Geoffrey Prince Associates Ltd 16 Kimble Close, Knightcote, Warwickshire CV47 2SJ

Telephone & Fax 01295 770772 Langridge Homes Email [email protected] Ltd 827055 agent Geoffrey Prince Strategic site appraisals, feasibility studies, 196755 development plans, planning applications, appeals and public inquiries for

urban and rural regeneration projects, town

expansion schemes, housing, retail and

PlanningPolicy industrial sites.

RushcliffeBoroughCouncil Also, military, airport, tourism and waste

DevelopmentControl planning. CivicCentre WestBridgford NOTTINGHAM NG25FE 22March2016 DearSirs

Rushcliffe LAPP Part 2 Consultation

Ihavebeeninstructedbythelandowners,LangridgeHomesLimited,tomakerepresentationsontheLAPPPart 2.

PleasethereforefindattachedastatementsettingourrepresentationstogetherwithaPlanningStatementof thesitewhichLangridgeHomesispromoting(SHLAARef364;GreenBeltAssessmentRefCOT8). The representations are focussed on Chapter 2 Housing Development and Chapter 3 Green Belt, and in particularto:

Question 4 where we consider that the LAPP should allocate further greenfield land for housing developmentatCotgrave;and

Question20,whereweconsiderthatfurthersafeguardedlandshouldbedesignatedinRushcliffe; Weshouldbegratefulifyoucouldacknowledgereceiptoftheserepresentationsandkeepmeinformedofthe nextstepsintheLAPPPart2process. IamsubmittingseparaterepresentationsontheGreenBeltAssessmentconsultation. Yourssincerely

GeoffreyPrince

Enc

Registered in England and Wales

Reg No 4306504 Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

LAPP Part 2 Land and Planning Policies - Issues and Options Representations submitted by GPA Ltd on behalf of Langridge Homes Ltd

I have been instructed by Langridge Homes Ltd (LH) to comment on the Rushcliffe Borough Council (GBC) LAPP Part 2 Issues and Options.

My representations are focussed on Chapter 2 Housing Development and Chapter 3 Green Belt.

Langridge Homes Ltd do not consider that LAPP Part 2 will allocate sufficient sites to meet the housing requirements of Core Strategy Policy 3 Spatial Strategy due to uncertainties in the delivery of the three sustainable urban extensions. In order to meet the requirements of the Core Strategy it recommends that:

Land for an approximately 2,000 additional houses will need to be allocated on land adjoining the main built up area of Nottingham (Rushcliffe) and on sites adjoining the Key Settlements including at Cotgrave.

To ensure that the LAPP is resilient further safeguarded land should be identified and include all land which is assessed as being of low or low-medium Green Belt importance unless there are other policy constraints such as flood risk, environmental and heritage designation, access problems which will pose significant constraints to the delivery of these sites.

Our rationale making these recommendations is set down below. Chapter 2 - Housing Development

This policy states that a minimum of 13,150 new dwellings will be provided over the plan period 2011-2028, of which 7,650 will be provided adjoining the main built up area of Nottingham (within Rushcliffe). Of these 7,000 are to be provided in three sustainable urban extensions (SUEs). The LAPP Part 2 does not propose to make any further adjustments to meet outstanding requirement of 650, as these can be built on sites within the main built up area. The Core Strategy also proposes that a further 5,500 will be provided beyond the main built up area including 2,020 at sites allocated in the Core Strategy at Bingham (1,000), RAF Newton (550) and the former Cotgrave Colliery (470). The LAPP Part 2 does not propose any further allocations at these locations, but does propose to make additional allocations amounting to 1,500 dwellings at East Leake (400) , Keyworth (450), Radcliffe on Trent (400) and at Ruddington (250). The remainder of the requirement will be made up from SHLAA sites, sites with planning permissions/under construction and infill/change of use sites.

Policy 3 of the Core Strategy also set down a delivery pattern, as follows:

2011-2013 - 500 (250 pa) 2013-2018 - 2,350 (470 pa); 2018-2023 – 6,500 (1,300 pa); 2023-2028 – 4,100 (820 pa).

The housing trajectory at Appendix D of the Core Strategy shows how the houses will be delivered over the plan period. This Trajectory is appended to these representations.

1 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

It is clear that the Spatial Strategy is not working with considerable slippage in housing delivery already recorded and acknowledged by Officers representing Rushcliffe Borough Council at a recent appeal (Decision Date 15 December 2015) (Ref 2277522, Land at Abbey lane, Aslockton) which was allowed on the grounds that the Council could not demonstrate a five year housing land supply. This is despite the Inspector to the Local Plan Core Strategy Public Examination agreeing to the adoption of the ‘Liverpool’ method for calculating housing land supply and the housing trajectory, whereby delays in bringing forward the SUEs and other strategic site allocations would result in a lower housing requirement in the short term (upto 2018) before making up the backlog supply in the second half of the plan period as these sites came on stream

However, the evidence regarding the non- delivery of the SUEs and other strategic sites allocated in the Core Strategy outside the built up area is so compelling that it is unlikely that the Council will be unable to deliver its housing provision of 13,150 dwellings over the plan period without a major shift in its housing supply strategy.

