Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

LDP VISION AND STRATEGIC OPTIONS Council 14 th June 2007.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "LDP VISION AND STRATEGIC OPTIONS Council 14 th June 2007."— Presentation transcript:

1 LDP VISION AND STRATEGIC OPTIONS Council 14 th June 2007

2 STRATEGIC VISION

3 LDP VISION (LDP Wales) “The LDP should address the unique economic, environmental and social characteristics, opportunities and issues of the area. It should be based on a vision of the future which should be clear, realistic and based on the objectives and priorities of the relevant community strategy”. “The LDP should address the unique economic, environmental and social characteristics, opportunities and issues of the area. It should be based on a vision of the future which should be clear, realistic and based on the objectives and priorities of the relevant community strategy”.

4 LDP VISION (Community Strategy)  The mission statement of the Community Strategy is:  The Aims and Objectives are to: - Improve quality of life for all - Improve quality of life for all - protect and enhance our environment - protect and enhance our environment - Increase prosperity - Increase prosperity - Have safer communities - Have safer communities - Achieve a healthier County Borough - Achieve a healthier County Borough - Have a more inclusive County Borough - Have a more inclusive County Borough

5 LDP VISION (Corporate Improvement Plan) The Corporate Improvement Plan sets out how the Council will work to deliver the aims and objectives of the Community Strategy, and has developed a set of thematic priorities which are:  Creating Learning Communities  Children Today, Adults Tomorrow  Realising the Potential of our Major Towns  Valuing our Values  Caring for Our Future  Diverse and Sustainable Economy  Supporting our Disadvantaged Communities

6 DRAFT LDP VISION (LDP)  The Draft Vision Statement for the emerging LDP is: “To improve the quality of life for all people living, working and relaxing in Bridgend County Borough by protecting and enhancing the environment and increasing prosperity whilst promoting safe, healthy, sustainable, and inclusive communities”. “To improve the quality of life for all people living, working and relaxing in Bridgend County Borough by protecting and enhancing the environment and increasing prosperity whilst promoting safe, healthy, sustainable, and inclusive communities”.

7 STRATEGIC GROWTH OPTIONS

8  Estimating future population growth is important as it will have major influence on future land requirements.  Housing development principal consumer of land.  Estimates produced by Chelmer Population & Housing Model.  Based on 2001 census data & includes 2003 local correction factors.  Model run for 5 strategic growth options, inputting known building completions for 2001 & 2006 and anticipated building programmes from 2006 –  The 5 strategies are as follows:

9 STRATEGIC GROWTH OPTIONS  Do Nothing Strategy  UDP Growth Strategy  Trend Based Growth Strategy  High Growth Strategy  Very high Growth Strategy

10 STRATEGIC GROWTH OPTIONS  All sites allocated in the existing UDP are expected to be developed and there is an anticipated contribution from small-scale and windfall housing sites.  Implicit commitment in each of the strategies of 6930 dwellings, the basis of the Do Nothing Strategy.  The results are as follows…

11 STRATEGIC GROWTH OPTIONS

12 EMPLOYMENT LAND AVAILABILITY  Currently exists a substantial landbank of 227 hectares.  Taking into account past take-up rates, increases in population, increases in economic activity etc. This represents more than sufficient employment land up to  Availability of employment land is not a constraining factor for any of the Strategic Growth Options.

13 DO NOTHING STRATEGY  Assumes build out of existing UDP commitments and small-scale and windfall contributions.  No further allocations.  Dwelling requirement of 6930 up to  Annual Build rate of 462 dwellings  Resultant population = 138,432.  Current net migration reduced by about one third  Required in application of SEA.

14 DO NOTHING STRATEGY (Advantages)  No further allocations of land required.  Less pressure on ‘protected land’.  Increased public certainty.  No cherry picking of easily developed sites/existing harder to develop sites may be brought forward.  Less pressure on public services and infrastructure.

15 DO NOTHING STRATEGY (Disadvantages)  Does not accord with regional growth aspirations.  Limited opportunity for public benefits available with new allocations (i.e. affordable housing).  At odds with market forces.  Possible re-assessment of small and windfall sites.  Bridgend’s growth may fall behind other centres affecting inward investment and retail service provision.  Affordability reduced with increasing house prices.  Increased net inward commuting due to decline in economically active population.  Decline in economically active population may not support existing community facilities.

