MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
Decision Made: |
27 January 2014 |
MAIDSTONE INTEGRATED TRANSPORT STRATEGY
Issue for Decision
The report sets out how the Integrated Transport Strategy (ITS) has developed and the direction the strategy is taking. It also sets out the next steps for the developing the ITS further.
Decision Made
a)
That the refined vision and objectives for the Integrated Transport
Strategy as the basis for officers to work with Kent County Council and other
transport providers in achieving improvements to the transport systems in
Maidstone be approved; and
b) That the work programme as set out in in paragraph 1.3.42 of the report of the Head of Planning and Development for developing the ITS to a full draft document and public consultation in the summer of 2014 be approved.
Reasons for Decision
This section provides the background and context to show how the Integrated Transport Strategy (“ITS”) has developed since the previous draft ITS went out for public consultation in August 2012. Information is provided on the actions taken to review the ITS and refine the direction of the transport strategy and produce a new vision and objectives. It also identifies a programme of further work now required to develop a full draft ITS. The Cabinet was invited to agree these to guide Maidstone Officers’ work in achieving a jointly agreed strategy with Kent County Council with a view to achieving the timetable for further modelling in Spring 2014 and public consultation in Summer 2014 as set out below.
Maidstone Borough Council (“MBC”) and Kent County Council (“KCC”) are working to achieve a jointly agreed document and significant work has been undertaken together including jointly funded traffic modelling. In this Council’s view the existing traffic situation in Maidstone is one of significant congestion on our roads. It is accepted that traffic congestion will increase as the borough grows, so the ITS is designed to minimise this increase and to mitigate the associated impacts on the local economy and air quality. The ITS is also directed towards improving road user safety and education.
Transport Strategy Development
The previous draft ITS was based on the results of multi-modal transport modelling commissioned by KCC and MBC. The model was used in 2011 and early 2012 to test the impact of planned housing and employment growth, together with background traffic growth, on the local transport network. The previous local plan housing target of 10,080 (to 2026) was used. The baseline data that informed the model was collected in 2007 at inner and outer cordon points around the Maidstone urban area. The data showed that the vast majority of vehicular traffic crossing the outer cordon in the morning peak hour was heading to destinations within the town itself, usually passing through the town centre to destinations including the secondary schools and the hospital. On this basis, the modelling strongly indicated that the provision of strategic highway capacity around the town (for example, the South East Maidstone Strategic Link scheme) would not represent a cost-effective solution to existing and forecast traffic congestion in and around the town centre.
These considerations, together with the significant peak period congestion and poor air quality across the urban area, require the ITS to complement one of the core principles in the NPPF, which is to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling. The ITS therefore focuses primarily on demand management measures (such as park and ride services, bus priority measures and enhanced walking and cycling infrastructure), combined with targeted highway capacity improvements at strategic junctions. This will enable people to make informed choices about how and when they travel to and from the town centre and other destinations in the borough.
KCC and MBC jointly identified three transport strategy options to address the impact of forecast trip growth over the local plan period; namely, Option 1: ‘Do Minimum’, Option 2: ‘Radial P&R Sites’ and Option 3: ‘North / South P&R Spine’.
Transport Strategy Options |
||
Option 1 |
Option 2 |
Option 3 |
|
Option 1 plus:
|
Option 1 plus:
|
Each of the options was modelled and subject to cost benefit analysis. Option 3 was found to have the most beneficial impact on traffic flows and to represent the greatest value for money. However, concerns over the existing subsidy requirement for park and ride and the capital cost of options 2 and 3 resulted in a modified option 1 being selected for public consultation in the summer of 2012.
Responses to the public consultation exercise on the ITS were collated to help inform its development. Responses ranged from those related to specific development sites and areas linked to the local plan, which will be considered through the planning process, to general comments regarding the overall strategy and specific comments regarding particular measures and actions. In terms of the issues raised, these varied from the need to tackle traffic congestion (approximately 12% of respondents), whilst not forgetting the needs of motorists, improving public transport provision including park and ride (approximately 23% of respondents), carefully considering town centre parking and enhancing walking and cycling infrastructure (approximately 12% of respondents). The need to ensure the strategy is deliverable and funding sources are identified was also raised.
In October 2012, the Joint Transportation Board (JTB) resolved that the level of forecast journey time increase on arterial routes associated with option 1 was not acceptable. In order to progress the ITS, it has therefore been necessary for officers to review and redefine the available options. At the meeting of the JTB in January 2013, an Informal Member Group (IMG) was established to progress the ITS and address the JTB’s concerns.
Transport Strategy Review
The technical studies completed to date, together with the outcome of the public consultation exercise and the resolution of the JTB, demonstrate that any ‘Do Minimum’ option would not satisfactorily address existing or forecast congestion. They also provide a strong indication that deliverable and cost-effective demand management measures, such as a north/south park and ride spine with bus priority measures on routes serving the sites, should continue to form the basis of the ITS.
These principles were accepted by the IMG, which agreed to recommend that new and /or enhanced park and ride services should feature in the revised ITS, alongside measures to increase highway capacity at strategic junctions in and around Maidstone. The IMG also expressed a clear view that any measures to increase the attractiveness of non-car modes should not disadvantage car or freight traffic.
On the advice of the IMG, KCC and MBC officers visited colleagues at Essex County Council and Chelmsford City Council to view the city’s new park and ride service and associated bus priority measures, and to discuss the critical success factors which could be applied in Maidstone. The meeting strengthened the findings of the earlier modelling exercise that a small number of large, purpose-built park and ride sites serving distinct catchment areas offer the strongest prospect of becoming commercially viable in the medium term. The park and ride service would also need to include bus priority measures along the route to provide journey time savings.
Alongside the enhanced park and ride facilities, highway capacity and pedestrian accessibility improvements at the Maidstone bridges gyratory are also proposed. The preferred option, which was endorsed by the JTB in October 2013, is to progress the previous ‘A229 Through Link’ scheme, involving the provision of two northbound lanes on the eastern side of the River Medway.
Defining the Transport Strategy Framework
It is considered that the ITS review exercise provides a sound basis on which to progress and develop a transport strategy framework. There are a number of essential elements to the strategy, which are then supported by discretionary elements.
The essential elements include:-
· A more targeted park and ride service, with new and / or improved sites in the vicinity of M20 junction 7 and at Linton Crossroads on the A229 corridor to the south of the town, aimed at long-stay commuters into the town centre;
· Bus priority measures in tandem with the enhanced park and ride service;
· Highway capacity improvements at the bridges gyratory and at other key junctions in and around the strategic development areas of north west Maidstone, south east Maidstone and M20 junction 7, to improve journey time reliability and air quality;
· Increased bus service frequencies (to at least every 7 minutes) on radial routes serving Maidstone town centre;
· Walking and cycling infrastructure, focusing on improved wayfinding, safer crossing points at the town centre gyratory, and improvements to the River Medway towpath;
· A car sharing initiative in partnership with local employers; and
· A refreshed town centre parking strategy, which will look to increase long-stay car parking charges and reduce car parking supply to promote the use of park and ride, and a reduction in short-stay car parking to prioritise shoppers and visitors.
