The new Guildford Borough Regulation 19 Local Plan Consultation will open on 9th June 2017 and run for 6 weeks.
The new Regulation 19 Local Plan Consultation will open on 9th June 2017 and run for 6 weeks.
As before, this site will capture the consultation and the evidence base as it is at the date of consultation.
The updated proposed submission draft local plan should be evidence based and so it is important to track both the evolution of the plan itself and the underlying evidence base.
On this site you will find the 2014 Regulation 18 consultation with its evidence base, the 2016 Regulation 19 consultation with its evidence base and the 2017 Regulation 19 consultation with its evidence base (after it is launched on 9th June).
There has been a trail of emails on the Guildford Dragon (www.guildford-dragon.com) where correspondents have taken issue with the term NIMBY.
I have no particular concern with the term NIMBY (‘not in my back yard’) and nor do I have any particular beef against people who staunchly protect their back yards – it should be a sign that people care enough about their own environment to get energised about development proposals that affect them.
There is a difficulty with NIMBYism where there is a development of national, regional or even Borough-wide importance. This should not prevent (no insult intended) NIMBYs seeking to have that significant development put elsewhere, but it should be noted that there will be plenty of people elsewhere (who don’t live in the micro-environment) who will press for the significant development to happen whether there or elsewhere.
I am as capable of being a NIMBY as the next person and I like to think I am objective in my NIMBYism. I can wear the badge with some pride but I do always try to point out that I am a near resident and that my intervention is knowledgeable of both my area and the proposal itself.
Dedicated NIMYism may take a huge amount of effort investigating other potential solutions elsewhere to demonstrate how much better they would be. So NIMBYism is not necessarily a hyper-local introverted attitude.
It goes without saying that often NIMBYs are disappointed in major developments because we have spent so much energy fighting against the principle that when we lose (as sometimes we do) we have had little or no say in what the end development is actually like. This is the real conundrum – how do we say “No, Bu if it happens it should be like this…” without undermining our core arguments?
Incidentally, I would rather be a NIMBY than a BANANA (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything/anybody).
Julian Lyon (8th January 2017)
The Guildford Society’s submission in respect of the Local Plan was delivered by hand to the Council before the deadline of 23.59pm Monday 18th July.
Here is the Submission with its accompanying documents:
Chair, The Guildford Society
18th July 2016
Here the slides used for the talk on the Local Plan and Town Centre Master Plan at the Artington Parish Council meeting tonight (10th May 2016)
Following publication of the preliminary version of the 2016 Regulation 19 Consultation Draft Local Plan (‘R19 Draft‘), it seems appropriate to compare it to the Regulation 18 Consultation Draft (‘R18 Draft‘) and the Guildford Society response to the R18 Draft.
I have, therefore, set the policies side by side along with the GSoc comments in the file below:
20160416_R18-2014_to_R19-2016_Comparison_Policies (more than 200 pages) This does not include a comparison of the site-specific policies or the proposed site allocations.
I have analysed the Guildford Town Centre and Guildford Urban Area sites as a comparison between 2014 and 2016 and GSoc’s 2014 comments:
I will in due course add the remaining sites from the 2016 draft plan in a similar format.
Jennie Kyte has prepared a very helpful summary (below) which I have just reformatted a little but have made no changes to:
Taken together these documents should help with navigation and orientation of the new draft plan.
The draft Guildford Town Centre Master Plan documents have been published today – all 200Mb+ of them!
Without any commentary from us at this stage, and because the GBC website seems to be unable to cope with the file sizes, they can be downloaded from this site (below):
Draft Town Centre Master Plan
Item 04 Appendix 2 Scenario 1 (29Mb)
Item 04 Appendix 3 Scenario 2 (29Mb)
Item 04 Appendix 4 Viability Report
Pages 1-61 of Item 04 Appendix 1 Town Centre Masterplan – the report.compressed (62Mb)
Pages 62-138 of Item 04 Appendix 1 Town Centre Masterplan – the report.compressed (116Mb)
On May 7th Guildford will decide who will take the Borough forward for the next four years.
It seems appropriate to consider some of the data behind running the Council (here taken from OpenCommunities.org)
Guildford has around 54,000 households (national average for a local authority is 66,597), of which 0.6 per thousand (0.49) are treated as homeless and 0.26 per thousand (1.72) are in temporary accommodation. In 2010/11 we added just 180 new homes (380) and just 90 affordable homes (188).
Guildford’s total service expenditure in 2011/12 was £400 per household (£393) of which £49 was spent on housing (£51), £119 was spent on cultural services (£79), £147 on environmental and regulatory services (£124), £21 on planning and development (£45), £96 on central services (£100) and -£86 on highways and transport (-£10). Perhaps the low expenditure on planning and transport & highways indicates some of the issues this site has been wrestling with!
There is more detail elsewhere on this website about deprivation indices but for the Borough as a whole, Guildford is the 27th least deprived Borough of 326 in the country (least deprived 8%)and 18th in terms of income. The two areas we perform much less well are Barriers to Housing and Services where we are 148th, and Living Environment where we are 155th. Two particular notes on these scores: (1) the Borough-wide scores should not allow us to gloss over specific pockets of relative deprivation in some categories – including some where we are in the most deprived 2% in the country; and (2) the Living Environment scores are made up from two sub-domains: (a) The ‘indoors’ living environment which includes Housing in poor condition: The proportion of social and private homes that fail to meet the decent homes standard; and Houses without central heating: The proportion of houses that do not have central heating; and (b) The ‘outdoors’ living environment which comprises Air quality and Road traffic accidents. The low outdoor environment scores outweigh the much better scores in the countryside.
The definitions can be found here
or downloaded from this site: DCLG_DefinitionsofDeprivationScores_1870718
The Guildford Society response to the Consultation Draft Local Plan provided analysis of the relative deprivation of our Lower Super Output Areas which can be seen on this site, and which gives a picture of some of the issues that will need to be addressed by the new Council and in a the Local Plan.
Good Luck to all new Councillors on May 8th!