 |
NEWSLETTER No 3 |
|
|
|
From the Chairman
A Happy New Year to all members.
In 2009 the work that CPRE does will be affected, like that of many organisations, by the many changes taking place economically, socially and environmentally.
For CPRE the chief concern is the fundamental shift of emphasis in planning to an increased speed of delivery, and a relaxation of the criteria that protected the environment and the countryside so well for so long.
We need to be ever more vigilant in our parishes and towns, and respond quickly to proposals which fail to meet the aims of CPRE. An already complex system, the planning system and the impact it has needs to be better understood and more openly debated in order to inform members of the public of the ways in which their views can be heard. Parish and Town councils are well placed as conduits for improving this situation.
The new Area Boards, which will come about with the Unitary Council, will be debating forums and should be used to bring forward local concerns.
We need to increase our membership in order to be better able to spread the word and to improve our capacity for responding to unexpected issues.
I would urge you all most strongly to encourage others to join CPRE. We would particularly like to have more, younger members. Their views on how they wish to see the rural environment in the context of their future should be of huge importance to us.
Anne Henshaw
Changes to the Development Control System under the Unitary Authority.
The present Development Control system in North Wiltshire works as follows.
Applications submitted are advertised in the press and circulated to parish or town councils, statutory consultees (Environment Agency, English Heritage, WCC Highways and others) if applicable, and interested groups like CPRE. Town and Parish Councils make their comments and, if they have concerns, contact their local (or any other) member of the NWDC Development Control Committee (DCC), or local councillor, to ask for them to “call in” the application for debate at the relevant DCC meeting. If a minimum of 5 members of the public who have concerns and wish for the same result write to NWDC objecting to the application this automatically triggers a “call in” if the Planning Officer’s (PO) recommendation is for approval. POs can also request to have an application debated at DCC when they have concerns which cannot be resolved or where the interpretation of a Policy is open to question.
Unitary Authority intentions are:
The percentage of decisions delegated to POs will be expected to rise sharply, and maybe as high as 90%. Those decisions that the PO declines to make will go directly to the DCC.
Town and Parish Councils will have to request the local Unitary member to call-in an application to DCC. If members of the public have concerns they will have to ask their Unitary member to call-in the application to DCC. The DCC will take into account other issues along with planning. These will include revision of conservation areas, the consideration and adoption of Village Design Statements, and Parish Plans.
In addition to the 4 North Wiltshire Area Committees, there will be a single Strategic Committee (SC) that will consider large-scale/major developments. The SC will also consider waste and minerals planning applications, and will examine some Local Development Framework matters.
The Implementation Executive (IE), the committee drawing up the new framework for the Unitary Authority, has been asked by CPRE whether, under the new Constitution, there will be a requirement for named and recorded voting at DCC/SC. So far work on developing the Constitution is ongoing but it appears that the process may remain unchanged from the present situation where a request by quarter of the DCC membership triggers a recorded vote.
Unitary members will be very powerful. They will have to act as advocate at DCC/SC for many groups. This begs the question of what will happen when a controversial application is submitted. Could this set parishes and towns against each other, and members of the public against their parish or town council? Whose voice will be heard in the chamber? In the case of a Unitary member having an identifiable conflict of interest, it appears that they will be able to nominate a colleague to take on their role. But will this change anything if they are of the same political persuasion?
Despite the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Cllr. Toby Sturgis, stating that “progress can continue to setting up a customer-focussed service”, the reality is that there will be less opportunity for the democratic voice and less opportunity for open and transparent debate.
I urge members to contact their parish/town councillors and ask them if they are aware of the proposed changes. Find out who has put their name forward as a candidate for election as a Unitary member [1] and contact them with a view to establishing their views and position on these undemocratic changes. Do not be brushed off by the response that the removal of minor, or petty, planning applications will make the process faster and more efficient.
There is a principle at stake. That principle is the one that provides for the open debate that the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has assured us all in press releases will be permitted, and a clear, attainable route to that debate.
Anne Henshaw
[1] Please let us know when you know !
An Overview of Planning Enforcement at North Wiltshire District Council.
Planning enforcement is one of the most complex and labour intensive parts of the planning system, with thorough investigation of the relevant history and painstaking evaluation of the facts being the foundation of effective enforcement action.
An effective enforcement system also relies on the assistance of the public and agencies such as the CPRE as added eyes and ears within our community. A dedicated team consisting currently of a Senior Planning Officer, 3 Investigations Officers, of whom 2 are part time, and an Administration / Technical Officer exists to deal with breaches of planning control.
The Council deals annually with approximately 550 planning enforcement complaints. Of these, almost half are found not to be a breach. The government allows for certain development to be carried out without having to apply for planning permission, (this is known as permitted development) and often our investigations find that the development which is the subject of the complaint, benefits from such permission.
We acknowledge and investigate all complaints and where a breach exists that is not immune from enforcement action, the Council has a range of options available to deal with it. Planning enforcement is a discretionary activity and we continue to exercise such discretion when it is expedient to do so. The primary function of enforcement is to bring to an end the harmful effects of the unauthorised development as soon as practicable. Enforcement action shall always be commensurate with the breach of planning control and formal action against trivial or technical breaches that cause no harm to amenity will, in accordance with central government advice, not normally be taken.