The discretionary elements include:-
· A reduced town centre long-stay parking supply;
· A Maidstone public transport smartcard, similar to London’s oyster card;
· A new park and ride service on the A229 corridor linked to the route 101 bus service, in partnership with Medway Council;
· Inbound bus and / or High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes on the A229 Royal Engineers Road and / or A229 Loose Road corridors; and
· Greater use of the River Medway as a transport corridor.
The development of the transport strategy framework as shown above allowed the vision and objectives for the ITS to be redefined with the aim of making them more concise and targeted.
A Transport Vision for Maidstone
The transport vision for Maidstone set out in the draft local plan states that “by 2031, Maidstone will have a transport network that supports a prosperous economy and provides genuine transport choices to help people make more journeys by sustainable modes such as public transport, walking and cycling. The transport network will promote Maidstone town centre as a regionally important transport hub and will have sufficient people and goods-moving capacity to support the growth projected by the local plan to 2031. The borough will have a safe environment for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists and its air quality will be better with more low carbon vehicles travelling on our roads. Both the rural service centres and Maidstone town centre will be better connected to facilities and employment within the borough. Strategic links to locations outside of the borough will be improved, and destinations such as London will be more accessible. Overall, Maidstone will be a better place to live with an enhanced quality of life supported by an improved transport network”.
Transport Objectives
The transport objectives for the borough and how these will be achieved are as follows:
Ensure the transport system supports the growth projected by Maidstone’s local plan and facilitates economic prosperity
This will be achieved by:
· Integrating transport and land use planning to support sustainable development, particularly in the growth areas identified in the local plan;
· Securing travel plans and appropriate developer contributions to ensure that the impacts of new development are adequately mitigated;
· Securing construction environmental management plans to minimise the impacts from new developments during construction;
· Investing in better public transport provision, in partnership with commercial bus and rail operators;
· Improving walking and cycling infrastructure, focusing on routes across the River Medway and the town centre gyratory;
· Enhancing the accessibility and safety of the borough’s transport network;
· Highway capacity improvements at the Maidstone bridges gyratory and at other key junctions in and around the strategic development areas of north west Maidstone, south east Maidstone and M20 junction 7; and
· Facilitating the safe and efficient movement of goods and servicing trips across the borough.
Manage demand on the transport network through enhanced public transport and park and ride services and walking and cycling improvements
This will be achieved by:
· An enhanced park and ride service, with new and / or improved sites in the vicinity of M20 junction 7 and on the A229 corridor to the south of the town, aimed at long-stay commuters into the town centre;
· Bus priority measures on park and ride routes in tandem with the enhanced service;
· Increased bus service frequencies (to at least every 7 minutes) on radial routes serving Maidstone town centre;
· Inbound bus and / or High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes on the A229 Royal Engineers Road and / or A229 Loose Road corridors;
· Improved walking and cycling infrastructure, focusing on routes across the River Medway and the town centre gyratory; and
· Securing travel plans and appropriate developer contributions to ensure that the impacts of new development are adequately mitigated.
Improve highway network capacity and function at key locations and junctions across the borough
This will be achieved by:
· Highway capacity improvements at the Maidstone bridges gyratory and at other key junctions in and around the strategic development areas of north west Maidstone, south east Maidstone and M20 junction 7.
Manage parking provision in the town centre and the wider borough to ensure it is fair and proportionate and supports demand management
This will be achieved by:
· A refreshed town centre parking strategy, prioritising shoppers and visitors;
· Giving consideration to a reduction in town centre long-stay parking supply;
· Utilising town centre parking tariffs to encourage a shift to sustainable modes of transport such as park and ride; and
· Reviewing the residents’ parking zones to ensure they are fair, simple and meet the needs of all road users.
Improve transport choice across the borough and seek to influence travel behaviour
This will be achieved by:
· Implementing an Influencing Travel Behaviour (ITB) programme;
· Securing travel plans for new development in order to influence their associated travel behaviour patterns;
· Improved walking and cycling infrastructure, focusing on routes across the River Medway and the town centre gyratory;
· A high-profile car sharing initiative in partnership with local employers;
· Introducing a Maidstone public transport smartcard, similar to London’s oyster card; and
· Greater use of the River Medway as a transport corridor.
Improving strategic links to Maidstone across the county and to wider destinations such as London
This will be achieved by:
· Investigating the feasibility of a new park and ride service on the A229 corridor linked to the route 101 bus service, in partnership with Medway Council;
· Improved train service frequency and capacity to London through working with central government and the train operating companies; and
· Working with the Highways Agency to continue to enhance Maidstone’s strategic road network connections.
Ensure the transport network provides inclusive access for all users
This will be achieved by:
· Reducing traffic dominance and severance;
· Improving road safety across all modes;
· Encouraging modes of transport that are affordable and easily available to everyone, such as walking, cycling and public transport;
· Improving the provision of transport information; and
· Removing physical barriers and ensuring transport modes are accessible to all users.
Address the air quality impact of transport
This will be achieved by:
· Implementing the Maidstone Air Quality Action Plan and Low Emission Strategy;
· Encouraging the take up of low carbon vehicle technology; and
· Providing the necessary supporting infrastructure to enable the use of low carbon vehicle technology.
Next Steps and Timetable
It is considered that the data derived from existing strategic transport modelling is now out of date. The previous modelling work was based on a housing figure of 10,080 and a future year of 2026. The housing figure is set to change significantly and in order to ensure the local plan is supported by a robust and sound transport evidence base it is considered necessary to undertake a new strategic transport modelling exercise once a new housing target and distribution strategy has been agreed.
The new modelling will factor in the trips generated by any housing and employment sites allocates in the draft local plan, and will cover the plan period 2011-2031. However, notwithstanding the fact that new modelling will be undertaken, the results of the previous modelling exercise combined with recent data obtained from transport modelling undertaken for the strategic sites in the south east and north west of the urban area, is considered robust enough.
On this basis, a number of steps need to be taken to develop the ITS further and to gain agreement to undertake a new public consultation exercise. The actions to be taken and approximate timings are as follows:
· Action: Agree a brief for carrying out the strategic transport modelling work based on a new agreed housing target, distribution strategy and package of transport mitigation measures.
· When: Spring 2014.
· Action: Undertake strategic transport modelling work to understand the transport impact of the proposed local plan growth. Test the package of transport mitigation measures in order to identify the measures required to manage the identified transport impact.
· When: Spring 2014.
· Action: Based on the outcomes of the modelling work, refine the ITS and develop an action plan. Produce a full draft ITS document and bring it to Scrutiny and Cabinet for agreement to go out to public consultation.
· When: Spring / Summer 2014.
· Action: Carry out public consultation of the draft ITS.
· When: Summer 2014.
Cabinet also considered an urgent update provided at the meeting from the Chief Executive following letters from KCC raising concerns with the report of the Head of Planning and Development.
The Cabinet considered the request to withdraw the report from the Agenda, however felt that the amendments to the recommendations proposed in the urgent update covered the points raised by KCC and agreed to consider the report.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
Not progressing the ITS would undermine the robustness and soundness of the evidence base of the emerging local plan.
Background Papers
None
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Policy and Communications by: 5 February 2014 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
Decision Made: |
27 January 2014 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH LOCAL PLAN PUBLIC CONSULTATION DRAFT - GROUP 3 POLICIES
Issue for Decision
This final group of local plan policies will comprise the housing target and spatial distribution of development for the borough, and a number of transport based policies.
