planning in hertfordshire to 2031 and beyond pl… · planning in hertfordshire. legislation and...

Planning in Hertfordshire to 2031 and BeyondFinal ReportNovember 2017

1

• Background• Approach• Legislative & Local Policy Background• Primary Research – interview key findings• Review of current practice (case studies)• Ways forward: Common ground & parameters• Joint Working: Objectives & Initiatives

Planning in HertfordshireReport structure

2

Planning in HertfordshireProject Background

3

The Hertfordshire Infrastructure Planning Partnership (HIPP) commissioned ARUP & Hyas Associates in May 2017 to examine the options for joint working in relation to planning, infrastructure & related matters leading up to and post 2031. The workstream was set up to cover the following ground:

• Examine the merits of the different models of governance to deliver a more joined-up and strategic approach to long-term planning of growth and infrastructure;

• Review alternative models for joint working emerging in other parts of the country; and• Consider options in the context of local long-term growth and delivery challenges, including

potential local scenarios such as pressures for urban intensification, expansion of existing towns (often cross boundary) and potential establishment of entirely new settlements.

The commission was to update and evolve the ‘Review of Strategic Planning Governance Arrangements’ work previously undertaken for HIPP by Catriona Riddell of POS Enterprise in 2014.

A core outcome of the work was to consider current practice and evolve options going forward, including capturing issues, opportunities & implications. The work was not intended to prescribe any one solution, with a recognition that findings would need to be fully considered by HIPP to consider the most appropriate route forward.

Stage 1Scope the current

context and emerging thinking on options for strategic joint work on

planning and infrastructure delivery, including the Statutory background & policy.

Stage 2Examine what is

happening in other parts of the country

and identify in particular the

requirements for any successful approach to work in Hertfordshire

Stage 3Develop a range of options for joint working post 2031 in the county and test them against future issues. Each

option should have a clear justification in terms of the benefits that it brings, and clear proposals in

terms of possible governance arrangements.

Planning in HertfordshireApproach

4

As a key part of the process, individual interviews were held with all Authorities across Hertfordshire and the Local Enterprise Partnership to draw out local insight and perspectives. This captured views on key opportunities for joint working, current/potential issues, constraints, knowledge of comparable models and potential parameters to joint working across Hertfordshire.

In addition, a selection of case studies were identified which offered opportunity for learning in the Hertfordshire context.

A three stage approach was deployed to the project:

Planning in HertfordshireLegislation and policy context

5

• Localism Act 2011 and amends to the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Place a legal duty on local planning authorities (LPAs), county councils and public bodies to engage on

strategic cross boundary matters in order to maximise the effectiveness of local plans. This is known as the ‘Duty to Cooperate’ (DtC).

• Local Democracy Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 and Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016 Enabled Government to establish combined authorities with a wide range of powers including transport

and local authority functions, and the ability to have a directly-elected Mayor.• National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

LPAs will be expected to demonstrate evidence of effective cooperation to plan for cross-boundary issues during examination of their Local Plans. This could be by way of plans/policies prepared as a joint committee, a memorandum of understanding or jointly prepared strategy.

Cooperation should be a continuous process of engagement resulting in a final position where plans provide the necessary land and infrastructure to support current and projected levels of development.

• The Housing White Paper (2017) Signals a clear direction of travel towards encouraging joint working. Proposes that all LPAs are required to prepare a Statement of Common Ground setting out how they will

work together to meet housing requirements and other issues that cut across authority boundaries. Planning for the right homes in the right place (Consultation 2017) aims to strengthen cross boundary planning

by requiring all Local Authorities to have ‘statements of common ground’ in place covering strategic matters. 5

6

Planning in Hertfordshire Local Plan progress chart

Note: Plan timescales will be subject to constant review – this chart illustrates the diversity but is not meant to be definitive or final6

• To establish and address future growth needs and achieve certainty

• To define infrastructure requirements, secure funding and make cost savings

• To establish a stronger voice to Government

• To ensure the Duty to Cooperate is fulfilled, address the forthcoming Statement of Common Ground requirement & local plans are found sound

Interview FindingsWhy is better joint working required?

