Written evidence from Ringwood Town Council
SUMMARY
Ringwood Town Council's summary and expanded comments
address the three particular questions and the three subsequent
matters for further consideration:
- We believe there will be a marked loss of impetus
in the development of housing, particularly amongst the "developer
community" as it comes to terms with the new regime.
- We believe that plans to incentivise local communities
will be singularly ineffective as it misunderstands human nature
and that alleged community gain will not outweigh perceived personal
loss.
- We reserve our position as to the relevance and
effectiveness of plans for incentives but are extremely sceptical
as to the hoped for impact on overcoming private "regret
or loss" by the offering of wider community benefits.
- We believe that there is need for a higher-level
view of strategic issues. However, whatever organisation is considered,
it must meet certain criteria of a "sense of place".
- We believe that there needs to be both rewards
and sanctions for whatever successor planning authority otherwise
a "duty to co-operate" is worthy but worthless.
- We believe that, firstly, such information should
be passed to Counties and Unitaries, and, secondly, that larger,
task specific or even ad hoc structures be considered,
subject to the nature of the specific task. Is there a possible
role for the Local Government Association?
MAIN COMMENTS
The implications of the abolition of regional
house building targets for levels of housing development
Ringwood Town Council believes there will be a marked
loss of impetus in new build housing whilst new criteria are developed
and implemented. The effect will be most marked on the "developer
community" as they had come to terms with rules and vagaries
of the previous hierarchical planning regime. Until the certainty
is established and understood by all parties there will be a reduced
rate of new house building.
The likely effectiveness of the Government's plan
to incentivise local communities to accept new housing development,
and the nature and level of incentives which will need to be put
in place in place to ensure an adequate long-term supply of housing
Ringwood Town Council believes that the concept is,
for most communities, fundamentally flawed. It misreads human
nature of which there is extensive theoretical and empirical evidence
that demonstrates clearly the vast difference a perceived personal
loss (a building or buildings next to me equals loss of amenity
(define and value), and the possible loss of value in my property
and the diffuse gain (quantify) that might benefit a local community.
The bulk of the community will see no personal gain, therefore,
no motivation to champion an "external good". It might
just work at the very smallest Parish level but even there will
be immense inertia to overcome a change to the status quo. There
is also the very real issue in forming a robust case for new housing—who
is to do this, what will be the quality and robustness of the
housing case and who will pay—sponsors or the community?
As an example and to put such initiatives in context
Ringwood is a small market town, bisected by the A31, on the edge
of the New Forest with a population of approximately 14,000. We
have currently a waiting list of some 15 years for affordable
housing and an approved new build rate under the current core
strategy of 20 units per annum to 2026. We feel that the current
long-term supply is neither adequate nor that the above proposals
will make any material difference.
The Committee understands that the Government
intends to announce further details of its plans for incentives
"shortly" and would welcome comments on the adequacy
and appropriateness of those incentives when the details are available
Ringwood Town Council maintains a watching brief
but strongly believes that the devising of incentives that achieve
acceptance of a public good by the community against the strongly
held and articulated opinions of a few affected persons who only
perceive loss or regret will be very hard to achieve. Blanket
solutions will not be appropriate, as the local circumstance should
dictate whatever incentive package is devised. That said any solution
must be sustainable and not add to the existing burden on the
Council Tax payers at large. Lastly, to be an effective local
solution, recognition must be taken in any overall calculus that
tailored solutions will be administratively costly to implement.
Unless it can be shown that there are overall savings then this
route should not be pursued.
The arrangements which should be put in place
to ensure that cooperation between local planning authorities
on matters formerly covered by regional spatial strategies (eg
waste, minerals, flooding, the natural environment, renewable
energy etc)
Ringwood Town Council believes that a critical, higher
level is required as the view and incentive for wider co-ordination
had been subsumed in the now abolished regional strategies. There
is an excellent case to review the level at which such overarching
viewpoints are formulated and implemented, previously the concept
of most regional bodies strained all the criteria of economic
geography, a sense of place and history and political comprehensibility.
The strongest consideration should be given to more compact structures
that address the above issues. What coherence was there ever in
an entity called SE region that spanned from the Isle of Thanet
(E), Milton Keynes (N), having skirted around almost three quarters
of London, to the conurbation of Southampton/Eastleigh/Portsmouth
(SW) with part of the region, New Forest western edge, strongly
linked with the other conurbation (Christchurch/Bournemouth/Poole)
in SW Region.
The adequacy of proposals put forward by the government,
including a duty to co-operate and the suggestion that Local Enterprise
Partnerships (LEPs) may fulfil a planning function
Ringwood Town Council believes that a duty to co-operate
unless backed up by a system of rewards and sanctions will be
worthy but worthless, which in turn requires some overarching
authority. At this stage no comment of substance can be made on
the suitability of a LEP fulfilling a planning function—detail
is scant, but see previous comments in that such a body must have
a sense of place if its decisions are to materially effect either
a community or an area.
How the data and research collated by the now
abolished Regional Local Authority Leaders' Boards should be made
available to local authorities, and what arrangements should be
put in place to ensure effective updating of that research and
collection of further research crossing on matters crossing local
authority boundaries
Ringwood Town Council believes an essential first
step is to ensure that such information is passed to Counties
and Unitaries, and secondly there needs to be created a "research
and analysis" capability that reflects what ever intermediate
structure is created to deal with these larger issues. Once again
careful thought needs to be given to the scope of such an organisation
be it a LEP or something else such that there is a sense of place
in its coverage. Communities must feel some natural affinity with
decisions affecting their larger, longer-term interests, without
some form of overarching but sufficiently local identity there
will be myopia and short-term thinking.
Maybe we need to consider more Ad Hoc structures
of the willing to address issues that dictate the scale of investigation
and coordination—flooding may have one focus, economic growth
another, with rural deprivation being part of a wider community
but once again reflecting the concept of a sense of place.
Lastly, is there a possible role for the Local Government
Association to complement its existing support, coordination and
representation functions which undertakes on behalf of all tiers
of Local Government?
September 2010
| 
