A decade of green growth?

As a counterpoint to some of my gloomier posts, I was given a pictorial reminder yesterday of just how keenly nature is intent on undoing mankind's infrastructure.

The context was cutting back a roadside fallen dead tree (previously it had just been cut back to the edge of the tarmac following its demise), and its accompanying shrubbery (mostly privet and brambles).  

As work progressed I noticed an upright metal pole appearing out of the depths, and then another:

Eventually the penny dropped and I realised I was looking at a ex-road sign from a decade ago - the actual metal sign having been liberated, presumably when it fell off the posts.
  

There is, of course, a political aspect to this, as WSCC are responsible for this land, as part of the public highway, and Highways revenue budget has been more than halved in real terms over the last decade (it might have picked up a little very recently).  You get what you pay for (and I didn't mention potholes once).

Local Plan stumbles again!

This time it's political: from an HDC press release dated Tuesday 10 January 2023:

Senior councillors of Horsham District Council have voted to pause the development of the Horsham District Local Plan until later this year. The planned meetings of Cabinet and full Council on 18 January 2023 have therefore been cancelled.

The Plan, which was set to go to a Regulation 19 consultation in February 2023 sets out how the District will deliver the required number of homes in a sustainable way, supporting the requirements to be water neutral and the delivery of community infrastructures, transport links and opportunities for local employment.

This translates as 'the Tory majority group got together and decided that, in the face of increasing verbal opposition from some of their supporters, it would make their chances at the upcoming May elections less dire if the plan were delayed for the new administration to sort out'.  I appreciate the irony of my commenting in this way, having proposed a delay in June 2021 (to see what the post pandemic environment would be like), but I think we have a much better idea now, and water neutrality will restrain development for the next few years, so a plan would be better than no plan?

A further twist emerged on Tuesday in a message from HDC's chief exec:

'I have today received a letter of resignation from Councillor Jonathan Chowen from his role as leader of the Council with immediate effect.  Councillor Tony Hogben, as Deputy Leader, will act as Leader until full Council is able to appoint a new Leader at its next meeting.'  

Which made for an interesting week, and it's only Thursday!  (It's almost as if the local Tories are trying to outdo the national party, in that the next incumbent will be the fourth Leader in as many years!) 

Back to the 'decision to delay' made by 'senior councillors'.  It doesn't strike me as very democratic, in that the debate was behind closed doors.  There has been a second press release sent to the WS County Times, but again that's not been made public (until WSCT's next edition).  I suppose I'm being naïve (undoubtedly I am, politically) but, regardless of the Tory group vote, a documented decision at a cabinet meeting (maybe the one planned for 18 January?) would have made the decision accountable in a formal way.  

Passivhaus for Scotland

 This could be big!  How refreshing to see a government with some foresight.

To plan, or not to plan? That is the question.

As noted in earlier blog pieces, Horsham District's revised local plan (the Horsham District Local Plan 2022 – 39) Regulation 19 submission is edging closer towards public scrutiny.  Were it not for the intervention from the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities intervention on 5 & 6th December, the plan would have been published in the papers for cabinet on 15 December, where it was expected to be be approved, coming to full council on 11 January 2023.

However, all that we have for now is a statement from the council leader in response to a question that I asked at full council on 14 December (starts at 2h 01m in).  As the leader said in his response to my follow up question, decisions will be made in January 2023, so it's make your mind up time!  

On balance, for the reasons the leader stated, I think it is important to get a plan in place, especially as the Water Neutrality problem will significantly reduce planned housing numbers compared with those mandated by central government's Standard Methodology.  Whilst the drafts I have seen are, to my taste, not tough enough with regard to housing build standards (relying too much on central government methodology) and sustainable travel provision, I believe that there is enough there to work with and take forward. 

Water Neutrality Update

The long awaited 'Sussex North Water Neutrality Study: Part C – Mitigation Strategy' was published today.  Amongst much discussion around how not to make things worse, and mostly ignoring the points raised in my earlier blog, there are some interesting insights in this report.  

Firstly, concerning the likely housing growth in Horsham District, the report estimates 12,800 new dwellings over the period to 2039, with initial growth being below average.  This compares with the previous 19,860 over a similar 18 year time span (cabinet, July 2021) ie a reduction of 1/3 compared with central government's 'Standard Method'.  Will this be 'Planning Inspector' proof?

Secondly, the report identifies the need for an LPA-led Offsetting Scheme that 'will require an operating body that will administer it, collect funding, pay offset providers and monitor results'.  What teeth, if any, will it have?

More wrangling to come, I suspect...

Just have a think!

Whilst I and all the other Horsham District councillors contemplate the oncoming revised Regulation 19 local plan (in the cabinet papers for its 15 December 2022 meeting), I'll just leave you with a clear post-Cop27 summary of the mess we are in.  Not a pretty sight is it, but there is still a glimmer of hope.

The relentless rise of atmospheric CO2

Easy to get diverted by all the Tory shenanigans, but this is what really matters:

"Atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide are now comparable to where they were during the mid-Pliocene epoch, around 4.3 million years ago. During that period, sea level was about 75 feet higher than today, the average temperature was 7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than in pre-industrial times, and studies indicate large forests occupied areas of the Arctic that are now tundra."

And the rate of carbon dioxide release is accelerating...

How high above sea level do you live?

PS: did I mention methane?