Contact your Parish Council

THE MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL

MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL

CABINET

8 OCTOBER 2008

REPORT OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

Report prepared by Sue Whiteside

and Sarah Anderton�

1. LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME: PRIORITIES

1.1 Issue for Decision

1.1.1 To consider the Council�s priorities for preparing Local Development Documents prior to updating the Local Development Scheme (2007).

1.2 Recommendation of Assistant Director of Development and Community Services

1.2.1 That, subject to the views of the Local Development Document Advisory Group, Cabinet approves the prioritisation of Local Development Documents contained in paragraph 1.3.38 and set out in appendices A and B for inclusion in a revision of the Local Development Scheme.

1.3 Reasons for Recommendation

1.3.1 A list of acronyms commonly used throughout this report is set out below.

Acronym	Term
Act (The)	Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004
AAP	Action Area Plan
AMR	Annual Monitoring Report
DPD	Development Plan Document
GOSE	Government Office for the South East
HPDG	Housing and Planning Delivery Grant
LDD	Local Development Document
LDF	Local Development Framework
LDS	Local development Scheme
LTP	Local Transport Plan
MITS	Maidstone Integrated Transport Strategy
Regulations	Town and Country Planning Regulations 2004, as amended 2008 (SI 2004 No. 2204 and SI 2008 No. 1371)
SA	Sustainability Appraisal
SCI	Statement Of Community Involvement
SPD	Supplementary Planning Document
SRFI	Strategic Rail Freight Interchange

Background

1.3.2 The Council is required to produce a Local Development Scheme (LDS) which sets out, to all interested parties, the range of Local Development Documents (LDD) the Council proposes to produce, together with the work programme for these, over a minimum three year period.� Delivery of the programme must be monitored through the Annual Monitoring Report, and the LDS amended as required.

1.3.3 There are four project �milestones� for the production of Development Plan Documents (DPD) and, under new planning regulations, milestones comprise:

� Consultation of the statutory bodies on the scope of the Sustainability Appraisal for the DPD

� Publication of the DPD for formal public consultation (Regulation 27)

� Submission of the DPD to the Secretary of State (Regulation 30)

� Adoption of the DPD (Regulation 36).

The plan making element of Housing and Planning Delivery Grant (HPDG) is dependant on meeting milestones for the Core Strategy and the Land Allocations DPDs.� Additional HPDG funding is available for demonstrating a 5-year housing land supply, and for the completion of Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments and Strategic Housing Market Assessments.� Land supply is monitored through the Annual Monitoring Report and the latter two assessments are being produced as part of the evidence base for the Core Strategy DPD.

1.3.4 Since the LDS was last reviewed in March 2007, representations on the Core Strategy DPD (Preferred Options) seeking the inclusion of a strategic rail freight interchange (SRFI) allocation, coupled with new government legislation and advice on the preparation of Local Development Frameworks (LDF), have delayed the submission of the Core Strategy.� This has resulted in a knock-on effect for the commencement of other DPDs in the LDS programme, most notably the Land Allocations DPD.

1.3.5 Clearly the LDS is now out-of-date and should be reviewed.� However, Members will not be in a position to make a decision on the inclusion (or otherwise) of an SRFI allocation in the Core Strategy until the Council�s consultants who are assessing the appropriateness of such an allocation have completed their appraisals.� Until that time, the Council cannot confirm its revised LDS timetable.� Nonetheless, there is an opportunity at this stage for Members to consider their approach as to which documents they would prefer to prioritise in the LDS so, once a decision has been taken on the SRFI proposal, the revised LDS can quickly proceed to a meeting of the Local Development Document Advisory Group for comment, and to Cabinet for authorisation to adopt the LDS subject to the Secretary of State�s approval.� This report is to be considered by Members of the Local Development Document Advisory Group on 6 October 2008.

Government Legislation and Advice

1.3.6 Earlier this year Government Office for the South East (GOSE) advised local authorities not to submit their revised LDS until new government legislation and advice had been published, which updated the LDF plan making process.� These changes are set out in:

� Planning Policy Statement 12: creating strong safe and prosperous communities through Local Spatial Planning (June 2008)

� Planning Manual (a continually updated web-based manual that accompanies PPS12)

� Statutory Instrument 2008 No. 1371 Town and Country Planning (Local Development)(England)(Amendment) Regulations 2008 (June 2008).