Decision Made
a)
That Policy SP3 for Rural Service Centres and SP4 for Larger Settlements
be deferred and will be considered alongside the Strategic Housing Land
Allocations Assessment scheduled to be considered by Overview & Scrutiny
and Cabinet in February 2014; and
b) That the proposed policies listed below and associated plans of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan (as attached at Appendix A to the report of the Head of Planning and Development) be approved for public consultation:-
Development Management Policies (borough wide) |
|
DM1 |
Development on Brownfield Land |
DM13 |
Sustainable Transport (previously CS7) |
DM14 |
Public Transport |
DM15 |
Park and Ride |
DM16 |
Air Quality |
Park and Ride Land Allocations |
|
PKR1(1) |
Linton Crossroads |
PKR1(2) |
Old Sittingbourne Road |
Reasons for Decision
The Cabinet report of 4 December 2013 explained that development management and spatial policies were being taken to Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet in three groups because of the number of policies that comprise the new local plan. The first and second groups of policies were approved by Cabinet on 22 October and 4 December 2013 respectively.
The report of the Head of Planning and Development focused on a third and final group of local plan policies before the local plan as a whole is brought to Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet in February 2014. The list of Group 3 policies is included in the table below.
Group 3 Policies |
|
|
|
Spatial Policies |
|
SP3 |
Rural Service Centres (previously CS4) |
SP4 |
Larger Settlements |
Development Management Policies (borough wide) |
|
DM1 |
Development on Brownfield Land |
DM13 |
Sustainable Transport (previously CS7) |
DM14 |
Public Transport |
DM15 |
Park and Ride |
DM16 |
Air Quality |
Park and Ride Land Allocations |
|
PKR1(1) |
Linton Crossroads |
PKR1(2) |
Old Sittingbourne Road |
The group of policies above includes a mixture of Core Strategy policies which have been seen by Members before, some of which have since been amended for inclusion in the local plan, and a number of new local plan policies. The following paragraphs add some detail on the amendments made to existing policies, where relevant, and the content of the new policies.
SP3 & SP4 Rural Service Centre and Larger Settlements
The Cabinet decision to withdraw spatial policies SP3 and SP4 from the draft plan followed a recommendation from Scrutiny Committee (2 December 2013) that officers meet with the parish councils and Ward Members for the settlements not previously designated in the settlement hierarchy for the borough, namely; Coxheath, Yalding, Boughton Monchelsea, Eyhorne Street (Hollingbourne) and Sutton Valence. The purpose of the meetings was to discuss the methodology used in making the designations and to hear any concerns that the parish councils may have with the policies going forward.
The settlement hierarchy for Maidstone establishes the most sustainable locations in the borough. The town centre and urban area sit at the top of the hierarchy because this is where the infrastructure is best and where the majority of the borough’s population is situated in closest proximity to a wide range of services and facilities. The edge of the urban area is considered the next most sustainable location because any additional population in these areas can easily access services and facilities in the urban area and can make best use of existing infrastructure, e.g. public transport.
Outside of the urban and edge of urban areas, the rural service centres (“RSC”) are considered the next most sustainable locations in the borough. The RSCs have more services and facilities, larger populations and better infrastructure than any other settlements in the borough. They serve their local communities and surrounding hinterland and are therefore considered more sustainable than the larger settlements, which are smaller in population and range of services, and tend to provide for the day-to-day needs of their local populations, therefore sitting below the RSCs in the settlement hierarchy.
Meetings have now taken place with the parish councils (and Ward Members) with respect to the Cabinet decision to withdraw policies SP3 and SP4, where officers have had the opportunity to better explain the need for a settlement hierarchy and the reasons why certain settlements are included in the hierarchy. Concerns were expressed by a number of the parish councils, which mainly focused on slight inaccuracies in the audit of services and facilities supporting the policies, and the perceived role the respective settlements play in the hierarchy.
Officers have given further consideration to the policies following the recent meetings and have decided to retain the designations as set out in the Scrutiny report of 2 December 2013. The settlements of Coxheath and Yalding are still considered suitable as rural service centres based on population, range of services and facilities, role of the settlement in serving a wider hinterland and potential to improve the range of services, facilities and infrastructure with respect to any future new development. However, Policy SP3 has been amended with respect to both settlements based on information received at the meetings. The amendments to the supporting text have focused on improving the accuracy of reporting on healthcare provision in Coxheath and highlighting the importance of flood mitigation in Yalding, particularly for the Syngenta site. The policy itself has been strengthened to provide more clarity on the fact that new development will only be approved within the settlement boundaries once they are redrawn in the new local plan. This will ensure that coalescence of settlements cannot occur.
Policy SP4 remains unchanged. Boughton Monchelsea, Eyhorne Street (Hollingbourne) and Sutton Valence are considered suitable to include in the settlement hierarchy for the borough because each settlement has enough key services and facilities to support the day-to-day needs of its local population, and the population of these settlements is greater than a number of others with a similar level of services.
However, following points raised at the meeting by Visiting Members and Cabinet Members, it was proposed that Policies SP3 and SP4 be deferred until consideration of the Strategic Housing Land Allocations Assessment (“SHLAA”) sites so that Cabinet can gain clarity as to the SHLAA implications of allocating these sites.
DM13 – Sustainable Transport (previously CS7 (2013))
Policy DM13 was approved as an interim local plan development management policy by Cabinet in March 2013. The policy is linked to the Integrated Transport Strategy (ITS), which supports the local plan with the aim of improving accessibility across the borough and to the town centre, in order to promote Maidstone as a regionally important transport hub. The supporting text and the policy have been further improved since Cabinet in March to add greater detail on air quality mitigation measures and adding a commitment to an enhanced public transport system which focuses on linkages to and from the town centre and to the rural service centres.
DM15 – Park and Ride Sites
Policy DM15 was approved by Cabinet for public consultation in August 2013 and sets the range of criteria that must be met if a new or replacement park and ride site is proposed. The only amendment to this policy is the inclusion of Linton Crossroads (to serve the A229 corridor) as a designated bus park and ride site along with the existing sites at Old Sittingbourne Road, Willington Street and London Road.
Linton Crossroads has been included in this policy based on transport modelling undertaken in 2011 and 2012, which has been used to support the ITS, part of the local plan evidence base. The evidence base shows that a site near Linton Crossroads is the most suitable location for park and ride to the south of the borough because it is at an appropriate distance from the town centre to intercept traffic movements early enough along the A229 corridor, and because the site would provide easy access to the identified catchment area, and particularly long stay commuters travelling to the town centre from the south of the borough. The ITS is the subject of a separate report on this Committee agenda.
The park and ride sites policy DM15 is supported by two park and ride site allocation policies, namely; the new site allocation at Linton Crossroads and an improved policy for the existing park and ride site at Old Sittingbourne Road (Eclipse Business Park) near the M20 junction 7. The “Eclipse” site is still considered the most appropriate site for park and ride to the north of the town based on the transport modelling and the fact that the site is already established and well integrated into the landscape in this location near the North Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The policies include detailed criteria to mitigate for any adverse impacts the sites may have on the landscape or the surrounding highways network and to ensure that any proposals for these sites are designed to a high standard to make them as attractive as possible for commuters. Both park and ride site allocation policies are included as in Appendix A to this report.
