[comments in square brackets are ours]
The story so far: We are now on page 13 of the Planning Advisory Service paper commissioned by EDDC in 2009 when it became apparent that all was not well with its Local Plan project. The Local Development Framework Panel (Chairman, Graham Brown) is meeting in secret, with no agendas or minutes published and the PAS is of the opinion that there is too little co-ordination between that Panel and officers.
The PAS report notes that an Issues and Options paper has already been produced but that the Local Development Strategy has not been reviewed since 2007 “and the council is way behind the proposed timescale set out in the document which had projected that the core strategy would be adopted in 2008”. It notes that the LDF Panel is “now looking at strategic allocations” with a “preferred options type allocation” consultation planned for early 2010 with submission later in 2010.
It notes that plans for what is now called the “Exeter Growth Point” (the Cranbrook area) are well advanced and there seems to be a clear vision for that area. ( It should be noted that this is probably because it is not in the hands of the LDF Panel and is a collaborative venture between many different groups, not just EDDC.)
In a key sentence the PAS says (Section A2, page 14 of the agenda):
“Although there are good working relationships with lots of agencies these have not yet been tied into the LDF process. The LDF is very much still seen as a land use planning document and there is not yet sufficient engagement from other partners. The planning policy team therefore seem to be developing the elements of an emerging vision in isolation.”. Recently some partners have been invited to give presentations to the LDF Member Panel e.g. SW Tourism and others will be invited similarly but these relationships need to be developed through ongoing engagement especially through the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP).
[This probably refers to the fact that, at this point, the LDF Panel has spent many meetings reviewing local sites (many belonging to EDBF members) but has not engaged with leading organisations outside that group, except to have the occasional presentation by invitation. It seems to imply that the LDF Panel is working in isolation from officers ]
The critique goes on:
“B.1
The LDF is still very much perceived within the authority as a planning document led by the planning policy team. Although planning is viewed as an important function of the authority it is not yet embracing the spatial planning links to the sustainable community strategy that it should be. The integration of partners’ plans is still very reliant on policy officers’ interpretation and the lack of an officers’ working group means that there is no effective method of sharing future plans, pulling together the corporate strands and providing a forum for debate.”
[So, there we have it – an important point which seems to imply that officers are not engaged with the LDF Panel nor are they interested in developing policy themselves. It is a “sink or swim” approach, leaving the LDF Panel to do the work. The LDF appears to think that it can do this work on its own without officers and officers do not seem to think that they need to do anything themselves.]
[Perhaps at this point we should remind ourselves that at least one officer could have helped to steer the LDF Panel out of its tunnel vision – Nigel Harrison, the EDDC Economic Development Officer, is the Hon Secretary of the East Devon Business Forum throughout the process and could have been a key officer liaison between the LDF Panel, other officers, EDBF AND outside consultation but he does not seem to have fulfilled this role, working only between the LDF Panel and EDBF (unless EDDC has documentation to show that this was not the case].
And finally, for today,
B2: There is some evidence of more joined up working on individual issues. For example, a virtual affordable housing team was recently established and a draft interim housing policy has been developed because of concerns of delivery on affordable housing for the rural areas. The interim policy which is currently out for consultation will allow for housing development at and near to villages (beyond existing Local Plan built-up area boundaries) in the district for a mix of market and affordable dwellings. However, this is seen by some as a sign of a reactive response to immediate circumstances rather than a positive proactive response to achieving wider objectives. There is concern that it will encourage further decision making by the development management committee on an ad-hoc basis rather than in relation to achieving the strategic vision. It is not also clear in developing this draft policy what account has been taken of evidence gathered for the LDF.
[Here we see for the first time that it is EDDC’s policy to go outside local boundaries in villages and that there is grave concern that there is no strategic vision when it comes to the LDF and that the DMC and LDF Panels are not working together.]
In our next instalment we will deal with what the PAS says about community involvement.
Bear in mind that EDDC, particularly Councillors Moulding and Diviani are currently blaming “NIMBYs” for holding up the draft Local Plan. It should be becoming patently obvious that the situation is quite different – in 2009 the LDF Panel, officers and the DMC are already floundering – no-one appears to be talking to anyone else and there does not seem to be any shared vision of how things should be done and no-one has overall control of the process.
At this point, the public is totally in the dark – no meetings of the LDF Panel have every taken place in public and no public consultation has been timetabled.
Like this:
Like Loading...