparation of the individual documents that will comprise the LDF, known as Local Development Documents (LDDs), and significant development control decisions1.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONSULTATION

The SCI is being published now, in order to provide opportunity for comment on the City Council’s proposals for community involvement.

Once the SCI has been adopted, the City Council will be required to ensure that all LDDs are produced, and consultation on all major planning applications is carried out, in accordance with the standards set out in the SCI.

1 Government guidance produced so far does not deal with the role of the SCI in involving the community in ‘significant development control decisions’. Separate guidance is to be published by ODPM, in due course.

2 PLYMOUTH DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

INTRODUCTION

The statutory Local Plan for Plymouth was adopted in 19962. The intended replacement plan (the FDLP3) was published in December 2001, and placed on deposit for consultation purposes, from 25 January to 15 March 2002. As a result, the City Council received over 3,500 representations.

In March 2003, in the light of the Government's proposed major reform of the development planning system, the City Council's Executive Committee resolved not to proceed to 'Revised Deposit' stage with the FDLP, but instead to move towards the production of a new LDF for Plymouth, at the earliest opportunity.

One of the requirements of the new system is for local planning authorities to produce an SCI. The main aims of the SCI are:

• to ensure that the LDF is developed through community and stakeholder involvement, that meets or exceeds certain minimum standards4

• to provide a clear approach to community involvement

The City Council aims to be a listening council. It wants its services and plans for the future to reflect the needs and aspirations of everyone who lives and works in the city. It is committed to getting and taking account of continuous feedback, both formal and informal, about how well it is meeting those needs, and what people would like to see done in the future.

Consultation processes to be used in the preparation of the LDF are intended to reflect the 'core values' set out in the City Council's Consultation & Participation Strategy 2004. These core values are:

• honesty • commitment to Plymouth • continuous improvement

Extensive community involvement has already taken place, both prior to, and during the production of the FDLP. The City Council intends to build on this, especially in relation to the more strategic development issues facing the city, e.g. where new homes should be built. Such issues have been fully debated

2 City of Plymouth Local Plan First Alteration: Adopted 1996 3 City of Plymouth Local Plan (1995-2011), First Deposit Version: December 2001 4 Minimum standards are set out in the Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004: ODPM, October 2003

3 during the preparation of Regional Planning Guidance5, the Devon Structure Plan6, the Cornwall Structure Plan7 and other sub-regional studies.

Rather than re-visit these issues, the Council therefore intends to engage in focused consultation throughout the preparation of individual LDDs, tailored to the particular documents being produced, and the needs, wishes, and expectations of the community, and other stakeholders.

PRINCIPLES FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT The City Council’s main principles for community involvement are intended to ensure that people have:

• access to information, to encourage the widest possible readership • opportunity to contribute ideas, confident that their ideas and concerns will be properly considered and responded to • opportunity to take an active part in developing proposals and options • opportunity to comment on formal proposals • opportunity to get feedback, and be informed about progress and outcomes

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

This document is being published for consultation purposes for a week period, so that everyone with an interest in doing so, can comment on the City Council's proposals for community involvement in the LDF process, and in relation to significant development control decisions.

ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY XXXXFriday 1st April 2005, AND SHOULD BE SENT TO:

PLANNING POLICY MANAGER PLANNING AND REGENERATION SERVICE CIVIC CENTRE PLYMOUTH PL1 2EW

COMMENTS MAY ALSO BE SENT

BY FAX TO (01752) 304294

OR BY EMAIL to: [email protected]

THIS DOCUMENT CAN BE MADE AVAILABLE ON REQUEST IN LARGER PRINT, BRAILLE, OR ON AUDIO-TAPE

5 Regional Planning Guidance for the South West (RPG10), produced by the Secretary of State, The Stationery Office, September 2001 6 Devon Structure Plan 2001-2016 7 Cornwall Structure Plan 2001-2016

4 INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION

Following the statutory 6-week consultation period, the SCI will be subject to independent examination by an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State, who will consider the 'soundness'8 of the document as a whole, and any representations made upon it.

Whilst those who have made representations seeking a change to the SCI have a right to attend and be heard at the examination, if they specifically request it, it will be for the Inspector to decide the procedures to be adopted at the examination. It is likely that most representations will be capable of being considered satisfactorily by means of written representations.

Following the examination, the Inspector will produce a report, which will be binding on the City Council. This means that the City Council must adopt the SCI, incorporating any changes made by the Inspector as a result of the examination. The report will contain reasons for the Inspector's decisions. However, these will relate to the 'soundness' of the SCI, and not to individual representations. The final ‘adopted’ SCI will be published, together with the Inspector’s Report, and included in the LDF.

If you would like more information about the Statement of Community Involvement or the Plymouth Development Framework please contact:

Mike Palmer Planning Policy Manager (01752) 304360 [email protected]

or one of the Strategy Co-ordinators

Graham Skedgell (01752) 304326 [email protected]

David Taylor (01752) 3044330 [email protected]

Andy Roberts (01752) 304361 [email protected]

8 The 'soundness' of the SCI will be tested by the Inspector in relation to criteria specified by the Government.

5 PROPOSED CONSULTATION STANDARDS AND METHODS

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

Details of the various documents to be produced as part of the LDF, and the timescale for their publication, are set out in the Local Development Scheme (LDS). For ease of reference, a simplified diagram taken from the LDS is attached to this statement at Appendix 1.

One of the Government's main aims in reforming the development planning system is to achieve 'continuous community involvement'9 in the preparation of the LDF. This means that in addition to specific stages at which there is a statutory requirement for consultation, local planning authorities are expected to enter into, and facilitate dialogue with the local community, and with other stakeholders, throughout the whole of the process.

The City Council will therefore adopt the approach to community involvement set out in this document, in addition to involving the community in the four primary stages of LDF preparation10, i.e.

• pre-production • production • examination • adoption

The City Council is firmly committed to consultation, and has a well-developed and proven track record in community engagement. However, if you believe there is more the City Council should be doing to achieve the Government’s objective of 'continuous community involvement', the publication of this SCI provides you with an opportunity to express such views.

9 The Government's objective of achieving 'continuous community involvement' is a fundamental principle on which the new planning system is founded, and is set out in, for instance, "Local Development Frameworks: Guide to Procedures and Code of Practice", Consultation Draft, ODPM, October 2003 10 The four key stages in LDF preparation are set out in Draft PPS12: Local Development Frameworks, ODPM, October 2003, and in related guidance and the Code of Practice

6

WHO WILL BE INVOLVED?

In preparing the LDF the City Council will seek to involve the following:

• the general public • City Councillors, including the LDF Member Advisory Panel • Government departments (generally via GOSW) • Plymouth 2020 Partnership • neighbouring authorities (see Appendix 2) • other statutory bodies, (see Appendix 2) • businesses, and representative organisations, including Plymouth Chamber of Commerce & Industry • landowners, developers, and commercial agents • ‘hard-to-reach’ groups, including black and minority ethnic groups, faith communities, older people, people with physical and sensory disabilities, housing tenants and residents' associations, community associations and centres (see Appendix 3) • the press and other media

HOW WILL PEOPLE BE ABLE TO BE INVOLVED?

Whilst many people now have access to the internet, and other electronic means of communication, including via public libraries, many do not, and some who do, prefer to use more traditional methods for certain purposes. A wide range of different communication methods will therefore be used during the preparation of the LDF, to provide information to all those who wish to be involved. These will include:

• Plymouth City Council (PCC) website (see below) • interactive CD (see below) • press and other media • statutory notices • posters, leaflets and newsletters, as appropriate • public libraries • PCC housing offices • site notices, where appropriate (see below) • workshops, meetings etc. (see below)

A detailed table of the methods of communication proposed for each type of document being produced, and for each stage of the LDF process, is shown at Appendix 4.

7

CITY COUNCIL WEBSITE

The City Council's website will be one of the most important methods of providing information and updates throughout the process. It will also provide an email facility for asking questions, and/or making comments, about the LDF. The main advantage is that it allows information to be accessed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and is not limited to 'normal office hours'. Use of the website is also consistent with the Government's aim of ensuring that all government services are available electronically by 2005. The website can be accessed at www.plymouth.gov.uk

INTERACTIVE CD

In addition to making documents available in paper form, the City Council intends to produce an interactive CD, at key stages in the process. This will ensure that the information provided is much more accessible and flexible. The CD will provide easy access not only to the information being provided in the main documents, but also to many of the background documents that have informed their production. The draft LDF will therefore be available on CD, with a number of useful links provided to other relevant documents.

SITE NOTICES

Every development site included in the FDLP, was 'advertised' by means of one or more distinctive yellow site notices, placed adjacent to the site. This approach sought to ensure that all interested parties were made aware of proposals that might affect them, and given opportunity to comment on them. Although highly effective as a means of raising awareness, the large number of site notices involved, was inevitably costly. In any event, given such a high level of publicity, it is not considered necessary to repeat the exercise in full, but only to advertise sites that were not included in the FDLP.

WORKSHOPS, MEETINGS ETC.

The City Council will hold workshops, meetings etc. as appropriate. However, because of limited resources, it may not be possible for staff to attend meetings of individual groups or organisations. In circumstances where it is not possible, the City Council will endeavour to answer queries that arise, or engage in some other form of dialogue, that meet the needs of those concerned, within the limits of the staff resources available.

8 HARD-TO-REACH GROUPS

The City Council is fully aware that some people find it much harder than others to engage in consultation processes. However, this is very often due to the limitations of the methods employed to engage with them. For that reason, and where this is known to be the case, the City Council will take all reasonable steps to enable such people to be involved in the LDF process, to the extent they wish to be. Particular groups, such as the elderly, will therefore be targeted through representative bodies such as Plymouth Senior Citizens Forum. Subject to resource availability, visits will also be made to selected schools, building on the work previously undertaken in relation to the ward-based Community Planning Studies11. (see Appendix 3 for fuller details of ‘hard-to-reach’ groups the City Council will seek to involve).

FEEDBACK

The LDF process is necessarily lengthy, because of the number of statutory stages involved. One of the most important aspects of communication throughout the process, will therefore be to ensure that all participants are kept fully informed, at each stage of the process.

The City Council will therefore provide regular updates, either directly (by letters, phone calls, emails etc.) or in more general ways (via the City Council's website etc.), so that no-one is 'left in the dark', wondering what is happening. This will include feedback on changes made directly as a result of community involvement in the process.

REVIEW

This SCI has been produced in a way that clearly sets out the City Council's proposals for involving the community in the preparation of the LDF, and in decisions on planning applications for major development. However, it will be reviewed at least once every 3 years, in order to ensure that it conforms to best practice.

Should any changes be considered necessary following such review, these will be publicised, to give all those affected the opportunity to comment on the changes proposed.

11 As part of the process of reviewing the City's adopted Local Plan, a series of Community Planning Studies were undertaken for each of the 20 Electoral Wards. The studies were published in July 2000, and can be viewed via the City Council's website Hwww.plymouth.gov.ukH

9

PROPOSED CONSULTATION STANDARDS AND METHODS

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DECISIONS

Development proposals can have a major impact on the environment and on people’s lives; it is therefore important that people can be involved effectively in the making of development control decisions. This section of the SCI sets out the standards for community consultation in the making of development control decisions.

PROPOSED APPROACH

In order to carry out effective community consultation, it is important that people are made aware of proposals and are given opportunities to influence decisions.

RAISING AWARENESS

The City Council has a statutory duty to publicise planning applications, inviting people to make comments that will be considered in the decision making process. The following methods of publicity will be used. (Please note that the choice of methods will depend on the size and nature of the application.)

• Advertisements in local press • Site notices • Letters of notification to individuals and organisations • Plymouth City Council website

Advertisements in local press

When an application is received, it will be advertised in the local press, giving the public 21 days from the date of the advert to submit a representation. The following types of applications will be advertised:

• ‘Major’ applications. • Applications for listed building consent. • Applications affecting a public right of way • Departures from the local plan • Applications affecting conservation areas • Other applications – if the City Council considers it necessary to supplement individual neighbour notification.

10 Site notices

Site notices will be displayed on or near the site in question. A period of 21 days, from the date when the notice is first displayed, will be allowed for any comments to be made. The following types of applications will require site notices: • Major applications • Departures from the local plan • Applications for listed building consent • Applications affecting a public right of way • Departures from the local plan • Applications affecting conservation areas • Other applications whereby the City Council considers it necessary to supplement individual notification with a site notice.

Letters of notification

Occupiers of adjoining properties will receive individual notification by letter, of proposals that may affect them. A period of 21 days, from the date of the letter, will be allowed for any comments to be made. If an occupier is unable to inspect the submitted plans at the City Council’s offices, as a result, for instance, of age or disability, the City Council can provide them with a free copy of the plans on request.

City Council website

All planning applications received will be advertised weekly on the City Council website (http://www.plymouth.gov.uk), together with the dates of Planning Committee meetings.

OPPORTUNITIES TO INFLUENCE DECISIONS

One of the purposes of publicising applications is to provide individuals and communities with the opportunity to comment on them in the form of written representations. The City Council treats a written representation as a ‘material consideration’ in determining an application, together with national and local planning policies. For some development proposals, decisions will be made by the City Council’s Planning Committee. Those who have made written comments may have the opportunity to speak at the Committee, if they wish.

WIDER COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

Some development proposals will have a wider impact on the community, thus requiring further community involvement, particularly at pre-application stage.

The extent of involvement, however, will depend on the nature and size of the proposed development. Therefore, the following tiers have been developed to

11 show which types of development are suited to different approaches to community involvement.

Tier Level 1

These are significant applications where there are potential issues of scale and controversy, or are contrary to or out of line with Local Development Framework policy. These could include:

• Development Plan Departures – as defined in Circular 07/99, Town and Country Planning (Development Plans and Consultation) (Departures) Directions 1999 • Schedule 1 developments – as defined by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (Town and Country Planning) (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999). These include schemes such as waste disposal facilities and aggregates extraction as well as industrial and other major developments • Development proposals subject to Town and Country Planning (Shopping Development) (England and Wales) Direction [as Annex D to Planning Policy Guidance note 6 Town Centres and Retail Development and substituted by Circular 15/93]

Tier Level 2

These are significant applications broadly in accordance with the Local Development Framework but raising controversial issue or detail. They consist of:

• Schedule 2 developments – as defined by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations. • Development proposals which fall within the Town and Country Planning (Residential Development on Greenfield Land (England) Direction 2000. These include proposals for 150 or more homes, or residential sites over 5 hectares, on Greenfield land • Development proposed on playing fields as set out in the Town and Country Planning Playing Fields) (England) Direction 1998. The Direction applies to any proposal for development of any playing field owned by a local authority or used by an educational institution, as specified in the Direction.

For tier 2 proposals, wider community involvement may not be necessary if the City Council can justify why for a particular application it can be wavered.

The following table shows the approaches to community involvement for both tiers, which may or may not be exercised for a particular proposal.

Approach Tier 1 Tier 2 Public meetings Tick Public exhibition Tick Tick Surgeries Tick Tick

12 Development briefs Tick Workshops Tick Enquiry by Design Tick Tick and/or Planning for Real Citizen Panels Tick Tick Consultation Panel Tick Media Tick Website Tick Tick Local architectural or Tick Tick Design Panel

Consultation on proposals within tiers 1 and 2 will be expected to be carried out at pre-application stage. One of the main advantages of pre-application consultation is that issues can be considered at an early stage, when there is greater opportunity for influencing proposals as they are being formulated, rather than simply providing opportunity for comment at a later stage. It can also save time at application stage, thereby leading to quicker decision- making.

In the past, the City Council has responded to requests from the community to discuss significant proposals. However, the City Council intends to formalise the procedure, making it a pro-active requirement for all major developments.

Developers will therefore be expected to carry out effective pre-application consultation exercises suited to the particular tier within which the proposal falls, and to submit a report with the application, demonstrating how the community has been involved in shaping the proposals. It is so recommended that pre-application consultation is carried out in partnership with the City Council, and advertised on the City Council website.

FEEDBACK

Once a decision has been made by the City Council, those who have made written comments, will be notified in writing of the outcome.

PLANNING APPEALS

In cases where planning permission has been refused, and in certain other circumstances, the applicant has the right to appeal to the Secretary of State. Appeals are dealt with in various ways, including by written representations, hearings, or public inquiries. Major cases are normally dealt with by public inquiries. All relevant parties, including those who made representations on the planning application that gave rise to the appeal, are notified in writing of the date of the public inquiry, and given opportunity to make further written comment, or appear (or be represented) at the inquiry, if they wish.

SECRETARY OF STATE ‘CALL-IN’ DECISIONS

In some circumstances, the Secretary of State may decide to direct the City Council to refer an application to him for decision. A ‘call-in’ may happen

13 when, for example, a proposal is deemed to conflict with national planning policy, or to have significant effects beyond the immediate locality. Those with a likely interest in such proposals are notified in writing, and are advised how they can put forward their views. Applications that are called in, are advertised in the Evening Herald, and on the City Council website.

14

LDS DIAGRAM

15 APPENDIX 2

CONSULTATION BODIES

The City Council will seek to involve the following bodies in the LDF process, except where advised not to do so, in relation to the SCI12. Reference should also be made to Appendix 3, for information regarding 'hard-to-reach' groups.

NEIGHBOURING LOCAL AUTHORITIES Caradon District Council Dartmoor National Park Authority Devon County Council South Hams District Council Torbay Borough Council West Devon Borough Council

OTHER STATUTORY BODIES AND AGENCIES Countryside Agency ) English Nature ) Environment Agency ) Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England ) Ministry of Defence ) except in relation to the SCI South West Regional Development Agency ) South West Water ) Strategic Health Authority ) Strategic Rail Authority )

British Gas Civil Aviation Authority Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment Crown Estate Office English Partnerships Government Office for the South West Health and Safety Executive Highways Agency House Builders Federation National Playing Fields Association Network Rail South West Regional Assembly Sport England

12 The draft Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004: ODPM, October 2003 state that certain 'specific consultation bodies' are not required to be consulted in relation to the SCI.

16 OTHER LOCAL BODIES AND ORGANISATIONS Associated British Ports City Centre Partnership Devonport Regeneration Company Devonport Urban Village East End Partnership Plymouth 2020 Partnership Plymouth Chamber of Commerce and Industry Plymouth Design Panel Plymouth Sub Regional Economic Partnership Sutton Harbour Company University Partnership

17 APPENDIX 3

HARD-TO-REACH GROUPS

The City Council will seek to involve the following groups, or their representative bodies, in the LDF process. In identifying these groups, the City Council has had regard to its own Best Practice Guide on consulting with people from 'hard-to-reach' groups 2002.

BLACK AND MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS Plymouth & District Racial Equality Council Virginia House 40 Looe Street Bretonside PLYMOUTH PL4 0EB

Chinese Cultural Development Centre 6 Headland Park North Hill PLYMOUTH PL4 8HT

Devon & Cornwall Refugee Support Council 7 Whimple Street PLYMOUTH PL1 2DH

FAITH COMMUNITIES Plymouth Religious & Cultural Resource Centre 3a Watts Road St Judes PLYMOUTH PL4 8SE

OLDER PEOPLE Plymouth Senior Citizens Forum The Bungalow Lower Anderton Road Millbrook TORPOINT PL10 1DJ

18 PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES DIAC Ernest English House Buckwell Street PLYMOUTH PL1 2DA

Hearing & Sight Centre Pounds House 162, Outland Road Peverell PLYMOUTH PL2 3PX

Plymouth & West Devon Talking Newspapers 4 Abbey Place TAVISTOCK PL19 0AA

HOUSING TENANTS AND RESIDENTS' ASSOCIATIONS PETRA The Harwell Centre 28-42 Harwell Court Western Approach PLYMOUTH PL1 1PY

COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS AND CENTRES Plymouth Community Network c/o Plymouth Community Partnership Old Treasury Building Catherine Street PLYMOUTH PL1 2AD

19 APPENDIX 4

COMMUNICATION METHODS - LDF

This Appendix sets out the methods of communication which the City Council proposes to use for each type of document being produced, and for each stage of the LDF process.

The reference numbers below are used in the tables that follow:

1 Engagement - the point at which people and organisations are made aware of the commencement of a specific stage of the process

2 Consultation - a stage in the process when people and organisations are asked for their views and comments

3 Consideration - a part of the process when views and comments received are actively considered, and taken into account

4 Examination - the stage in the process when a document is formally ‘examined’ by a Government Inspector. This may involve a formal inquiry, attended by those who have been invited, and/or have a statutory right to attend

5 Feedback - this stage will involve regular updates, and information about changes made directly as a result of community involvement in the process

Published Documents - including questionnaires and surveys, letters, advertisements giving information and inviting opinions, displays in libraries, and exhibitions.

Explanatory Documents - including leaflets, circulars and posters.

Meetings and Working Groups - including formal meetings, focus groups, examinations and round-tables.

Internet and Electronic Media – including websites and e-mail.

Press and Broadcast Media – including regional and local newspapers, television and radio.

Particular methods will be selected from these categories, for each stage of the process, as appropriate.

20

Communication Methods – Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)

Published Explanatory Meetings Internet and Press and Documents Documents and Electronic Broadcast Working Media Media Groups Stakeholders

Residents 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2

Community 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2 Groups Businesses 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2

Major 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2 Landowners Strategic 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2 Partners Infrastructure 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2 Providers Public 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2 Organisations City 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2 Councillors

City Council 1, 2, & 5 3 & 4 1, 2, & 5 1 & 2 Services

21

Communication Methods – LDF Issues and Preferred Options Report

Published Explanatory Meetings Internet and Press and Documents Documents and Electronic Broadcast Working Media Media Groups Stakeholders

Residents 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2

Community 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Groups Businesses 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2

Major 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Landowners Strategic 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Partners Infrastructure 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Providers Public 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Organisations City 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Councillors

City Council 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Services

22 Communication Methods – Development Plan Documents (DPDs)

Consultation Explanatory Meetings Internet and Press and Documents Documents and Electronic Broadcast Working Media Media Groups Stakeholders

Residents 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2

Community 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Groups Businesses 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2

Major 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Landowners Strategic 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Partners Infrastructure 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Providers Public 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Organisations City 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Councillors

City Council 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Services

Development Plan Documents are:

Core Development Strategy Development Proposals Criteria-based Policies Proposals Map

23 Communication Methods – Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs)

Consultation Explanatory Meetings Internet and Press and Documents Documents and Electronic Broadcast Working Media Media Groups Stakeholders

Residents 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2

Community 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Groups Businesses 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2

Major 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Landowners Strategic 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Partners Infrastructure 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Providers Public 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Organisations City 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Councillors

City Council 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Services

Supplementary Planning Documents are:

City Centre Urban Design Framework Plymstock Quarry East End Renewal/Eastern Gateway Northern Plymouth Framework Millbay/Stonehouse Framework Devonport Framework Sutton Harbour/Hoe Framework Barne Barton Framework Plymouth’s Design Strategy Affordable Housing Education Contributions Employment Land Contributions Retail Development Strategy

24 Communication Methods – Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

Consultation Explanatory Meetings Internet and Press and Documents Documents and Electronic Broadcast Working Media Media Groups Stakeholders

Residents 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2

Community 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Groups Businesses 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2

Major 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Landowners Strategic 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Partners Infrastructure 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Providers Public 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Organisations City 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Councillors

City Council 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 , 2 & 3 1 & 2 Services

25 APPENDIX 5

COMMUNICATION METHODS – DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

This Appendix sets out the methods of communication which the City Council proposes to use, in relation to development control matters.

The reference numbers below are used in the table that follows:

1 Engagement – the point at which people and organisations are made aware of a proposal

2 Consultation – when people and organisations are asked for their views and comments

3 Consideration – the stage in the process when views and comments received are actively considered, and taken into account

4 Determination – the stage in the process when the proposal is formally determined by the City Council at committee

Consultation Documents – including questionnaires and surveys, letters, advertisements giving information and inviting views, displays in libraries, and exhibitions

Explanatory Documents – including leaflets, circulars and posters

Meetings and Workshops – including ‘open days’ and Enquiry by Design

Internet and electronic media – including websites and e-mail

Press and Broadcast Media - including regional and local newspapers, television and radio

Particular methods will be selected from these categories, for each stage of the process.

26

Communication Methods – Significant Development Control Decisions

Consultation Meetings, Internet and Press and Statutory Committee documents workshops, Electronic Broadcast consultation meetings ‘Enquiry by Media Media documents Design’ etc Stakeholders

Adjoining neighbours 1 & 2 3 1 & 2 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 (including businesses)

Wider community 1 & 2 3 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 (occupiers of properties that do not adjoin site)

Owner of site (if not 1 & 2 3 1 & 2 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4 owned by developer)

Statutory consultees 1 & 2 3 1 & 2 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4

Councillors 1 & 2 3 1 & 2 1 & 2 3 & 4

27 Page 123 Agenda Item 12

CITY OF PLYMOUTH

Portfolio and Cabinet Member: Planning Policy & Regeneration Councillor Mrs Nelder CMT Member: Director of Development Subject: Plymouth Local Development Framework (Local Development Scheme and Statement of Community Involvement) Committee: Cabinet Date: 13 July 2004 Author: Jonathan Bell, Strategy Manager Contact: Tel: 01752 894196 email: [email protected] Ref: JAB/SU

Part: I

Executive Summary:

This report seeks authority to formally “submit” and consult upon two key documents to launch the City’s Local Development Framework (LDF) programme, namely:

• The Local Development Scheme (LDS) – a three year project plan setting out the planning documents that the City Council will prepare as part of the LDF; • The Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) – setting out policies for community involvement in the LDF and in significant development control decisions;

The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act finally received Royal Assent on 13 May 2004 and is expected to fully ‘commence’ in September 2004. This is the earliest possible date that these documents can be submitted and published as part of the LDF process, ensuring that the City Council is leading the way nationally in moving towards the new LDF.

Corporate Plan 2004-2007:

The Corporate Plan identifies publication of the LDF as a key element of delivering the objective of providing “a strong strategic framework to promote investment, guide development and safeguard our built and natural environment”. It includes a target of publishing a deposit version of the LDF by November 2004.

The LDS and the SCI are important elements of the LDF, and if agreed by Cabinet, will be “submitted” (the term used in the new legislation instead of “placed on deposit”) in September 2004. The development planning documents will be submitted in April 2005, to synchronise with the LDF programme of South Hams District Council. Given the slippage in the national legislation, this is now the earliest date by which these documents can realistically be “submitted”.

The LDF will contribute directly to other objectives and targets of the Corporate Strategy, most notably: • Delivering the Mackay Vision and improving the quality of design across the city, Page 124

through appropriate spatial planning and design policy frameworks. • Improving development control performance, through providing an up to date and robust policy framework. • Working with developers to bring forward developments at key City Centre sites and Strategic Opportunity Areas and Sites, through provision of supportive general and site-specific policy frameworks and enabling powers such as CPO to be used effectively. • Providing clear plans for future investment that helps secure Government and other funds for transport priorities, through identifying strategic infrastructure needs in association with the spatial planning strategy. • Ensuring an adequate level and choice of employment land and premises, through land use allocations. • Implementing a £38m PFI for schools, through appropriate land use allocations. • Ensuring an adequate supply of affordable housing to meet Plymouth’s housing needs, through land use allocations and policies.

Implications for Medium Term Financial Plan and Resource Implications: Including finance, human, IT and land:

The direct costs associated with the LDS and SCI are primarily printing and community consultation costs that can be met from the existing Planning Policy budget.

The LDS does however sets out a three year programme of work which will have medium term financial planning and resource implications. These costs will relate to the preparation (including consultant input in specialist areas such as carrying out a Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Plan), printing, publication, community consultation costs, as well as the cost of holding an independent public inquiry into the statutory parts of the plan. The costs associated with this work that are programmed for this financial year can be met from the existing Planning Policy budget. The additional estimated costs associated with this work for the following two-year work programme are £750,000 for 2005/06 and £250,000 for 2006/07.

Other Implications: e.g. Section 17 Community Safety, Health and Safety etc:

The LDF will directly support the promotion of community safety through the provision of policies to influence the design and nature of physical development. In addition, the LDF will build on the work undertaken on the Community Planning Studies (produced in preparation for the First Deposit Local Plan), to assimilate the work of the LNAPs, and any other relevant area guidance, into a set of area-based SPDs. This will also embrace social inclusion matters.

Recommendations & Reason for recommended action:

It is recommended that the Cabinet:

1 Approve the contents of the attached document proofs of the Local Development Scheme and the Statement of Community Involvement.

2 Delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Regeneration to agree the final publication format of the LDS & SCI documents, subject to any significant changes to the content of these two documents being agreed with the Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning & Regeneration before their publication.

3 Delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Regeneration to make the LDS and SCI available to key stakeholders and the general public, (at the earliest practical opportunity), through such media as the City Council’s Web site, as a process of engagement before the official consultation period can commence in September Page 125

2004.

4 Delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Regeneration to formally ‘submit’ the LDS & SCI to the Secretary of State at the earliest opportunity that the legislation allows – expected to be September 2004.

Reason: To comply with the new planning legislation and enable the City Council to proceed towards a Local Development Framework at the earliest opportunity.

Alternative options considered and reasons for recommended action:

Given that the publication and submission of the documents is a statutory requirement under the provisions of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, there is no option but to produce them. The only real options available to the City Council relate to the timing and content of the documents. It is considered advantageous to the delivery of its corporate priorities to publish these documents at the earliest practicable opportunity, and this could also assist the City Council in receiving a significant Planning Delivery Grant award in 2005/06. In relation to the content of the documents, should the Cabinet feel that changes are required, the option exists to defer publication until the changes are made.

Background papers:

Report of Director of Development and Transport & Planning Manager to Executive Committee, 18th March 2003: City of Plymouth Local Plan (1995 – 2011): Transition From Local Plan To Local Development Framework.

Report of Director of Development and Transport & Planning Manager to Executive Committee, 18th March 2003: Reform of the national planning system, and the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Bill. Page 126

1 BACKGROUND

1.1 At its meeting of 18th March 2003, the City Council’s Executive Committee resolved to make the transition from the City of Plymouth Local Plan First Deposit Version to a Plymouth Local Development Framework. The context for this decision was the reform of the national planning legislation, which was also reported for information to the same meeting of the Executive Committee.

1.2 After slippage in the progress of the Bill through Parliament, the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act finally received Royal Assent on 13th May 2004. It is understood that the Act is now expected to fully commence in September 2004.

1.3 The new system aims to promote greater integration between the various strategies produced by local authorities and other agencies and the land use planning system. This will be achieved through the production of spatial plans. The spatial approach towards planning goes beyond the grant or refusal of planning permission and will involve a wider range of policies than has normally been included in development plans. (In essence the plan will cover both the use of land as well as have implications for the activities that take place on it.) Under the reformed planning system the development plan is intended to reflect a wider, more inclusive approach to planning, in order to achieve the most sustainable use of land and to create areas which have a sense of identity.

1.4 This report seeks to place Plymouth in the forefront of progress nationally in relation to the preparation of Local Development Frameworks (LDFs). It seeks authority to publish and consult upon two key statutory elements of the LDF process – namely the Local Development Scheme and the Statement of Community Involvement. It also seeks to clarify the status of the First Deposit Local Plan (FDLP) and Interim Planning Statements pending the publication of the LDF.

2 KEY TERMINOLOGY

2.1 While all the LDF reports will be written on the basis of using ‘Plain English’, a complication is that different parts of the LDF will have different status in law. This means that they will be known by different names (and acronyms) for legal purposes, and therefore reference to the Government’s chosen terminology is unavoidable. Key terms are as follows:-

2.2 Local Development Framework This is a generic term used in Government guidance but not in the Act itself. The LDF is effectively a portfolio of Local Development Documents (LDDs). It is these that are referred to in the Act. The LDF is more than a traditional development plan. It has a remit to consider the spatial dimensions and implications of the whole spectrum of social, economic, environmental and resource conservation issues. As such it is potentially a far more powerful tool for regeneration than the previous system of Local and Structure Plans.

2.3 Local Development Documents These are the individual plans and strategies that together make up the LDF. Some of these LDDs will be Development Planning Documents (DPDs). Some will be Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs). In addition, the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) – see Section 4.0 below – is also an LDD.

2.4 Development Planning Documents DPDs are the statutory documents that will be subject to independent examination. Together with the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) they will constitute the statutory “development plan” which, under the previous system was made up of Local and Page 127

Structure Plans. At a local level they are likely to contain the following components: • A core strategy, which sets out the authority’s vision for the area, as well as the overall strategy and primary policies for achieving that vision. • Proposals for site allocations, by which individual sites are allocated for development so as to meet the vision and core strategy. • Criteria based policies for the control of development. • Proposals map, to illustrate the policies and proposals in the DPDs. • Area action plans1, which may be used as an option to provide a planning framework for specific areas of change or conservation. • Waste and minerals plans.

2.5 Supplementary Planning Documents SPDs are the equivalent of the non-statutory plans and policies that could be produced as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) under the former planning system. These can include, for example, matters such as: • Detailed layout of uses in an area in amplification of broad proposals in the DPDs. • Detailed design guidance. • Delivery and implementation plans in relation to the LDF. Although SPDs must be subject to full public consultation, they will not be subject to independent examination as for DPDs.

3 LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME

3.1 The Act requires all local planning authorities to submit a LDS to the Secretary of State within 6 months of commencement of the Act. The Government Office has advised that the timeliness of production and quality of content of the LDS is very likely to be a key factor in the award of the plan-making element of Planning Delivery Grant for 2005/06.

3.2 The LDS must set out: • the DPDs and SPDs that the planning authority is proposing to prepare over a three-year period, and the timetable for their preparation; • the policies which the authority wish to save from their existing local plan until these are superseded; • the timetable for the preparation of the Statement of Community Involvement.

3.3 The proposed LDS for Plymouth is reproduced in Appendix 1. Key stakeholders have been engaged during the preparation of the LDS in accordance with the principles of continuous community involvement.

3.4 It is proposed to publish and submit the following DPDs in April 2005, to synchronise with South Hams District Council’s timetable:

• Core Strategy • Site allocations • Criteria based policies • Proposals Map • Waste and minerals DPDs

1 Members should be aware that whilst preparation of AAPs is optional, GOSW have been pressing for the City Council to prepare AAPs for the key regeneration areas. There are questions as to whether AAPs, or the less formal SPDs, are the most appropriate tools in terms of speed of preparation and adoption, flexibility in terms of implementation, and the cost of production (including inquiry costs in particular). Officers currently consider that on balance, the SPD approach has advantages. However, GOSW would seem to prefer the AAP approach. This matter is still under discussion. Page 128

3.5 The programme for submission of SPDs (see Appendix 1) has been identified having regard to the following priorities: 1. Area based design and planning guidance for existing and proposed Strategic Opportunity Areas in support of the Mackay Vision and the City Council’s other corporate priority regeneration initiatives. 2. Neighbourhood Plans, and Design Briefs for strategic sites, in support of Mackay, the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy and regeneration priorities. 3. Topic based planning and regeneration policy guidance, to ensure the policy aspirations such as affordable housing and other planning benefits are delivered in reality. 4. Review of existing SPG, to ensure that it reflects the new spatial policies of the LDF.

3.6 ODPM’s PSA 6 sets a target for all local planning authorities to complete LDFs by the end of 2006/07 financial year. The timetable proposed within the LDS will enable the City Council to have achieved an Adopted LDF by 2006, thereby supporting the ODPM’s PSA target.

3.7 The LDS, if approved by Cabinet, must be formally “submitted” to the Secretary of State. He then has 4 weeks to consider it. Should no directions be made, then the LDS will formally “take effect”. At this point, the City Council must publicise its availability. Although these is no formal statutory consultation required on the LDS, local people and stakeholders will be afforded the opportunity to comment on the LDS during the “submission” stage, in accordance with the principles of continuous community involvement.

4 STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

4.1 The SCI is classified as a Local Development Document. It must set out how the authority intends to achieve continuous community involvement in the preparation of LDDs. It will be subject to independent examination as if it were a DPD. People who have an interest in the planning of the area will therefore be able to make representations on the SCI which will then be considered by a Government Inspector.

4.2 The proposed SCI for Plymouth is attached at Appendix 2. In accordance with Government advice, it sets out the methods proposed to enable people to contribute to the process of preparing LDDs. This includes a variety of methods in accordance with the City Council’s corporate strategy on consultation, including specific measures in relation to “hard to reach” groups. Key stakeholders have been engaged during the preparation of the SCI in accordance with the principles of continuous community involvement.

4.3 In addition to consultation on LDDs, the SCI must set out the City Council’s policy for enabling community involvement in significant development control decisions.

4.4 The SCI, if approved by the Cabinet, will be formally submitted to the Secretary of State and representations sought from the public over a 6 week period, in accordance with the requirements of the legislation.

4.5 It is anticipated at this stage that the independent examination of the SCI will take place at the earliest opportunity – at least by the Spring of 2005. The Inspector’s report will be binding, and the City Council must then adopt the SCI, as amended by the Inspector, unless the Secretary of State intervenes. Once adopted, the SCI will be included in the LDF. Any DPD which is in preparation before the SCI is adopted, does not need to comply with the SCI, but it must comply with minimum consultation requirements as set out in Regulations. Page 129

Table 1 – Summary of LDF Timetable LDF Document Publish Examine Adopt Scope & Timetable (LDS) Sept. 2004 --- Jan. 2005 Statement of Community Involvement Sept. 2004 March 2005 May 2005 Issues /Preferred Options consultation Oct. 2004 ------Sustainability Appraisal / Strategic Environmental Assessment Issues /Options stage Oct. 2004 ------LDF consultation stage Jan-June 2005 ------LDF Core Strategy Jan 2005 Aug /Sept 2005 April 2006 Proposals for sites Jan 2005 Aug /Sept 2005 April 2006 Criteria Based Policies Jan 2005 Aug /Sept 2005 April 2006 Proposals Map Jan 2005 Aug /Sept 2005 April 2006 Supplementary Planning Documents Background Reports By Dec. 2004 ------/Area Framework Studies Convert background reports into SPD By Dec 2005 --- Summer 2006 Monitoring Report Dec. annually ------

5 STATUS OF THE ADOPTED LOCAL PLAN AND FIRST DEPOSIT LOCAL PLAN

5.1 Although the City Council is in a transitional stage between the First Deposit Local Plan and the LDF, the FDLP has not been abandoned and will (until the LDF is published) remain a material planning consideration for the determination of planning applications.

5.2 Furthermore, the Adopted (1996) Local Plan will be ‘saved’ for 3 years, and will comprise the statutory development plan, together with the Devon Structure Plan, until the new LDF is adopted

6 STATUS OF THE ADOPTED DEVON STRUCTURE PLAN

6.1 The soon to be Adopted Devon Structure Plan will also be ‘saved’ for 3 years from the date of adoption, or until the Regional Spatial Strategy is adopted, whichever is the earliest.

7 MEMBER INVOLVEMENT IN THE PROCESS TO DATE

7.1 The cross party LDF Member Advisory Panel, which has proved immensely valuable in enabling discussion of many important issues, has met on three occasions to date. The LDS and SCI have been refined and revised as a result of these discussions.

Sign off: Fin DF450018 Leg HR L.P. IT Originating CMF Member

Organisations Consulted under Regulation 25

Company 3G Antony Parish Council Bickleigh Parish Council British Telecom Brixton Parish Council Callington Town Council Calstock Parish Council Caradon District Council Caradon District Council Caradon District Council Caradon District Council Caradon District Council Caradon District Council Cornwall County Council Countryside Agency Dartmoor National Park Department for Constitutional Affairs Department for Culture Media and Sport Department for Education and Skills Department for Transport Department of Trade and Industry Department of Work and Pensions Devon County Council English Heritage South West Region English Nature Environment Agency Government Office for the South West Highways Agency Home Office Home Office Landulph Parish Council Lanteglos Parish Council Linkinhorne Parish Council Maker with Rame Parish Council Millbrook Parish Council MoD Defence Estate Organisation MoD Defence Estate Organisation National Grid Transco Network Rail O2 Office of Government Commerce Orange Pillaton Parish Council Plymouth 2020 Partnership Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust Plymouth Primary Care Trust Powergen Saltash Town Council Secretary of State for Health Shaugh Prior Parish Council South Hams District Council South Hill Parish Council South West Peninsula Strategic Health Authority South West Public Health Group South West Regional Assembly South West Water Sparkwell Parish Council St Cleer Parish Council St Dominic Parish Council St Neot Parish Council St Veep Parish Council St Winnow Parish Council Strategic Rail Authority SW RDA SWEB Energy T Mobile Telewest coms Torbay Borough Council Torpoint Town Council Virgin Mobile Vodafone Warleggan Parish Meeting Wembury Parish Council West Devon Borough Council Western Power Distribution

local development framework

Draft Statement of Community Involvement Plymouth City Council Local Development Framework Statement of Community Involvement Preferred Options - July 2005 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

1. Why produce a Statement of Community Involvement.

1.1. Local authorities are required to produce Statements of Community Involvement to identify their standards and policies for consulting on planning policy (in particular, the Local Development Framework) and planning applications. 1.2. The City Council recognises that it needs to involve local people, community organisations, businesses and groups, government agencies and service providers in the planning of the City if it is to achieve it’s aim of making Plymouth ‘One of Europe’s finest cities, where an outstanding quality of life is enjoyed by everyone’. 1.3. This draft Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) identifies a framework for achieving continuous community engagement in the planning process. In particular it identifies proposals for: 1. A framework for community involvement in preparing all the documents that comprise the Local Development Framework (LDF). 2. Standards for community engagement in all documents that comprise the LDF and in Significant Development Control Decisions. 3. Delivery mechanism for ensuring effective community engagement takes place. 4. Targets and indicators to measure effectiveness and success. 1.4. A Task Group of volunteers from the community and voluntary sector has advised the City Council during the preparation of the SCI. The Council is extremely grateful for the assistance given by the members of this group. 1.5. The document is produced for consultation purposes and will be available for comment from all interested parties. If you would like to view or comment on this document, receive it in another language or like to be more involved in the process of creating the plans for Plymouth’s future: 1. Look on the Plymouth City Council Website http://www.plymouth.gov.uk/homepage/yourcouncil/environment/ planning/ldf.htm?referer=planning 2. Contact the Planning Strategy Team, Plymouth City Council, Floor 8, Civic Centre, Armada Way, Plymouth, PL1 2EW, Tel 01752 307845 or 304818. 3. Look at the documents that are available in libraries and Council offices. 4. And remember that comment forms are available from all these places as well and we welcome your views on this and all documents we produce.

