South Godstone Garden Village Introduction to the scheme Proposed - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

South Godstone Garden Village

Introduction to the scheme Proposed expansion of South  Godstone to create a new Garden Village  Up to 5,000 new homes delivered over 15-20 years  Early delivery of homes to contribute to TDC housing trajectory  Central to District and served by rail  Phased delivery of supporting infrastructure, shops, services, schools, employment, sports pitches and open space

The core site

Constraints and opportunities

Emerging vision and masterplan

Key planning benefits 1. Rebalancing away from more sensitive north of District which has seen majority of past growth; 2. Low transport infrastructure hurdle – key opportunity to make best use of railway station and safeguard services/improve frequency; 3. Secondary school in central location to serve south of District generally; 4. Targeting investment and enhancing sustainability of existing community and village; 5. Few constraints and lower landscape sensitivity 6. Location close to Lamb’s Business park with proposals to integrate employment growth into Garden Village 7. Delivers timely infrastructure and early housing

Information shared to date HELAA Submission; February 2016 (SGOD  009-012 & 014) Vision Document; August 2016   Presentation to Officers; November 2016 Local Plan Sites Consultation Submission;  December 2016  Updated vision document  Feasibility report  Transport report  Site availability information; February 2017 onwards  HELAA Updates; May 2017  Pro-forma information  Heritage report  Govia Thameslink Railway information

Heritage and ecology  Heritage De sk-based Assessment:  Sensitive masterplanning can ensure no harm to significance and setting of Lagham Manor designations  Seek to retain Park Pale as feature of development  Archaeological potential can be addressed through future planning applications  Ecology walk-over survey:  No ‘show - stopper’ constraints identified  Formal report to be prepared

Our ongoing work  Meetings held with stakeholders:  Met with Surrey County Council re. transport and highways. No significant concerns over A22, possible issues for growth generally at A22 junctions nr. East Grinstead and M25 junction, but no show-stoppers  Met with Govia Thameslink Railway. Lots of spare capacity on Redhill-Tonbridge line, with growth making best use of that  Met with Education Authority. Supportive in principle to new secondary school in this location to serve wider-south of District  Ongoing discussion and engagement with officers and councillors Further technical work ongoing:   Road and access options  Environmental baseline  Any further information required by Council?

Site ownerships and availability Map No. & Landowner Summary Position HELAA Ref 1. Understood landowners intend to SGOD 012 release the land (even if not with BA) SGOD 014 and have confirmed this to Council. 2. Assessed already as available. SGOD 009 Confirmed by landowner agent to Council in letter 28 February 2017. 3. Confirmed available by landowner SGOD 011 agent to Council in letter 28 February. 4. Understood landowners intend to SGOD 010 release the land (even if not with BA) and have confirmed this to Council. 5. Confirmed available by landowner SGOD 010 agent to Council in letter 28 February. 6. Land option with BA agreed. BA in SGOD 010 control of site. 7. Confirmed available by landowners to SGOD 010 Council in letter 2 March. Three small clusters of ‘ landbanked ’ plots being assembled, but can be planned around. 8. Principle terms of option agreed. SGOD 010 Confirmed available by landowner. 9. Confirmed available by landowner to SGOD 010 Council in letter 02 March. 10. Negotiations ongoing. Understood SGOD 010 landowner has confirmed availability

Wider land - providing flexibility

Bringing forward South Godstone Multiple landowners around South Godstone:   Bonnar Allan is in control, or is in advanced contract discussions to control, all land shown in the core p roposal which provides certainty over the delivery of c.3,500 homes and associated infrastructure  Other land is being promoted by independent discussion with Bonnar Allan that could add to or development further this vision and which offers flexibility beyond the core scheme Bonnar Allan committed to working with other landowners to bring forward holistic and  comprehensive development  Tandridge District Council has a role to play in binding together interests: Plan-led approach – allocation and policy can set parameters   SPD/masterplan approach with involvement of all parties could be one way of providing detail and unifying interests around a single vision  Few large sites are in single ownership; some other examples where comprehensive approach has worked…

Lichfields examples Callerton Park Welborne  3,000 home urban extension to Newcastl e  6,000 home Garden Village in Fareham, Hampshire  Five main landowners (Bellway, Taylor Wimpey, CEG, Northumberland Estates a nd  Two main promoters (90% of site), but eight Council) other landowners Allocated in Plan, with collaborative ‘The Welborne Plan’ (LP Part 3) sets out all   masterplan and design code prepared to development plan policies provide framework for applications  Complex land ownership resolved