COUNCIL CHAMBER, WALLFIELDS, HERTFORD

THURSDAY 21^ST FEBRUARY 2013

REPORT BY COUNCILLOR ALAN DEAN, MEMBER FOR STANSTED SOUTH, UTTLESFORD DISTRICT COUNCIL

The author attended the above meeting accompanied by Cllr Geoffrey Sell, the chairman of Stansted Mountfitchet Council. Their purpose was to gain some understanding of how the Local Development Framework is conducted and to compare this with the process adopted by neighbouring Uttlesford District Council in Essex. Comments on the equivalent situation at Uttlesford, as far as this is known, are included in italics.

The meeting was observed to be well attended and most professionally conducted. Approximately 45 people were present, of whom some 16 were elected members and at least 12 were members of the public.

The meeting was being webcast so that other members of the public could observe the meeting from their homes. This will soon be available from the webcast library at:

http://www.eastherts.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcasts

A 2cm thick documentation pack containing 13 reports was available for the public’s use. This is available at: http://online.eastherts.gov.uk/moderngov/documents/g2211/Public%20reports%20pack%2021st-Feb-2013%2019.00%20District%20Planning%20Executive%20Panel%20formerly%20known%20as%20LDF%20E.pdf?T=10

At Uttlesford the public is not allowed to attend meetings of the LDF working group. UDC provides webcasts of none of its meetings.

The chairmanship of the panel was most impressive. Cllr Mike Carver conducted the meeting highly professionally and he seemed well on top of his brief. In conversation after the meeting it became clear that East Herts has from the outset of its LDF process (and will continue to its conclusion) insisted on maximum transparency. They will treat pressure groups and members of the public with utmost respect. Their maxim seems to be that they have nothing to hide and that the public will find them out if they become secretive. They seem to consider achieving and retaining the public’s trust to be paramount. At Uttlesford the reverse seems to be the case. Meetings are held in private and even secret. It has been repeatedly claimed that discussion about land is commercially confidential so must be in camera. That attitude is most assuredly rejected as being counter-productive by East Herts, as indeed it has become in practice at Uttlesford. Members of the East Herts public said that they had confidence in the way East Herts is preparing its Local Plan. Public opinion in Uttlesford differs markedly; the public seems to be very angry with the conduct of the LDF in the neighbouring Essex district.

East Herts is theoretically less advanced than Uttlesford with its Local Plan. This is mainly explained by their current local plan still being live, though nearing the end of its life. Uttlesford’s last plan expired two years ago.

Cllr Carver made clear to the meeting on several occasions that they will conduct the LDF process thoroughly and that the final Local Plan will be based on hard evidence, such as demographic and highways evidence. He is insisting that it will be both sustainable and deliverable. They will not go before a government inspector with a Local Plan that has any risk of being found unsound. Uttlesford has been acting recently in a way that it is said may lead to its Local Plan being declared unsound.

East Herts has been examining housing annual forecasts in the range 500-850. They have declined to go for a low figure and will not choose a final number until the demographic work is completed. They are part of the Greater Essex work of which Uttlesford is part. Current indications are that they will have to settle towards the top of their range. They are cognizant of the need to account for inward migration of people. Their current planning horizon is 2031. Uttlesford decided some time ago to lower its annual housing target from around 420 to 330, then put it up again to 420 but shortened its planning horizon to 2026 vice 2028 to reduce the plan period total. The development industry has already challenged Uttlesford’s tactics on housing numbers as being unsound and not in conformity with national planning guidance. Uttlesford has chosen to ignore inward migration from its calculations. East Herts is aware that such behaviour can lead to a plan being declared unsound. Cllr Carver did make the point that the demographic data exists to inform the plan, not determine it. It was said that environmental and capacity issues have to be taken into account, but if these are to be claimed as barriers to limiting growth, the reasons must not be spurious.

The panel received a very comprehensive report on highways. This is an ongoing process. East Herts intends to finalise the work before it finalises its proposed housing locations. They are determined to be able to demonstrate deliverability. Uttlesford has already been out to consultation of a Draft Plan and housing locations but has not yet published a highways analysis. This has led to public dissatisfaction with Uttlesford’s timing and its professionalism has been questioned.

East Herts holds regular workshops with members of topics such as highways (January) and viability (January) – a new test of plan soundness. At Uttlesford there has not been a single workshop on the LDF with all councillors in the past three years.

Cllr Carver ended the meeting by saying that he hoped all present found that the work of the panel had been conducted in a transparent way. There was no disagreement. That question cannot even be asked at Uttlesford because no one is present who might be qualified to comment.

ENDS