2 local development framework

2. SCI Objectives and Principles.

2.1. The City Council proposes the following Objectives and Principles, which set the framework for the consultation standards and policies that follow.

Objectives. 1. To increase awareness and understanding of the Local Development Framework and significant planning proposals in Plymouth’s communities. 2. To tap into the vast amount of knowledge that local people, groups and organisations (referred to as stakeholders) have about the city, to ensure that the planning decisions are based on sound information and evidence. 3. To seek wide involvement from all sectors of the community and stakeholders in the identification of key issues and options for the future development of the City. 4. To provide opportunity for all citizens and other stakeholders to put forward their views on planning matters.

Principles. Principle 1. Prioritisation of “front loading” and early engagement of the community in the planning process. 2.2. The City Council believes that effective community engagement in the planning system is only really achievable if engagement is achieved at the earliest stage possible – and ideally before documents are produced. 2.3. Effective community engagement at this stage will help to ensure that plans and planning applications are properly informed by evidence from the community and other stakeholders, and that local issues and views are clearly understood. 2.4. The early engagement of the community in the planning process is central to the SCI. The City Council will seek to front load the consultation process in a number of ways, including where appropriate: 1. Reviewing and incorporating the wealth of information already produced by the City Council and its partner organisations. For example community planning studies, regeneration strategies, area based initiatives, and neighbourhood renewal studies which themselves are outputs of community engagement. 2. Commission and complete studies of areas to highlight community needs, aspirations, and opportunities through engagement with local communities, key stakeholders and service providers to ensure that communities’ views are heard and their needs addressed. 3. Undertake topic-based studies involving community participation to ensure the City Council has an up-to-date information base upon which to build primary research and document production.

3 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

2.5. Front loading of community engagement is equally relevant in the planning application process, in particular with regard to large or controversial applications Principle 2. Joining up of consultation with other strategic initiatives. 2.6. The SCI will be part of a wider framework of consultation undertaken by the City Council. 2.7. The purpose of the LDF is to deliver the spatial aspects of Plymouth’s community strategy, called the “City Strategy”. Community engagement in the LDF thus helps to inform future reviews of the City Strategy, and vice versa. 2.8. Community engagement in the LDF will also be used to inform other strategy development work, and vice versa. Examples include: 1. Local Transport Plan. 2. City Growth Strategy. 3. Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy. 4. Area based regeneration strategies. 5. Housing Strategy. 6. Community Cohesion. 7. Social Inclusion. 8. Urban Pioneers. 9. Safer Communities. 10. Ideas for Change (schools reorganisation) Principle 3. A targeted approach to community engagement, to ensure efficient and effective use of available resources. 2.9. Community engagement activity will need to be designed with regard to the need for efficient and effective use of available resources. There are several aspects of this: 1. Ensuring the LDF is informed by other consultation initiatives that have been undertaken or are planned. This relates to Principle 2. 2. The need to target resources at those groups least able to engage with the planning process (so-called “hard-to-reach” groups). 3. The need to raise awareness and build capacity of other groups to engage effectively in the planning process. 4. The importance of effective communication and processes that enable people to make their views known. 5. To make effective use of information technology. 6. The need for the Council to be proactive in seeking external resources and support for community engagement – e.g. as part of the neighbourhood renewal process, or through negotiation with developers. Principle 4. Values of Community Involvement. 2.10. The community engagement policies of the SCI will be consistent with the ‘core values’ set out in the City Council’s Consultation & Participation Strategy 2004.

4 local development framework

2.11. It will also comply with the shared principles laid out in the Plymouth Compact: i) Access and Equity (A voice for all) 2.12. Providing fair and equal access to good quality services, economic resources and decision-making and equality of opportunity for all people, regardless of, for example, ethnicity, age, disability, gender, sexual orientation or faith. ii) Independence (Enabling community) 2.13. Independent and diverse Community and Voluntary Sectors, democratically elected governments and effective Public Sector organisations are fundamental to the well being of Plymouth and a democratic and a socially inclusive society. iii) Integrity (Striving for the best) 2.14. Although the Public and the Community and Voluntary Sectors have differing forms of accountability and are answerable to a different range of stakeholders they share in common the need for integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty, leadership and quality in all their undertakings. iv) Partnership (Adding value) 2.15. Meaningful consultation and participation builds relationships, improves policy development and enhances the design and delivery of services and programmes. Partnership results in increased efficiency and more effective outcomes for the community. Inherent in partnership is the participation of user groups. v) Sustainability (Protecting the future) 2.16. Sustainable development meets the needs of today without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. It requires the responsible use of natural resources, protection of the environment, social progress and economic growth within sustainability principles. vi) Participation (Inclusiveness) 2.17. Providing genuine opportunities for informed community engagement in decision- making processes. 2.18. Developers will be strongly encouraged to adopt these values in their own consultation on development proposals.

5 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

3. The wider context of the SCI.

The Local Development Framework explained. 3.1. The SCI is one of a range of documents that comprise the LDF. More information on the LDF is provided in Appendix 1 and the Local Development Scheme. 3.2. All of LDF documents (known as Local Development Documents) need to be subject to community consultation, although the nature of consultation will vary depending on the type of document being consulted upon. The Local Development Documents (LDDs) are split into different document types: 1. Development Plan Documents (DPDs) – which form part of the statutory development plan. 2. Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) – which will amplify policies of the statutory development plan. 3. Other Development Plan Documents (ODPDs) – which will relate to the process of LDD preparation. 3.3. The diagram below shows the different types of LDD which form the LDF. A description of the documents is available in a project plan for the LDF, called the Local Development Scheme.

Local Development Framework

Proposals Map Planning Local Minerals Supplementary Obligations/ LDD Development Planning Affordable Housing Documents Documents (LDDs) (SPDs)

Waste LDD Development Design Plan Strategies Documents (DPDs)

Core Strategy Statement of Criteria Other Community Based Development Involvement Area Policies Action Plan (SCI) Documents

Proposals for Sites Sustainability Strategic Appraisal Environmental Assessment

6 local development framework

Status of existing planning documents. 3.4. The new LDF, once adopted, will become the statutory development plan for the area. Until it is formally adopted, the current Adopted Local Plan (1996) will carry some weight in planning decisions. The weight attached to each LDF document will increase as it goes through each statutory stage. 3.5. The First Deposit Local Plan (Dec 2001) will carry some weight in planning decisions until relevant sections of it are replaced by the emerging LDF documents.

Statutory minimum consultation requirements. 3.6. The legal requirements for consultation and public participation on the LDF are set out in the Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004. The City Council is required to consult all of the groups listed in Appendix 2 List A, as well as those on lists B and C who are affected directly by the document. 3.7. It is however the City Council’s aim that there should be genuine community engagement from all parts of the community including those groups that are usually defined as ‘Hard to Reach’. The City Council therefore intends to go beyond the minimum requirement and engage the community in a variety of ways using different types of media and engagement techniques.

Resources. 3.8. The level of resources available will influence the precise design of consultation for individual LDDs. Principle 3 above sets out some of the aspects of resource management that the City Council will undertake in the delivery of its consultation processes.

Resource allocation 3.9. The City Council’s Planning & Regeneration Service Strategy Unit is responsible for the production of the LDF and will be providing the majority of the resources involved in undertaking the community involvement. The Unit’s budget, which is set annually but within the context of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan, will be managed such that a variety of demands for expenditure can be met. These include document publication, advertising and publicity, consultation and research, and the costs of Independent Examinations into the LDDs. In addition, the Unit’s staff will be used flexibly to deliver effective community involvement. Where possible, this will be done in a coordinated way with other Services to deliver more effective and efficient programmes of consultation which meet multiple objectives. 3.10. With regard to development consents consultation arrangements, those which are carried out post application submission largely represent a formalisation of existing practice. They will continue to be resourced by the Council’s Development Consents team.

7 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

3.11. Pre-application consultation as outlined in Section 6 will predominantly be resourced and funded by the applicant, with the assistance of the Development Consents team supported where necessary by other sections of the Council.

Timetables. 3.12. Once formal LDF documents are published, or planning applications submitted, the planning process becomes locked into timetables against which the Council is expected to perform (and indeed, may be penalised financially if it does not perform). This re-emphasises the importance of the “front loading” principle, whereby early engagement in the planning process is essential.

Independent help with Planning Matters 3.13. Planning Aid is a voluntary service run predominantly by the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI), registered charity no. 262865. It provides free, independent and professional planning advice and support to communities and individuals in need of support. The main aims of Planning Aid are to target “hard to reach” groups and to assist people and local communities in developing their own strategies for influencing development in their areas. It offers free and independent advice from a qualified planner. Planning Aid can also help people to: 1. Understand and use the planning system. 2. Participate in preparing plans. 3. Prepare their own plans for the future of their community. 4. Comment on planning applications. 5. Apply for planning permission or appeal against refusal of permission. 6. Represent themselves at public inquiries. 3.14. The City Council are fully supportive of Planning Aid and will actively help any one seeking their help in planning matters. Further information is available from the City Council’s Planning and Regeneration Service or from: 1. South West Planning Aid 2. Planning Advice Help line: 0870 850 9807 3. [email protected]

Reporting Back and Feedback 3.15. The Council recognises that it is important to provide feedback on the results of consultation stages. The Council will publish a summary of representations and comments made after each LDD consultation stage. It will make these available on its website and as a document format. 3.16. The Council will also keep an up to date record on its website of LDF Progress, forthcoming consultations and LDD stages. This will enable local communities and stakeholder to be informed and build an interest in planning issues to be able to engage and influence the LDF process.

8 local development framework

4. How and when involvement and engagement will take place-

Proposals of relevance to all stages of the LDF process. 4.1. Specific proposals for each stage of the planning process need to be underpinned by proposals for: 1. Effective communication – so that there is maximum awareness of the planning process. 2. Efficient systems – so that people can easily make their views known. 3. Capacity building – to help groups engage with the planning system. Effective communication. 4.2. Ensuring that the City Council produces the LDF in an open and transparent way is only possible through communicating appropriately with the wider community, stakeholders and organisations involved. To ensure this takes place the Council will: 1. Publish all of its consultation documents and provide feedback on consultation events and representations made, on its website. 2. Share information about the planning system, through Area Committees and established networks (e.g. Plymouth Community Partnership, Plymouth Environmental forum). 3. Communicateon planning issues with the development industry through regular meetings of the Plymouth Regeneration Forum. 4. Hold briefings with Ward Councillors regarding LDF matters relating to their areas. 4.3. The Council will proactively seek to work with the media (TV, radio and newspapers) to raise awareness about planning issues and encourage engagement in the planning process by: 1. Producing press releases at key stages. 2. Occasionally producing DVDs to enable the public to access information about the planning system. 3. Through established contacts with the media. 4. Placing advertisements in the press at key stages of the LDF process. Efficient systems. 4.4. The efficient running of systems that the City Council use to relay information on the LDF and planning matters is vital to the whole process and as such the Council will: 1. Advertise in advance through a variety of media the key events and document releases, to increase local people’s knowledge and ability to engage.

9 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

2. Ensure easy access to information throughout the process by making all LDDs available at local libraries, council offices, housing offices, community centres and on the Internet 3. Ensure the planning pages of the Council’s website are easy to navigate, and include contact details and details on forthcoming events and publications. 4. Provide a variety of means for people to provide comments and by making response forms available at all consultation events and at all locations where LDDs can be read. 5. Provide an easy-to-use electronic response form on the Council’s website. 6. Offer people the ability to sign up for information to be sent directly to them on areas that are of interest. Capacity Building. 4.5. The Council recognises that in order to engage effectively with the planning process, groups, communities and individuals need to extend their knowledge, skills and understanding of the system. The Council will help build this capacity in the community through: 1. Adopting the Planning Aid Protocol by which it will promote the Planning Aid service for those needing help to engage in the planning process (See Appendix 3 for details of Planning Aid). 2. Seeking to equip umbrella organisations such as Plymouth Community Partnership (PCP), the Plymouth Guild of Voluntary Service (PGVS), and Maritime Plymouth etc to inform, engage and consult with members about planning issues that affect them. Support will take the form of advice, training, and where appropriate the commissioning of services. 3. Providing training to Ward Councillors on the new planning system to enable them to effectively represent their wards on planning matters. 4. Work with community development organisations that support communities and individuals, e.g. North Prospect Partnership, Groundwork Trust, Devonport Regeneration Company, Efford Building Communities, East End Partnership. 5. Running a series of “breakfast meetings” to raise their awareness of the planning process.

10 local development framework

5. How and when involvement & engagement will take place- LDF.

The Preparation stage – 5.1. The preparation stage is the stage after a need for a LDD is identified but before the first formal LDD “preferred options” report or draft plan is produced. The preparation stage will be the most intensive stage of community involvement in accordance with principle 1 on “front loading.” The Council proposes to use the following methods and information at preparation stage: Making best use of existing information and evidence. 5.2. There has been a vast amount of consultation on planning and regeneration issues in Plymouth over the last few years, some of which has led to the preparation of draft plans. It is vital that this information is not lost to the LDF process. Examples include: 1. Community Planning Studies for Plymouth and for each ward in Plymouth. Published in 2001, these award winning studies, were based upon extensive community engagement across the city and directly informed the preparation of the First Deposit Local Plan, Dec 2001. The Community Planning Studies also provided information to other services, and thus was a “joined up” consultation (see Principle 2 of the SCI). 2. Representations received on the First Deposit Local Plan. This was placed on deposit from January – March 2002. 3569 representations were received. These representations will assist the Council in putting together its policies and proposals for the LDF. 3. Regeneration strategies published for parts of the City. Regeneration and development strategies have been published for places such as Devonport, Millbay, Barne Barton and the East End following extensive community engagement. This information will be used to help frame the planning policy framework in the LDF for these areas. 4. Major landowner consultation. The Council used press advertisements in 1999 to invite landowners to put forward proposals for sites for consideration in the First Deposit Local Plan. A judgement was reached on their suitability for development through the First Deposit Local Plan. Many of these sites are still relevant for consideration in the LDF. Preparation of Area Studies. 5.3. Where existing evidence is not adequate, the Council will work with local communities to undertake Area Studies. These will identify key issues and opportunities, include assessments of the urban form and the extent to which the area provides a sustainable community. They will help communities to identify their own priorities. 5.4. The first Area Studies will be carried out for those neighbourhoods prioritised through the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy. These are some of the most deprived areas of Plymouth and action for their improvement is a priority.

11 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

5.5. The output of these studies will have wider corporate relevance. Not only will they help the Council to determine whether an Area Action Plan or some other planning policy intervention is needed. They will also provide information to other Council services and other service providers in the City about the needs in these areas. 5.6. In this sense this work is important in relation to Principle 2 of the SCI regarding “joined-up consultation”. Sustainable Communities Assessments. 5.7. The Council has developed a methodology for assessing the extent to which areas of the City provide “sustainable communities”. These are places where: 1. There is a sufficient critical mass of population to sustain a range of neighbourhood facilities. 2. There is good access to employment, open spaces and other services 3. There is a balanced community with an integrated mix of decent homes of different types and tenures to support a range of household sizes, ages and incomes. 4. A well connected community where there is a clear and understandable pattern of streets and spaces providing an ease of movement between key destinations and services, adjacent areas and to the rest of the City. 5. There is an attractive and safe environment with safe places to live and work with good quality buildings and public spaces. 6. The local community respects and capitalises on its environment, using resources effectively. 5.8. The Council will use this assessment process in order to identify particular needs in communities. These will be undertaken initially for each area to be subject to an Area Action Plan or Area Study. The intention is to eventually use the assessment process across the entire City. Targeting “hard to reach groups”. 5.9. To ensure that the Council is as inclusive as possible when consulting with people from so called “hard to reach groups” the Council needs to make it as easy as possible for them to participate and use appropriate methods. The Council will facilitate this by: 1. Guaranteeing the whole process is made as easy as possible for people to take part 2. Evaluating consultation activities undertaken in order to form a greater understanding of the most appropriate type of engagement for future use. 3. Ensuring that representatives of ‘hard to reach’ groups are identified on the LDF consultation database. 4. Having targeted and tailor-made consultation process for specific groups (e.g. reaching young people through schools).

12 local development framework

5. Commissioning independent community consultation experts where resources permit and where this can achieve better access for hard to reach groups. 6. Having consultation activities around the clock to help people to engage in the process. 7. Locate consultation activities in places that are accessible by a variety of public and private transport means and are wheelchair and child friendly. 8. Making provision for childcare, where appropriate. 9. Where consultation is on an area specific document, ensuring that the venues for consultation are located where possible within the area. 10. Providing advanced publicity of community consultation events in the media. 11. Using plain language in its communications. 12. Offering a translation / transcription service for all of its consultation documents – to ensure that people who don’t have English as their first language or who are deaf or blind or partially sighted are not excluded.

The Production Process 5.10. Once the statutory documents are published the process becomes locked into a timetable, which makes it more difficult to maintain a high level of proactive community engagement. At this point, the emphasis of consultation shifts towards providing clear information and the opportunity for people to make their views known. 5.11. There is a fine balance between achieving effective community involvement in the planning process and ensuring that plans are produced and considered at sufficient speed to enable Plymouth’s vision and the LDS to be delivered. Proposals relating to the formal statutory stages of the planning process. 5.12. In relation to a DPD of the LDF the key formal stages are normally as follows: 1. Publication of an Issues & Options report and Sustainability Appraisal. 2. Publication of a Preferred Options report and Sustainability Appraisal. 3. Submission of the final Document and Sustainability Appraisal to the Government. 5.13. In relation to an SPD of the LDF, there will normally be: 1. Publication of draft SPD. 2. Adoption of SPD 5.14. It is intended that significant consultation with relevant groups and communities will have taken place before these stages are commenced. At these stages the Council will:

13 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

1. Publish on its website a summary of issues identified during the issues and options consultation 2. Inform in writing all relevant consultees listed in Appendix 2. 3. Give presentations on the DPD or SPD at relevant Area Committees. 4. Attend a range of community meetings to explain and receive feedback on the DPD or SPD. 5. Enter all comments and statutory representations received on a database, provide written acknowledgement of receipt of all statutory representations (relates to DPDs only, at Preferred Options and Submission stage) and publish summaries of these on it’s website. 6. Seek to negotiate on representations received in relation to Preferred Options reports where there is a reasonable prospect of the objection being satisfactorily resolved before Submission stage.

Independent examination 5.15. Following the submission of a DPD to the Sectary of State an independent examination will be held by a planning inspector. The purpose of the examination is to determine whether the plan is sound. Any one who has raised an objection in the 6-week period after submission has the right to be heard at the examination. 5.16. The nature of the examination will depend in part on how those people wishing to express their views wish to do this. The Government expects the majority of representations will be through written representation. However the opportunity to make verbal representations to the inspector is available. Both means of giving representations carry equal weight in the examination process.

14 local development framework

6. Methods of Community Engagement

6.1. The Council will determine for each consultation exercise the most appropriate consultation methods. The following list shows a range of consultation actions and methods that may be used as part of a package for any particular consultation. It is not inclusive of all techniques 1. Document made available for inspection at Civic Centre and Local Libraries, housing offices and community centres during all consultation stages, with any additional information needed. 2. Letters to statutory bodies and formal written consultation (from lists A, B and C as required), including DPDs and response forms, to receive consultation responses from statutory bodies. 3. Internet, providing detailed information and feedback on the LDF and LDS, and making LDDs available for consultation with electronic responses forms all available from the City Council’s Web page. 4. Media (local press, T.V. and radio), advertisements, articles and press releases about forth-coming consultation events and publications will increase knowledge and the profile of the LDF. 5. Written representations, providing a formal way of responding to DPDs with people’s views, thoughts, comments or objections. 6. Public exhibitions and displays, including open days, displaying key information, issues and proposals for public viewing and consultation. 7. Meetings (including area committees, public meetings and breakfast meetings), providing information, discussion on key topics and information, increasing awareness and informing on the progress of the LDF and LDDs. 8. Community planning workshops and focus groups, particularly suitable for area-based policy development. 9. Attending existing panels, forums and groups, such as residents’ associations or community groups, to help increase awareness and disseminate information. 10. Support for ‘Planning Aid’, which assists people to engage with and influence the planning process. 11. DVDs, Leaflets and summary documents, providing information in an accessible and flexible way, which can be viewed at any time without the need to attend events. 12. Studies, background studies and assessments such as area based studies of community needs, community planning studies and sustainable communities assessments. These provide evidence to guide the development of the LDF 13. Independent examination, the final opportunity to engage in a DPD through written or verbal representation. 6.2. Summary tables of the types of consultation methods that may be used at different stages of the LDF process are shown below

15 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

Development Plan Document Production and Consultation Table

Document Consultation Consultees Type of Potential Method of Stage Length Engagement Engagement Preparation up to Key Consult Public exhibitions & submission Stakeholders displays, Meetings, of Issues workshops /Focus All & Options groups, Existing panels, Document forums & groups, Planning Aid, Studies. Issue & See LDS All Inform Publication of DPD, Options available from PCC Publication Web Page, Local (+SA) Libraries & Council Offices Issue & 6 weeks All list A, Formally inform DPDs & letters to Options relevant & request statutory bodies Consultation organisations response & formal written on lists B & C consultation All Inform & Documents made Consult available for inspection, Internet, Media, Written comments, Public Exhibitions & Dispalys, Meetings, Existing

Continuous engagement throughout the process Panels, forums & groups, Planning Aid & Increased formality of documents and consultation Summary Documents Interim

16 local development framework

Document Consultation Consultees Type of Potential Method of Stage Length Engagement Engagement Preferred See LDS All Inform Publication of DPD, Options available from PCC Published Web Page, Local (+SA) Libraries & Council Offices Consultation 6 weeks All list A, Formally inform DPDs & letters to on Preferred relevant & request statutory bodies Options organisations response & formal written (+SA) on list B & C. consultation All Inform & Documents made Consult available for inspection, Internet, Media, Written comments, Public Exhibitions & Dispalys, Meetings, Existing Panels, forums & groups, Planning Aid & Summary Documents Interim Submission of See LDS All Inform Publication of DPD, DPD to Sec. available from PCC of State & Web Page, Local publication of Libraries & Council DPD with its Offices SA. Period to make 6 weeks All list A, Formally inform DPDs & letters to representations relevant & request statutory bodies Continuous engagement throughout the process on DPD & SA organisations response & formal written on list B & C. consultation Increased formality of documents and consultation All Make Formal Written representations representation Examination by Set by All who Public Enquiry Written & verbal SOS on DPD & inspector submitted representations its SA respnse forms on final DPD Adoption of Development Plan Document

17 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

Supplementary Plan Document Production and Consultation Table

Document Consultation Consultees Type of Potential Method of Stage Length Engagement Engagement Preparation up to Key Consult Public exhibitions & submission of Stakeholders displays, Meetings draft SPD /Focus groups, Existing All panels, forums & groups, Planning Aid, Steering & Advisory groups, Studies. Publish draft See LDS All Inform Publication of SPD, SPD & its SA available from PCC Web Page, Local Libraries & Council Offices Consultation 4- 6 weeks All list A, Formally inform SPD & letters to on draft SPD relevant & request statutory bodies & its SA organisations response & formal written on lists B & C consultation All Consult Documents made available for inspection, Internet, Media, Written comments, Public Exhibitions & Dispalys, Meetings, Existing Panels, forums & groups, Planning Aid & Continuous engagement throughout the process Summary Documents Consider See LDS Those Consult Written or verbal Increased formality of documents and consultation representation who made communication & alteration representation of SPD where where necessary necessary Adoption of Document

18 local development framework

7. How and when involvement and engagement will take place- Development Control Process.

7.1. Community involvement in the consideration of Planning Applications is vital in ensuring that developments, where possible, take account of the community’s views. It has until now only been the statutory requirement of Local Planning Authorities to publicise (press advert and/or site notice and/or neighbour letter) all planning applications after they have been received, giving third parties a period of time in which to make comments before a formal decision is made. 7.2. Whilst these arrangements will remain, it is now the intention, via this Statement of Community Involvement, to seek to engage communities much earlier in the process on more significant applications. 7.3. The City Council has already introduced a pre-application process to enable applicants to run through their proposals with the planning office prior to submitting their formal application. In this way issues and information can be identified early to enable the applicant to submit a more comprehensive proposal that improves the formal decision making process. 7.4. By introducing an opportunity for the community to engage with the development process at the pre-application submission state, it is intended that comments made by the community can more easily be accommodated in the final submission made, so avoiding unnecessary disputes or delays. 7.5. Outlined below are the two distinct stages in which public consultation takes place at Pre-application submission and Post application submission and the methods of consultation used in each stage.

Pre- submission consultation Provisions relating to significant planning applications. 7.6. Wider community consultation, in addition to the minimum standards post-planning application submission, will be required for applications that might have a major effect on the local community. Such consultation will have to be carried out at the pre-application stage. 7.7. In order to define what constitutes a ‘significant application’, a development proposal will have to fall into one of the tiers of development, as shown below. A different approach to community consultation is recommended for each tier. Tier Level 1 7.8. These are significant applications where there are potential issues of scale and controversy, or are contrary to or out of line with Local Development Framework policy. These could include: 1. Development Plan Departures – as defined in Circular 07/99, Town and Country Planning (Development Plans and Consultation) (Departures) Directions 1999, i.e. proposals in conflict with the adopted Local Plan or emerging LDF, DPDs. 2. Schedule 1 developments – as defined by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (Town and Country Planning) (Environmental

19 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999). These include schemes such as waste disposal facilities and aggregates extraction as well as industrial and other major developments. 3. Development proposals subject to Town and Country Planning (Shopping Development) (England and Wales) Direction [as Annex D to Planning Policy Guidance note 6 Town Centres and Retail Development and substituted by Circular 15/93]. Tier Level 2 7.9. These are significant applications broadly in accordance with the Local Development Framework but raising controversial issue or detail. They consist of: 1. Schedule 2 developments – as defined by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations as major developments which are of more than local significance, developments which are proposed for particularly environmentally sensitive or vulnerable locations, and for developments with unusually complex and potentially hazardous environmental effects. 2. Development proposals which fall within the Town and Country Planning (Residential Development on Greenfield Land (England) Direction 2000. These include proposals for 150 or more homes, or residential sites over 5 hectares, on Greenfield land. 3. Development proposed on playing fields as set out in the Town and Country Planning Playing Fields (England) Direction 1998. The Direction applies to any proposal for development of any playing field owned by a local authority or used by an educational institution, as specified in the Direction. 7.10. For tier 2 proposals, wider community involvement may not be necessary if the City Council can justify why for a particular application it can be wavered. The following table shows the recommended methods of consultation for each tier (it is not necessary for each method to be used, just the most appropriate ones for the individual case): Approach Tier 1 Tier 2 Public meetings  Public exhibition  

Development briefs 

Interactive workshops 

Media  Website   Local architectural   or Design Panel

20 local development framework

7.11. The specific design of the pre-application consultation should be discussed and agreed through pre-application discussions. It should be consistent with the principles and policy framework set out in the SCI. 7.12. The planning applicant will be responsible for carrying out this consultation, in liaison with the Council. 7.13. Applicants are strongly encouraged to use an independent facilitator to design and implement their consultation programme. The Council will set up a database of facilitators which it accredits as having a sound understanding of the planning process. 7.14. Applicants are strongly encouraged to present a report of their consultation process, including information on how it has influenced the application, when the application is submitted. 7.15. The Council emphasises that failure to carry out effective consultation at pre- application stage could lead to objections being made which could be material to the determination of the application.

Post submission consultation 7.16. Post-application consultation will be usually be limited to the general publicity provisions identified below. It will be the exception that those types of application listed above will be subject to the wider forms of community engagement as stated above once the application has been received. It will normally be the case that applications will be determined as submitted and that where significant amendments are required that would justify a further community consultation, a new application will be sought. . Publicity 7.17. Applications will be publicised using the following methods, depending on the type of application. 1. Advertisements in the local press 2. Site notices 3. Letters of notification to individuals and organisations 4. Plymouth City Council website. 7.18. The following types of applications will be subject to both advertisements in the local press and site notices: 1. ‘Major’ applications. 2. Applications for listed building consent. 3. Applications affecting a public right of way 4. Departures from the local plan

21 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

5. Applications affecting conservation areas 6. Other applications – if the City Council considers it necessary to supplement individual neighbour notification. 7.19. The public will be given 21 days from the date of the advertisement or site notice to submit comments to the City Council. Such comments will then be treated as a ‘material consideration’ in the making of planning decisions. Letters of notification. 7.20. Occupiers of adjoining properties will receive individual notification by letter of proposals that may affect them. Like site notices and press advertisements, 21 days from the date of the letter will be allowed for any comments to be made. If an occupier is unable to inspect the submitted plans at the City Council’s offices, as a result, for instance, of age or disability, the City Council can provide them with a free copy of the plans on request. Commenting on planning applications. 7.21. The City Council treats a written representation as a ‘material consideration’ in determining an application, together with national and local planning policies. For some development proposals, decisions will be made by the City Council’s Planning Committee. Those who have made written comments may have the opportunity to speak at the Committee, if they wish. The dates of committee meetings will be advertised on the City Council’s website. Feedback 7.22. Once a decision has been made by the City Council, those who have made written comments will be notified in writing of the outcome. Secretary of State “call-in” decisions. 7.23. In some circumstances, the Secretary of State may decide to direct the City Council to refer an application to him for decision. A ‘call-in’ may happen when, for example, a proposal is deemed to conflict with national planning policy, or to have significant effects beyond the immediate locality. Those with a likely interest in such proposals are notified in writing, and are advised how they can put forward their views. Applications that are called in, are advertised in the Evening Herald, and on the City Council website. Community involvement in Independent Examination and Development Control appeals. 7.24. In respect of appeals against refusal of planning permission, and in certain other circumstances, the applicant has the right to appeal to the Secretary of State. Appeals are dealt with in various ways, including by written representations, hearings, or public inquiries. Major cases are normally dealt with by public inquiries. All relevant parties, including those who made representations on the planning application that gave rise to the appeal, are notified in writing of the date of the public inquiry, and given an opportunity to make further written comment, or appear (or be represented) at the inquiry, if they wish.

22 local development framework

8. Project management, monitoring and review.

Project management. 8.1. The Council will apply project management principles to the implementation of its consultation on the different LDDs. It will produce a Project Plan which: 1. Identifies its specific consultation proposals and programme. 2. Sets out clearly how this programme is consistent with the principles and policy framework set out in the SCI. 3. Agrees this Project Plan with the Council’s Corporate Consultation Officer, to ensure that opportunities for “joined-up” consultation are being achieved. 4. Identifies the specific resources for the consultation – including any external resources being sought. 5. Identifies clearly who is doing what – this might include some actions for external agencies. 6. Ensure collection of relevant monitoring and review data.

Monitoring and Review. 8.2. The performance of the SCI will be measured in relation to the following indicators and targets. 8.3. The LDF Annual Monitoring Report will identify the extent to which these targets have been achieved, and include a wider evaluation of the SCI’s performance. 8.4. The Council’s performance in relation to its SCI will be subject to scrutiny and overview, possibly involving external representation (specific proposals still to be prepared). 8.5. Along side the annual monitoring review the City Council will regularly update its consultation database and consultation lists.

23 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

SCI Performance Indicators and Targets Output Indicator Target

Objective 1 To maximise awareness of the Local Development Framework and significant planning proposals in Plymouth’s communities. Number of comments / representations Target not able to be set against, received at Issues & Options, Preferred as no experience of new planning Options and Submission stages. system against which benchmarks can be set. Objective 2 To tap into the vast amount of knowledge that local people, groups and organisations (referred to as stakeholders) have about the city, to ensure that the planning decisions are based on sound information and evidence. % of Area Action Plan’s Issues & Options 100% papers informed by community planning studies / area studies.

Objective 3 To seek wide involvement from all sectors of the community and stakeholders in the identification of key issues and options for the future development of the City. Extent to which representation is Representation is achieved from the achieved from all sections of the following groups at least equivalent community. to their representation in Plymouth’s population: • Black and ethnic minorities. • Women. • Young people. Objective 4 To provide opportunity for all people and other stakeholders to put forward their views on planning matters. Customer satisfaction with ease Target not to be set until benchmark of access to inputting to planning survey undertaken. consultations.

24 local development framework

9. Appendix 1: The Local Development Framework.

9.1. The LDF is a new style statutory development plan, introduced under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (available from www.odpm.gov.uk). It is best described as a folder of different planning policy documents (known as Local Development Documents), with each document concentrating on a separate topic. Each LDD is individually produced in accordance with the LDS. Together, the LDDs will provide a framework guiding the development of Plymouth. In this sense, it is quite different to the old-style Local Plans. 9.2. The LDF is based on three principles: 1. Sustainable development (development that enables us to meet our own needs but not at the expense offuture generations to meet their own needs) 2. A Spatial Planning system (which looks at the use of land and the activities on it) 3. Continuous community involvement in the planning process 9.3. This will enable the Council to take a fresh look at Plymouth and develop a strategic approach that influences land use and the activities that take place in communities, improves the quality of people’s lives and reflects their aspirations.

Key Component Documents that form the LDF. 1. Local Development Strategy (LDS) sets the scope and timetable for the various documents that comprise the LDF 2. Statement of Community Involvement sets out the standards for community engagement throughout the process of preparing the LDF 3. Core Strategy -, sets out the vision for the long term future of the City, in line with the City Strategy. 4. Criteria Based Policies defining how development proposals will be assessed in terms of their contribution to achieving the strategy 5. Proposals for Sites defining the land allocations required to implement the strategy 6. Proposals Map Illustrates the location and extent of all development proposals and policies and inset maps. 7. Area Action Plans Proposals and Policies for the development of specific areas of change or conservation. 9.4. The Local Development Documents (LDDs) are split into different document types: 1. Development Plan Documents (DPDs) which will form part of the statutory development plan. 2. Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) which will amplify policies of the statutory development plan. 3. Other Development Plan Documents (ODPDs) which will relate to the

25 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

process of LDD preparation. 9.5. Development Plan Documents will be used to guide the consideration and determination of planning applications.They will also help guide the strategic development of Plymouth. All DPDs are subject to public consultation and independent examination during their production, as outlined in the LDS. The type and level of community involvement will differ from DPD to DPD dependent on its topic and strategic context. It is the role of the SCI to ensure the appropriateness of the community engagement and also to ensure the statutory Government attainment targets are met. 9.6. Supplementary Planning Documents add more detail to the policies and proposals in the DPDs and explain and elaborate them. Unlike the DPDs, SPDs are not subject to statutory public consultation nor are they submitted to the Sectary of State for adoption. They are, however, subject to non-statutory public consultation set out in the SCI and upon their submission into the LDF they must have a statement of conformity with the SCI, which must include specific details: 1. How the document has been consulted on 2. Who was consulted 3. A summary of the main issues raised in the consultation and how they have been addressed in the SPD. 9.7. Other Development Plan Documents such as the Sustainability Appraisal of LDDs and the Statement of Community Involvement must also be subject to consultation.

26 local development framework

10. Appendix 2. List of Consultees.

10.1. List A – Specific consultation bodies that the Council shall consult with in order to comply with statutory requirements: 1. British Gas 2. Caradon District Council 3. Countryside Agency 4. Dartmoor National Park Authority 5. Devon County Council 6. Electronic Communications Code Operators/Controllers of Electronic Communication Apparatus 7. English Nature 8. Environment Agency 9. Highways Agency 10. Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England 11. Ministry of Defence 12. Relevant Electric and Gas Companies 13. Relevant Government Offices and Departments 14. Relevant Sewerage and Water Undertakers 15. South Hams District Council 16. South West Regional Assembly 17. South West Regional Development Agency 18. South West Water 19. Strategic Health Authority 20. Strategic Rail Authority 21. Telecommunications companies 22. Torbay Council 23. West Devon Borough Council

Note: 10.2. Only those in italics will be consulted in respect of the SCI 10.3. List B - General consultation bodies that the Council will consult with where necessary 10.4. Voluntary bodies whose activities benefit any part of the City Council’s area Bodies, which represent the interests of: 1. Different racial, ethnic or national groups, 2. Different religious groups, 3. Disabled persons, 4. Persons carrying on business.

27 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

10.5. List C – Other consultation bodies that the City Council will consult with where appropriate 1. Age Concern 2. Airport Operators 3. British Chemical Distributors and Trade Association 4. British Geological Survey 5. British Waterways, canal owners and navigation authorities 6. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology 7. Chambers of Commerce, Local CBI and local branches of Institute of Directors 8. Church Commissioners 9. Civil Aviation Authority 10. Coal Authority 11. Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment 12. Commission for New Towns and English Partnerships 13. Commission for Racial Equality 14. Crown Estate Office 15. Diocesan Board of Finance 16. Disability Rights Commission 17. Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee 18. Electricity, Gas, and Telecommunications Undertakers, and the National Grid Company 19. Environmental groups at national, regional and local level, including: i. Council for the Protection of Rural England ii. Friends of the Earth iii. Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and iv. Wildlife Trusts 20. Equal Opportunities Commission 21. Fire and Rescue Services 22. Forestry Commission 23. Freight Transport Association 24. Gypsy Council 25. Health and Safety Executive 26. Help the Aged 27. Housing Corporation 28. Learning and Skills Councils 29. Local Agenda 21 including: i. Civic Societies; ii. Community Groups;

28 local development framework

iii. Local Transport Authorities; iv. Local Transport Operators; and v. Local Race Equality Councils and other local equality groups; National Playing Fields Association; Network Rail; Passenger Transport Authorities; Passenger Transport Executives; Police Architectural Liaison Officers/Crime Prevention Design Advisors 30. Port Operators 31. Post Office Property Holdings 32. Rail Companies and the Rail Freight Group 33. Regional Development Agencies 34. Regional Housing Boards 35. Regional Sports Boards 36. Road Haulage Association 37. Sport England 38. The House Builders Federation 39. Transport for London 40. Traveller Law Reform Coalition 41. Water Companies and 42. Women’s National Commission

Note 10.6. These lists are not complete or prescriptive of individual consultees but show the broad spectrum of bodies that will be consulted. A separate database is held which identifies individual consultees, which is continuously updated.

29 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

11. Appendix 3 Glossary of Terms

AAP Area Action Plan AMR Annual Monitoring Report DC Development Control DPD Development Plan Document LDD Local Development Document LDF Local Development Framework LDS Local Development Scheme LPA Local Planning Authority LSP Local Strategic Partnership ODPD Other Development Plan Document ODPM Office Of The Deputy Prime Minister PCC Plymouth City Council PCP Plymouth Community Partnership PGVS Plymouth Guild of Voluntary Services PPS Planning Policy Statement RSS Regional Spatial Strategy RTPI Royal Town and Country Planning Institute SA Sustainability Appraisal SCI Statement of Community Involvement SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SOS Secretary Of State SPD Supplementary Planning Document

30 local development framework

31 Statement of Community Involvement - Preferred Options

We need to know what you think

The statutory consultation period to respond is 29th July 2005 - 9th September 2005.

All comments must be received within this period and can be sent to:

Planning Policy Manager Planning and Regeneration Service Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL1 2EW

or

by fax: 01752 304294 by e-mail: [email protected]

Further copies of the leaflet and response forms are available from:

www.plymouth.gov.uk The Civic Centre (Planning Section) Local Libraries

The document is also available in Large Print, Braille, or on Audio Tape.

32 Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework Consultation

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential.

Questionnaires without a name and address cannot be included in this consultation.

All questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager Planning & Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL1 2EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please enter your name and address below: Please enter your agent's details (if applicable)

Title & initial Surname Address

Postcode Organisation [if applicable] Telephone Fax Email Instructions for completion:

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IN BRAILLE OR LARGE PRINT TELEPHONE 01752 307845 Please mark the appropriate box with a cross ⌧ or fill in as required Your level of agreement that the criteria have been met in this 1 = Strongly agree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree consultation 2 = Agree 4 = Disagree Positive Negative

Draft Statement of Community Involvement identifies: 12345

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for • 1. consultation how the City Council's strategy for community involvement in the planning process • 2. links with other community involvement initiatives e.g. the City Strategy (in general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be • 3. consulted how the community and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible • 4. manner suitable methods of consultation to be employed for the intended audience and for • 5. the different stages in the preparation of local development documents how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community • 6. involvement effectively how the results of community involvement will be fed into the preparation of • 7. development plan documents and supplementary planning documents

• mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement 8.

• clearly the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applications 9.

If you do not agree that the above criteria have been met please state why, using the numbers above to indicate the specific criteria to which you refer:

10

If you would like to suggest any changes to the draft SCI please state below including a reference number:

11

If you are a member of a resident, action group or voluntary organisation and YOUR GROUP would like to be involved in further consultations, please provide the contact details for the Secretary/Chair of your group:

12

Would your group wish to be consulted on:

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood 13

planning issues city wide 14

Thank you for completing this questionnaire Draft Statement of Community Involvement Preferred Option Consultation

To help us to be sure that we are reaching all sections of the community we would like you to provide some details about yourself which will not be disclosed. This information will be used for monitoring purposes only and will be treated in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998. The Data Controller for Plymouth City Council is the Corporate Information Manager who can be contacted at the Civic Centre, Plymouth PL1 2EW.

Please mark the appropriate box with a cross ⌧ or fill in as required Your Gender:

Male Female Your Age: What age range do you fall into?

Under 18 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 or over Ethnicity: How would you describe your ethnic origin?