The table below summaries our understanding of the current planning current status of these sites. This table shows that:

By 2020 the three SUEs should have delivered 1,850 dwellings, but given that no planning applications have yet to be submitted for two of the SUEs (at Clifton and East of Gamston), and at the other (Land off Melton Road, Edwalton) planning applications are under consideration, then we consider that only the Edwalton SUE will have delivered any houses by 2020. Optimistically we consider that this SUE may start to deliver in 2018/19 and by the end of 2019/2020 may have delivered around 250 dwellings. This represents a shortfall in supply from this source over the next 5 years of 1,600 dwellings, at a time when supply from the SUEs should be on a rapidly rising upward curve;

By 2020 the Core Strategy allocations beyond the built up area should have delivered 1,550 dwellings. The land at former Cotgrave Colliery is under construction and can expected to be complete by 2020 (470 dwellings). Although the other two sites have the benefit of outline planning permissions, they appear to be a long way from submitting reserve matters applications. The land north of Bingham is owned by the Crown Estate and there is no indication of this land being marketed to a developer/housebuilder. On this basis we consider that development at RAF Newton and Bingham will also be delayed. Assuming that development may commence by 2018/19 (an optimistic assumption), then these two sites may deliver around 300 dwellings in total by 2020. Thus the total supply from this source is estimated at 770 by 2020, a shortfall of 780 based on the housing trajectory;

By 2020 delivery from other sites/locations (ie SHLAA sites, sites to be allocated in the LAPP Part 2 beyond the built up area and infill/change of use sites is estimated to deliver 2,201 dwellings – we consider that this total is achievable.

Thus, between 2011 and 2020 some 5,450 dwellings should be delivered, but the evidence indicates that only 3,221 will be delivered (including completions to date), a shortfall of 2,229 dwellings (approximately 40%). It is unlikely that this shortfall in supply can be made up during the remainder of the plan period, and indeed there may be further delays in bringing forward the SUEs and other allocated sites outside the built up area. Indeed the evidence from the rest of the Nottingham HMA (ie in Gedling and Broxtowe) shows that they too are having difficulties in meeting their housing supply targets due to too much reliance on large complex strategic sites allocated in the Aligned

2 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

Core Strategy. The same story emerges from the adjoining Leicester and Leicestershire HMA, where 12 SUEs have been proposed since 2007 and as yet none have delivered any houses, although one has recently started.

It is abundantly clear therefore that Rushcliffe will need to make some fundamental adjustments to its LAPP Part 2 by making additional allocations on the edge of the built up area of Nottingham (in Rushcliffe) and also in settlements beyond the built up area.

Location Core CS Housing Revised Planning Status Comment Strategy Trajectory Housing Requirement Target by Trajectory 2020 Target by 2020 Main Built up Area of Nottingham South of 3,000 600 Awaiting Planning Unlikely to deliver Clifton SUE Application any houses within timeframe – planning delays, infrastructure requirements, S106/CIL Melton Road, 1,500 600 Outline Planning Potential to start Edwalton SUE applications under delivering consideration towards end of 5 year period – say 250 by 2020 East of 2,500 650 Awaiting planning Unlikely to deliver Gamston SUE applications any houses within timeframe – planning delays, infrastructure requirements, S106/CIL Total (from 7,000 1,850 250 max at SUE at SUEs) Edwalton (shortfall of 1,600) Beyond the main built up area (Core Strategy Allocations) Land North of 1,050 600 Outline Planning Potential to start Bingham Application approved delivering towards end of 5 year period – say 150 by 2020 Land at Former 550 550 Outline Planning Potential to start RAF Newton Application approved delivering towards end of 5 year period – say 150 by 2020 Former 470 400 Under construction Potentially this Cotgrave site will be

3 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

Colliery complete by 2020 (470) Total (from CS 2,070 1,550 770 (shortfall of allocations 780) outside built up area) Overall Totals 9,070 3,400 1,020 (shortfall of from Core 2,380) Strategy allocations Other Sites/Locations SHLAA Sites 2,011 1,637 Under 1,637 achievable construction/Planning by 2020 permissions in place Infill and 885 204 Awaiting planning 204 achievable by change of use permissions 2020 LAPP Part 2 1,500 360 Only East Leake has 360 achievable by New planning permissions 2020 at E Leake Allocations (for 734 dwellings) and Keyworth, and Keyworth has a but assume none NDP to meet at Radcliffe and requirement (450) Ruddington Total from 4,396 2,201 2,201 (no other shortfall/surplus) sites/locations Overall Totals 13,466 5,601 3,221 (shortfall of 2,380) Requirement 5,450 +151 -2,229 (40% 2011-2020 shortfall)

Specifically we do not consider that there is any justification for not making additional allocations at the Key Settlements of Bingham, RAF Newton and Cotgrave, as stated in LAPP Part 2.

