Next Step for Local Plan – Reactions to GBC Announcement

Published on: 30 Aug, 2018
Updated on: 1 Sep, 2018

This week the council announced the next step in the Local Plan, listing the modifications to the plan recommended or required by the examining planning inspector before the plan is approved.

The proposed changes, once formally agreed by GBC, need to go out for public consultation details of which are yet to be announced.

Here are the reactions from other local political parties and organisations…

Caroline Reeves, Lib Dem leader of the opposition at Guildford Borough Council:

“Given the time that already devoted to the Local Plan, by so many, I think we have to be optimistic that an end is in sight. The inspector was very clear what further work was required. There will be objections, some have been heard before. However, we would be foolish to ignore the inspector.

“We faced our own planning committee decisions being overturned by the Planning Inspectorate. Any Local Plan has to be the least worst option and in a borough as diverse as ours there’s little chance of wholehearted agreement.

“We Liberal Democrats have argued against large-scale developments and across the borough argued for houses to be built of the sort needed in appropriate locations as well as trying to protect the urban area from high rise overdevelopment and cramming.

“But we are told that if we don’t have a Local Plan in place next year the Conservative government will decide on what is built and where, without necessarily any concern for infrastructure. This does beg the question of what has happened to democracy in local planning?

Susan Parker leader of the Guildford Greenbelt Group:

“We’re dismayed by the inspector’s comments on the Local Plan and deeply unhappy that it’s been found sound. GGG attended the Local Plan Examination in Public throughout.

“Good arguments questioned the fundamental soundness and validity of the plan (many by us), but these have all been disregarded.  Instead, the housing allocation (already far too high) has been increased to accommodate a proportion of Woking’s unmet need.

“People should participate in the consultation process, but the Inspector indicated proposed changes would be agreed between him and the planning department so we fear the process is largely a fait accompli.”

Brian Creese, spokesperson for Guildford Labour:

“Guildford Labour Party does not share the council Leader’s optimism on the progress of the local plan given the funereal pace of this development so far. This is a huge concern since the plan seems to be falling further and further behind the needs of the town.

“Consultation is important and should be as open and transparent as possible, including open meetings where residents can voice their concerns.

“There are some key questions about the plan whatever the inspector decides, such as how we can ensure sufficient “affordable” housing is included in this revised plan and how to ensure that good ideas from Guildford residents are fully considered.

Tony Rooth, Independent councillor for Pilgrims ward:

“The Local Plan will continue to change – a new site for retail and housing in White Lion Walk has just emerged and other sites may appear. New issues or changes may arise during the consultations which the council says will only be about the main modifications. Those cover four new rural housing sites (including 200 homes at Aaron’s Hill), alterations to Blackwell Farm and Gosden Hill sites and major redrafting of the town centre proposals.

“Proper consultation with residents should be more than just comment in writing. Local presentations should be made so local people can have their say. The Local Plan is not over until the inspector sings.”

Bill Stokoe Guildford Vision Group

“GVG is focused on the vitality and sustainability of the town centre. The local plan inspector called for new policies for the town centre, recognising that the council’s long-term plan failed to address important issues.

“The new policy, “S3”, now contains much of what we have been calling for over the past six years. Our concerns remain around the lack of any commitment or intention to implement, as in numerous town centre plans before where little or nothing has happened (see 2006 TC Area Action Plan and subsequent plans).

“We’re also not certain that S3 contains enough new policy to tackle important matters such as traffic pollution, road safety and critical, infrastructure-related deficits in our town, principally involving the gyratory.

“The gyratory should go, the centre should be delivered to pedestrians, infrastructure should be people-centric and the riverside opened up for all to enjoy.”

Keith Meldrum Guildford Residents Association:

“Guildford is vulnerable and we call on residents to speak out. The Local Plan expands our congested borough by over a quarter, yet the infrastructure essential to support this scale of development is far from certain.

“The council proposed large areas of green belt for development and, so far, the main effect of the inspector’s examination has been to call for more homes in the next five years. The council’s response is to suggest more green belt sites.

“Guildford Residents Association is calling on the council and the inspector to take account of new ONS [Office for National Statistics] and OBR [Office for Budgetary Responsibility] evidence which shows that the scale of expansion proposed is excessive.”

Share This Post