Executive
Report
Report to: / EXECUTIVE / Decision number:Earliest date for decision: / 3rd DECEMBER 2008
3. CENTRAL LANCASHIRE PREFERRED CORE STRATEGY
1.0 / Matter for consideration:1.1 / Blackpool's response to the consultation by Preston City Council, South Ribble Borough Council and Chorley Borough Council on the Central Lancashire Preferred Core Strategy.
2.0 / Recommendation(s):
2.1 / That the Council submit representations as set out in this report, in particular objecting to the proposed status afforded to Preston City by the document and the explicit support afforded to the Preston Tithebarn development.
3.0 / Category grouping: / Corporate/Strategic
4.0 / Community Plan objective:Strong and Vibrant Communities
5.0 / Information
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
5.10 / All local authorities are required to prepare a Core Strategy as the strategic element of their Local Development Framework (the portfolio of planning documents replacing the current single Local Plan for each local authority area).
Adjoining authorities forming part of a wider urban area, housing and/or job market are encouraged to work together on the preparation of such strategies and Preston, South Ribble and Chorley Councils have elected to prepare a Joint Strategy for Central Lancashire.
Their Core Strategy Vision states that “ The City of Preston will have become well established as the alternative destination to Manchester and Liverpool for retailing, culture entertainment, business and higher education, with a transformed, high quality city centre and regenerated surrounding areas.”
The key areas for growth and investment identified in the preferred Core Strategy include Preston City Centre (incorporating the Tithebarn Regeneration Area), Chorley Town, Leyland and Longridge (in Ribble Valley).
It is considered that this places too much emphasis on the role of Preston after Manchester and Liverpool. Preston appears to be seeking to raise the level of the City above that established by the Regional Spatial Strategy.
This is contrary to regional policy contained within the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS). Policy RDF1 of the Regional Spatial Strategy places the regional centres of Manchester and Liverpool as the first priority for growth and development, followed by the inner areas surrounding these regional centres. The third priority for growth and development should be the towns/cities in the 3 city regions, which includes amongst others Blackpool, Blackburn, Burnley and Preston.
Elsewhere the Central Lancashire Preferred Option Core Strategy states "The aim for Preston is that it will provide a viable alternative shopping and leisure destination to Manchester and Liverpool. Within Preston City Centre it is assumed that the Tithebarn Regeneration Area will have been redeveloped and that this will have greatly enhanced the city’s retail and leisure offer and created further opportunities for city living.” Under ‘Givens’, Page 94 of the Preferred Cores Strategy states that Regional Spatial Strategy “identifies Preston as a centre for higher order retailing and services”.
This is not the case. Policy W5 of the Regional Spatial Strategy establishes a hierarchy for retailing in the North West. It states that: “Manchester/Salford and Liverpool City Centres will continue to function as the North West’s primary retail centres. Preston City Centre is at the level below these centres in the hierarchy along with Lancashire’s other 4 main centres Blackpool, Blackburn, Burnley and Lancaster. Policy CLCR2 describes the role of these centres in more detail but treats them equally as centres for retail services. It makes no reference to higher order retailing.
The Central Lancashire Preferred Option Policy for Retailing and Tourism commits to the delivery of the Tithebarn mixed-use scheme and by extension the Preston Principal Retail Core. As covered by another report to the Executive, this scheme is considered to be of excessive scale; to be contrary to the provisions of national planning policy and the newly adopted Regional Spatial Strategy; to be likely to have an unacceptable adverse impact on the vitality and viability of other centres and to lack robust supporting assessments.
In pursuing a vision for Preston that is contrary to the Regional Spatial Strategy and in its associated unconditional commitment to a scheme for Preston City Centre that is contrary to wider national and regional planning policy and lacks robust justification, the Preferred Option document is considered to be unsound. It does not provide an appropriate basis for the development of a Submission Core Strategy.
5.11 / Does the information submitted include any exempt information? / NO
6.0 / Legal considerations:
6.1 / Consultation on a Preferred Option Core Strategy is required prior to the preparation and public deposit of a formal submission Core Strategy document. The latter is subject to statutory objection on the basis that the document or policies within it are unsound assessed against a list of tests of soundness. The soundness of the document is then considered at an Examination in Public with an Inspector making binding recommendations on the basis of that examination.
7.0 / Personnel considerations:
7.1 / None
8.0 / Financial considerations:
8.1 / None
9.0 / Performance management considerations:
9.1 / None
10.0 / Risk management considerations:
10.1 / None
11.0 / Relevant Officer:
11.1 / Tim Brown, Chief Planning Officer
12.0 / Relevant Cabinet Member
12.1 / Councillor Mrs M. Callow, Tourism and Regeneration
13.0 / Consultation undertaken:
13.1 / The Central Lancashire authorities have also consulted Fylde and Wyre Councils on the Preferred Option consultation document. Discussions have taken place between officers of the three Fylde Coast authorities on the document and the stance set out in this report represents a shared officer view.
14.0 / Background papers:
14.1 / Central Lancashire Core Strategy Issues and Options.
15.0 / Key decision information:
15.1 / Is this a key decision? / NO
15.2 / If so, Forward Plan reference number: / N/A
15.3 / If a key decision, is the decision required in less than five days? / NO
15.4 / If yes, please describe the reason for urgency:
16.0 /
Reasons for Recommendations
16.1 / To seek to ensure that the strategic policies adopted by the Central Lancashire authorities meet statutory requirements including being robustly justified and demonstrating consistency with national and regional policy, and that they do not have a detrimental adverse impact on Blackpool's regeneration, the pressing need for which is acknowledged both national and regionally.16.2a / Is the recommendation contrary to a plan or strategy adopted or approved by the Council? / NO
16.2b / Is the recommendation in accordance with the Council’s approved budget? / YES
16.4 / Other alternative options to be considered:
Not to raise objection to the Preferred Option Core Strategy.
17.0 / Call-in information:
17.1 / Are there any grounds for urgency, which would cause this decision to be exempt from the call-in process? / NO
17.2 / If yes, please give reason:
TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PROPER OFFICER
18.0 / Policy, Overview and Scrutiny Committee Chairman (where appropriate):Date informed: / N/A / Date approved: / N/A
19.0 / Declarations of interest (if applicable):
19.1
20.0 / Executive decision:
20.1
20.2 / Date:
20.3 / Reason(s) for decision:
21.0 / Date of publication:
22.0 / Call-in:
22.1
23.0 / Notes:
23.1