CPRE Brands Guildford’s Draft Local Plan as ‘Unrealistic’ and ‘Over-ambitious’

Published on: 28 Jul, 2016
Updated on: 31 Jul, 2016

The Surrey branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) has described Guildford Borough Council’s (GBC) draft Local Plan as “unrealistic”, “over-ambitious”, “misguided” and “unsound”.

The Lib Dem leader at GBC said the comments would be considered as part of the consultation process, while the leader of the Guildford Greenbelt Group said the CPRE statement was “spot-on” and a spokesperson for Guildford Labour said he was “not surprised”.

Tim Harrold, CPRE Guildford Chairman

In a 28-page submission to the borough council’s consultation on the Local Plan, CPRE Guildford chairman Tim Harrold challenges Guildford’s calculation of figures for new housebuilding.

Under the plan, the borough must find land for the building of 13,860 new houses over 20 years (693 houses per year), of which more than 8,000 are to be built on sites currently within the green belt.

CPRE believes the maximum per-annum figure should be 481. This is based on extensive research undertaken for CPRE by planning consultants Green Balance.

“What is required”, says Tim Harrold, “is a more careful consideration of the many widespread and serious constraints on development within the borough, and the need to protect and enhance the countryside adjacent to and around the town of Guildford and its villages.”

In CPRE’s view a lower and more realistic figure for new housing would remove the development threat to the green belt and would shift the focus of development towards urban and brownfield sites.

“We find the plan unrealistic”, writes Tim Harrold, “not only because of its over-ambitious onslaught on green belt policy but also because of the £3bn shortfall in infrastructure backlog across the county which is recorded in the Surrey Infrastructure Study… This backlog has to include issues relating to roads, rail, water as a finite resource, waste disposal and sewage treatment, flood issues, air pollution and a range of other environmental and social considerations.”

CPRE expresses “serious concern” that no account has been taken in the Guildford Local Plan of the “as yet unpredictable political and economic outcome” of Brexit; neither has the plan reflected properly the latest Government guidance regarding the planning system.

Mr Harrold pointed out that the Minister for Housing & Planning recently restated that: “green belt boundaries should be adjusted only in exceptional circumstances through the Local Plan process and with the support of local people. We have repeatedly made clear that demand for housing alone will not change green belt boundaries.”

The Local Plan, as currently drafted, proposes significant incursions into the green belt including the building of 2,100 houses at Three Farm Meadows, Wisley, 2,000 at Gosden Hill Farm, 1,800 at Blackwell Farm (Hog’s Back), 1,100 between the villages of Normandy and Flexford, and major housing developments at the Horsleys, among others. All of these areas are in the green belt.

“All of these precious areas of countryside could be saved if GBC had put forward a more realistic plan based on solid evidence rather than the over-ambitious and poorly thought-out plan it has just published”, said CPRE Surrey branch director Andy Smith.

“What the council have come up with here is a blueprint for the steady erosion of the green belt, the consequence of which would be to gradually merge the town of Guildford with neighbouring villages and to lose the tranquillity and rural character which makes this Borough so special.

“The plan should recognise the importance of retaining the openness of green belt land. Perhaps councillors need to be reminded that the green belt, when it was created 70 years ago, was meant to be permanent.”

Leader of the opposition at Millmead, Cllr Caroline Reeves, (Lib Dem, Friary & St Nicolas), said “The CPRE comments will be considered as part of the consultation process. However it has always been made clear that until we have the comments on the transport infrastructure from Highways England and Surrey County Council, we cannot decide what is feasible anywhere in the borough.

“In the meantime applications from developers are coming in for sites across the borough, regardless of whether they are included in the Local Plan. The longer we delay the process the less chance we have of not refusing these applications.”

Cllr Susan Parker, leader of the Guildford Greenbelt Group at GBC, said: “CPRE’s comments are absolutely spot-on.  The draft Local Plan assumes that the aggressive, overstated housing projections must be met and that therefore green fields must be sacrificed.

“CPRE expresses what many people in the borough think, and have expressed in various formal consultation responses, but which have been ignored so far. We hope that the council’s Executive will respect these concerns and will make serious adjustments to the proposed plan.

“As CPRE has pointed out, the political and economic changes that will follow Brexit present an opportunity for fundamental revision and re-thinking of our Local Plan. There are also changes in national government policy, including those following the departure of George Osborne, the former chancellor, so a change in national government direction should also be recognised now.

“The national political situation gives us an unrivalled opportunity to revise our Local Plan. The council can and should now take the chance to reflect genuine local needs and concerns.  We can plan a sustainable future for Guildford, and should not force through an ill-conceived, out of date plan which has been rejected by the general public as part of the consultation process.

George Dokimakis, vice chair Guildford Labour: “I am not surprised by CPRE’s comments. We have also called for transparency. Until such time that GBC’s Executive Committee is open and honest about how the SHMA figures were derived no one will support the Local Plan.

“It is time the Executive stopped protecting corporate interests and sided with the people.”

Council leader Paul Spooner (Con, Ash South & Tongham), lead councillor for planning, was also invited to comment.

Share This Post