1.3.7 PPS12 focuses on the Core Strategy as the key element of the LDF, emphasising the value of community engagement in the plan making process and the importance of a sound evidence base.� However, the new regulations on how to carry out consultations with stakeholders and the community are much less rigid.� The formal Issues & Options and Preferred Options stages for Development Plan Documents (DPD) have been replaced by a wider and continual form of consultation with stakeholders (Regulation 25) and the public (Regulation 27).� The extent of public engagement should reflect the scale of the issues being addressed by the DPD.� Following public consultation, objectors can appear at an Independent Examination into the DPD.� The new consultation process gives local authorities much more flexibility in deciding the extent of consultation according to the complexity of the document and local circumstances.� There are minor changes to the process for producing Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) in the new Regulations, but the stages are essentially the same as before and there is still no requirement for an Independent Examination for an SPD.

1.3.8 PPS12 urges local authorities to ensure that their LDS timetable for producing the Core Strategy and its evidence base is effective, and there is an emphasis on the need for Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments, Strategic Housing Market Assessments and Strategic Flood Risk Assessments to form part of the evidence base for sound Core Strategies.� A report updating Members on the progress of the Core Strategy and its evidence base will be presented to the next meeting of Cabinet.� The adoption of a sound Core Strategy is a key milestone in securing Housing and Planning Delivery Grant, and its policies form the essential �hook� on which a number of Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) can be prepared.

1.3.9 Local authorities are required to consult GOSE on their LDS timetables, who will take the following matters into account:

� That any postponement of milestones is justified by reference to special circumstances

� The LDS must reflect government priorities on subject matter

� The LDS timetable has to be realistic and take account of the resources available

� The LDS must reflect the time and resources required to produce a robust evidence base.

If GOSE is not satisfied that the LDS has addressed these matters, the Secretary of State can issue a direction under section 15(4) of the Planning and Compulsory Planning Act 2004, which directs the local authority to make amendments to the LDS as the Secretary of State thinks appropriate.� Essentially, government priorities are focused on the adoption of the Core Strategy.

Resources and Costs

1.3.10 Staff resources have a major impact on the production of LDF documents.� The Planning Policy team comprises the posts of Manager (in part), Team Leader, 3� Principal Planning Officers, 2� Planning Officers, � Planning Support Officer and a � Technical Clerk.� A Planning Consultant is also contracted 2 days per week to the team for one year to July 2009 to focus on the Core Strategy, whose consultancy additionally produces a number of SPDs for the Council.� A County Council Highways Officer is seconded 2/3 days per week for specialist advice on the Core Strategy and Growth Point funding.

1.3.11 However, despite advertising twice, vacancies for 1� Principal Planning Officers have not been filled, 1 Planning Officer has recently commenced a one-year career break (this position will be advertised shortly) and intermittent sick leave has affected the contribution from the � Planning Officer post.� Management is currently considering alternative recruitment options for either filling vacant posts or further out-sourcing work to ensure the Council is in a position to adopt its Core Strategy as soon as possible, and to continue to produce other DPD and SPD documents to achieve a sound policy framework for determining planning applications.� These options are discussed further under the risk management section of this report.

Options for the Production of Local Development Documents

1.3.12 The focus of the 2007 LDS was the production of the Core Strategy DPD, closely followed by the Land Allocations DPD.� The priority for the adoption of the Core Strategy has been confirmed in recently updated government policy (PPS12) and should remain the focus of the Council�s LDF.� The Core Strategy sets the policy framework for determining planning applications, but it is also the linchpin on which further DPDs spring from and SPDs must be produced.� The ability to rely on saved local plan policies and structure plan policies as the essential �hook� for further publications will diminish over time.

1.3.13 Whilst preparing a comprehensive sound evidence base for the Core Strategy over the past year, the Council has also produced two Character Area Assessment SPDs for the London Road and Loose Road areas, which are due to be adopted this year, and it is about to commence public consultation on the Residential Extensions SPD.

1.3.14 There are a number of further DPDs and SPDs that Members wish to advance.� The purpose of this report is to set Members� priorities for the production of documents over a 4-year period so that the LDS can be prepared quickly for Members� approval once a decision has been made on the inclusion or otherwise of an SRFI allocation.

