PROPOSED NASEBY BATTLEFIELD VISITOR CENTRE APPROVED BY DAVENTRY DISTRICT COUNCIL Wilbraham Associates were appointed by the Naseby Battlefield Project to co-ordinate and prepare an outline planning application to develop a Visitor Centre to recognise the importance of the Battle. Naseby is poorly served, certainly by comparison with other battlefield locations such as Hastings, Bosworth and Culloden, all of which have purpose built visitor facilities. The proposed building would provide an essential educational and tourist resource including permanent and flexible exhibition space, learning and seminar facilities, teaching facilities for all levels including themed events and conferences, facilities for the re-enactor groups, refreshment/dining facilities as well as a retail shop at land off Mill Hill, Sibbertoft Road, Naseby. The proposed site is located to the south of the registered battlefield within open countryside. The site optimises interpretative opportunity and provides appropriate physical access to the battlefield. An outline planning application for the proposed Visitor Centre was submitted to Daventry District Council in Spring 2011. Whilst the application was recommended for refusal by Planning Officers, the Council’s Planning Committee Members resolved to approve the application and planning permission was finally granted on 29 September 2011.
VILLAGE HOUSING
Following the successful test cases at Potterspury and Cosgrove in 2008 (reported elsewhere) South Northamptonshire Council introduced an Interim Rural Housing Planning Policy to identify those villages where new housing development outside the village limits will be permitted, subject to meeting certain criteria. As a result of this policy we have secured planning permission for a 49 dwelling scheme at Greens Norton, a 27 dwelling scheme at Blisworth and a 20 dwelling scheme at Potterspury. Inevitably such applications tend to be contentious because the villages have only accommodated very small scale development over the past fifteen to twenty years. Such applications need careful preparation to address highway, ecology, flood risk, amenity and other issues as well as the potential impact of the development on the landscape setting of the village.
FIVE YEAR LAND SUPPLY One of the shortcomings of Local Plans was the time taken between initial preparation and final adoption with this taking on average across England and Wales, six years. The 2004 Planning Act sought to speed up the plan making process by replacing Local Plans with Local Development Frameworks and the new system was supposed to be in place by 2009. It was intended that LDDFs would be prepared and adopted more quickly than Local Plans as well as providing greater certainty as the Core Strategy had to run for at least ten years post adoption. However as with so many reforms of the planning system, this ‘fast track’ approach has, in the majority of cases, actually made much slower progress than the system it replaced. Only a small number of planning authorities have now adopted their Core Strategies and even fewer have adopted Development Plan Documents allocating specific parcels of land for housing, industry, etc. As a result an increasing number of Councils are facing a policy vacuum in that Local Plans are now nearly five years past their end date and the Core Strategy/DPDs are not yet in place. Consequently housing land supply in many planning authorities is well below the required five year supply and in these circumstances PPS3 sets out a presumption in favour of housing subject to meeting certain criteria. Wilbraham Associates have secured a number of permissions for housing outside development limits where a planning authority does not have a five year supply of housing land where the Local Plan is out of date and where the scheme meets the tests in PPS3. These include schemes at Burton Latimer (Kettering Borough), Potterspury, Cosgrove and Pattishall South Northamptonshire District, Lilbourne (Daventry District) and at Whitchurch (Aylesbury Vale). In all of these cases this is the first opportunity for almost twenty years to obtain planning permission for anything other than affordable housing outside village confines.
RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY CENTRE Whitemoor Haye, Lichfield Any proposals for development in the countryside away from existing settlements are particularly sensitive. Planning policies throughout the country have for many years sought to restrict new buildings to those required for agricultural, forestry, leisure or tourist purposes and generally have sought to limit their size. Any proposals therefore for large scale development need very careful preparation if they are to receive planning permission.
We successfully obtained planning
permission for a recreational activity centre close to the National Memorial Arboretum at Alrewas near Lichfield. The scheme involved the construction of a substantial building comprising reception/meeting rooms/dining room, kitchen/sports hall and activity room comprised in a 2,500 sq m building together with 6 dormitory blocks comprising 50 beds each. The centre is currently under construction on behalf of the Northamptonshire Association of Youth Clubs who run similar facilities in Northamptonshire and on the Welsh border. The facility will provide residential courses in sailing, canoeing and windsurfing on the adjacent lake and will be available to school groups as well as other organisations. The scheme involved a number of sensitive issues not least being the size of the proposed centre, the provision of two abseiling towers and its location within a flood plain.
