former wood top mill site, burnley planning statement 0145 planning... · former wood top mill...

Former Wood Top Mill site, Burnley Planning Statement

Former Wood Top Mill site, Burnley Planning Statement April 2014

Indigo In conjunction with

Environ UK Limited

Ashley Helme Associates

MCK Associates

Vernon & Co

Ecology Solutions

Geotechnics Limited

Indigo Planning Limited Lowry House 17 Marble Street Manchester Tel: 0161 836 6910 Fax: 0161 836 6911 [email protected] indigoplanning.com


Contents Page

Executive Summary 1

1. Introduction 2

2. Site and surroundings 3 Application Site 3 Site Surroundings 3

3. Planning History 4

4. Proposed Development 5

5. Planning Policy 6 National Policy 6 Local Policy 8 Other Material Considerations 10

6. Planning Justification 13 The Principle of Development 13 Regeneration 15 Viability and Deliverability 15 Layout and Design 17 Transport and Accessibility 17

7. Conclusions 18


Appendices

Appendix 1

Site Location Plan (Drawing Ref: OS01)

Appendix 2

Illustrative Masterplan (Drawing Ref: MP01 Rev A)

Appendix 3

Marketing Evidence

Wood Top Mill, Burnley rpt.001.JL.20610001 Indigo on behalf of Connaught Administration Services Limited c/o Blue Gate Capital Limited

Executive Summary

Planning permission was granted for the former Wood Top Mill site in Burnley in 2010 for a

mix of housing and employment floor space (Application Ref: APP/2010/0086). Condition 5

requires the submission of a phasing plan which demonstrates that the delivery of the

employment uses on the site are maximised in advance of the residential development.

The applicant marketed the site for employment use with no success. An application to

renew the content was approved in July 2013, which gave the applicant more time to try and

secure some occupier interest. The site has been marketed for in excess of 4 years; there is

clearly no interest for employment in this location. The housing element of the scheme has

also received little interest because of the proximity of the potential employment uses.

This planning application therefore seeks to establish the principle of residential

development on the part of the site previously identified for employment uses, in order to

make the overall scheme viable.

This will secure the delivery of the proposals for the whole site and, in turn, will diversify the

mix of housing in Burnley. It will also contribute to the physical and social regeneration of

the area, assist in tackling the Borough’s persistent under delivery of housing and assist the

Council in meeting brownfield targets.

A separate application will be submitted to seek the removal of Condition 5 of planning

Application Ref: APP/2010/0086.

The NPPF includes a presumption in favour of sustainable development where the

proposals do not result in significant or demonstrable harm to wider planning objective. This

planning statement concludes that any identified harm is outweighed by the presumption in

favour of sustainable development and in view of the Council’s persistent under delivery,

planning permission should be granted without delay.


1. Introduction

1.1. This Planning Statement has been prepared on behalf of Connaught Administration Services

Limited (c/o Blue Gate Capital Limited) in support of an outline planning application for a

residential development comprising up to 25 dwellings.

1.2. The application site (Appendix 1) forms part of a wider site known as Wood Top Mill, which

benefits from a previous outline planning consent for a mixed use development comprising

up to 70 dwellings, 3,716sqm of B1 employment use and details of access, which was

originally granted approval in July 2010 (Application Ref: APP/2010/0086) and subsequently

renewed in July 2013 (Application Ref: APP/2013/0251).

1.3. The area of land subject to this application was earmarked for employment use under the

previous application however the applicant is now seeking to establish the principle of

residential development on this part of the wider site, to complement the surrounding

residential uses that form part of the consented scheme.

1.4. Viability has been a major challenge for many developers in the Borough, and indeed

nationwide given the current economic climate. Guidance from both the national and local

level is now emphasising the need to revisit viability issues to ensure the planning system

facilitates the deliverability of development proposals and economic growth. The main

obstacle to implementing the extant consent has been viability.

1.5. This Statement demonstrates that the proposal will improve deliverability prospects of a

brownfield site. This in turn will make a much needed contribution to housing delivery, in

both qualitative and quantitative terms, and will deliver important physical and social

regeneration.

1.6. The applicant has entered into detailed discussions with senior officers at the Council prior to

the submission of the application.