1.3.15 Although not necessarily an exhaustive list, documents to be given consideration for inclusion in the LDS are:

� Core Strategy DPD (mandatory)

� Land Allocations DPD

� Gypsy & Traveller Pitch Allocations DPD

� Urban Regeneration AAP

� Generic Development Control Policies DPD

� Urban and Rural Open Spaces DPD

� Town Centre & Rural Service Centres Economy DPD

� Character Area Assessment SPDs

� Interim Planning Tariff SPD

� Shop Fronts and Advertisements SPD

� Kent Design Guide SPD

� Parking Strategy SPD

� High Buildings SPD

� Air Quality SPD

� Planning out Crime SPD

� Urban Extension SPD

� Landscape Character Area Assessment SPD

� Sustainable Construction SPD

� Public Art SPD

� Access for Disabled People SPD

� Planning Tariff and/or Community Infrastructure Levy SPD.

1.3.16 In addition to producing a suite of DPDs and SPDs, the Council will also:

� Publish and submit its Annual Monitoring Report to the Secretary of State by 31^st December

� Update Maidstone�s Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report in early 2009, in advance of revisiting the Core Strategy Sustainability Appraisal (SA) for public consultation

� Commence a revision of the Council�s Statement of Community Involvement in 2009 which, whilst still valid, is becoming outdated due to legislative changes.

1.3.17 Core Strategy DPD: A key LDF document setting the spatial vision and strategy for future development in Maidstone. �The Core Strategy will include strategic land allocations for major development and new road infrastructure essential for delivery of the strategy.� Resources must be focused on the Core Strategy in accordance with government policy and advice.� The LDS is unlikely to be approved by the Secretary of State if priority is not given to this DPD.

1.3.18 Land Allocations DPD: Site specific allocations for housing (including gypsy & traveller pitches), business and retail, and designation of countryside and environmental protection areas.� However, alternative options include preparing an autonomous DPD for gypsy & traveller pitch allocations to meet identified need, which is a local priority (see paragraph 1.3.19).� If Members also wish to give priority to the production of an Urban Regeneration AAP (see paragraph 1.3.20), which would include business and retail allocations for the town centre and surrounding areas, there is potential to delay the preparation of the Land Allocations DPD.� The Council currently has the necessary residential land supply to meet its short to medium term targets, a large proportion of which comprises brownfield sites, and it is highly likely that the Council will be allocating strategic greenfield housing land through the Core Strategy.� Further greenfield sites adjacent to the urban periphery and larger villages could therefore be allocated at a later stage, still within a year of the DPD�s earliest date of adoption. �However, it will be important to review the housing trajectory in advance of submission of the LDS to ensure delivery of medium to long term housing targets.� Since the borough�s land supply is continually monitored against residential targets, the DPD could be brought forward if a shortfall was predicted.� This approach would be a departure from the norm because the Land Allocations DPD is usually submitted to the Secretary of State following the adoption of the Core Strategy.� However, if Members are minded to adopt this approach, advice from GOSE can be sought at an early stage before the LDS is approved by Members for submission in order to avoid a Secretary of State Direction under section 15(4) of the Act.

1.3.19 Gypsy & Traveller Pitch Allocations DPD: Potential for an independent DPD allocating land for pitches to meet identified need.� The options for making provision through both �making land allocations to meet needs and a criteria policy to address planning applications on other sites is set out in Appendix C of this report (to follow along side further confidential advice issued under Part 2 of the Agenda). �One option is to set a criterion based policy for determining planning applications in the Core Strategy and once adopted, to allocate land for new pitches through the Land Allocations DPD (reflecting regionally set requirements).� This would be the standard approach.� The second option is to still formulate a criterion based policy in the Core Strategy, but to then produce a dedicated DPD for pitch allocations in advance of other land allocations. �This way land allocations for new pitches could be adopted more quickly than in the first option but not until after the Core Strategy was adopted.� Further options also exist and have been the subject of questions put to Counsel for legal opinion.� Members are clearly concerned to accelerate the development of policy and pitch allocations on these matters and to step out of the current position of �making provision by appeal�. �There are risks, and pros and cons, associated with all the options which are fully addressed in Appendix C. �The indicative programme at Appendix A provides for a dedicated pitch allocations DPD being submitted after adoption of regionally set district level targets by SEERA and after relevant criteria for site identification have been discussed at the Core Strategy Independent Examination. Alternative options and programmes are addressed in Appendix C.

