NOTICE OF INDIVIDUAL EXECUTIVE MEMBER DECISION ITEM NO. IMD 2008/21 TITLE Wokingham Borough Council response to consultation from Bracknell Forest Borough Council on Issues and Options for the Development Management Housing and Commercial Policies and Sites Development Plan Document DECISION TO BE MADE BY Gary Cowan, Executive Member for Local & Regional Planning DATE OF DECISION 27 March 2008 REPORT TO BE PUBLISHED ON 17 March 2008 INDIVIDUAL EXECUTIVE MEMBER DECISION REFERENCE IMD: 2008/21 TITLE Wokingham Borough Council response to consultation from Bracknell Forest Borough Council on Issues and Options for the Development Management Housing and Commercial Policies and Sites Development Plan Document FOR CONSIDERATION BY Gary Cowan Executive Member for Local & Regional Planning DATE 27 March 2008 WARDS Finchampstead South, Hurst, Westcott and Wokingham Without REPORT PREPARED BY Graham Ritchie on behalf of Heather Thwaites, Acting Corporate Head of Strategy & Partnerships SUMMARY Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) needs to agree its response to the consultation underway by Bracknell Forest Borough Council (BFBC) on the Issues and Options for the Development Management Housing and Commercial Policies and Sites Development Plan Document (the BFBC DPD). The BFBC DPD applies to the whole of Bracknell Forest and amplifies the guidance set out in its approved Core Strategy which was the subject of consultation with this authority. It will when finalised provide more detailed policies on the issues for the management and delivery of new housing, retail and employment development. It will also identify sites for these activities beyond that committed for Amen Corner, Binfield and north of Whitegrove/Quelm Park, Bracknell. Further details on the Issues and Options consultation are available at www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/dmh. The BFBC DPD is out for consultation from 15 February to 28 March 2008. This response to the BFBC DPD is based upon the issues this Council raised for the production of BFBC’s Core Strategy. REASONS FOR DECISION Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) during the various stages of consultation on the Bracknell Forest Borough Council (BFBC) Core Strategy emphasised the need to consider the impacts of development outside of the BFBC administrative area, especially within Wokingham Borough. These primarily related to transport, education and the need to maintain the separation of settlements. Since BFBC have started to refine their proposals for its area, it is necessary that WBC uses every opportunity to positively influence the strategy and to secure benefits to minimise adverse impacts on Wokingham Borough’s residents. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS, IF ANY WBC could decline to comment at this stage. However, this means that the WBC will have lost a key opportunity to influence proposals at Amen Corner. It may also make it harder to discuss with BFBC the issues of how any capital works within the Borough required by the development may be financed. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Executive Member agrees the responses to the questions detailed in the accompanying Appendix as the WBC response to this consultation by BFBC. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Revenue How much will it Cost Is there sufficient budget (or grant / Save funding) available? – if not quantify the Supplementary Estimate OR if savings, also quantify. Current Financial Year £0 From existing Development Plans (Year 1) team budget Next Financial Year £0 From existing Development Plans (Year 2) team budget Following Financial £0 From existing Development Plans Year (Year 3) team budget Other relevant financial information relevant to the Recommendation/Decision At the current time it is unknown if work may need to be commissioned to support the views of WBC in responding to the BFBC DPD. In the event that work needs to be commissioned which cannot be financed from the Development Plans team budget, a report will be presented to the Executive for their consideration. The development envisaged by this document could have financial implications for WBC but this cannot be quantified at this stage Please note: The Recommendation must request the Supplementary Estimate required in this year, noting the ongoing commitment in future years. SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES Corporate Head of Finance Comments incorporated into report. Monitoring Officer To be advised Leader of the Council To be advised Impact on Equality The consultation documents themselves will be reviewed by Bracknell Forest Borough Council to ensure that they do not have direct impacts on any one age, faith, gender, etc. It is not considered that the views of Wokingham Borough are likely to significantly differ from those of Bracknell Forest Borough with regard to ensuring that any direct impacts are minimised. Impact on Sustainability As with the equality assessment, Bracknell Forest Borough Council will review the impacts on sustainability of this document. They will need to ensure that the final version of the document minimizes the impacts on the various factors that they consider necessary. This review of sustainability of the Development Plan Document is a statutory requirement. List of Background Papers None Held by Graham Ritchie Service Development Plans Telephone No (0118) 974 6457 Email [email protected] Date 5 March 2008 Version No. 2 NB All reports seek to identify environmental, community safety, customer care and equal opportunities implications. Consultation with residents and organisations which has or is about to take place, will also be reported. SUPPORTING INFORMATION The proposed responses to the questions posed within the BFBC DPD are included in the accompanying appendix. Appendix DETAILS OF RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS Q1 – No additional spatial objectives for the Sustainability Appraisal are required for this document. Q2 – Density approach 1 (seeking a minimum of 30 dwellings per hectare with flexibility for higher where design, layout, accessibility and other factors indicate support) is considered the most appropriate for Bracknell Forest. Q3 – BFBC should aspire to the delivery of 60% of the required housing on previously developed land, subject to the findings of its Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) that such a proportion is achievable. If the SHLAA indicates that a 60% proportion is not achievable (having regard to availability and deliverability of land), an appropriate alternative target should be selected. Q4 – The 2001 Census indicated (Table KS16) that around 2.1% of the household spaces of BFBC were vacant. The since cancelled Tapping the Potential suggested that 2% was the minimum vacancy rate to allow the normal operation of the housing market. Therefore, it is considered appropriate that BFBC should seek to protect losses from the existing housing stock. However, due to the current low household vacancy rate the value of producing a Empty Homes Strategy is queried. Q5 – WBC considers that BFBC should promote good design across Bracknell Forest with specific area guidance produced in conjunction with the local community and other relevant stakeholders. Q6 – WBC agrees that a design led approach to addressing the issues of safety and security is appropriate. Q7 – WBC considers that for inclusive design, it is appropriate to have regard to the latest guidance to ensure that the issue is addressed. It is therefore necessary to have regard to the guidance on factors such as lifetime homes. Q8 – WBC considers that option 2 regarding areas of special character is most appropriate for BFBC. This indicates that the policy for character areas will have regard to the assessments currently underway and that its implementation will be supplemented through Supplementary Planning Documents. Q9 – WBC considers that for extensions, option 2 is the most appropriate as it enables the production of additional guidance to amplify the implementation of the policy. Q10 – For Green Infrastructure, WBC considers that option 3 (developing a separate policy and then seeking to protect the existing network and address deficiencies) is the most appropriate. Q11 – BFBC should protect existing important areas for biodiversity and seek to increase the ability of development sites to support a range of species as suggested in option 4. Q12 – Open spaces should be considered on a site by site bases through the site allocation process with more detailed policies within the DPD. Q13 – WBC questions whether the findings of the SHLAA can justify the very exceptional circumstances to warrant a review of the Green Belt, without clear evidence that insufficient available and deliverable land is available to meet the requirements of the emerging South East Plan. Q14 – WBC considers that the responses of the water and sewage companies should be used as the basis for determining the appropriate approach to addressing the impacts of development on this infrastructure. Q15 – WBC considers that depending upon the risk of flooding in parts of Bracknell Forest, it may be appropriate to provide additional guidance on the implementation of PPS25. Q16 – WBC considers that BFBC should have regard to the wide range of evidence on the needs for market housing and should seek to provide a mix that best reflects local circumstances, including the needs for elderly population and those with specific needs. Q17 – BFBC should seek to protect existing low cost market housing sites and increase provision. BFBC should consider the results of an affordable housing viability study to establish whether there may