1.7. This Statement sets out how the proposed development accords with national and local

planning policy, and is structured as follows:

• Section 1 provides an introduction;

• Section 2 describes the site and surroundings;

• Section 3 provides a review of relevant planning history;

• Section 4 outlines the details of the proposed development;

• Section 5 sets out the relevant national and local planning policy, as well as other

material considerations;

• Section 6 provides a planning justification for the proposal; and

• Section 7 draws the conclusions.


2. Site and surroundings

Application Site

2.1. The site is located within the regeneration area of South West Burnley. The site measures

0.62 hectares and comprises vacant brownfield land with the remains of a mill building,

formerly the Wood Top Mill complex. The site is currently bound by tall brick walls that

create a hostile environment, acting as a barrier to pedestrian movement and providing little

visual integration between Brush Street and Cog Lane to the east of the site. The site

therefore has a strong negative impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding

area.

Site Surroundings

2.2. The site lies in a mixed use area comprising residential and commercial uses. The site is

bounded by housing to the west on Brush Street, to the north on Villiers Street and further to

the east, on Cog Lane. The Moorhouse Brewery is located immediately opposite the

application site, on Villiers Street.

2.3. It is a typical inner urban landscape with former mill buildings surrounded by high density

terraced housing.

2.4. The area has benefitted from Housing Market Renewal funding in the past, for which

Keepmoat Homes has been the lead developer.

2.5. Nearby developments in the area which will impact upon the application site include:

• The extension of the Moorhouse Brewery at Moorhouse Street, directly to the north of the

application site;

• The opening of a Farmfoods foodstore on Cog Lane; and

• Keepmoat Homes’ part-constructed residential development (known as Pendle View) at

land bounded by Accrington Road, Smithwaite Street, Howard Street and Perth Street.

2.6. The Pendle View development was granted planning permission in August 2011 (part outline

and part full for phase 1) through application ref APP/2011/0284. The overall proposal

includes the development of approximately 111 new dwellings.

2.7. As such, the redevelopment of the Wood Top Mill site is capable of bringing significant

benefit to the surrounding area, in injecting much-needed investment and physical

improvement.


3. Planning History

3.1. The application site has extant consent for mixed use development which was first granted

in July 2010 (Application Reference: APP/2010/0086). The description of development is:

‘Proposed mixed use scheme incorporating up to 3,716 sq mtrs

employment units (Classes B1) and up to 70no. residential units including

details of access (all other matters reserved for future approval)’

3.2. An application to renew the consent was submitted to Burnley Borough Council (BC) in May

2013 and was granted consent in July 2013 (Application Reference: APP/2013/0251).

3.3. The masterplan for the extant scheme can be found at Appendix 2.


4. Proposed Development

4.1. This application seeks outline planning permission for residential development with all

matters reserved for future determination except for access. The application is for:

‘erection of up to 25 dwellings and associated access’

4.2. The proposal will seek to provide a mix of dwellings, comprising a range of 2, 3 and 4 bed

dwellings to meet local needs and complement the existing housing offer in the area. The

detailed design of the scheme will be agreed at Reserved Matters stage.

4.3. Vehicular access to the site is to remain as consented, with primary access taken from the

primary access point on Villiers Street, to allow integration with the surrounding area and to

bring activity and movement to these streets.


5. Planning Policy

5.1. This section of the Statement sets out the key planning policy and other material

considerations relevant to the determination of the application. This includes national and

local planning policy (adopted and emerging), along with other material considerations.

5.2. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that applications

be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations

indicate otherwise. The Development Plan in this instance comprises Burnley’s Local Plan

Review (April 2006).

5.3. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published on 27 March 2012. This

document does not change the status of the Development Plan but offers consolidated

guidance to which regard should be had as a material consideration in determining planning

applications (paragraph 212). In situations where Local Plans are out-of-date - as is the case

within Burnley – the NPPF becomes the primary policy consideration (paragraph 215), thus it

is included at the start of this policy review.

National Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

5.4. NPPF sets a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which it defines as having

an economic, social and environmental role (paragraph 7): These three dimensions are

interlinked and the NPPF advocates that gains should be sought simultaneously through the

planning system.

‘an economic role – contributing to building a strong, responsive and

competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is

available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and

innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development

requirements, including the provision of infrastructure;

a social role – supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by

providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present

and future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment,

with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and

support its health, social and cultural well-being; and

an environmental role – contributing to protecting and enhancing our

natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to

improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste

and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving

to a low carbon economy’.