1.3.20 Urban Regeneration AAP: Defining urban and suburban regeneration areas and providing a policy framework for the revival of defined areas.� Members may wish to prioritise an Action Area Plan for the town centre and surrounding pockets of urban areas above the Land Allocations DPD for the reasons outlined in paragraph 1.3.18 of this report.� The AAP would allocate land for business, retail, leisure and residential use, and it would develop a policy framework for the enhancement of the vitality and character of the town.� The AAP could also incorporate generic policies for the defined area, addressing issues on shop fronts, advertisements, high buildings, crime and disorder, licensing, parking, etc.� With respect to timing, the submission of the AAP should await the adoption of the Core Strategy to ensure it accords with sound Core Strategy policies.� Again, the approach of producing an Urban Regeneration AAP in advance of the Land Allocations DPD would require GOSE support prior to submission of the LDS.

1.3.21 Generic Development Control Policies DPD: Setting out criterion based policies for the determination of planning applications.� This DPD is currently programmed in the 2007 LDS.� Government advises that local authorities focus on their Core Strategies, but also recommends that Councils do not undertake a large number of DPDs.� Guidance is also clear that DPDs should not be repeating national, regional or local policy.� The issues this DPD was intending to address (sustainability, design, residential extensions, shop fronts, parking standards, etc.) are covered in planning legislation, Planning Policy Statements and other LDF documents, including the Core Strategy.� It is recommended that this DPD is not given priority and consequently is not carried forward to the revised LDS.

1.3.22 Urban and Rural Open Spaces DPD: Providing a detailed policy framework addressing the future role of the countryside and for the protection and enhancement of urban and rural open spaces.� Again, many of the issues intended to be addressed by this DPD are covered in planning legislation, government guidance and other LDF documents, in particular the Core Strategy and proposed Landscape Character Area Assessment SPD.� It is recommended that this DPD is not given priority and consequently is not carried forward to the revised LDS.

1.3.23 Town Centre and Rural Service Centres Economy DPD: Providing a detailed policy framework for retail and leisure uses in the town centre and rural service centres. �The proposed production of an Action Area Plan will address all of the town centre issues covered by this DPD.� The Core Strategy will set the policy framework for the Rural Service Centres.� It is recommended that this DPD is not carried forward to the revised LDS.

1.3.24 Character Area Assessment SPDs: Setting detailed criteria for the protection and enhancement of a series of special character areas throughout the borough.� Two pilot studies for the Loose Road and London Road areas are nearing completion.� A report outlining the lessons learned from the pilots will be presented to the next meeting of the Local Development Document Advisory Group and to Cabinet Member for Regeneration, once the public consultation period has ended.� A further report seeking the adoption of the two SPDs will be presented to the November or December meeting of the Advisory Group for consideration and to Cabinet Member for Regeneration for approval.� Whilst both pilot documents were produced by a Planning Consultant, the project management, public consultation and administrative process aspects of steering the SPDs through the LDF were undertaken by the Planning Policy team and consequently impacted on resources within the team.� Depending on the size and complexity of documents, the cost of producing further Character Area Assessments is likely to be in the region of �12�k to �15k per SPD, plus internal staff resources for the LDF processes that would be available if vacancies are filled.� Members need to consider the priority for further Character Area Assessments in the context of competing SPDs for a planning tariff, air quality or access for disabled people.

1.3.25 Interim Planning Tariff SPD: Setting out the circumstances under which the Council will expect development contributions from new development.� This would be an interim DPD whilst awaiting further government legislation and policy on Community Infrastructure Levy (see paragraph 1.3.37).� There is a clear need for this SPD to be produced quickly in order to secure contributions for strategic & local infrastructure and community facilities from windfall development.� Since resources can not be diverted from the Core Strategy to prepare the SPD, it is recommended that Members approve the use of external consultants to produce an Interim Planning Tariff SPD within the LDF budget, and that priority is given to Planning Policy team resources to steer the SPD through the LDF processes.

1.3.26 Shop Fronts and Advertisements SPD: Providing detailed policy guidance on the design of shop fronts and advertisements and on free standing advertisements.� An Urban Regeneration AAP would provide policy guidance for shop fronts and advertisements.� It is recommended that this DPD is not carried forward to the revised LDS.

