Agenda item

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9 (Public Participation), a question was submitted to Councillor Turrell, Executive Member for Planning and Transport by Mrs C Doran, resident of Crowthorne with regard to strategic gap in the Draft Local Plan on behalf of CVAG (Crowthorne Village Action Group).

The following question will be asked at the meeting by CVAG’s chairman, Mr A Holley:

We are interested to note that the Executive is to be asked to make a Key Decision on 17th July, when authority is sought to carry out consultation on new sites that have emerged through the recent consultation on the Borough Local Plan.

You will of course know that the Crowthorne Village Action Group made a series of representations on the Draft Local Plan in March this year. We are particularly concerned, as a community, that the Strategic Gap between Crowthorne and Bracknell is not mentioned in the Draft Plan, and that in its place there is proposed to be a development site for 570 houses (Policy LP4, land at The Hideout and Beaufort Park), which will effectively occupy what will remain of the Gap following the development of the TRRL site.

You will know that local people would like to see this gap clearly maintained, and that they have taken comfort from the fact that its importance was underlined in the Council’s Core Strategy of 2008, when it says;

These predominantly undeveloped areas are often subject to development pressures which if left unrestrained could over time lead to the merging of settlements and the loss of individual identity. In order to protect their existing open and undeveloped character, it is important that gaps are identified to steer development away from those settlements where coalescence is a real threat.

This was reinforced in the Inspector’s Report on the SDL in 2013, and more recently  by the Council’s landscape consultants in their recommendations, which form part of the evidence base for the Draft Local Plan.

Our question, therefore is in two parts. First: Do you share the significance of this Strategic Gap – as with the five other Strategic Gaps which remain listed in paragraph 11.2.12 of the Draft Local Plan -  to the wider community of Bracknell Forest, and their quality of life? Second: would you share our optimism that among the new sites which have emerged and which will be discussed by Executive on 17th July, there will be one or more which can be substituted for the site at Policy LP4, enabling the Council to provide for housing needs whilst  respecting the longstanding  policy of maintaining a strategic gap between Crowthorne and Bracknell.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9 (Public Participation), a question was submitted by Mrs C Doran, resident of Crowthorne with regard to strategic gap in the Draft Local Plan on behalf of CVAG (Crowthorne Village Action Group). CVAG’s chairman, Mr A Holley asked the following published question:

We are interested to note that the Executive is to be asked to make a Key Decision on 17th July, when authority is sought to carry out consultation on new sites that have emerged through the recent consultation on the Borough Local Plan.

You will of course know that the Crowthorne Village Action Group made a series of representations on the Draft Local Plan in March this year. We are particularly concerned, as a community, that the Strategic Gap between Crowthorne and Bracknell is not mentioned in the Draft Plan, and that in its place there is proposed to be a development site for 570 houses (Policy LP4, land at The Hideout and Beaufort Park), which will effectively occupy what will remain of the Gap following the development of the TRRL site.

You will know that local people would like to see this gap clearly maintained, and that they have taken comfort from the fact that its importance was underlined in the Council’s Core Strategy of 2008, when it says;

These predominantly undeveloped areas are often subject to development pressures which if left unrestrained could over time lead to the merging of settlements and the loss of individual identity. In order to protect their existing open and undeveloped character, it is important that gaps are identified to steer development away from those settlements where coalescence is a real threat.

This was reinforced in the Inspector’s Report on the SDL in 2013, and more recently  by the Council’s landscape consultants in their recommendations, which form part of the evidence base for the Draft Local Plan.

Our question, therefore is in two parts. First: Do you share the significance of this Strategic Gap – as with the five other Strategic Gaps which remain listed in paragraph 11.2.12 of the Draft Local Plan -  to the wider community of Bracknell Forest, and their quality of life? Second: would you share our optimism that among the new sites which have emerged and which will be discussed by Executive on 17th July, there will be one or more which can be substituted for the site at Policy LP4, enabling the Council to provide for housing needs whilst  respecting the longstanding  policy of maintaining a strategic gap between Crowthorne and Bracknell.

In response Councillor Turrell stated that the Council recognises the importance of trying to maintain gaps between settlements in order to protect the identity and character of individual settlements. He added that there was also a need to accommodate growth.

He stated that comments made by the Inspectors dealing with the Core Strategy and Site Allocations Local Plan were made in the context of a historic level of growth. He considered that there was now a need to review existing policy constraints in order to identify sites suitable for accommodating further development and associated infrastructure and that was part of the role of the new Local Plan. The Council could only consider sites that are deliverable and developable and must ensure that a sustainable approach was pursued. He acknowledged that given the existing constraints and the limited extent of suitable and available land for development the Council needed to take some difficult decisions which may mean that it was preferable to build within existing strategic gaps. He added that the role of SANG land in providing physical separation should not be overlooked and on the larger sites the provision would be generous. He confirmed that the landscape studies referred to in the question remained an important part of the Council’s evidence base for the emerging Local Plan.

In relation to the first part of the question he concluded that the proposals put forward in the Draft Bracknell Forest Local Plan were currently being reviewed in the light of comments received through the consultation which would include consideration of comments received on the current Strategic Gap and its role and extent.

In response to the second part of the question Councillor Turrell stated that council officers were in the process of summarising and considering the comments received during the consultation on the draft Local Plan during February and March 2018. Over 1,500 detailed comments had been received from around 475 individuals and organisations. On behalf of the Council he thanked everyone who had contributed either by making a submission or attending the staffed exhibitions held around the Borough.

He commented that planning for the Borough’s future needs was a very important and sometimes controversial aspect of the Council’s work. He acknowledged that the Council would not be able to meet the wishes of all those who had commented but would ensure that all the comments received were properly considered and changes were made to the plan where appropriate.

He reported that the final housing requirement that would need to be provided for in the new Local Plan was yet to be confirmed and it was also likely that a change in government policy would require another year to be added to the plan period for the Local Plan which could increase the number of new homes to be provided.

He concluded that further technical work was being undertaken to address issues with all the major new proposed allocations as well as analysis of the comments made on the previous consultation. Based on this work, the Council would propose in the next version of the Local Plan what it considered to be the most appropriate and sustainable distribution of development on the available sites. He stated that it would be important to take a strategic approach for the whole Borough and therefore it would not be appropriate to give a view on whether it would be possible to substitute any potential new sites for ones in the Draft Local Plan.   

Mr Holley asked as a supplementary question whether CVAG had support for recognising the policy of retaining strategic gaps wherever possible.

Councillor Turrell replied that yes he did support continuing to recognise the policy but this could only be done through thorough investigation of the alternative options.