7

• All current local plan programmes are different

• Differing growth pressures and geographic ‘pulls’

• Exiting partnerships around common interests / corridors / sites

• Need to deal with external influences – O2C, LSCC, XR2, HS2, London growth – risk will get left behind or picked off if don’t collaborate

• Difficult to engage with statutory third parties

Interview FindingsGeneral issues 1/2

Greater London

Lond

on S

tans

ted

Cam

brid

ge

8

• Focus (too much) on the short term • Difficulty in finding available/suitable development sites • Politics - cross boundary political differences and a lack of

overall political will to give up sovereignty• Lack of appetite for a joint statutory plan• Some common skills needs (viability, strategic

masterplanning, some other technical areas)• Resourcing, skills and staff retention -staff merry go round &

competitive salaries – and lack of planners causing issues • LEP passive role• Relationship with Hertfordshire County Council

Interview FindingsGeneral issues 2/2

9

• The Group is too large• It does not get full participation from members • Needs a clearer work programme and terms of reference• Similar issues for consideration keep arising • Members have different levels of decision making capacity • Difficult to get unanimous agreement• Mainly consultative • Needs extra momentum• Needs greater organisation and clearer governance• Lack of focus

Interview FindingsHIPP specific issues

10

• There is an appetite to change, address challenges and share resource/evidence base work

• Recognition that sub regional working/evidence base groups have been generally successful

• Some clear benefits of joint working - including cost savings, a stronger voice to Government and the opportunity to create stronger relationships

• There is joint working already going on (including growth area boards/growth area forums, some shared services/resources and existing joint evidence base studies)

• Next rounds of plan making will need to fully consider new settlements and take a more ‘place based’ approach

Interview FindingsPositive messages

11

• Establish a Memorandum of Understanding, work programme and project manager (third party coordination)

• Non-statutory strategy/strategic vision/plan (prospectus)• Pooling skills/resources/finances and knowledge sharing• Joint/Shadow Committee/s • Normalise plan periods to establish a rolling programme & enable

coordination of evidence studies• Two tiers of strategic planning (1. strategic and 2. local policies)• ‘One Public Estate’ model• LEP and other bodies to have more of a role / influence• Unitary Local Authority model• HIPP to be given ‘more teeth’ and to facilitate discussions between

finance officers and planners • Establish a firm decision making process

Interview FindingsIdeas & options for the future

12

• Cooperation for Sustainable Development Board• North Essex Joint Planning & Garden Communities• Oxford Growth Board• Coastal West Sussex• London Stansted Cambridge Consortium• Oxford to Cambridge Arc• Dacorum/St Albans Enterprise Zone Envirotech Project• Gatwick Diamond• Thames Gateway Kent Partnership• South West Group

Review of Current PracticeSuggested Examples (HIPP members)

13

• Joint studies/evidence base where appropriate• Local Plan Examinations- Programme Officer/s, Inspectors, legal support• Training, Events & Capacity building• Hertfordshire ‘Building Futures’ – Sustainable Design Toolkit & Design Review Panel• Herts wide infrastructure plan• Pool of specialist officers / shared resources and skills• ‘Statement of Intent’ / joint planning working protocol

Planning in Hertfordshire Workstream: Joint working up to 2031

At the outset of the commission, the intended focus had been on long term (post 2031) coordination. A separate (HIPP internal) workstream was tasked with looking at coordination over the short term. However, it became clear that there was considerable overlap between the 2 workstreams and this commission evolved to address both.

The workstream considering the shorter term had identified the following opportunities:

1. Cooperation for Sustainable Development Board2. North Essex Joint Planning & Garden Communities3. North Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit4. Coastal West Sussex & Greater Brighton Strategic Planning Board5. London Stansted Corridor Consortium 6. Cambridge City Council & South

South Cambridgeshire District Council7. Kent & Medway GIF8. Leicester Growth Plan9. Suffolk Growth Strategy

Review of Current PracticeCase Studies

1

325

8

7

6

154

9

Aims & Objectives1. The Co-operation for Sustainable Development

Board will support Local Plan making and delivery for sustainable communities across geographical and administrative boundaries in West Essex, East Herts and the adjoining London Boroughs. It will do this by Identifying and managing spatial planning issues that impact on more than one local planning area within West Essex, East Herts and the adjoining London Boroughs.