1.3.27 Kent Design Guide SPD: Setting criteria to achieve design quality and sustainability in new development.� The process of preparation and consultation of the revised Kent Design Guide has been designed to allow all partner authorities across Kent to adopt the document as SPD. GOSE has confirmed that the draft document met the criteria required for a full and extensive consultation process, which Maidstone Borough Council contributed to, so the Council can proceed straight to adoption.� It is important that this document is adopted as SPD before the time limit on the Structure Plan expires.� Since the SPD is included in the 2007 LDS, it is recommended that a report seeking the formal adoption of the Kent Design Guide as SPD be presented to Members for consideration as soon as practical.� There will in fact be further options for producing LDDs for generic policies through partnership working.

1.3.28 Parking Strategy SPD: Addressing the parking needs of the borough, over and above County Council parking standards, having regard to the Maidstone Integrated Transport Strategy (MITS) and Local Transport Plan (LTP).� This SPD is crucial in developing detailed parking policy for the borough, but it is dependent on Core Strategy policies for sustainable transport provision and the completion of the MITS and LTP.� It is therefore proposed to programme the SPD in the latter period of the revised LDS, as new standards emerge when new infrastructure is permitted.

1.3.29 High Buildings SPD: Setting criteria for the determination of planning applications relating to tall buildings.� A criterion based SPD for assessing planning applications that involve high buildings is desirable but could be included in an Urban Regeneration AAP.� Given the need to produce higher priority SPDs, it is not recommended that an SPD be included in the revised LDS.

1.3.30 Air Quality SPD: Providing technical guidance for developers, their consultants and other interested stakeholders, on the way in which air quality and air pollution issues will be dealt with through the planning system.� A paper on Air Quality is being drafted by the Environmental Enforcement team which, once approved by Members, would be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications.� However, if the contents of the report are adopted as SPD through the LDF process, the policies would carry greater weight with the Inspectorate at appeals.� This is another case whereby the Planning Policy team resource would be focused on LDF procedure rather than document production.� The �hook� for an SPD on air quality would be Structure Plan policy NR5 or Core Strategy policy, depending on the timing of the SPD and its content.� Further work in this area would need to be undertaken before proceeding with an SPD, so it would not be programmed early in the LDS timetable.� Members will need to give consideration to including this SPD in the LDS against competing priorities.

1.3.31 Planning out Crime SPD: Setting out the design principles that the Council would wish to be demonstrated in developments for the prevention of crime.� The Kent Design Guide addresses the issue of how design can reduce crime, and good design principles are fundamental in the determination of planning applications.� Furthermore, where appropriate, each adopted DPD and/or SPD includes a section on designing out crime.� It is also worth noting that the Council is currently investigating opportunities for partnership working with other local authorities, which could include the production of generic policy documents and might offer an alternative way forward for establishing a criterion based policy document for reducing crime by design.� Given competing priorities, it is not recommended that an SPD on Planning out Crime is included in the revised LDS.

1.3.32 Urban Extension SPD: Developing the policy framework and land uses for the urban extension, as defined in the Core Strategy.� Dependent on Core Strategy policy.� It intended that the Core Strategy will define the strategic land allocations for the urban extension.� Therefore, following adoption of the Core Strategy, an SPD setting out the finer details of the allocated sites will be required.� It is recommended that an SPD be included in the revised LDS.

1.3.33 Landscape Character Area Assessment SPD: Developing a �toolkit� for the determination of planning applications within identified landscape character areas.� Dependent on Core Strategy policy.� A Landscape Character Area Assessment is currently underway as part of the evidence base for the Core Strategy.� Once the Core Strategy is adopted, an SPD on the implementation of policy in defined landscape areas will be required.� Much of the groundwork for an SPD is being carried out as part of the evidence base assessment.� It is therefore recommended that an SPD be included in the revised LDS along the same timeframe as that for the Urban Extension SPD.

1.3.34 Sustainable Construction SPD: Encouraging sustainable building approaches, recycling and energy conservation in all development.� Members will recall that the Sustainable Construction: Using Water SPD was adopted in July 2006.� Subsequently, Members resolved not to produce other parts of the SPD on energy and accessibility.� Renewable energy is already addressed in government Planning Policy Statements, and the Core Strategy will contain policies on sustainable design and construction.� The South East Plan is likely to allow local targets to be set for on-site energy regeneration.� Improving accessibility for disabled people and supporting Lifetime Homes could be addressed through an Access for Disabled People SPD (see paragraph 1.3.36).� Additionally, as explained in paragraph 1.3.31, there may be an opportunity to produce generic policy documents in partnership with other local authorities.� It is therefore recommended that further chapters of the Sustainable Construction SPD are not resurrected.