5.5. These three dimensions are interlinked and the NPPF advocates that gains should be

sought simultaneously through the planning system.

5.6. One of the NPPF’s overarching core planning principles is to encourage the effective reuse

of previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high quality (paragraph

17). It also continues to require that local planning authorities should consider setting locally

appropriate targets for the reuse of brownfield land (paragraph 111).


Compliance with the Development Plan

5.7. The NPPF makes it clear that development which accords with an up-to-date Development

Plan should be approved without delay. In situations where the Development Plan is out-of

date, permission should also be granted unless:

‘- any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably

outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policy in this

Framework taken as a whole; or

- specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be

restricted.’ (Para 14, NPPF)

Viability and Economic Growth

5.8. NPPF states that the challenge for planning authorities is to balance the need to achieve

sustainable development with the realities of economic viability (paragraph 154). To ensure

viability, paragraph 173 sets out that:

‘the costs of any requirements likely to be applied to development, such

as requirements for affordable housing, standards, infrastructure

contributions or other requirements should, when taking account of the

normal cost of development and mitigation, provide competitive returns to a willing land owner and willing developer to enable the development

to be deliverable’.

5.9. Furthermore, there is an underlying ‘commitment to securing economic growth in order to

create jobs and prosperity’ (paragraph 18). As such, it states that significant weight is to be

placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system (paragraph

19).

Housing

5.10. In order to deliver a wide choice of quality housing, NPPF advocates the importance of

meeting locally identified need/demand and ensuring a rolling five year supply of deliverable

sites to meet these requirements.

5.11. Paragraph 49 of NPPF states that:

‘Housing applications should be considered in the context of the

presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies

for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local

planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable

housing sites’.

5.12. Paragraph 47 of the NPPF introduces the requirement to bolster five year supply figures with

an additional 5% to be brought forward from later in the plan period to enhance competition

and choice or an additional 20% if there is clear evidence of under delivery in past years.

Burnley BC now uses the additional 20% in evidence base documents in light of its

persistent under delivery, which is attributable to large scale clearance and poor housing

market conditions.

Design

5.13. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development (paragraph 56). Planning decisions should aim to ensure that developments:

‘will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for

the short term but over the lifetime of the development;


establish a strong sense of place, using streetscapes and buildings to

create attractive and comfortable places to live, work and visit;

optimise the potential of the site to accommodate development, create

and sustain an appropriate mix of uses (including incorporation of green

and other public space as part of developments) and support local

facilities and transport networks;

respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local

surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging

appropriate innovation;

create safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder, and

the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion;

and are visually attractive as a result of good architecture and

appropriate landscaping.’ (paragraph 58).

Transport

5.14. In terms of transport impacts for residential development, the guidance advises that account

should be taken of the accessibility of the development; the type, mix and use of the

proposals; the availability/opportunity of public transport; local car ownership levels; and the

need to reduce the use of high emission vehicles.

Local Policy

Burnley Local Plan Review (BLPR) (April 2006)

5.15. The BLPR does not allocate the site for any specific use.

5.16. In relation to housing, Policy H2 sets a sequential approach for the release of new housing

land which favours the reuse of brownfield land. Policy GP1 reiterates this sequential

approach and seeks to direct development to within the urban boundary of the Borough.

5.17. Policy H8 promotes environmental improvements in residential areas by promoting urban

regeneration. Policy H4 seeks to achieve balanced communities by providing a mix of

housing types, sizes and tenures in new developments. In addition, Policy H3 sets out the

design and quality criteria for new housing developments.

5.18. Policy H5 and H7 set requirements for affordable housing and Public Open Space (POS)

respectively. For new residential developments, Policy H5 requires 10% of new dwellings to

be either affordable, or for those with special needs as informed by the Council’s Housing

Market Assessment. Policy H7 requires development of over 50 dwellings to incorporate 0.3

hectares (0.74 acres) of POS or a proportion thereof.

5.19. The Council seeks to ensure quality design in all new housing development through Policy

H3, by supporting proposals which meet the following:

a) ‘Is suitable in terms of overall design, including layout, materials, size,

scale and siting when compared with both neighbouring properties and

the wider locality;

b) The site layout responds imaginatively to the landscape and creates a

sense of place;

c) The development provides a range of house types and designs to

promote mixed communities and contribute to an attractive and varied

environment;


d) The amenity of neighbouring properties is protected and the

development minimises overlooking, and provides a reasonable degree

of privacy and outlook;

e) The development provides adequate private garden space and

landscaping;

f) Pedestrian access is safe and convenient, incorporating traffic calming

measures and the designation of Home Zones with reduced speed limits;

and

g) The provision of parking in accordance with Council standards’.

