Getting the Ingredients RightHomes means Business 17 March 2006

Presented by

Paul Fong

Created by Maple Rock Design Ltd

Paul Fong MRTPIManaging Director of Hunter Page Planning

Hunter Page is a specialist planning firm offering a personalised service to individuals, companies and publicorganisations throughout the UK. We assist our clients in achieving their development aspirations by influencing planning policy, unlocking development potential, and securing planning permission.

Hunter Page provides professional advice on a wide range of planning issues from, applications and appeals, feasibility studies, site appraisals, development plan policy and representations, urban design andmasterplanning services, conservation and regeneration.

The company was established in 1993 by Paul Fong and has subsequently been involved in a diverse range of planning projects. Our approach has evolved through experience in development schemes throughout the UK, providing us with an insight into complex planning situations and giving our staff effective communications and negotiation skills.

The practice has a broad client base including individual landowners, major commercial developers, house builders, national PLC’s and Government Quangos.

Paul has been involved in a number of Live/Work developments across the country but most notably the Riverside Village project in Malmesbury which has recently received planning permission and will be the largest rural based Live/Work proposal in the UK.

Malmesbury Case Study

The Client: Minton Group – London Based Commercial Developer www.mintongroup.com

• Purchased the former LucentTechnologies Site

• 10 miles from Swindon

• 29 miles from Bristol

• 47 miles from Oxford

• 10 miles from Chippenham

• 5 miles north of junction 17

of the M4 Motorway

• Site area: 5.09 hectares (12.6 acres)

• 160,000ft2 of existing accommodation

(14,864m2 gross), 500 parking spacesAll B1 office accommodation and mostof the buildings were of some age.

• Brownfield site

• In the flood plain

• TPOs on site

• No listed buildings

• Not in a conservation area

• Outside settlement boundary butadjoining it on the western boundary

• Linked to town centre by footpath

Site history

The site historically developed around the former CowbridgeHouse. In 1773 there was a large house and Mill (Cow Mill) on this site. Cowbridge House was bought the day before the second world war was declared and was used as a ‘shadow factory’ producing radio equipment. By summer 1940 radar production started in Cowbridge House. In 1942 twelve prefabricated houses were built for workers north of CowbridgeHouse in what would become Cowbridge Crescent.

At the end of the war many people were made redundant, however radar production continued until the mid 1960’s, the site went on producing telephone and telephone exchange equipment through out the 1970’s.

From 1980’s, Philips Telecommunications UK Ltd took over. The main activity on site was research and development of telephone equipment. In the mid 1990’s Lucent Technologies was formed employing 650 staff researching and developing transmission and switching equipment for mobile and fixed telephone networks.

Following the decline of the information technology industries, Lucent Technologies closed and vacated the site in September 2002.

Background of Malmesbury

• Malmesbury is considered to be a sustainable urban settlement

• Well catered for in terms of employment, shops, services and facilities.

• Market town in North Wiltshire

• Oldest Borough in England

• Population of 4804

• several specialist shops offering a unique range of goods.

• There are several bus services providing services to settlements and the outlying areas.

• Secondary and primary education in situ, a local hospital, as well as a leisure centre.

Table 1. SUSTAINABILITY TABLE

Nursery, Crèche or Play Group 2

Primary School 2

Secondary School 1

Town Council 1

Public House 4

Place of Worship 4

Sports Centres 2

Clubs & Societies 60

GP Surgery 1

Dental Surgery 2

Hospital (Total Number of Beds) 1

Employment Land Allocation within 4km (adopted plan) 9.1 ha

Industrial Estates within 4km 4EMPLOYMENT

HEALTHCARE

COMMUNITYFACILITIES

EDUCATION

3.5 milesSite’s distance to nearest Railway Station (km)PUBLIC TRANSPORT

2Large Grocer/Supermarket

7Food Shops

64Non Food

7Restaurant/Take-away

4Bank

1Post Office

RETAIL

Employment situation

• Malmesbury was formerly reliant on two main employers: Lucent Technologies and Dyson.

• Earlier Dyson moved their main production plant to Malaysia, retaining the research and development in Malmesbury.

• 2002 Lucent Technologies closed their doors moving all remaining activities to Swindon.

• Most of the economically active population are currently commuting out of the town for employment purposes.

• Concerns over loss of employment within the town.

