Representations on Behalf of Marshalls Plc to the North Somerset Council Core Strategy
Representations on behalf of Marshalls Plc to the North Somerset Council Core Strategy Consultation Draft
A site specific allocation for Marshalls’ site, Bridge Road, Bleadon
Richard Raper Planning Ltd.,
82a Otley Road, Headingley, Leeds, LS6 4BA.
Tel: 0113 275 4555
Fax: 0113 275 3355
Email:
February 2010
MARSHALLS PLC - BLEADON
1.0INTRODUCTION
2.0CONTEXT
A description of the Marshalls site and planning background
The Development Plan and Settlement Boundaries
The Emerging Housing Requirement
Brownfield Opportunities
The Economic Context
Sustainability
Implications for the Draft Core Strategy
3.0A BESPOKE POLICY OR SITE ALLOCATION
1.0INTRODUCTION
1.1Marshalls Plc is the leading UK landscape products manufacturer with10 production sites in England, Scotland and Wales. Largely as a result of the current economic recession and the demise of the construction industry 4 (Sawley, Cannock, Hambrook, Llay) of Marshalls sites have closed in the past 3 years, 2No of which are the subject of proposals for mixed-use redevelopment for employment and residential purposes.
1.2Marshalls’ site at Bleadon is the smallest in the group. It is geographically remote from the main centres of the company’s operation. There are planning restrictions on the site concerning HGV movements and payloads of vehicles. This means the site has serious operating constraints.
1.3Having said this, the Marshalls operation at Bleadon is still an integral part of the company’s business plan for the time being. This is not to say that operations will cease in the short-to-medium term. Certainly, in the context of the Core Strategy, with an end-date of 2026, the future allocation of the site needs to be addressed.
1.4It is therefore the purpose of this report to consider BleadonVillage and more especially the future of Marshalls site at Bleadon, in the wider context of the Council’s Local Development Framework Core and Draft Housing Strategies. Parallel Representations have already been made to the Council Draft Housing Strategy 2010-2026, with request made for the Council to recognise the need to make best use of brownfield opportunity sites. So far as this, the draft Core Strategy is concerned, questions are raised as to the robustness of the Council’s overall housing strategy with its proposed hierarchy of sites from large scale urban extensions down to service villages, to the role of brownfield sites in general, and to the wisdom of doing away with settlement boundaries for smaller villages. It is concluded however, that despite these misgivings the Marshalls site at Bleadon is so physically and unusually unique that it warrants a different, site-specific approach. As the site is so discrete, there will be little or no impact on the overall Council Strategy other than that of a positive contribution made to the housing trajectory in the absence of a 5 year land supply and also to light industrial needs. A mixed-use, residential/employment allocation is therefore put forward.
1.5In this submission, we consider first of all the context of Bleadon and the Marshalls site with an understanding of the history of both the site itself and also of the forward planning policies promoted by successive Councils and latterly by the Parish Council in their Village Plan for the area. The emerging housing requirement is analysed as well as the economic context with a general requirement for more light industrial floorspace.
1.6In section three, the Marshalls site is described as a unique opportunity which requires a different approach. It is recommended that a bespoke policy be introduced or site allocation made in the Council’s Core Strategy.
2.0CONTEXT
Appendix A is a plan at 1:1250 scale identifying the Marshalls site in relation to the village.
A Description of the Marshalls Site and Planning Background
2.1In terms of formal planning history, planning permission was granted for “The winning and working of minerals from land at Bleadon Quarry, South Hill, Bleadon” in September 1952 (Ref: B/8226). It was from this time that the striking horse-shoe shape of the quarry, with its steep cliff sides with the upland grassed meadows of South Hill beyond, was created. Much of the so-called top yard area, that to the north of the site at a slightly higher level was also included in the red line on the application plans.
2.2In 1983 planning permission was granted to ARC, the former owners, for construction of the main factory building and plant (Ref: 2403/87). However, restrictions were placed on the payloads of goods vehicles and also on their movement times.
2.3In the early 1990’s ARC were successful in promoting the site initially via the Woodspring Local Plan to be incorporated later into the North Somerset Local Plan (2000), as being within the settlement boundary thereafter known locally as the ‘village fence’. This situation has pertained for almost 20 years.
2.4In 1993, Marshalls purchased the business from ARC. The numbers of those employed at the site have fluctuated with up to 33 people in 2001 falling to 23 in 2005 and to 15 currently. It is worthy of note that none of the current employees live in the village and a significant percentage live outside North Somerset District.
2.5In March 2007, the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan was adopted. Marshalls had made representations to the Local Plan process but did not proceed with any formal objection as they were content that the majority of the site was to continue to be included within the defined settlement boundary which followed the quarry bottom/cliff faces.