1.3.35 Public Art SPD: Setting design and funding criteria for securing public art as part of the planning process. ��Funding for public art will be considered as part of the Interim Planning Tariff SPD (see paragraph 1.3.25) and opportunities for identifying the need for public art addressed in an Urban Regeneration AAP. Given the urgency to prepare other documents as part of the LDF, it is not recommended that an SPD for Public Art should be a priority for the revised LDS.

1.3.36 Access for Disabled People SPD: Setting criteria to secure suitable access facilities for disabled people, to assist in the determination of planning applications and building regulations.� The recent Comprehensive Area Assessment of the Council highlighted the fact that Maidstone ought to have an up-to-date policy document on access for disabled people.� If Members wish to adopt an SPD addressing access for disabled people, the document could be produced internally by another Council team or by external consultants within the LDF budget.� Again, the Planning Policy team would need to steer the SPD through the LDF process to ensure soundness.

1.3.37 Planning Tariff and/or Community Infrastructure Levy SPD: Paragraph 1.3.25 discusses the need for an Interim Planning Tariff SPD based on existing structure plan and local plan policies.� It is envisaged that the Council will move to a new planning tariff based on Core Strategy policy and associated infrastructure plans.� The SPD would be designed in such a way that it could be converted from planning tariff to community infrastructure levy if advantageous to the Council.� A judgement for the way forward would be made once government legislation for a levy is published.

Summary of Options

1.3.38 In addition to publishing the AMR for submission to the Secretary of State, reviewing the SCI and updating the Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report, the recommended approach towards prioritising Local Development Documents in the LDS is:

� Core Strategy DPD

� Gypsy & Traveller Pitch Allocations DPD

� Interim Planning Tariff SPD

� Parking Strategy SPD

� Urban Regeneration AAP

� Land Allocations DPD

� Kent Design Guide SPD

� Access for Disabled People SPD

� Air Quality SPD

� Urban Extension SPD

� Landscape Character Area Assessment SPD

� Planning Tariff and/or Community Infrastructure Levy SPD

It is important to note that further Character Area Assessment SPDs have not been programmed at this stage.� To include additional SPDs is likely to be at the cost of other documents.

1.3.39 The documents in italics represent those that could be prepared by other teams within the Council or by external consultants.� Reducing the number of DPDs in the revised LDS will save on production costs and Independent Examination fees, thereby giving an opportunity to produce the additional documents within the LDF budget.� This approach will produce a comprehensive policy framework for the LDF in a relatively short time frame (4 years).� With the exception of further Character Area Assessment SPDs, a draft timetable for the production of Local Development Documents is set out in Appendices A and B.� Appendix A sets a programme for the production of DPDs or AAPs, which have a more structured plan making process than SPDs as timetabled in Appendix B.

1.3.40 In terms of staff resources, the amount of Officers� time required to steer documents prepared by outside bodies through the LDF process to ensure soundness of LDDs should not be underestimated.� Setting work programmes, commissioning consultants, project management, ensuring legislative requirements such as the need for Sustainability Appraisals are met, transferring documents to the Limehouse system in readiness for public consultation, the preparation of formal statements, public notices, consultation lists, the public consultation exercise, quality assurance and the production of Member reports take a considerable amount of time over the lifespan of document preparation.� Therefore, the draft timetable assumes that at least some of the staff vacancies are filled over the next few months.

Programming of Local Development Documents

1.3.41 The timescales for producing Local Development Documents (LDD) depend on the complexity of the documents, the resources available to produce them, and the inter-relationship of LDDs with other documents.� The diagram below helps to explain this relationship for the list of proposed documents set out in paragraph 1.3.38.� In particular it demonstrates SPD relationships with parent DPDs, and LDDs with non LDF documents.

Local Development Document Relationships

1.3.42 Members will note that the draft LDS timetable (Appendices A and B) does not set target dates.� This is because the Council cannot move forward to re-consult on its Core Strategy until its position on the inclusion (or otherwise) of a strategic rail freight interchange allocation is known.� When that decision is made, a refined LDS incorporating Members� priorities for the production of LDF documents will be the subject of a new report.� It is emphasised that the purpose of this report is to establish what those priorities are.