Moreover we consider that the case for additional allocations at Cotgrave is overwhelming, given that:

The majority of SHLAA sites around the edge of Cotgrave have been shown to be of low- medium strategic importance in meeting the five purposes of including land in the Green Belt;

Secondly the allocation site on the former Cotgrave Colliery site will be complete by 2020. This will mean that there will be no significant new development at Cotgrave for the remainder of the plan period and possibly beyond. Yet Cotgrave is one of the largest settlements in Rushcliffe, is a very sustainable location with a full range of facilities including primary and secondary schools, a leisure centre, shopping centre and a range of employment opportunities. It is strategically located close to the recently upgraded A46 (Newark-Leicester) and also the A52 (Grantham – Nottingham). Without additional housing local people will be forced to meet their housing needs elsewhere from 2020 onwards which is not sustainable;

4 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

Thirdly it will be important that Cotgrave continues a strategy to rejuvenate and rebalance its population and diversify its economy which is heavily reliant on an ageing former colliery population. A strict Green Belt boundary drawn tightly around the edge of the settlement will not enable this process to continue.

Through previous representations on the Local Plan and also through a pre application submission (2013) Langridge Homes has previously promoted a sustainable site near to the village centre of Cotgrave (SHLAA Ref 364; COT8 in the Green Belt Assessment), Land to the west of Main Road) to ensure that that there is an adequate supply of housing over the plan period at Cotgrave and which can make a positive contribution towards meeting the Council’s housing requirements for the Borough.

Attached to this representation are two alternative options for developing this site, together with a supporting planning statement (refer also representations on the Green Belt Review consultation and concept master plans attached to this representation).

Option 1 extends over 2 fields to the north of Church Lane and west of Main Road. It has a gross site area of 6.3 ha and a capacity for 148 dwelling units;

Option 2 is a reduced scheme involving development on the field nearest to the village centre. It extends over 2.9 ha and has a capacity for around 80 dwelling units.

Both schemes will deliver a mix of house types and tenures, and specifically it is intended to make provision for specialist housing for the elderly due to the proximity to local facilities including local shops, the church and community facilities. Chapter 3 Green Belt

Langridge Homes Ltd has submitted separate representation on the Green Belt Review, and suggested how the assessment of COT 8 should be adjusted to take account of the situation on the ground.

With regards to LAPP Part 2 our main concern relates to the identification of Safeguarded Land. We note that the Council is proposing safeguarded land at Edwalton Golf Course and potentially at Keyworth where the NDP is proposing two sites as safeguarded land.

It is unclear from the text whether the Edwalton Golf Course will be regarded as safeguarded land with potential for development or whether the safeguarded land designation is being used as a planning tool as it is not considered appropriate for this site to be included in the Green Belt and for the site to be brought forward for development in the future (as is the case in Gedling Borough where the Mapperly Golf Course is proposed as safeguarded land). If this is the case then effectively the Borough Council has failed to identify any safeguarded land to meet ‘longer term development needs stretching well beyond the plan period’ as per Para 85 of the NPPF.

In any event there is clearly a strong justification of identifying a portfolio of safeguarded land to meet longer term development needs on the edge of the built up are and on land adjoining the Key Settlements.

We propose that all SHLAA sites which have been assessed as being of low or low/medium Green Belt importance in the Green Belt Part 2 assessment should be removed from the Green Belt, unless

5 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd there are other over-riding policy constraints as to why these sites will not be capable of being developed. This will add resilience to the LAPP. The identification of safeguarded land will provide a mechanism to enable the Council to respond to shortfalls in supply, particularly if the SUEs and other strategic site allocations at the Key Settlements fail to deliver as planned in the Housing Trajectory, and without having to go through a full blooded Green Belt review process which will take years to complete. Moreover it will enable Rushcliffe to make its contribution to meeting the housing needs and requirements in South Nottinghamshire where Nottingham City is regarded as one of the major provincial cities with significant growth prospects. These prospects will be enhanced with HS2, the establishment of a combined authority for Nottingham and Derby, growth of East Midlands Airport, strategic road improvements.

Geoffrey Prince, March 2016

For Langridge Homes Ltd 17-21 Clumber Avenue Sherwood Rise Nottingham NG5 1AG Tel 0115 9626626

6 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council - LAPP Part 2 Prepared by GPA Ltd Proposed Residential Development for Langridge Homes Ltd on Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave

Planning Statement Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave SHLAA Site Ref 364; Green Belt Assessment Ref COT8) 1 Introduction

This Planning Statement for Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave has been prepared in support of the representations submitted by GPA Ltd on behalf of Langridge Homes Ltd with regards to the LAPP Part 2, and the Rushcliffe Geeen Belt Review Part 2. It sets out: Summary site appraisal; Scheme description (two options are put forward and indicative Master Plans are attached to this statement); An assessment of the site against the Green Belt Review criteria; Scheme benefits.

