Letter: This Local Plan Will Not Deliver

Published on: 14 Apr, 2019
Updated on: 14 Apr, 2019

From Julian Lyon

former Independent candidate

In response to: Adoption of the Local Plan is Important to Those Who Need Housing

To build more affordable homes (both social housing and housing that key workers can afford) is, of course, a noble cause. If that were indeed the reason to adopt this shockingly poor Local Plan, then it is another objective poorly delivered.

Firstly, the housing will be in the wrong place – instead of being in the town, it will be where residents will have to have cars; that is hardly a sustainable model.

Secondly, the levels of SANG [Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace] and CIL [Community Infrastructure Levy] contributions (required to be paid for developers to offset the risk of increased population and their pets damaging the habitats of protected ground-nesting birds, and to pay for infrastructure improvements) have been set at such a high level that there will be little prospect of delivering affordable homes due to viability issues.

Thirdly, whilst I have nothing against student housing per se, the thousands of new market-based student homes along the river have been (and will continue to be) given preference over sustainable affordable homes.

Fourthly, the council notes that housing will come forward in the town centre even though it is not allocated in the Local Plan, but this inept politically-driven myopia, where the town centre is concerned, will have provided none of the social infrastructure to support those additional residents.

This Local Plan simply cannot keep its promises. It will not deliver for the less well-off in our society, it will not solve issues with pockets of relative deprivation where we are in the poorest performing 10% in the country.

If it is affordable housing you want, there is almost nothing to commend this plan and no reason to vote to adopt it.

That the lead councillors for planning and for infrastructure are seeking to railroad this plan through for whatever reasons they have is precisely why it should not be adopted in haste during purdah before the local elections (irrespective of what the council’s QC, funded at our expense, might advise).

This plan may not keep the rarely attending Cllr Illman awake at night but it sure as eggs are eggs it will not make those who need affordable homes sleep any easier at night.

Responses to Letter: This Local Plan Will Not Deliver

Paul Spooner Reply

April 14, 2019 at 1:17 pm

I thought that Mr Lyon understood something about the planning policy and development management process but either I was wrong or this is just blatant election rhetoric.

So much wrong with many statements here but let’s start with CIL [Community Infrastructure Levy]. As Mr Lyon knows very well that we can’t start the CIL consultation and process for adoption of CIL until the Local Plan is adopted. So he appears to be looking into the future and assuming that a future CIL levy will be set when no such proposal is in place. This is, may I suggest, impressive premonition.

I am on record of stating that strategic sites may work better than Section 106 anyway. We need infrastructure to support development, so how if those he supports run Guildford will they be able to fund it?

Paul Spooner is the council leader at GBC and the conservative candidate for South Ash and Tongham in the forthcoming borough elections.
- Julian Lyon Reply
  
  April 15, 2019 at 10:08 pm
  
  Really?
  
  On the Local Plan website, as Mr Spooner should know very well, the draft charting schedule is still extant:
  https://www.guildford.gov.uk/newlocalplan/cil.
  
  This document suggests a charge of £500 per square metre for town centre homes.
  
  In the Supplementary Planning Document for charges (2017) https://www.guildford.gov.uk/media/10058/Planning-Contributions-SPD/pdf/Planning_Contributions_SPD1.pdf the SANG and SAMM contribution is cited as circa £5,500 per two bedroom home. For an apartment of 70 square metres, this would equate to £40,500 contribution.
  
  Mr Spooner can seek to suggest that this is election rhetoric, but he could read objections I have written over the past few years to find this is a repeated and earnest theme.
  
  If Mr Spooner thinks this is in any way political (as he has stated) he should cancel the Extraordinary full council meeting as a recognition that to vote on the Local Plan is, and was always going to be, a matter of intense political sensitivity.
  
  Julian Lyon withdrew as an Independent candidate in the forthcoming borough council election to be held on May 2.
Geoffrey Davis Reply

April 14, 2019 at 4:55 pm

The council has been regularly criticised that we haven’t had a Local Plan since 2003, much harming the ability to deal with planning applications of all sizes.

Now, the very same people who have been criticising such a long delay, have been seeking a deferment on the last lap of a complex and very expensive process.

As my ward buddy said at a recent Planning Committee – that is a decision to “kick the can down the road”.

Geoffrey Davis is a Conservative candidate for Holy Trinity ward in the forthcoming borough council election
Fiona Curtis Reply

April 15, 2019 at 10:44 am

This letter hits the nail on the head.
David Roberts Reply

April 15, 2019 at 4:56 pm

From a party so adept at “kicking the can down the road”, Cllr Davis’s comment is a bit rich.

Trying to ram such a huge, controversial measure through during election purdah is unethical, probably illegal and certainly politically inept since voters are now watching and are sure to take their revenge. Any Conservative councillor wishing to save their political skin on May 2 will do the right thing and vote it down. The bullying approach of this council leadership has to end.
Jules Cranwell Reply

April 16, 2019 at 12:41 pm

The more Cllr Spooner and his Executive chums attempt to defend their indefensible plan, and their unholy rush to have it ratified a week before the election, the less credible they become.

It’s time for a change.