2. The Board will support better integration and alignment of strategic spatial and investment priorities in West Essex, East Herts and adjoining London boroughs, ensuring that there is a clear and defined route through the statutory local planning process, where necessary.

1a. Cooperation for Sustainable Development BoardBackground & Context

Background• Established in response to Duty

to Cooperate & Planning needs• Member workshops to identify

cross boundary issues • Original Terms of Reference

agreed October 2014, reviewed annually

• Regular Board meetings at least quarterly, rotating Chair (annual)

16

1b. Cooperation for Sustainable Development BoardStructure & Operations

Original Group: • Districts: Epping Forest,

Harlow Uttlesford, Brentwood Borough, Chelmsford City, East Herts, Broxbourne

• Counties: Essex County Council, Hertfordshire County Council,

• LB’s: London Boroughs of Waltham Forest, Redbridge and Enfield

• Other: LSCC, HCA

Core Group: Epping Forest, Harlow, Uttlesford & East Herts

Work Programme• Local Plan Progress• Evidence Base: MOUs, SHMA (Core

Group), Transport Modelling, Harlow Strategic Sites

• Harlow Garden Town• Strategic infrastructure (M11 J7A,

Princess Alexandra Hospital)• Responding to pressures (ie Crossrail 2)17

2a. North Essex Joint Planning & Garden CommunitiesBackground & Context

Background• Aligned Local Plans –

timing of preparation• Shared evidence needs• Officer joint working

from 2015• Need to plan for future

new settlements• Keen interest in Garden

City Agenda

Work Programme• Local Plan Progress• Evidence Base: SHMA. Garden

Communities, Infra (A12, A120, Economic

• Land & Delivery Structure• Legal & Corporate financing

Core Partners• Braintree DC• Colchester BC• Tendring DC• Essex CCOthers• HCA• Uni of Essex• SELEP

Rationale & Benefits• Sound Plans • Quality outcomes • Securing funding• Increased capacity• Reduced Costs• Raising status

Joint Planning• Shared Section 1

(strategic overview, approach to housing distribution, economic & infra priorities)

• Section 2’s – local DM 18

Background• North Essex Garden Communities Ltd,

Site specific LDVs, Delivery team• Potential transition to Development

Corporation• Potential public/private partnership,

appetite for CPO & direct delivery• Funded to date by DCLG £1.3m &

Councils pooled contributions (£1m)

19

2b. North Essex Joint Planning & Garden CommunitiesApproach to Garden Communities

3a. North Northamptonshire Joint Planning UnitBackground & Context

Background• MKSM Growth Area• Large urban extensions &

new garden village sites• Joint Planning Unit

established 2004• Memo of Intent (2005

amended since)• Joint Planning Committee

operational from July 2005• Joint Core Strategy

adopted 2008 & 2016

Northamptonshire Arc Prosperity Plan• Prepared in 2011 by NCC• Provides strategic context• Guide investment decisions• Secure investment (public & private)20

3b. North Northamptonshire Joint Planning UnitJoint Planning & Delivery Unit

Work Programme• Joint Core Strategy• Joint SPDs (ie Place Shaping SPD)• Evidence Base & Technical work• Specialist support design & sustainability

Rationale & Benefits• Sound Plan • Quality outcomes • Increased capacity• Reduced Cost• Securing Funding• Attracting partners

Funding & Delivery• Pooled budget• LA Contributions• Equalisation• Secondees• NCC Accountable

Body• Others (ie DCLG £1m

Garden Towns) Joint Planning Unit• Head of Unit• Design Action

Manager• Urban designer• Principal Planner• Senior Planner• Planner (x2)• GIS officer

Joint Committee• 3 members from

each District

• Joint Core Strategy (Part 1)

• Districts prepare Part 2s

Joint Planning

Unit

21

4. Coastal West Sussex & Greater BrightonStrategic Planning Board

22

Background• Remit - identify and manage

spatial planning issues which impact on more than one local planning area within Coastal West Sussex and the Greater Brighton area.