COFFEE SHOP OPENS IN TOWCESTER TOWN CENTRE
Wilbraham Associates were appointed by Strangford Property Consultancy Limited to advise on the prospects of achieving planning permission for the change of use of retail premises at 120 Watling Street, Towcester to a coffee shop. A planning application was submitted to South Northamptonshire Council setting out a detailed case that the proposal would add to the vitality and viability of the town centre. Planning permission was granted in May 2010 and the premises were opened by operators, Costa Coffee in early September. October 2010
DC Casebook: In depth – Golf resort secures extension to accommodate overnight guests Leisure and entertainment Planning, 10 July 2009 A development of 23 letting bedrooms in the East Midlands has secured permission after an inspector gave weight to a memorandum written by the Council’s tourism and marketing manager. The site was part of the extensive grounds of a golf and country club. The appeal building was used as a reception for a campsite and contained function rooms and staff accommodation. The appellants sought to extend the building and convert the ground floor into a reception area and dining room to serve the bedrooms. They stated that the accommodation was needed for visitors attending weddings at the complex, for golfing societies’ members and for individuals using the golf training facilities and staying more than one night. They explained that many weddings were held each year at a number of licensed venues in the grounds and there was a demand for on-site accommodation. The Council argued that demand for overnight accommodation could be met by existing hotels in the area. It also queried whether the demand from golfing societies was significant. It asserted that a memorandum from its own tourism and marketing manager simply repeated what the appellants had claimed and could not be relied on as an objective assessment of need. The Inspector decided that the appellants did not need to carry out a sequential assessment of town centre sites. He noted Government advice in the Good Practice Guide for Tourism stating that only major hotel developments should be subject to a sequential test. Accommodation close to hand was likely to be attractive to wedding guests, he reasoned. Similarly, golfing societies wishing to hold multi-day events would be more likely to book the courses if affordable accommodation were available on-site, he opined. The complex drew professional golfers from the European tour and the presence of accommodation would complement the existing facilities, he decided. He considered that the tourism and marketing manager was well qualified to assess the merits of the scheme and would have a good understanding of accommodation needs in the district. Allowing visitors to remain on-site was likely to reduce the need for guests to travel between the complex and hotels further afield. Although the design of the extension was not of the highest standard it would not appear out of place, he ruled, and allowed the appeal. DCS Number 100-062-827 Inspector John Roberts; Inquiry
DC Casebook: Leisure and entertainment – Marina need outweighs locational issue Leisure and entertainment Planning, 16 October 2009 The construction of a marina has been allowed in Warwickshire after an Inspector decided that it would accord with planning policies dealing with provision of such facilities in the countryside. The site lay in an attractive rural conservation area adjacent to the Oxford Canal and the setting comprised open valley farmland and canal-based leisure uses. The proposal entailed the creation of a 108-berth marina with associated facilities and wooded spinneys, grassland, ponds and wetland. The Inspector considered that the development would be in harmony with the character of the countryside, which already accommodated an element of leisure uses linked to the canal. He also welcomed a management plan for the enhancement and creation of biodiversity features. In his view, the proposal would preserve the Conservation Area’s character and appearance. In examining whether the site was an appropriate location for a marina, he noted that a Local Plan policy stated that consent would normally be granted for canal-based recreation facilities provided they were related to existing settlements. He recognised that the site could not be said to be close to any village, since the nearest was 1.5km away. However, he took account of the Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism, which acknowledges that there are situations in which tourism development may be south at locations where it would be difficult to meet the objective of access by sustainable modes of transport and the choice of site may be determined by functional need. He noted that a marina of the size proposed needed to be located on a straight stretch of canal within reasonable cruising distance form other facilities. He took the view that there was a clear need for the marina and it would bring financial benefit to the area. The management plan would also have significant benefits, he considered. While the majority of marina users would rely on private cars, he anticipated that they would park for the day or longer. He concluded that the proposal’s benefits outweighed the disadvantages of the location. DCS Number 100-064-361 Inspector Simon Rawle, Hearing