Policy DM16 - Air Quality
This is a new policy that has been developed to address growing air quality issues in the borough and to complement the National Planning Policy Framework requirement for councils to sustain compliance with EU limit values and national objectives for pollutants. The council has a responsibility to work towards achieving these targets and does this through the Local Air Quality Management regime. Through this function the council has identified 6 areas currently exceeding EU guideline values and has an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) in place in order to identify measures aimed at reducing air pollution at these locations.
The supporting text to the Air Quality policy gives examples of appropriate mitigation measures for proposals that will affect air quality, and links the evaluation of air quality impacts to the principles set out in the AQAP. This is taken forward into the policy where mitigation measures are required which are locationally specific and proportionate to the likely impacts of any new development proposals.
Policy DM1 – Development on Brownfield Land
The council has been very successful in recent years in delivering development on brownfield land. A large proportion of brownfield sites in the urban area have been developed at high densities for housing, particularly in and adjacent to the town centre along the River Medway. This new policy sets to build on this success and responds to one of the core principles of the National Planning Policy Framework, which encourages the effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed, provided it is not of high environmental value.
Policies in the new Maidstone Borough Local Plan have been designed to avoid repetition, so the local plan should be read as a whole when determining planning applications. A table of all local plan policies is included at Appendix B. The draft local plan (including site allocations) will be presented to Cabinet, via Scrutiny Committee, in February 2014. This will give Members the opportunity to see the draft local plan as a single document and to see how a number of the policies are interconnected. It is hoped that the document will be approved by Cabinet to go forward for Regulation 18 public consultation, which is currently scheduled to commence in March 2014.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
The policies could have been presented to Cabinet for approval as part of the new Maidstone Borough Local Plan as a whole. However, deliberation of these policies, some of which have not been seen by Members since October 2011, at this point offers the opportunity for early debate, and the chance to identify new local issues that have not been addressed through these and/or other policies that will be carried forward to the local plan. This is the final batch of policies that will be brought to Cabinet in advance of the whole local plan being brought for consideration and approval in February 2014.
Background Papers
None
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Policy and Communications by: 5 February 2014 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
Decision Made: |
27 January 2014 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH LOCAL PLAN DRAFT SPATIAL STRATEGY
Issue for Decision
To consider the borough's objectively assessed needs arising from the Strategic Housing Market Assessment. It will seek Member approval of the draft local plan spatial strategy for public consultation, including the targets for new dwellings and employment/retail floorspace.
Decision Made
a)
That the borough’s objectively assessed housing need of 19,600 dwellings
for the local plan period 2011 to 2031 as the basis for determining the housing
provision for the borough be agreed;
b)
That the currently identified potential to make provision for 17,100 dwellings,
subject to full consideration of proposed housing site allocations in February
2014 be noted;
c)
That the borough’s objectively assessed need of 37 hectares for office,
industry and warehousing based sectors and at the Maidstone medical campus for the
plan period 2011 to 2031, and the draft provisions for employment floorspace
(offices 39,830m2; industry 20,290m2; warehousing 49,911m2;
medical 98,000m2) be noted;
d) That
the key local issues, as amended, set out in paragraph 1.3.46 of the report of
the Head of Planning and Development be noted; and
e)
That the spatial vision and objectives, as amended, set out in paragraph
1.3.48 of the report of the Head of Planning and Development be agreed, subject
to the earlier decision of the Cabinet to defer the decision on Policies SP3
and SP4 which impacts on the designation of Coxheath and Yalding as Rural
Service Centres and the designation of Larger Settlements.
Reasons for Decision
Introduction
Since the Cabinet decision[1]
to prepare a single Maidstone Borough Local Plan, Cabinet has received several
reports on groups of local plan policies. Members have given consideration to
spatial policies for urban and rural areas together with more detailed
development management policies.
The spatial strategy and development targets were initially
set out in the Core Strategy, which was subject to public consultation in
September/October 2011. However, new government guidance, namely the National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in 2012 (and subsequent draft
National Planning Practice Guidance 2013), required the evidence base
supporting the spatial strategy to be updated. Consequently, the Strategic
Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), the Economic Sensitivity Testing and
Employment Land Forecast report, Strategic Housing and Economic Development
Land Availability Assessments (SHLAA and SEDLAA), and the Town Centre
Assessment and Retail Capacity Study have been prepared as part of the local
plan evidence base. In addition, a consultation draft Green and Blue
Infrastructure Strategy has been produced.
In 2011 the council sought the public’s views on a housing
target of 10,080 for the period 2006 to 2026, using a dispersed distribution of
development. The main issues raised by respondents were reported to Cabinet on
25 July 2012. There were mixed responses to the Council’s 10,080 dwelling
target whereby some respondents supported the target (22 respondents or 5%)
while others believed it was too high or too low (42 respondents or 9%). A
proportion of the development industry proposed a higher target, while
residents sought a reduction.
There was a consensus of support from both the development
industry and residents for a dispersed distribution pattern of development that
delivers housing at the urban fringe and at rural service centres, although a
minority of respondents did object in part or as a whole.
There was support for the principle of identifying a
strategic housing development location to the north west of the urban area in
the vicinity of Allington, although some objections focused on reducing the
amount of housing proposed. A number of residents and the adjoining local
authority unconditionally objected to development in this location (47
respondents or 10%) on the grounds of increased traffic congestion, the impact
on the landscape, and maintenance of the strategic gap between conurbations.
There was general support for the south east strategic
housing development location around Park Wood and Otham (6 respondents or 1%).
In the main, objections were from a minority section of the development
industry who objected to a move away from a strategic development area that
would accommodate 3,000 or 5,000 dwellings supported by a strategic link road.
There was a call for the inclusion of specific targets for
rural service centres, as opposed to a single target to be distributed amongst
the 5 villages[2]
(27 respondents or 6%). Part of the development industry wished to see
detailed strategic development site allocations, as opposed to the strategic
development locations identified on the key diagram of the consultation
document. Site allocations within strategic development locations together
with specific housing targets for rural service centres were the subject of a
further public consultation in 2012: Core Strategy Strategic Site Allocations.
Representations on strategic site allocations were considered when the
allocations were confirmed at the Cabinet meeting of 13 March 2013.
Respondents to the 2012 consultation sought site specific allocations at the
rural service centres as opposed to overall village targets. The move to
prepare a single local plan overcomes this objection.
In December 2012, Kent County Council issued revised
demographic and labour supply forecasts for Maidstone borough, which took
account of the latest CLG household projections. The forecasts were based on
the new local plan period 2011 to 2031 and revealed an interim housing
provision of 14,800 dwellings[3].
Consideration was given to the findings of the forecasts at the Cabinet meeting
of 13 March 2013. This interim figure was never tested through public
consultation but superseded the 10,080 dwelling target for the former plan
period (2006/26). The new SHMA, which has been prepared in accordance with
national guidance using the latest data from CLG and the Office for National
Statistics, will supersede all former demographic forecasts for housing
provisions.
The report of the Head of Planning and Development focused
on the outputs from updated evidence documents for housing and economic
development and, also taking into account previous consultation representations
together with changes to national planning policy, sets out the consequential
revisions to the local plan spatial vision and objectives and the implications
for the borough’s development targets.
A further report bringing together all of the policies of
the draft Maidstone Borough Local Plan, including the spatial strategy,
development targets and site allocations, will be presented to Cabinet on 24
February 2014. At the same meeting, Members will receive supporting reports on
the Infrastructure Delivery Plan and the Community Infrastructure Levy.
Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA)
A Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) for the borough
has been undertaken as a further piece of evidence to support the preparation
of the local plan. The SHMA has been prepared in partnership with Ashford and
Tonbridge & Malling Borough Councils which were at a similar plan making
stage to Maidstone. Medway Council, Tunbridge Wells Borough Council and Swale
Borough Council were invited to take part in the exercise but declined due the
stage their local plans had reached. GL Hearn, a firm of expert consultants in
this field, has undertaken the work for the three authorities.
A number of briefings and training sessions that included time for questions have been held, to assist Members in understanding the complexities of the SHMA. These sessions were well attended by Members.
· 28 August 2013 – Presentation on the methodologies validating the SHMA (and SHLAA/SEDLAA)
· 4 & 11 November 2013 – Presentations/Workshops on the NPPF/NPPG and the importance of objectively assessed needs
· 22 November 2013 – Presentation/Q&A by Planning Advisory Service representative (Jo Lee of Peter Brett Associates) on Meeting Objectively Assessed Need: The SHMA – context and practice examples
·
9 December 2013 – Presentation/Q&A by GL Hearn (Nick Ireland
and Justin Gardner) on the findings of the SHMA and housing provisions.
A principal purpose of the SHMA is to assess the overall
need for additional housing in the borough for the plan period (2011-31). The
NPPF directs that Local Plans should meet “the full, objectively assessed
needs” for both market and affordable housing within housing market areas as
far as this is consistent with other policies in the NPPF (NPPF paragraph 47).
The housing market area reflects key functional linkages between places where
people live and work.
The draft National Planning Practice Guidance 2013 (NPPG) sets
out how a SHMA should be undertaken[4].
The guidance specifies that the basis for calculating the future overall need
for housing must be the latest national household projections published by
CLG. The SHMA has used the interim 2011 based household projections released
by CLG in 2013. These are trend based projections that are an indication of
the number of households that would form if recent demographic trends
continued. They are interim projections, rather than official statistics,
because they are based on the 2011 interim sub-national population projections
(SNPP) which only project population growth to 2021. These population
projections are based on the 2011 mid-year population estimates rolled forward
from the Census 2011 data and applying the demographic trends used for the
previous 2010-based SNPP. New SNPP data is expected in spring 2014, and
updated CLG household projections are expected towards the end of 2014. This
base information has then been further refined in the SHMA by examining the key
local inputs that fed into the SNPP, and undertaking a critical assessment of
more recent migration data, household formation rates and housing vacancy
rates.
The conclusion of this analysis is that the SHMA predicts
that some 19,600 new homes would need to be built over the 20 year plan period
(2011-2031) for the full objective need for housing in Maidstone borough to be
met, i.e. 980 dwellings per annum.
Importantly the methodology and key assumptions which
underpin the assessment are common to the reports for each of the three
authorities. This helps add to the rigour of the reports and means that there
has been a consistent approach to the assessment of housing needs across the
whole of the Maidstone housing market area which encompasses parts of Tonbridge
& Malling Borough, namely Aylesford, East & West Malling, Larkfield and
Snodland. The housing market areas have been based on CLG research of 2010
(The Geography of Housing Market Areas in England – CURDS). The administrative
boundary of Maidstone falls within two housing market areas: Maidstone and
Ashford (Harrietsham & Lenham and Headcorn wards), although the objectively
assessed needs have been disaggregated by district.
The extent of the Maidstone housing market area is an
important consideration and the degree of integration with the Medway Towns to
the north has been assessed. The labour market and migration move in both
directions between Maidstone and Medway. However, the SHMA has analysed other
factors, in particular the housing “offer” (house type, size and tenure), the
London influence and housing costs, and concluded that there is justification
to distinguish Maidstone from Medway in market terms.
The objectively assessed housing need for Maidstone has also
been benchmarked against five and ten year migration trend projections. These
provide a useful sensitivity test, but they do not take account of the impact
of population age profile on migration (both in Maidstone borough and other
areas from which people typically move to Maidstone). Further sensitivity
testing of the objectively assessed housing need was undertaken through the
modelling of two economic scenarios. This confirms that the scale of household
growth necessary to generate sufficient working age people to support the
expected growth in the economy over the same period (2011 to 2031)[5]
will not exceed the objectively housing assessed need of 19,600 dwellings.
The SHMA also considers the need for affordable housing over
the plan period. The methodology draws together analysis of the number of
households currently in housing need with estimates of how many additional
households will require affordable housing in future years to 2031. The supply
of affordable housing from existing stock re-lets, vacancies and developments
in the pipeline is then derived to establish what the net requirement for new
affordable housing will be. The SHMA concludes that of the total annual
requirement of 980 dwellings needed over the local plan period (2011 to 2031),
324 new affordable homes will be needed annually between 2013 and 2031. This
finding assumes that households will spend up to 30% of income on housing costs
although, in fact, some households will be willing to spend a greater
proportion than this. The private rented sector will also continue to have some
role in providing affordable accommodation.
The SHMA is a technical document and is a pivotal piece of
the local plan evidence base. Hence an independent demographer was appointed to
review Maidstone’s objectively assessed need. The demographer has concluded
that the objectively assessed need of 19,600 dwellings set out in the SHMA is
the best scenario of the alternatives tested, and that the results for
population, households and new homes are robust.
Representatives from local authorities, house-builders, planning agents, estate agents and registered providers attended a stakeholder presentation and workshop for the SHMA, which was held on 26 July 2013. The workshop covered the three local authority areas but also drew comparisons with wider trends in Kent and other parts of the country.
The key points arising from the event were:
· Some recovery from the bottom of the market in 2007.
·
Recovery has been variable across different segments of the
market and in different areas:
- Recovery in demand for family homes stronger (particularly small family
homes) whilst flats remain muted
- More established, affluent buyers returned to the market more quickly, first
time buyer activity less so
- Higher value rural locations and areas traditionally linked with the London
market recovering more strongly.
· Future recovery is likely to be gradual, but in higher value areas demand and pricing pressures could return to the market more rapidly.
· Improving access to mortgage availability will be critical to the market recovery. Help-to-Buy is greatly assisting with this, but what happens after will be important. More certainty in the employment market and increases in earnings will also be needed to sustain recovery.
· Greater choice in the supply of sites (particularly more small sites) would help to improve housing delivery and provide an alternative to large scale allocations.
·
The private rented sector continues to grow apace, but there is a
need to ensure it is aligned with need and that standards are maintained.
Demand for older persons housing and retirement accommodation is also strong.
Following the Members’ presentation on 9 December 2013, the
draft SHMA was published on 9 January 2014 and is available to view or download
from the local plan webpage. At this point in time the SHMA should remain in
draft because new national data on household projections is expected to be
released in 2014. Officers will monitor the implications that may arise from
new releases and will report resultant actions needed to Members.
Meanwhile, subject to Cabinet decisions in February when
land allocations will be recommended, there is currently potential capacity to
make provision for up to 17,100 dwellings over the plan period 2011-2031. This
figure includes a yield of 8,210 dwellings from potential new SHLAA sites (in
addition to the approved strategic housing sites), based on the dispersed
distribution strategy formerly approved by Cabinet[6]
and the borough’s environmental and infrastructure constraints.