16  Anticipates continuation of existing UDP strategy to 2021 (annual build rate of 498 dwellings per annum)  Requirement of 7,470 dwellings between 2006 and  Resultant population = 139,800  Current net migration reduced by about a quarter  Requires a further 540 dwellings in addition to ‘Do Nothing’ dwelling requirement. UDP GROWTH STRATEGY

17  Reinstatement of approved growth strategy  Additional dwellings could be accommodated on existing allocations subject to greater housing densities.  Less pressure on ‘protected land’.  Public certainty by reinstating UDP rates.  No cherry picking of easily developed sites/existing harder to develop sites may be brought forward.  More sustainable, realistic and achievable rate of development cf. to Do Nothing  In line with regional housing growth apportionment (SEWSPG). UDP GROWTH STRATEGY ( Advantages)

18  May not accord with WSP growth aspirations.  Limited opportunity for public benefits available with new allocations (i.e. affordable housing).  Affordability reduced with increasing house prices  Increased net inward commuting due to decline in economically active population.  Decline in economically active population may not support existing community facilities. UDP GROWTH STRATEGY (Disadvantages)

19  Produced using average annual dwelling completions in BCBC since 1991 (540 per annum).  Requirement of 8100 dwellings up to  Resultant population = 141,378  Current net migration reduced by one tenth  Requires a further 1170 dwellings in addition to ‘Do Nothing’ dwelling requirement. TREND BASED GROWTH STRATEGY

20  Takes account of economic cycles.  Information is robust given the time period.  Additional dwellings accommodated on existing allocations using higher densities and follows same tested methodology as the UDP.  Possibility of accommodating additional dwellings on brownfield land.  Less pressure on ‘protected land’.  Limited cherry picking on easily developed sites.  Based on up-to-date build rates so more realistic.  Accommodates SEWSPG apportionment rates and more in line with WSP growth aspirations. TREND BASED GROWTH STRATEGY (Advantages)

21  More difficult to develop sites may not be brought forward.  Limited opportunity for benefits made available with new allocations (i.e. affordable housing) due to possible constraints associated with brownfield sites. TREND BASED GROWTH STRATEGY (Disadvantages)

22  Anticipates 20% increase in build rate from Trend Based Strategy.  648 dwellings per annum.  Dwelling requirement of 9720 up to  Resultant population = 145,489.  Current net migration increased by a quarter  Requires a further 2790 dwellings in addition to ‘Do Nothing’ dwelling requirement. HIGH GROWTH STRATEGY

23  Additional dwellings accommodated on existing allocations using higher densities.  Some additional dwellings could be accommodated on brownfield land.  Scope for additional community benefits and facilities from new sites.  Accelerated growth will have positive effects on inward investment and retail and service provision.  May accord with WSP growth aspirations.  More in line with economic growth aspirations. HIGH GROWTH STRATEGY (Advantages)

24  Exceeds agreed SEWSPG housing apportionment figures.  May require allocation of Greenfield sites.  Existing protected areas could be affected.  ‘Cherry picking’ of new easily developed sites/difficult to develop sites may not be brought forward.  This level of development has only been achieved in 3 of the past 16 years.  Possible pressure on existing physical infrastructure resulting from accelerated growth. HIGH GROWTH STRATEGY (Disadvantages)

25 VERY HIGH GROWTH STRATEGY  Anticipates 30% increase in build rate from Trend Based Strategy.  702 dwellings per annum.  Dwelling requirement of 10,530 up to  Resultant population = 147,534.  Current net migration increased by half  Requires a further 3600 dwellings in addition to ‘Do Nothing’ dwelling requirement.

26 VERY HIGH GROWTH STRATEGY (Advantages)  Additional dwellings accommodated on existing allocations using higher densities.  Additional dwellings possibly accommodated on brownfield land.  Scope for additional community benefits and facilities from new sites.  Accelerated growth will have positive effects on inward investment and retail and service provision.

27 VERY HIGH GROWTH STRATEGY (Disadvantages)  Significantly exceeds agreed SEWSPG apportionment figures and may exceed WSP growth aspirations.  Will require allocation of Greenfield sites.  Existing protected areas will be affected.  ‘Cherry picking’ of new easily developed sites/difficult to develop sites may not be brought forward.  This level of development has never before been achieved.  Further additional pressure on existing infrastructure.  Could encourage further net out commuting creating dormitory settlements.