5.20. To ensure that proposals do not adversely affect privacy and outlook the Council works to

the following minimum standards as follows:

• the minimum acceptable distance between the windows of habitable rooms facing each

other is 20 metres; and

• two storey blank gable walls will not be permitted closer than 15 metres from the main

outlook of an existing window.

5.21. There is a degree of flexibility applied to these standards subject to developers

demonstrating that the objectives of the standards can be met by way of high quality design.

5.22. Policy GP7 requires all new development to be examined in consultation with the pollution

control authorities to assess the potential for noise, air, groundwater and soil pollution.

5.23. Policy GP9 requires all new developments to contribute to improved security and crime

prevention utilising the appropriate techniques (e.g. lighting, layout and secure parking

facilities).

5.24. Policy TM4 sets a transport hierarchy which all new development proposals should adhere

to, in terms of their accessibility. This hierarchy puts pedestrians, emergency service

vehicles and cyclists as the highest priority for being able to access a development in a safe

and sustainable manner. Private cars are the lowest priority in the hierarchy.

5.25. Policy TM15 sets out the on-site parking standards for the Borough. It sets maximum

standards for motor vehicles which should not be exceeded. The parking standards for

bicycles, motorcycles and disabled spaces are set at a minimum.

Emerging Policy

5.26. With respect to the emerging Local Plan, NPPF paragraph 216 states that:

‘decision-takers may also give weight to relevant policies in emerging

plans according to the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the

more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that may be

given).’

5.27. The Burnley Local Plan is at an early stage of production; at the time this report was written,

the Council is consulting on its Issues and Options document and the Draft Proposals Map

until the end of March 2014. As such, it holds very limited weight.

5.28. Notwithstanding this, the Council’s most recent Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) 2011/13

seeks to inform the policy direction of the emerging Local Plan based on the Borough’s

current socio-economic status. In terms of the housing market, it states that the findings of

the Affordable Housing Site Viability Study (February 2011) suggests that:

‘in the urban parts of the study no target proportion of affordable housing


could reasonably be sought as a requirement in the present market

situation…’

5.29. The policy response to this is to promote housing market renewal and potentially introduce a

two-tier target for greenfield and brownfield sites.

Other Material Considerations

Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (December 2013)

5.30. The SHMA recommends a requirement of 60-100dpa for Burnley, providing a realistic level

of housing to deliver some economic growth, whist recognising the demographic and viability

challenges faced.

5.31. In order to achieve such growth targets, the SHMA advises that the vast majority of new jobs

created for Burnley would need to ‘claw back’ residents who currently commute out to other

areas for work. This could be achieved by planning for a mix of housing which encourages

the retention of residents of an economically active age, or encourages younger

economically active people to move into Burnley. The Assessment encourages the

provision of family housing to help encourage the retention of, or attract new families to the

area.

5.32. The SHMA also sets out the affordable housing need for Burnley. Burnley has a net annual

need of 434dpa based on the gross household formation approach, which takes account of

the net backlog spread over 5 years. If this was calculated using net household projections

instead, then the need would reduce to -25dpa over the next 5 years. Therefore, in

quantitative terms, Burnley does not need to provide any new affordable housing as it

already has an over-supply of units.

5.33. However, given the poor quality of the existing housing stock in Burnley, there remains a

qualitative need for replacement housing stock of a higher quality. Therefore, the Study

recommends an affordable housing target of circa 10% to be appropriate.

5.34. In order to rebalance the housing stock away from small terraced properties (as evident in

the streets surrounding the application site), the SHMA recommends that the majority of new

houses (45%) are 2-bed properties, and that 35% of all new houses in Burnley are 3-bed

properties. In terms of property types, it is recommended that the majority (35%) are semi-

detached with only 10% to be terraced.

5.35. The Assessment recommends that the Council takes a flexible approach to applying these

targets when considering planning applications, because the very low level of housing

viability in urban areas could be compromised by an unsuitable housing mix.

Housing Land Availability Book (June 2013)

5.36. The Council annually undertakes a survey throughout the Borough to assess the availability

of housing land and to calculate the amount of new development which has taken place

during the preceding year. The results of the survey enable the Council to monitor the

uptake of housing land against the level of planned provision.

