Truth Behind the Plan: 7. Broken Promises – The Duty to Cooperate Failure
Planning is not just about land. It is about law, process, and relationships. At the heart of the Local Plan system is a principle enshrined in law: the Duty to Cooperate.
This duty — set out in Section 33A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 — requires local planning authorities to engage constructively, actively, and on an ongoing basis with neighbouring councils and statutory consultees on cross-boundary issues. It is not a procedural nicety. It is a legal test, and if that test is failed, the Plan must be rejected — full stop.
Chelmsford City Council has failed this test.
What Is the Duty to Cooperate?
The Duty to Cooperate (DtC) ensures that major strategic issues — such as housing distribution, flood risk, transport, landscape impacts, and infrastructure delivery — are tackled collaboratively across administrative boundaries.
It applies to:
- Neighbouring planning authorities
- Statutory consultees (including Natural England, Environment Agency, and National Highways)
- Public bodies prescribed under the Localism Act 2011
Under national planning policy (NPPF §26–27), a Council must:
- Demonstrate ongoing engagement, not one-off consultation
- Provide evidence of joint working
- Show that strategic cross-boundary matters were dealt with proactively and transparently
If this duty is not met, the Local Plan cannot proceed to adoption, regardless of its other content.
Who Was Missed?
Several key bodies were excluded from meaningful engagement on the Chelmsford Local Plan — particularly in relation to the proposed allocation at Hammonds Farm.
❗ Maldon Town Council
- Sits directly adjacent to the Hammonds Farm site
- Received no formal consultation at Regulation 18 or 19 stages
- Only became aware of the Local Plan via Little Baddow Parish Council
- Their involvement came after key decisions were already taken
This is a direct breach of the Duty to Cooperate. Even Maldon District Council’s role remains unclear, with no clear documentation showing active joint working.
❗ Natural England
- A prescribed statutory consultee for biodiversity, flood risk, and landscape matters
- Was not engaged during Regulation 18 despite the site’s proximity to multiple Local Wildlife Sites and sensitive landscapes
- Raised serious concerns only after being informed by third parties
Natural England’s absence from early engagement is both procedurally indefensible and a missed opportunity to mitigate harm.
❗ Parish Councils (Little Baddow, Danbury, Sandon)
- Discovered the Hammonds Farm allocation second-hand
- Were not formally invited to participate in site option appraisal or early workshops
- Left to react to decisions already made — not to help shape them
This is not ‘constructive engagement’. It is reactive containment — the opposite of what the Duty requires.
A Failure of Process – and of Trust
Chelmsford City Council’s plan was not developed through cooperation. It was presented as a fait accompli. There is no documented evidence of:
- Cross-border infrastructure coordination
- Joint housing need assessments
- Shared environmental impact analysis
This is a clear procedural failure, but also a political and democratic one. The Duty to Cooperate is designed to prevent precisely this type of top-down planning that ignores neighbouring authorities and affected communities.
Legal Consequences
The Planning Inspectorate has ruled consistently that failure to meet the Duty to Cooperate is fatal. It is not something that can be retrofitted or corrected during the examination.
Cases where Local Plans were declared unsound due to DtC failures include:
- St Albans (2014) — failure to engage constructively with adjoining councils on housing distribution
- Castle Point (2017) — inadequate cooperation on housing need and green belt
- Wealden (2020) — failure to engage on environmental impacts and road networks
The same risk applies here. Chelmsford has:
- Failed to work with Maldon
- Failed to involve Natural England
- Ignored the voices of adjacent parishes
- Made decisions before cooperation could take place
As a result, the entire Local Plan is legally vulnerable.
What It Means for Hammonds Farm
The proposed Hammonds Farm site affects multiple authorities:
- Traffic impacts on Maldon and A12 corridors
- Flooding concerns affecting Danbury and the Chelmer Valley
- Landscape and biodiversity connections to adjoining parishes and districts
Yet none of these issues were addressed through joint planning. Decisions were made in a vacuum, with stakeholders brought in after the fact.
This is not just bad practice. It is unlawful process.
Conclusion: A Legally Vulnerable Plan
The Duty to Cooperate exists to ensure no council plans in isolation. It is the foundation of strategic planning in England — one that Chelmsford City Council has ignored.
The exclusion of Maldon Town Council, Natural England, and neighbouring parishes from the Local Plan process is not a technicality. It is a legal breach. And it puts the entire plan — including the proposed allocation at Hammonds Farm — at risk of being declared unsound.
For the plan to proceed lawfully, the Council must start again, with real cooperation — not policy by omission.
Leave a Reply