The NPPF directs local authorities to identify deliverable
housing sites for the first 5 years (it is implied this starts from the date of
adoption of a local plan). Deliverable sites, including integral
infrastructure, must be available, offer a suitable location, be achievable
(with a realistic prospect of being delivered within those 5 years), and be
viable. For years 6 to 10 and, where possible, years 11 to 15 following
adoption (i.e. the last 10 years of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan period),
sites should be developable. Developable sites must be suitably located, and
available and viable at the point of release. The greater the number of
dwellings on sites that are specifically identified as deliverable/developable,
the more robust the local plan will be. However, the NPPF also allows for the
identification of broad locations for housing in this latter period. Three
broad development locations yielding a potential 3,000 dwellings will be
presented to Members in February.
This appraisal would currently result in an unmet need of 2,500 dwellings which represents 13% of the objectively assessed need. The council will need to be in a position to robustly defend any constraints to development, and to demonstrate what measures have been taken to fully meet the objectively assessed need. These measures will be discussed in more detail in the February reports when development targets are considered, but are likely to include a further call for sites as part of the public consultation process, a reappraisal of the reasons why sites previously submitted have been rejected, and ultimately whether (under the duty to cooperate) unmet need can be satisfied by neighbouring authorities.
Objectively Assessed Need and Housing Land Supply |
Dwellings |
Totals |
Objectively assessed housing need |
|
19,600 |
|
|
|
Completed dwellings 2011/12 and 2012/13 |
1,503 |
|
Planning permissions at 1 April 2013 |
1,850 |
|
Planning permissions 1 April to 1 October 2013 |
246 |
|
Planning permissions – outstanding Section106 Agreements at 1 October 2013 |
107 |
|
Land allocations – approved strategic sites |
2,140 |
|
Land allocations – potential SHLAA sites |
8,210 |
|
Total potential housing land supply (approx.) |
|
14,100 |
|
|
|
Potential broad locations for housing development |
3,000 |
|
Total potential housing land supply including broad locations |
|
17,100 |
|
|
|
Unmet housing need (19,600 less 17,100) |
|
(2,500) |
Constraints to Development
The NPPF makes distinctions between the hierarchy of
international, national and locally designated sites, so that protection is
commensurate with their status. Whilst the NPPF gives weight to the protection
of international and national designations, this does not downgrade local
designations for landscape or wildlife sites in plan making, and such sites are
not suitable for development but a strong case for their protection must be
made. Another important and common theme that runs through the NPPF is the
need for viable infrastructure to support new development. The local plan must
ensure that new and expanded infrastructure requirements generated by land
allocations can be met.
Of international importance in Maidstone is the North Downs
Woodlands Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The borough includes 23
nationally important Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI); and 63 Local
Wildlife Sites (LWS) and 2 Local Nature Reserves (LNR) which are locally
important. A large area of the borough lies within the Kent Downs AONB, a
nationally important landscape designation where a strong level of protection
is given. A strong level of protection is also given to the small section of
the Metropolitan Green Belt that lies to the west of the borough. These areas
are protected but they are not sacrosanct.
All landscapes have some value, but they cannot all be
protected, so at the local level the focus must be on protecting the borough’s
best landscapes. Of particular local significance are the borough’s river
valleys (the Medway, Loose and Len) and the scarp face of the Greensand Ridge.
Local plan policies identify and safeguard such areas, although there are
currently no major pressures for housing development in these locations.
In other parts of the borough where sites have been
submitted for consideration through the call for sites, local constraints have
been examined through the site assessment pro forma[7]. The pro forma has been
used to assess each potential development site submitted through the SHLAA call
for sites (and the SEDLAA) in order to achieve a consistent and transparent
approach. The mitigation of constraints - local landscape, ecology, highways,
services, flooding and so on - has formed part of the assessments. In
accordance with the requirements of the NPPF, the availability, locational
suitability, deliverability and viability of each potential development site
has been examined, and the results will be available to assist Member decision
making in February.
There are often solutions to overcoming infrastructure
constraints. A new school or community centre can be built; open space or play
equipment can be provided; and increased traffic congestion can be addressed
through new public transport schemes and highway improvements.
So if the council cannot fully meet its objectively assessed housing need, it must establish a strong case of constraint to development within the borough, and demonstrate that neighbouring authorities have fewer constraints.
Sustainability Appraisal and Testing of Development
Options
Consultants URS have been commissioned to prepare the
sustainability appraisal (SA) for the local plan. The production of an SA is
required under EU regulations and planning law, and it is an appraisal of the
economic, environmental, and social effects of a plan (and its policies) from
the outset of the plan preparation process. An SA is an iterative process that
allows decisions to be made that accord with sustainable development.
A key purpose of the SA is to appraise development options
for the local plan. The emerging Maidstone Borough Local Plan has a strategy of
directing development to the most sustainable locations, in particular making
best use of previously developed land (brownfield sites). Brownfield sites
within an urban area have access to existing infrastructure and can generally
be developed at higher densities, thus reducing the need to release greenfield
sites for development. This approach accords with the principles of the NPPF
and the aims of this council. Regeneration of the town centre is one of the
key objectives of the local plan, and every effort has been made to identify
potential redevelopment sites over and above those that were submitted through
the SHLAA call for sites in December 2013/January 2014. Local plan policies
encourage a regeneration approach through the allocation of brownfield sites
for redevelopment and by requiring a lower affordable housing contribution on
brownfield sites within the urban area in order to encourage regeneration.
In the past 10 years, a high percentage of development has
been built on brownfield sites (between 85% and 96% annually). This was a
result of introducing a moratorium on the release of greenfield land allocated
in the Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan (2000) following the publication of an
urban capacity study in 2002. This trend cannot be sustained and the
moratorium has been lifted to enable the council to meet short and long term
housing provisions. The need for greenfield sites is compounded by national
policies that are leading to considerably higher annual housing targets than
previously experienced. New homes are needed because of a growing population,
people are living longer and there are more elderly people in smaller
households, new jobs are being created and, over the past decade, there has
generally been a level of net in-migration into the borough (both internal
migration from other parts of the Country and international migration).
There is a clear hierarchy in determining which locations
are the most sustainable for allocating new development sites. Following the
redevelopment of brownfield sites within settlement boundaries, the most
sustainable location for greenfield development is adjacent to the currently
defined[8]
urban boundary, where access to services is greatest and best use can be made
of existing infrastructure. However, not all development needs can be
accommodated here because of environmental and infrastructure constraints.
Seven rural service centres form the second tier in Maidstone’s settlement
hierarchy. These centres act as a focal point for trade and services for wider
communities, providing a concentration of public transport, employment and
community facilities. Rural service centres are Maidstone’s most sustainable
villages and are able to accommodate further development. Three larger
settlements form the third tier of the settlement hierarchy. These villages
have a smaller range of services than rural service centres, but still meet the
day-to-day needs of local communities. Where appropriate, larger settlements
can accommodate some limited development.
The SA is appraising various options that follow the
settlement hierarchy, and is also assessing the impact of the Golding Homes’
proposal for a new settlement[9],
which was submitted during the call for sites. The SA will appraise three
targets for housing: 19,600 dwellings (objectively assessed need), 17,100
dwellings (draft capacity to date including broad locations for development),
and 14,100 dwellings (draft capacity to date excluding broad locations for
development). The SA will also appraise these targets against the various
distribution options for development: a dispersed pattern of development, with
and without broad locations for development and/or the new settlement. This
will compare a strategy of development dispersal with one of a new settlement
together with a reduced dispersal of development. These options will be tested
against their ability to deliver the objectively assessed need for housing, but
will be balanced by sustainability indicators including flooding, health,
poverty, education, congestion, climate change, biodiversity, countryside,
heritage, waste, energy and economy.
