LDF

Suffolk Coastal DC is tonight considering its LDF. The council has been told it has to build over 4000 houses and that it is obliged to plan for that. This target has not been set locally but has been imposed by Whitehall, by the Labour government, and allocated through the Regional Spatial Strategy.

This top-down approach then pitches councils against communities, obliged to plan for housing that may not be needed. Contrast that to the Conservative approach, which will throw out the top-down housing targets and will seek to have a bottoms-up, needs-based or aspiration-based approach with genuine partnership between the council and communities.

The link to the Conservative Policy is here - http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Where_we_stand/Housing.aspx - and look to the downloadable documents on the right called Green Paper - Open Source Planning.

I have publicly stated that I support the bottom-up approach, that it should be a matter for local councils and communities to decide (localism in action) and that I personally oppose development on greenfields.
This is in line with the Conservative planning guidance that will be introduced - In particular, we will maintain national Green Belt protection, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest and other environmental designations which protect the character of our country’s landscape, stop unsustainable urban sprawl and preserve wildlife.

I have fought against similar developments in Hampshire because although I understand that concentrated development is one approach for me, going into greenfield should be the last approach available, and that putting in new beacon towns or super-villages provide the opportunity to increase sprawl, rather than limit it.

I have received a number of representations from residents and pressure groups on this matter. As I have said, I believe in localism and that candidates and MPs should not interfere, but I do believe the strategic nature of this LDF merits my representation to councillors.

I may be off the Christmas card list of some of them as a consequence but this is not an easy issue for councilors and I do this in the spirit of ensuring that they have considered the representations, the submissions, the views of their constituents. I have not asked councillors to vote one way or the other. I would not want councillors telling me how to vote if I were in Parliament but I would expect them to share their views with me on different topics that affect them.

The text of my letter is below...

Dear Councillor,

On Thursday, you will be voting on the LDF. I firmly believe in localism and that councillors representing their local communities should decide on these matters. I reflected for some time on deciding whether or not to write to you but I felt it was merited as the LDF is of such strategic impact for Suffolk Coastal.

I appreciate that you have been considering this for some time and that I have only been a candidate a few weeks. I will immediately say that I am not going to ask you to vote one way or the other. My general views on development are in the public domain though I will add this letter to my blog, in the interests of transparency.

Other constituents and groups will have sent you detailed thoughts on the interpretation of data, their concern about adjacencies to AONB and SSSI sites, the capacity of the Orwell Bridge and the process. I wish to articulate some of the concerns of those constituents that have approached me and ask you to consider five particular points when deciding on the LDF.

i) I believe that the Regional Spatial Strategy is fundamentally flawed with targets imposed top down from a Labour government in Whitehall that are out of kilter with local needs.

ii) If Conservatives form the next government, and we will know that within the next 7 weeks, the RSS will be declared null and void – the housing targets will disappear and councils will be invited to do a bottom-up needs assessment, in conjunction with parish councils and communities. The Conservative policy (open source planning) is now online. It is not a NIMBY, anti-developers’ charter, in fact, a locally-sourced policy with little or no housing growth may well be rejected by the Secretary of State. However, it encourages sustainable development and it also makes the statement - In particular, we will maintain national Green Belt protection, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest and other environmental designations which protect the character of our country’s landscape, stop unsustainable urban sprawl and preserve wildlife.

iii) I recognise the concerns expressed about the risk of speculative planning applications in the absence of a defined plan. I have been led to believe that the planning changes will move quickly and that the invoking of executive powers to revoke the RSS is being considered. Combined with the draft policy being published and considered as emerging policy, then would it be worth delaying the LDF till after the Election? I am trying to secure a meeting with the Shadow Planning Minister to have a more certain view, though this may not happen before your special council meeting.

iv) I hear genuine concern principally on the coalescence of the Trimleys around Felixstowe and the site at Martlesham which seems to have grown from 1000 houses to 2000 and 3000 is anecdotally floated at regional level. This creep and sprawl has sent shockwaves into neighbouring communities, really concerned about the urban strip emerging from Ipswich to Felixstowe, who consider that the consultation process has been mainly a tick box exercise rather than a genuine engagement on the next steps for the district. I have also received representation about a lack of natural development or restricted use of redundant buildings in the rural areas.

v) I recognise there is a valid choice between concentrated and dispersed development, each with its own merits. I do understand that a new town will have facilities on hand whereas spreading out development will not automatically bring infrastructure funding but can provide a route for smaller villages to evolve organically. Just reflect then on the impact the two approaches could have in 5, 10 years’ time on the shape and feel of SC? Who will that housing be for? For local people? Will they want to leave their villages? Will it be for people moving out of Ipswich? Or for those new to Suffolk? What is it that draws new people into Suffolk? Will the villages survive if the younger generations feel they have to move out? Will the local pubs and shops be viable with their existing population?

These are not easy issues to consider and as said above, I recognise that you have been considering this for some time and that this is your democratic decision. Rest assured, if I am elected to Parliament, I will be eager to vote in the new legislation that will see more power devolved to local councils and communities, especially on planning matters. I also hope that we will be working together to continue to make Suffolk Coastal a great place to live, work and play.

I wish you well at the meeting on Thursday.

Yours faithfully,


Therese Coffey
Conservative PPC for Suffolk Coastal