5.37. The study shows that Burnley has, on average, achieved 150 completions per year, but due

to the significant amount of clearances (1,170 in total from 2003 to 2012), the average net

completions is only 33 dwellings per annum.

5.38. On 19 October 2010 the Council resolved that, following the revocation of the RSS, the

previous RSS housing requirement of 130dpa would be retained. This leaves a residual

requirement of 2,014 dwellings from 2013 to 2021, or 252 dwellings per annum.


5.39. In the study, the Council refers to the annual requirement of 130 dwellings per year. With

the additional 20% buffer prescribed by NPPF, there is a requirement for 780 dwellings plus

the shortfall over a five year period.

5.40. The report claims that there is a current supply of 1,445 dwellings made up of sites with

planning permission (both outline and full). However, the study makes no attempt to

consider how realistically deliverable these sites are within the short term (0-5 years) and

thus, how they will contribute to the five year supply.

5.41. Paragraph 4.3 of the SHMA refers to the guidance on objectively assessed need, as set out

in the now published NPPG at Paragraph 004;

‘The assessment of development needs is an objective assessment of

need based on facts and unbiased evidence. Plan makers should not

apply constraints to the overall assessment of need, such as limitations

imposed by the supply of land for new development, historic under-

performance, viability, infrastructure or environmental constraints.

However, these considerations will need to be addressed when bringing

evidence bases together to identify specific policies within development

plans.’

5.42. In its assessment of housing land supply, the Council does not consider it realistic to deliver

the shortfall in the first five years of the plan period i.e. it is adopting the Liverpool

methodology and will make up the shortfall over the plan period 2013-2030.

5.43. If the Liverpool approach was to be adopted, and the shortfall added to the remainder of the

plan period – as the Council has suggested should be adopted – then the housing land

supply would equate to 6.75 years.

5.44. If the Sedgefield approach was to be adopted, and the shortfall added to the first five years

of the plan, the housing land supply would equate to 4.12 years.

5.45. Overall it can be concluded that the Council has persistently under-delivered against its

housing requirements and that it is likely that is does not have a five year supply.

Burnley Employment Land Study Demand Update (February 2014)

5.46. The Study concludes that, in basic terms, the Borough has a moderate level of employment

land, comprising around 55ha (which includes potential sites).

5.47. The Study acknowledges the possibility for around 46ha of existing employment land to be

lost to non-B Class uses, as identified in the lasted SHLAA (see above).

5.48. Past take-up of employment land in the Borough has been reasonably high, influenced by a

number of large-scale B2 industrial developments in recent years. Losses to non-B Class

uses have been high, averaging 1.2ha per annum.

5.49. The Study reports that the Borough requires between 45ha and 100ha of employment land

to meet needs up to 2030.

5.50. The Study advises the Council to adopt a proactive approach to managing and improving the

existing portfolio of employment sites to facilitate future growth, which in some cases may

include releasing some of the Borough’s poorer quality employment sites to housing or other

higher value uses in order to cross subsidise improvements to other, more viable estates.

5.51. The advice states;

‘Where mixed-use development or potential release of an employment

site to other uses is contemplated, this should have regard to the


availability of alternative sites to accommodate the relocation of firms.’

5.52. Where mixed use developments are proposed to ensure the retention of employment land,

this should be carefully assessed to ensure that it will be attractive to the market.

RICS Financial Viability in Planning Guidance (October 2012)

5.53. The guidance acknowledges that the consideration of financial viability will in many cases be

taken into consideration when determining planning applications. In presenting development

proposals to the local planning authority, the Guidance advises that independent expert

viability input is recommended.

5.54. Any viability assessments submitted in support of a planning application should be

supported by evidence, and it is advised that the appraisal is undertaken by a suitably

qualified practitioner and ideally a suitably qualified surveyor who has experience of the use,

scale and complexity of development being reviewed.

5.55. A viability appraisal has been undertaken by Vernon & Co and is submitted as part of this

application.

5.56. The conclusions of the appraisal are set out in the following section.


6. Planning Justification

6.1. The key issues to be considered are:

• The principle of the development

• Regeneration

• Viability and deliverability

• Layout and design

• Transport and accessibility

The Principle of Development

6.2. This application seeks to establish the principle of residential development on land

previously consented for employment use. The principle of residential development

providing up to 70 dwellings on the wider site has already been established through

application ref: APP/2013/0251.