Enforcement action operates to protect the public interest. Harm can result in terms of the effect on visual or residential amenity, highway safety, or the environment in general. It is worth noting however that the assessment of harm does not include private interests, such as loss of value to property, competition, loss of view, trespass or breach of covenant.
The Council recently adopted a Planning Enforcement Policy, which can be found
on our web site. Further information relating to enforcement can be found under
The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), Planning Policy Guidance
Note 18 and Circular 10/97 all of which can be accessed at the Communities and
Local Government website at www.communities.gov.uk.
Tony Phillips
Senior Planning Officer, enforcement. NWDC
Post Offices
The Government will have completed its compulsory closure of rural post offices by the end of February and the country will be left with some 11,500 branches and another 500 “outreach” outlets.
James Purnell, the Work and Pensions Secretary announced on 13th November that it was awarding to Royal Mail a further five-year contract to run the Post Office Card Account (POCA) which will run from 2010 until 2015 with the possibility of a further extension. This was seen as a commercial lifeline for many branches as POCA pays out £80 million of benefits and pensions every day. Pay-Point and others already bidding for this contract were suddenly told that the bidding process was over; they will no doubt be paid compensation. Mr. Purnell and Lord Mandelson said “The Post Office is a trusted brand and it is seen as a safe, secure and reliable provider of services in these turbulent times” and that they are considering the network providing other government services and financial products. Let us hope the Government keeps its word. This decision is credited with securing the future of over 3,000 branches already at risk, but there is a further risk that Royal Mail will not be able to find enough sub-postmasters to keep existing Post Offices open and they are already having particular difficulty in manning the “outreach” outlets. If this turns out to be correct it will mean many unplanned closures and the target in rural areas of 95% of the population living within three miles of a Post Office will not be sustained. It is essential to ensure the survival of rural Post Offices by using them as much as possible.
Around Wroughton
The Science Museum, Wroughton
For a number of years, CPRE has been opposing repeated planning applications for warehousing uses of hangars on Wroughton Airfield, which, if they had been successful, would have seen large numbers of HGV lorries travelling through Wroughton and/or neighbouring villages. We were, therefore, very pleased when the Science Museum, which already had a presence on the site, was successful in purchasing most of the remainder.
However, towards the end of 2005, the Science Museum started consultations, including workshops at which CPRE was represented, with regard to their proposals for a “Creative Planet” project. This would involve several new buildings, including a very large new exhibition centre to be located towards the north of the site, “for the storage, conservation and display of the National Museum’s collection in an educational and inspirational manner”. In order to reduce the visual impact of this building in the foreground to a North Wilts Area of Outstanding Beauty, it was proposed that the building be partly below ground level and the roof be covered in turf. At one stage it was proposed that the main access be relocated from Red Barn Hill to the bridleway at Uffcott; a proposal very strongly opposed both by Uffcott residents and CPRE.
In addition to concerns about the visual impact and access to the site, the huge number of visitors that the Science Museum expected to attract through their promotional activities, 275,000 visitors in 2011, rising to 600,000 per year in 2025, raised major traffic issues. It was intended that most of these would arrive in coach parties travelling through Broad Town; others would be encouraged to use a Park and Ride facility to operate from Junction 16 of the M4.
Although a planning application for the development was submitted, this never reached the stage of public consultation. The development depended on the proposers being successful in a bid for major funding from the National Lottery fund; in the event the proposal was not included in the short list of those applying. At the time we were told that the proposal would still be pursued, although at a slower pace, but very recently Swindon Borough Council informed us that the planning application had been withdrawn.
The Borough Council were welcoming the proposal as a major acquisition for Swindon, but for those most affected, its withdrawal is no doubt a matter for great relief.
Honda Storage, Wroughton
Following the sudden downturn in car sales caused by the credit crunch, Honda applied for planning permission to store up to 6,600 cars on the runways at Wroughton airfield on a temporary basis not extending beyond summer 2009. The proposal involved the passage of not more than 5 HGV vehicle transporters per hour from the South Marston factory to the airfield, on routes to be agreed with the Borough Council.
While recognising the exceptional circumstances in which this application was submitted, CPRE submitted objections to the use of Wroughton airfield for this purpose and suggested that the Borough Concil should oblige Honda to extend their area of search for a more acceptable location. The proposed use would have a very serious visual and environmental impact on this area, which is in the foreground to the North Wiltshire Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and in normal circumstances the use of this site would seem to be quite out of the question.
Of no less concern than the environmental issue, was the proposed movement of up to 5 HGV transporters per hour through congested residential areas of Stratton and Wroughton or along a suggested alternative route through Broad Hinton and rural lanes to the A361 beyond Wroughton, from 7.30am to 3.30pm daily. We pointed out that this could involve the passage of a transporter, either going to the site or returning to the factory, every six minutes of the day during these hours. This would extend into the hours when children are arriving at, or leaving, school, giving rise to a great deal of pedestrian and vehicular activity. There would also, in due course, be the further movement of up to 6,600 vehicles away from the site, when the period of storage came to an end.