• Core members comprise representatives from Adur, Arun, Chichester, Worthing, Lewes, West Sussex County Council, Brighton & Hove City Council, and the South Downs National Park.

• Advisory body

Aims and Objectives• Create a strategic planning vision, working jointly with

the economic and regeneration Coastal West Sussex Partnership (CWSP)

• Develop an investment framework.

Growth & Infrastructure CoordinationOther Examples

5. London Stansted Corridor Consortium & Growth Commission• Public sector members & private sector

partners• Aims to promote the economic potential

of the London-Stansted-Cambridge corridor and make recommendations on how to achieve change

• Vision, leadership, lobbying, sector strategies, infrastructure

• Governed by a Board. Direct resources -Director and Programme Manager

• Growth Commission - recommendations report published July 2016

6. Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council

• Moving to a joint local plan and shared service• Joint/shared evidence base• Shared costs/knowledge and expertise• Joint Planning Committee • Shared growth objectives/challenges• Joint approach on cross boundary

infrastructure• Enables a shared view/vision for quality• Joined up approach to delivery/phasing• Resolution – joint Director & Chair/Vice Chair• Potential/scope for a joint growth board

23

Growth & Infrastructure CoordinationOther Examples

9. Suffolk Growth Strategy• Growth Project Board with

CEO’s and Leaders, Uni, CoC, LEP. Chaired by a District Leader

• Project Manager, moving towards joint team

• Evolution from growth strategy – strong economic focus

8. Leicester Growth Plan• 9 LAs around Leicester• Member Advisory Group

with LEP as observer• Officer level Strategic

Planning Group• Project Manager• Growth Statement first

shared position• To be followed with

Growth Plan

7. Kent & Medway GIF• Led by Kent CC• First to be published 2015• Living document, updated

2016• Covers period 2011-2031• Overview of growth• Infrastructure

requirements• Funding & delivery• Action Plan

24

• ‘Planning’ – but recognised in the wider context of economic development, infrastructure delivery & place making

• Prevalence of non-statutory growth & infrastructure plans• More statutory plans emerging – potentially 2 tier – Part 1 for

strategic matters (joint); Parts 2s for local situation (individual)• Scale of partnership working has been generally limited but is

starting to grow (3-5 Local Authorities max)• County Councils often play a strong / leading role, mainly on

infrastructure related strategies• Some form of delivery vehicle with a strong individual identity

can avoid trust / control issues• Importance of robust project management / organisation

Review of Current PracticeKey Messages

25

Review of Current PracticeCriteria/attributes for successful joint working

26

Case Study

Joint vision

Clear objectives

LA Decisionmaking

structure

Terms of Reference

Political buy-in

Dedicated joint

resources

Privatesector

support

Joint studies / evidence

bases

1. Cooperation for Sustainable Development Board

-

2. North Essex Garden Communities - -

3. North Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit

4. Coastal West Sussex & Greater Brighton Strategic Planning Board

5. London Stansted Corridor Consortium

6. Cambridgeshire City Council & South Cambridgeshire District Council

7. Kent & Medway GIF

8. Leicester Growth Plan

9. Suffolk Growth Strategy

Firstly, agree the drivers/principles behind future joint working e.g. : • Getting sound plans in place: need to satisfy Duty to Cooperate,

strong evidence bases• Responding to common growth pressures & needs (London, O2C)• Attracting investment in infrastructure• Delivering quality places (sustainable, socially mixed & balanced

new communities)• Accommodating large scale growth through new settlements• Addressing resourcing challenges – attractiveness, capacity

building, addressing skills gaps • Revenue challenges – delivering smarter planning services

Planning in HertfordshireWays forward: 1. Common ground/needs

1. Ensure buy-in from CEOs/leaders to help find a balance between economic growth, infrastructure and planning. Need genuine political collaboration to deliver on shared objectives such as securing infrastructure funding.

2. Review the role and responsibilities of HIPP in terms of establishing a terms of reference / memorandum of understanding, summary business plan, and resourcing/funding to facilitate stronger joint working.

3. Early focus on continuing to build trust and delivering outcomes– respecting equality of positions & protecting existing sovereignty.