DCC Casebook: Housing: New build – housing land supply supports permission Housing new build Planning, 13 February 2009 A residential development in Northamptonshire has been permitted in part because the Council was unable to demonstrate a five-year supply of housing sites in its area. The Council asserted that it could identify 3.3 years’ supply of housing land based on an increase of 382 dwellings per annum. The appellants argued that only 2.3 years’ supply could be assumed given the likely rate of delivery on certain sites, the amount of windfall development and the likelihood that some permissions would lapse. While noting PPS3’s advice that no allowance should be made for windfall sites, the Inspector noted that over the past seven years such developments had accounted for an average of 63 per cent of all completions in the area. However, he recognised that development at one of the large sites on which the Council relied to deliver housing in the next five years appeared uncertain. Its estimate of 3.3 years’ supply seemed optimistic, he held. In this situation, he judged that the appeal proposal should be considered favourably. Although it did not involve brownfield land, it was in an area where future housing development was likely to be required and an urban capacity assessment confirmed that some Greenfield land would be needed. The site had relatively good access by public transport for a rural location, there were no infrastructure or other constraints and the scheme would make a positive contribution towards affordable housing, he decided. DCS Number 100-059-676 Inspector Bern Hellier; Inquiry
HOUSING LAND AVAILABILITY The new plan making system, which replaces Local Plans with Local Development Frameworks has proved far more complex than was ever envisaged and consequently the preparation of these new documents has been much slower than anticipated. At present only a handful of Councils across the country have an LDF in place. A situation exists in many planning authorities where the Local Plan has expired and the new LDF is still at a very early stage of preparation. Consequently all allocations of land for housing in the old Local Plans have been used up. In these circumstances many planning authorities do not have a five year supply of housing land as required by the Government and as reinforced within PPS3 ‘Housing’. It was on the basis of the failure of South Northamptonshire Council to have a five year supply of land that we obtained planning permission on appeal in January 2009 for a 2.1 acre site outside the village confines of Potterspury just north of Milton Keynes. The Council refused planning permission on the basis that the site lay outside the built up area of the village. We successfully argued that because the Local Plan was out of date the village confines plans needed to be treated with some caution and that the appeal needed to be considered against the guidance on ‘Planning for Housing’ contained in PPS3. Not all sites on the edges of villages will be suitable for development and in the assessment under PPS3 the sustainability of the village and the impact of the development on the character and setting of the village need to be assessed. Potterspury was the first test case in South Northamptonshire but a second appeal decision in relation to land at Cosgrove in March 2009 has confirmed this approach where permission was granted for nine dwellings on a site which was also outside the confines of the village.
IMPLICATIONS OF THE PLANNING REFORM BILL The Planning Reform Bill, the Energy Bill and the Climate Change Bill are the three legislative pillars of the Government’s aspirations to streamline and improve the planning regime. The Planning Reform Bill was granted Royal Assent on 26 November 2008, it principally sets out a new single regime for handling key infrastructure projects such as power stations, reservoirs, airports, railways, wind farms, waste projects, etc. and establishes a new body, called the Infrastructure Planning Commission. The Bill also provides the enabling powers to establish a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) which will give local authorities the ability to “charge” developers to help fund new infrastructure provision. In the past, a “planning charge” or a “planning gain supplement” had been considered by the Government. These measures have now been superseded by the CIL whose revenue importantly will not be collected centrally. There are a number of other elements in the rest of the Bill, taking matters up following the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. In respect of the appeal system, a number of changes are set out within the Planning Reform Bill. The key measures include giving the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State the power to determine by which method an appeal will be considered, for example, by written representations, a Hearing, or Inquiry by applying ministerally approved published criteria. The changes also include giving the Planning Inspectorate the power to charge a fee to cover the cost of appeals and this is likely to follow later in the year. Furthermore, the Bill allows the extension of power to the Planning Inspectorate to correct minor errors in decisions by