6.3. NPPF encourages the effective reuse of brownfield sites which are not of high environmental

quality. Furthermore, the Burnley Local Plan Review applies a sequential approach to

locating development on previously developed land which lies within the urban boundary of

the Borough and close to existing services and infrastructure. Whilst this sequential

approach advocated in the Development Plan is not entirely consistent with NPPF, it is

consistent with the Framework’s requirement to effectively use brownfield land.

6.4. The site represents a highly sustainable location for development given its urban location in

close proximity to public transport, amenities and local services. The proposals therefore

represent sustainable development and are wholly in accordance with NPPF which includes

a presumption in favour of sustainable development.

6.5. Furthermore, the proposal secures gains across all sustainable development criterions

(economic, social and environmental) as set out in the Framework. It will improve and

diversify the housing mix present in Burnley, assist in sustaining the local economy

(including through the provision of construction jobs) and offer physical regeneration benefits

on this prominent site.

6.6. Paragraph 111 of the NPPF states that;

‘Planning policies and decisions should encourage the effective use of

land by re-using land that has been previously developed (brownfield

land), provided that it is not of high environmental value. Local planning

authorities may continue to consider the case for setting a locally

appropriate target for the use of brownfield land.’

6.7. In order to meet this objective, the BLPR set a target of 90% of new housing to be provided

on previously developed land. However, the most recent AMR (2011-2013) indicates that

the Council has exceeded this target for the last two monitoring years (2011/12 and

2012/13).

Housing Land Supply

6.8. There is a pressing quantitative and qualitative need for new housing in Burnley and in

particular in the South West Burnley area as demonstrated through a review of the housing

land supply position.


6.9. In order to deliver a wide choice of quality housing, NPPF advocates the importance of

meeting locally identified need/demand and ensuring a rolling five year supply of deliverable

sites to meet these requirements.

6.10. The Council has not published a Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA)

and as such, relies on site allocations and sites with planning permission identified in the

‘Housing Land Book’ to demonstrate a five year supply.

6.11. The supply identified in the Housing Land Book consists of allocated sites with full planning

permission; mixed use sites with outline planning permission; windfall sites with full

permission; windfall sites with outline permission; and changes of use and conversions.

There are no remaining Local Plan allocations in Burnley. The total supply amounts to 1,445

units.

6.12. The Borough has a situation of persistent under delivery of housing when measured against

the annual requirement, due to HMRI clearances and a lack of viable sites with planning

permission. The Council admits to having a situation of persistent under delivery in excess

of three years and as such, it is necessary to apply the additional 20% buffer as prescribed

by NPPF in supply terms.

6.13. The 2013 SHMA makes reference to the Council’s Housing Land Supply and Viability

Assessment (HLSVA) which is being undertaken to assess existing housing land and future

needs in the context of preparing a sound evidence base for the emerging Local Plan. The

HLSVA includes an assessment of the deliverability and developability of sites, based on the

viability of bringing forward sites identified by the Housing Land Availability Schedule.

6.14. The HLSVA has found that, whilst most sites were found to be developable, only suburban

sites and rural sites were found to be deliverable within 1-5 years. The assessment

concludes that despite most urban sites achieving viability, the residual land value is

considered marginal or low, which has a resultant impact upon deliverability.

6.15. The HLSVA also reports that many developable sites have been left vacant and planning

permissions have not been implemented. The underlying reasons for this are that values

have either remained at the levels they were at prior to the economic downturn or have

fallen. On the other hand, construction costs have increased. An additional factor is that

many owners bought sites at the peak of the market, which can impact on deliverability when

factored in as a cost.

6.16. Overall it can be concluded that the Council has persistently under-delivered against its

housing requirements and that it is likely that is does not have a five year supply.

Employment Land Supply

6.17. The Council’s latest AMR (2011/13) identifies that there is approximately 57ha of

employment land available.

6.18. The Council’s Burnley Employment Land Study Demand Update (February 2014) sets out a

requirement for between 45ha and 100ha of employment land to meet needs up to 2030.

6.19. However, the Study advises the Council to adopt a proactive approach to managing and

improving the existing portfolio of employment sites to facilitate future growth, which in some

cases may include releasing some of the Borough’s poorer quality employment sites to

housing or other higher value uses in order to cross subsidise improvements to other, more

viable estates.

