NEWS RELEASE from the Liberal Democrats on Harlow District Council

Local Plan Delay has Serious Implications

Liberal Democrats on Harlow Council have warned that a three month delay to the consultation on the council’s Local Plan could have serious implications.

The delay was forced at last Thursday’s Full Council meeting when, in a surprise move, Conservative councillors (who had supported the draft Local Plan at Committee) switched their vote and joined with Labour to delete the Maypole site from those identified for industrial use, and to send the draft Local Plan back to the Environment & Community Committee.

Commenting on this decision, Liberal Democrat councillor Chris Millington said:

"There were other ways in which residents’ understandable wish to discuss their concerns about the proposals for the Maypole site could have been accommodated, without holding up the process of the Local Plan inquiry.

"As it is, this decision could lose the council money, worsen our performance figures, and delay the regeneration of the north of our town centre.

"Worst of all, it could increase the risk that the Government will insist on creating an Urban Development Corporation to deliver extra homes in and around Harlow. This would remove these decisions from the democratic process, leaving an unelected body to make these major decisions over the heads of local people.

"Councillors and officers will need to work very hard to limit the damage this decision could cause to Harlow."

ENDS

Note to editors: Implications of the delay to the Local Plan

1. Despite having agreed the Local Plan draft at Committee in September, the Full Council voted on Thursday 16 October to delete the Maypole site from the list of industrial land allocations. It did not specify an alternative site for industrial development. This means that the Local Plan does not conform to the County Council Structure Plan and will therefore have to be reviewed.
2. The Council had intended to place the draft Local Plan on deposit for public comments in November and December; this will now not be possible. The Council cannot consult on the Local Plan over Christmas, so the six week deposit period will now have to take place in January and February next year.
3. The delay to the deposit period will result in delay to the Local Plan inquiry, which will now have to take place in summer instead of spring next year.
4. The review of the Local Plan timetable in the light of the deletion of the Maypole site may mean that officers will not be available to start developing the regeneration proposals for the north of the Town Centre.
5. The delay to the Local Plan process is likely to mean that Harlow Council’s performance figures for planning will worsen. The Government gives grants to councils that perform well in planning. Harlow Council received £180,000 of planning grant this year; a repeat of this grant next year could be put at risk by the delay.
6. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) is currently being advised by consultants to establish an Urban Development Corporation (UDC) to manage the process of building thousands of additional homes in and around Harlow. Local politicians and others have argued that a democratic local partnership, not a UDC, should be responsible. The failure of Harlow Council to pass its own Local Plan, even after it had been agreed by the Environment & Community Committee, may suggest to the ODPM that a local, democratic partnership may not be sufficient to deliver the Government’s growth plans.

ENDS