Sustainability Appraisal: Housing development options |
||
1 |
19,600 |
Dispersed and broad locations |
2 |
19,600 |
Dispersed, broad locations and a new settlement |
3 |
17,100 |
Dispersed and broad locations |
4 |
17,100 |
Dispersed and new settlement |
5 |
14,100 |
Dispersed only |
6 |
14,100 |
Dispersed and a new settlement |
The results of the appraisal will be available prior to the February reports when Members will consider the housing target and distribution pattern of development.
Employment Land Forecast
An updated employment land forecast has been prepared as
evidence for the local plan, which will replace the employment forecast
published in 2013 that was based on housing provisions of 14,800 dwellings. The
new forecast uses a different methodology than previous for a number of
reasons, not least to enable economic growth opportunities to be assessed
objectively and then used to inform the housing growth discussion. The
forecast has been produced by the consultancy firm GVA which has undertaken
such forecasting work for the council in the past.
The approach used in this forecast looks first at the
different sectors in the local economy and establishes which sectors are
projected to grow or contract (in terms of jobs), and by what percentage, over
the lifetime of the plan. The basis for this assessment is the nationally
recognised Experian forecast for the borough. This has then been refined where
more detailed local factors support a higher or lower growth rate than is
predicted by Experian, which provides a more strategic analysis of the
economy. In particular, the forecast has taken account of potential employment
growth at the medical campus proposed at junction 7 of the M20; an allowance
has been made for market “churn”, calculated from the average annual
construction rate of space within the borough; and the impact of changing
working practices by sectoral activity in the borough has been appraised. The
output of this sectoral analysis is an employment (jobs) forecast for all of
the sectors in the local economy.
This jobs forecast is then converted into a land requirement
for those sectors which will need new office, industrial or distribution/
warehousing floorspace for the full local plan period 2011 to 2031 (i.e. the B
use classes). The creation of a total of 14,394 jobs between 2011 and 2031 are
forecast across all employment sectors, of which 7,933 will be in the office,
industrial and warehousing based sectors and at the Maidstone medical campus,
including KIMS[10].
Total figures in the table below vary due to rounding.
2011-2031 |
Job creation |
Floorspace (m2) |
Land (hectares) |
Office |
3,053 |
39,830 |
2.7 |
Industrial |
226 |
20,290 |
5.1 |
Warehouse |
453 |
49,911 |
10.0 |
General requirement |
3,733 |
110,030 |
17.7 |
Medical |
4,200 |
98,000 |
19.0 |
Total (incl. medical) |
7,933 |
208,030 |
37.0 |
The council’s ability to meet its employment provisions
through new land allocations, together with the distribution of development,
will be given consideration by Members through the February reports.
Retail Capacity Study
Members have received a presentation on the Maidstone Town
Centre Assessment and the Retail Capacity Study, produced by consultants DTZ,
and both documents have been published on the local plan webpage. At its
meeting on 4 December 2014, Cabinet approved the retail provisions set out in
the appended policies to that report. Two retail allocations at Maidstone
East/Royal Mail Sorting Office and Newnham Park were approved, and the Mall was
identified as a future broad location for retail growth.
The Maidstone Retail Capacity Study assessed the
quantitative needs for retail development to 2031. The RECAP model was used in
forecasting: an empirical step-by-step model based on the results of the 2012
Maidstone Household Survey of shopping patterns as its method of allocating
retail expenditure from catchment zones to shopping destinations. The model is
therefore based on consumer responses about actual shopping patterns.
The Retail Capacity Study was based on an interim provision
of 14,800 dwellings. The consultants have considered the outputs in the
context of increased provisions, and concluded that the population forecasts
used for the purpose of the Maidstone Retail Capacity Study are consistent with
a provision for 17,100 dwellings. For information and completeness, the retail
provisions are reproduced below. The provisions are cumulative for each year.
Retail provisions |
2016 |
2021 |
2026 |
2031 |
Comparison (m2) |
5,500 |
12,400 |
18,800 |
23,700 |
Convenience (m2) |
3,700 |
4,400 |
5,250 |
6,100 |
Key Local Issues, Spatial Vision and Spatial Objectives
The challenge for the local plan is to manage the potential
impacts of future housing and employment growth, together with supporting
infrastructure, to ensure that development takes place in a sustainable manner
that supports the local economy whilst safeguarding valuable natural and built
assets. The borough’s key local issues were initially identified in the Core
Strategy[11],
and the same document set out the council’s spatial vision and spatial
objectives for the borough. These have been updated to ensure conformity with
changing government policy and the publication of the NPPF and subsequent
guidance, and to reflect any changes in local circumstances.
Revisions to the key local issues set out in the Core Strategy 2011 are set out below (deletions are shown in strike through text and additions in italic text). The revisions will be carried forward to the Maidstone Borough Local Plan for further public consultation (Regulation 18) following Member decisions on the plan in February.
Key Local Issues
1. Where, when and how much development will be distributed throughout the borough;
2. Maintenance of the distinct character and identity of villages and the urban area;
3. Protection of the built and natural heritage, including the Kent Downs AONB and its setting and areas of local landscape value;
4. Provision of strategic and local infrastructure to support new development and growth including a sustainable integrated transport strategy, adequate water supply, sustainable waste management, energy infrastructure and social infrastructure such as health, schools and other educational facilities;
5. Improvements to quality of air within the air quality management area (AQMA);
6. Regeneration of the town centre and areas of social and environmental deprivation;
7. Redressing
the low wage economy by expanding the employment skills base to target
employment opportunities and improving higher and further education
opportunities to target employment opportunities in green technologies
including low carbon energy production;
8. Meeting
housing needs by delivering of vulnerable groups including young
people, affordable housing, local needs housing, accommodation for the
elderly, accommodation to meet Gypsy and Traveller needs and accommodation to
meet rural housing needs;
9. Promotion of the multi-functional nature of the borough’s open spaces, rivers and other watercourses;
10. Ensuring that all new development is built to a high standard of sustainable design and construction; and
11. Ensuring that applications for development adequately address the impact of climate change, especially the issues of flooding and water supply.
The Maidstone Borough Local Plan is the spatial interpretation
of the vision and priorities set out in the Maidstone Community Strategy[12].
The local plan also has regard to other corporate documents, in particular the
Strategic Plan 2011-2015 (2013-2014 Refresh), the emerging Green and Blue
Infrastructure Strategy and the Housing Strategy 2011/12 to 2014/15. Spatial
Policy officers work closely with colleagues in these departments and also with
other departments such as Development Management, Economic Development, and
Environmental Health. The policies of the local plan aim to deliver the plan’s
vision and objectives.
Revisions to the spatial vision and objectives set out in the Core Strategy 2011 are set out below (deletions are shown in strike through text and additions in italic text). The revisions will be carried forward to the Maidstone Borough Local Plan for further public consultation (Regulation 18) following Member decisions on the plan in February.