6.20. Given the marketing evidence submitted with this application (Appendix 3), it is clear that

there is no market demand for the employment element of the consented scheme. Despite

marketing efforts, no interest has been shown by potential occupiers, therefore it is

reasonable to conclude that there are more suitable premises available elsewhere in the


Borough, and the site is unlikely to come forward for employment use in the foreseeable

future. In this instance, a strong case can be put forward for the release of the employment

element of the consented scheme for residential development, as per this application. The

Council should look elsewhere in the Borough when identifying sites for future employment

development.

Regeneration

6.21. The site comprises cleared brownfield land which currently has a detrimental impact on the

surrounding area and is in need of redevelopment and remediation. The proposal will

remediate the site and introduce high quality residential development with associated

landscaping. Overall, it will deliver a significant enhancement to the local environment.

6.22. The site is subject to the broad Borough-wide regeneration agenda and lies in a deprived

HMR area. The proposal helps achieve the broad regeneration objectives through the

following:

• Remediation of a previously developed site

• Environmental enhancements

• High quality housing with integral landscape

• A diversified mix of high quality homes for local people

• Job creation throughout the construction of the development

• A new sense of place and community

• Connectivity to surrounding land uses and public transport

• Regeneration benefits to the local community and wider area in terms of investment into

local shops and facilities.

6.23. The proposed development will help create a new sense of place within an established

residential environment. It will promote a new deliverable housing scheme that will help to

achieve Burnley’s housing requirements whilst delivering sustainable development on

brownfield land within the urban area.

Viability and Deliverability

6.24. Paragraph 173 of the NPPF places emphasis on the importance of ensuring that

developments are not subjected to obligations and policy burdens of such a scale that their

ability to be developed viably is threatened. It states;

‘To ensure viability, the costs of any requirements likely to be applied to

development, such as requirements for affordable housing, standards,

infrastructure contributions or other requirements should, when taking

account of the normal cost of development and mitigation, provide

competitive returns to a willing land owner and willing developer to

enable the development to be deliverable.’

6.25. As previously mentioned, the Council’s HLSVA suggests that reducing the affordable

housing and other planning contributions to nil would still not achieve residual land values

that would make a site deliverable however this may assist when economic conditions

improve in future.

6.26. The assessment therefore makes several recommendations to improve the viability of sites

in urban areas such as the application site. Recommendations include reducing affordable


housing provision and public sector funding towards remediation costs.

Viability

6.27. An Economic Viability Assessment has been undertaken and is submitted in support of this

application. The Assessment makes various key assumptions, including residential values

and development density, which results in a completed development value from which the

developer’s costs are deducted to calculate the residual site value.

6.28. The assessment results in a net value after profit and existing land value of -£56,745

therefore demonstrating that the site is not sufficiently viable to make any contributions as

part of the proposed development.

Deliverability

6.29. Within South West Burnley there is a need for housing to come forward to contribute to the

regeneration of the area. Given the current housing land supply position and the

regeneration benefits of the proposal, there is no reason for this development to be held

back.

6.30. Footnote 11 of paragraph 47 of the NPPF states:

‘To be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a

suitable location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic

prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years and in

particular that development of the site is viable. Sites with planning

permission should be considered deliverable until permission expires,

unless there is clear evidence that schemes will not be implemented

within five years, for example they will not be viable, there is no longer a

demand for the type of units or sites have long term phasing plans.’

6.31. The site is brownfield and, once planning permission is granted, will meet the definition of

deliverable as set out in Footnote 11 above. The application site is sustainably located and

will bring with it significant regeneration benefits.

6.32. The applicant is committed to the delivery of the site, and is confident that units will be

delivered within five years.

Marketing Evidence

6.33. Following consent being granted in 2010, the site has been actively marketed by both Savills

and Trevor Dawson.

6.34. Trevor Dawson was instructed between 2010 and 2012 to market the wider site for a mixed

use development scheme. Extensive and regular mailing campaigns were undertaken

covering active house builders in the North West region and commercial developers in the

Lancashire area. Enclosed at Appendix 3 is a letter providing a summary of the marketing

efforts by Trevor Dawson, their Sales Particulars and a list of the parties that were

approached on behalf of the applicant.

6.35. There was little interest received during this period. The feedback received from commercial

developers was that the site was in a tertiary location compared to other developments in the

area at that time. There was also a lack of interest in the site from residential developers

due to the fact that the commercial element detracted from the residential scheme.