2 Site Appraisal

The key features of this site can be summarised as follows:

Location: The site adjoins Cotgrave along its north west boundary, and is located along the main road leading out of Cotgrave to the A52, a key strategic route linking Nottingham with Grantham and the A46/A52 junction. Cotgrave is located within a triangle formed by the A52, A46 and A606, and is approximately 5 miles (8 km) to the south east of the centre of Nottingham. The Grantham Canal passes by the town;

Site boundaries and adjoining uses: The site is adjoined by residential development to the east (along Main Road) and south (along Church Lane); the site is within walking distance of a range of local facilities including public houses, All Saints Church, a primary school, SureStart kindergarten, post office, local shops including a Sainsbury convenience store, local cafes, a petrol station and bus stops; the northern and western site boundaries are formed of hedges interspersed with a few trees. Further to the west is the Cotgrave Sewage Treatment Works, and a such the field boundaries represent a clearly defined boundary to further outward expansion to the west of Cotgrave;

Land ownership: The whole site is under the control of Langridge Homes Ltd, and as such there are no ownership constraints to the development of this site;

Existing Use: Land is currently subject to a short term agricultural lease and is used for arable farming;

Accessibility: The site is within 5 minutes walk of most village facilities, including bus stops;

Access: There are good opportunities for the site to be accessed from Main Road – a draft highway assessment has been undertaken which clearly demonstrates that access from Main Road is achievable by demolishing existing properties owned by Langridge Homes along the Main Road frontage and which would enable appropriate design standards and visibility displays to be achieved (refer illustrative master plans for further details);

1 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council - LAPP Part 2 Prepared by GPA Ltd Proposed Residential Development for Langridge Homes Ltd on Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave

Green Infrastructure: Footpath 15 runs along the southern boundary of the site and which connects Cotgrave to the wider countryside beyond. The footpath can be incorporated into the scheme to provide an enhanced public benefit;

Capacity of the Services Infrastructure: The site can be connected to the local utility networks which run along Main Road. There are no capacity constraints with regards to water, gas and electricity given the amount of development proposed on this site; however, it is noted that it may be necessary to upgrade the local sewage treatment works located to the west of the site, or possibly to consider an on-site package plant solution;

Topography: Flat with a slight upward slope from south to north; the land also tilts downwards slightly from west to east;

Flood Risk: The Environment Agency (EA) maps show that the site is not at risk from flooding:

Natural Environment: The site is not affected by any environmental designations;

Historic Environment: The site is not within the Conservation Area. Also there are no known heritage assets within the site. However, we note that the Nottinghamshire Historic Environments Records list one non designated heritage asset within the boundaries of the site, and this is listed as a terrace bank and hollows (NHER ref: L7464). Beyond the site there are 20 heritage assets within 1 km (10 Listed Buildings and 10 SAMs), including the Grade 1 All Saints Church, but it is considered that there will be no significant or adverse impact on the setting of the church due to the site’s topography and existing built development along Church Lane including the Church Farm Nursing Home as a result of the proposed development, and also thlack of any public views across the site from public vantage points.

A Desk Top Archaeological Assessment has been undertaken by Trent and Peak Archaeology (July 2013). This identified a range of probable earthworks including a hollow way or track and four possible enclosures in the south field. Cropmarks including two lines and two possible circular features were also identified in the north field. The Assessment concluded that given that earthworks have been identified, there is potential for buried remains associated with occupation and cultivation during the Medieval and Post medieval period, as such further investigations (geophysical and trial trenching) may be required prior to commencement of development (this report is available on request).

Landscape and Visual Assessment: The site falls within Landscape Character Zone SN04 Cotgrave and Tollerton Village Farmlands, where the overall strategy is ‘Enhance and Restore’. The landscape condition is regarded as moderate, and man-made elements have had a localised influence on character. Being relatively low lying, development on this site would be well contained by the surrounding landscape.

Phase 1 Ecological Assessment: The site is of low ecological value, although the hedgerows along the western and northern site boundaries are important wildlife corridors.

Agricultural Land: Grade 3A/3B. Irrespective of the grade, any loss would be relatively insignificant.

2 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council - LAPP Part 2 Prepared by GPA Ltd Proposed Residential Development for Langridge Homes Ltd on Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave

3 Scheme Description

The proposed schemes are shown on the illustrative Master Plans (attached).

Option 1 Scheme

The key features of this scheme are:

Net and gross development areas: The gross development area is 6.3 ha and the net developable area (less open space and SUDS area) is 5.4 ha.

Total number and mix of dwellings: 150 dwelling units, which could include elderly/special needs housing at the southern end of the site close to the local amenities. The other dwellings would comprise mainly 2-5 bedroomed family houses to suit market conditions and also affordable houses in accordance with policy. The net density would be around 30 dwellings per ha, and the gross density would be around 25 per ha;

Non residential uses: We have shown an area for commercial or community uses at the southern end of the site where it adjoins Main Road.

Open Space: The scheme includes an area of public open space, centrally located in the development and linked to the SUDS feature. Within the development area incidental areas will be included and shown at the detailed design stage. If required land could be made available for a recreation area/sports pitches.

Access: - Two access points are shown, at the southern and northern end of Main Road. The northern junction will be located at the existing garden of number 55 Main Road, a property owned by Langridge Homes Ltd. The proposed site access would provide a 5.5m carriageway width and 2m wide footways on both sites of the access which would link into the existing footway provision along Main Road. Minimum visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m are achievable in both directions; - The southerly vehicular access junction will be located at the existing retail unit, directly to the south of the petrol filling station situated along Main Road. The retail unit is owned by Langridge Homes Ltd. The proposed site access would provide a 5.5m carriageway width and 2m wide footways on both sites of the access which would link into the existing footway provision along Main Road. Minimum visibility splays of 43m from a point 2.4m back from the give-way line are achievable in both directions from the proposed site access; - The 2 separate vehicular accesses will be linked via the development’s internal site road network; - The proposed development will generate between 90 and 100 vehicular trips during each of the peak hour periods. These figures equate to one additional vehicle on the local highway network every 36 to 40 seconds during the peak periods. The proposed development is predicted to generate a total of 818 vehicular trips during the course of a whole day. An initial traffic impact assessment shows that the proposed development will not result in any capacity issues to the operation of any local junctions and will have negligible impacts on junctions further afield. - A separate pedestrian access is also shown from Church Lane which is part of the Public Footpath 15.

