Views
1 week ago

JCS_MasterDocument_v7a_CLIENT_24.01.18

PART 5 - Infrastructure

PART 5 - Infrastructure Policies Introduction 5.1.1 Successful and sustainable communities depend upon physical, green and social and community infrastructure to meet the needs of residents and businesses. Infrastructure encompasses a very wide range of provision including transport, public utilities and waste management, flood management measures, social and community infrastructure such as affordable housing, health care facilities and sports provision, green infrastructure, culture, faith and spiritual facilities, education, leisure and tourism, and other community facilities ranging from community meeting halls to children’s play areas. 5.1.4 a long-term sustainable plan, which means taking a cross-cutting and strategic approach to infrastructure planning, funding, financing and delivery’. Recognition of the need to provide sufficient infrastructure to enable and support sustainable development and economic growth is inherent within the NPPF. Whilst infrastructure is referenced frequently throughout the NPPF, several core planning principles and key sections relate specifically to it (such as Parts 4, 5, 8 and 10). 5.1.2 5.1.3 It is important to appreciate that whilst there is a considerable degree of funding from governmental and other public sources, a significant amount of the money for provision of new or enhancement of existing infrastructure comes in the form of financial contributions from developers or in the form of payment in kind through direct provision of facilities or services. Clearly, there is only so much that a developer can be expected to contribute to infrastructure provision without threatening the economic viability of the proposal. This may be particularly so in respect of the redevelopment of brownfield land. In encouraging, where feasible, the redevelopment of brownfield land, the local planning authorities will on a case-bycase basis take into account evidence of any mitigating circumstances that affect the viability of redevelopment. Equally, a planning authority cannot reasonably be expected to allow development that will have an unacceptable impact on existing infrastructure. Where viability appears finely balanced, hard choices may sometimes need to be made in prioritising what is to be provided and / or when it is to come forward during the life of the development. For this reason, it is crucial to consider infrastructure provision ‘in the round’ and not to look at items in isolation from each other. This approach is endorsed by Government at Page 3 of the National Infrastructure Plan 2013: ‘The government recognises that meeting the UK’s infrastructure ambitions requires 5.1.5 5.1.6 In acknowledging the central importance of infrastructure to the delivery of the plan’s policies and proposals, the JCS is supported by an Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP). Its function is to assess the infrastructure and services that will be required to support the levels of housing and employment growth proposed in the plan. In doing so, the IDP fulfils several roles: • It provides evidence supporting the preparation and delivery of the JCS; • It presents estimated infrastructure costs and secured sources of infrastructure funding, including the potential for developer contributions towards infrastructure through S106 planning obligations. In due course, it will also be the evidence base underpinning any Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) charging schedule for each of the three constituent local planning authorities; • It identifies whether any Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) are expected to come forward within the JCS area. Currently there are no NSIPs in the JCS area registered with the Planning Inspectorate. In addition to enabling development to come forward, securing delivery of infrastructure will contribute to the achievement of JCS objectives. These include limiting flood risk, reducing dependency on the car, and enhancing access to community services within local centres. Gloucester, Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy 2011-2031 Adopted December 2017 76

INF1 – TRANSPORT NETWORK Background 5.2.1 5.2.3 Providing choice in modes of travel can help achieve sustainable development while contributing to wider economic, environmental and community objectives. Having access to different ways of travelling also contributes towards the quality of environment and the sense of place created by development, and influences the desirability of an area as a place to live or to locate a business. The NPPF states that ‘The transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel’. The ONS data on commuting patterns collected from the Annual Population Survey (2010 and 2011) indicates a high proportion of people both living and working within the JCS area. This selfcontainment highlights the potential for shortdistance trips to transfer where appropriate to non-car modes, such as public transport, walking or cycling – something which the NPPF considers to be a core planning principle. Enabling the transfer to non-car modes requires a coordinated approach across several policy and delivery areas, and the JCS seeks to achieve this through its policies on design and infrastructure. This policy contributes to the delivery of the strategy’s ambitions and strategic objectives. The preparation and implementation of transport strategy is primarily a matter for the Local Transport Plan. The role of the development plan is to reflect, support and enable the implementation of transport objectives through its land-use policies and proposals. 5.2.4 5.2.5 In the JCS area, the Local Highway Authority is Gloucestershire County Council. The County Council manages and maintains the local road network, supports non-commercial passenger transport services, and promotes safe and sustainable travel. The Local Transport Plan (LTP) is prepared by the County Council and sits alongside the JCS. In order to get a ‘full picture’ of transport policy and its implementation, the two documents along with the JCS transport implementation strategy (TIS), need to be read together. The LTP is the key strategy for the delivery of essential transport infrastructure to support the delivery of growth identified through the JCS. The preparation of this and other relevant parts of the JCS are the result of co-operation between the planning authorities and the Local Highway Authority. The Transport Implementation Strategy sits alongside the JCS and provides important explanation and guidance on the interpretation of policies relevant to the provision of transport in the JCS. Highways England is a government company that is charged with operating, maintaining and improving the strategic road network in the area including the M5, M50, A40, A46 and A417. Highways England also contributes to local transport policy formulation and implementation by engaging with the Local Highway Authority through the periodic LTP review process and other relevant consultations. Ongoing partnership working also happens through regular liaison and operation meetings. Gloucester, Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy 2011-2031 Adopted December 2017 77

Draft JCS for Consultation October 2013 Council ...
00.03 Strategic Green Belt Review - South West Regional Assembly
Examining Development Plan Documents ... - Planning Portal
LONDON’S
ADAPT2DC_Economics_and_Strategic_Mangement
Irish Planning Institute Submission on the National Planning Framework
Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2029 Part 1 - Drayton-near ...
UDIA NSW Policy Agenda 2009.indd
South Wiltshire Core Strategy - Wiltshire Council
MDAG
RSS East Of England Plan - Broads Authority
Core Strategy Proposed Submission - Fenland District Council
local-plan-combined-version-jan-2016-small
Core Strategy - Newark and Sherwood District Council
Delivery.pdf 06 August 2013 - Liverpool City Council - NSW ...
Adopted Core Strategy - Huntingdonshire District Council
SURREY STRUCTURE PLAN 2004 - Surrey County Council
Garden Cities now - October 2014