White Black or Black British British Caribbean Irish African Any other white background Any other black background Please state: Please state:

Mixed Chinese White & Black Caribbean Chinese White & Black African White & Asian Other Any other mixed background Any other ethnic group Please state: Please state:

Asian or Asian British Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi Any other Asian Background Please state:

Disability Yes No Do you have any long standing illness, disability or infirmity? If 'Yes', how would you describe your long standing illness, disability or infirmity? Please mark all which apply: Mobility impairment Hearing impairment Sight impairment Learning difficulties Other Notice of Proposal Matters

Plymouth City Council’s Local Development Framework

Preferred Options Stage And Draft Statement of Community Involvement

The following details relate to the Preferred Options stage of the Local Development Framework and the Draft Statement of Community Involvement and comply with The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004, Regulation 26.

Proposed title of Proposed subject Matter: Geographical Consultation Coverage Document: Core Strategy The spatial vision and strategic City of Preferred Options Stage objectives for the city of Plymouth Plymouth to 2016. The spatial strategy and strategic policies to deliver this vision Waste Development The Preferred Options for the City of Plan Document location and provision of Waste Plymouth Preferred Options Stage management facilities Devonport Area Action The preferred options for the Plan Preferred Option future development and Stage regeneration of Devonport Millbay/Stonehouse The preferred options for the Area Action Plan future development and Preferred Option Stage regeneration of Millbay and Stonehouse North Plymstock Area The preferred options for the Action Plan future development of North Plymstock and the new Settlement of Sherford Draft Statement Of The guidelines for community City of Community Involvement consultation for the Local Plymouth Development Frame work and consultation on Planning Applications The Consultation Period for these documents is six weeks and will run from 29th July to 9th September 2005, all representation must be received in this time.

Representation should be sent

By Post to: By Email to: Strategy Unit [email protected] Planning and Regeneration Plymouth City Council The Civic Centre Plymouth PL1 2EW

Or by completing the Online Representation form.

Request to be notified, if you would like to be notified when any of these documents is submitted to the Sectary of State please complete the form below.

Please notify me when: (please tick as required) Core Strategy Waste Development Plan Document Devonport Area Action Millbay/Stonehouse Area Action Plan North Plystock Area Action Plan Draft Statement Of Community Involvement Alll Is submitted to the Secutary of State. Name: Address: Postcode: Signature Please return this form to Strategy Unit, Planning and Regeneration, Plymouth City Council, The Civic Centre, Plymouth, PL1 2EW Statement of Fact/Availability

Plymouth City Council Local Development Framework

Documents available for consultation

Core Strategy Preferred Options Report. Preferred Options Stage Preferred Options Report. Waste Development Plan Document Preferred Options Report. Preferred Options Stage Preferred Options Report. Devonport Area Action Plan Preferred Option Stage Preferred Options Report. Millbay/Stonehouse Area Action Plan Preferred Option Stage Preferred Options Report. North Plymstock Area Action Plan Preferred Options Report. Draft Statement Of Community Involvement.

These document are available for consultation for six weeks running from 29th July to 9th September 2005. During this time copies of these documents will be available to view at these locations

Location Time documents can be viewed Planning Desk Monday-Friday office hours Civic Centre Plymouth Windsor House Monday-Friday office hours Deriford Plymouth Central Library Monday-Friday office hours Drake Circus Plymouth Crownhill Library Monday: 9am - 7.15pm Cross Park Road Tuesday: 9am - 5.30pm Crownhill Wednesday: 9am - 1pm Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 5.30pm Friday: 9am - 7.15pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Sunday: closed Devonport Library Monday: 2pm - 6pm Devonport Guildhall Tuesday: closed Ker Street Wednesday: 10am - 12noon Plymouth 2.30pm - 5pm

Thursday: closed Friday: 2pm - 5pm Saturday: 10am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Efford Library Monday: 1pm - 7pm Efford Lane Tuesday: 9.30am - 12noon Efford 1pm - 5.30pm Plymouth Wednesday: closed Thursday: 9.30am - 12noon 1pm - 5.30pm Friday: 1pm - 5.30pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Eggbuckland Library Monday: 3pm - 5.30pm Eggbuckland Community College Tuesday: closed Westcott Close Wednesday: 3pm - 7pm Eggbuckland Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 3pm - 5.30pm Saturday: closed Sunday: closed Ernesettle Library Monday: 2pm - 5.30pm Duxford Close Tuesday: closed Ernesettle Wednesday: 2pm - 5.30pm Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 2pm - 7pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Estover Library Monday: 3pm - 5.30pm Estover Community College Tuesday: 3pm - 5.30pm Miller Way Estover Wednesday: 3pm - 5.30pm Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 3pm - 7pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Laira Library Monday: 2pm - 5pm 240 Old Laira Road Tuesday: closed Laira Wednesday: 2pm - 5pm Plymouth Thursday: closed Friday: 9am - 12.30pm 2pm - 6pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed North Prospect Library Monday: 2pm - 5pm Tuesday: closed Wolseley Road Tuesday: closed North Prospect Wednesday: 2pm - 5pm Plymouth Thursday: closed

Friday: 9am - 12.30pm 2pm - 6pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Peverell Library Monday: 9am - 7pm 242A Peverell Park Road Tuesday: 9am - 5.30pm Peverell Wednesday: closed Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 5.30pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Sunday: closed Plympton Library Harewood Monday: 9am - 7pm Plympton Tuesday: 9am - 7pm Plymouth Wednesday: 9am - 1pm

Thursday: 9am - 7pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 5pm Sunday: closed Plymstock Library Monday: 9am - 7pm Horn Cross Road Tuesday: 9am - 7pm Plymstock Wednesday: 9am - 1pm Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 7pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 5pm Sunday: closed

St. Budeaux Library Monday: 9am - 7pm The Square Tuesday: 9am - 6pm Victoria Road Wednesday: 9am - 1pm St Budeaux Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 6pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 5pm Sunday: closed Southway Library Monday: 9am - 7pm 351 Southway Drive Tuesday: 9am - 6pm Southway Wednesday: closed Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 6pm Friday: 9am - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Sunday: closed Stoke Library Monday: 2pm - 7pm 21 Albert Road Tuesday: 9.30am - 1pm Stoke 2pm - 5.30pm Plymouth Wednesday: closed Thursday: 9.30am - 1pm 2pm - 5.30pm Friday: 2pm - 7pm Saturday: 9.30am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed Tothill Monday: 2pm - 7pm Tothill Community Centre Tuesday: 2pm - 5.30pm Knighton Road Wednesday: closed St Judes Plymouth Thursday: 9.30am - 12.30pm 2pm - 5.30pm Friday: 2pm - 6pm Saturday: 10am - 12.30pm Sunday: closed West Park Library Monday: 2pm - 7pm 423 - 425 Crownhill Road Tuesday: 9am - 5pm West Park Wednesday: 9am - 1pm Plymouth Thursday: 9am - 5pm Friday: 2pm - 7pm Saturday: 9am - 4pm Sunday: closed North Prospect Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-4.30 91/93 North Prospect road Friday 8.45-4.00 North Prospect Plymouth Ernesettle Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then 7 Warmwell Road 1.30-4.30 Ernesettle Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Whitleigh Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then 101 Whitleigh Green 1.30-4.30 Whitleigh Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Southway Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then 65 Rockfield Avenue 1.30-4.30 Southway Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Honicknowle Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then 18 Honicknowle Green 1.30-4.30 Honicknowle Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Devonport Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then 10 Granby Way 1.30-4.30 Devonport Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Estover Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then Leypark Walk 1.30-4.30 Estover Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth Efford Housing Office Monday-Thursday 8.45-12.30 then 21D Torridge Way 1.30-4.30 Efford Friday 8.45-12.30 then 1.30-4.00 Plymouth

The Document will also be available to view at Plymouth City Councils Web page www.Plymouth.gov.uk In the Planning Section.

Representations on the document can be return to:

By Post Strategy Unit Planning and Regeneration Plymouth City Council The Civic Centre Plymouth PL1 2EW

By Email [email protected]

Representations must be received with in the six week consultation period running from 29th July to 9th September 2005. Only those representation received during the consultation period can be considered.

For any further information or if you would like any document to be available in brail, audio form or in any other language please contact Strategy Unit, Planning and Regeneration, Plymouth City Council, The Civic Centre, Plymouth, PL1 2EW Page 83 Agenda Item 9

CITY OF PLYMOUTH

Subject: Plymouth Local Development Framework: Preferred Options Reports (Core Strategy, Waste Development Plan Document, Area Action Plans for Devonport, Millbay / Stonehouse and North Plymstock, including minerals) and Draft Statement of Community Involvement. Committee: Cabinet

Date: 12th July 2005 Cabinet Member: Councillor Mrs Nelder

CMT Member: Director of Development Author: Jonathan Bell Strategy Manager Contact: Tel: (01752 (30)4353 e-mail: [email protected] Ref: SU/JAB. Part: I

Executive Summary:

The report brings before Cabinet the first tranche of Local Development Documents (LDDs) to be progressed as part of the emerging Local Development Framework (LDF).

These include: 1. The Core Strategy (covering Plymouth). 2. Waste Development Plan Document (DPD). 3. Devonport Area Action Plan (AAP). 4. Millbay / Stonehouse AAP. 5. North Plymstock AAP (including minerals). 6. Statement of Community Involvement.

The Planning & Compulsory Purchase Order Act 2004, and its associated regulations, set out the requirements for preparation and adoption of LDDs. A draft Environmental Report will be published along side each of the documents, as a statutory requirement.

The first 5 LDDs listed above will form part of the statutory development plan for Plymouth. For these documents there is a need to: • consult on Issues & Options; • publish and invite representations on a Preferred Options report.

After these steps are taken are the LDDs formally “submitted” to Government and subject to independent examination.

The Issues and Options consultation stage for these documents was undertaken during March and April 2005. Page 84

Cabinet approval is now sought to publish Preferred Options reports for these LDDs.

In addition, Cabinet approval is also sought to publish for consultation the Draft Statement of Community Involvement. This sets out a draft policy and framework for community involvement in the LDF. It also has the status of an LDD in the LDF. It too will be formally “submitted” to Government and subject to independent examination by a Planning Inspector.

Cabinet will also be considering at this meeting a report on the Local Transport Plan 2, which identifies a proposed transport plan for the period 2006-2011. LTP2 will provide one of the stepping stones to the delivery of the spatial strategy being developed through the LDF, which itself is informed by the City Strategy and Mackay vision. Its measures to tackle congestion and promote quality of life will be key to enabling Plymouth to become one of Europe’s finest, most vibrant waterfront cities.

Corporate Plan 2004-2007:

The Corporate Plan identifies publication of the LDF as a key element of delivering the objective of providing “a strong strategic framework to promote investment, guide development and safeguard our built and natural environment”. It includes a series of targets relating to core LDF documents.

The LDF will contribute directly to other objectives and targets of the Corporate Strategy, most notably: • Delivering the Mackay Vision and improving the quality of design across the city, through appropriate spatial planning and design policy frameworks. • Improving development control performance, through providing an up to date and robust policy framework. • Working with developers to bring forward key developments at City Centre and waterfront sites and Strategic Opportunity Areas and Sites, through provision of supportive general and site-specific policy frameworks and enabling powers such as Compulsory Purchase Orders to be used effectively. • Providing clear plans for future investment that helps secure Government and other funds for transport priorities, through identifying strategic infrastructure needs in association with the spatial planning strategy. • Ensuring an adequate level and choice of employment land and premises, through land use allocations. • Implementing a £38m PFI for schools, through appropriate land use allocations. • Ensuring an adequate supply of affordable housing to meet Plymouth’s housing needs, through land use allocations and policies. • Making the best use of the Council’s land and buildings, through providing a planning policy context to support delivery of services and corporate strategies.

Implications for Medium Term Financial Plan and Resource Implications: Including finance, human, IT and land

The financial implications are covered in the separate report to this Cabinet meeting on the Local Development Scheme.

Other Implications: e.g. Section 17 Community Safety, Health and Safety, Risk Management, etc.

The LDF will directly support the promotion of community safety through the provision of policies to influence the design and nature of physical development.

Page 85

Recommendations & Reasons for recommended action:

It is recommended that the Cabinet:

1 Approve for statutory consultation purposes, the publication of the following Local Development Documents: a). The Core Strategy Preferred Options Report (Appendix 1).. b). Waste Development Plan Document Preferred Options Report (Appendix 2). c). Devonport Area Action Plan Preferred Options Report (Appendix 3). d). Millbay / Stonehouse Area Action Plan Preferred Options Report (Appendix 4). e). North Plymstock Area Action Plan Preferred Options Report (Appendix 5). f). Draft Statement of Community Involvement (Appendix 6).

Reason: To meet the publication targets set out in the approved Local Development Scheme.

2 Delegate authority to the Head of Planning and Regeneration to agree the final publication format of the Local Development Documents, subject to any significant changes to the content of the documents being agreed with the Strategic Planning Policy Portfolio Holder before their publication.

Reason: To comply with the new planning legislation and enable the City Council to proceed towards a Local Development Framework at the earliest opportunity in accordance with the performance standards set out in BVPI 200.

3 Approve the Local Development Documents as material considerations for the purposes of development control decisions, taking precedence over any conflicting provisions of the First Deposit Local Plan.

Reason: To clarify the policy status of the First Deposit Local Plan in relation to the Local Development Documents being published at this time.

Alternative options considered and reasons for recommended action:

The main alternatives will be in the context of the content of the individual LDDs.

The Preferred Options Reports have been drafted on the basis of a number of factors, bottom-up and top-down, including: • Community involvement (including not only the recent Issues & Options consultation, but consultation undertaken over several years, including the Community Planning Studies for the First Deposit Local Plan). • Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment work for the LDF. • Technical reports and regeneration initiatives. • Corporate and partnership aspirations. • The Mackay vision. • In the case of the AAPs and Waste LDD, compliance with the emerging Core Strategy. • Emerging regional spatial planning guidance. • National planning guidance.

Officers have prepared the reports on the basis of their professional evaluation of the issues and evidence.

Page 86

Background papers:

City of Plymouth Local Plan, adopted 1996.

Community Planning Studies for Plymouth and wards, May 2001.

City of Plymouth First Deposit Local Plan, December 2001.

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 13th July 2004: Plymouth Local Development Framework (Local Development Scheme and Statement of Community Involvement).

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 9th November 2004: Sustainable Communities Plan for the South West.

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 14th December 2004: Plymouth Local Development Framework: Local Development Scheme, Status of Existing Policies, and Safeguarding Issues.

Local Development Scheme. Submitted. January 2005 (this document includes a detailed list of the evidence base for each LDD).

Preliminary Sustainable Appraisals for LDDs. March 2005.

Plymouth, South East Cornwall and South West Devon t0 2026 consultation leaflet, March 2005.

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 15th March 2005: Plymouth, South East Cornwall and South West Devon Sub Regional Strategy: Sustainable Growth Options.

Report of Director of Development to Cabinet, 14th June 2005: Regional Spatial Strategy: Informal policy proposals for the Plymouth, South East Cornwall and South West Devon Joint Study Area.

Report of Director for Life Long Learning to Cabinet, 14th June 2005: School Implementation Plan 2005-2015.

Responses to LDF Issues and Options consultation, June 2005. (Summary report of consultation).

Sign off: Fin DF560023 Leg JR HR N/a AM N/a IT N/a Originating CMF Member Page 87

1 BACKGROUND

1.1 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 received Royal Assent on 13th May 2004. Its provisions relating to development planning came into effect on 28th September 2004.

1.2 The Act, and its associated regulations, provide for the preparation of Local Development Documents (LDDs) which together will constitute the new Local Development Framework (LDF).

1.3 Some of these LDDs, will have the status of the statutory development plan. These are known as Development Plan Documents (DPDs). They will be subject to independent examination by a Government appointed Planning Inspector, whose report will be binding on the Council. On adoption, they will replace the provisions of the Adopted Local Plan and therefore carry considerable weight in the planning process.

1.4 Other LDDs are known as Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs). These are intended to amplify the provisions of DPDs. They will not be part of the statutory development plan and will not be subject to independent examination.

1.5 This report is concerned with the publication of Preferred Options Reports for 5 proposed DPDs, namely: • The Core Strategy. • Waste DPD. • Devonport Area Action Plan. • Millbay / Stonehouse Area Action Plan. • North Plymstock Area Action Plan (including minerals).

1.6 It is also concerned with the publication of a Draft Statement of Community Involvement. This LDD also will be subject to independent examination, but does not have the status of DPD.

2. PROCESS

2.1 The process for preparation and adoption of LDDs is set out in statutory regulations. In particular, in relation to the LDDs being progressed at this stage, it includes: • Preparation. Evidence should be gathered and community involvement undertaken in relation to the identification of issues and options. • Preferred Options. A Preferred Options Report must be published and subject to a 6 week period during which formal representations can be made. • Submission. The LDDs should then be amended and formally “submitted” to Government. • Independent examination. An independent examination will later be held, over seen by a Planning Inspector, whose report will be binding on the Council. Page 88

• Adoption. Once changes are made following this report, the Council can formally adopt the LDDs.

2.2 The Preparation stage for the LDDs now being progressed has in effect been completed. This has involved consideration of both bottom-up and top-down information sources, including: • National and regional planning guidance. • Corporate and partnership aspirations. • The Mackay vision. • Community involvement (This includes not only the results of the recent Issues & Options consultation, but also of consultation undertaken over several years in respect of the First Deposit Local Plan, including the Community Planning Studies, and regeneration initiatives such as Devonport Development Framework and Millbay Action Plan). • Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment work for the LDF. • Technical reports and regeneration initiatives. • In the case of the AAPs and Waste LDD, compliance with the emerging Core Strategy.

2.3 The Preferred Options stage now follows. This involves publishing reports which set out the Council’s preferred options in relation to the individual LDDs and should: • Include Plymouth’s preferred policy directions, (but not the actual policies as such), together with an explanation of the relevant issues and specific proposals, indicating a comprehensive approach to the area; • Identify alternative approaches where appropriate; • Be presented as an opportunity for all to respond the options, as well as encouraging people to bring forward alternatives.

2.4 These Preferred Options reports are then subject to a statutory 6 week consultation period, through which people may lodge formal representations. These will be taken into account in preparing the final document to be submitted to the Secretary of State.

3 ISSUES & OPTIONS CONSULTATION

3.1 A formal Issues & Options consultation was undertaken during February and March 2005. A series of Issues & Options pamphlets were produced to provide communities with the opportunity to respond to the emerging ideas for the Local Development Framework.

3.2 In particular, the pamphlets articulated issues and options in relation to the 5 DPDs now being progressed.

3.3 In total, 2,704 responses were received (including petition signatures), distributed as follows:

• The Core Strategy- Building Sustainable Communities: 72 responses. Page 89

• The Core Strategy- A Strong Economy: 43 responses. • The Core Strategy- Environment: 48 responses. • The Core Strategy- Social Inclusion: 28 responses. • The Core Strategy- Waste: 31 responses. • The Core Strategy- Transport: 80 responses. • North Plymstock AAP: 240 responses. • Devonport AAP: 35 responses. • Millbay/Stonehouse AAP: 38 responses. • Derriford/Seaton/Southway AAP: 40 responses. • Central Park AAP: 472 responses. • City Centre AAP: 37 responses. • East End AAP: 19 responses. • The Hoe AAP: 58 responses. A petition with over 2,000 signatures was included, concerning protecting West Hoe Park and the Hoe. • Sutton Harbour AAP: 31 responses • Cross Border Issues (Sherford and Minerals): 1346 responses. Within the responses were 3 petitions, signed by 1,226, 177 people and 7,385 people. These related to the Sherford proposal and its key implications; and also to the option for a transport interchange at Haye Road and a feared loss of sporting facilities. • Plymouth, SE Cornwall and SW Devon to 2016: 64 responses.

3.4 Sections 4-8 of this report identifies some of the key issues raised through the Issues & Options consultation process. Many detailed matters were raised which are more appropriately dealt with in the individual Area Action Plans rather than the Core Strategy. Additionally, many comments were made regarding what were perceived to be firm proposals of the Council, rather than (as is the case) issues and options identified by the Council to engender discussion. This was particularly the case in relation to the Central Park and Hoe issues and options papers – where there was particular concern amongst many about a perceived loss of parkland.

3.5 A report of consultation responses is published on the Council’s Website.

4. CORE STRATEGY PREFERRED OPTIONS REPORT (See Appendix 1 for full text).

4.1 The Core Strategy Preferred Options report sets out a proposed long term spatial planning strategy for Plymouth. Its purpose is to set the statutory planning framework within the context of the long term aspirations of the City Strategy and Mackay vision. The intention is to develop a spatial planning framework, (based on the community aspirations), to guide the future development of Plymouth, to 2016 (in detail) and beyond to 2026 (in terms of the more general directions).

4.2 The issues & options consultation has helped to highlight the following issues to address in the Core Strategy:

1. Sustainable Communities as a key element of the Core Strategy. 2. Promotion of sustainable development through integration of environmental, social and economic issues. 3. Consideration of infrastructure needs arising from new development. Page 90

4. Provision for providing for maritime and other key economic sectors. 5. Provision for green space protection, energy efficiency and renewable energy. 6. Provision for social inclusion and affordable housing. 7. The potential tension between accelerated growth, environmental protection and infrastructure provision. 8. The need for the visions and strategic principles for development and change in each AAP areas to be clearly articulated, balancing regeneration and economic development aspirations with social and environmental needs in order to enhance overall quality of life.

4.3 The Core Strategy Preferred Options report includes provision for the following broad levels of development in the period 2001-2016.

Housing (total) 10,000 Housing (affordable) 25% of new homes Employment land 80 hectares Shopping 130,000 sq.m new retail provision (approx)

It also considers future levels and directions of growth beyond 2016, consistent with representations made by the City Council to the South West Regional Assembly (agreed at Cabinet meeting, 14th June 2005).

4.4 Key provisions of the preferred Core Strategy include: • Support for the Plymouth “quality agenda” whereby long term economic and population growth is promoted as part of a wider strategy to enable Plymouth to fulfil its potential as a European waterfront city. • Promotion of a city of linked sustainable communities as one of the concepts at the heart of the spatial strategy. • Proposals for placing sustainable development at the heart of the spatial strategy. • More targeted strategic planning frameworks for employment land and shopping developments, in support of the Council’s development and regeneration priorities. These reflect the key economic growth sectors and the priority of creating sustainable linked communities. • Proposals to support new investment in education and cultural facilities. • Promotion of high quality urban design, community safety, stewardship of the historic environment. • Visions for each part of the city to be subject to an Area Action Plan.

5. WASTE DPD PREFERRED OPTIONS REPORT. (See Appendix 2 for full text).

5.1 The Waste DPD sets out the preferred spatial strategy, policies and proposals for provision of waste management infrastructure in the city.

5.2 The issues & options consultation has helped to highlight the following issues to address in the Waste DPD: Page 91

1. The need as far as possible to address the city’s waste management needs within Plymouth (the “proximity” principle). 2. The need to set the Waste DPD firmly in the waste management hierarchy of Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, with landfill as the last resort.

5.3 The main strategic waste management sites identified in the Waste DPD Preferred Options report are: • China Clay Works, Coypool. • Chelson Meadow. • Moorcroft Quarry. • Prince Rock depot. • Employment allocation / playing field site, west of Ernesettle (this site only to come forward if the other sites could not become available).

6. DEVONPORT AAP PREFERRED OPTIONS REPORT. (See Appendix 3 for full text).

6.1 The Preferred Options report for Devonport AAP will set out the City Council’s proposed planning approach, the relevant issues and specific proposals, including alternative approaches where appropriate, in order to generate debate about the re-creation of Devonport as a distinct place in modern Plymouth; a vibrant self sustaining community; a place of real quality, variety and interest, the pride of residents, attractive to visitors and a model of 21st Century living, working and playing. 6.2 The issues & options consultation has helped to highlight the following issues to address in the Devonport AAP:

1. High levels of social and economic deprivation, which the AAP can help tackle through provision of new homes, jobs, shops, health and community facilities. 2. The need to improve shopping provision and establish a new role for Marlborough Street. 3. The need to increase the quality of life for residents. 4. Traffic management in the area and the transport implications of proposals. 5. The need to improve primary schools provisions in the area. 6. The need for appropriate development of key sites such as MoD Mount Wise and the Storage Enclave which helps to build a sustainable community.

6.3 The Devonport AAP Preferred Options report includes provision for the following broad levels of development in the period 2001-2016:

Housing (total) 450 (net increase) Housing (affordable) 25% of new homes Employment land 8,000 sq.m. Shopping 2,000 sq.m. (net increase)

6.4 Key sites for development / redevelopment include: Page 92

• South Yard Storage Enclave – mixed use development including a new district shopping centre (with medium sized supermarket and a range of smaller units), housing (including a significant number of family houses, mixed tenures and affordable housing), employment (approx 3,000 sq.m. B1 and B2 uses), health and community facilities and a new primary school. • Marlborough Street – relaxation of existing retail protection policy and support for relocation of traders to move, if they wish, to new district centre. • MoD Mount Wise – mixed use development, including housing, offices, recreational / leisure uses– with public access provided and open space / cricket pitch safeguarded.

7. MILLBAY / STONEHOUSE AAP PREFERRED OPTIONS REPORT. (See Appendix 4 for full text).

7.1 The Preferred Options report for Millbay / Stonehouse AAP will set out the City Council’s proposed planning approach, the relevant issues and specific proposals, including alternative approaches where appropriate, in order to generate debate about developing Millbay as an attractive sustainable mixed- use quarter, creating a unique, high quality environment that will attract investment and new residents to the area.

7.2 The issues & options consultation has helped to highlight the following issues to address in the Millbay / Stonehouse AAP:

1. The need to optimise the huge regeneration opportunity in Millbay and to spread the benefits to the wider Stonehouse area. 2. The design and deliverability of the new “boulevard” linking Millbay to the City Centre. 3. The role of Union Street. 4. The need to optimise the opportunities from the reuse of Royal William Yard. 5. The future of the Grain Silo. 6. The appropriateness of tall buildings.

7.3 The Millbay / Stonehouse AAP Preferred Options report includes provision for the following levels of development in the period 2001-2016.:

Housing (total) 700 (approx) on sites that can be identified at this stage Housing (affordable) 25% of new homes Employment land Not quantified at present, but Shopping on range of sites

7.4 Key sites for development / redevelopment include: • A new “boulevard” linking the City Centre to Millbay – with mixed uses, but including significant level of office and residential development, leisure and recreation, neighbourhood shopping and community uses, and potentially a new primary school as part of a mixed use campus. • Arena – provision of a new Arena in the Millbay area, linked to Page 93

relocation of facilities from Plymouth Pavilions as part of the Boulevard proposal. • Millbay Docks – Mixed use with housing, tourist / leisure related used, cafes and restaurants, offices, marine employment and high quality public realm linking and along the waterfront. • Royal William Yard – conservation and enhancement of the historic buildings and environment, mixed use development, including housing, tourist / leisure uses, employment and workshop space, offices, hotel. High quality public realm and public access are key elements of the preferred options for this site. • Stonehouse Creek – site to be reserved as potential location for a new secondary school serving the waterfront area (this may be needed in response to anticipated population increase in the area). • Union Street – introduction of more residential and other uses to enable Union Street, and concentration of night club uses within a specific area, enabling Union Street to reclaim its former glory and link more effectively with communities to north and south.

8. NORTH PLYMSTOCK AAP PREFERRED OPTIONS REPORT. (See Appendix 5 for full text).

8.1 This Preferred Options report considers the whole of the North Plymstock area, from the Plym estuary through to the eastern boundary of the city, and from the A379 to the southern edge of Plympton. It sets a preferred planning framework that links North Plymstock with Sherford, enabling an integrated strategy to be set for the eastern corridor. This AAP will be co-ordinated with that proposed by South Hams District Council for Sherford. The AAP for Sherford prepared by South Hams District Council and the North Plymstock AAP will share the same ‘strategic development diagram’. This will in effect enable an informal Joint AAP to be prepared. This is considered to be the most effective way of ensuring that cross border issues are adequately addressed.

8.2 The issues & options consultation has helped to highlight the following issues to address in the North Plymstock AAP:

1. The need to ensure that developments are supporting the implementation of comprehensive improvements to the transport infrastructure of the Eastern Corridor, and are promoting high levels of public transport and sustainable transport use. 2. The relationship of the Sherford and Plymstock Quarry developments to surrounding areas – in particular Plympton St Maurice, Elburton, Saltram and Pomphlett. The implications for neighbouring communities needs careful consideration. 3. The opportunity to improve leisure provision including a new swimming pool. 4. The future direction of growth (post 2016) once Sherford is developed. 5. The need to protect greenspace such as Billacombe Green.

8.3 It is clear from the issues and options consultation exercise that there remains a high degree of concern regarding major development in the eastern Page 94

corridor. These concerns relate to a variety of matters, including the precise location of Sherford. The transport implications of development is perhaps the greatest area of concern.

8.4 The principle of the Sherford development itself has been thoroughly tested and agreed through the Devon Structure Plan Examination in Public. It is now a proposal of the adopted Devon Structure Plan. It is therefore not considered appropriate to revisit the principle of this development. The more detailed proposals emerging through the Enquiry by Design process are considered to be well founded in sustainable development and planning terms, and are thus supported through the Preferred Options report. However, it clearly will be incumbent on both Plymouth and South Hams Councils, together with Devon County Council, to ensure that development is of the highest quality and addresses very legitimate infrastructure and environmental concerns adequately.

8.5 The North Plymstock AAP Preferred Options report includes provision for the following levels of development in the period 2001-2016:

Housing (total) Approx 1,700 Housing (affordable) 25% of new homes Employment land At least 5.5 ha. Shopping 1,800 sq.m. plus small units

8.5 Key sites for development / redevelopment include: • Plymstock Quarry – new mixed use neighbourhood of Plymouth, with full range of social and employment facilities, including mixed tenure housing (with at least 25% affordable housing), a new primary school, shops, leisure uses, public transport interchanges, open space and employment uses. • Elburton – a small section of the Sherford new community crosses the administrative boundary at Elburton. • Wakehams Quarry – identified as a mixed use development opportunity site at an important Gateway location. • Chelson Meadow –retaining the waste management and treatment function at the south west sector of Chelson Meadow, and provision of a new recreation facility. • Moorcroft Quarry – identified as suitable for waste management and employment uses. • Hazeldene Quarry – northward extension of Hazeldene Quarry. • Sherford – a small part of the Sherford new community will cross the boundary into Plymouth’s administrative area. • Saltram – creation of a regionally significant country park based on Saltram Park and the surrounding National Trust estate. • Improving strategic transport links serving the eastern corridor. • Safeguarding minerals deposits, in a manner which allows for the development of a sustainable new community at Sherford . • Promoting a network of pedestrian and cycle routes and recreational areas linking Plymstock and new development with the South Hams, the waterfront, Chelson Meadow, Saltram Estate and on the Plym Valley and Dartmoor. Page 95

9. DRAFT STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. (See Appendix 6 for full text).

9.1 This can be seen in full in Appendix 6. The Draft Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) sets out a proposed framework and standards for community involvement in the LDF and development control process.

9.2 An earlier draft SCI was approved by Cabinet for consultation purposes in July 2004. Since then, much detailed guidance has been published by the Government, and a community-led SCI Task Group has been established to advise the Council on its SCI preparation.

9.3 The SCI Preferred Options report includes the following key elements / provisions:

• It sets out the Council’s objectives for community involvement in the LDF and planning applications. • It identifies key principles of community involvement in the planning process, including the “front-loading” principle concerning the need for early engagement of people in the planning process. • It identifies a range of consultation processes and methods that may be used at different stages of the plan-making process. • It sets a framework for consultation on planning applications, including the need for pre-application consultation by applicants in respect of significant development control proposal.

10. NEXT STEPS.

10.1 Each of these LDDs will now be subject to a 6 week period during which formal representations can be lodged with the Council. The Council will need to consider these representations as it prepares the LDDs for formal submission to Government.

10.2 Formal submission of these documents to Government is anticipated as set out below:

• The Core Strategy. November / December 2005. • Waste Local Development Document. September / October 2006. • Devonport Area Action Plan. November / December 2005. • Millbay / Stonehouse Area Action Plan. November / December 2005. • North Plymstock Area Action Plan. February / March 2006. • Statement of Community Involvement. November 2005.

Page 96

This page is intentionally left blank

Consultation Events Held for Preferred Options Documents and Draft SCI

During the Preferred Options consultation period a series of event were held to allow people to comment on the Documents and talk to Staff about issues they had. Three events took place in the locations of specific Area Action Plans (AAP’s), for Millbay and Stonehouse AAP, Devonport AAP and North Plymstock AAP. These events focused on the individual AAP’s with additional information on the Draft Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) and the other documents. A three day citywide event was also held in the city centre which covered all documents. Table A below sets out the locations of each event, the document that were covered, the time and date of the event and the number of attendees.

Table A Event Location Documents Time, Date Number of covered attendees Plymstock North Plymstock 10-4 30/07/05 200 Community Centre, AAP, all Broad way, Plymstock Stonehouse Millbay/ 1-7 08/08/05 85 community centre, Stonehouse AAP, Stonehouse all DRC, Malborough Devonport AAP, all 1-7 17/08/05 75 St. Devonport Guild Hall, City ALL 10-4 18/08/05 850 Centre 10-4 19/08/05 10-4:30 20/08/05

All events were held in easily accessible locations with disabled access. Events that focused on specific AAPs were held within the geographical area of the AAP. The city centre event which covered all the preferred options and draft SCI documents was held in the Guildhall due to its central location. The events were also held at times which ensured that all sectors of the community were able to attend. All events were advertised in the local media and also in shops, cafes and other visible locations throughout the areas of the event and the geographical AAP areas, to ensure widespread advanced notification of the events in accordance with the Draft SCI.

Summary of Hard-to-Reach Consultation exercise SCI Specific

1. Introduction

As part of the Preferred Options consultations, Plymouth City Council (PCC) organised a series of targeted events with members of Hard-to-reach groups during the consultation period (29th July- 9th September 2005). Corporate Diagnostics Ltd was engaged by Plymouth City Council to under take this work. In addition to the Local Development Framework (LDF) preferred options consultation, the Local Transport Planning (LTP) consultation process was included in the consultant’s brief, providing an opportunity to join up the consultations.

The events took the form of facilitated workshops/ discussion groups, with members from young people, older people, disabled people and black minority ethnic people (BME). The Plymouth Pride Forum (gay and lesbian representative group) were invited to attend but declined to take part in the workshops. Individual events were held for each group.

Each event was intended to bring together groups of between 10-14 members of each group for discussion. Invitees were invited by Fata He for the BME work shop, the Youth Parliament via Corporate Diagnostics for the Young persons work shop, older people by Plymouth City Council’s transport department for the Older Persons work shop and Disabled people by the Guild of Voluntary Service for the Disabled people work shop. The actual turn out to each group was substantially lower due to people pulling out or not turning up on the day, as such the turnout for each workshop was as follows:

Workshop Number of Attendees Young People 4 Older People 9 Disabled People 6 Members of the BME community 4

The workshops were semi-structured and delivered by DVD, PowerPoint presentation and verbally. Interactive involvement was encouraged throughout the sessions in order to obtain maximum feedback from the participants. Group dynamics were good at all the workshops, with excellent involvement and interaction from all who attended.

1.1 Common themes that emerged from the workshops, SCI specific.

• There was a high level of support for the four principles set out in the draft SCI, but it was felt that openness, honesty and transparency should be included in the principles/values. • One group asked that any consultation should be apolitical so politics does not interfere with the process. • There were some lengthy discussions on how PCC should engage with the community, with the common theme being that better use should be made of local television and radio stations to deliver information clearly and concisely. These channels should also be used to inform people how they can become involved in the consultation process, particularly how and where to access information and give their input. • It was suggested that literature (in the form of leaflets or newspaper supplements) should be written in plain English and delivered to all households. • All groups were disappointed at the short notice of the workshops, and concerned at the tight deadlines for input. • Most of the people attending had no prior knowledge of the LDF or LTP as many do not read the local newspapers, and do not use public libraries where printed information could be accessed. • Of those who did use the libraries, they were not aware that any LDF/LTP consultation literature was available to them there. • It was suggested by all the groups that PCC could deliver information at locations where people naturally congregate. Young people suggested that exhibitions etc could be held at The Sundial in the city centre. This group also thought that as young people are probably the sector of the community most affected by the LDF and LTP, ideally school lesson periods could be used as a forum for delivering information/presentations and gaining input from young people. • Some of the older persons requested that their representative groups be given presentations to raise awareness of the proposals. • Some of the workshop participants were rather cynical about PCC’s intention to take on board comments/suggestions made during the consultation process. There were concerns about the use of words such as ‘affordable’ and ‘reasonable’ in documentation as these can be open to interpretation if there is insufficient detail attached to them. • It was recognised that there are time and budgetary constraints which limit the methods of consultation, but all groups felt that PCC could perhaps get more effective involvement by physically going out to specific sectors of the community. In particular the young people would really have liked the LDF and LTP to have been included as part of their school curriculum. • The documentation produced for these consultations was detailed and expensive to produce and not widely available. It was suggested that leaflets/flyers setting out the main points could have been widely distributed in the community raising awareness of the consultation and advising where more detailed information could be sourced.

2. Summery of Young persons’ workshop

The workshop was held on 1 September 2005 in the Guild of Voluntary Services. Although more had indicated they would be present, in total only four young people attended who were aged between 15-17 years old. All were members of the local Youth Parliament and came from different areas of Plymouth, with three living within the city boundaries and one in the outskirts. The group dynamics were good with all attendees having equal input to the discussions. They were all vocal, confident and relaxed about expressing their opinions. Although they had different political and social leanings they were able to debate amongst themselves and come to a consensus. There was a male/female divide to a greater or lesser extent on some topics but this did not have a detrimental impact on the discussions. The group were all unaware of the LDF or future plans for the development of Plymouth.

2.1 Draft statement of community involvement The group agreed with and supported the principles of the draft Statement of Community Involvement. However they felt that more could and should be done to engage with young people, particularly as they are now part of the community most likely to be impacted by plans currently being developed for 2016 and beyond. Their suggestions for engaging with young people included local radio and TV bulletins raising awareness of the development plans and informing how they can have an input into the process. Using relevant school lesson periods was also thought to be a good medium, along with taking road shows to places where young people gather, eg The Sundial. The group also felt that young people should be included in planning forums as equal functioning members, not as token guests with no input or impact.

3. Summery of Older Persons Workshop This workshop was held on 5 September 2005 in the Marlborough Room of the Council House. In total nine attended, seven females and two males, who belonged to a variety of older persons’ groups. Group dynamics were good with participation from all attendees to a greater or lesser extent. One person was actively involved in the Stonehouse and Millbay project and was therefore more knowledgeable than the rest of the group on PCC’s vision for Plymouth. This person gave the group useful third party endorsement of PCC’s intentions and was able to give reassurance and clarity on some issues arising during the workshop. Most of this group were unaware of the LDF, and even though they used the public libraries had not seen the booklets and questionnaires. Most of the group did not read the local papers but preferred to listen to Radio Devon and said that they had heard nothing about the plans on this radio station.

3.1 Draft statement of community involvement The group were generally supportive of this document but wanted ‘openness and transparency’ to be included in the principles. They also particularly wanted the consultation to be explicitly apolitical so that ‘politics’ does not interfere with the process. There were concerns about the short timescales for input within the consultation process and in particular about the short notice of the workshop, especially as it was close to the end of the consultation period. Requests were made that other members of the groups they were representing were given the opportunity to attend presentations/workshops to inform them of the LDF (and Local Transport Plan).

4. Disabled Persons’ Workshop This workshop was held in the Guild of Voluntary Services on 6 September 2005. In total eight people attended, five males and three females (one female did not actively participate as she was attending with her disabled partner). Some were there as representatives of organisations/groups including Shopmobility. One female said she represented the National Health Service, but did not clarify her role and left part-way through the session as it was not the forum she had anticipated.

Two of the group voiced particularly negative experiences of contact and dealings with PCC and were more vocal and critical than the rest of the group, but all attendees did contribute to the discussions.

Members of the group had differing levels of knowledge of the LDF but most had not seen the booklets and questionnaires. One said it was too expensive to download the information from the website and it seemed that most of the group did not access public libraries.

4.1 Draft statement of community involvement The group felt that they had not been properly involved or consulted. One member of the group had been part of the task force involved in early consultation and was dismayed that their input had not been reflected in this version of the SCI, and felt that the principles in fact reflected Government guidance rather than local views. They felt that PCC could do a lot more to engage local people, in particular by using local newspapers, TV and radio stations to disseminate information clearly and concisely.

5. BME Workshop This workshop was held on 8 September 2005 in the Frobisher Room of the Council House. In total there were four males, including one slightly late arrival, who were all connected with the Fata He* organisation. One of the group was involved with the Devonport regeneration and had some knowledge and awareness of the PCC vision. The group dynamics were good with all contributing to an interesting discussion. *Fata He is West African for ‘Inclusion’

The Chief Executive of the Fata He* BME Development group was disappointed that the workshop could not be included in a one-day conference scheduled for 20th September which is expected to attract at least 300 people, although it was accepted that this date is outside of the consultation period. It was suggested that the Planning & Strategy Department should liaise with PCC’s Race Equality Manager to see if it would be possible to make a presentation at the conference. The lack of consultation time was an issue as this workshop was held the evening before the end of the consultation period.

5.1 Draft statement of community involvement In view of the previous experience of one of the group, it was felt that PCC must demonstrate that it has taken on board views of the local people during the course of this consultation. The group also suggested that information dissemination and public involvement/engagement might be more effectively achieved if better use is made of more popular and accessible channels such as local television and radio. The principles of the Draft SCI were supported but there needs to be openness, honesty and transparency during consultation.

Plymouth City Council Local Development Framework

Report on consultation workshops

September 2005

55 Peverell Park Road, Plymouth PL3 4LT Tel: 01752 255930 e mail: [email protected]

Plymouth City Council Local development framework consultation report

Contents

Page

Executive summary 2

Limitations/recommendations 3

Main report:

Introduction 5

Young persons’ workshop • Summary 6 • Detail 7

Older persons’ workshop • Summary 12 • Detail 13

Disabled persons’ workshop • Summary 17 • Detail 18

BME workshop • Summary 22 • Detail 23

Appendices

• Presentation 29

• Contact sheet 33

• Evaluation sheet 34

Corporate Diagnostics 1

Executive summary

Plymouth City Council (PCC) recognised the need to involve ‘hard to reach groups’ in its Local Development Framework (LDF) and Local Transport Planning (LTP) consultation process. Corporate Diagnostics Ltd was engaged to facilitate workshops/discussion groups with young people, older people, disabled people and black minority ethnic people (BME). The Plymouth Pride Forum (gay and lesbian representative group) declined to take part in the workshops.