2.6From September 2005, work began on the Bleadon Village Plan and Marshalls have continued to liaise closely with the various committees involved in the Plan as well as with the Parish Council generally. Although the Marshalls site did not feature in the final plan document published last year (indeed there were no specific land allocations), the Environment and Housing sections of the Village Plan both continue to promote the village settlement boundary and sought that… “Through the planning process vigorously question all development outside the Village Settlement.” It is understood that the Parish Council itself has made representations to the Core Strategy where they will continue to argue for retention of the defined Village Settlement Boundary. From our contacts with the Village Plan committee,the Parish Council has always been of the view that the Marshalls site, when industrial activity ceases could accommodate up to 75 houses. The local perception is that development should and will come one day within the quarry. A common understanding is also that if BleadonVillage is to survive, housing development is very much a requirement,
The Development Plan and Settlement Boundaries
2.7The North Somerset Replacement Local Plan is a fairly recent document, adopted in March 2007. From Policy H/1 of the Local Plan it is explained what Settlement Boundaries do, viz:-
“Settlement Boundaries define the limit of development that is necessary to preserve and maintain the character and separate identity of the towns and villages in North Somerset.”
Settlement Boundaries are traditionally therefore concerned with character, largely visual character. They are essentially a tool of retention of character and identity. Only now, with the added gloss of sustainability do the policy proposals contained in the consultation draft Core Strategy seek to extend the role of settlement boundaries beyond character, and identity based on visual perception. See for example Proposed Policy CS23 which deals with smaller settlements and countryside where it is stated “proposals for development in rural areas outside the Service Villages will be strictly controlled in order to protect their character and prevent unsustainable development”(Authors emphasis). Here is Marshalls’ first objection to the Core Strategy that the long-standing function of settlement boundaries, which are so well understood by the communities they serve, need not be altered and certainly not removed by virtue of an additional test of ‘sustainability’. The point we seek to make here is that the essential purpose of settlement boundaries is to protect village character and that that should endure. As such the village boundary at Bleadon should preferably remain as is.
The Emerging Housing Requirement
2.8Marshalls Plc question the robustness of the Councils Housing Strategy both in terms of the achievable housing target and also its hierarchical approach.
2.9From the outset, the Housing targets are based on figures fixed by the Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West (26,750 dwellings by 2026) which the District Council refute. Next, North Somerset Council are vehemently opposed to the suggested South-Westward expansion of Bristol which inevitably threatens Green Belt land. Moving down the chain, the suggested South-Eastwards expansion of the Weston-Super-Mare Urban area is to provide 9000 dwellings but this may well not be achieved because of the depressed market but also as there are inherent technical difficulties involved such as surface water drainage and flood mitigation requirements for example. Even the Council’s consultants have themselves admitted that to achieve the target of 9000 dwellings in the plan period is unlikely. Next comes expansion of three towns followed by the 12 defined service villages, apparently defined by their critical mass, location and sustainability. These are logical categories.
2.10Proposed Policy CS14 however effectively removes settlement boundaries from non-service villages and in Vision 6 following the introduction of service villages, it is stated how the rural villages (eg. Bleadon) will “retain their character, identity and sense of community.” It is suggested that this is simply not enough and is a sterile proposal. Bearing in mind the popular view of the residents of Bleadon that the village needs to have a future if it is to survive, something altogether more proactive is required.
Brownfield Opportunities
2.11Fortunately, for Bleadon at least, the Marshalls site represents a good future brownfield opportunity site. Rarely does a site exist where new development would not be visible at all from beyond its boundaries. It is major criticism that neither the Core Strategy nor the Council Draft Housing Strategy make the most of brownfield opportunities and this despite central government urgings to encourage the use of vacant and underused previously developed land.
2.12The Marshalls site is in one ownership, is visually contained, relates to the village and not the open land beyond, is likely to be available in the plan period possibly sooner rather than later, and is a very good candidate for consideration as a mixed use development.
The Economic Context
2.13As already described (paragraph 1.2 passim), the B2 general industrial use of the site is not a good prospect because of the close proximity of housing and the legal restrictions placed on the use of the land. The opportunity for mixed use with a more flexible range of employment activities with job prospects more suited to those living in the village, is an attractive alternative.
2.14From discussions with the Economic Development Team of the Council, it is understoodWeston-Super-Mare is an area of deprivation with in some Wards 34% of the workforce on benefits. 90% of business are small in nature with multinationals having relocated elsewhere (such as Clerical Medical). There is a shortage of light industrial workspace and in particular of units up to 5000 sq ft in size. The Marshalls Bleadon site could accommodate some of these units. Indeed, other light industrial opportunities in the village, notably at Purn House Farm have all been well subscribed with no vacancies, such that there would appear to be a ready market for small units for small to medium sized enterprises.
2.15In terms of the Draft core Strategy, Policy E/5 deals with ‘Safeguarding Employment Areas’. This policy is supported in as much as point (iii) recognises that the removal of incompatible development can result in greater potential benefit to the community. In this particular instance the opportunity exists for the creation of a mixed use scheme incorporating small, light industrial units amongst other more locally appropriate employment generating facilities.