The Borough Council Planning Committee, at its December meeting, gave planning permission for the temporary use of the airfield, subject to a maximum of twelve months. Restrictions were also imposed to restrict the number of deliveries to 4 per hour and to prevent the transporters travelling through Wroughton during the morning and afternoon periods when children are going to and from school. We understand that the transporters will travel over the direct route from the South Marston factory, through Stratton and Wroughton, to the airfield
Geoffrey Hamilton
Keynes Country Park
A 104-acre area that included two large lakes formed by worked out gravel was purchased by Gloucester County Council (GCC) in 1970, with funds made available by Central Government under the Countryside Act 1968. The idea was to restore it to a Country Park to comply with the Act.
A very attractive log building was erected overlooking the lake and housed many items of interest to nature studies and included a large meeting room/lecture hall. Walks, picnic areas and camping sites were constructed and a sailing club occupied part of one lake. The site was free to pedestrians although a charge was made for car parking.
After some years the generous funding from the Countryside Agency dried up and GCC and the Cotswold District Council (CDC) had to find alternative methods of financing the operation. Thus was born the Cotswold Water Park Society (CWPS) Ltd. a joint venture between CDC and NWDC, who were granted a 125-year lease at a nominal rent of £1.00 p.a. We have not been able to examine the terms of the lease, but the idea was that the area was to be a recreational and sporting facility for the public as a whole.
After some years of successful operation, it seems that the CWPS overstretched itself with other projects, including the building and operating of the Gateway Centre. It became dependant on local authority grants. It is said that a senior officer persuaded the joint committee that they would be facing massive debts, so they were only too pleased to fall in with his rescue plan to sell the remaining 114 years of the lease at a rent of £70,000- p.a. The new lease was completed in Jan. 2008 to Watermark, who are major developers of houses, most selling for about £650,000 on other lakes in the Water Park. Watermark also operates a water ski cable tow and has just received permission for another on the lakes now leased.
The fear is that the public will inevitably have to pay for access, that the footpaths surrounding the lakes will be closed and that development will replace peace and tranquillity. A cable ski tow entails tall posts and cables as a permanent feature, whereas a simple ski boat of course can be removed when not in use.
Residents are maintaining that the CWPS had no right to sell the lease without safeguarding the original concept. A meeting is to be held at CDC shortly to argue the point (when confirmed the date will be advertised on our website). If there is a moral here it is that any philanthropist considering leaving land or a property to the public, should ensure that it be sown up with watertight conditions and it is put in the hands of independent trustees and certainly not councils.
The CWPS Ltd is described as a company but has not been formed under the Companies Act. Instead it is a Society registered under the Provident Societies Act 1965. We appreciate the site is just over the Wilts/Glos border but is in the CWP, much of which is in Wiltshire.
David Bowen-Jones
AGM Update/Reminder
This year we are having a joint AGM with the whole Devizes Branch. It will be held on Friday 5th June, 2009 at Wootton Bassett Memorial Hall from 6 o'clock, with the Branch AGM starting at 6.30 and North Wiltshire AGM starting at 7 - 7.15. The bar will be fully manned all evening and after the two AGMs there will be small eats, tea or coffee followed by presentations from 3 speakers under the Chairmanship of the Rt. Hon. Lord (Tom) King of Bridgwater.
Elizabeth Money-Kyrle
Editor’s Odds and ends
DON'T TELL THE NEIGHBOURS': PLANNING APPLICATIONS NO LONGER ADVERTISED IN LOCAL PAPERS?
The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) expressed alarm at a Government review into the planning system recommending that local authorities should be able to choose whether to publish planning applications in local newspapers or not. CPRE’s Richard Richard Moseley has said: “This recommendation could leave local people unaware of development proposals which might affect them. We fear that local authorities will resort to doing the bare minimum when advertising planning applications in their area and not advertise in their local papers. With limited resources at their disposal it is likely that some local councils will prioritise the things they have to do and not things they ought to do.'
We believe that many of the recommendations to be sensible and fair. We hope to work closely with Government in taking these forward for the benefit of local communities. But anything that leaves local people in the dark should be avoided.”
Who we are – your Committee
Anne Henshaw – Chairman; Pauline Lyons – vice Chairman; Elizabeth Money-Kyrle – Secretary; Donald Shirreff – Treasurer;
Brian Burrows, Geoffrey Hamilton, David Bowen Jones, Marie Kamkar, Jane King, Peter Pennington-Leigh, Fred Soady, Charmian Spickernell and John Swainson.
Feedback
We encourage feedback so that we stay in touch with, and represent, the membership as best we can. If we have missed, or look set to miss, a planning issue that you think we should look at – please tell us.
Contact us
Anne on 01249 817 003, Elizabeth (membership and programme) on 01380 850 281, and the Editor on 012409 890 424 (John Swainson) … Or Via The Website!! (See Footer)
Ed. [You can also see this Newsletter on our website.]