2. Start with agreeing areas of common ground / current needs. Implement immediate tasks/actions with demonstrable value (quick & enduring wins)

4. Adopt good organisational practices, project management & clear programme of work - focus on deliverables, task & finish.

5. Good governance, review throughout implementation to ensure appropriate decision making – ‘teeth’ needed, but not from the outset (long term goal)

6. ‘De-politicise’ joint working (e.g. include LEPs, Universities, health boards, etc)

Planning in HertfordshireWays forward: 2. Ways of working

• Review HIPP structure & governance – seek to improve on what currently exists, but consider future potential structure e.g. a stand-alone structure.

• Establish HIPP business plan to include objectives, workstreams, work programme, deliverables.

• Bolster resources – employ dedicated project manager/director.

• Trial an informal joint working/decision making structure.

Planning in HertfordshireObjectives & Initiatives

Improved Organisation & Governance

Better Outcomes & Quality of Place Focus

Positioning to attract investment & funding

Capacity, Resources & Cost Saving

• Prepare a Growth Framework which hypothesises the quantity of growth (say by 2050) and discusses the strategic spatial options and major infrastructure requirements needed to deliver high quality, sustainable solutions.

• Consider need for shared ‘placemaking’ resource – shared skills to support with design quality (site masterplanning, urban/landscape design, sustainable transport, etc).

• Prepare appropriate SPDs, area wide guidance/capacity building.

• Placemaking Training & Capacity building.• Greater use/role of Hertfordshire ‘Building

Futures’ – Sustainable Design Toolkit & Design Review Panel.






• Prepare a Hertfordshire Infrastructure and Funding Prospectus which sets out the infrastructure required to deliver the agreed growth to 2031.

• Evolve & integrate longer term needs via preparation of the Growth Framework.

• Coordinate joint commissioning of evidence (key infrastructure interventions, cross boundary infrastructure planning & approaches to new settlements).

• Consider scope for and implement local infrastructure fund / equivalent.

• Standardised approaches to scheme viability testing & developer contributions.






• Trial the sharing of resources, skills and knowledge (including potential for secondments).

• Contribute to pool of central functions –potentially securing match funding (Govt/LEP).

• Commission joint studies/evidence base where appropriate (localised or County wide).

• Joint preparations for Local Plan Examinations -Programme Officer/s, Inspectors, legal support, IT (maps).

• Training, Events & Capacity building.• Establish additional resource in order to sign off

documents.






Wider measures• Consider role & approach to ‘new settlements’ – spatially and new

growth delivery models (such as locally led development corporations)

• Statements of Common Ground with adjoining growth areas• Strategic Infrastructure Levy / equivalent• Align plan reviews / new local plan evolution processes (where

possible)• Consider scope for 2 part future Local Plans – shared Part 1 to

address strategic, Part 2 local matters• Consider scope for (localised) joint committees on strategic matters


Planning in HertfordshireIllustrative Initiatives & Timeline

2017 2031+

Growth Framework

Local Plan Reviews

infrastructure & Funding Prospectus

New settlement feasibility studies

Local infrastructure funding model

Current Local Plan Adoptions

Joint Local Plans (where appropriate)

Herts Wide SPDs / Planning Guidance

HIPP Review / new

governance

Specialist Support / Capacity Building

Review Point

Implementation

Review Point

Planning in HertfordshireLooking to the future

Hertfordshire Growth Framework

Hertfordshire Revolving Infrastructure Fund

SW Herts Joint Strategic Plan

NE Herts Joint Strategic Plan

Hertfordshire Garden Settlements Development Corporation/s

Where might we be in 2031?• Infrastructure & Funding

Prospectus• Growth Framework• Joint Local Plan/s – Strategic

Part 1’s (around functional geographies)

• Joint Statements of Common Ground with adjoining growth areas

• Locally Led Development Corporation/s

• Strategic Infrastructure Levy• Hertfordshire Revolving

Infrastructure Fund

Greater London Statement of Common Ground

Oxford to Cambridge Corridor Statement of Common Ground

London Stansted Cambridge Corridor SOCG

Report Produced by

[email protected]@arup.com

Hyas Associates [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



planning in hertfordshire to 2031 and beyond pl… · planning in hertfordshire. legislation and...

Documents