Spatial Vision
By 2026
2031:
·
The Core Strategy Maidstone Borough Local Plan will
deliver sustainable growth and regeneration whilst protecting and enhancing the
borough’s natural and built assets;
·
Development will be guided by a sustainable and the
delivery of the integrated transport strategy together with the timely
provision of appropriate strategic and local infrastructure;
·
Maidstone town will be a an enhanced
vibrant, prosperous and sustainable community benefiting from its an
exceptional urban and rural environment with a vital and viable Maidstone
town centre
·
The character and identity of rural settlements will be
maintained roles of the rural service centres will be reinforced by
directing suitable development and supporting infrastructure to the rural
service centres of Coxheath, Harrietsham, Headcorn, Lenham, Marden, and
Staplehurst and Yalding;
· The roles of the larger rural settlements of Boughton Monchelsea, Eyhorne Street (Hollingbourne) and Sutton Valence will be maintained through the delivery of limited development, where appropriate, together with supporting infrastructure;
· The distinctive character of the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and its setting, together with the openness of the Metropolitan Green Belt, will be rigorously protected and maintained;
· Employment skills will be expanded to meet an improved and varied range of local jobs;
· There will be a better balanced housing market to meet the needs of the community across the whole borough; and
· Development will be of high quality sustainable design and construction to respond to climate change and to protect the environment.
Spatial Objectives
1. To
provide for 10,080 new homes and 10,000 new jobs a balance of new
homes and related retail and employment opportunities, with an emphasis on
increasing skilled employment opportunities in the borough alongside developing
learning opportunities.
2. To focus
new development mainly within the Maidstone urban area with:
i. 80%
of new housing built within and adjacent to the urban area of Maidstone with
appropriate sustainable greenfield development being well located in relation
to existing services in the urban area Principally within[13]
the Maidstone urban area and at the strategic development locations at the edge
of town, including junction 7 of the M20 motorway;
ii. The
aim of providing 60% of new housing across the plan period on previously
developed land and through the conversion of existing buildings
ii. New
employment land allocations to be exploited in Maidstone Town Centre first
co-ordinated with opportunities on the most suitable greenfield sites to
provide for a suitable mix of employment opportunities To a lesser
extent at the seven rural service centres of Coxheath, Harrietsham, Headcorn,
Lenham, Marden, Staplehurst and Yalding[14]
consistent with their range of services and role; and
iii. The
creation of opportunities to provide for local power generation Limited
development at the three larger settlements of Boughton Monchelsea, Eyhorne
Street (Hollingbourne) and Sutton Valence where appropriate.
3. To
transform the offer, vitality and viability of the Maidstone town
centre including its office, retail, residential, further and higher
education, leisure, cultural and tourism functions together with
significant enhancement of its public realm and to the
natural and built environment particularly in respect of including
the riverside environment.
4. To consolidate
reinforce the roles of the rural service centres through the
retention of existing services, the addition of new infrastructure where
possible, and the regeneration of employment sites at Harrietsham, Headcorn,
Lenham, Marden and Staplehurst as the focus of the network of rural settlements
with retained existing services and regenerated employment sites including the
expansion of existing employment sites where appropriate.
5. To
support new housing in the smaller villages that meet local needs and is
of a design, scale, character and location appropriate to the settlement and
which supports the retention of existing services and facilities.
6. To
safeguard and maintain the character of the district’s borough’s
landscapes including the Kent Downs AONB and other distinctive local
landscapes of local value whilst facilitating the economic and social
well-being of these areas, including the diversification of the rural economy.
7. To retain and enhance the character of the existing green and blue infrastructure and to promote linkages between areas of environmental value.
8. To
ensure that new development takes account of the need to mitigate the impacts
of climate change, implementing sustainable construction standards for both
residential and non-residential schemes. and adapt to climate change and
also to improve air quality by locating development to minimise the use of
resources, to promote sustainable travel patterns, to develop a greater choice
of transport measures, to support water and energy efficiency measures and to
encourage renewable energy sources and sustainable drainage solutions.
9. To ensure that new development is of high quality design, making a positive contribution to the area including protection of built and natural heritage and biodiversity.
10. To
provide for future housing that meets the changing needs of the borough’s
population including provision for an increasingly ageing population and family
housing, an appropriate tenure mix, affordable housing, and accommodation to
meet the needs of the local Gypsy and Traveller community.
11. To ensure
that key infrastructure and service improvements needed to support delivery of
the Core Strategy Maidstone Borough Local Plan objectives and
policies are brought forward in a coordinated and timely manner, and that
new development makes an appropriate contribution towards the infrastructure
needs arising as a result of such new development.
The need (or otherwise) for junction 8 of the M20 motorway to assist in delivering the borough’s employment requirements will be given consideration by Members in February. This may result in an amendment to objective 2(i).
Following the decision to defer Policies SP3 and SP4, Cabinet felt it appropriate to agree the spatial vision and objectives, as amended, subject to amendments being required following the further consideration of these policies as they impact on the designation of Coxheath and Yalding as Rural Service Centres and the designation of Larger Settlements.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
The key decision arising from the report of the Head of Planning and Development is the agreement of the borough’s objectively assessed need of 19,600 dwellings. The NPPF aims to significantly boost the supply of housing land and the basis for calculating a borough’s housing need is the most up-to-date Office for National Statistics data releases and CLG trend based population and household projections. The SHMA takes account of the latest national demographic data and has examined local factors such as migration patterns, household formation and vacancy rates. The next step is for the local authority to use its evidence base to demonstrate how (and if) it can fully meet objectively assessed need through the SHLAA, constraints mapping, infrastructure assessments and sustainability appraisal. To reject the objectively assessed need of 19,600 dwellings would result in the local plan being found unsound at examination.
Background Papers
None
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Policy and Communications by: 5 February 2014 |
[1] Cabinet 13 March 2013
[2] Originally included Harrietsham, Headcorn, Lenham, Marden and Staplehurst
[3] Based on 10-year trend-based projections 2011 to 2031.
[4] There is further advice on how to prepare a SHMA. PAS published “10 key principles for owning your own housing number – finding your objectively assessed needs”, and there is an online tool “What Homes Where” which is a website set up by professional bodies, charities and trade association professionals with an interest in planning for housing.
[5] Between 15,783 dwellings and 18,560 dwellings
[6] Cabinet reports 9 February 2011, 10 August 2011 and 25 July 2012
[7] Approved by Cabinet Member for Planning, Transport and Development, via Overview & Scrutiny Committee on 22 March 2013
[8] Maidstone Borough Wide Local Plan 2000
[9] Proposal for a freestanding garden suburb, accommodating 4,500 new homes on greenfield sites located to the south east of the urban area.
[10] Kent Institute for Medicine and Surgery
[11] Core Strategy Public Consultation Draft 2011 (Regulation 18 consultation)
[12] Maidstone Community Strategy 2009-2020 (refreshed July 2013)
[13] Land allocations will be made within and adjacent to the boundaries of the urban area, rural service centres and larger settlements as defined in the Maidstone Borough Local Plan 2000. A consequence of allocating land is the amendment of boundaries so that new sites become part of those settlements. To state that allocations will be made “adjacent” to settlements implies further development would be acceptable outside settlement boundaries following adoption of the local plan.
[14] The primary development site at Yalding is the former Syngenta works, where flood mitigation measures will be an essential part of new development proposals.