On balance the Panel concludes that the sub-regional strategy is necessary to address the combination of contextual issues and challenges shared by the districts around London’s southern fringes, and would mirror the London Arc in the emerging East of England RSS.
Core Strategy
The Panel concludes that the approach to the sub-region needs to be creative in order to protect the environment while addressing economic needs and that Policy LF1 fails to do this. In particular, the Panel feels that the approach taken to the Metropolitan Green Belt (MGB) is fundamentally wrong as it starts from the position that there should be no alterations of any substantive nature. It also concludes that the strategy underplays the role and potential for sustainable growth of the three regional hubs - Guildford, Redhill/Reigate and Woking - particularly Guildford. Where Redhill/Reigate is concerned, it finds it ironic that this is now included in a New Growth Point yet its overall housing provision is less that that envisaged in RPG9.
The Panel recommends that Policy LF1 be amended to provide a more positive strategy about the need to sustain the important role played by the economy in the wider region and beyond, and to meet housing needs, whilst retaining the overall quality of life.
Economy
This is the only sub-region that the Assembly and SEEDA did not agree a job estimate for monitoring purposes. The Panel accepts that it would be unrealistic to expect an exact match between labour supply and jobs given the complex labour markets and proximity to London, but is concerned about the scale of the mismatch and about the over-reliance on ‘smart growth’. To redress this, the
Panel recommends an increase in the housing level of 23% but recognises the importance of monitoring the scale of new jobs and labour supply.
While the Panel supports the general approach to employment land, focusing on re-use of existing employment land and town centres, and the local authorities view that there is no overall shortage of employment land, it is concerned about quality and variety to satisfy the range of needs. However, it is satisfied that the Plan, Monitor and Manage (PMM) approach advocated by Surrey CC would
be capable of addressing these needs providing the right monitoring arrangements are in place. If new provision is needed, the Panel recommends that this is provided in the urban extensions proposed in the sub-region and in the redevelopment of the DERA site in Chertsey (see Housing section below)
Settlement Shaping
The Panel concludes that water supply and waste water treatment issues have not played a significant part in shaping the strategy other than influencing the phasing provisions.
Flood risk has, however, influenced the strategy but detailed studies are needed to address the impact at the local level.
The strategy has not been influenced by where there is transport capacity given the acceptance that existing congestion levels are already high throughout the sub-region and the Panel agrees this means that wherever growth is located it will add to congestion. It accepts that all three hubs require to be supported by additional infrastructure investment to enable them to fulfil their regional
role. The Airtrack scheme, if implemented, will strengthen the role of the Guildford and Woking as hubs.
Housing
Given the concerns about the mismatch between labour supply and jobs and the fact that the proposed housing provision in the LF will not even allow for natural change in the population, the Panel recommends an increase from 37,360 to 46,120 (2,306 dpa). Whilst it accepts that urban potential estimates are uncertain, particularly in the longer term, there is strong evidence to suggest that the reliance
placed on previously developed land sources has been associated with a failure to undertake genuine testing of the opportunities to accommodate a higher level of provision.
In terms of accommodating the additional housing, the Panel considers that urban potential may deliver more and acknowledges that some alterations to the MGB will be required but that this is necessary because the need for additional housing in this part of the region is so great. It recommends that the hubs should be the focus of additional housing and that; a selective review of the MGB should
focus on the area to the north-east of Guildford; if required, a selective review of the MGB around Woking focusing on the south of Woking; smaller scale MGB reviews around Redhill and Reigate and, given the proximity to Tandridge, this applies here as well. The Panel also recognises that all district allocations within the sub-region may require small releases of Green Belt to accommodate the recommended
increases.
An additional 300 dwellings (15 dpa) is allocated to Runnymede, most of which is to be provided on the DERA site at Chertsey. It recommends that this should be allocated as part of a mixed-use development, adding 2,500 dwellings to the Borough’s total.
A summary of the district and sub-regional allocations are included in Annexes 1 and 2.
On affordable housing, the Panel supports the 40% target in the plan and non-residential development making a contribution to affordable housing where appropriate.
Implementation
The Panel strongly endorses the need for a joint approach to infrastructure funding as advocated in the plan and welcomes the positive work being done in Surrey on the tariff approach. Although there are some concerns about how this will operate in practice, on balance the Panel commends joint working on a tariff to fund infrastructure from small sites to mitigate the impact of cumulative development
in a revised Policy LF5.