3 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council - LAPP Part 2 Prepared by GPA Ltd Proposed Residential Development for Langridge Homes Ltd on Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave

- Main Road provides a carriageway width of between approximately 5.5m and 6.5m, and the section of Main Road running directly adjacent to the proposed development site is subject to a 30mph speed limit. Footways, part of which is a shared footpath/cycleway, and street lighting are provided along this section of Main Road. - The closest bus stops to the site are situated along Main Road, adjacent to the site, and within a walking distance of 200m from both of the proposed vehicular site access locations. The bus stops are served by regular bus routes 22, 50 and the Cotgrave Connection. The Cotgrave Connection runs at 20 minute intervals from early am until late evening Mon-Sats, and at hourly intervals on Sundays.

Sustainable Urban Drainage: In order to ensure that surface water drainage does not exceed agricultural run off rates with an allowance for climate change, the site has been designed to incorporate a SUDS pond where storm water can gather before being released into the wider drainage network once the storm water has abated.

Landscape and boundary treatments: Existing hedges along the southern and western site boundaries will be reinforced;

Ecological Treatment: At present the site is of low ecological value. It is proposed that a Planning Application would be accompanied by a Ecology Management Plan to demonstrate how the site will achieve an ecological enhancement across the site as a result of development

Option 2 Scheme

The key features of this scheme are:

Net and gross development areas: The gross development area is 2.9 ha;

Total number and mix of dwellings: 80 dwelling units, which could include elderly/special needs housing at the southern end of the site close to the local amenities. The other dwellings would comprise mainly 2-5 bedroomed family houses to suit market conditions and also affordable houses in accordance with policy. The net density would be around 30 dwellings per ha, and the gross density would be around 25 per ha;

Access: - A single access point is shown, at the southern end of Main Road. The vehicular access junction will be located at the existing retail unit, directly to the south of the petrol filling station situated along Main Road. The retail unit is owned by Langridge Homes Ltd. The proposed site access would provide a 5.5m carriageway width and 2m wide footways on both sites of the access which would link into the existing footway provision along Main Road. Minimum visibility splays of 43m from a point 2.4m back from the give-way line are achievable in both directions from the proposed site access;

4 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council - LAPP Part 2 Prepared by GPA Ltd Proposed Residential Development for Langridge Homes Ltd on Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave

- The proposed development will generate between 50 and 60 vehicular trips during each of the peak hour periods. These figures equate to one additional vehicle on the local highway network every 60 to 75 seconds during the peak periods. The proposed development is predicted to generate a total of around 500 vehicular trips during the course of a whole day. The proposed development will not result in any capacity issues to the operation of any local junctions and will have negligible impacts on junctions further afield. - A separate pedestrian access is also shown from Church Lane which is part of the Public Footpath 15. - Main Road provides a carriageway width of between approximately 5.5m and 6.5m, and the section of Main Road running directly adjacent to the proposed development site is subject to a 30mph speed limit. Footways, part of which is a shared footpath/cycleway, and street lighting are provided along this section of Main Road. - The closest bus stops to the site are situated along Main Road, adjacent to the site, and within a walking distance of 200m from both of the proposed vehicular site access locations. The bus stops are served by regular bus routes 22, 50 and the Cotgrave Connection. The Cotgrave Connection runs at 20 minute intervals from early am until late evening Mon-Sats, and at hourly intervals on Sundays.

Sustainable Urban Drainage: In order to ensure that surface water drainage does not exceed agricultural run-off rates with an allowance for climate change, the site has been designed to incorporate a SUDS pond where storm water can gather before being released into the wider drainage network once the storm water has abated.

Landscape and boundary treatments: Existing hedges along the northern and western site boundaries will be reinforced;

Ecological Treatment: At present the site is of low ecological value. It is proposed that a Planning Application would be accompanied by an Ecology Management Plan to demonstrate how the site will achieve an ecological enhancement across the site as a result of development

5 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council - LAPP Part 2 Prepared by GPA Ltd Proposed Residential Development for Langridge Homes Ltd on Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave

4 Green Belt Assessment

The assessment of the importance of this site to the Green Belt is discussed in our representations on the Green Belt Review. This concluded that: The Option 1 proposals should have its Green Belt score adjusted downwards from 14 to 11 to reflect the fact that the impact on the Green Belt purpose to preserve the setting and special character of the historic environment is negligible, as the site is hidden from the setting of the historic core of the village and the Grade 1 listed All Saints Church by existing modern development along Church Lane. Also the character of this site is on eof countryside adjoining the village edge – and not open countryside as suggested in the assessment; and

The Option 2 proposals should have its Green Belt score adjusted downwards from 14 to 7. The impacts of development on the Green Belt purposes to check the unrestricted sprawl of settlements , to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and to preserve the setting and special character of the historic environment are significantly less than for the Option 1 proposal.

