LEIGH PARISH COUNCIL’S RESPONSE: 24TH SEPTEMBER 2012

Response to Leigh Parish Council Working Group – Submission on ADMP (GSK Site) - September 2012.

Key issues raised:

Marketing

-Recommend additional employment marketing for a period of two years.

-Response – GSK is currently undertaking additional marketing of both building 12 and the entire site. Details of this marketing will be provided in due course. This is a continuation of the marketing process undertaken by Cushman & Wakefield that commenced in September 2011. GSK marketed the site both nationally and internationally via their Worldwide Business Development/Transaction team. GSK directly contacted 32 competing research companies, of the 32, 5 signed Confidential Disclosure Agreements, 3 conducted site tours, but none progressed further. The latest marketing process (for both building 12 and the wider site) will also focus on the local market to ensure that any local interest in the site is tested. It is not considered appropriate to impose a 2 year time limit on such marketing. However, if commercial interest in the site is forthcoming, in advance of any proposed re-allocation, the Council will require this to be pursued.

-LPC response: we are delighted that GSK is undergoing additional marketing of both building 12 and the entire site. We still feel strongly, however, that a two year time limit is agreed as the current economic climate may not be robust enough for businesses to consider re-locating or expanding, or for new businesses to locate in this area. The marketing campaign must allow for economic growth and stability in the next few years, and we request that a further period of two years is agreed in order to sustain our local economy. It is important that local jobs are available for local people.

Mixed Use / Residential

If the marketing campaign continues to be unsuccessful, and there is evidence to justify the loss of the employment site, the working group recommends that the scheme should retain a mixed-use element. If further marketing demonstrates that a mixed-use site is not deliverable, the Parish would not object to a low density residential development on the site. Response – Noted and accepted

The working group propose that any residential development should:

-Be within the existing overall total footprint of buildings on the site. Response – Noted and accepted

-Have no greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt, through reduction in height and scale – generally should not exceed two storeys in height. Response – Noted and accepted

-Have a density of no more than 15 dph. The working group consider this to be an appropriate density since they consider the area to be a hamlet with limited services. The Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) evidence-base document to the Core Strategy used an indicative density assumption of 15 dph for rural settlements, in order to calculate potential housing yield from these areas. The working group also suggest that the existing residential development in the Powder Mills/Hunter Seal area is built at a density of approximately 15 dph (47 dwellings in 3 ha area), and thus the new development should reflect the surrounding density.

-Response – the draft site allocation is currently shown at 30pdh, which would provide approximately 100 dwellings on the site. This is in line with the Council’s Core Strategy density policy (SP7) which states that new residential development outside the main settlements will be expected to achieve a density of 30dph. The StrategicHousingLand Availability Assessment (SHLAA) evidence-base document informed the Core Strategy, but the density figure of 15dph was not adopted in the Council’s Core Strategy density policy (SP7). Policy SP7 also states that new housing will be developed at a density that is consistent with achieving good design and does not compromise the character of the area in which it is situated. In relation to the surrounding area (please see site plans below), it is considered that Powder Mill Lane is currently developed at a density of 27 dph (24 dwellings / 0.9 h) and Hunter Seal currently at a density of 28 dph (17 dwellings / 0.6 ha). Lower densities are only calculated if the land at Sevtons Farm and the large properties around the Old Powder Mill House (6 houses in total) are included, which distort the figures.

-It is also relevant that this is a Major Developed Site within the Green Belt. Assuming Building 12 is to be retained at the site, this provides a building area (footprint) of 7,365sqm that could be released for residential development. Assuming a house footprint of 75sqm (4 bed house), this would provide approximately 100 dwellings of this size. In practice, a mix of size units will be required.

-It is acknowledged that this is a remote rural settlement with limited amenities and accessibility. Although 30 dph would normally be the starting point for such a location, due to the local character of the area in which this site is situated and the lack of sustainability, it is recommended that the indicative site density is reduced to 25dph, which would result in 75 units (on a 3ha site), which should be of a range of sizes to meet local need. The site area has been reduced to 3ha to reflect the need for Building 12 (as an employment site) to be accompanied by parking, screening and access etc.

-LPC response: our proposal for a housing density of 15 dwellings per hectare is appropriate for this rural hamlet which, as you say, has limited amenities and poor accessibility. SDC’s own Rural Hamlet Housing density draft recommendations stated a figure of 15 d.p.h. We believe that SDC’s calculations having removed the larger properties and farmland in order to justify a larger housing density is incorrect; these properties should be included as they are part of this rural hamlet. Your third calculation in Appendix 1 is acceptable, which shows 47 dwellings with a density of 18 d.p.h. for the surrounding area, but the Parish Council and Working Party still believe that a density of 15.d.p.h. is appropriate for any new development on the GSK site.

Other issues

-Historic and archaeological interest of site should be acknowledged. Response – Noted and accepted

-Protection and enhancement of woodland area and habitats, providing appropriate levels of public access, green buffer zones on the edge of the developed site and open spaces incorporated within the development. Response– Noted and accepted

-Redevelopment of the site will need to include measures to improve accessibility. Response – Noted and accepted

-Appropriate and sufficient infrastructure contributions should be sought to mitigate impacts of the development. Response– Noted and accepted

Appendix 1 - Review of Existing Density

Powder Mill Lane - 24 dwellings / 0.9 ha = 27 dph

Hunter Seal - 17 dwellings / 0.6 ha = 28 dph

47 dwellings / 2.6 ha = 18 dph