The four workshops were semi-structured and followed similar formats with information delivered by DVD, Powerpoint presentation (Appendix 1) and verbally. Interactive involvement was encouraged throughout the sessions in order to obtain maximum feedback from the participants. Group dynamics were good at all the workshops, with excellent involvement and interaction from all who attended.

Although the four groups were all quite different a number of common themes emerged from the workshops.

Draft statement of community involvement (SCI)

There was a high level of support for the four principles set out in the draft SCI, but it was felt that openness, honesty and transparency should included in the principles/values. One group asked that any consultation should be apolitical so politics does not interfere with the process.

There were some lengthy discussions on how PCC should engage with the community, with the common theme being that better use should be made of local television and radio stations to deliver information clearly and concisely. These channels should also be used to inform people how they can become involved in the consultation process, particularly how and where to access information and give their input. It was also suggested that literature (in the form of leaflets or newspaper supplements) should be written in plain English and delivered to all households.

All groups were disappointed at the short notice of the workshops, and concerned at the tight deadlines for input. Most of the people attending had no prior knowledge of the LDF or LTP as many do not read the local newspapers, and do not use public libraries where printed information could be accessed. Even those who did use the libraries were not aware that any LDF/LTP consultation literature was available to them there.

It was suggested by all the groups that PCC could deliver information at locations where people naturally congregate. Young people suggested that exhibitions etc could be held at The Sundial in the city centre as this is a well known and well populated youth meeting place. This group also thought that as young people are probably the sector of the community most affected by the LDF and LTP, ideally school lesson periods could be used as a forum for delivering information/presentations and gaining input from young people. Corporate Diagnostics 2

Some of the older persons requested that their representative groups be given presentations to raise awareness of the proposals.

Some of the workshop participants were rather cynical about PCCs intention to take on board comments/suggestions made during the consultation process. There were also concerns about the use of words such as ‘affordable’ and ‘reasonable’ in documentation as these can be open to interpretation if there is insufficient detail attached to them.

Local development framework

There was a high level of support for the vision set out by PCC but there was also some doubt that the vision would be delivered. All groups supported the concept of sustainable communities but there was uncertainty that in reality this could be achieved, particularly the ideal of integrated social and private housing. It was hoped that providing attractive environments would encourage people to take a pride in their communities and have a positive impact on current unacceptable behaviour.

There was acceptance that the population of Plymouth might have to increase, but this should only happen if properly supported by the correct infrastructure. In particular there should be a strategy to encourage a good mix of businesses to move to Plymouth to create jobs and increase the wealth of the city’s economy.

Every group supported PCCs intention to provide a better quality of life for all but were very concerned that the proposals might disadvantage poorer local people in favour of more affluent people moving into the area, particularly as waterfront developments are likely to be too expensive for low earning local families. There was also concern that established communities would be broken up if people are dispersed across the city during redevelopment.

There were demands that developers should be obliged to provide community facilities and job opportunities for local people. It was also suggested that PCC should instigate construction skills training programmes so a local sustainable workforce is well placed to take maximum advantage of emerging employment opportunities.

The concept of Plymouth becoming at 24/7 city with a vibrant café culture was welcomed by all the groups but it was felt that this might be difficult to achieve unless the mindset and behaviour of some residents is significantly changed.

Limitations/recommendations

1. There was insufficient time in the workshops to discuss all the aspects of the LDF and LTP, but interestingly all workshops covered virtually the same ground with the exception of the BME which ran longer and where it was possible to include one extra area on the LTP.

Corporate Diagnostics 3

2. It is recognised that there are time and budgetary constraints which limit the methods of consultation, but all groups felt that PCC could perhaps get more effective involvement by physically going out to specific sectors of the community. In particular the young people would really have liked the LDF and LTP to have been included as part of their school curriculum.

3. The documentation produced for these consultations was detailed and expensive to produce and not widely available. It was suggested that leaflets/flyers setting out the main points could have been widely distributed in the community raising awareness of the consultation and advising where more detailed information could be sourced.

4. Participants were asked to complete contact sheets (Appendix 2) where they could indicate whether or not they wanted a copy of the report of the workshop and if they wished to be involved in further consultations. On some of these sheets there were specific requests for presentations to be made to older persons groups. The completed sheets do not form part of this report, and are supplied separately to enable PCC to take appropriate follow up action.

5. Participants were asked to complete evaluation sheets (Appendix 3) indicating their level of satisfaction with the workshops and venues. There was almost unanimous satisfaction with the content and presentation of the workshops, and the need to have workshops to discuss important Plymouth-related issues. There was slight dissatisfaction from one or two individuals about both of the venues.

Corporate Diagnostics 4

MAIN REPORT

Introduction

Plymouth City Council (PCC) recognised the need to involve ‘hard to reach groups’ in its planning consultation process. Corporate Diagnostics Ltd was engaged to conduct workshops/discussion groups with young people, older people, disabled people and black minority ethnic people (BME). The Plymouth Pride Forum (gay and lesbian representative group) declined to take part in the workshops.

Young people were recruited by Corporate Diagnostics Ltd via the local Youth Parliament group, and participants for the other workshops were recruited by PCC staff via their network of contacts. Venues were arranged by PCC.

At the beginning of all the sessions participants were shown the ‘promotional’ DVD commissioned by PCC outlining the vision for Plymouth, the purpose of the Local Development Framework (LDF) and the importance of involving citizens early in the planning process.

The session was then split into two parts, the first focusing on the Local Development Framework and the second on the Local Transport Plan.

Detailed information was delivered to participants verbally, supported by Powerpoint presentations, with interactive involvement throughout the sessions.

Workshops were semi-structured and followed a format agreed with PCC. The two facilitators maintained a flexible approach when delivering the material in order to adapt to the emerging situation/circumstances, and to more effectively engage and involve the participants.

Corporate Diagnostics 5

Young persons’ workshop

This workshop was held on 1 September 2005 in the Guild of Voluntary Services. Although more had indicated they would be present, in total only four young people attended who were aged between 15-17 years old. All were members of the local Youth Parliament and came from different areas of Plymouth, with three living within the city boundaries and one in the outskirts.

The group dynamics were good with all attendees having equal input to the discussions. They were all vocal, confident and relaxed about expressing their opinions. Although they had different political and social leanings they were able to debate amongst themselves and come to a consensus. There was a male/female divide to a greater or lesser extent on some topics but this did not have a detrimental impact on the discussions.

Summary of Young Persons’ LDF Workshop

The group were all unaware of the LDF or future plans for the development of Plymouth.

Draft statement of community involvement

The group agreed with and supported the principles of the draft statement of community involvement. However they felt that more could and should be done to engage with young people, particularly as they are now part of the community most likely to be impacted by plans currently being developed for 2016 and beyond.

Their suggestions for engaging with young people included local radio and TV bulletins raising awareness of the development plans and informing how they can have an input into the process. Using relevant school lesson periods was also thought to be a good medium, along with taking road shows to places where young people gather, eg The Sundial. The group also felt that young people should be included in planning forums as equal functioning members, not as token guests with no input or impact.

Local development framework

The group were very supportive of the concept of sustainable communities and neighbourhoods. They believed that if people lived in attractive environments it would encourage a culture of pride in their local communities and improve the quality of life for everyone. They also believed that having easy access to local amenities would have a positive impact on the environment in the long term.

However the group had concerns about the potential impact of some of the development plans, in particular that poorer people might be disadvantaged by not being able to afford housing in their improved communities.

Corporate Diagnostics 6

Plymouth City Council’s vision was supported and welcomed by the group but there was a level of uncertainty that PCC would deliver it. The group want Plymouth to be safe and attractive and a city of choice, and they would like other cities to say “We want to look and be like Plymouth”.

Detail of Young Persons’ LDF Workshop

Draft Statement of community involvement

Specific questions posed during this section: What do you think of the principles of the Statement? What other ways are there of consulting/reaching people? What do you think will get people interested in the consultation? What other ways are there of involving the community?

At the beginning of the session the group were specifically asked if any of them had any knowledge of the Local Development Framework (LDF) or development plans for the future of Plymouth. None of them had any awareness.

They were then asked if they accessed public libraries where the consultation documents and questionnaires were available. None of the group use the public libraries or had any awareness of any consultation documents.

They were concerned about their lack of knowledge of the Local Development Plan (LDF) for the future development of Plymouth, particularly as their section of the community would be aged 20+ by 2016 and were therefore the most likely to be impacted by plans being drawn up now.

The group’s attention was drawn to a selection of press cuttings and feature articles about various aspects of the LDF which had recently appeared in the Evening Herald and Western Morning News, but none of them regularly read either of these newspapers.

There was a general discussion about the best methods of consultation and information sharing with young people. These are summarised below:

1. As a matter of urgency make the LDF (and Local Transport Plan) a discussion topic in relevant school lesson periods.

2. Information should be presented to young people briefly, clearly and concisely with maximum use of visual aids such as models.

3. Information should be delivered in small manageable segments with the emphasis on what is going to happen in the short term rather than the massive strategy and vision.

Corporate Diagnostics 7

4. Real buy-in to the consultation process will only be encouraged if the reality of what is happening now is delivered to young people where they gather, eg the Sundial in the city centre.

5. The group thought the ‘promotional’ DVD was very good (if a little long), particularly the parts that showed the difference between places now and what the future held in store eg the Devonport development.

6. The best medium to reach young people is local radio and TV, particularly Plymouth Sound. The consensus was that newspapers and booklets would probably not be accessed as the format is too ‘dry’.

Summarising the above, in the opinion of this group, young people want maximum impact delivered in minimum time, and with particular emphasis on the ‘before and after’ effect. They also prefer specifics rather than high level intangibles. The group felt that in general terms young people are apathetic and probably would not bother to look at the Plymouth City Council website or complete a questionnaire without a high level of coercion.

The group agreed with the principles of the Draft Statement of Community Involvement and supported the vision for Plymouth. However further general discussion revealed that the group were a little cynical about PCC’s ability to deliver the vision and wondered how the LDF would impact on jobs, housing provision, aggressive crime and education.

There were also concerns about rumours they had heard eg Pavilions being knocked down, changes to Central Park. In view of the amount of ground to be covered, it was agreed that these specific issues would be explored in more detail at the end of the session if time permitted.

The group felt that PCC should keep the public informed via a range of media including TV, radio and road shows at places such as The Sundial so that rumours can be dispelled and facts established.

There was a suggestion that the local press should be persuaded to use eye-catching headlines, such as ‘500 new jobs to be created’ to encourage people to read articles about how the new development will attract new businesses and create jobs.

The group welcomed the new vision for Plymouth but were concerned about high crime rates and drunkenness. They wondered if a change in environment would change the attitude of people, or if the net result would be similar crime rates and drunkenness but in a more attractive environment.

There was apprehension about poorer people being pushed out of their communities to make way for wealthier and better educated people in the new developments.

In particular the group felt strongly that if Plymouth is to develop into a fine European city it must do so in conjunction with the University of Plymouth so that business and education

Corporate Diagnostics 8

move forward together and thrive together, resulting in a great city with a great university. The group believed that the perceived standard of the University of Plymouth would need to improve considerably if young people were to be more inclined to stay in Plymouth for their higher education, and in order to attract high calibre students from other regions and countries.

Sustainable communities

Specific questions posed during this section: How important is it to have local shops? Should the Council encourage development of local shopping centres? How do you feel about the proposals for sustainable communities? What’s important? What’s missing?

The group were given an explanation of sustainable development and a description of sustainable communities and were shown the diagram of a mixed-use and integrated urban neighbourhood.

1. One of the group had seen and liked the Brighton model where shopping centres are part of small, well designed and attractive communities.

2. The group agreed that neighbourhoods needed a variety of housing and also a youth focus eg youth centres, reasonably priced sports facilities such as tennis courts etc. It was felt that if the community and facilities looked attractive and were well maintained it would create social engagement and respect, with the result that bad behaviour would be less tolerated and areas would gain better reputations.

3. Security measures should be introduced in parks and outdoor spaces to encourage more use out of hours

Housing

1. When designing new housing developments provision should be made for safe places to park cars – not necessarily on the roadside but perhaps in banks of garages

2. The group were concerned that: a. if the population increased there wouldn’t be enough jobs – they recognise the need to balance numbers of people and jobs b. the disadvantaged and poor would be pushed out of areas where they have lived for generations c. low earners may not be able to afford to live in the newly developed areas

3. When housing redevelopment/building is in progress the group wondered where current occupants would live. It was felt that good communication channels from the Council should be in place so the impact on people would be clearly understood.

Corporate Diagnostics 9

Summary of sustainable communities

The concept of sustainable communities is supported as long as housing development is linked with transport and park/green space provision.

City Centre

1. The group wondered if the city centre was going to be expanded, and if so how.

2. The concept of Plymouth having a 24/7 thriving city centre was considered to be a great idea but the group were uncertain that it could be achieved, particularly the café culture.

3. There are real concerns that there will always be a Union Street and if this were to change then perhaps The Hoe/Barbican would become the new Union Street as they believe is happening now.

4. The group agreed there was a need for a Union Street/clubland area but suggested it should be contained within an area at the lower end of the street, away from the city centre.

5. It was suggested that the new version of Union Street should be drastically different so it is no longer associated with drunks and that there should be more outlets open during the day.

6. The group believed that people are naturally attracted to their own kind, ie drunks will go where there are other drunks particularly if it is tolerated. They thought perhaps there should be zero tolerance.

7. There was a suggestion that resources should be put into education programmes for youngsters to bring about a change in their attitude to drinking.

8. At present the town centre is ‘dead’ after 5pm – the group suggested longer/later shopping hours and that the Council should actively encourage a culture of cafes and restaurants.

9. The group believe that generally people are socially malleable so if their environment is nicer this will have a positive impact on their behaviour.

Central Park

1. There are concerns about the rumours of what is planned for the park in that they do not want it to become over-developed.

Corporate Diagnostics 10

2. Also the group wondered what interim arrangements would be put in place to ensure that current users of the swimming pool (eg diving club) do not permanently relocate to other facilities if the pool is closed for redevelopment.

Close of session

At the end of the session the group were asked two specific questions about the impact of the plans. These questions prompted some very concise views from this group of young people of the aspirations they have for their city:

Question 1: How will you as individuals need to feel or think or behave to confirm that the LDF plans are a success?

1. To be able to sit on a bench in an attractive place and feel safe 2. For Plymouth to be compared favourably with other cities who have had similar ambitious plans

Question 2: How would you like Plymouth to be in 10 years time?

1. Not to be known not as a place with the worst drunks in the country, but a culturally attractive place which is not a stereotypical city. 2. To be a community of social enterprise 3. A place where people come to better themselves 4. Safe and attractive 5. A place where people want to bring up their families 6. A place where other cities say “We want to look and be like Plymouth”.

Future involvement in planning

The group want young people to be included in planning forums as equal functioning members, not as token guests with no input or impact.

They also felt it would be useful to run workshops regularly to inform on progress and produce an informal cascade of information through the Youth Parliament networks.

The group questioned how serious the Council was about communicating with young people if they are not prepared to get out and meet them in their own territory.

Corporate Diagnostics 11

Older Persons Workshop

This workshop was held on 5 September 2005 in the Marlborough Room of the Council House. In total nine attended, seven females and two males, who belonged to a variety of older persons’ groups.

Group dynamics were good with participation from all attendees to a greater or lesser extent. One person was actively involved in the Stonehouse and Millbay project and was therefore more knowledgeable than the rest of the group on PCC’s vision for Plymouth. This person gave the group useful third party endorsement of PCC’s intentions and was able to give reassurance and clarity on some issues arising during the workshop.

Summary of Older Persons’ LDF Workshop

Most of this group were unaware of the LDF, and even though they used the public libraries had not seen the booklets and questionnaires. Most of the group did not read the local papers but preferred to listen to Radio Devon and said that they had heard nothing about the plans on this radio station.

Draft statement of community involvement

The group were generally supportive of this document but wanted ‘openness and transparency’ to be included in the principles. They also particularly wanted the consultation to be explicitly apolitical so that ‘politics’ does not interfere with the process.

There were concerns about the short timescales for input within the consultation process and in particular about the short notice of the workshop, especially as it was close to the end of the consultation period. Requests were made that other members of the groups they were representing were given the opportunity to attend presentations/workshops to inform them of the LDF (and Local Transport Plan).

Local development framework

The group were largely supportive of the plans and vision but had reservations about PCCs ability and commitment to deliver.

They liked the idea of sustainable communities if greenspace is preserved and high quality play areas provided. The group agreed that housing provision should be mixed tenure and type, but particularly wanted supported/sheltered housing to be included in all new developments to avoid elderly people having to move to new areas in their twilight years.

There was a strong feeling that developers should be contractually obliged to provide community facilities and that the construction of houses and facilities should take place at the same time and not as separate projects.

Corporate Diagnostics 12

The group were enthusiastic about the idea of Plymouth city centre having a 24/7 café culture, particularly if it attracted more cruise liners and their passengers into the city.

They believed that the ‘clubland’ area of Union Street should be contained in a smaller area and that the street should be rejuvenated to make it a safer place for families.

Improved accessibility to the local beauty and tourist areas by provision of better footpaths and free/subsidised county-passes was also considered to be a priority by this group.

Detail of Older Persons’ LDF Workshop

One of the group had reasonable knowledge of the LDF but the rest were unaware. Although some of the group used public libraries they were unaware that the booklets and questionnaires were available there.

There was a general level of concern that most present had no knowledge of the LDF and had not yet been consulted. One person had proactively invited PCC to a meeting to take on board the views of the local people she represented and others at the workshop hoped that they might also have similar opportunities for their own groups.

At the start of the workshop one of the group said he had been asked by his grandchildren to request that more leisure facilities such as swimming pools be made available. The point was also made that leisure facilities need to be easy to access with affordable public transport. This highlights the fact that older people are keen that future generations should benefit from their input to the LDF.

The group had heard rumours of The Pavilions being closed or re-sited and were concerned that it would be closed before a new facility was opened.

During a brief discussion after the DVD issues were raised about funding for the vision, the ability of PCC to deliver it and the timescales. One of the group said that funding was coming from the Regional Development Agency and Government partnership.

There were real worries that the consultation period is being rushed with very short timescales for input. The group were in particular disappointed at the very short notice given for the workshop and the fact that it was scheduled almost at the end the consultation period which finishes on 9 September.

There was some cynicism that any of the proposals would come to fruition as the group had many years experience of plans and developments being discussed but never being delivered. They also cited examples of land being purchased and left for years before any development gets underway.

The group sought reassurance that developers would be contractually obliged to provide facilities for local communities such as meeting places/halls, gardens etc. They did not Corporate Diagnostics 13

just want to see expensive apartments being built for rich people, they want local people to benefit from the new developments.

It was suggested that if PCC really want people to be involved in future plans they should run a ‘good will’ campaign to overcome the cynicism, mistrust and suspicion that is prevalent in the local population. The campaign needs to change attitudes and convince people that things have changed, and PCC will deliver its promises and plans.

There was agreement that regenerating communities might bring about some change in current bad behaviour in certain areas of the city.

Draft Statement of community involvement

Specific questions posed during this section: What do you think of the principles of the Statement? What other ways are there of consulting/reaching people? What do you think will get people interested in the consultation? What other ways are there of involving the community?

There was support for the four principles stated but the group wanted ‘transparency and openness’ to be included. In particular they felt that the whole consultation process should be apolitical and that this should be stated explicitly so it is clear that politics per se does not have a detrimental impact.

Some of those present requested that the groups they represented should have the opportunity to attend workshops or have presentations as part of the consultation process. Some have made a formal request on the contact sheets (supplied separately): groups particularly keen to be involved are New Plymouth Forum and Plymouth Communities Befriending Forum (contact Caroline Hinkley).

Suggested additional methods of involving and consulting with the wider community included mail shots of leaflets/literature written in plain English and radio broadcasts, particularly on Radio Devon.

Sustainable communities

The group supported the principles as long as existing greenspace is preserved and high quality play areas are provided for children. They wanted to believe that improving surroundings would improve behaviour so that vandalism would be a thing of the past, but they were doubtful that this would be achieved without the visible presence of park wardens and community police.

Safety is a big issue, and the group wanted the police to be a more integral part of the community, building trust and relationships.

Corporate Diagnostics 14

The group also wanted more health services to be available and easily accessible within the local community.

Housing

The group supported the idea of integrating social housing with more expensive privately owned homes but doubted that it would work in practice.

They firmly believed that community infrastructure should be developed in tandem with housing so services are up and running as soon as the houses are built.

There was a request that PCC consider developing a simple process whereby elderly people can downsize from their owned home and move to a smaller rented or owned home within their local community. It was also felt that provision for supported/sheltered housing for older people should be included in all new communities.

City Centre

The group were very enthusiastic about promoting a vibrant 24/7 café/restaurant culture within the city centre. Once this culture is established they believed that cruise ships would be more attracted to Plymouth, and that passengers would be more inclined to stay in the city rather than being whisked away to other places and tourist attractions.

There was agreement that Union Street should be rejuvenated and returned to an area where families and children would feel safe. It was suggested that ‘clubland’ should be contained in a smaller manageable area away from the city centre.

Suggestions were made that public toilet facilities should have attendants, be open longer and be of a high standard, even if this required payment of a small fee. It was also suggested that the bandstand should be reinstated on The Hoe with different types of music being available for all tastes and ages.

Environment

There was a request that there should be easily accessible footpaths to explore the local area and that county-wide bus passes for over 60’s should be available, either free or at a reduced rate.

General observation

The group wondered how and why the ‘ugly’ Staples building had been approved. It was felt that the building appeared with undue haste and should never have been allowed, and brings into question PCCs stated intention of ‘joined up thinking’ to fulfill their vision of a beautiful city.

Corporate Diagnostics 15

Close of session

At the end of the session the group were asked two specific questions.

Question 1: How will you judge effectiveness of plans?

1. They want to see tangible progress 2. They want to know their views have been taken on board 3. They want something positive to come from the consultation. They have had lots of promises and now need to see results

NOTE: There is concern that Laira Bridge will not be able to cope with additional traffic generated by the North Plymstock development. The group believe Laira Bridge needs to be widened before development starts.

One person voiced concern over Chelson Meadow’s diminishing capacity and was given a brief outline of the proposed waste management plan.

In summing up the LDF session, the priorities for this group were:

1. Finance to be in place for developments 2. Definite plans and timetable for developments 3. Regular updates on progress 4. Early involvement in consultation 5. Name and shame those that block progress

Question 2: How would you like Plymouth to be in 10 years?

1. A city with better facilities, especially for the young 2. A clean city 3. A city with more care in the community opportunities

The group were concerned that local people would be forced out of their area as housing provision is developed and improved because they would no longer afford be able to afford a house in the new developments. The group agree it’s nice to see improvements but they do not want to see local people disadvantaged.

Corporate Diagnostics 16

Disabled Persons’ Workshop

This workshop was held in the Guild of Voluntary Services on 6 September 2005. In total eight people attended, five males and three females (one female did not actively participate as she was attending with her disabled partner). Some were there as representatives of organisations/groups including Shopmobility. One female said she represented the National Health Service, but did not clarify her role and left part-way through the session as it was not the forum she had anticipated.

Two of the group voiced particularly negative experiences of contact and dealings with PCC and were more vocal and critical than the rest of the group, but all attendees did contribute to the discussions.

Summary of Disabled Persons’ LDF Workshop

Members of the group had differing levels of knowledge of the LDF but most had not seen the booklets and questionnaires. One said it was too expensive to download the information from the website and it seemed that most of the group did not access public libraries.

Draft statement of community involvement

The group felt that they had not been properly involved or consulted. One of the group had been part of the task force involved in early consultation and was dismayed that their input had not been reflected in this version of the SCI, and felt that the principles in fact reflected Government guidance rather than local views.

They felt that PCC could do a lot more to engage local people, in particular by using local newspapers, TV and radio stations to disseminate information clearly and concisely.

Local development framework

There was support for the concept of sustainable communities even though the group were extremely doubtful that the vision would be delivered.

The major concerns were that local people should not be disadvantaged in favour of businesses and more affluent people, and that a sound infrastructure should be integral to any development plans.

The group wanted more detail to be provided throughout the consultation process and in any documentation on which they were asked for input. In particular where words such as ‘affordable’ and ‘reasonable’ were used the group said they should be supported by

Corporate Diagnostics 17

numbers so people are able to make informed decisions and provide meaningful input to the debate.

They want to see PCC working towards creating a more positive culture by acknowledging and acting on input received from local people, and to start producing visible results rather than just plans which do not come to fruition.

Detail of Disabled Persons’ LDF Workshop

The group had differing levels of knowledge of the LDF but most had not seen the booklets and questionnaires, and one said it was too expensive to download the information from the website. It seemed that most did not access public libraries and there were particular difficulties with the Central Library as there is no easy access to disabled toilets.

After watching the DVD the group were asked for their views on it which prompted a number of comments. These are summarised below:

1. Consultation should be an ongoing exercise working in tandem with planning and implementation so that communities really feel informed and involved from start to finish. Real feeling of ‘buy in’ and ownership could be achieved by ongoing opportunities to provide input throughout the process.

2. One of the group had personal experience of the Devonport Regeneration where local people are continually being told the development is for them yet any ideas or proposals are usually fobbed off with ‘the funds are not available’. There appears to be no support for small local businesses wanting to set up in the area.

3. There is a suspicion that words such as ‘affordable’ and ‘reasonable ‘ are used as a smokescreen to hide real meaning and are open to interpretation in any number of ways to suit PCCs or the developers’ agenda. The group believe there should be detailed explanation including numbers if PCC really wants meaningful input and support for their proposals from the public. One of the group said: “The devil is always in the detail and it always seems that the detail is missing until it is too late to make any real changes.”

4. There is a lack of confidence in PCCs ability to deliver the vision when considering their track record of implementing plans, regulations or agreements. An example given was that the 1995 disabled parking regulations have still not been implemented 10 years on.

5. The group agreed that the aims and objectives outlined in the DVD are good but they have grave doubts about implementation.

6. The group feel the ‘cut of the cake’ is disproportionately allocated in favour of rich people, with the needs of local people low on the priority list. They want to see the resource allocation to be more favourably apportioned to meet local need. Corporate Diagnostics 18

7. It was felt that Plymouth was in danger of becoming a two-tier city, with excellent waterfront facilities and housing, but with big slum areas behind the façade.

8. One of the biggest problems in Plymouth is its perception as a city of drunks: licensing is already in the control of PCC and should be exercised diligently in order to promote and properly deliver this new vision. The group want to see regeneration, not degeneration.

Draft statement of community involvement

This prompted many comments which are listed below:

1. The group do not feel properly involved as local people.

2. One participant was part of the task force debate indicated dismay that he did not recognise any task force proposals in the Principles of Involvement and it rather seemed that these principles are just a rehash of the government guidance.

3. They felt dissemination of information via libraries would not produce the outcome of real community involvement; libraries outside the city centre are closing down and in the Central Library there are no disabled toilets so it is not an easy place for a disabled person to just ‘drop into’.

4. The group felt it was questionable that PCC really wanted to achieve community involvement as in their experience it was more like a tick box/lip service exercise.

5. There was agreement that the plans sound good but concern that these can be interpreted in many ways due to lack of detail, and on the whole the group do not feel confident that all this vision will be implemented.

Engaging the community

The group were asked how they would like to be consulted, and if there were any other ways to get people interested and involved in the consultation. This again prompted a number of comments:

1. People will only feel really engaged if they see evidence that they have been listened to and PCC have taken their views on board.

2. In general they don’t feel ‘consulted with’; rather feel ‘presented to’.

3. A lot is said at meetings but all written information contains a ‘get out’ word (such as affordable, reasonable) which is perceived as a lack of real commitment.

Corporate Diagnostics 19

4. They want to feel that as people of the city their genuine concerns will be considered as part of the decision making process. They are looking for some proper dialogue.

5. There is a perception that PCC do not acknowledge what people are saying. Members of the group said they had first hand experience of letters to the PCC being unanswered and phone calls not returned.

6. Some of the group do not trust PCC and feel that they are not taken seriously, particularly when summary information they have collated and sent to PCC is not acknowledged.

7. The group acknowledged that there are consultation channels available, such as Plymouth Community Network where groups can be represented and their views escalated to local government, but there is a perception that this does not work well.

8. One of the group is setting up a ‘Plymouth Peoples Project’ which aims to facilitate open ongoing consultation, real dialogue and access to detailed information. There is a belief that this is not available at present and examples were given:

• One lady attended a meeting at North Hill where no one was allowed to ask a question in open forum. All questions had to be submitted before hearing the presentation. • Planning applications are no longer printed in newspapers because they are available electronically. This seen as a delaying tactic, complicating and limiting access and hiding information rather than being open.

9. There are strong feelings of disenfranchisement at the moment; they want a real feeling that local people are involved in the vision.

10. If PCC is committed to open consultation, some of the ways PCC should demonstrate this are by:

• Ongoing consultation ‘postbag’ in Evening Herald. • Regular updates via local TV and radio

11. The group understand the financial implications but are concerned that some people are only in it for short term gain. If Plymouth is really in it for the long term, the views of local communities need to be considered and it is in PCC’s own interests to ensure these views are taken on board. Funding should be prioritised in favour of local people in local communities.

Sustainable communities

Generally there was a high level of cynicism and lack of belief that anything will happen. Comments made are summarised below:

Corporate Diagnostics 20

1. The group can’t see what is really in it for local people, the main beneficiaries seem to be business and the well off.

2. They agree that the right infrastructure must be in place – schools, health, community and leisure activities, proper road layout, public transport.

3. It’s difficult to buy-in to plans, especially the transport infrastructure, when current experience is that bus routes are being curtailed and compensation payments of about £3m are paid out to pedestrians being injured on poorly maintained pavements.

4. Neighbourhoods are like villages of old and are a good example of a better way to live but the group say they are currently seeing regeneration monies resulting in a shift in lawlessness to outlying areas e.g. Plymstock.

5. The group acknowledge that the root of many problems is a lack of money in a low wage economy. They accept there is a need to attract money into the overall city economy but money should not be taken out at community level.

6. People will only use green spaces, shops and businesses if they can afford to get there which is exasperated by the current trend of the rising cost of petrol, bus fares, and parking charges.

7. They agree that some wonderful ideas are being presented, but they will only believe it when they see it. This mindset will only change if they feel engaged in continual and proper consultation/information dissemination with much more detailed information provided throughout the duration of the process.

8. The recent experience in Devonport now is of areas of wasteland lying empty for years where homes have been demolished and people are still waiting for new houses to be built.

End of session

This was a group with very strong feelings and opinions on the plans for Plymouth, often based on previous experiences with PCC and perceptions of non-delivery against plans. There was a general feeling of ‘not being heard’. We did not ask how the group would judge the effectiveness of the plans, and how they would like to see the city in 10 years time due to time constraints. However some of the group did take away the booklets and questionnaires.

Corporate Diagnostics 21

BME Workshop

This workshop was held on 8 September 2005 in the Frobisher Room of the Council House. In total there were four males, including one slightly late arrival, who were all connected with the Fata He* organisation. One of the group was involved with the Devonport regeneration and had some knowledge and awareness of the PCC vision.

The group dynamics were good with all contributing to an interesting discussion.

*Fata He is West African for ‘Inclusion’

Summary of BME LDF Workshop

The Chief Executive of the Fata He* BME Development group was disappointed that the workshop could not be included in a one-day conference scheduled for 20 September which is expected to attract at least 300 people, although it was accepted that this date is outside of the consultation period. It was suggested that the Planning & Strategy Department should liaise with PCC’s Race Equality Manager to see if it would be possible to make a presentation at the conference. The lack of consultation time was an issue as this workshop was held the evening before the end of the consultation period.

Draft statement of community involvement

In view of the previous experience of one of the group, it was felt that PCC must demonstrate that it has taken on board views of the local people during the course of this consultation. The group also suggested that information dissemination and public involvement/engagement might be more effectively achieved if better use is made of more popular and accessible channels such as local television and radio.

The principles of the Draft SCI were supported but there needs to be openness, honesty and transparency during consultation.

Local development framework

Although there was support for PCCs vision, the group did not feel it reflected BME community and diversity issues. There was also uncertainty whether PCC could deliver as the group had a feeling that PCC was attempting to do too much, too quickly and wondered if enough could be done to change the culture of the people of Plymouth to enable the vision to flourish.

Corporate Diagnostics 22

They also had grave concerns about the viability of the LDF as there was no clear indication of a strategy to attract businesses to Plymouth to support the necessary growth in the economy.

There was also a concern that local communities would be broken up as people were dispersed during redevelopment, and that they would not be able to afford to return to their own areas. The group believed that the vision was likely to promote exclusive waterfront developments for rich people, with poorer local people being forced to live in the outskirts of the city.

The group were particularly keen for PCC to ensure that local people are given training in construction skills to enable them to take maximum advantage of the forthcoming redevelopment building programme. One tangible outcome of the LDF should be the creation of a sustainable skilled local workforce.

Detail of BME LDF workshop

The Chief Executive of the Fata He* BME Development group was disappointed that the workshop could not be included in a one-day conference scheduled for 20 September which is expected to attract at least 300 people, although it was accepted that this date is outside of the consultation period. It was suggested that the Planning & Strategy Department should liaise with PCC’s Race Equality Manager to see if it would be possible to make a presentation at the conference.

The lack of consultation time was an issue as this workshop was held the evening before the end of the consultation period.

After the group watched the DVD several comments were made, listed below:

1. Where do the BME community and diversity issues fit into this overall vision? The DVD doesn’t capture this.

2. In order to achieve the vision it will be vital to attract sustainable investment into the local economy. In particular the local low wage economy will need to rise in order to produce real growth in the area. The group believe there is a risk that if this is not delivered Plymouth will be left with sterile environments and potential ‘white elephants’.

3. Has the vision taken low earnings of many Plymouth people into account?

4. How will real community spirit be generated? The experience of the Mount Wise pool was that when it was redeveloped the old community spirit as well as its relaxed and informal nature was lost.

5. In the 1970’s Devonport was a mixed community where racism was not experienced and people cared for each other. Redevelopment can disperse communities and

Corporate Diagnostics 23

destroy relationships that have built up over generations, and efforts must be made to retain that community spirit. This should be explicit within redevelopment plans.

6. There is a high level of concern that in Devonport and other waterfront areas subject to redevelopment, people will be/have been ‘temporarily’ relocated but subsequently unable to return to the waterfront where they previously lived. There is a fear that poorer people will be relegated to inland areas as prime waterfront positions will be expensive and unaffordable to local people. The group are concerned that the local indigenous population will suffer rather than benefit from these developments.

Draft statement of community involvement

The question was asked if the Draft SCI was truly inclusive if it was not available in the 50 languages spoken in the city.

The group felt that historically Plymouth has not been good at really engaging with the public and perhaps a more ‘bottom up’ approach would be successful. There is a feeling that the real decision making and dialogue only takes place between the ‘suits’ and local people need to be included more. This needs to be the ‘people’s vision’. There is respect for the integrity of the originator of these ideas who probably wanted to achieve real community involvement.

It was suggested that consultation and information dissemination would probably be more effective if it was channelled through more accessible and popular media such as local television and radio. Consultation and information needs to be proactively provided in areas where people naturally congregate. If PCC wants to actively engage it needs to go out into the community eg visit schools, parent support groups, link into social services and education departments to promote the vision through communication channels that currently exist to support or bring together local people.

If the long term strategy is really about inclusion the LDF should be used as an opportunity to generate local employment when building the new developments - contractors should be required to allocate a fixed percentage of jobs to local people. There is now an opportunity to instigate a local training programme for young people to develop skills in trades such as building, plumbing, electrical services and carpentry.

The group want a mandate that ensures local people are given training and employment opportunities as part of the long term development plans to enable them to really become empowered. If this is not mandated and is reliant on trust, the danger is that it will not materialise because no-one is accountable. This was an opportunity missed in the Devonport redevelopment, and the group want to avoid it happening again.

An experience of recent poor consultation was cited when local BME input was specifically sought on a waterfront redevelopment. The subsequent draft report did not include any of the local BME views expressed but did include views from two other organisations that did

Corporate Diagnostics 24

not even attend the event. As a result of this experience the individual felt his input as a local representative with a wealth of experience was neither valued nor recognised.

In summary the group support the principles but want to see openness, honesty and transparency. They also expect that reports produced after a consultation process should be a true reflection of the input received.

Sustainable communities

The group believe sustainable communities are a great idea if they can be made to work, but they are concerned about Plymouth being able to attract enough investment to support the required infrastructure. They do not want areas to become isolated poor ghettos due to lack of employment and poor transport links.

The group wondered whether Plymouth would be able to provide enough employment to support the proposed population growth to 300,000. There needs to be more detail on plans to support development of large and small businesses, and a good mix of business so that neighbourhoods are not left in a vulnerable position if some parts of the economy slow down or major businesses withdraw.

Where possible employers should be encouraged to give local people priority when inviting applicants for job interviews, as Plymco had done in Devonport.

One of the group said he was impressed with the improvements to housing and the environment in the North Prospect area, and particularly as local people remained in the area rather than being moved out.

Housing

Although the group supported the housing plans and PCC’s intentions, they believe it is inevitable that locals will be moved out of the prime waterfront locations during development and will not be able to afford to return to their previous communities.

The group well understand the economics of the need to grow and prosper as a city, but they asked that PCC be honest about the prospects for local communities: people should be given choices about their options when they return their communities.

It was suggested that rather than demolishing and rebuilding in the city centre, the 1950’s architecture should be preserved with buildings being cleaned and restored, retaining the character of the city. The natural beauty of Plymouth, particularly The Hoe, should be available to everybody, and development should be tightly controlled to ensure these assets are protected.

The group supported the proposal of 80% new housing being on brownfield sites, but clarity is needed on the location of these sites and detail about how these will be developed. From experience the north of the city was always designated as green belt not

Corporate Diagnostics 25

to be developed and yet over the years there has been massive house building on what was perceived as protected green space. There are fears that the city centre will be business and money focused and the waterfront areas for rich people, with local communities being moved out to the periphery and more green spaces used for building houses to accommodate this dispersal.

The general feeling of the group is that the vision is too brave, too much, too quick, and they thought a small area should be developed within the vision to test the success of the model before it is rolled out over the whole area.

24/7 City

The group loved the vision of a 24/7 city but have some reservations.

The University of Plymouth has created a great injection into the local economy and is an important aspect of the overall vision. In particular it has impacted on the attitudes of young people, providing greater diversity and a more cosmopolitan feel to the city. However there is a fear that a 24/7 city will be a paradise for students but may not be attractive to families living outside the city centre. The belief is that families will not travel in to the city centre unless there is something to attract them and it was suggested that a large community meeting place in the city centre would provide such a focus.

BME and other communities are dispersed across the city, and a purpose built community facility will bring people together for specific events and encourage them to also access the proposed 24/7 café society while they are ‘in town’. The group suggested that a 2,000-capacity venue should be built for mixed used cultural exchange, and that this should be managed as a not-for-profit facility.

Union Street has the potential to become a much more vibrant 24/7 area but the group recognise that changing the current culture will take a long time. They would like to replicate the Barbican area where the architecture is attractive and buildings can be adapted for a variety of uses without significantly changing the façade. As there is also residential accommodation above the shops/cafes/restaurants it manages to retain a community feel.

The Local Environment

Plymouth is rich in artistry and artists and PCC should use this local capacity, knowledge and skill explicitly in its development strategy. Local artistic input and creativity should be sought when designing buildings and open spaces and when developing the strategic vision.

Visitors to Plymouth should be encouraged to explore areas beyond the city centre; there is a need to ensure that communities don’t become so self-contained that they appear almost ‘tribal’ and unwelcoming to outsiders. Visitors and locals need to feel comfortable in all areas of the city, open spaces and surrounding areas.

Corporate Diagnostics 26

It was suggested that there is an opportunity to use the development of the environment and its sustainability as a tool for educating our young people in conservation and regeneration. If young people feel a connection and ownership it will engender positive feelings about caring for their local communities.

Close of session

The group were asked how they would judge if the plans have been a success, and the response was that they want to feel that PCC has really listened and taken on board the views and opinions it sought in the consultation process.

Corporate Diagnostics 27

Appendices

Corporate Diagnostics 28

Appendix 1 - Core presentation

Corporate Diagnostics 29

Core presentation handout page 1

Corporate Diagnostics 30

Core presentation handout page 2

Corporate Diagnostics 31

Core presentation handout page 3

Corporate Diagnostics 32

Appendix 2 – Contact sheet

Please provide your name and address:

Name ……………………………………………………………………

Address ……………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………

Postcode ……………………………………………………………………

Please let us know if:

you would/would not like to receive a copy of the report resulting from the workshop held on ………………………………………………… (please insert date)

you would/would not like to be involved in further consultations

you would/would not like to be kept informed of progress in the transport consultation

you would/would not like to be kept informed of progress in the planning consultation

Corporate Diagnostics 33

Appendix 3 - Evaluation sheet

What did you think of the workshop?

To help us with planning and presenting future workshops, please tick the box next to the Smiley which matches your view of today’s workshop.