5 Benefits

The allocation of this site for housing development will deliver significant benefits:

It will appeal to local people living in Cotgrave who want to purchase a family house or downsize as the site is within walking distance of a range of community facilities;

Specifically the scheme includes provision of specialist housing for the elderly in a highly sustainable location, something which the former Cotgrave Colliery site cannot deliver due to its distance from the village centre;

Cotgrave is one of the most sustainable key settlements in Rushcliffe;

It will provide a supply of housing after 2020 when the former Cotgrave Colliey site is due for completion;

It will contribute towards a rebalancing and rejuvenation of the settlement’s population.

6 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council - LAPP Part 2 Prepared by GPA Ltd Proposed Residential Development for Langridge Homes Ltd on Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave

7 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council - LAPP Part 2 Prepared by GPA Ltd Proposed Residential Development for Langridge Homes Ltd on Land to the west of Main Road, Cotgrave

8 March 2016

Geoffrey Prince AssociatesLtd 16 Kimble Close, Knightcote, Warwickshire CV47 2SJ Telephone & Fax 01295 770772 Email [email protected]

Strategic site appraisals, feasibility studies, development plans, planning applications, appeals and public inquiries for urban and rural regeneration projects, town expansion schemes, housing, retail and Planning Policy industrial sites. Rushcliffe Borough Council Also, military, airport, tourism and waste Development Control planning. Civic Centre West Bridgford NOTTINGHAM NG2 5FE

21 March 2016 Dear Sirs

Rushcliffe Green Belt Review Consultation

I have been instructed by the landowners, Langridge Homes Limited, to make representations on the Green Belt Review Consultation.

Please therefore find attached the following: Completed Response Form; Separate statement setting our representations.

The representations are focussed on Chapter 4 Key Settlements: Bingham, Cotgrave, Keyworth, Radcliffe on Trent and Ruddington of the Rushcliffe Green Belt Review Part 2 (b), and more specifically on the assessment of Site Ref COT8 (SHLAA Ref 364) Land to the West of Main Road, Cotgrave which is in the Strategic Green Belt Area West (Land between Plumtree Road and Main Road, Cotgrave). . We should be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of these representations and keep me informed of the next steps in the LAPP Part 2 process. I am submitting separate representations on the LAPP Part 2 consultation.

Yours sincerely

Geoffrey Prince

Enc

Registered in England and Wales Reg No 4306504 Rushcliffe Green Belt Review Part 2 (b) (Draft for consultation) Response Form

Your Details Agent details (where applicable)

John Fletcher Name Geoffrey Prince Langridge Homes Ltd Address Geoffrey Prince Associates Ltd 17-21 Clumber Avenue 16 Kimble Close Sherwood Rise Knightcote Nottingham Southam NG5 1AG Warwickshire Tel 0115 9626626 CV47 2SJ E-mail 1. Green Belt Review Part 2 (b): Proposed insets for washed over villages

Do you consider the methodology for identifying the inset village Green Belt boundaries is appropriate (page 7 of the review)? If you do not, please state how the methodology for new inset boundaries could be improved.

No comment.

(please continue on a separate sheet if necessary) 2. Green Belt Review Part 2 (b): Proposed insets for washed over villages

Do you agree or disagree with the suggested inset boundaries for the settlements currently washed over? If you disagree, state why the boundary is incorrect and where the new boundary should be. Your comment should focus on the contribution the land makes to the openness of the Green Belt, long term permanence and the presence of recognisable defensible boundaries.

No comment.

(please continue on a separate sheet if necessary) 3. Green Belt Review Part 2 (b): Minor Amendments to Existing Boundaries

Do you consider the methodology for identifying minor amendments appropriate (pages 19 to 20 of the review)? If you do not, please state how the methodology for minor amendments could be improved.

No comment.

(please continue on a separate sheet if necessary) 4. Green Belt Review Part 2 (b): Minor Amendments to Existing Boundaries

Do you agree or disagree with the suggested minor amendments to existing settlement boundaries? If you disagree, please identify which minor amendment is incorrect and state why and how the minor amendment should be changed. This should be based on the contribution the land makes to the openness of the Green Belt, long term permanence and the presence of recognisable defensible boundaries.

No comment.

(please continue on a separate sheet if necessary) 5. Green Belt Review Part 2 (b): Key Settlement Review

Do you consider the methodology for assessing land around Rushcliffe’s Key Settlements against the purposes for including land within the Green Belt is appropriate (pages 39 to 44 of the review)? If you do not, please state how the methodology could be improved.

Please refer to comments attached.

(please continue on a separate sheet if necessary) 6. Green Belt Review Part 2 (b): Key Settlement Review

Do you agree or disagree with the assessment of Green Belt land around Rushcliffe’s Key Settlements against the purposes for including land within the Green Belt (pages 44 to 148 of the review)? If you disagree, state why the assessment is incorrect and provide your Green Belt score and conclusions on Green Belt importance. Your comment should focus on the land’s performance against Green Belt purposes.