1.4 Alternative Action and why not Recommended

1.4.1 The programme for producing Local Development Documents set out in the Local Development Scheme (2007) has been delayed due to factors outside of the Council�s control (the SRFI representation at Preferred Options stage of the Core Strategy and the introduction of new legislation relating to the LDF process). ��Consequently the Local Development Scheme is considerable out-of-date, even though the production of certain LDDs under the current Scheme has continued.� There is an option not to revise the LDS but Councils are obliged to maintain an up-to-date LDS to ensure timely and effective delivery of its LDF.

1.4.2 The report discusses alternative routes to achieving a planning policy framework for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation. Taking no action would fail to address the need for Gypsy, Traveller (and possibly Travelling Showpeople) pitches in a planned, pro-active manner and would risk inappropriate sites being granted at appeal for a continued and indefinite period.

1.4.3 There are numerous options for alternative actions for the production of LDF documents examined in this report.

1.5 Impact on Corporate Objectives

1.5.1 The LDF sets the policy framework for the Council so all LDDs will aim to meet corporate objectives set out in the Strategic Plan and the Sustainable Community Strategy.

1.6 Risk Management

1.6.1 The following table identifies the risks and mitigation measures involved in creating a new programme for the LDS.

1.6.2

Risk	Likelihood	Impact	Mitigation Measures
Further delays to the Core Strategy DPD	Dependent on Members� decision on SRFI allocation	Significant	Early consideration of LDS options, and await Members� decision before submitting LDS to Secretary of State
Issue of Section 15(4) Direction by Secretary of State	Unknown at this stage	Critical	Early engagement with GOSE
Failing to meet revised LDS milestones	Dependent on formulating pragmatic targets to take account of� resources	Critical/Significant	Setting of realistic milestones and determining available resources prior to submission of LDS to Secretary of State
Staff vacancies not filled	High	Critical	Review situation and adjust LDS programme accordingly
Confirmed SEERA pitch requirement is lower/higher than currently �estimated	significant	critical/ marginal depending on magnitude of difference.	Await confirmation of requirement before Publishing Gypsy pitch site allocations
Adverse public reaction to gypsy & traveller site allocations	significant	critical/ marginal depending on magnitude	Establish sound evidence base; Establish monitoring regime; Ensure early and continued stakeholder involvement
Risk of planning applications being granted on appeal if provision of pitches not maintained	significant	significant	Agree and implement approach to establishing a planning policy framework

1.7 Other Implications

1.7.1

1.�� Financial

2. Staffing

3. Legal

4. Social Inclusion

5. Environmental/Sustainable Development

6. Community Safety

7. Human Rights Act

8. Procurement

9. Asset Management

1.7.2 Financial: The number of LDDs proposed for the revised LDS will impact on the LDF budget, as will the approach taken to the production of certain documents (using in-house resources and/or the use of consultants).� There would be some savings on production costs and Independent Examination fees by reducing the number of DPD/AAP documents from six in the 2007 LDS to three or four (depending on whether a dedicated DPD for Gypsy and Traveller Pitch Allocations is included in the LDS).� Meeting milestones for the Core Strategy and Land Allocations DPDs secures Housing and Planning Delivery Grant.� There is no immediate financial impact arising from this report but, based on the decisions made, a case to draw down on funds will form part of a report to Cabinet Member.

1.7.3 Staffing: Difficult to fill vacancies are having a major impact on team resources.�� Short and long term solutions to these problems will need to be found to enable the continued production of a comprehensive LDF.� It is important to note that even if documents are prepared by consultants, considerable staff time is required to steer documents through the LDF processes.

1.7.4 Social Inclusion: Social inclusion is inherent in the documents that will be produced under the LDS.

1.7.5 Environmental/Sustainable Development: All Local Development Documents must have regard to the effects on social, environmental and economic objectives, which are the key indicators in defining sustainability.

1.7.6 Procurement: The use of consultants will require invitations to tender or submit quotations for the work to be undertaken.

1.8 Background Documents

1.8.1 ● Local Development Scheme (2007)

http://www.digitalmaidstone.co.uk/PDF/070329_LDS%20March%202007.pdf

● Annual Monitoring Report (2006/07)

http://www.digitalmaidstone.co.uk/pdf/080117%20AMR%20Final%200607.pdf

● Circulars 01/06 and 04/07 http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/143579

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/circular0407

NO REPORT WILL BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT THIS BOX BEING COMPLETED

Is this a Key Decision?�� Yes�� No��

If yes, when did it appear in the Forward Plan? October 2008

Is this an Urgent Key Decision?�� Yes�� No

Reason for Urgency

N/A