6.36. Savills took over the marketing from 2012 onwards, and a summary of their marketing efforts

and feedback to date are also enclosed at Appendix 3. There has been no demand from

commercial developers for the commercial land and house builders have been unwilling to

develop the site in conjunction with potentially finding a commercial developer. There has


therefore been little or no interest for the site.

Layout and Design

6.37. The development of the site for housing accords with Local Plan Policies GP1, H1, H4, H5

and H6 which set out the required quality and design standards for new housing schemes.

6.38. Whilst layout is a matter reserved for future determination, consideration has been given to

the site layout to ensure that it is policy-compliant, complements the consented scheme for

the wider site and integrates well with the existing residential area.

Transport and Accessibility

6.39. A full Transport Assessment was submitted in support of the consented mixed use

application, which demonstrated that the proposals could be accommodated on the existing

local highway network.

6.40. A Supplementary Report has been prepared by Ashley Helme Associates (dated March

2014) and is submitted in support of this application.

6.41. The report concludes that the proposed development has no material transport impact and

that there is no transport/highways reason for refusing planning permission.


7. Conclusions

7.1. This Planning Statement has been prepared on behalf of Connaught Administration Services

Limited (c/o Blue Gate Capital Limited) in support of an outline planning application for

residential development at the former Wood Top Mill site off Villiers Street, Burnley.

7.2. The proposal for residential development is justified by the fact that the consented mixed use

scheme has received little or no interest from both house builders and commercial

developers since consent was granted, despite considerable marketing efforts. The

commercial element is therefore hindering the delivery of the overall residential

development, which would make a significant contribution towards local housing stock.

7.3. These considerations, together with the Council’s identified housing need, lead to the

conclusion that the proposal should be supported by the Council and planning permission

granted, to enable this site and the wider consented scheme to be delivered which will

without doubt act as a catalyst for further investment and development in the area.

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

AP

PE

ND

IX 2

PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MASTERPLAN

AP

PE

ND

IX 3

Matthew JonesE: [email protected]

DL: +44 (0) 113 220 1252F: +44 (0) 0113 244 0104

Ground FloorCity Point

29 King StreetLeeds LS1 2HL

T: +44 (0) 113 244 0100savills.com

bc

Offices and associates throughout the Americas, Europe, Asia Pacific, Africa and the Middle East. Savills (UK) Limited. Chartered Surveyors. Regulated by RICS. A subsidiary of Savills plc. Registered in England No. 2605138. Registered office: 33 Margaret Street, London, W1G 0JD

Dear Mr Bromhead Former Woodtop Mill, Burnley, BB11 5ER Further to our recent correspondence regarding the above, I understand that you require a summary of the marketing to date since our instruction from yourself in January 2012, along with an indication of levels of interest generated during this period. As stated above Savills were instructed in January 2012 to undertake the marketing of the above property. As agreed with yourself as part of a marketing strategy we produced a set of marketing particulars for the subject site advertising the opportunity and seeking offers for the freehold interest in the subject site. We sent out the details to all national and regional housebuilders, local and regional developers and Registered Providers. We undertook this process on a regular 6 monthly basis and undertook discussions with various developers and housebuilders to assess their interest levels in the subject site. All of the housebuilders and developers turned down the subject site as they were both unsure at the time of the residential market and there was no demand anyway for the 40,000 sq ft of proposed employed uses on the subject site. During the marketing there was no demand from commercial developers for the commercial land and housebuilders were unwilling to develop the site in conjunction with potentially finding a commercial developer. Housebuilders also stated that during 2012/13 the residential market in Burnley with regards to speculative residential development land was very limited. To this end during the marketing period from 2012 I can state that we had little or no interest for the subject site. We did have discussions with Gleeson Regeneration, however they stated that they were purchasing a number of sites from the local authority and that they had sufficient development land in the pipeline in the area. I hope that the above brings you up to speed with the process we have undertaken in the past two years and unfortunately I cannot provide you with anymore positive feedback than the comments I have made above. Yours sincerely

Matthew Jones Director

27 March 2014 J Bromhead Esq Connaught Consultancy Services LLP 3rd Floor 29 New Bond Street London W1S 2RL

mailto:[email protected]

former wood top mill site, burnley planning statement 0145 planning... · former wood top mill...

Documents