1 Was the workshop interesting? ☺ 2 Was the workshop informative? ☺ 3 Was the information clearly presented? ☺ Do you think it is helpful to have workshops on 4 important issues about Plymouth? ☺ 5 Did you like the venue? ☺

If you would like to make any comments about changes or improvements to the workshop, plans or consultation process, please do so below:

Corporate Diagnostics 34

Corporate Diagnostics Ltd 55 Peverell Park Road, Plymouth PL3 4LT

Tel: 01752 255930 e mail: [email protected]

Plymouth City Council

Agenda • Introductions • Purpose of the session • Management of the session • Local development framework consultation • BREAK • Transport consultation • Summary of the session Plymouth’s Plan for 2001-2016

•Plymouth’s vision

•Turning vision into reality Plymouth’s Ambition

•• “One“One ofof Europe’sEurope’s finest,finest, mostmost vibrantvibrant waterfrontwaterfront citiescities wherewhere anan outstandingoutstanding qualityquality ofof lifelife isis enjoyedenjoyed byby all.”all.” (Plymouth 20/20 Partnership)

• To be a key centre in the far south west

• To improve the quality of life, so that Plymouth becomes the city of choice. Key parts of future plans • Focus on quality of life • Variety and growth of businesses, employment and shopping opportunities • Improvements to services such as transport, education, health • Focus on major waterfront improvement • Provide a range of homes and employment opportunities. • Provide for the city’s long term future – making sure there are enough people to use the range of services being planned How can the LDF help deliver this vision? What is

al an LDF? Local Annu ent ing lopm nitor Deve al Mo eme Loc port Sch ent Re lopm Deve k ewor Fram t of tary men emen State ty Suppl muni nning Com nt Pla eme ments Involv Docu

c ther Core ecifi osals O nt te Sp Prop ction opme tegy Si ions ea A evel Stra locat Map Ar D an Al lans Pl P ments Docu

Development Plan Documents

ed al Plan Requir Option Project Where are we now?

Evidence Gathering Pre Production Prepare issues and alternative options in consultation Reg 25

Public participation on preferred options Reg 26 We are here

Representations on preferred Reg 27 options Production

Community Involvement Involvement Community Preparation of Submission DPD (as Part outlined in 2 Regulations)

Submission of DPD Reg 28

Representations on submitted Sustainability Appraisal Reg 29 DPD Key

Process Pre examination meeting

Ongoing engagement Independent Examination in examination Examination Statutory consultation ( 6 weeks)

Representations and participation Binding Report

Adoption and Monitoring Adoption Having your say

Principle 1- Early involvement of the community in the planning process

Principle 2 - Linking into other important plans, such as the transport plan

Principle 3 - Make best use of what’s available

Principle 4 - Main values Building Sustainable Communities

Living,Living, workingworking andand ‘playing’‘playing’ togethertogether

Key elements are: • Sufficient numbers of people • A mix of land uses that work together • Places where people can meet • Character and sense of identity • A community with a shared vision

Sustainable communities: enough people, enough houses

• Enough people in the city and in the local communities

• Enough new homes for the growing population

• Living and working in small but linked communities Sustainable communities: mix of housing

• What are the most important factors when looking at housing provision? Sustainable communities: thriving mixed use centre

• How would you describe a 24/7 city? Sustainable communities: make the most of our environment City level: • Network of green spaces • Links to the coast, Dartmoor and beauty spots • Country park Community level: • Access to community open spaces and parks • Protect historic places and buildings Sustainable communities: sense of place and identity

• Good designs, interesting architecture and landscaping

• Developments designed so they reduce antisocial behaviour and make people less afraid of crime Waste Development Plan: Vision

Everyone has a part to play in producing less waste, recycling more, composting garden waste, and sending less waste to landfill sites. Waste Development Plan: Main preferred options.

Waste management sites at: • China Clay works, Coypool. • Chelson Meadow. • Moorcroft Quarry. • Prince Rock depot, Cattedown. • Land at Ernesettle Lane (reserve site). Devonport Area Action Plan Devonport AAP: Vision. The recreation of Devonport as a distinct place in modern Plymouth; a vibrant community; a place of real quality, variety and interest, the pride of residents, attractive to visitors and a model of 21st century living, working and playing. Millbay & Stonehouse Area Action Plan Millbay & Stonehouse AAP: Vision.

To develop Millbay and Stonehouse as an attractive mixed use part of the city, creating a unique, high quality environment that will attract investment and new residents and improve the quality of life of existing residents. North Plymstock Area Action Plan N. Plymstock AAP: Vision. To create a new high quality and distinctive urban district to Plymouth, including a sustainable neighbourhood related to Sherford. A high quality public transport system and facilities, green spaces and country parks. Also to safeguard mineral deposits and plan future operations to support the development of the new community at Sherford. The process • Consultation on Preferred Options reports – 29th July – 9th September 2005. • Submission of SCI – November 2005. • Submission of Core Strategy, Devonport and Millbay / Stonehouse AAPs – December 2005. • Submission of North Plymstock AAP – March 2006. • Submission of Waste DPD – July 2006. The City Centre

To create a lively and vibrant mixed use regional centre which provides high quality regional shopping, together with a range of facilities for living, working and recreation – both by day and night. The Hoe

To enhance the civic focus of The Hoe, improving its links to surrounding areas and promoting its tourism, leisure and residential functions. Sutton Harbour

To consolidate and develop the Sutton Harbour area as an attractive and sustainable mixed use city quarter, creating a unique, high quality environment that will attract investment and new residents. East End

To create a sustainable mixed-use urban district in Plymouth’s East End, well connected to the waterfront, providing a high quality Eastern Gateway to the city and maintaining a thriving commercial port. To reduce the impact of traffic congestion and enable high quality public transport provision. Central Park

To create a Life Centre within Central Park that will be an outstanding venue of regional significance for sport, recreation and leisure, and to strengthen Central Park’s position as the City’s premier park for all residents and visitors to enjoy. Derriford, Seaton & Southway

To create a new centre as a focus for Northern Plymouth, and to strengthen the existing centre at South way, both supported by strong, vibrant and well connected communities. Plymouth City Council

Agenda • Introductions • Purpose of the session • Management of the session • Local development framework consultation • BREAK • Transport consultation • Summary of the session Plymouth’s LDF 2001-2016

“An invitation to aspire”

•Plymouth’s vision

•Turning vision into reality

Plymouth’sPlymouth’s PreferredPreferred OptionsOptions ConsultationConsultation 2929th JulyJuly toto 99th September.September. What is an LDF?

l al Loca Annu ent ing lopm nitor Deve al Mo eme Loc port Sch ent Re lopm Deve k ewor Fram f ry ent o enta atem plem St nity Sup g mmu annin Co nt Pl ts veme men Invol Docu

ic ther Core ecif osals O nt ite Sp Prop tion opme tegy S ions ea Ac vel Stra ocat Map Ar De lan All lans P s P ment Docu

Development Plan Documents

ed al Plan Requir Option Project Where are we now?

Evidence Gathering Pre Pre Production Prepare issues and alternative options in consultation Reg 25

Public participation on preferred options Reg 26 We are here

Representations on preferred Reg 27 options Production

Community Involvement Involvement Community Preparation of Submission DPD (as outlined in Part2 Regulations) in (as outlined

Submission of DPD Reg 28

Representations on submitted Appraisal Sustainability Reg 29 DPD Key

Process Pre examination meeting

Ongoing engagement Independent Examination in examination in Examination Statutory consultation ( 6 weeks)

Representations and participation and participation Representations Binding Report

Adoption and Monitoring Adoption Draft Statement of Community Involvement.

Process of continual community engagement • Principle 1- Early engagement of community in planning process • Principle 2 - Joined up consultation with other strategic initiatives • Principle 3 - Targeted approach making best use of available resources. • Principle 4 - Core values Building Sustainable Communities

Living,Living, workingworking andand ‘playing’‘playing’ togethertogether

Key elements are: • Sufficient numbers of people. • A mix of land uses that work together. • Provision for people to meet & interact. • Character & sense of place • A community with a shared vision

Sustainable communities: enough people, enough homes

City level: Community level: • 10,000 new homes • Critical mass to to 2016; up to support local 34,500 new homes facilities, 2000-3000 to 2026 • Grouped in • Critical mass for neighbourhoods, high quality services 5000-10,000 • City to grow to over 300,000 population Sustainable communities: mix of housing

• What are the most important factors when looking at housing provision? Sustainable communities: thriving mixed use centre

• How can Plymouth become a 24/7 city? Sustainable communities: respect / capitalise on environment City level: • Strategic network of greenspaces • Links to south west Coast, AONBs, and Dartmoor • Country Park Community level: • Access to community open spaces and parks • Conservation of historic environment Sustainable communities: sense of place and identity

• A commitment to high quality urban and architectural design Waste Developmment Plan: Vision

Everyone has a part to play in producing less waste, recycling more, composting garden waste, and sending less waste to landfill sites. Waste Development Plan: Main preferred options.

Strategic waste management sites at: • China Clay works, Coypool. • Chelson Meadow. • Moorcroft Quarry. • Prince Rock depot, Cattedown. • Land at Ernesettle Lane (reserve site). Devonport Area Action Plan Devonport AAP: Vision. The recreation of Devonport as a distinct place in modern Plymouth; a vibrant self sustaining community; a place of real quality, variety and interest, the pride of residents, attractive to visitors and a model of 21st century living, working and playing. Millbay & Stonehouse Area Action Plan Millbay & Stonehouse AAP: Vision.

To develop Millbay and Stonehouse as an attractive and sustainable mixed use city quarter creating a unique, high quality environment that will attract investment and new residents and improve the quality of life of existing residents. North Plymstock Area Action Plan N. Plymstock AAP: Vision. To create a new high quality and distinctive urban district to Plymouth, including a sustainable neighbourhood related to Sherford. A high quality public transport system and facilities, green spaces and country parks. Also to safeguard mineral deposits and plan future operations to support the development of the new community at Sherford. The process • Consultation on Preferred Options reports – 29th July – 9th September 2005. • Submission of SCI – November 2005. • Submission of Core Strategy, Devonport and Millbay / Stonehouse AAPs – December 2005. • Submission of North Plymstock AAP – March 2006. • Submission of Waste DPD – July 2006. The City Centre

To create a lively and vibrant mixed use regional centre which provides high quality regional shopping, together with a range of facilities for living, working and recreation – both by day and night. The Hoe

To enhance the civic focus of The Hoe, improving its links to surrounding areas and promoting its tourism, leisure and residential functions. Sutton Harbour

To consolidate and develop the Sutton Harbour area as an attractive and sustainable mixed use city quarter, creating a unique, high quality environment that will attract investment and new residents. East End

To create a sustainable mixed-use urban district in Plymouth’s East End, well connected to the waterfront, providing a high quality Eastern Gateway to the city and maintaining a thriving commercial port. To reduce the impact of traffic congestion and enable high quality public transport provision. Central Park

To create a Life Centre within Central Park that will be an outstanding venue of regional significance for sport, recreation and leisure, and to strengthen Central Park’s position as the City’s premier park for all residents and visitors to enjoy. Derriford, Seaton & Southway

To create a new centre as a focus for Northern Plymouth, and to strengthen the existing centre at South way, both supported by strong, vibrant and well connected communities.

304243

[email protected]

2 March 2006

Dear Sir/Madam

Plymouth City Councils Planning Strategy and Transport teams would like to invite you to attend a round table discussion on the Local Development Framework and the Local Transport Plan 2. This will involve a short presentation on each followed by the opportunity to put your views forward and have your say on the future development of the City.

The event will be held on the 8th Septemeber in the Frobisher room of the Council House next to the Civic Centre from 6:30 pm till 9 pm with refreshments provided.

If you have any problems with accessing the venue or require any adaptations or particular aids or equipment please contact me on the number above.

Yours faithfully

Alistair Wagstaff Planning Officer

This letter is also available in Braille and large print. To request a copy please telephone (01752) 307845.

Draft Statement of Community Involvement P&%o@dh Local Development Framework Conaulttatlon -\

Plyrnotfth City Council will only us@the information provided for the purpow of preparing the bmlDeve6opment Framework. Pbass not@that a copy of your response wii?be placed on a public rqiskr and cannot therebra be taeabd as confidentisb.

Quwtionnaim without a name and address cannot bea included in thCr eonsultiatian.

Ali qmtbn~eiresmust be r@turn& by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager Planning b Regensratimw Services Pfymwth CiQ Council cm Gntre P!ymouth Ptl 2EW

Altematively, please return the questionnaire to Ciyi~Centre reception or any library

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overkitf. Source: Planning lnspwtarate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWQRKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PMDOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUPIIW INVOLEMENT Feb 2005 (Csnsulbtion document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches; your opinion.

Cmpbtion of betext boxes is optional but o%rs tha opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agrcte the criteria have benmet, to suggest any changes to the draft §Cl and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do wf forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over Your the

haw the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for 0000 ccmsuktation ...... --.. F- -- .- ...... how the City Council's strategy for mmmunity involvement In the planning process aaraoo links other community involvemsnt initiatives e.g. the City Strategy ...... with ...... - ...... (in generat terns) which focal community groups and otkr badies will be e~eaa consulked -..-.-v-** ...... -..a.. -.-*--d. ,.A--- ..... <"...... -..*-....-.e..-..*.*+ ...*..d...-...+-..-...... how the cornrnuniagc and other badies can be involved in a timely and accessible HEaDGaEI manner

Row the results of community invobarnent will be fed in% the ~re~arationof IIIP-+~~~I * LJmuI-ILI devslopmcsnt ...... -.- plan documenk ...... and supplementary planning d&&ents - merchanisms for reviewing the statement of community invotvemant

eieariy the planning authority's policy for consultation an planning applications RBOCICI ......

Thank yasr for cempIetrng this questisnnaife

raft Statement of Community.Involvement Local Development Framework G~nsmrltation

P#ymotltP1 City Courlcil will oniy use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed pn a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential.

Questionnaires without a name and address cannot be inciudod in this consultation.

Aft questionnaires must be returnad by 5pm, Friday %h September 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager Pfanning & Regoneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centra Plymouth PLl 2EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

' Please enter your name md address blow: Please enter your agent's detaits (if appllabls)

......

Instructions for ozernpletion:

The soundness d the draft Statement of Community lnvolvernent is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNlSlY INVOLVEMENT Feb2005 (Consuitation document)

Please indicate your level af agreement (1 to 5)to the extent to which the criteria have been mat by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optianaf but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have 5een met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCt and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue an a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

04 not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over bmaa mark the appropriate b~xwith a cross or fitt in as required "I Your Iew@Iof agreemenf that fhs criteria have been met in this 2 "l= Strongly agree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree csnsultation 2 = Ape 4 = Disagree f'ositiveS-wPtive

how the City Council has compl~edwith the minimum legal requirements for ~oaoaI eonsulbtion-...... - -- how the City Council's strategy for commu U a m l2 f.Y$ 2 process links with other -W communityW involvement lnitiativrts e.g. the City Strategy -- - pp (ii?general terms) which local comrrlunity groups and other bodies will be 8DE9CIO 3 consulted ------haw tRe ccrmrrrunity and other bod~escan be nvolved in a timely and accessible &3C!@08 4 rnarmer - p suitable meth and Oe3~UCII 5 for the d~fferantstages m the preparation of how the City Council intends to &t out, resource and OUUBQ 6 rnvolvement effectrvefv .-p. .- ...... how the results oof camrnun~tyinvolve deveiapment plan documents and su rrloeau 7...... - .-. -...... -.-....

mechanisms far raviewing the statement of community involvement UEJEIII1CI G. -. . ------.p-

clearly the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applications BWUU6:II Y

------.. - --pp.------p--p

Yes Ms

planning issues in your particular nttighbourkssd & e3 73

planning issues city wide Cl 14

Thank you for completing this questionnaire raft Statement of Community involvement Local Development F rarnework Gansultatisn

/#*

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provrded for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Pleaso note that e copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot tfiwefore be treated as csnfidmtial.

Qafestisnnaire6s wittsoikl a name and address cannot be included in this cgnsujtation.

All questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Palicy PPIanning Manager Planning I$ Regeneration Services Plymouth City Coutaeil Csvic Centre Plyrn~trth PL1 2EW

Atternatjvely, please return the questionnaire to Civic Cantre reception or any library

Please enter your name and address below: Please enter your agenrs details fH appiicable)

Instructions for c~rnpletion:

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Plsrrning inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT FaUN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF CBMMUNI'TY lNVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (lto 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCl and to be involved in further consultations. IF you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over

IF YOU WOULD LIKE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IN BRAILLE OR LARGE PRINT TELEPHONE 01752 307845 - "a, >leaso mark the appropriate box with a cross B or fill In as required Your level of agrwment that the criteria haw been met in tbrk: 1 Strongly agree 3 = Neither agne nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree consultation

2 E Agree 4 = Disagree Pmitiwc(.:.:C..:, ...... c,:.:, ....:.:.:.:,.,I,:,..:,:: "sD.Nagative...... p. W

the C~tyCouncil has complted wrth the minimum legal requ~rementsfor how 1 car~sultafior~ -- p--- how the City Council's strategy for involvement in the community 2 process links with other GO e.g. the City Stmtegy (in general

clearly the planning authority's policy for eonsulbtion on planning applications aa~7~xQ.

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood U 17 13

planning issues city wide 0 14

Thank you for completing this questionnaire Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework Consultation

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on EI public register and cannot therefore bs traated as confidential. l I Cdue&ionnalres without ss name and address cannot be included in this consultation. I All que~tionnairmmust be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to: I , Policy Planning Manager Pianning & Regeneration Sewices Plymauth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL'I 2EW I Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library Please enbr your name and addmsa belaw: Please enter your agent's details (if applicable)

...... p-..--.- ...... -...... -.~-.

-- . - .- .-.- .

......

-. -...... - -......

instrudiotos for completion:

The soundnoss of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against e number of criteria listed overlwf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2QQ5 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement f lto 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the I one box which best matches your opinion. I Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the oppoptunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be invotved in further consultations. If you require more spam please continus on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer. I Do not forget to fiif irt your name and address above before turning over. i= Strongly agm 3 = Neither agree nor dieagree S = Strongiy disagree consulfa tjm %=Ape 4 = Disagree Positive Negative

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for consultation --p - --p. " . -- -P - p. how the City Council's strategy for community involvenmt in the planning Bctooa process links with other community involvement initialives e.g. the City Strategy (in general terms) which loral community groups and ~therbodies will be mnsutte3d -- "----.p. - - -p-- - --p ------haw the community and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible mmner mm130a ------suitable methods of consuitation to be e ded audie BnOn for the different stages in the ~re~arattonof lml develo~mentdocuments how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community involvement sffectivslv BDgJUO

how the results of community invalvement will be fed into the preparation of IBR~I-IT~TI~ development plan documents and supplementary planning documents ~F~LJUULI --- -p-a ------mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement LZ]BElO

clearly the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applications Ot3iflD

Ns

planning issues in your particular neighbsurkoad CS 13

planning bsues city wide IJ $4 Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework Consultation

&.*: t /" 3 l* 'L:;*,4k Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential.

Questionnaires without a name and address cannot be included in this consuitation.

All questionnaires must be return~dby 5pm, Friday 9th September 2055 to:

Policy Planning Manager Planning & Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PI.; 2EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

I Please enter your name and address below: Please enter your agenrs details (if applicable)

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give mare detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over

Unit I Eclipse Office Park High Street Staple Hill Bristol 135.16 5EL

Policy Manager Plymouth City Council Date: 23 August 2005 Planning and Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Our Kef: MB M4/1207-02 Civic Centre Your Ref: Plymouth PLI 2EW

KK - STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

We represent the South West RSL Planning Consortium, which is supported by the National Housing Federation, and which includes leading registered Social Landlords (RSLs) active in Devon. Our dientk concern is that opporfunities for the provision of sociallal-fordabie housing are optimised over the Plan period.

Tetfow King Planning has extensive experience of the interrelationship between sociallaffordable housing and the dsvelopment plan system. We are retained by the National t4ausing Federation and the Housing Corporation, and have acted for over 250 RSLs and 50 Local Authorities to advise on land, planning and housing issues, br! particular, we have acted for the NatisnaD Housing Federation and leading member RSLs in rclatiorl to more than 200 development plans, including the Devon Structure Plan and leading local plans throughout Devon, over the past twelve years. Government ministers have encouraged RSLs to become directfy involved in the pDanning process, and see it as an important means of enabling sociallaffordable-housing provision

Our representations are as foiiows:

We generally support the statement of community Involvement. We would wish to be consulted at all stages of the production of the Local Development Framework, as we would like to establish a meaningful dialogue with the Council as the LDF progresses. Registered Social Landlords are the main providers of affordable housing and it is important that their views are heard on affordable housing and planning issues.

Yours faithfully

4 '3 ROBIN TETLOW W: for and On Behalf Of TETLOW KING PLANNING

cc. Devon and CornwalI Housing Association Guinness Trust Magna Housing Association Ocean Housing Sarsen Housing Association Signpost Housing Association TOPHomes Westcountry Housing Association William SuZton Housing Tmst Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework Consultation

Plymouth City Council wilt only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Frarnewark. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential.

Questlsnnairas without a name and address cannot be included in this consultation.

All questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager PIanning & Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL12EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please enter your name and address below: Ploaae enter your agent's details (if applicable)

Instructions for completion:

The soundness of the draf&Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning tnspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNlTY INVOLVEMENT Fsb 2005 (Consu#ation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by puffing an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the drafl SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

I DO not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. 21estse mark the appropriate box with a cross El or fill in as required Your level ofagreement that the criteria have been mat in fhk f = Strongly agree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagrcatr consultation 2 = Agree 4 = Disagree Positive Negative

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for consultation n how the City Council's strategy for community involvement in the planning process 0 links with other community involvement initiatives e.g. the City Strategy - -...-..-.--m -. (in general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be C1 cons Jted how the community and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible manner a suitable methods of consultation to be employed for the intended audience and for C3 the d~ffarentstaaes in the premration of local development documents how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage wmrnunity U

how the results of community involvement will be fed into the preparation of m development plan documents and supplementary planning documents U .---..-.,----..A.-. -b....--..-- mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement

clearly the planning atrthority't poky for consultation on planning applications CI

--a.- V- ."-.-p ",-W" ~ ..--

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood C3 U 43

planning issues city wide C9 El 14

Thank you for complefing this questionnaire Mr Pad Barnard Plymouth. City Council - Planning Civic Centre fbyal Parade Plygrmmth Devon PLI nEW

Dear Mr Barnad

Thank you far consulting the South West Regional Assembly on Plymouth City Cuuncil's Draft Statement of Community Involvement. I only haw a few comments to make which I hope you will find constructive.

Section 3 usefully sets the context of the new planning system in terms of the production of Local Development Frameworks (EDFs). It would be beneficial at this point to include the fact that: not only were the 1,DFs introduced but dso that Regional Planning Bodies produce Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS).

In the interests of clarity from the public's perspective, it will also be helpful if "(the Regional Planning Badly)" is inserted alongside the reference to the Assembly under the Specific Consultation Bodies in Appendix 2.

For infosm&lon, you sh~uldaIs0 be aware that the Assemb!y has produced a Statement of Public Participation which can be downloaded from http://www.soutbwest- ~av.uk/swra/downloa&/ouwork/RS~SSCI.pdf .

Yours sincerdy 26 August 2005

Planning Policy Manager Planning and Regeneratkm Service Plymouth City Council Civic Centre PLYMOUTH Pfl 20N

We act on behalf of Wm Morrison Supermarkets Plc and write in respect of your Authority's Draft Statement of Community Involvement,

We have reviewed this document and note that it allows for the involvement of groups, such as my Client, in a variety of ways. On this basis we do not consider it necessary to submit format representations.

However, Wrn Morrisons is a sbkeholder in the future of the City, particularly in relation to retailing, with three stores located within Plymouth. We therefore consider the Company's involvement in the preparation and review of Local Development Documents is critical, In terms of consuttation methods, my client seeks to be included on any database to ensure Rapleys LW, as their agenb, are inf~rmedof the publication of Development Plan Documents by te#er and consider that one-to-one meetings would best allow for their views to be considered during the preparation of such documents.

On this basis, we would be grateful if you could include our Client, and Rapleys LLP as their agent, on any database, as detailed below and note their particular interest in retailing issues.

We trust this is acceptable and look forward to engaging with your Authority throughout the process.

Should you have any queries in relation to the above please do not hesitate "ee contact Wendy Walker on the number below.

Rgpleys W,AcreMeid, St Ann's Square, MANCHESTER M2 7HR National Tel: 080 777 6299 Fax: 0161 835 9519 info&orapIeys.a?.uk www.rapleys.co.uk Also at: London Wl HuntSngdon Bdstot and Edinburgh Registeredas a bmlted Uabil~tyPaitnenhip m Englrrnd and Wales. RegistraWn No: OC308311 Regeptstered WRce at House, GwrJe $betkiuntifigdon, PE29 3NQ & M) lW of MembeFs is amilaMe fM inspeEtion at wr Reg Ottke during nmmal business hours Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Developmrant Framework Cansultatisn 19:,.: ~'7"X<* "s-,*@&S I)' Plymouth City Council wrli only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Piease note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential.

Questionnaims witha& a name and address cannot be included in this consuitatian.

I All questionnaires mud be returned by 5pm. Friday Rh Sspternber ZOOS to:

Policy Piaesning Manager Planning 8 Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL1 2EW

I Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PUNDOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNIW INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation documenf)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the I one box which best rnat~hesyour opinion. Cornplet~onus' free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been mt, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space piease continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to RII in your name and address above before turning over. =lease mark the appropriate box with a cross El or fill in as required Your kvel of agrmmetnt that sth cr9tevka have been met in this 1 = Strongly agree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 Strongly dlsagwe consultatim 2 = Agree 4 = Disagree Positive Negative

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for nonaa consultation - -. how the C~tyCciuncl's strategy for community in o a a* process links with ot n - ...... (in general terms) which local community group consulted ------unnam how the cornmu

for the differwit stages in the preparation d local deveioprnent dswments - --- * -- -- P - - -- .- -- how tho City ~ouncj!intends to set out, resource and manage wkmunity

involvement. effectively W -- . how the results of community involvement wil development plan documents and supplementary planning documents ------mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement amima

clearly the planning authority's psl~cyfor consultation an planning applications ULIBCIEI

-. ------p - -- -

Yes No

ptanning issues In your particular neighbourhood 0 U $3

planning issues city wide OI 0 14

Thank you fur compl~btingthis questionnaire

'The following is a typescript version of mm~~scpiptcomments submitted herewith.

Comments on Item f l.

'The SCI mast provide for the sub-division of cornsraltaljoa documents ilxto those which \will be intended for approval by the Sec. of State a6; Stallatmy Development PIm DocwmeS per S 17 of the 2004 Act. This Consdtation document should identify each of the 9 items above by reference to paragraph numbers in the docuxnrmt, The document is unfinished and needs an h&xlcontents list related to page numbers. The rrr;lati(~f~ihipbtwwz~ documents and previously issued documents is not explained by pm9.3 ad9.4 when read in conjunction with the figure in pma 3.3. The latter seems back to front, The LDF gives rise to LDDs and DPDs which art: the end products for submission to the Sec. of State. There should be a cfwstatement of how representations made on the Local Pkm First Deposit Plan me taken note of during the inter-regnm between it and some future approved statutory development plan. T TO THE SCU GmNG FORWARE) IN ITS PRESENT STATE, IT SHOLZD BE REI&5mD IN A MUCH CLEARER FORM FOR mTk3CEIR CONSULTATION. Draft Statement of Community Involvement

.. X'., Local Devefspment Framework Consultation 2 $4 " C 0 l ,l

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Devt;lopment Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public registw and cannot therefore be treated as confidential. I QwrstCannaires without a name and address cannot be included in this consultation. Afl questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Policy Pfafining Manager Planning & Regeneration S~rvices Peymouth City Council Civic Centm .: ...... b;. ?'!L Plymouth ...... ',..'...... I.. PL-I 2EW I Alternativdy, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please enter your name and address below: Plaasa enter your agent's details (If applicable)

Instructions for sampktion:

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number d criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FHBMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PUW DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNlTY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (9 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please conjinue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. Please mark the appropriate box with a cross El or 5111 in as required Your /@v@/of agreement that the

criteria haw bwn met in this lj 1 2 Stitrsngiy agree 3 = Nefther agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree consuftathm L = Agree 4 = Disagree P~~itive-NWative ,., , &L,.wA, ., , ,

haw the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for consultation

L

process linksp--- with other community -- - ~nvolvernent- inrtiatives e.g.. the City siratogy -- .. -- - - - A-p (in general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be U a 5 3 consulted ------how th, -3mm46 and other bodies can be invoked in a timely and accessible manner rsa ug*am 4 ...... -.-.-.-.....-...... -.---.-.------p suitable methods of consultation to be tlrnpioyed for the intencled audience 5. for the different stages in the pr ~--~- how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community involvement sfiectively how the results of comrritsnify invulvernent will be fed into the preparation af n 17 IZI~~CI 7 development- plan documents and supplernsntory planning-. documents ------.-p. .- mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement B

* clearly the planning authorjty's policy for c~nsuitatianon planning appfications U rr1~'CI g.

Yes Ma

planning issues in your particular neighbourho~d llld IJ 13

t planning issues city wide lZll 14

Thank you for completing this questionnaire Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Beveiopmenf Framework Consultation /F ' .*a &Bi / " '" '* I Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing tlha Locai Developrrlent Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential.

Questiannairee without a name and address cannot be inciuded in this consultation.

All questiannajrw must be returned by Span. Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager Ptanni~g8 Regeneration Sewlees Plymouth City Council Ctvic Centre Plymouth PL.1 2EW

Alternatively, piease return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please enter your name and aMrasr; belaw: Please enter your- agent's details (if appfimblr)

-. ..

---..---.----.p

...... p.p-- .- ..-. . -

InPitrutAions for mmptetion:

The soundness of the drag Statement of Comrnunity Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consubtton document)

Please indicafe your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require mare space phase continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

00 not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. 1 = Strongly agme 3 E Neither agme nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagrae eonsulfation 2 3 Agree 4 = Disagree

how the City Council has cornptisd with the minimum legal requirements for a srna o consultation m o )low-the C,$ Council's strategy for community-involveme Ot23ElflK-l process links with other community rnvoivement initiatives e.g. the City Strategy .- -.- . - (in general terms) which local community groups and other bodiesvhl be @oooo consulted how the community and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible manner -- -- suitable methods of consultatiun to be empl for the different stages in the preparation of- l how the City Council intends to set out, reso I nv~lvarnanteffrjaively p------p- -. A how the resub of community involvement will be fed ~ntothe preparation of devefopment plan documents and ~nnuo ?" " ------p- mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community invotvement 813flD17 clearly the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applications HEIKIITD

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood 0 C3 93

ptanning issues city wide El D I4

Thank you fw completing this questionnairs raft Statement of Community Involvement Local Oevefopment Framework Consultation $.'j$

..L 4.r Q

Plymouth City Council will only use the informatron provided for the purpose of preparing the I-ocal Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential. I Qwstion~aimswithout a name and address cannot be included in this consuitation. I All qwc;tionnair@smust be mturnsd by 5pm, Friday 9th Sagtcsmbe~-2005 to" Policy Planning Manager Planning 8.Regeneration Sewices Plp~btlhGify Council Civic Ce11tr8 Plyniouih PL? 2EW I Allernatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre? reception or any tibrary

be-&.- initial . . .

Instructkns for completion:

The soundness d the draft Statement of Community lnvolvernent is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspodorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVf LOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF CQMMUNIPY lNVOLVEMENB Feb 2005 (Consuftationdocument)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a sewrate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

09 not forget to RI1 in your name and address above before turning over. Please mark the appropriate box with a cross El or fill in as required Your level ofagreement that th;?. crit~riahave been me6 In this ; i Strongly agree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 -- Strongly disagree csnsulrafisn 2 = Agree 4 = Disagree P~5iti~e-N@~alv@

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for consultation -. -- how the city Council's ~~rat& oa~nn process links with other com -- - (in general terms) which local consuited o@riuo - -- Row the c%mmunity aid other EICICSU manner - suitable methods of consulhti for the different stages in the preparation of local development documents @nunu . ------. p- . how the City Corincil intends to setbut, resource and manage cokunity O@OUO involvement effectively -- how the results of community involvement will be fod into the p development plan documents and supplementary planning doc og~oaa ------mechanisms for reviewing the statement of comrnunily involvement

clearty the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applications

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood El 0 7 3

planning issues city wide El C1 14 Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Develspment Framework Consultation

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a capy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannat therefore be treated as conR&ntial.

Ques~lannaiwswithout st name and address cannot be incfuded in this consultation.

AB1 questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th Septarnbar 2085 to:

Pdley Planning Martager Planning & Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Ptyrnouth Ptl 2EW

Alternativeby, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please enter your name and address below: Please enter your agent's details {if applicable)

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community fnvoivement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOhlNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2605 (Consultation document)

Piease indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by pulEIng an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Cornplelion of hetext boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met* to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in Further consultations. If you raquirr! more spa= pleass continue an a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over

IF YOU WOULD LIKE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IN BFLb\lbtE OR LARGE PRINT TELEPHONE Ui752 30784!5 Please mark the appropriate box with a cross El or fill in as requlred ? Your kvel of agreement thf the crltwia haw been met in this ; f = Strongly agne 3 = Naither agree nor disagres 5 Strongly disagree cortsultation 2 = Agree 4 = Disagree Po~i~iv~~~~~W~~v~

how the Crty Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for consultation how the City Council's strategy far community involvement in the planning pmeess links with other.-- community involvement initiatives e.g. the City ...... -. - ..- -- .- -. .- - (in general terms) which lacal carnrnunity groups and other bodies will be cansuited

involvement effectively Row the results of community invofvernent will be fed into the preparation of

developmer~tplart documents...... - and supplementary planni ...... -- ...... mechanisms for reviewing the statement of cornrnur~ityinvolvement

clearly the planning authnr~ty'spdicy for consultation on planning applications

Yes Mo

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood El f 3

planning issues city wide C7

Thank you for complefing this questionnaire raft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework Consultation /&$p v-.--4" p i/ PIymoutR City Councl will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note thah a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential. I Questionnaires wlMout a name and address cannot be included in this consultation. All questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Paticy Planning Manager PIanning R Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic C~rltre Plymonfh Ptl 2EW I Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

...... - ......

-- . ...

--

...... -..

...... p----

Inshwctiows for completion:

The soundness of the drefi Statement of Community Involve?mentis measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspedorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF BEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please iptdicate your level of agreement (1 to 55) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be hvolved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over 31ea~~mark the appropriate box with a cross IEl or fill in as required Your kvel of agreement.that the

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for ~onsuttation

how the community and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible manner

how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community involvement effectively how the res~lts(3f community involvement will be fed into the preparation of development plan documents and suppfementary planning documents sanan

L PP- - -- PP------p- mechanisms far revi .- .. -...... - ...... -- clearly the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applications

...... p--.

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood El 13

planning issues city wide B 14

Thank you for completing this questionnake

raft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework Consultation

Plymouth CiQ Council wisl only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Ploase note that a copy d your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential. I Puesliormaints without a name and address cannot be imludsd in this urnsuitation. I All questionnaires must be returned by 5prn. Friday 9th September 2005 to: Policy Planning Manager Planning & Regeneration Sewices Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Psymeuth PL? 2EW I Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library Please eater your name and address below: Pieraso enter your agent's details (If appllcabta)

...... -....-p ...... -

(S ... >e~_t.t3....

....

...... - .

...... Telephone .. - ......

The soundness of the draff Statement of Community involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMEMT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your. level of agreement (lto 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the ~pportunityfor you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the dra8 SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fit! in your name and address above before turning over. 4 = Strongly agre 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree consui&Mon I 2 = Agree 4 Disagree Prxitive~Negative ......

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for UMTJClU I. consultation how the City Council's strategy for community involvement m the planning UCIB0r.I process links with other community involvement inrtiatjves e.g. the City Strategy .. .p - -- * .. - .---p - . (in &rkralterms) whch local mrn&nity groups and other bodies will be mmTmnn J. cansuited U U L..J L..J I.J -- ...... haw the community and o CL1 4. manner D m cl m ..... p---...... - suitable rnethods of cons rJo!&ma 5. for-L- the different stages in the preparatio -- pp ...... haw the City Council inte B R Q 8. invulvernent m a ...... -...... A...... effectively -.pp- ...... how the results of mmm nnaun 7. develapment plan documents.. ..-...... and supplementary planning documents -- -......

D mechanisms krreviewing the statement of community involvement t7B17UW S

- . -pp---.------

X * cloariy the pianning authori&y'spaticy far consultation on planning applications O~DEIO Y ------

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood eS El 13

planning issues city wide a U 14

Draft Statement of Community Involvement> (l,y..

Lacal Dsveiopment Framework Consultation ,* % ' /*7,J I?-... ."+A 8Y

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development F~arnework.Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot there for^ b~ttr@aBd as confidential.

Questionnaires without a name and address cannot be itaclud@din this cansultatlan. l' AI[ questionnaires must he returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 20C

Pol~cyPlanning Manager l Planning B Regeneration Services Plymouth City Carmcrl Civic Centre Plyrnauf h PL1 2EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please enter your name and address below: Please enter your agent's details (if applicable)

The soundness of the drafi Statement of Community lnvotvemerlt is measured against a number of criteria listed svedeaf Source: Ptanning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FWMEWQRKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF-. DEVELOPMENT PUN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Cunsulltation document)

Please indicate your level d agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the or= box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria hew been me?,to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over 'Eoase mark the appropriate box with a cross @lar RIi in as required Your Ievd of' agr(a@rnen%.that the criteria have been met in flrb 4 - Strongly agrerer 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree consultation 2 = Agree 4 = Disagree Positive< ...... ~Nwat*@ ., ., . ,. ,. , . , ,. ,. ,., . , .,., . , ., . .,. . ,., .,. ,., . '4

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for U 0 B 17 l3 consultatioti ...... how the City Council's st U drr 0 B process links with other -- -- ...... (in general terms) which consulted n~ntslid anoa~ .... atlodsa

U a a do involvement effectively ...... - ...... how the resufts of community involvemend will 0 c31 dh KI development documents supplementary.-..... plan ..-....-...... plan ....-.-.----..------.W..- and mechanisms for rwiewing the statement of community involvement. U cJ l3 dl2

* clearly the planning authority's policy for consultation an planning applicatians arduua 9.

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood d €3 73

planning issues city wide 0 Draft Statement of Community involvement Loeai Development Framework Consultation pj-'"'?+ f "g )$ f"'

Plymouth City Cour~cilwill only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. P!aase note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated

Qasostionnaires without a name and address cannot. be included in this eonsuitatlon.

All questaonnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Poky Planning Manager Planning 8 Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL1 2EW

Alternatively, please reeturn the qucsstionfaaire to Civic Centre reception ot any library

Please enter your name and address blow: Please enter your agent's; details (if appliwbh)

The soundness of the draft Stztkment of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overieaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please conjinue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. Jkase mark the appropriate box with a cross [ZO or fill in as required Your k v@lof agreement the t the

how the City Council has camplied with the minimum legal requirements for 1. consultation -...... -- ...... -p . haw the City Council's strategy for wmmunity invnlvemeni in the planning QM080 2. promss links with other i ...... wrnmunity (in general terms) whi O~C7067 3. CQ~ISU~~~- ...... how the community a BEKIKXI 4. manner of consultation to be e a0050 5 for the different stagesp -In the preparation of local development docu - -"" - --- - how the City Councrl intends to set out, resource and manage community invo1vernc;nt. effectively uaoeo 6 --m--- . - - ..- . - -- .- how the results d cemmun~tyinvolveme~w~llbe fed mto the preparation of Co~"59L30CI 7 development pian documents and supplementary planning documents -- -A - pp ------.

mechanisms for reviewing the stilterrlent of community involvement o@~u~8. -...... - ...... ,L...... -

clearly the planning authorfty's policy far cansultabion on planning applications UB0OE.l g. -- .--..-...... -

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood C7 13

planning issues city wide €3 74 S raft Statement of Community Involvement a

Local Development Framework C~nsarltation 8< 0"<+ 1 .U .U ". ,...,/ g,*"" Flymouth City Cot~neilwill only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please no4e that a: copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential. I Questionnaires without a name and address canrrot be ineludwi in this consultation. AH qisestionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager Planeririg & Regeneration Sewices . . Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PLI 2EW I Al~~rnat~vely,please return the questionrraire to Civic Centre reception or any library

The soundness d the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overltjaf. Source: Planning inspecbwte, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF CIEVELWMERIT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNIW INVOLVEMENT Feb 2085 (ConsuRation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (4 to 55) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Compldon of free text boxes is optional but offers the ~pportunityfor you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in hither consultations. If you require more space pfeiise continue an a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer. I Do not forget to fill in your name and addross above before turning over. Please mark the appropriate box with a crass or fill in as required Your level of agreerntanf that the criteria have been met in this = Strongly agree 3 - Neither agree nor disagrw S = Strongly disagree 2 = agree

how the City Council has mmpfied with the minimum legal requirements for consultation aaoou ...... -. how the City Councif's strategy Far cornmunity inv~lvementin the planning u*@on o process -links -.- with. other community invotvement initiatives e.g. the City Strategy -. .. - -- --m

manner . --- ...... suitahie methods 13consultation to be employed for &rsurao for the different.-. stages in the preparation of local de ...... - ...... -p how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community involvement effectively

--...---.----.--.uL .. ----p how the results $~comrnunity involvement will be

mentary-- -- planning the statemen mrnunity involvement -...... -.. -...... cfeady the planning authority's policy far cansuHation an planning applications O@WoLl

~p..-...-..---.--......

Yea No

planning ~ssuesin your particular neighbourhood Cl C3 13

planning issues city wide El El 74 Page l of l

Stone, Mike {DEVELOPMENT)

From: BWEA Katie Adderley [[email protected]] Sent: 07 September 2005 10% To: [email protected] Subject: BWEA Response - Plymouth SCI Consultation

Please find attached BWEA's response to the Plymouth SCI Consultation.

I would be grateful if you would reply to this email to confirm that BWEA's comments havs been recelved and duly made

BWEA welcomes the opportunity to participate in this consultation, and is happy to respond to any furZRer queries.

Regards,

Kafie Addertey Planning Adirisor 020 7689 1936

BWEA: Championing the UK Wind industry Renewable Energy House 1 Aztec Row Berners bad London NZ OPW Plymouth City Council Civic Centre PIymoidth Ptl 2EW 1 Aztec Row, Berners Rd London, N1 OQW

7* September 2005

The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) welcames the opportunity to provide ammeflts on Plymouth City Council's Statement of Community Involvementt and provides this submission on khaff of the UK wind energy industry.