Please refer to comments attached with regards to Site Ref COT8 (SHLAA Ref 364)

(please continue on a separate sheet if necessary) 7. Please provide any others comments you wish to make

(please continue on a separate sheet if necessary) Geoffrey Prince 21/03/2016 Signed: Date:

Please return by 5pm on Thursday 24 March 2016 to: Planning Policy Rushcliffe Borough Council Civic Centre, Pavilion Road West Bridgford Nottingham. NG2 5FE Or to: [email protected]

Please note that your comments can be directly entered through the Borough Council’s online consultation system: http://rushcliffe-consult.objective.co.uk/portal

Data protection: The details you submit to the Borough Council will be used in the Local Plan preparation and associated processes. Please note that comments and personal details cannot be treated as confidential and may be made available for public inspection both physically and/or through the Borough Council’s website. We may publish all names, addresses and comments received, including on our website. We will use our best endeavours to not publish signatures, personal telephone numbers or email addresses. Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

LAPP Part 2 Green Belt Assessment (January 2016) Representations submitted by GPA Ltd on behalf of Langridge Homes Ltd

I have been instructed by Langridge Homes Ltd (LH) to comment on the Rushcliffe Borough Council (GBC) Green Belt Assessment (January 2016).

My representations are focussed on Chapter 4 Key Settlements: Bingham, Cotgrave, Keyworth, Radcliffe on Trent and Ruddington of the Rushcliffe Green Belt Review (Part 2 (b), and more specifically focus on the assessment of Site Ref COT8 (SHLAA Ref 364) Land to the West of Main Road, Cotgrave which is in the Strategic Green Belt Area West (Land between Plumtree Road and Main Road, Cotgrave).

The assessment score for the Strategic Green Belt Area West was 13 (out of 20), which indicated that this area is of low –medium Green Belt importance. The assessment concluded that:

This area shares two boundaries with Cotgrave in the north west of the settlement, providing an opportunity to round the settlement off without intruding into the open countryside beyond developments along Plumtree Road and Main Road. If restricted it would not constitute urban sprawl;

Development within this area would however have a negative impact on the setting of Cotgrave’s historic core; and

As with developments south of Plumtree Road, the expansion of Cotgrave West would reduce the distance between the settlement and the main urban area. This distance will be reduced further as the strategic allocation at Tollerton is brought forward for development.

We consider that the last two of these conclusions are an over exaggeration. The impact on the setting of Cotgrave’s historic core is very much a subjective matter, and clear conclusions can only be reached on this matter following a detailed examination in the context of specific sites. With regards to the narrowing of the distance with the strategic allocation at Tollerton, some 2.5 miles from the western edge of Cotgrave, small scale development will not give rise to any perceptible change to the reduction of this gap due to changes in levels between the two settlements with a slight rise providing a clear physical separation between the two locations.

Notwithstanding the above assessment, Langridge Homes has reviewed its proposals for COT8 and is proposing two options for the development of this site (refer illustrative master plans attached):

- Option 1 (existing COT8) which extends across both fields located immediately to the north of Church Lane and west of Main Road. This scheme has a capacity for around 148 dwellings on a gross site area of 6.3 ha.

- Option 2 which only involves development on the lower field adjoining the edge of the village. This smaller scheme has a capacity for approximately 80 dwellings on a gross site area of 2.9ha.

For both options we have reviewed the Council’s Green Belt Stage 2 Assessment of the COT8 site and these assessments are set out in Tables 1 and 2 below.

1 March 2016 Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

COT8 – Option 1 Green Belt Site Assessment

With regards to Option 1 we agree with the Council’s assessment except with respect to the assessment of the Green Belt purpose of ‘preserving the setting and special character of historic settlements’. Whilst we acknowledge that the site is close to the historic core of Cotgrave and close to the Grade 1 All Saints Church any development of this site will be separated from the heritage assets by development along Church Lane which includes modern residential development and the Church Lane Nursing Home, which are not listed buildings. These developments obscure views of the church from the site although the church tower will be visible, as it should be, particularly from the upper, more distant part of the site. These views of the church tower would still remain from gardens and new roadways within any future residential development of this site. Ground level views from the church to the north of the settlement are also obscured by existing development. There are no long distance views of the church across the two fields from public vantage points including public footpaths. We therefore conclude that development of the Option 1 proposals for COT8 will not have an adverse or significant effect on the heritage assets, as suggested in the Council’s Green Belt assessment. We therefore conclude that this site should be scored 2 and not 4 for this purpose. Also we consider that the assessment of the purpose to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment is too high as the character is one of countryside adjoining the edge of the village. A score of 3 rather than 4 would be more appropriate. This reduces the overall score from 14 to 11, but still leaves it in the low-medium category.

