LETTER: Reduction of strategic gap

Nick Boles, the Planning Minister, in an address to Parliament confirmed that ‘green belts’ must be protected, and that building on them was not an acceptable way of satisfying housing needs.

Green belts were created specifically to prevent the urban sprawl and ribbon development that has so damaged the environment elsewhere.

The significant word was not ‘green’, although they tended to be mainly countryside, but ‘belt’. According to Wikipedia, at 31 March 2010 there were 14 officially designated green belts in England. The green spaces around Horsham are not officially a green belt but rather a strategic gap.

But what is the difference between a ‘green belt’, a ‘strategic gap’, a ‘green wedge’ or ‘a rural buffer’.

Your readers might care to refer to www.wokingham.gov.uk/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=210129&type=Full&servicetype=Attachment

6. The basic purposes of the designations are as follows:

For strategic gaps; they are to protect the setting and separate identity of settlements, and to avoid coalescence; retain the existing settlement pattern by maintaining the openness of the land; and retain the physical and psychological benefits of having open land near to where people live;

For rural buffers; to avoid coalescence with settlements (including villages) near a town until the long-term direction of growth is decided; and

For green wedges; to protect strategic open land helping to shape urban growth as it progresses; to preserve and enhance links between urban areas and the countryside; and to facilitate the positive management of land.

Overlap with Green Belt Purposes

7. The main overlap between strategic gap and green wedge and Green Belt purposes is in the area of preventing the coalescence of settlements. Most of the strategic gap and green wedge policies also have the purpose of avoiding coalescence between large built-up areas and villages. This purpose does not however overlap with those of Green Belts. Strategic gap and green wedge policies do not have the purposes of assisting urban regeneration or checking unrestricted sprawl.

Horsham District Council (HDC) in their background document in support of their existing Local Development Framework plan state: “Strategic gaps have been designated within the (Horsham) District by successive West Sussex Structure Plans since 1980.” (para 1.1).

It goes on to state: “They are used specifically to maintain the strategic settlement pattern of the County by seeking to resist the loss of character of individual settlements and by preventing settlement coalescence.” (para 2.1)

So unless HDC have taken another decision in secret to cancel this policy and downgrade the ‘strategic gap’ north of the A264 to a ‘rural buffer’ the common aim of a ‘green belt’ and ‘strategic gap’ is to prevent coalescence.

Despite Cllr Dawes’ incorrect assertion (3.10.13, p41) that the gap north of Horsham is ‘not being narrowed’ (for which misleading statement he has never apologised in the generous space you afford him each fortnight) careful study of the map shows it will be reduced from 2.14 miles by 15 per cent.

The flawed plan of Cllrs Dawe, Helena Croft, Vickers and Rae if allowed to go ahead will reduce the ‘strategic gap’ between Horsham and Crawley by 15 per cent.

Then what follows?

ROGER BAKER

New Moorhead Drive, Horsham