BWEA was established in 1978 and is the representative body for companies active in the UK wind energy market. Its membership has grown rapidly aver recent years and now stands at over 325 companies, representing 98,8% of all grid-connected wind energy now installed.

In representing the wind industry, BWEA is in a unique position to comment on the circumstances which wilt affect the future growth and development of the sector. BWEA would be pleased to clarify any issues raised and off& any further information which may be required.

A key principle underpinning the new planning system is the need for it to be transparent, accessibte, and awuntabte, and to actively promote and strengthen public participation and stakeholder invotvement,

Under the Planning & Carnpufsory Purchase Bill, local planning authorities are required to prepare a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), in which to identify their approach to community involvement i.e. Who will be involved and how those involved are representative of the wider community and stakeholders; and How the approaches to consultation may vary in relation to different topics, different types of tml development documents (core strategy, area action plans, and supplementary planning guidance), or at different stages in the document preparation process.

Registered Office as above Registered in England No. 1874667 VAT 432958535 GB BWEA emphasises that the SCI should follow the guidance of Planning Policy Statement 12: Local Development Frameworks, and the recommendations contained in Planning Policy Statement 22: Renewable Energy.

In particular, PPS12 states that the SCI should be a clear public statement ertabling the commurtity to know how and when they will be involved in the preparation of local development documents and how they will be consulted on planning applications,

ft is hugely important for all local planning authorities to adopt an inclusive approach to community involvement, to ensure that different groups have the opportunity to participate and are not disadvantaged in the process. Identifying and understanding the needs of groups who find it difficult to engage with bureaucratic processes such as the planning system is essential.

As highlighted in draR Planning Policy Statement 1: Creating Sustainable Communities, effective community involvement requires processes for: Notifying and informing communities about poticies and proposals in good time. Enabling communities to put Forward their own ideas and participate in developing proposals and options, rather than simply comment once these are fixed. Consultation on formal proposals. Feedback.

Community Involvement and Wind Energy hvelo~ment

PPS12 suggests that it may be appropriate to explain how community involvement will be undertaken for different subjects or issues, In the case of wind energy development, appropriate community involvement at different stages in the planning process can have considerable benefits for ail parties involved. It can help to improve understanding of the issues facing develstprs, Imf communities, and stakehelders, and therefore help to reduce conflict; it can help provide an opportunity to engage local people actively in the development of schemes; it can help to address concerns about the impacts of potential schemes; and to explain the wider benefits of renewable energy (A Companion Guide to PPP22, 2004).

There are many methods of community involvement that may be appropriate at different levels and stages of the planning process i.e. regional, local level. This is discussed in detail in 'A Companion Guide to PPS22', and should k considered by all local planning authorities in preparatjon for their SCI.

Local planning authorities may wish to consider informing iml communities about renewable energy, ik potential benefits and any potential effects of development, before any schemes are submitted for planning permission in their area. It is important to offer a balanced view to the public! before any specific schemes are discussed, as a better-informed public is more likely to bok at a proposal objectively and realistically,

As identified in paragraph 4.26 of 'A Companion Guide to PPS22: appropriate methods of community involvement will vary depending on the stage in the planning process, but may include: Public exhibitions, displays, roadshows; Presentations at public meetings; * Dissemination of information via the internet, local press, or leaflet drops; Consultation with focus groups; consultation with parish and town councils. The issues that may need to be addressed could indude: A lack of awareness about the technology and concerns about noise, visual effects, odour and other perceived hazards; * Juxtaposition between the importance of addressing a long term global impact threat such as climate change, and the specific, immediate local impacts arising from a particular project; and, Difficulties in making the link between regional policy and local delivery,

For further guidance? on community involvement and wind energy development, BWW rgcommends local planning authorities refer to the 'South West Public Engagement Protocol for Wind Energy' (available at www.regensw.c~,uk/c~te~~~d.~wnload/Re~PEPWE- p~4ocobndGuidance.adQ. The document discusses the various options for community invofvement at each stage of the planning process, and offers valuable guidance in terms of how to delher these options effectively and appropriately. Endorsed by the South West branch of the Local Government Association, the South West branch of the Royal T~wn Planning Institute, and BWEA; the Protocol could be used by local planning authorities as a basis upon which to develop their own approach to community involvement for wind energy development,

Communitv Involvement in Siqnificant Ptannina Appli~tions

Local planning authorities will have the power to identify the level of community involvement they consider appropriate for different types of 'significant' planning application, including renewable energy generating schemes. BWEA emphasises the importance of local planning authorities highlighting in their SCI what level of community involvement they consider appropriate.

I confirm that BWE3 want to be notified of the further stages in the preparation of this document, including submission to the Secretary of State, examination and eventual adoption.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments to the discussion group, BWEA looks forward to future opportunities to participate in Local Development Framework consultations. If you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact BW€A.

Yours sincereb,

Katie Adderfey Planning Adviwr, BWEA S- .-S- for~onsultatiantatutorjstakeholders are shown in red)

District: Chuncii County Council Councillors Parish Council MP Errvironment Agency Countryside Agency Englkh Nature English Hedhge The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Local Wildlife Trust Area Rights d Way Officer ITC (Independent Television Commission) OFCOM (now includes ITC and RCA) Rritl~hBreb~idcasting Coi-poration (8K) Crown Castle UK Ltd British Telemmmunications {BT) T-Mobiie UK Vodafone Orange 02 (forrneriy BTCellnet] National Transcommunications ttd (NTL) Ccabie and Witetss Electricity company TWNSCO Civil Aviation Authority (CM) Minktry of Befence (MOB) National Air Traffic Sewices (MATS) Health & Safety Executive Dn The Highways Agency (HA)

Please note: this list is not exhaustive - to be used as guidance only. Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework Consultation

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as canfidential.

Questitiannairtes without P name and address cannot be included In this co~lsult;tth.

All questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2006 to:

Policy Planning Manager Planning & Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth Pt.1 2EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Pfease enter your name and addmsa blow: Please enter your agent's details (if applicable)

T--,-.p...... --" " -.-..

"m"b., ... . -m-.. -

The soundness of the draff$tatement of Cmmunity Involvement is measured against a number of criteria iisted overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PUN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF GOMMURIITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (lto 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Compfetion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over.

IF YOU WOULD LlKE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IN BRAILLE OR LARGE PRINT TELEPHONE 01752 307845 Yease mark the appropriate box with a cross IXI or fill in as required Your level of agreement that the criteria have been met In this 1 Strongly agree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree conslrftatian 2 = Agree 4 S Disagree Positive.@$$$ NeSative

how the City Council has complied W& the minimum legal requirements for consultation CIlOimCJCl .---U---,..- ---.-.A,.*-..-.-L..-...... -. how the City Cwncib strategy for-&mrnunlfy invoivement in the planning process

links with other ...mmrnunity involvement initiatives e.g. the City Strategy.--.-...--7,.---- {in general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be consulted aaa~a .------.---.--m- "-----.-...p- how the conzrnunity and other bodies can be invoivsd in a timely and accessible manner aoaarr -"..m,.-,.- .-+- suitable methods af canaultation to be employed for the intended audience and for D D Cl D the diffennt stages in the preparation of local development documents m ---p--~------"." how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community involvement efffeetivelv aaaaa how the results of community involvement will be fed into the preparation of a~lamn deveiopment plan dacumants and supplementary.-"" planning documents mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement D Cl Ill U 0 - ---- .------. -...... -..-p-. &arty the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applications ElDClOD --

Yes No

@i h planning issues in your particular neighbourhood B 13

planning issues city wide U 1 $4

Thank you for completing this questc'onnaire Question 11 (Proposed changes to the draft SCI)

"The University of Plymouth would like to be included on 'List C' of consultation bodies detailed at section 10.5 of the draft Statement of Community Involvement. The University is an important stakeholder in the city, and almady piays an important role as a key economic driver and contributor to the social and cuttural well-being of the Plymouth. The University currently employs 2,276 people at its Plymouth base, with 30,165 students enrolled across eight faculties for the 200415 academic year. Tha University is keen to further develop its relationship with the city. Since its activities are bath wideranging and far-reaching, inclusion as a consuttee would provide an opportunity for the University to contribute to forthcoming debates and city wide stratagics from their earliest stages. This would ensure a synergy of approach which woufd have benefits to both the city centre and University Quarter.

Bristol I Card~ff1 London f Mancheste: / Plymouth fiuro

Architecture lawn Plarlrwg Intenor Design Building Surveying i456~CQ1-050907-response to cons Architecluro 7"' September 2005 Graphic Design

Palicy Planning Manager Planning 8 Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre PLYMOUTH PLI 2EW

Bear Sir

PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL DRAFT STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK CONSULTATION

Please find enclosed completed response forms for the University ~f PIyrnauth to the above consultation.

The Council's forms have been completecl where appropriate although, given the nafure of the University's response, it has been necessary to include much of the Universily's comment on accompanying sheets. The entry on the consultation response form identifies the appropriate reference used on the additional pages, as appropriate. We trust this is aweptitble.

The University would reserve the right to supplement andtor clarify the comments made in order that this could better inforan the LDF debate. Please do not hesitate to make contact should you wish further information to be supplied.

We look forward to further opportunities to continue our participation as a key local stakeholder in the emergence of a LDF for Plymouth.

Yours faithfully

Richard Cooke Town Planner For

STRIDE TREGLOWN

STRtDE TREGLOWN LTR P, omemde Haee The Promenade, Ciiton IJown Urlsiul LISB 3NL

Ensto! l Card~ff! Londoi~I R-lanchesler I Plymouth Truro

Draft Statement of Community lnvoive Local Development Framework Consultation

d/ 4 Plymouth City Council will only use the inforrnation provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential.

QuesPionnaEms without a name and address cannot be included In thls mnsu#atlan.

A18 questiannairw must be returned by 5pm, Friday Mh September 2005 to:

Policy Ranning Managw Planning & Regeneration Services Piymouth City Council Civic Csrttre Plymouth PLI 2EW I Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community lnvoivernent is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF CQMMUNiW INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your Ieve1 of agreement (4 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Campletion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require msm space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer. I Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over Please mark the appropriate box with a cross W or fill in as required n Your level of agreement that tho criteria have beon met in thI* 4 -- Stmngiy agree 3 - k?lth~~agree nor dioagne 5 = Strongly disagree consultation 5 2 = Agree 4 = Disagree Positive Rlc~utive

how the City Councif has camplied w!th the min~murnlegal requirements for 0 0 @f'!3 7 consultation p-. - how the City Council's strategy for community involvement in the pl 1 process ftnks with other community i ------

(in general terms) which local comm P.3 r-"s m m P-, consulted -- - *-- how &; &mmunity and other

for the different stages In the how the City Council irgks involvement effectively -- -p------p how the resuits of community involvement wrll be fed into the preparation of development plan documents and supptemontary pianning --- - L ------L -

mechanisms for rewewing the statement of community ~nvolvement EL%KIEICJ 8

- - - . -- --p

cfearfy the planning authority's palicy for mnsultatron on planning applicat~ons EIHDLILI 9.

-- p-- - - .-

Yes No

plannlng issues in your particular neighbourhood

planning issues city wide S2 14 Draft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework Consultation .-. .

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Pleaso note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as cmnfidentia!.

Qtrestiannaires without a name and address cannot be includad in this consuitatian.

AE questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 200%t

Policy Planning Manager Phnning & Regeneratbra Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL? 2EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

I Please enter your name and addrws below: Please enter your agsnP's d&ails (If applicabliar)

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed ovarhad. Sourc-ce: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING 'THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Con~iJltati~r?do~~ment)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Cornpietion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have ben met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCf and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over how the City Council has campliad with the minimum legal requirements for 'l. mnsultatim - ---pA- . .- -- . -P .- .------how the City Council's strategy for community mbolvernent in the planning aqnaa 2. process.- links - with 0th t~ativaa- - e.g. the C~tyStrategy -p- -

I

manner 4. -...... -p

5"

involvement effectively o @U cl U 0. . ...---... , ...... how the results of cclrnmunidy involvement will be fed into the preparation of 7. development plan- documents and supplementary plannir~gdocuments ----* - - * h

mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement 8.

ciearly the planning authrrrilyts poky for consultation on planning applications 9"

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood D 73

planning issues city wide Ci $4

Thank you for com~letinathis auestionnaire raft Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Framework ConsulWion ;;-va ;;-va ,*.% Q&s-.n'.y * k*,?. g Lf Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Pleases note Iha%a copy of your response wit1 be placed on a public register and r~nnottherefore be treated as confidentiai. I Qu~~stOonnaireswithout a name and address cannot be included in thls eansultatian. Ali questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager Planning & Regeneration Services Plymouth City Csuncil Civic Centre Plyrneuth PL.1 2EW I A!tmwtively, plaasa return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please: enter your name and address below: Please enter your agent's dlratdls (if applicable)

.- --.-p

. . P

The soundness of the drafi Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN D43CUMENTS AND STATEMENTS Of COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Csnsultatior: document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (Ito 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by puHing an X in the I one box which best matches your opinion. Completion d free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the drafl SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do nd forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. I Please mark the appropriate box with a cross fEIl or fill in as required Your 1ev& OP agm@menfthat ths criteria have beer?met in this 1 = Strongfy qw 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree csnsultation b

2 S Agree 4 = Disagree PosifiveG~-Ne~a~ive

how tho City Council has complied with tho minimum legal requirements for MBflBCL1 consultation ...... -.. .-p - . -. . .- .- p-.... .- haw the City Council's strategy for community involvement in the planning wnooa process links with stht? ..- .... --p ...... -.... (in general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be mnsulted how the comrncanity and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible manner suitable methods of consultation to be employed for the intended audience and for the different stages in the pre -- -- .. - - - - how the City ~ounc~iintends to s oo@an involvement effeetivelv- how the results af commuiity invaiFment will be fidinto the preparation of dsvelowrnent plan documents and su~~lementarv~lannina documents TJMBE178

mechanisms for reviewing the statement of earnmunibj involvement ElE33tC3TJB

clearly the planning authority's policy

-- * - - - - -

Yes No

planning issues in your partfcular n ghbaurhsod E&e l3 13 C s;*ca%% "i ing issues city wide El IQ

Thank you for compkting this questionnaire Draft Statement of Communitv Invalvernent W ,. . ,... Local Development Framework Consultation

Pfymoulk City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Deveiopmenl Framework. Please note that a copy af your response will be placed an a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidentiat.

Questionnaires without e name and address cannot be included in this consultation.

All questiannaires must it returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager Planning & Regeneratim Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth Pt.1 2EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

The soundness of the draff Stat~rnentof Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consuitation document)

Please indicate your leve! of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give mare detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE PHlS QUESTIONNAIRE 1N BRAlLLE OR URGE PRINT TELEPHONE 01752 307845 please rriark the appropriate box with a crass fZl or fEl1 in as required Your level of agreement that the criteria have been met in this l.: Strongly agree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree consu/tation 2 Agree 4 = Disagree Pos~tive Negative

how the City Council has cornpiied with the rniriirnum tegaf requirements for consultation how the City Council's strategy for community involvenlent in the planning process iinks with other cornrnunity involvement inltlatives e.g. the Clty Strategy nonna 2 ------p. -. (in general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be cnnsufted how the ceimrnunity and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible manner CC3OBD 4. suitable methods of consultation to be employed for the intended audience and nC71700 5. for the different stages in the preparation of local development documents how the City Counsr~lintends to set out, resource and manage comrnuntty u~~~~ 6 involvement effectively ------.------. --W - ? - - how the results of ccsmmmty involvement will be fed in6the preparation of e761aC3CI 7 development- plan documents and supplementary plann~ngdocuments ------p------

* mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement CTJUUUU 8.

* dearly the planning authority's pot~cyfor consultation on planning applications RDlLIUO B

------

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood fl B f3

planning issues city wide D 14

Thank vou for comrcrletinu this auestionnaire DRAFT STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY l[WBLwMENT

'fiis document is intended to set the standards to be adopted by the Local Planning Authority in terms of engaging thc community and key stakeholdws in the plan making process including significant development control decisions.

1Ae statement of Community Involvement is not a Development Plan Document but wilt be subject to independent examination . It is the intention that it should include a range of statutory and non statutory organisations that a: appropriate to the LAX. Ftrflkmmore in Principle 1 states there shall be a priority of Tmnt loading' and early cngagemcnt of the cc?mmunity in tlw planning process. This is to enable a sense of ownership of Local Planning decision. It is noted that a number of ways to front load consultation process art: outlined.

IJrban Splash hwe taken a full and active part in the promotion of their proposals for Royal Willim Yard and wish to continue to do so. They also want to continue to take a lid and active part in the preparation of the LDF. They consider (see dso reprcssntations in respect of Millbay and Stonehouse Area Action Plans) that the best way to proceed with proposals for Royal William Yard is to prepare a Master Plan document. 'I'his would be subject to community consultation and involvemerlt in its preparation and enable views to be obtained at an edy stage. 'These view can then be incorporated into the Master Plan document. Such an approach would be in line with thc dra;ft Statement of Community Involvement and should be expressed in the document.

RECOMMENDATION

That the draft Statement of Community Involvement slate that it is a part ofthe 'front loading' exercise to engage communities that a Master Plan will be prepared for its priority sites such as Royal William Yard.

Furthermore Urban Splash wish to be identified as an a non statutory consultee within the Statement of Community Involvement. DSLY vp/89/05

8 September 2005

Planning Policy Manager Planning m$ Regeneration Ptymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth P1 1 2E W

Dew Sir

Plymouth Local Development Framework (LDF) Preferred Optioas Report and Draft Statement of Community Invobemenb

We refer to the above and enclose our representations on behalf of Urban Splash (South West) Limited. The representation me in respect of:- i) Draft Statement of Community Involvement. ii) The Core Strategy. iii) Mill bay/Stonehouse Area Action Plan.

We look forward to receiving a receipt of the representations and tmgaging in discussions.

If you require my additional information do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours faithfully Penrilla Consultants Limited

Paul Barnard Head of Phmhg & Regeneration Department of development Your Ref Civic Centre Our Ref DUPCCT Plyrnouth Date 7 September 2005 PL12EW

Dear Sir

The Plymouth Chunks of Commerce and. Industry wishes to eqress a broad. welcome md support for the recently published documents forming part of the e~nerghgLDF for Plymouth We have a number of individual coments to make and these are set out below.

Core Strategy

The many changes that have been made to this docmeni, hparticular combining the previous individual documents, the explanatory p3ms with links to the Action Area Plans mcl a number of cfarifIcations are welcomed.

Option 8 - It is suggested that indicative thresholds may be helpkl h avoiding unnecessary debate over which applications should be accompanied by a Design Statement.

Diagram 1 - This visual expression of the spatial strategy is extremely helpful.

Option 1 1 - Limithg the requirement for affordable housing at 25% is considered pragmatic and helpM in enswing the delivery of aS'forbble housing. Clearly delivery at this level without any subsidy may be difficult on some brownfield sites or where other significant planning benefits me sought. As a consequence the policy should contain guidance as: to how bhcewill be struck in such circumstances.

Option 12 - The densities being sought fall within government guidelines. It is comidered that in many locations within the city, such as around the centre, district centres and along primary public transport corridors higher densities should be sought. Research into effective public tansport systems indicates that densities above 40 -50 are essential to run effective bus services and h excess of 200 for maxs transit schemes such as tKrg

Option 14 - The gitit~lhrmof employment land is just one important ktar hemuring there is suEcient land for continued investment in jobs hthe City. Equally important are: quality and beation. The need to enswe these fwtoss &odd firm part of this optha The ofice quarter at MiZlbay is welcomed - the potential at Cattedom to meet a wider range of employment opprtunzifies is cweratly mderplayed.

The Uru'versity -. It is surprising given that he university is a large employer in its own sight adthe current emphasis on the knowledge economy, its role and potential for hovation and the need to support these functions do not appear in the employment or the ducation &ions. This is r major oversight which needs to be rectified.

Millbay and Stonehouse AAP

The principies set oui in the document are supported.

The need to provide a quality link to the City Centre is considered essential but care needs to be taken to enswe that whichever option is chosen that it is deliverable in the short to medium term and does not give rise to further blight.

Option 2 - .this is strongly supported.

Option 6 -. The principle of green arc is supported however there is a danger that if is just a green swathe and not an important part of the City. Considerati~nshould be given to some limited office or residential development along the bumdwies so as to define the mm it% a way &at Royal Crescent defines Victoria Gmdens in Bath. North. Plymstock AAP

We welcome the drawing together of the opportunities at the quarries with the delivery of Sherford to make a coherent whole, This should permit a more csmp?ehensive pattern of i.r&astructue delivery which will be essential to the success of my of these: projwts

Option 10 - overall hstis welcomed but we would stress very strongly that ""a contribution at the outset7' is not the same rrs ensuring that a high qurzlity public t~aqortsystem is available at the outset and this was a critical principle behind the justification for tke new community. The Chamber retains its concern that a failure to deliver the public tramport on which Sherfarsl was predicated myhave profo'oranrl consequences on the A38 in respect of congesting the principal artery of the City.

NB. TfPe Chamber is unceriain as to whether or not it has been codedon the Eastern Corridor Study

Statement of Commrrnity Invohement

Tkis docment reflects government pidance but does not appear particularly specific to Plymouth, More fOcw on particular target groups would be welcomed,

Waste DPD

The general propsal to provide a wide range of recyclmg facilities is welcomed, Care will be required to ensure that these do not fiave adverse impact on investment in adjoining or nearby bodies of land

find Regards A*

David Lobbaq BSc Dip T&CP MR'fPI Chartered Town Planner

Copies Sally Perdrisat PCCI Brim Hegarfy, Ashford's Midlands, South Wed &Wales RtPgians -.______I- 'iow Wdhi rari % i3 Yaqm Cxaztor - Mob&. &&, wieSi 8 #aies ~ieg~o;ls * * L% s: Wsm c hWf: r&q &W*%%&F Fkmrpr?* klll3~5, 0121 ?@ -8tt E RC; h P@&% *5Wk 'C**? h-:A wa#?G?~:r~.j+.s %*m;, 8% 757 ~TT~~qan)se* * * as" ci.rX 'I h Draft Statement of Community Involvement

PByrnouth City Counci! will only use the infornation provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential. I Questionneims without a name and address cannot be included in this consuitation. I NI questionnaires must bb r&urned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to: Policy Planning Manager Plannirrg & R~generalionServices Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL4 2EW

Alternatively, plsase return the qtiastlonnajre to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please enter your agent's details (if applicable)

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FBAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (lto 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the ORB box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the cri8ria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft §Cl and to be involved in further consultations. If you require mere space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. - P - - - P @4ei%emark the appropriate box with a ersos El or fill in as required Your kval ofagreement that the *

hew the City Counch has complred with the mrnimum legal requirements for consultation --p - . ------p . . .- -- - P .. bow the C~tyCouncil's strategy for community ir~volvementin the planning 0 rs 0 0 ra" orncess links with other community involvement initiat~vese.g. the City Strategy (in general terms) which Local community groups and ather bodies will be a*'- ...... how the community and other bodi manner - -- - suitable methods 6-consuMion to be employed for the intended audience and aorr~n~ for the different --stages -- in- the preparation- - - .. of local d haw the City Council intends to set out, resource ar C"_] o PI a+ ~nvolvemeoteffectively . - . . . - .- - .------how the results of community involvement will be fed rntd the preparat~onof ~rn~n~~ development plan documents and supplementary planning documents WUUUCPJ .. - ...... -. - .-. -----.P------"--M- mechanisms for revrewing the statement od community involvement aflflC70 - - clearly the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applicatrons D~DO~

Yes MO

planning issues in your particular neighla~urhcrsd 0 0 13

Thank you for csmpleti~lgthis questionnail% Response to the consultation on Draft Sbtemant of Community lnvoivernent (July 2005) produced by Plymouth City Council

f ha document would benefit if the language was altered for public consumption. For example, I asked two work colleagues if they understood Principle 1 on page 3 when it referred to "front loading" and none of us knew what this meant. There are a number of other examples throughout the document.

A commitment to produce a leaflet summarising key points for the public, and bringing to their attention how they could obtain a copy of the full document would be useful.

The amount of jargon should be reduced. If terms not generally used by the public are deemed necessary for this document, an explanation beside them would be helpful, or supply a glossary which explains what the terms mean, not only what the initials used throughout stmd for.

There is no list of contents at the front, which makes a dscurnent of this length less accessible.

There is no explanation of what consultation means, and this should come near the beginning of the document. The Compact prinnipies on page 5 do not provide this. A recurring problem with consultation is the misbken assumption about the Brms of a consultation by the different parties involved, if these have not benmade explicit. For example, on gage 3 the term 'kommunity participation" appears to be used interchangeably with consultation, and the implications of the twr, terms are significantly different. Amstein's Ladder or work by e.g. David Wilcax addresses this and would give some brief, clear definitions.

Explanations of several different things are merged into one, which results in a variety of initials and abbreviations finding their way into single sentences. This is confusing if you are not familiar with what is being referred to. It might be better to provide separate, brief explanations at the beginning relating to the different themes.

The document contains a lot of information in a very dense format. There is a danger that this will detract from the explanation of the process. Information which is not necessary to understand the process coutcf be deleted.

It is difficult to comment on the section on Methods of Community Engagement, as whatever combination of methods is selected is dependent on the conditions and context. It would be better to omit the section on methods as this is not a tooikit for practitioners and whoever is conducting the consultation should have skills in this respect. Details about what the commitment to good practice entails and what the minimum standards are wwQd be more useful, perhaps in the format of

Fiona Sheaff Plymouth Guitd of Voluntary Service a Consuttation Charter. (See the compact Code of Gsod Practice, First Steps or cabinet first Guidelines).

9. For Section 7, a clear flow chart would help to clarify the process.

10. For Appendix 2, List of Consultees, it is not clear why a few voluntary organisations have been named while equally re'elevantgroups have been left off the fist.

Fiona Shaaff Plymouth Guild of Voluntary Service raft Statement of Community Involvement ,..q Local Development Framework Consultation

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential, I Questionnaires without a name and address cartnot be included In %hisconsultatlerr. Ail quest!onnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th Sept~rnber2005 tw

Policy Planning Manager Planning & Regeneration Sewices Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL? 2EW

Alfernafiv@ly,please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Please enter your name and address blow: Please enter your agent's ddatalfs (If applicable)

......

. -p.. - ..

...... - ...... -. --

----.---p ------

.-y:i i Q xq...... - .. .-

The soundness d the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNlTY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consuitation document)

Please indicate your Sevel of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by pufting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be invoked in further mnsultations. If you require more space piease continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. 3lease mark the! appropriate box with a cross or fill in as required Your level of agrpment that the criteria have been ranabin fhk 1 = Strongly agree 3 = Neither agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree cansultartlsn 2 Agm 4 :: Disagree Positive Negaittve

how the CQ Councit has complied with the nlirrirnurn legal requirements for

consultation ...... -...... -. how the Ctty Council's strategy for community involvement in the planning 2. prowss links the City Strategy ...... -...... -p (in general terms) which local community groups arid other bodies will be cor~sulted how the community and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible manner .- ......

odo 5. far the different stages in the preparation o ...... how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community 0 U U B. trwolvament effectively drb .- -- - ...... hew the rssults af OLl5dc1 7. develaprnent ptan docu ~- ...... mechanisms for reviewing the statement of cornrnunity involvement El Cl U B* W

clearly the planning authority's galicy for consultation on planning applications U I3 El L21 L1 P.

Yes No

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood B 13

planning issues city wide GP"<' "' ' B 14

Thank you far compjetinrr this auesfionnairvs Herewith the Forumss reply to the Draft Baternent of CJarnmu~ityInvolvement:-

3, Council% smnliancc: with minimum lw8lm 2. -mrnunitv involvement

8. Reviewha: statement of community involvement 9. Pllannira~authoritv's aoiicv for consultation on pla~ni~~nlications

Dow not comply %bedocurriemts Le. City Strategy etc, as listed in 2,W were dthrttr m% available or difficul1: to view. 1Docurnen;t.ssuch as Study, Orban Capacity Study and Greenscape Stra included tokr;&er with the 19952011 heal Pian Planning Studies* If. slhoarid dso show how suggestions and somme~lbs:put forward in the Planning Studis were incorporated in the C.D.P. It is reprehensible that details were not readily zrvoihbte for the public to see who were participating on the consultative group set up primarily for input from the community Muthe L.D.F. There was very little advertising for members of the public or mmmianity groups to take part, i.e. Plymstack has a population of nppraximately 25,000 amounting to 10% of the population of Blymauth, yet not oat?:mmmunity group in Blymstock was invited to sit on this consultinfive group l'hb flagrantly ignores government guidelines of communities taking a Imdimxlg role in the local government af their arm, i.e. apennesa, transparency and accaunta'bilityr. Plyrnstock had absolutely no say ia this draft document, and yet at least dwelGiin@ are planned in the North Bliymstwk area commencing in the next A total rethink has to be mdertPlbrea by the Couracil before plici opted in order to give ALL communities, albeit vh eommulty greups or indi~dual strong and informed voice as to what they wish ta happin t sad community. It is the obligation of $be Caatneil to colasult with evwysne in the comrmwai4-y not just a selected few, PIymutosk Area Committee held on the 16'~A~rgusb, 2M15 was brief pi-~enxt~tioruon thctD.P. This venue was most unsuitable. Due to a Iarge vsiurne of other business i.e. lscd transport issues etc. time was very Gimitd for this presentation and the subsequent rqmatiow. This was most uameisBctory. A separate public meeting held in Plymstock timed at a mare convenknt hour of"say 7.30p.m. rather than 6.l)lf)pm.when families have other commitments should have bmn wrrawd. These t&oxdd have? been intensive advertising throughout the media and poster8 in every wailsrbk place Eo emcourage smkdenta to come along and have their s@y, This did not happen. The exhibition at Plm~tloek Community Centre on the 30'' June wap not ns wide ranging as had been exp&&, although dD coaacil officers were extremely helpful wad informative, These two events were the sum total of anything which could b;f: described as tz 6L~~amltationprocedureW. No comrnmt The Council have nd set out clear guidelines as to how they inteud to eE&vely resource and organise community ievalvemllrm%. En view of the past record of the Council, whilst their proposrlls on plaaanfng comuhtio~1is m& with a guarded web ono^ we await the fima2 outcome with interest. We wodd like to glace sn record that the recent decision by the Council m to advertise planning appiieatiolgw in the local evening paper is a retrogrmk step- The paper is widely read and easily accwib1e to al, this decision has nlpw prwentecX many local rmiden& finding out what is happening in their are&. This decision sharuld be rescinded and the advertiaemermb reinstated ianrnedi~tdy. Contmry to the Councilli's belief, lnot all members of the public own, or smuse fs computer. The Council must not slip into the misguided asswnption that &ifit is on the website" then evernone Ixmrs aceas %aQbat information. As above As above

FinaXIy, the Blymslock Community Forum would fib CO trab this opporbnit;y of stating that in their opinion the questions in the questiomnaire were di%cult to correlate with a relevant heading and or subheading in the Draft Sateemeprt of Cc~mmunlitgrPnvnlvernent document.. The space for comment in Sections 110 and 111 wm very bited. For the Iaymsn, fhL was a coavoluted #ad obscure method of csnsultw~on,and r the qi~estisaas to whether the Council really did wish "to rmch out &aaEi wetions sf the community" for their response. Plymouth City Council wili oniy use the information provided for the purpose cd preparing the I.,ocal Uevelaprnenl Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confiderttial.

Questionnaires without a riarne and address sanrrsk be included in this eurrs~lbtian.

AI1 questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th Septembar 2006 to:

Poky Planning Manager Planning & Regeneration Services Plymouth City Councii Civic Centre Plymouth PLI 2EW

/ Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

The soundness of the dxafl Statement of Community Invetvement is measured against e number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL UEVELBPMENT FRAMEWIIRKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNI'P/ IhlVQbVEMENT Feb 2005 jCansultatiow document)

Please indicate your level ~f agreement (4 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria I~avebeen met by putting an X in "re on6 box which best matches your opinion.

@crmpletianof free text b~xesis optional but offers the rspportunib for you to give more detail if ynil da not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to fhe dr&$$Cl and to be involved in further consultatiana. If you r@quiremore space pieass continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Da not forget to filf in your name and address above before turning over.

TELEPHONE 64752 307846 L_ ""=.-m P 4 -- Strongly agree 3 P Nelthef agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree censutt8flon I 2 S Agree 4 p: DhgrW! Positive Negativ

suitaMs methods af wrreultation to be employed for the intended audience and for ClODDCi a.

ub3nL363 S. invoivement etfectiv how $h&results of c T]iDUUU 7. d~veiopmentplan documents and supplememaiy planning documents ~ .. . " ".. - - ~. . .. .~.. .. .

mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community invoivement nuaged 8

clearly the planning atltharity's policy for consuftation an planning applications DUUCIW 9

induding a refmnce number:

I----- Would your group wlsh to be consulted on: I Yes RI0 I planning issues in your partieuilar neighbeurhosd C) 13 I planning issues city wide C1 L3 rr Tesco Stores Limited would like to -sec? the Statement of' CarnmurJty Xnvolvemer~tamertded in accordance with ODPM Good Practice Guide on SCIs 'Statements of Commlanlty linvaivernent and Planning Applications' published December 2004 which ac%nowledges that on mcasisns pre application discussions with an authority ought to be allowed to take place in confidence ar on a "without prejudice" basis, Tern Stores Iimited therefore OBJECT to the omission of this acknowledgement rand would like to see the Statement of Community Involvement amended in accord-rlanewith this guidance.

Page 1 of 1 Draft Statement of mmunity lnvolvemen Local e)evelsprne mework Consuitation 4 1%

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of pmparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your respurrse will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be trwated as confidential.

Q~rastianraalmswitholaa: a name and address cannot be incfarded In this cansultation,

AWI questionnaires must be returned by 5pm, Friday 9th September 2005 to:

Poli~yPBanning Manager Planning 8r Regeneration Services PIyrnouth City Council Civic Centre Ptyrno~th PLI 2EW

Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or sty library

...... Pieash enter your name and adcfrers below: Please enter your agent's debiis (If appiicabla)

p------

-

- ......

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed ~verteaf-Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS QF DEVELOPMENT PUN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Cansultatian document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by pufting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consultations. If you require more space please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do nd forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. %as@ mark the appropriate box with a cross ar fill in as required El Your level of agrmmetsf %he%%h eritwia hawe been melt in this 1 = Strongly agree 3 = Nelther agree nor disagree 5 = Strongly disagree consultatkm

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for 0 0h 0 0 I.

how the City Cauncrl's strategy for community involvement In the planning CJCL3E.lOQ 2. -.p -- A - - -- involvement- - ~nitiativese.g. the City Strategy process links-- -- with other communrty . W - - -pp p (in general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be consulted- - .- - .- - - - -" - - - -- p ...... how the community and dher bddios can i&olved 6iimely and accessible be ih ~R~UU4 manner ...... -...... --p-..-...... -.p------~ suitable methods of consuttation to be employed for the intended aodierlce and for the different staqes in the weparation of local development docurnents how the City Council intends to set out, rwourm and manage community U C1 Pi' C1 C7 a. involvement effectively --.-" "------$ h&& results csof community involvement will be fed into the preparation of fl a1EI a a 7 development plan documents and supplemsntary planning documents P------A-- --" ------

mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement a'g n n 8.

dearly the planning authority's policy for mnsuftation on planning appiications ETLNJ~EI

Yes MQ

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood CI Q 73

planning issues city wide El 61 $4 From: Tara Dickenson [[email protected]] Sent: 09 September 2005 1524 To: [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Kathrine HADDRELL; Michelle PEART; Richard ORMEROD Subject: Draft SCI - Comments (Closing Date Today 9/9)

09.09.05.d~~ Dear Mike,

Pieaae find the attached G0 comments regarding Plymouth's Draft SCI - happy to discuss.

Regards

Tara

Tara Dickensm Planning Manager Mast House 01752 635186

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet IGSi) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by Energis in partnership with MessageLabs.

On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus-free Mr Mike Palmer Planning T~tam Strategic f fanning Unit Mast House Plymouth City Council, Shepherds Wharf Floor 8, Civic Centre, 24 Sutton Road Plymouth, Devon. PL1 2EW Plymouth PL4 OH3

Tfrl: 01752 635081 Fax: 09752 635090 ernail: [email protected]. gov. uk Your Ref: Our Ref: Date: September 2005

Dear Mr Palmer

DRAFT STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK.

Thank you for sight of this very comprehensive document. There are, however, some comments, both genera! specific that Government Office would like to make.

a) Consultees -an appendix to list Consultees does seem somewhat counter productive as the reader, being a consultee, will be instantly interested In the breadth and reality of athers invdved. It would be a shame to lose their interest by creating the need to refer to an appendix when it could easily be in the main body of the text.

List A - correctly lists the adjoining 'relevant authorities' such as SSHams,Caradon etc. Although I am aware that as a unitary you do not have any Parish Councils I am aware %hatsome of these other authorities a do. Annex E of the PPS12 companion guide states, under El(c), that a relevant authority is a specific consultation body and must be consulted under the Act and Reg. The guidance?in Part 1 (2) clearly states that a parish council is a relevant authority. As such, they must have the statutory consultation period far each relevant LDD including the SCI. It would be helpful to include Parish Councils on the Statutory List for consultation as appropriate.

List B - has a number of generic terms for consultation group rather than details of th~st? groups. There is an inconsistency between the advice in Creating LDFs and the PPS42 direction, but a definitive answer on the subject has yet to be received from ODPM. Government Office are however advising ft~illists to be given, atlowing for parties who believe they should be included to approach the Council if they are not included in the SCI stakehsiders list, (this is another way to identify missed groups or unknown groups). I do appreciate that you have made a note at 10.6 referring to a database but this advice does still remain.

Is) SEA - The SCI does explain Sustainability in some detail but there is no reference to SEA compliance, which is vital to the production of LDD's. There should be a clear, if brief, explanation in the main body of the text addressing the importance and necessity of the compliancy for relevant LDD's (a reference to the SEA directive is needed) I c) f imescalss -The Statement currently shows no timescales for the SCI itself. Nor does it speak of the possibility of an Examination. The SCI does not show how it will work around the proposed timescaieslpredictsd dates in the current LDS. It may be more appropriate to work these dates into a revised table of consultatior~in preference to the summary table you have used at 6.2. 1 think this would be mare relevant to the reader as currently this table just duplicates the written text you have already provided.

d) Joint Working - Although any joint working you undertake will be informal, it needs to be addressed briefly in the SCI.

e) Performance and Indicators - It needs to be made clear that these are not Government indicators and targets and that they are localty self irnposed.(lt is not clear as to the importance of this table as requirements are made clear in the act and guidance).

In the text you have referred to LDD's as Of)PDSs- this is confusing to the reader and it is suggested that they be referred to simply as LDD's to avoid such confusion. e 3.8 refers to resources and the influence they have an the design of the consultation. It must be made clear that this will not be allowed to affect the process thus allowing a fall below the minimum requirements. r 4.2 (3) there is a typo in the word cfcornmunication.'

l hope the comment above are helpful, I am also aware that there has been a request amongst the comments to add further, if brief, information to an already capacity length document. It may be advisabie to remove some of the more detailed text such as the Plymouth Pact - making reference to where the detail can be found in stead.

1 look forward to your submission of this document and ask that you also send at ieast one electronic and one hard copy to the Planning Inspectorate.

Yours sincerely

Tat-a Uickenson Planning Manager raft Statement of ommunity Involvement ..:.. :.v...... ,,.X "A. - Local Development Framework Consultation ,J:>iz 90. f; .?,.... .?,.... 3; ..<...... $ ,&A

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose of preparing the Local Development Framework. Please note that a copy of your response will be placed on a public register and cannot therefore be treated as cunfidentiel.

QmsslGionnaiws without a name and address cannot be included in this consultation.

Ail questionnaires must bo returned by 5pm, Frlday 53th September 2005 to:

Poky Planning Manager Planning 8 Regeneration Sewices Pbymouth City Council Civic Centre Ply mouth PlB 2EW

Alternatweiy, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

Pioase enter your agsnf s details (H appllcrrble)

I Instructions for cmr&etion: The soundness of the drag Statement of Community Involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PUNDOCUMENE SAND STATEMENTS Of COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consuftation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (1 to 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the I one box which best matches your opinion. Completion of free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be invobed in further consultations. If you require I more space please continue on a separate sheet indwxtfing the criteria number to which you refer. Do not forget to fill in your name and address above before turning over. * "lease mark the appropriate box with a cross IN sr fill in as required

how %haCity Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for ,..l # YYUUPS*Ir"7 rl ,..., consultation -p.p --- how the City Co vement m the planning unaa process links with other community involvement ~nitiatrvese.g. the City Strategy -. --. .- - - A - ---- (in general terms) whrch local communrty groups and other bodies will be 001S1[11a consttltaef how the cammur~ityand other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible aallur?m manner [30lJam for the different stages in the preparation of local dev pp. .-p -- -. . -. . .. how the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community OI3UUla involvement effectively --- - * - .. - . . . . - - .------how the results of community lnvofvement will be fed inb the preparation of UUUUU development plan documents and supplementary planning documents p-. - p mechanisms for reviewing the statement of community involvement OClDUU

Yes No

planning issues In your particular neighbourhood Cl 0 13

planning issues city wide 61 El $4

Thank vou for cemnletina this auestionnaim

Stone. Mike IDEVELOPMENT)

From: John Oakes {[email protected]] , ,,+.. .".. .:. " Sent: 09 September 2005 1 'l :36 +.:, ,,..,.? &..$Q@::F P. ~ +. L+-.'. To: [email protected] '7%" ,,X..* Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]~v~uk;Alan Robinson: Bridget Green; Denise Vigars; Graham Swiss; James Doxford; Lee Bray Subject: Plymouth LDF Preferred Options Reports and SCI - Representations from South Hams District Council

PtymouthDF-Fin&? ew-mx j Please find attacked a report on the above de~%kent"which.was considered by the Council's Executive on 8th September 2005.