permitting this power to be used without first obtaining the consent of the land owner and/or appellant. The measures also include the reduction of the appeal period for making a planning appeal on a development for which an enforcement notice has been issued. Finally, the measures include aligning the Lawful Certificates process with the planning appeal process by imposing a time limit on when appeals can be made. Other measures consulted upon in the Planning White Paper which do not require primary legislation, are also being taken forward through revised regulations, policy and guidance. These include: • Introduction of bespoke householder appeals service which would give a decision within eight weeks of the appeal; • Measures to improve the quality and reduce the quantity of evidence by developing templates; • Encouraging earlier and more effective dialogue by requiring the Statement of Common Ground to be submitted much earlier in the appeal timetable and adopting a clearer line of fixing Inquiry and Hearing dates; • Ensuring that the appeal is fundamentally about the application which was considered by the Local Authority to overcome any perceived lack of fairness created; and • Extending the ability to apply for costs to the written representations process. February 2009
PROPOSED HERITAGE CENTRE RECEIVES SUPPORT FROM COUNCIL
Wilbraham Associates were appointed by Northampton Museums Ltd to advise on the prospects of achieving planning permission to develop a heritage centre consisting of teaching facilities, museum, tea room and gift shop at land off Station Road, Billing. A previous application submitted to the West Northants Development Corporation had been unsuccessful and was subsequently refused planning permission in March 2007. Wilbraham Associates advised on a resubmitted scheme which was modified for determination by Northampton Borough Council who as a consultee to the previous planning application gave unanimous support to the proposal. An outline planning application for the proposed heritage centre was submitted to Northampton Borough Council in December 2007. Whilst the application was considered as a departure to the development plan and was recommended for refusal by Officers, the Council’s Planning Committee Members resolved on 7 May 2008 to approve the application in principle subject to prior referral to the Government Office for the East Midlands (GOEM); the finalisation of a Section 106 agreement and planning conditions. Currently, the application is before GOEM to allow the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to consider whether the Council should proceed in granting planning permission for the proposed scheme or that the application should be "called in" for her own determination following a public inquiry. 2 June 2008
UPDATE ON PROPOSED HERITAGE CENTRE - NOT TO BE CALLED IN BY SECRETARY OF STATE Following the resolution of Northampton Borough Council’s Planning Committee to approve the development of a Heritage Centre at land off Station Road, Billing, the planning application was referred to the Government Office of East Midlands on 23 May 2008 as a departure to the development plan. The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government confirmed to Northampton Borough Council on 1 July 2008 that the application would not be called in for her own determination. The letter stated, “Although the development would be located in open countryside identified as greenspace in the adopted Northampton Borough Local Plan, it would result in an improved tourist facility for the area, located fairly close to existing leisure facilities at the Billing Aquadrome. In the Secretary of State’s view, the proposed development does not raise issues of such wide significance as to require a determination by her. She has, therefore, concluded that your Council should decide the application.” It is hoped that the outline planning permission will be issued by Northampton Borough Council in the next month or so. 7 July 2008
NORTH NORTHAMPTONSHIRE TEST CASE
Wilbraham Associates Ltd has recently secured outline planning permission for around 200 dwellings, on appeal to the Secretary of State. The land at Burton Latimer was not allocated for development, but the Secretary of State endorsed our argument that the serious shortfall in deliverable housing sites in Kettering Borough outweighed this. The Secretary of State also agreed that the development would be broadly in line with the Regional Spatial Strategy. So far as we are aware, this was the first application of Government policy in PPS3 to a housing proposal in the North Northamptonshire growth area. After a week-long Public Inquiry the Inspector found firmly in our client’s favour and the Secretary of State strongly endorsed her report in granting outline planning permission. We worked with a professional team including highway and drainage engineers, landscape architects, an ecologist, archaeologists and other professionals including Queen’s Counsel in order to deliver the outline planning permission. A number of detailed technical issues had to be resolved, in particular a strong objection by the Environment Agency. Any questions about the case can be put to Laurence Wilbraham at info@wilbrahamassociates.co.uk
(Drawing courtesy of Lovejoy Planning & Design)
April 2008