28 PREFERRED STRATEGIC GROWTH OPTION? The Preferred Strategic Growth Option needs to satisfy the Tests Of Soundness which will be applied the whole of the LDP process

29 LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (LDP) WALES: Policy on preparation of LDP’s Page 27 states: “The presumption will be that the LDP is sound unless it is shown to be otherwise as a result of evidence considered throughout the examination. There are 10 criteria for assessing soundness which fall into three categories. They are…”

30 LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (LDP) WALES Procedural tests: P1: It has been prepared in accordance with the Delivery Agreement including the CIS P2: The plan and its policies have been subject to sustainability appraisal including strategic environmental assessment

31 LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (LDP) WALES Consistency Tests: C1: It is a land use plan which has regard to other relevant plans, policies and strategies relating to the area or to adjoining areas C2: It has regard to national policy C3: It has regard to the Wales Spatial Plan C4: It has regard to the relevant community strategy/ies

32 LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (LDP) WALES Coherence & Effectiveness Tests: CE1: The plan sets out a coherent strategy from which its policies and allocations logically flow and, where cross- boundary issues are relevant, it is compatible with the development plans prepared by neighbouring authorities CE2: The strategy, policies and allocations are realistic and appropriate having considered the relevant alternatives and are founded on a robust evidence base CE3: There are clear mechanisms for implementation and monitoring CE4: It is reasonably flexible to enable it to deal with changing circumstances

33 PREFERRED OPTION? After considering all of the growth options against all the tests of soundness illustrated above, the Officer Working Group consider the “Trend-Based” Growth Option to be the ‘Preferred Option’ to follow.

34 PREFERRED OPTION? The Cross Cutting Policy Forum nevertheless, expressed a preference for less growth and decided to endorse the UDP Growth Option i.e. the reinstatement of the growth strategy adopted in the UDP.

35 UDP Growth Option Significant risk that reinstating the UDP Growth option would mean that the LDP would fail one of the Consistency Tests of soundness: C3: It must have regard to the Wales Spatial Plan

36 UDP Growth Option If so there is also a risk that the LDP might additionally fail one or more of the Coherence and EffectivenessTests, particularly : CE1: The plan sets out a coherent strategy from which its policies and allocations logically flow and, where cross-boundary issues are relevant, it is compatible with the development plans prepared by neighbouring authorities CE2: The strategy, policies and allocations are realistic and appropriate having considered the relevant alternatives and are founded on a robust evidence base CE4: It is reasonably flexible to enable it to deal with changing circumstances

37 Wales Spatial Plan-Southeast Wales

38 Bridgend has been identified as one of the key or hub settlements in Southeast Wales. These are “…places which provide a focus for economic clustering both now and in the future. Where services are provided which meet the needs of residents, where cultural and leisure facilities provide enjoyment and an enhanced quality of life and places centred on a movement framework that provides people with a range and choice of transportation options, including high quality reliable public transport….”

39 Wales Spatial Plan- Southeast Wales The relationship of these hub settlements to the success of the region as a whole is matched by their role as catalysts to the further regeneration of their surrounding settlements.

40 Wales Spatial Plan- Southeast Wales Bridgend is classified as a major district centre, with opportunities and constraints similar to, if on a smaller scale, to those of Cardiff and Newport – economic growth potential, tempered by the need to avoid traffic overload. It is classed as an important manufacturing and service town, it also has a range of leisure and retail attractions which draw from a large catchment.

41 Wales Spatial Plan- Southeast Wales The town should be aiming to perform a far greater sub regional role, with diversification of employment a key issue, and future reinforcement of the Town Centre. Bridgend also has an important role as a major district service centre for the deprived former mining communities to the north. The transport links between Bridgend and its valley satellite settlements are therefore an important consideration. Bridgend can be viewed as a hinge point, connecting all three sub-regions, with an important role to play in each.

42 Wales Spatial Plan-Southeast Wales

43 Wales Spatial Plan- Swansea Bay

44 The settlements of Maesteg and Porthcawl/Pyle, are seen as second tier ‘key settlements’ within the Swansea Bay WSP area In this respect, Maesteg is considered to be “a significant local retail and employment centre”, with brownfield land development opportunities. Porthcawl/Pyle is acknowledged as being an important residential area. Porthcawl itself is a main seaside tourist destination providing accommodation, leisure and entertainment facilities to match, is an important future tourist, retail, employment and housing area, and is included in the Swansea Bay Waterfront development area.

45 PREFERRED OPTION? The emerging regional and sub-regional strategies have a direct bearing on Council’s choice of a Preferred Strategic Growth Option for the LDP, as regard must be had to the Wales Spatial Plan in all matters related to Development Plan preparation. The clear message coming from the emerging WSP area strategies is that the Bridgend C B area has a significant future role to play in the development of South Wales as a whole, and that it may be at risk of not fulfilling its true potential.

46 PREFERRED OPTION? In this context, the Trend-Based growth option favoured by the LDP Officer Working Group is much closer to the aspirational role for Bridgend CB currently emerging from both WSP area strategies, than is the UDP growth option favoured by the Cross Cutting Policy Forum.

47 RECOMMENDATION Council is requested to approve the draft Vision, the draft Strategic Options and a Preferred Option for consultation with the Key Stakeholder Forum

48 Questions?


Download ppt "LDP VISION AND STRATEGIC OPTIONS Council 14 th June 2007."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google