The secommendation and report were agreed by Executive without change. The report contains the Council's representations on the LDF.

The rnmutes of the meeting are not yet approved and I will send them through as soon as I receive them - I would be grateful if you would also take these into account as you revise your LDF. In particular the minutes will emphasise support for the aspiration of PCC in the LDF to seek a prioritisation of the economy of the City as the focus for its regeneration. The LDP will need to be fully integrated with other key strategies for the area, particularly economic strategies, for this to be successful.

I would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this e mail, John Oakes Forward Planning Manager ::a,., -rrP i a&,, ,,g) g&& so?Q.;. &q&-F' v

...... Confidentialitv Notice Please note this e-mail is confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately; after notifying the sender please delete khe e-mail. Unless you are the intended recipient you shouZd not copy the e-mail or use it for any purpose or discfose its contents to any other person. This e-mail message has been scanned for computer viruses, however South Hams District Council do not accept any liability in respect of damage caused by any virus which is not detected. Please note that the local authority monitors e-mail for busine~6 purposes. X*********X*******************************************************~**** ITEM

Executive - 8 September 2Q05

PLYMOUTH LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

Report of the Head of Community Regeneration

Statutory Powers: Town and Country Planning Act 7990 and ths Planning and Computsory Purchase Act 2804

Financial Implications: None

Purpose: To bring to Members' attention the latest documents published by Plymouth City Council (PCC) as part of the Plymouth Local Development Framework (LDF), pafticulariy those with cross boundary implications, and to seek Member support for the recommended response.

Links to Council Priorities - the documents link to all Council priorities, but particularly CPI (affordable homes), CP2 (good jabs) and CP3 (maintain the district's character).

That the Executive RESOLVES that the recommended responses to the Plymouth Local Development Framework set out in this repot%be endorsed.

?. Plymouth City Council (PCC) have recently published severat documents which will form part of the Plymouth Local Development Framework (LDF).The programme for the Plymouth LDF is closely in step with that for the South Hams and the recently published Plymouth documents largely mirror those published by for South Hams in late June this year. In view of the significance of cross boundary issues both authorities have been working to achieve a joined up approach not only to key strategic issues but aka to matters of detail.

2. The documents published by PCC (all at "preferred uptions" stage apart from the draft Statement of Community Involvement) include:

Core Strategy 0 North PIymstock Area Action Plan Devonport Area Action Plan Millbay and Stonehouse Area Action Plan Waste Development Plan Document Oraft Statement of Community Involvement

3. The documents can be viewed at http://w.~f~moutR.gov.uklhome~aqc3/~ourcouncil/environment/~Iannin~/~lanni ~q~oficv/Idf/~referredoptions.htmand a hard copy is also available for inspection in the Forward Planning office. Responses are required by 9" Septernber. I Core Strategy

Vision

4. The Core Strategy sets out the aspiration for Plymouth to become one of the finest cities in Europe and that, to affirm its role as the leading city of the far south west, Plymouth must be of significant critical mass. The emerging Regionai Spatial Strategy highlights the city as one of a small number of centres with the potential to accommodate higher rates of growth.

5, The Devon Structure Plan context to 2016 provides fur the population of the Plymouth Principal Urban Area (PUA) to grow by about 20,000 people, including the Structure Pian proposals for 4,500 new dwelfings and 80 hectares of employment land in the South Warns part of the PUA. The emerging Regional SpatiaX Strategy suggests that, based on recent trends, that the PUA could grow by 46,600 people by 2026, so that its population would approach 300,000. The Mackay Vision for Plymouth sees the long-term creation of a city with a population between 300,000 - 350,000,

6. Housing development linked to population growth is therefore a key aspect of the Core Strategy. There will also be focussed growth of the city's economy and its r~leas a service and commercial centre will also be deveioped. The prosperity and vitality of the city is important to the South Hams, and the vision for the city's future should be supported,

Housing

7. The key objective is to ensure that ail Plymouth residents have access to a decent and safe home within a quality living environment. Progress towards achieving this objective will be measured against a set of targets:

Provision of 10,000 homes in Plymouth 2001-1 6 * 25% of new housing will be affordable At least 80% of new homes to be provided on previously developed land At least 20% of new housing at lifetime homes standards; and * At least 30 dwellings per hectare as the average net density

8. Reference is also made in the preferred options to starting to make longer term provision for a potential population increase of 29,200 to 46,600 for the period 2001-2026. This would require 26,500 to 34,500 new homes in the PUA.

9, The Council has worked cfosely with PCC on housing needs and provisions, especially in relation to Sherford. The South Hams LDF sets high targets for affordable housing provision, including 50% at $herford, and it is disappointing that Pfymouth's Core Strategy has a comparatively iow target of 25% affordable housing.

10. In rdation to the Plymouth PUA dwelling provision shown in Diagram 1, the section of the table listing potential sites in South Hams should include 4,000 units for Sherford new community and 500 units for the South Hams part of the PUB rather than 4,500 for Sherford. Specific reference to Newnham as the location of the 500 units in the South Hams part of the PUA should be removed. The specific location for these dwellings will be determined through the South Hams LDF process which is stilf ongoing. The total pruvision of 4,500 for the South Hams part of the PUA is to be accommodated in the period 2001-2016. The diagram shows provision beyond 2016 for this area. PCC are aware of these errors and the table should be amended accordingly.

Employment

14. The LDF has the strategic objective of using employment land and premises effectively and efficiently in order to promote sustainable economic growth. This will be measured against two targets:

Provision of 80 hectares of employment land within the city by 2016, and 0 A net increase in the number of employees by 600 pa and the number of businesses by 40 pa.

12.The employment objectives and targets of the Core Strategy should be supported as helping to support the regi;neration of the city and sub region.

Transportation

13. Reference is made to the importance of improving the city's links with the south west region and beyond and also with the surrounding hinterland. The city is working with its neighbouring authorities to provide integratad infrastructure, including:

* New park and ride interchanges in Caradon and the South Hams - providing links to key employment and commercial destinations Developing and extending the local rail links into the city, and Extending the city's high quality public transport network to nearby towns

14."Te transport elements of the Core Strategy should be supported, but with the caveats set out in relation to the North PIymstock AA? below, particularly that the Eastern Corridor Study should not compromise or undermine the work carried out in relation to Sherford.

1S.The issues dealt with in this sedion of the Core Strategy are covered in the context of the North Plymstock Area Action Plan below.

North Pta(~$to~kArea Action Plan (AAP)

16. This document covers the eastern corridor of Plymouth, between Plymstack and Plympton, which is an area which will be subject to significant change in earning years. Its future links closely to the development of the new community at Sherford and the MPembraces the principles which have ernsrged through the Sherford Enquiry by Design process, particularly that future development should extend weshards from Sherford back in towards Plymouth.

1S.The North Plyrnstock AAP makes reference to the Sherford AAP published by this Councii in June and the importance of coordinated, complementary planning and defivery of development. Together the MPSprovide a framework to guide the form and content of development and provision of infrastructure which is vital to support successfuf and sustainable communities.

1&The AAP establishes its vision as the creation of a new high quality and distinctive urban district including a sustainabfe new neighbourhood, well related to the new community at Sherford, the existing urban fabric and the city centre. Reference is made to major new sustainable infrastructure, a high quality public transport system and the facilities required ta support a high quality of life. The AAP strategy is based on a range of development principles consistent with the principfes which underpin the South Hams LDF and the Sherford AAP in particular. Its broad content and principles should be supported.

4 9. The AAP lists preferred development options for 12 locations/topics, as follows:-

Pfymstock Quarry - a new neighbourhaad of PIyrnouth subject to a comprehensive master plan and providing about 1,500 homes, including 25% mixed tenure affordable and 20% lifetime home standard. A mixed use approach will include employment, retail, entertainment, commercial, education and health facilities.

Parnphlett Industrial Estate - to be integrated with the master plan for Pfymstock Quarry.

Billacornbe Green - retained as an area of public open space.

Wakehams Quarry (river frontage) - mixed use re-development including provision for strategic transport solutions for the gateway, awaiting the outcoma of the eastern corridor study.

South West sector of Chelson Meadow - retain as a waste management centre.

Chelson Meadow Restored landraise site - create a new recreation and leisure resource for the city to farm part of the country park below.

Saltram House and Country Park - create a new country park focused on the Saltram Estate and linking to others including the Sherford New Community and community park.

Maorcrofi Quarry - redevelopment where the land is no longer required to support mineral extraction.

Hazeldene Quarry - safeguard the extraction of minerals.

Strategic high quality transport links - ensure the provision of high quality sustainable transport infrastructure in the eastern corrid~r to secure a very significantmodal shift, in support of which PCC has commissioned the "Eastern Corridor Study".

Sket-furd (North Elburton) - to accommodate part of the Shehrd new community within the city boundary to the north of Elberrton, including provision for 125 to 210 homes with a mix af house types, at least 30 homes per hectare including 25% mixed tenure aff~rdableand 25% lifetime homes standard. Road links between Sherford and the A379 must also be secured on an appropriate alignment subject to the Eastern Corridor Study and a multi modal transport interchange be located at an appropriate point at the A379 corridor. Also to be included are a sports centrelswimming pssf facility, a variety of community facilities and a landscaped green corridor between the northern limit of Elburtori and southern limit af the Shetford development.

Land to the west of Sherford and north of Hazeldene Quarry -- with potential development to accommodate long term development beyond 2016, subject to ta plan, monitor and manage process. Reference is made to the fixed outer/eastern limit fo the eastern edge of Sherford so that "there is no prosped in the future, of the expansion of the new community further into the sensitive countryside of South Hams". Rather, SheQ-Fordhas been designed to allow potential growth back towards the city which "is regarded in principle as a sustainable and appropriate approach",

20. It is considered that the foilowing response should be made to the North Plymstock AAP :-

a) The vision for Nodh Plyrnstock is supported, particcr!ariy the references to the provision of sustainable infrastructure and a high quality of life which arc? complementary with Sherford.

b) PCC's willing engagement in effective crass boundary planning is welcomed, particularly their commitments ta high quality development, timely provjsion of infrastructure, high quaiity public transport and the coordinated progression of cross boundary strategies.

c) The option for a 1,500 home mixed use master planned development at Plymstock Quarry is supported as a significant contribution to the regeneration of brownfield sites within the city.

d) The mixed use development at Wakehams Quarry is supported, particularly a strategic transport solution for the eastern gateway.

e) In relation to the eastern gateway and the Eastern Corridor Study, PCC are urged to ensure that the principles enshrined in the emerging master plan for Sherford as developed through the Enquiry by Design process are not compromised or undermined.

f) The retention of the south west sector of Chelson Meadow as a waste management centre is supported

g) Enhanced recreation and leisure opportunities at Chelson Meadow and Saltram Country Park are supported and integrate well with the proposed Shetford community park. The BAP should protect the opportunity t~ make strategic open space connections.

h) Mineral extraction at Moorcroft and Wazledene Quarries should be planned so as not to compromise strategic development options in the North Plymstock and Sherford areas.

i) The provision of high quafity sustainable transpori infrastnrcture in the eastern corridor is strongly supported. The Council urges that the work already carried out in the c~ntextof the Sherford Enquiry by Design process is fully integrated into the Eastern Corridor Study and any subsequent work so that the EbD conclusions are not compromised or undermined.

j 1 The allocation of land at Sherford / North Etburton to accommodate part of the Sherford new community within the city boundary is supported, together with the supporting community facilities and particularly the sports centre and swimming pool and green corridor. It should be re-emphasised that a suitable transport salution, providing road links between Sherford and the A379 and a rnutti rnodaf transport interchange at an appropriate location, should be brought forward in a manner which will not compromise or undermine the EbB master plan solution for Sherford.

k) The identification of long term development potential beyond 2016 to the west of Sherford and norlh of Hazeldens Quarry is strongly supported as being fully in line with the EbD solution for Sherford and able to deliver sustainability objectives for the area into the mediumllong term future.

Draft Statement of Community Involvement

27 .The drafi Statement of Community Involvement (SCl) sets out how PCC aims to engage the tacal community with the development of planning policy and the determination of planning applications.

22.Phe document is clear and fairly concise. It follows a similar pattern to the South Hams SCI. Although the methods of community engagement are often different, it is considered that these largely reflect the distinctions between errbanfsuburban and rural communities and that the methods set out are appropriate for the city context. SHBC is included as an organisation to be consulted on the LDF. The SCI should be supported.

Waste Development Plan Document

23.The role ~f the Waste DPD is to support sustainable waste management, by ensuring that development allows for sustainable management of waste and that enough sites am allocated in the plan where waste management processes can operate. The City's Council's vision is for Plymouth to be as self sufficient as possible in managing its waste. The document assumes limited new waste infrastructure development in the shot3 term. Therefore, a substantial amount of waste will be moved outside the city, especially with the closure of Chelson Meadow landfili expected in March 2007. In the long term, the BPD seeks to maximise opportunities for treatment within the plan area.

24. The plan highlights the requirement far PCC to work with neighbouring authorities and the Regional Assembly to ensure that appropriate waste mariagement solutions are found for wastes that need to be managed outside the city. Adequate provision for waste management sites will need to be reflected in regional and sub-regional planning and adjacent waste planning authorities will have to demonstrate that their plans will enabie this.

25. The long term objective for self-sufficient sustainable waste management and the need fo identify a sustainable long term alternative to Chelson Meadow should be supported. However, the Council is concerned that in the short to medium term it will be necessary to move waste out of the city, and should seek fulf engagement with waste! planning authorities in the determination of a satisfactory solution, particularly bearing in mind the sensitivity of much of the South Hams.

Devonpart and Miifbay & Stonehouse Area Action Plans

26. The City Csbtncii has also published Area Action Pians for Devonport, Millbay and Stonehouse. These areas are on the western side of the City, well away from the City boundary with the South Hams and the proposals cantainsd within them have no direct implications for the district.

Risk Assessment

p-.-- --- U-...* - -.- Risk --- Mitigation Inadequate cross boundary co-ordination PCC and SHDC have agreed ta work of plans, strategies and key together informally to produce joined up infrastructure. solutions to cross boundary issues. This is exemplified in the planning approach to Sherford and is continued in the North

Plymstock MP. "* lnadequak waste management / The Council should continue to seek full leading to unsustainab~~evelo~ment in planning for waste and environmental damage in sensitive in the region and sub pats of the South Hams. -- Conclusion

27.The Plymouth tDF documents are a significant step towards putting in place the necessary strategy to deliver the regeneratian and transformation of the city which is aspired to and is referred to in the JSA report: elsewhere an this agenda. The quality credentials enshrined in the Plymouth LDF correspond with those contained in the South Hams LDF and the Sherford MP in particular.

28, Members are recommended to support the broad content of the Plymouth LDF dacurnents subject to some detailed concerns in line with recommended responses and to continue to aim ta work closely with Plymouth to advance coordinated slratcsgies and in particular the sustainable development of S herford.

John Qakes Forward Pfannina Manager

Lee Bray Executive Head of&ommunitv Regeneration 8 September 2005

Background Documents: None I Page 1 of l

i) Western, Nicola (DEVELOPMENT)

From: SIMMONDS, Ross ~Ross.SIMMONDS@engl~sh-heritage.org.uk] Sent: 09 September 2005 1632 TO: [email protected],uk Subject: Plymouth's LDF

Dear Sir Piease find aftached English Heritage's response to Plymouth's Local Development Framework.

English Heritage is subject to the Freedom of Information Act. A11 information held by the organisation will be accessible in response to a Freedom of Information request, unless one of the exen~ptionsin the Act applies. ENGLISH FiERIri7AGE SOUTH WEST REGION

Our ref: WDIP 6039 Planning Policy Manager Your ref: Planning and Regeneration Service Civic Centre Telephone 01 17 975 0692 Plymouth Fax 81 17 Q75 0683 PLI 2EW

Q9 September 2005

Dear Sir

re: Plymouth Local development Framework (LDF), Preferred Options Reports and Draft Statement of Community Involvement

English Heritage welcomes the opportunity to comment an this important process and we have outlined our comments below.

Core Strategy f referred Option 1 and its Key Objectives land 2 both allude to the importance of the historic environment but the wording currently lacks a clarity and is ambiguous on this subject. They should be explicit on the value of the historic importance in the area. Likewise preferred Option 4, under 2 and 3 are also ambiguous in that they wish to enhance the natural and built environment and conserve scarce resources, What elements of this natural and built environment; and which resources are scarce and need to be conserved? We would suggest that in this context it is the historic envkonment that is not only scarce but vital to the development of sustainable eumrnurrities in Plyrnoi~thand sh~uldconsequently be recognised in a much clearer way.

Section 8 - In Def/vering the Qualify City point 5 recagnises the importance of the historic environment and we support this aim. However, it should afso be made clear that there is a national policy of "preserving and where appropriate enhancing" those assets.

Preferred Option 7 & 8 is supported, but should use the term "presen/ing9'in preference to Safeguarding". Furthermore, Options "I 8 only touch upon needing to understand the character of an area. The design policy should be clear about the nature of the historic environment and the role it has in the regeneration of urban areas though the use of methodologies such as characterisation. CABE advice fr~m Making Design Policy Work June 2005 supports the approach of understanding the character of an area and using this as the foundation to develop master plans and regenerate areas.

29 QUEEN SQUARE BRISTOL BSI 4ND Telephone 0117 875 0700 Facsimile OlfT 975 0704 rw.engfish-hen'fage.org, uk Pkse note that English Heritage operates an access to information policy. Correspondence or infonnafion whjcb you send us may thereforeborne publicly svabble ~harac~erisation'as a methodology lies at the heart of a sustainable planning system. It is a process that hetps communities identify and recognise the values it attaches to its immediate env~ronrnent,and can be a critical factor in getting communities to engage in local planning or regeneration issues. In tandem with the work carried out for the rural areas, as part of the Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC) and Landscape Character Assessment (LCA), this information base can seek to identify development apportunities as well ss conserving and enhancing local distinctiveness of the South West.

Existing historic environment statutory controls comprise the designation of individual sites, buildings and monuments. These controls can be viewed as a constraint to development and are not necessarily designed to pravide incentives for new develspment. Characterisation, on the other hand, is an inherently pro-active and flexible tool that can be used to identify management implications as well as opportunities for change and development. This ensures that future development respects the environment whilst not restricting economic or social development.

An exampie of this methodology is the Cornwall and Scilly Urban Survey (CSUS) which sought to investigate and create an information base of urban character assessment for 19 historic towns in Cornwall. This has allowed a framework for sustainable development and economic regeneration within these urban areas,

The Environmental and Natural Resources Engiish Heritage support the key objectives of the LDF highlighted an 18.6. The targets upon which the objectives will be measured, however, need to be considered in much more detail. You may wish to consider a number of the possible indicators below and include a much wider ranging set of indicators so that a groperIy informed picture of baseline conditions for the historic environment can be understood and measured against.

English Heritage's annual series of national and regional repods, 'Heritage Counts: State sf the Historic Environment' [available via vrww.heritagecclunts.ory.uk), includes a suite of indicators for monitoring the extent, size and quality of the assets that comprise the historic environment. As the strategy Is taken forward it would atso seem appropriate to provide a measure of the fikely impact of different policy options on a range of historic assets, i.e. the number, % or area of historic buildings, sites and areas, including locally listed assets, affected, whether in an adverse or beneficial way.

An indicator based on the impact of change on the character and appearance of a conservation area utilising an up to date conservation area appraisal woufd be very useful.

n Number ~f,and percentage (of the total), of Listed Buildings on the register as a Building at Risk

kharackrisritictn is an important way of managing change in the h~stororiclandscape through a systematic and comprehensive idmtiflcation and description of the present historic components of the landscape or townscape, coupled with m assesslnerat of the value of its various par&. This provides a better informed understanding as a starting point from which to consider development proposafs and cm ultimately inform both policy formulation and decision making. Sincc the English HeritageLocal government collaboration on HLC begm. ail &c principles of this approach (and indeed those of the Countryside Agency's programme of Landscape Chmicter Assessment) fiave been endorsed by the European Ltuldscape Convention (ELC). Historic Iandscape Characterisation should dso be carried out and considered as part ofthe exercise.

26 QUEEN SQUARE BRISTOL BS1 4ND Telephone Of l'/ 975 0700 Facsimile 0917 975 070f www.english-heritags.org.uk Please note that Engiish Heritage operates an access lo infornationpolicy. Cormspondencs w informaficnwhich ~DUsend us may themforebecome publkfy avaikMe The average length of time Listed Buildings have been on the Buifding at Risk register Number ~f conservation statements submitted in connection with a listed building application (plus as a percentage of all listed building applications). Percentage of Conservation Areas with an up to date adapted AppraisaVAudit Number of design statements submitted in connection with planning applications (plus as a percentage of ail planning applications). Fixed Point Photography to monitor tandscape change Landscape character and condition assessment - or conservation area appraisals Road sigtl clutter audits A) Number of schemes carried out in Conservation Areas B) Number of schemes that preserve the character of Consewation Areas C) Number of schemes that enhance the character of Conservation Areas Number of schemes where the Historic Environment is appraised as part of the planning and design process. A) Nurnkr of schemes where Historic Environmental issues are identified as part of the planning and design process B) Number of schemes in which historic fabric is re-used or repaired or where historic monuments are restored or conserved

6) Number of schemes which use traditional materials e D) Number of schemes which use street furniture, lighting and fittings designed to enhance or complement the Historic Environment Number of buildings damaged by transport without appropriate mitigation Number of registered iandscapes affected Number of schemes that incur loss and number of schemes that involve mitigation

North Piymstsek Bearing in mind the importance of the historic environment to Plymouth there should be more reference made within the North Plymstock Strategy. Paint 4 of paragraph 9.1 is one of the few references to the historic environment. Moreover the master plan process that is mentioned at point 4 should utilise the characterisation methodology already discussed above. Indeed there has been a rapid characterisation study carried out and completed towards the end of 2004 by Alan Baxter Associates that was commissioned by English Heritage. This work sets the broad context for areas of character across the whole of Plymouth and the Area Action Plan should use the work already carried out and build upon it, to inform the future planning of North Plymstock.

Preferred Option 7 Despite the importance of and the registered park this option and supporting text view these important historic assets very much in terms of the open space. There needs to be a greater understanding and recognition of the importance of this asset if its value and integrity is not to be lost. Access and interpretation of the historic environment for the locai communities and the wider tourism economy is important and indeed core to their future survival. There must, however, be an understanding of the capacity of the environment to absorb change and the ability of the management plan to protect these valuable assets.

29 QUEEN SQUARE BRlSTOL BS14NB Rlephone 01 IT 995 0700 Facsimile 01 l7 975 0701 www.eng1isfihePitage.org. uk Please note that English Herifage operaies an access to informationpolicy. Comspondence or information which you send us may therefore become publicly available Millbay and Stonehouse Area Action Plan On the whole English Heritage feel this is a useful document that provides a good background to the historic significance of Millbay and Stonehouse.

Principle 1 refers to clearly identifiable neighbourhoods that each have there own unique character. Part of this work, as mentioned already, has been undertaken by Alan Baxter Associates This work needs to be built upon, however, so that it can identify and describe the historic components of the townscape, by assessing the value of its various parts. Bearing in mind the work that has been carried out, it is disappointing there is no rationale, explanation or mention of this work in the Area Action Plan. This should be rectified.

We welcome and support the aims identified in Principle 2, and paragraph 8.9 regarding Union Street.

Principle 7 at paragraph 8.21, which seeks to create a locally distinctive neighbourhood should be incorporated into the Preferred Option 40 in the Core Strategy as it is key to the regeneration of this area.

Principle 8 and the paragraphs following it, are all built upon characterisation and understanding the historic environment. This work can be built upon and could form the basis for design codes foltowing a solid understanding of the historic character af the area that in turn can offer development opportunities.

Section 9 the Preferred Development Options Vision should identify and conserve key buildings of historic townscape importance. Again the historic environment is key to developing and regenerating Millbay and Stonehouse and curiously it is recognised elsewhere in the document, for exampie at paragraph 9.14. It is therefore appropriate and consistent with the text to incfude and be explicit within the principle, the aim of identifying and conserving key buildings of historic townscape importance

Preferred Option 13 and the following paragraphs are wetcorned as is the reference to the rapid Urban Character Study of Pfymotath and the commitment that this work will be developed. This study should not only be used as a toot contributing to the consewation area review but should, more: importantly, be integral to the development of this Area Action Plan and any development opportunities that are derived from it.

Oevonport Area Action Plan The Dewonport Area Action Plan is interesting as it is dealing with one of the oldest: parts of PIymoktth with extensive historical military connections. The document continually t~uchesupon the historical links but curiously is not explicit that it is the historic environment if is referring to. The historic environment is therefore a dominant part of the area and heritage led regeneration is undoubtedly core to its devetopment. It should therefore be explicit in 7.2 that the re-creation of Devonport is dependant upon knowing and understanding what those historic assets are and how they fit into the regeneration and bring about focally distinctive phws in Devonport.

Paragraph 8.10 is the exception that recognises the inherent importance of the historic environment to the fabric and character of Devanport and that these should form the context for the regeneration opportunities. Bearing this in mind it is sensibfe to enshrine in Principle 3 that Devonport's "distinctive character and identity" is derived from its historic environment. Explicit reference should be made to the historic environment.

Preferred Option 1 - South Yard Enclave. We support the idea of the development review and that development should provide for the reuse of historic buildings and an understanding of the historic street patterns in helping to fbm the new streetscape (as identified In the second round 05 bullet points, 4 & 2, on page 1l). This process should nonetheless come out of an accountable characterisation process for the entire Devonporf Area. Indeed, building upon the rapid Urban Character Study of Ptymouth that has already been undertaken,

Draft Statement of Community lnvofvernent Under the Town and Country Planning (Local Development) Regulations 2004, Erigiish Heritage is not specified as an authority that the Council must consult: with on the pr-eparation of a draft SCI [Regulation 25 (2)) However, as a statutory consultation body at other stages in the preparation of Development Plan Documents, as well certain planning applications, we welcome the opportunity to make general comments on the SCI.

In view of our remit, outlined below are a set of general principles which we suggest are reflected in the $Cl.

Envimnmenhi Quality in Spatial Planning: Incorporating the natural, built and historic environment and rural issues in plans and strategies: Guidance to help in preparation of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks was published in June 2005 jointly by the Environment Agency, Countryside Agency, English Nature, and English Heritage. Planning authorities are urged to contact the agencies as early as possible in the plan making process, including sending a copy of the Council's Local Development Scheme to help inform our involvement and use of resources- The guidance also strongly endorses the value of wider community engagement in the planning process. With regard to this wider engagement, the statutory and non governmental organisations within the heritage sector that the agencies recommend are included in the planning process are: CABE, Ancient Monuments Society, Council far British Archaeoiogy, Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, The Georgian Group, The Victorian Society, The Twentieth Century Society, Garden History Society, The National Trust, Local CividAmenity Society, Local Building Preservation Trust, Local Archaeological and Antiquarian Societies, and iocal history societies.

Planning and Development in the Historic Environment - A Chatter for English Heritage Advisory Services (second edition, Aprii 2005): This document, copy enclosed and atso available on our website ~~~~ert_gll~ heritaae,arg.uk sets out English Heritage's advisory services for planning and development. It details the circumstances where we must be consulted upon planning applications affecting the historic environment, and the type of information required for consultations with English Heritage on proposals affecting nationally important heritage assets. It also underlines the value and importance of pre-application discussions with us on proposals with the potential for major change or damage to nationally important heritage assets. The principles set out in this charter should inform the Council's consultation approach to significant planning appfications. Als~attached is a copy of Appticafions Requiring Nafificafbn fo English Herifage for your information.

29 QUEEN SQUARE BRISTOL BSI 4ND Teiephone 0117 975 0700 Facsimile 0117 975 0301 www.engfish-heritap'org.uk Please note that English I-leritage operates an access to information policy. Correspondence or hfonnatisn which you send us may therefore become pubiicly svailabfe Paper-based consultation - We would be grateful if you could continue to send any correspondence and documents relating to the Local Development Framework or SPD to our South West Region office, for the attention of the Regional Planner. We would ask that consultations are sent in hard copy to ensure that we can engage fully in the process.

Sustainability Appraisal - Whilst English Heritage is a statutory consultee for SEA, we do not have the capacity to attend SWSA workshops. If it is proposed to hold such an event, you should ensure that your Conservation Officer and a representative from the County Council's archaeofogical sentice is invited ta attend to advise on any issues relating to the historic environment. We will, of course, respond to correspondence relating to SEA at the appropriate stages.

Community Plan - Because of the link between the Community Plan and the new planning system, we would like to receive a copy of any future draft revised document. Your Council will have received a copy of our recent position statement on Local Strategic Partnerships and the Histark Envimnment which includes a checklist for Local Strategic Partnerships. It is important that historic environment interests are properly represented on the LSP and Community Plan.

Consultation address database - all consultations should be made through our regional office, address belaw. You may remove any other addresses for English Heritage or the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England from your database.

Regarding the Strategic EnvironmentaMSustainabilityAppraisal, we have already commented once in this process and resources dictate that we are unable to comment further at this time. However, as a statutory consultee we will continue to be engaged later in the process.

Yours Faithfufly

ROSSSimmonds Regional Land Use Planner E-mail: [email protected]

29 QUEEN SQUARE BRISTOL BSI 4ND Telephone 0117 995 0700 Facsimile Of 17 995 0701 www.engfish-heritage. ong. uk .P/easenote that English Heritage operates an access to information poky. Correspondence Dr infornationwhich you send us may therefm become pubficly available ITEM

Executive - 8 September 2005

PLYMOUTH LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWOR

Report of the Head of Community Regeneration .

Statutory Powers: Town and Country Planning Act 1890 and the plirmin@hnd ' Compulsory Purchase AC~2004 l

Financial Implications: None

Purpose: Tn bring to Members' attention the fatest documents published by Plymouth City Council (PCC) as part of the Plymouth Local Development Framework (LDF), particularly those with cross boundary implications, and to seek Member support for the recommended response.

Links to Council Priorities - the documents link to all Council priorities, but @ particularly CP1 (affordable homes). CP2 (good jobs) and CP3 (maintain the distrid's charact~r).

Recommendations

That the Executive RESOLVES that the recommended responses to the Plymouth Local Development Framework set out in this report be endorsed.

BackgroundJThe Issues

1. Plymouth City Council (PCC) have recently published several documents which will form part of the Plymouth Local Development Framework (LDF). The programme for the Plymouth LDF is dosely in step with that for the South Hams and the recently pubiished Plymouth documents largely mirror those published by for South Hams in late June this year. In view of the significance of cross @ boundary issues both authorities have been working to achieve a joined up approach not only to key strategic issues but also to matters of detail.

2. The documents published by PCC (all at '*preferredoptions" stage apart from the draft Statement of Community Involvement) include:

9 Core Strategy North Ptyrnstock Area Action Plan

0 Devunport Area Acti~nPlan e Mitlbay and Stonehouse Area Action Plan Waste Development Plan Document Draft Statement of Community Involvement

3. The documents can be viewed at http://w.pl~mouth.~~~.~k~h~mepa~e/v~~r~o~n~i~/en~ir~nmentl~Iannin~/~Ian~~~ nspolicvlldfl~referredo~tions.htmand a hard copy is also available for inspection in the Foward Planning office. Responses are required by September. Core Strategy

Vision

4. The Core Strategy sets out the aspiration for Pfyrnouth to become one af the finest cities in Europe and that, to affirm its role as the leading city of the far south west, Plymouth must be af significant critical mass. The emerging Regional Spatial Strategy highlights the city as one of a small number of centres with the potential to accommodate higher rates of growth.

5. The Devon Structure Plan context to 2016 provides for the population of the Plymouth Principal Urban Area (PM) to grow by about 20,000 people, including the Structure Plan proposals far 4,500 new dweltings and 80 hectares of employment land in the South Hams part of the PUA. The emerging Regional Spatial Strategy suggests that, based on recent trends, that the PUA could grow by 46,600people by 2026,so that its population would approach 300,000. The Mackay Vision for Plymouth sees the long-term creation of a city with a population between 300,000- 350,000.

6. f-iousing development linked to population growth is therefore a key aspect of the Core Strategy. There will also be focussed growth of the city's economy and its rote as a sewice and commercial centre will also be developed. The prosperity and vitality of the city is important to the South Hams, and the vision for the city's future shoufd be supported.

Housing

7. The key ~bjectiveis to ensure that all Plymouth residents have access to a decent and safe home within a quaiity living environment. Progress towards achieving this objective wiil be measured against a set of targets:

r Provision of 10,000 homes in Plymouth 2001-?6 25% of new housing will be affordable At deas"cQ% of new homes to be provided on previously devefoped land e At laast 20% of new housing at lifetime homes standards; and At least 30 dwellings per hectare as the average net density

8. Reference is also made in the preferred options to starting to make longer term provision for a potential population Increase of 29,200 to 46,600 far the period 206f-2026. This would require 26,500 to 34,500 new homes in the PUA.

9. The Councif has worked closely with PCC on housing needs and provisions, especially in refation to Sh~trford.The South Hams LDF sets high targets far affordable housing provision, including 50% at Sherford, and it is disappointing that Plymouth's Core Strategy has a comparatively low target of 25% affordable housing.

10. In relation to the Piymouth PUA dwelting provision shown in Diagram l, the section of the table listing potential sites in South Hams should include 4,000 units for Sherford new community and 500 units for the South Hams part of the PUA rather than 4,500 for Sherford. Specific reference to Newnharn as the location of the 500 units in the South Hams part of the PUB should be removed. The specific location for these dwellings wilt be determined through the South Wams LDF process which is still ongoing. The total provision af 4,500for the South Wams part of the PUA is to be accommodated in the period 2001 -2016. The diagram shows provision beyond 2016 for this area. PC6 are aware of these errors and the table should be amended accordingly.

Employment

"I -The LDF has the strategic objective of using employment land and premises effectively and efficiently in order to promote sustainabte economic growth. This will be measured against two targets:

Provision of 80 hectares of employment land within the city by 2016, and A net increase in the number of employees by 600 pa and the number of businesses by 40 pa.

12,The employment objectives and targets of the Core Strategy should be supported as helping to support the mgeneration of the city and sub region.

Transportation

"1. Reference is made to the importance of improving the city's links with the south west region and beyond and also with the surrounding hinterland. The city is m working with its neighbouring authorities to provide integrated infrastructure, including:

New park and ride interchanges in Caradan and the South Hams - providing links to key ernpfoyment and commercial destinations Developing and extending the local rail links into the city, and e Extending the city's high quality public transport network to nearby towns

f 4. The transport elements of the Core Strategy should be supported, but with the caveats set out in relation to the North Plymstock AAP below, particularly that the Eastern Corridor Study should not compromise or undermine the work carried out in relation to Sherford.

Minerals

15.The issues deait with in this section of the Core Strategy are covered in the a context of the North Plyrnstock Area Action Pfan below.

North Plyrnstock Area Action Plan (AAP)

16.4"hi.s document covers the eastern corridor of Plymouth, between Plymstock and Pfyrnpton, which is an area which will be subject to significant change in coming years. Its future links ciosely to the development of the new community at Sherford and the MPembraces the principles which have emerged through the Sherfurd Enquiry by Design process, particularly that future development should extend westwards from Sherford back in towards Plymouth.

17.The Nopth Ptymstock MPmakes reference to the Sherford AA$ published by this Council in June and the importance of coordinated, complementary planning and delivery of development. Together the AAPs provide a framework to guide the form and content of development and provision of infrastwcture which is vital to support successful and sustainable communities.

18.Tke AAP establishes its vision as the creation of a new high quality and distinctive urban district including a sustainable new neighbourhood, well related to the new community at Sherford, the existing urban fabric and the city centre. Reference is made to major new sustainable infrastructure, a high quality public transport system and the facilities required to support a high quality of life The MPstrategy is based on a range of development principles consistent with the principles which underpin the South Hams LDF and the Sherford MPin particular. Its broad content and principles should be supported.

19.The AAP lists preferred development options for 12 locations/topics, as follows:-

Plymstack Quarry - a new neighbourhood of Plymouth subject ta a comprehensive master plan and providing about 1,500 homes, including 25% mixed tenure affordable and 20% lifetime home standard. A mixed use approach will include employment, retail, entertainment, commercial, education and health facilities.

Pornphlett Industrial Estate - to be integrated with the master plan for PIymstock Quarry.

Billacornbe Green - retained as an area of public open space.

Wakehams Quarry (river frontage) - mixed use redevelopment including provision for strategic transport solutions for the gateway, awaiting the outcome of the eastern corridor study.

South West sector of Chefson Meadow - retain as a waste management centre.

Chelson Meadow Restored landraise site - create a new recreation and leisure resource for the city to form part of the country park below.

Saltram House and Country Park - create a new country park focused on the Saltram Estate and linking to others including the Sherford New Community and community park.

Moorcroft Quarry - redevelopment where the land is no longer required to support mineral extraction.

Hazeidene Quarry - safeguard the extraction of minerals. Strategic high quality transport links - ensure the provision of high quality sustainable transport infrastructure in the eastern corridor to secure a very significant modal' shift, in support of which PCC has commissioned the "Eastern Corridor Study"-

Sherford (North Elburton) - to accommodate part of the Sher7st-d new community within the city boundary to the north of Elburton, including provision for 125 to 220 homes with a mix of house types, at least 30 homes per hectare including 25% mixed tenure affordable and 25% lifetime homes standard. Road links between Sherford and the A379 must also be secured an an appropriate alignment subject to the Eastern Corridor Study and a multi modal transport interchange be located at an appropriate point at the A379 corridor-. Also to be included are a sports centrelswimming pooi facility, a variety of community facilities and a landscaped green corridor between the northern limit of Elburton and southern limit of the Shetford devefopment.

12, land to the west of Sherford and nolth of Hazeldene Quarry ---- with potential development to accommodate long term development beyond 2016, subject to a plan, monitor and manage process. Reference is made to the fixed outerleastern limit to the eastern edge of Sherford so that "there is no prospsct in the future, of the expansion of the new community further into the sensitive countryside of South Hams". Rather, Sherbrd has been designed to allow potential growth back towards the city which "is regarded in principle as a sustainable and appropriate approach".

28.It is considered that the folfowing response should be made to the North Plymstock AAP :-

a) The vision for North Plyrnstock is ~~pp~ded,partic~llarjy the references to the provision of sustainable infrastructure and a high quality of life which are complementary with Sherford.

b) PCC's willing engagement in effective cross boundary planning is welcomed, particularly their commitments to high quality development, timely provision of infrastructure, high quality public transport and the coordinated progression of cross boundary strategies.

c) The option for a 1,500 home mixed use master planned development at Plyrnstock Quarry is supported as a significant contribution to the regeneration of brownfield sites within the city.

d) The mixed use development at Wakehams Quarry is slapparted, particularly a strategic transport solution for the eastern gateway.

e) In relation to the eastern gateway and the Eastern Corridor Study, PCC are urged to ensure that the principles enshrined in the emerging master plan for Shelrford as devebped through the Enquiry by Design process are not cornprcrmised or undermined.

Q "Pe retention of the south west sector of Chelson Meadow as a waste management centre is supported

g) Enhanced recreation and leisure opportunities at Chelsan Meadow and Saltram Country Park are supported and integrate well with the proposed Sherford community park. The AAP should protect the opportunity to make strategic open space connections.

h) Mineral extraction at Mosreruft and Hazledene Quarries should be planned so as not to compromise strategic development options in the North Plymstock and Sherford areas.

i) The provision of high quality sustainable transport infrastructure in the eastern corridor is strongly supported. The Council urges that the work already carried out in the context of the Sherford Enquiry by Design process is fully integrated into the Eastern Corridor Study and any subsequent work so that the EbD conclusions are not compromised or undermined.

j) The allocation of land at Sherf'ord / North Elburton to accommodate part of the Sherford new community within the city boundary is supported, together with the supporting community facilities and particularly the sports centre and swimming pool and green corridor. It should be re-emphasised that a suitable transport: solution, providing road links between Shsrford and the A379 and a rnuki modal transport interchange at an appropriate location, shauld be brought forward in a manner which will not compromise or undermine the EbB master plan solution for Shetford.

k) The identification of long term development potential beyond 2016 to the west of Shefiord and north of Wazeidene Quarry is strongly supported as being fully in line with the EbD solution for Skerford and able to deliver sustainability objectives f~rthe area into the rnedium/long term future. Draft Statement of Community Involvement 0 21 .The draft Statement of Community involvement (SCI) sets out how $CC aims to engage the local community with the development of planning policy and the determination of planning applications.

22. The document is clear and fairly concise. It follows a similar pattern to the South llarns SCI. Although the methods of community engagement are often different, it is considered that these iargely reflect the distinctions between urbanlsubuhan and rural communities and that the methods set out are appropriate for the city context. SHBC is included as an organisation to toe consulted an the LDF.The SCI shrrufd be supported.

Waste Development Plan Document

23.The role of the Waste DPD is to support sustainable waste management, by ensuring that development allows far sustainable management of waste and that enough sites are allocated in the plan where waste management processes can operate. The City's Council's vision is for Plymouth to be as self sufficient as possible In managing its waste. The document assumes limited new waste infrastructure development in the short term. Therefore, a substantial amount of waste will be moved outside the city, especiaily with the closure of Chelson Meadow landfifl expected in March 2007. In the long tern, the OPT) seeks to maximise opportunities for treatment within the plan area.

24. The plan highlights the requirement for PCC to work with neighbouring authorities and the Regional Assembly to ensure that appropriate waste management solutions are found for wastes that need to be managed outside the city. Adequate provision far waste management sites wilt need to be reflected in regional and sub-regional planning and adjacent waste planning authorities will have to demonstrate that their plans will enable this.

25. The long term objective for self-sufficient sustainabfe waste management and the need to identify a sustainable long term alternative to Chelson Meadow should be supported. However, the Council is concerned that in the short to medium term it will be necessary to move waste out of the city, and should seek full engagement with waste planning authorities in the determination of a satisfactory solution, particularly bearing in mind the sensitivity of much of the South Hams.