Employment Issues of the Site

• From a commercial perspective the site was unusually large for this rural location.

• All accommodation was set out for office use for whichthere was little demand.

• Majority of the accommodation was of some age.

• The site was remote from major communication networks.

• The location suffered from serious competition from centres such as Chippenham, Swindon and Bristol which have large modern serviced accommodation that are more accessible.

• Site was marketed by 2 national agents and 1 local agent.

• The marketing of the site resulted in very little interest from end users but more interest from investors.

• The site remained empty for two years.

The Options

• Leave the site empty and wait for alternative employment to arrive:

– Will employment ever arrive in this location?

– Leaving the site empty will lead to the deteriorationand dereliction of the site

– Dereliction of the site will detract from the character of the locality and the attractiveness of the town

• Provide an appropriate redevelopment of the site, which will be capable of creating new employment opportunities?

Redevelopment of the site• Following the marketing of the site and advice

from commercial agents, it was agreed that the redevelopment of the site was appropriate

• Supported by implicit advice in PPG3 regarding mixed use

• Supported by advice in paragraph 42a of PPG3 relating to re-use of redundant employment land for mixed use orresidential purposes.

• 15 ha oversupply of employment land in the District

Opportunities for the site –

• Good environment

• Close to town centre

• Ability to create clusters of development

• Opportunities to re-utilise some of the buildings

• Opportunity to remove contamination and alleviate flooding

• Opportunity to improve the physical appearance of the site

• Opportunity to provide planning gain – S106 contributions

• Opportunity to create new businesses and employment

• Opportunity to provide social and key worker housing

• Sustainable re-utilisation of the site

• Good socio-economic background for Live/Work use

• Willing local community

• Reduce commuting

Combi Live/Work units

Constraints of the site• Former employment site

• Outdated local plan

• Local planning authority had no experience or understanding of Live/Work

• Planners adopted an inflexible attitude

• No explicit national policy just implicit

Given the constraints and opportunities –the proposed development of the site:Mixed Use Development comprising of:

• Cedar House: refurbished office building providing 2,768m2 ofoffice accommodation, meeting rooms and central facilities – B1 use class

• 42 home based Live/Work units – Sui Generis use class

• 32 Studio Live/Work units - Sui Generis use class

• Mill Building converted to a restaurant – A3 use class

• 27 key worker units – C3 use class

• 6 one bedroom flats – C3 use class

• 39 two bedroom flats – C3 use class

• 5 three bedroom houses – C3 use class

• This was seen as the most sensible re-utilisation of the site which would also improve the appearance and local environment of the area.

• Development designed to concentrate the business uses towards the front of the sitecentered around the refurbished office building.

• the more low key home working units to the rear of the site along the rural edge.

Mixed Use Development comprising of (continued):

The ProblemsThe inflexible attitude by planners led the original application to getrefused by delegated powers.

In summary refused for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development was in the countryside where residential development was unacceptable; and

2. the proposed development would lead to the loss of employment land and there are no significant benefits from its redevelopment

Planners lacked vision!

The Solution

The local Population and committee members saw thebenefits of the development and wanted:-

• An innovative development

• New employment

• Improved environment on the site

• Community gain

• Did not want the redevelopment of the site forindustry or warehousing as this would not sitcomfortably with adjoining residential uses;and Would not tidy up the site

Community Liaison Group –• PPS1 – involving the community

• Malmesbury Town Council

• Malmesbury Residents Association

• Malmesbury Civic Trust

• St Paul Malmesbury Without Parish Council

• 2 Ward Councillors

• Local Business interest

Supporting information –• Local employment survey

– Post

– Door to door

• Supporting Live/Work report – demonstrating that it was anarea where people wanted to work from home rather thanneeded to work from home

• Supporting Planning Policy – 03/05 had arrived!

• Traffic Impact Assessment

• Flood Mitigation

• Support from the local community

The Result

• Unanimous support from committee

• Against officers recommendation for refusal once again

• Approved by the Government office

• Live/Work secured by condition

Conclusion

• Persistence pays off

• Achieve local support

• Do your research

• Use Planning Policy

There is a place for Live/Work

This concludes our presentationThank you for your time

Hunter Page PlanningThornbury House • 18 High Street • Cheltenham • GL50 1DZ

t: 01242 230066 e: info@hunterpage.net