Sustainability
2.16Bleadon is presently not one of the 12 Service Villages identified in the Core Strategy. It is not large enough. It does not have the critical mass of community facilities. However, unlike most other villages in the District Bleadon is far from being an isolated settlement. The centre of Weston-Super-Mare may be 3½ miles distant but there is a Tesco Express in Oldmixon with two secondary schools and WestonGeneralHospital in the same area as well as local shops at the Corporation Estate. These are all within a mile and a half from theMarshallssite. The No. 83 bus service is an hourly service to Worlebury via Weston-Super-Mare running everyday except at Christmas. Bleadon itself has a traditional pub, a recently approved post office and café as well as other local shops including a hairdressersand a monthly Saturday market held in Coronation Hall.
2.17 We believe there is no reason at all why sustainable communities cannot be created via the planning process. Bleadon does therefore have the potential to be more sustainable. Indeed, to rely instead on a policy whereby the “rural villages will retain there character, identity and sense of community” is to do nothing and to allow them to stagnate. If, on the other hand, the worthy aspirations of the village community are to secure the future of the village, as is the case at Bleadon, then there is no reason at all why Bleadon cannot become more sustainable. Returning for example to the Councils Draft Housing Strategy, much is said in the document about “why housing matters” and in that document it is suggested that good housing contributes to a healthy community, to an improved economy and even to a better education. It is quite clear that those responsible for the Bleadon Village Plan are desirous of all these things and it is for exactly this reason that the Bleadon site, a prime example of previously used development land (Brownfield), should not be missed as an opportunity to create sustained growth via a mixed use residential scheme. It is therefore recommended that draft policy CS33 be altered in recognition of the fact that where appropriate sustainable communities can be created through positive planning.
Implications for the Draft Core Strategy
2.18From these contextual considerations it is suggested that the Draft Core strategy be altered to include the following points:–
1.An increased recognition of the role previously developed (Brownfield) land can provide in helping to achieve housing targets. Where existing employment land becomes available and there is a need for job creation, mixed used residential / employment schemes should be encouraged. In this way the mantra of employment-led housing, which is a feature of the Draft Core Strategy is continued.
2.Brownfield sites are historic occurrences in that they are found in all manner of unplanned locations and not necessarily always in built-up urban areas. They should nevertheless be treated as opportunistic, windfall sites. Each site needs to be considered on its individual merits rather than being discounted as being in less sustainable locations.
3.The Village Settlement Boundary is a long standing and well understood tool of planning policy. It defines a settlement in terms of its essentially visual character. It has served this purpose for very many years and there is no need to change it by for example, introducing the gloss of sustainability as an added test.
4.Sustainability can be created via new housing proposals and the introduction of new employment opportunities. It is unacceptable to merely leave rural villages as they are without prospects. Rather, their future can depend upon further new development. New housing can create better conditions in general, as is expounded in the Draft Housing Strategy.
5.Notwithstanding the above objections and ultimately whether the Settlement Boundary is removed or not, the Marshall site at Bleadon has uniquedefining qualities that warrant its identification as a site for beneficial re-use in the Core Strategy via a bespoke policy or site allocation.
3.0A BESPOKE POLICY OR SITE ALLOCATION
3.1The Marshalls site may become available for alternative use in the short to medium term. It is secreted from view in the landscape such that new development would be more or less invisible within it. It has (properly) been included within the BleadonVillage envelope for 20 years and is regarded as an integral part of the village and not of its rural hinterland.
3.2The site is clearly developed and were it to cease production would be an example of underused previously developed land. The Policy Planners at North Somerset Council themselves accept that it is unique in the sense there is no other example of so large a brownfield site occurring within a defined village settlement boundary in the District.
3.3The site has the capability to accommodate up to 100 houses including an affordable element to accord with RSS requirements; some light industrial units up to 500sq/m; a Care Home plus sheltered accommodation (providing employment in addition to jobs in light industry); a small doctors surgery and three shop units. The Care Home would potentially provide full and part time alternative employment for the local residents in the village. Public open space would also be a priority (as requested in the Village Plan) and it is suggested that the top yard (which currently has a landscape wildlife local plan designation) would represent an ideal location for a significant area of formal and informal recreational space. A pedestrian link to the heart of the village could be created from the Public Open Space area and along Mulberry Lane. In short, this is a very good site which merits a carefully planned layout to incorporate the District and Parish Councils preferred ingredients possibly via a development brief.
3.4To conclude, given the recommended added recognition of the positive role brownfield sites can play, given the undoubted local support for re-development and given the obvious qualities of this site, it is recommended that the Marshalls site at Bleadon be given either a Site Specific Policy Reference or an individual allocation for Mixed Use Development in the Core Strategy. Appendix B contains a suggested site specific reference and also an example of a similar site specific policy reference from a Marshalls site in Falkirk, Scotland.