Devanpart and Millbay & Stonehouse Area Action Plans

26. The City Ccztancit has also published Area Action Plans for Devonport, Millbay and Stonehouse. These areas are on the western side of the City, well away from the City boundary with the South Hams and the proposals contained within them have no direct implications for the district.

Risk Assessment

Risk Mitigationh --.- cross boundary co-ordination PCC and SHDC have agreed to work of plans, strategies and key together informally to produce joined up infrastructure. solutions to cross boundary issues. This is exemplified in the planning approach i to Sherfard and is continued in the North / Plymstack AAP. Inadequate waste management solutions I The Council should continue to seek full leading to unsustainable~de~elo~ment engagement in planning for waste and environmental damage in sensitive management in the region and sub p@s of the South Hams. region . I Conclusion

27.7% Plymouth LDF documents are a significant step towards putting in place the necessary strategy to deliver the regeneration and transformation of the city which is aspired to and is referred to in the JSA report elsewhere on this agenda. The quaiity credentials enshrined in the Plymouth LDF correspond with those contained in the South Hams LDF and the Sherford AAP in particular.

28. Members are recommended to support the broad content of the Plymouth LDF documents subject to some detailed concerns in line with recommended responses and to continue to aim to work closely with Plymouth to advance coordinated strategies and in particular the sustainable development of Sherford.

John Qakes ---".Forward Pfanninq Manaqer

Lee Bray Executive Head of~ommunitv Regeneration 8 September 2005

Background Documents: None Draft Statement of Community lnvolvernent Local Development Framework Consultation

Plymouth City Council will only use the information provided for the purpose d preparing the Local Development Framework, Please note that a copy of your response will be placed an a public register and cannot therefore be treated as confidential. I Questionnaires without a name and address cannot be included 'in this consultation. All questionnaires must be returnad by Spm, Friday 9th Sepbrnber 2005 to:

Policy Planning Manager Pianniny & Regeneration Services Plymouth City Council Civic Centre, Plymouth P11 2EW

I Alternatively, please return the questionnaire to Civic Centre reception or any library

I Pkme sntar your name and addrarr below: Plesss enter your agent's details [if applicable)

The soundness of the draft Statement of Community involvement is measured against a number of criteria listed overleaf. Source: Planning Inspectorate, LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FMMEWORKS: ASSESSING THE SOUNDNESS OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Feb 2005 (Consultation document)

Please indicate your level of agreement (Ito 5) to the extent to which the criteria have been met by putting an X in the one box which best matches your opinion.

Gar~lplstionof free text boxes is optional but offers the opportunity for you to give more detail if you do not agree that the criteria have been met, to suggest any changes to the draft SCI and to be involved in further consuitations. If you require more space, please continue on a separate sheet indicating the criteria number to which you refer.

Do not forget to fill in your Dame and address above before turning over 'lease mark the appropriate box with a cross l23 or fill in as required Your Ievei of agreemen%%ha% the * crit~riahiam been met in this

1 = Strongly agree 3 = Neither qree nor disagree S = Strongly disagree consultation sl 2 Agree 4 = Disagree Poytive-Nqative...... - ......

how the City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for consultation -L - - -- . .-- - - 66; the City Council's sfratogy for community involvement in the planning OlJOCII 2. mocess links with other communitv involvement initiatives e.g. the City Strategy (in general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be consulfed --- how the community and orhcr bodies can be in&ved in Grnely and Gessible L] r~ U rx 4 manner.. .. .- U-.-----...... suitable methods c-zf co wunuu 5. for the different stages p-. - how the City Council intends to sot out, resource and manage community maoilr~e 6. involv@menteffactivefv how the resufts of community involvement will be fed rnto the preparation of UUOCl 7

developmen%- -.plan -- documents- and supplementary- . -- - plannmg--p- documents -- mechankms fur rwiewing the statement of community involvement: GJDCID

clearly the planning authority's palicy for consultation on planning applications E3ElCaQ

Yes MO

planning issues in your particular neighbourhood D f3 13

planning issues city wide 0 14

'fhank you Par sornpieting Rhis questionnaire Plementer your Ha&talk (W dppiialoira) We m &mly cclnwmd PhZ t&mis w+thingwithin )he LClF abut Zhs on MW ebwnity of the $till incmsiq rurmhrs (PP$Wknh ~WeMdiy ?h u~tjmity BP &mouth. 7% uniwmiYs ckaswbr af kks:Mpc and ifs prop9af to G~SEfa all^ &$!agemat kiw mrried fwmrd wi$.hou+any com~rl8al.ianwkth comnitlsr wkhas? the wority sP tb,irP&Pa cetediq the univessigr.

Pm &emhnk $ham is alrmdy OM a$ the high& $ewi9ies of pop~hionin the cily of Plyracaar.Eh and *t PkciPy To inc~ecmthis even further, Among* the e6d@ttci$.b$ rqm~P$ W& fid the 2@33 hick kkwvrffldrqx~6-y fw 7,W &eJti* "..,. . Am4 ~(aPb.4: W .,. This is cblymt the case.

Chair Treasurer %a&uy L F- P IiWctms l Gould 5 &w&n Place 37 Kk:,aents Cmfl E 5 ha&StW PL4 8FIA PIA 8BD PM $LT 6W1S local development framework

Statement of Community Involvement

Preferred Options Consultation - July 2005 - Summary Report

1. Introduction

1.1 The Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) sets out the Council’s strategy for involving the community in the preparation and revision of Plymouth’s Local Development Framework, as well as in the consideration of planning applications. Its intention is to improve the planning process by ensuring everyone’s views are taken into account.

1.2 The requirements for the preparation and adoption of the SCI are set out in the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Order Act 2004, and its associated regulations. When adopted, the SCI will have the status of a Development Plan Document within the new Plymouth Local Development Framework.

1.3 Plymouth’s SCI has been prepared over an extended period of time, enabling a wide range of views to be incorporated. This has included:

• Publishing an initial draft SCI in July 2004 to start the engagement process to develop this document. • A more formal consultation stage, during the LDF Issues/Options consultation period of March /April 2005, when the SCI was advertised for public comment. (There was only one formal comment at this stage, requesting to be identified as a non-statutory consultee in relation to the SCI. The respondent has been included on the LDF consultations list.)

1 local development framework

• Establishing a Task Group to advise the City Council on its SCI preparation. This task group was made up of representatives from community partnerships, as well as representatives from ‘hard to reach groups’. It met 9 times during the period Feb.2004 – Aug. 2005 • The most recent Preferred Options consultation stage during July / September 2005. This involved publishing a revised draft SCI, as a basis for formal public consultation. The revised document reflected the comments received during the preparation stage, as well as changes to reflect the latest government guidance and emerging best practise. As part of this consultation process a consultation event was held specifically to establish the views of ‘hard to reach groups’.

1.4 This report brings together the responses made during this latest consultation stage from 29th July 2005 to 9th September 2005. It provides both a quantitative and qualitative summary of the main issues raised, and goes on to explain how these matters have been addressed in the final submission document.

2 local development framework

2. Plymouth’s context (section 2)

2.1 The draft SCI was generally well received at the Preferred Options stage, although some concerns were raised. All respondents were asked, through a structured questionnaire, to express a view as to whether the draft SCI was soundly based (i.e. whether it met the government’s nine ‘tests of soundness’), as well as to make further comments on the content of the SCI.

2.2 From a total of 39 responses from organisations and individuals, (of which 24 answered the questionnaire), there were more than twice as many supports than concerns raised, in a general ratio of 2.5 supports to every one concern raised.

2.3 Of the respondents who chose to express an opinion as to whether the SCI either met, or did not meet one or more of the government’s ‘Tests of Soundness’ - on average, most respondents were satisfied that the draft SCI met the government’s nine ‘tests of soundness’. In general 30%– 40% of the responses were satisfied, compared to the 10% - 20% of responses which queried whether it met one or more of the ‘tests of soundness’.

2.4 However, about half the respondents chose not to express a view one way or the other as to whether the SCI met a particular ‘test of soundness’. These respondents either selected the ‘neither agree nor disagree’ option or chose not to express an opinion, but decided to simply inform us about a matter they wish to be considered in revising the draft SCI.

3 local development framework

3. PO1 - Planning Policy Context

3.1 Table 1 sets out how the respondents scored the SCI, from 1-5 (strongly agree to strongly disagree) in relation to each of the nine questions, (based on the governments ‘tests of soundness’ outlined in Planning Policy Statement 12). These results are shown in Figure 1, given as a percentage.

3.2 When considering the results shown in Table 1 it should be noted that:-

• The middle columns (3a & b) include respondents who scored the SCI as (3a - neither agreeing nor disagreeing), and in column (3b) those respondents who did not complete this question on the response form (some 36% of the responses). This approach provides an overall (i.e. 100%) indication of everyone’s views. • The figures shown in bold under each row provide a combined total for columns 1 and 2 (agree and strongly agree), a total for columns 3a and 3b (nil or no response), and total for columns 4 and 5 (disagree and strongly disagree).

3.3 Appendix 2 (at end of this document) provides a more detailed summary table setting out the actual number of responses, as well as percentage responses.

4 local development framework

Table 1 % Responses to the government’s ‘test of soundness’ questions.

The government’s eight 1. 2. 3a. 3b. 4. 5.

‘Tests of Soundness’. strongly agree neither Nil disagree Strongly agree agree response disagree (These questions are set out in the nor Government’s Planning Policy disagree Statement12, and amplified in supporting guidance.)

1. Has complied with minimum 11% 28% 11% 36% 6% 8% requirements for consultation as set out by Regulations

Combined totals 39% 47% 14%

2. Strategy for community 6% 25% 19% 36% 3% 11% involvement links with other community involvement initiatives

Combined totals 31% 56% 14%

3. Identifies in general terms 11% 22% 17% 33% 6% 11% which local community groups and other bodies will be consulted

Combined totals 33% 50% 17%

4. Identifies how the community 22% 11% 17% 33% 8% 8% and other bodies can be involved in a timely and accessible manner

Combined totals 33% 50% 16%

5. Identifies methods of 19% 11% 17% 36% 11% 6% consultation to be employed are suitable for the intended audience and for the different stages in the preparation of LDD’s

Combined totals 30% 53% 17%

5 local development framework

The government’s eight 1. 2. 3a. 3b. 4. 5.

‘Tests of Soundness’. strongly agree neither Nil disagree Strongly agree agree response disagree (These questions are set out in the nor Government’s Planning Policy disagree Statement12, and amplified in supporting guidance.)

6. Identifies resources are 3% 31% 11% 36% 11% 8% available to manage community involvement effectively

Combined totals 43% 47% 19%

7. Identifies how the results of 6% 28% 17% 39% 6% 6% community involvement will be fed into the preparation of DPD’s and SPD’s

Combined totals 34% 56% 12%

8. Identifies mechanisms for 6% 33% 14% 39% 6% 3% reviewing the SCI

Combined totals 39% 53% 9%

9. Clearly describes the policy for 14% 28% 8% 39% 3% 8% consultation on planning applications

Combined totals 42% 47% 11%

6 local development framework

Figure 1

3.4 This diagram gives a visual representation of the responses gained from the 9 questions asked regarding the soundness of the Draft SCI. It should be noted that the data for those respondents that did not express an opinion one way or the other (i.e. nil or no response) has been excluded. This is to allow a direct comparison between the level of agreement (in green), compared to disagreement (in red), as to whether the draft SCI met each of the government’s nine ‘test of soundness’.

Statement of Community Involvement Preferred Options Consultation

Agree Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly disagree

50%

40%

30%

20%

10% % of Respondents of %

0%

-10%

-20%

-30%

Question No. 1 Question No. 2 Question No. 3 Question No. 4 Question No. 5 Question No. 6 Question No. 7 Question No. 8 Question No. 9

7 local development framework

4. Summary of Main Issues raised in Draft SCI consultation

4.1 In addition to the nine structured questions to establish the level of agreement as to whether the draft SCI met the government’s ‘tests of soundness’, respondents were also given the opportunity to explain, in their own words:

• why they felt that the draft SCI did not meet a specific test of soundness • what other changes they felt should be made to the draft SCI.

4.2 The following sections consider the comments made in relation to these two questions, and explain how the Council has addressed these matters in the Submitted SCI. (A summary of the individual comments made, together with the Council’s response, is provided in Appendix 1 to this report.)

4.3 In addition to the issues raised through this consultation process, a separate consultation was undertaken by Corporate Diagnostics, on behalf of the Council, to establish the views of the ‘hard to reach groups’. The outcomes from this are set out in a separate report, annexed as Appendix 2 to this report.

8 local development framework

Matters relating to the ‘Test of Soundness’

4.4 When the SCI is submitted to the Secretary of State, there will be a further six week period during which anyone can make representations about the document. These representations will be considered by an independent Planning Inspector, whose judgement will be binding on all parties. A critical question that the inspector will consider, is whether the draft SCI is soundly based (i.e. whether it meets the government’s nine ‘tests of soundness’).

4.5 In anticipation of this question, the draft SCI response form asked respondents – if they were commenting that they felt the document did not meet one of the government’s tests of soundness, to explain why. The following analysis considers the issues raised from this question, and explains how the matter has been addressed in the revised SCI now being submitted to the Secretary of State.

Question 1. - 14 respondents agreed that the draft SCI has complied with minimum requirements for consultation as set out by

Regulations, while only 5 disagreed.

4.6 While the majority agree that the draft SCI met minimum consultation requirements, specific concerns related to:

• lack of information to be able to judge whether the government’s criteria have been met • failure to comply with minimum government guidance. (From further feedback on this response it would seem that the concern is mainly directed towards the question of advertising planning applications. However, the respondent may have other more general concerns.)

9 local development framework

• lack of evidence that consultations have been undertaken with the consultees on Lists A, B, & C. e.g. the Plymstock Local Agenda 21 group has not been consulted • the short consultation timescales • failure to make the SCI specific enough to Plymouth – needs to be targeted more at specific groups

4.7 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• Appendix 4 of the submitted SCI clarifies and explains how the document complies with the government’s nine tests of soundness • The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on how it has complied with the minimum requirements for consultation. This is now explained in the following: Part 1 para.2.9; Part 2 para.2.17-2.18 Part 4 para.6.2 • The Council is required to consult for a statutory six week period. However, the council, in paragraph 4.24 of the SCI, now undertakes to make draft documents available as early as possible in advance of the statutory consultation period, so as to promote genuine community engagement • The list of who the Council will consult is set out in Part 4 paragraphs 6.13-6.14. Paragraph 6.14 confirms this list is not prescriptive and allows for the consultee database to be updated as new bodies or individuals identify themselves.

Question 2 - 11 respondents agreed that the draft SCI strategy for community involvement links with other community involvement initiatives, while only 5 disagreed.

10 local development framework

4.8 While the majority agree that the draft SCI links with other community strategies, specific concerns related to:

• the wording of the government’s ‘test of soundness’– i.e. the SCI is supposed to govern, not link community involvement • the lack of a requirement that the SCI applies to all Council departments • related documents not easily available - e.g. Community Strategy etc

4.9 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on how it links to other initiatives. This is now explained in the following: Part 1 para.2.12-2.14; Part 2 para.4.8-4.12. • The Council’s commitment to joining up consultation with other strategic initiatives is defined in key principle 2 and explained in paragraph 2.12. How this will be achieved is now explained in paragraph 2.13-2.14, in terms of complying with the Council’s Consultation & Participation Strategy 2004, as well as meeting the shared principles set out in the Plymouth Compact (reproduced in Appendix 1 to the SCI). • Plymouth’s Community Strategy & Corporate Strategy are corporately published documents. To assist ease of access it is intended to provide links to these documents on the Council’s LDF website.

11 local development framework

Question 3 - 12 respondents agreed that the draft SCI identifies in general terms which local community groups and other bodies will be consulted, while only 6 disagreed.

4.10 While the majority agree that the draft SCI identifies who should be consulted, specific concerns related to:

• concerns that community groups do not always represent the views of the wider community • the low level of turnout at the West Hoe meeting • a request by Urban Splash to be identified as a non statutory consultee • Plymstock community groups not participating in the SCI task group

4.11 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on who and when people will be consulted. This is now explained in the following: Part 1 para.2.15-2.16, para.4.8-4.25; Part 4 para.6.12-6.13. • The relatively low level of turnout at the West Hoe consultation event has been noted. While the general approach to advertising was the same for all events, the question of alternative approaches for this venue will be considered in the future consultation events • It is confirmed that Urban Splash had already been included in the consultation database – arising from their early request at the issues /Options stage.

12 local development framework

• Requests for volunteers for the SCI task group was specifically made at the launch of the LDF (Issues /Options stage), where a wide range of interests were represented. The number and range of volunteers that came forward at that stage were considered appropriate to forming the task group, and subsequently proved very helpful in developing the document.

Question 4. - 12 respondents agreed that the draft SCI identifies how

the community and other bodies can be involved in a timely and

accessible manner, while only 6 disagreed.

4.12 While the majority agree that the draft SCI identifies how people can get involved, specific concerns related to:

• the need for longer lead in times and more publicity for consultation periods • the need for greater publicity on progress made & explaining the current position • concern that there is very little agreement between community groups • the two community consultation meetings in Plymstock were considered inadequate • the low level of turnout at the West Hoe meeting • a request to identify the need for a master plan for Royal William Yard

13 local development framework

4.13 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on who and when people will be consulted. This is now explained in the following: Part 1 para.2.10-2.11; Part 2 para.4.1-4.25 Part 4 para.6.14. • Paragraph 4.24 of the SCI, now undertakes to make draft documents available as early as possible in advance of the statutory consultation period, so as to promote genuine community engagement • The Council already provides progress reports through press releases, but it is intended to address the question of keeping everyone up to date with progress through enhancements to the Council’s LDF Website.

Question 5. - 11 respondents agreed that the draft SCI identifies methods of consultation to be employed are suitable for the intended audience and for the different stages in the preparation of LDD’s,

while only 6 disagreed.

4.14 While the majority agree that the draft SCI identifies suitable methods of consultation, specific concerns related to:

• the need to make the SCI more understandable – i.e. Plain English. • the method of engagement table is confusing • concern that no electronic response form was available for the SCI • the need for a greater level of community engagement

14 local development framework

4.15 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on the different methods of consultation to be adopted. This is now explained in the following: Part 1 para.2.17-2.18; Part 4 para.4.1-4.25. • The Methods of Engagement table at paragraph 4.25 has been clarified and improved, while still meeting government guidance as to it contents • The question of improving the LDF’s electronic representation form is being addressed.

Question 6 - 12 respondents agreed that the draft SCI identifies resources are available to manage community involvement effectively, while only 7 disagreed.

4.16 While the majority agree that the draft SCI adequately identifies resources for effective community engagement, specific concerns related to:

• concern that the Council has not demonstrated how it will resource effective community engagement • concern that the SCI process is budget driven, not task driven • how to ensure adequate resources are actually made available

4.17 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on who and when people will be consulted. This is now explained in the following: Part 1 para.2.15-2.16, para.2.19-2.22; Part 2 para.4.25; Part 4 para.6.3-6.7.

15 local development framework

• In particular Part 4 of the SCI (paragraphs 6.3 to 6.7) clarifies and expands the previous section on resources, explaining how the council will effectively resource consultations.

Question 7 - 12 respondents agreed that the draft SCI identifies how the results of community involvement will be fed into the preparation of DPD’s

and SPD’s, while only 4 disagreed.

4.18 While the majority agree that the draft SCI identifies how the results of community engagement will be fed into the plan preparation stages, specific concerns related to:

• concern that public views are not being fully considered • how best to explain how people’s comments had been dealt with (particularly at the Issues & Options stage).

4.19 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on how the Council will communicate how the results of community engagement will be fed into the preparation of DPDs. This is now explained in the following: Part 1 para.2.10-2.11, para.2.17-2.18, para.2.23-2.24; Part 2 para.4.1-4.25. • There is a specific reference to the need to provide feedback on the consultation results at each of the plan making stages. This is now explicitly noted in paragraph 4.5. It should also be noted that the response summaries for the Issues & Options stage have been published on the Council’s web site and made available at the Civic Centre & Libraries.

16 local development framework

Question 8. - 14 respondents agreed that the draft SCI identifies mechanisms for reviewing the SCI, while only 3 disagreed.

4.20 While the majority agree that the draft SCI identifies mechanisms for review, specific concerns related to:

• how the SCI is to be reviewed • The timetable for review is set out in the supporting Local Development Scheme.

4.21 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on how the SCI will be reviewed. This is now explained in the following: Part 4 para.6.8-6.10.

Question 9. - 15 respondents agreed that the draft SCI clearly describes the policy for consultation on planning applications, while only 4 disagreed.

4.22 While the majority agree that the draft SCI clearly identifies the policy for consulting on planning applications, specific concerns related to:

• need for wider publicity to ensure everyone affected knows about an application • believes that all applications should be publicised in the Evening Herald • • need to recognise that some pre-application discussion should be ‘in confidence’ or on a ‘without prejudice’ basis. • support the process if adhered to, but believes the process has failed

17 local development framework

• over reliance on the web site as a source of information

4.23 These issues have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI clarifies and expands on the policy for consulting on planning applications. This is now explained in the following: Part 3 para.5.1-5.19. • The Council believes that the submitted SCI now contains a much simplified explanation of how and when engagement will take place on Planning Applications which is fully compliant with government guidance on this matter.

18 local development framework

Suggested changes to the draft SCI

4.24 There were a number of more general issues raised, relating to how the document could be improved. These are as follows:

• There is a need for greater clarity within the document through the use of Plain English and avoidance of technical jargon, as well better formatting • There is a need to highlight the relevance of the SCI to individuals. It needs to demonstrate how the adoption of the SCI is going to make a difference • There is a need to develop more effective consultation methods. For example the greater use of DVDs, TV, Radio, as well as giving talks / presentations to schools and other groups • There needs to be a clear commitment to provide sufficient financial resources to ensure the city’s aspirations to involve everyone can be effectively met • There is a need for longer consultation timescales, with better notification as to when they are going to take place • There is a healthy scepticism of whether the Council will act on the responses it receives from consultation events, but a recognition that overcoming this will take time. There is a need to build trust, and provide more ‘feedback’ about how the Council has responded to the public’s views.

4.25 These matters have been addressed in the submitted version of the SCI by:

• The submitted SCI has been extensively re-written, in Plain English, to provide greater clarity and avoid technical jargon. • The principle of explaining the relevance of the SCI to individuals has been part of the process of revising the document into Plain English

19 local development framework

• The range of consultation methods is better explained and expanded on in paragraph 4.25 • The question of ensuring adequate resources are made available to provide effective community engagement is explained in the new section on Resources, paragraphs 6.3 to 6.7 • While the consultation periods are set by statute, paragraph 4.24 now sets out the Council’s undertaking to publish draft documents as early as possible in advance of the statutory consultation period, to enable wider community engagement • The SCI sets out the Council’s commitment to promoting more effective engagement. By being transparent about how the process will work should help build greater trust that the Council will consider, and where appropriate, act on the responses it receives.

20 local development framework

5. Other matters

5.1 All respondents were given the opportunity to register additional resident /action groups, or voluntary organisations, on the LDF consultation mailing list. The following requests to be included in the LDF consultation process were received. While the majority of the organisations listed were already on the LDF consultation database, it has now been updated to include all new requests, and will be updated on an on-going basis as further requests come in.

The following groups were already on the LDF consultation database – but their continued interest noted.

Plymouth Community Partnership

Rapleys LLP

Cornwall /Plymouth & District Transport 2000

Neighbourhood Voluntary Support Service

British Wind Energy Association

University of Plymouth

Maritime Plymouth

Urban Splash

House Builders Federation

Plymouth Guild of Voluntary Service

The following groups were added to the LDF consultation databases – as a result of their request at the Preferred Options stage.

Millbay Marina Village Residents Assoc

SW RSL Planning Consortium

Elburton & District Resident Association

21 local development framework

Plymouth Community Network

Plymstock Community Forum

GreenBank community Association

22 local development framework

Appendix 1: Summary of Representations and Responses

Response Organisation Summary of Representation Response to Reference or individual Representation Number

0001 Mrs E J Halliday Concern over resourcing Part 4 resources section (Para 6.3) clarifies and Plymouth expands previous Community resource section, Network explaining how the Council will effectively resource consultations

0001 Mrs E J Halliday The documents don't clearly list issues Paragraph 4.5 of the SCI and options comments, will this sets out the Council’s Plymouth happen in future? undertaking to provide Community feedback throught the Network process.

The I&O responses summaries are available on Council web page and from Civic Centre, this will continue throughout LDF production.

0002 Sir R Gerken Turnout of West Hoe Residents Noted meetings minimal not advertised Millbay Marina enough. Village Residents Association

23 local development framework

0009 Mr G Ackers 1.No evidence of consultation with 1) Part 2 section 4 Lists A, B, C explains Council approach to community 2. Sci supposed to govern community engagement and methods involvement not link it intends to use. 3.+6. concern over resourcing of 2) SCI will govern consultations community involvement in 4. concern over lack of SPD table relation to LDD and tables. planning application, but 5. method of engagement table will also link with other confusing. community initiatives, Part1 section 2. 7.concern over ability to feed back information 3 +6) Part 4 resource section (Para 6.3) 8. concern over how SCI is reviewed explains councils 9.support if adhered to, believes resourcing of process has failed consultations

4) SPD production table more clearly available part 4 Para 6.14 of SCI

5) Engagement table has been altered to take on board comments.

7. + 8) noted, taken on board in SCI

9) part 3 SCI explains issue and how planning application are dealt with.

0010 Mr F D Allen 1 and 9 7.1 states…the statutory Part 3 section 5 of the requirement of Local Planning SCI set out the different Transport 2000 Authorities to publicise all planning methods of consultation applications after they have been that will be applied received… 7.2 states whilst these dependent on the nature arrangements will remain, it is now the of the planning intention…Why then is the full number application, in line with of planning applications not published government guidance in the Evening Herald?

24 local development framework

0013 Mrs J M Watkins I have no clear information as to Comments noted, the SCI whether the criteria has been met and has been altered to Neighbourhood to the mechanisms in place or increase readability and Voluntary followed. I have had serious concerns clarity as well as Support Service around some of the timescales which identifying how the SCI have been very short in some meets the ‘tests of instances. soundness’

0016 Mrs P Smith In theory the SCI states how the Comments noted. SCI Council intends to involve the amended to take on community but in practice this doesn’t board comments where always appear to happen. 1. Too much viable and not in conflict reliance on web sites when a lot of with National guidance, interested people do not have access other points will be taken 2. The reversion to a full planning on board when arranging application list in the local paper, not consultation the shortened version. 3. More publication of dates for consultations and displays in local papers giving people time to make arrangements (not adverts or articles the day before or on the day of event/meeting) 4. People who could be affected by private planning applications to the north, south, east and west of the property should be notified. This does not always happen at present it seems. 5. Civic Societies and protests via the paper, etc - are they being considered at all (one reference university campus new building seems to have had a lot of objections but is still going ahead).

25 local development framework

0017 Mr T C 3. Very few local community groups Comments welcomed and Goldsmith are in actual consensus of the local taken onboard consens. 4. A progress report and timetable to be made widely accessible, perhaps a mobile information facility , and the benefit mobile van. 5. Make sure council officers are savvy enough to negotiate with commercial developers

0022 Ms Kearney My negative attitude is due to lack of The SCI is only applicable faith that the written criteria will be to planning who will Plymouth positively adhered to by all PCC depts. ensure its Community If absolute criteria were followed as implementation. Network outlines, then my level of agreements However the wider would be 2 - agree. 7.10 tier level 2 is application of the key SCI a wide-open cop out. Websites/PCC principles are officers do not reach all citizens a word incorporated into the I would wish to see used in the LDF Council’s 2004 Corporate Consultation document.

0024 Mr J Hepburn 5. Although electronic response forms Comments noted. SCI should be provided they have not been amended to take on Maritime for this and other LDD Pos. Expecting board comments where Plymouth consultees to trawl the agenda of viable, other points will be planning committee meetings is not taken on board when good enough. Responses should state arranging consultation when the meeting will take place. 6. Concern remains that the SCI process may not be fully resources, as budget not task drive. 9. does not make sense.

26 local development framework

0025 Urban Splash Urban Splash have taken a full active Support welcomed (South West) part in the promotion of their proposals Limited for Royal William Yard and wish to continue to do so. They also want to Mr D S Dunlop continue to take full and active part in D2 Planning the preparation of the LDF. They Limited consider that the best way to proceed with proposals for RWY is to prepare a Master Plan document. This would be subject to community involvement to enable views to be obtained at early stage. Views would be incorporated into Master Plan and would be in line with draft SCI and should be expressed in the document.

27 local development framework

0028 Mrs F D Sheaff 1) Document would benefit from plain Comments welcomed and English - what is frontloading?. 2) taken on board in Plymouth Guild Produce a summary leaflet of key production of SCI of Voluntary points and how to obtain full copy. 3) Service Jargon should be reduced explanations to be used of glossary for words not in everyday use. 4. No list of contents. 5) Explanation of consultation, page 5 does not provide this. Page 3 community participation is used interchangeably with consultation the implications are significantly different. 6) Explanations are merged into one with initials and abbreviations in single sentences, very confusing. 7) Very dense format, detracts from explanations of process, not necessary information should be deleted. 8) Difficult to comment on methods of engagement as its dependent on the conditions and context. Omit section on methods. Good practice and minimum standards more useful. 9)Section 7 - clear flow chart would help. 10) List of consultees, not clear why some voluntary organisations appear and some equally important ones left off.

28 local development framework

0029 Mr G M Whillock 1) does not comply. 2) City Strategy, Comments noted. SCI either not available or difficult to view, amended to take on Plymstock eastern corridor, UCS, and board comments where Community Greenscape should be included with viable and not in conflict Forum 1995-2011 Local Plan, show how with National guidance, incorporated. 3) Details not readily other points will be taken available, very little advertising, not on board when arranging one community group from Plymstock consultation invited to sit on consultative group. We have had no say in this document- rethink has to be done before policies adopted to give everyone chance to speak. 4) venue for presentation for area committee on Plymstock unsuitable, time very limited - unsatisfactory - another meeting at 7:30pm should have been arranged with intensive advertising. Exhibition was not wide ranging but all officers extremely helpful. 5) no comment. 6) No clear guidelines on resourcing/organising community involvement. 7) Decision to not advertise planning applications in local paper is a retrograde step, preventing residents finding out. Not everyone owns or uses a computer.

0030 Tesco Stores Would like to see SCI amended to Pre application discussion Ltd acknowledge that on occasions pre- are not covered by sci, application discussions with an separate protocol deals The authority ought to be allowed to take with this issue. Development place in confidence or on a without Planning prejudice basis. We object to the Partnership omission of this acknowledgement.

29 local development framework

0031 Mrs J F Slavin Recognise difficulties in getting the Noted community involved from personal experience. Am wary of the same people representing the same interests - are they time reflecting the average resident?

0032 Ms T Dickenson Appendix list of consultees should be Comments noted. SCI included in main body of text. List A amended to take on Government Parish Councils should / must be board comments. Office for the included. List B generic terms for South West consultation group used rather than details. GOSW are advising full lists to be given. SEA - No reference to SEA compliance vital to LDDs production. Should be a clear, brief explanation in main body text addressing importance and necessity. Timescales - Shows no timetable for SCI itself, nor of possible examination. Replace table 6.2 with revised table of consultation. Joint working undertaken maybe informal but needs to be addressed briefly in SCI. Performance and Indicators - needs to be clear these are locally self imposed, you refer to LDDs as ODPDs, which is confusing suggest using LDDs only. 3.8 refers to resources should be made clear this is not allowed to affect process allowing a fall below minimum requirements. 4.2 (3) communication typo.

30 local development framework

0033 Mr J C Emery 1) Not consulted in Plymstock area, The Council has have not gone beyond minimum exceeded the minimum requirements. 2) Documents difficult to requirements for view or not available. Greenscape, consultation and has sort UCS and Eastern Corridor Study and to ensure the widest 1995-2011 LP should be included and possible levels of shown how incorporated. 3) Councils consultation refusal to make details of groups noted part 1 section 2 available not open, transparent or and part 2 section 4 accountable. Community groups reps explaining how existing should not be taken to represent material is incorporated community as a whole. Council under Consultees are available obligation to consult with everyone not to view by generic type in select few. 4) Plymstock Area SCI and full list of Committee presentation time limited organisations consulted and exhibition limited in scope - no available on council web other form of consultation has taken site. place. 5) Consultation of 1995-2011 LP should have been followed. 6) Council 4.+5. Minimum not demonstrated resource and consultation requirements management of involvement have been meet and effectively. 7,8 &9 speculation on exceeded in LDF future plans, proposals on planning consultations. consultation welcomed but no 6.-9. Noted guarantee of implementation.

31 local development framework

Response Organisation or Summery of Representation Response to Number individual Representation Question 11

0001 Mrs E J Halliday All documents need indexes. Review Points welcomed, SCI ending after Para 3.1 to illustrate size has been altered to taken Plymouth of area covered. SPD meaning on board points and to Community required. Are only responses on form increase clarity of Network accepted needs clarification. Need document. SPD examples in headings. Who adopted docs? Para 7.16 should be waived not wavered. Para 10.4 doesn't make sense. Page 28 no mention of resident groups etc. Item 29 doesn't make sense,

0002 Sir R Gerken Please add RNLI. There is little if no RNLI added to consultee reference to Police, Security, Road database. Millbay Marina Safety, Design to Combat Crime, Village Alcoholic Abuse Prevention. Residents Association

0005 South West General support, wish to be consulted Support welcomed, South RSL, Planning at all stages of LDF production West RSL added to Consortium consultee database.

Mr R Tetlow

Tetlow Planning

0009 Mr G Ackers Object to sci apropreatly meeting tests Comments noted. SCI of soundness in it current form, further amended to take on work and inprovements are needed. board comments and improve format.

0010 Mr F D Allen 3 Could meet the local mencap society Noted. at 20 Outland Road, Peverell, become Transport 2000 one of the consultees. 3.13 more details of planning aid please

32 local development framework

0017 Mr T C There is a huge unease regarding the Noted Goldsmith provision of health services, youth social active provision and transport. Can the city council drive a hard enough bargain with commercial companies to get sufficient financial dividend at the right phasing of development.

0018 Mrs J C Howard Dates for achieving targets could be Noted, Local useful, so much is stated in the future Development Scheme is Elburton and tense, rather idealistically. We in available on councils web District Elburton feel overlooked in general. site and at civic Centre Residents The Eastern Gateway study is overdue setting out time frames for Association and we need it as regards the A379 future consultations and and links to Plymstock Quarry and document production. Sherford Development.

0021 Mr M Berkien The University of Plymouth would like University to be added to to be included on list c of consultation list C on Consultee University of bodies. The University is an important database. Plymouth stakeholder in the city and a key Mr R J Cooke economic driver and contributor to the Stride Treglown social and cultural well-being. The University is keen to develop its relationship with the city as its activities are wide-ranging and far-reaching. This would provide an opportunity to contribute to forthcoming debates and city wide strategies from the earliest stage. Would ensure a synergy approach benefiting the city centre and university quarter.

33 local development framework

0022 Ms Kearney 7.9 tier level 2 - At no point can I see Inclusion of information affordable housing mentioned. Playing on affordable house is not Plymouth fields and other developers titbits are included in SCI a SPD will Community not sustainable for inclusion of be produced on Network affordable housing in development Affordable housing in plans. I understand the figure for during 2006/07 inclusion of affordable housing is 25% which needs to be paramount.

0024 Mr J Hepburn 1.2 Include "waterfront" in aim, as in all Sections concerned have other LDF documents. 7.21 Final been replaced taking Maritime sentence "The City Council will advise onboard comments where Plymouth those who have made written viable. comments of the date of the committee meeting".

0025 Urban Splash Urban Splash wish to be identified as Urban Splash added to (South West) an a non statutory consultee within the list c in consultee Limited SCI. database.

Mr D S Dunlop

D2 Planning Limited

0032, Ms T Dickenson Remove some of the more detailed Comment taken on board 0040 text such as the Plymouth Pact - in the production of the Government making reference to where the detail submission SCI. Office for the can be found instead. South West

0039 Mr J.A Gould We are extremely concerned that there Comment to be is nothing within the LDF about the incorporated into review Greenbank impact on our community of the still of other LDF documents, increasing numbers of students as not applicable to SCI. attending the university of Plymouth. The university's closure of Seale Hayne and its proposal to close Role College are being carried forward without any consultation with the communities who host the majority of the students attending the university.

34 local development framework

Response Organisation or Summery of Representation other Response to Number individual format Representation

0037 J. Oakes The SCI is clear and fairly concise and Comments welcomed follows similar pattern to the South South Hams Hams SCI. The methods set out are District Council - appropriate for the city context. The forward planning SCI should be supported.

0008 Rapleys- WM No formal comment can be added to Details to be added to Morrison database database Supermarkets

0015 N Rowe As part of the consultative process Comment noted, council could you please consider the insertion can not due to shape Plymouth Sports by name of the Plymouth Sports Forum restrictions include all Forum into the Statement of Community organisations within Involvement document, which is part of document, will however Plymouth City Council Local be entered on the Development Framework. 4.5 consultee database to Capacity Building insert Plymouth engage in all future Sports Forum (PSF) as the recognised consultations. umbrella organisation for sport in Plymouth.

0020 K Adderley BWEA emphasises we should follow Comments welcomed PPS12 guidance and the The British Wind recommendations contained in PPS22 Energy - Renewable Energy. No specific Association representation made to our reports

0026 D Lobban This document reflects government Comments welcomed and guidance but does not appear taken on board in the SCI Penrilla particularly specific to Plymouth. More Consultants Ltd focus on particular target groups would be welcomed.

35 local development framework

0027 J Molyneux The federation is pleased to note its Comments noted, written inclusion, but we ask that the Council representations will Home Builders does not place undue reliance on continue to be a primary Federation participatory methods of consultation form of consultation and sufficient notice is paid to written representations. Where an organisation may involved in a number of plans, it is not always possible to meet a local authority's timescale with regard to focus groups.

0028 F D Sheaff I would like to be Consulted on While this does not relate planning applications relevant to directly to SCI as part of Plymouth Guild health/social care in voluntary sector. improving consultations of Voluntary on planning application a Service weekly list of all planning applications is available on the councils web site.

0029 G M Whillock The questions in the questionnaire are Response form were only difficult to correlate with relevant one of a variety of Plymstock heading or sub-heading in the methods of consultation Community document. Space for sections 10 and and comment have been Forum 11 very limited. This is a convoluted taken on board for future and obscure method of consultation consultations and begs the question as to whether the Council really wish to reach out to all sections of the community for a response.

0032 T Dickenson Send at least one electronic copy and Comments noted one hard copy to the Planning Government Inspectorate of the submission Office for the document. South West

36 local development framework

0033 J C Emery Council failed to make full use of The council has exceeded consultation technology to inform local the minimum people of LDF impact on their lives. requirements for Over reliance on internet, consultation and has tried disadvantaged many people in the to ensure that its LDF community who do not have access to documents are as widely a computer. Why not available on and easily accessible as DVDs? Why weren't display boards in possible local libraries? and the Civic Centre? Why was local media not used to greater effect?

0034 J Oakes The document is clear and fairly Comments welcomed concise. Follows similar pattern to South Hams SHDC SCI, the methods of community District Council engagement are different, these largely reflect the distinctions between urban. suburban and rural communities and the methods appropriate for the city context. SHDC is included as an organisation to be consulted on the LDF, the SCI should be supported.

37 local development framework

0035 R Simmonds Planning and Development in the Comments welcomed Historic Environment a Charter for recommended consultees English Heritage English Heritage Advisory Services added to consultee (2nd edition April 2005) - details where database. we must be consulted upon with panning applications. Underlines value of pre-application discussions. Continue to send paper copies of correspondence to us at Bristol address, remove any other addresses for EH from your database or the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England. SEA/SA workshops it is suggested your Conservation Officer and a rep from archaeological service are invited, we will respond at appropriate stages. We would like to receive any draft copy of the Community Plan.

0036 C Herbert EA looks forward to being involved Comments noted throughout LDF process and welcome Environment discussions. Thank you for SCI Agency document for comment.

38 local development framework

Appendix 2: Total Responses – actual count and percentages

Number of Responses % Responses Nil Nil response response Total Representations Strongly or no Strongly Strongly or no Strongly Received = 36 Agree Agree opinion Disagree disagree Agree Agree opinion Disagree disagree Question Draft SCI identifies the No. 1 City Council has complied with the minimum legal requirements for consultation 4 10 17 2 3 11% 28% 47% -6% -8% Question Draft SCI identifies the No. 2 City Council's strategy for community involvement in the planning process links with other community involvement initiatives, e.g. City Strategy 2 9 20 1 4 6% 25% 56% -3% -11% Question Draft SCI identifies (in No. 3 general terms) which local community groups and other bodies will be consulted 4 8 18 2 4 11% 22% 50% -6% -11% Question Draft SCI identifies how No. 4 to be involved in timely manner 8 4 18 3 3 22% 11% 50% -8% -8% Question Draft SCI identifies No. 5 suitable methods of consultation to be employed for the intended audience and for different stages in the preparation of local development documents 7 4 19 4 2 19% 11% 53% -11% -6% Question Draft SCI identifies how No. 6 the City Council intends to set out, resource and manage community involvement effectively 1 11 17 4 3 3% 31% 47% -11% -8% Question Draft SCI identifies how No. 7 the results of community involvement will be fed into preparation of development plan documents and supplementary planning documents 2 10 20 2 2 6% 28% 56% -6% -6% Question Draft SCI identifies No. 8 mechanisms for reviewing the Statement of Community Involvement 2 12 19 2 1 6% 33% 53% -6% -3% Question Draft SCI identifies No. 9 clearly the planning authority's policy for consultation on planning applications 5 10 17 1 3 14% 28% 47% -3% -8%

Core Strategy Preferred Options July 2005 – summary report of public consultation 39