Table 1 Green Belt Assessment of Option 1 Site

Green Belt Purpose Score Justification Our Our Justification Assessment Score Check unrestricted 2 Adjoining Cotgrave on two 2 Agree with RBC Assessment sprawl of settlements boundaries, the land is well contained within 2 small fields, hedgerows and brook to the north. The land is flat and can therefore be viewed from some distance however. Prevent merging of 1 Development would result 1 Agree with RBC Assessment settlements in a minor reduction in the distance between Cotgrave and the main urban area of Nottingham (as now defined by the strategic allocation at Tollerton). Assist in safeguarding 4 Whilst inappropriate 3 Partly agree with RBC the countryside from development has not Assessment. We consider encroachment encroached, the edge of that a score of 4 is too high, as Cotgrave is a prominent the character is one feature. The overriding countryside adjoining the character is however open edge of a village. As such the countryside score should be reduced to 3. Preserve setting and 4 The land is adjacent to 2 The land does not contain or special character of Cotgrave’s historic core, form the setting of a historic settlement which includes the listed designated asset or non-

2 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

church and several designated asset – the site is buildings of local interest. close to the All Saints Church (Grade I Listed (but the setting of the church is obscured by existing development along Church Lane including Church Farm Nursing Home. The development on this site will certainly not have an adverse or significant impact on the setting of this heritage asset Assist in urban 3 Provided Local Plan 3 If Rushcliffe adopted the same regeneration policies restrict retail uses approach as Gedling and outside the town centre, Broxtowe in their assessment Cotgrave’s town centre of Green Belt sites, then this regeneration project or purpose would be excluded the redevelopment of from the analysis as the Former Cotgrave Colliery scores would be the same for should not be jeopardised all sites (ie neutral impact on by the removal of this site Green Belt Assessments) from the Green Belt Green Belt Score 14 11 Strategic Green Belt 13 13 Assessment (Score/Importance) Low/ Low/ medium medium

COT8- Option 2 Green Belt Site Assessment

With regards to the smaller Option 2 scheme we disagree with the Council’s assessment of the COT8 site on three counts as follows:

To check unrestricted sprawl of settlements. In this option development is restricted to the lower field adjoining the urban edge of Cotgrave. As noted in the Strategic Green Belt assessment for this area this area shares two boundaries with Cotgrave in the north west of the settlement, providing an opportunity to round off the settlement off without intruding into the open countryside. By only developing in the nearest field to the edge of the village, then the expansion would be more contained than with the Option 1 proposal. We therefore consider that this site should be accorded a score of 1, compared to the Council’s score of 2 (based on the Option 1 site score).

To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. In option 2 only the lower lying field is proposed for development. The site has a ragged edge along its eastern and southern boundaries where it adjoins the edge of the village. The village edge is the overriding feature of this piece of land. Strong landscape planting including reinforcement of hedgerows will provide a strong defensible boundary to deter further outward expansion of what effectively resembles a small rounding off of the settlement in this location. Development further to the west would in any event be constrained by the Cotgrave Sewage Treatment Works, approximately 300m from this site. We therefore consider that the score for this site should be reduced from 4 to 1.

3 March 2016 Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

To preserve the setting and special character of historic settlements. Whilst we acknowledge that the site is close to the historic core of Cotgrave and close to the Grade 1 All Saints Church any development of this site will be separated from the heritage assets by development along Church Lane which includes modern residential development and the Church Lane Nursing Home, which are not listed buildings. These buildings obscure views of the church from the site from the church. although the church tower will be visible, as it should be, particularly from the upper part of the site. These views of the church tower would still remain from gardens and new roadways within any future residential development of this site. Ground level views from the church to this field will be obscured by existing development and also the low lying position of this field relatively to surrounding development. There are no long distance views of the church across the field from public vantage points including public footpaths. We therefore conclude that development of the Option 2 proposals for COT8 will not have an adverse or significant effect on the heritage assets, as suggested in the Council’s Green Belt assessment. Indeed we consider that this site scores better than the Option 1 site with regards to this Green Belt purpose. We therefore conclude that this site should be scored 1 and not 4 for this purpose.

These adjustments to the assessment scores for the Option 2 site give it an overall score of 7 (out of 20) which means it is of low Green Belt importance. As such this site must be regarded as being of the most suitable SHLAA sites for development in Cotgrave.

We set out our case for making additional allocations at Cotgrave in our representations on the LAPP Part 2.

Table 2 Green Belt Assessment of Option 2 Site

Green Belt Purpose Score Justification Our Our Justification Assessment Score Check unrestricted 2 Adjoining Cotgrave on two 1 In this option development sprawl of settlements boundaries, the land is would only take place in one well contained within 2 compact field adjoining the built small fields, hedgerows up edge of Cotgrave. The land is and brook to the north. lowlying and barely visible when The land is flat and can viewed from some distance as it therefore be viewed from appears as part of the village some distance however. edge Prevent merging of 1 Development would result 1 Agree with RBC Assessment settlements in a minor reduction in the distance between Cotgrave and the main urban area of Nottingham (as now defined by the strategic allocation at Tollerton). Assist in safeguarding 4 Whilst inappropriate 1 The site has a ragged edge along the countryside from development has not its eastern and southern encroachment encroached, the edge of boundaries where it adjoins the Cotgrave is a prominent edge of the village. The village feature. The overriding edge is the over-riding feature character is however open of this piece of land. countryside Preserve setting and 4 The land is adjacent to 1 The land does not contain or special character of Cotgrave’s historic core, form the setting of a designated

4 March 2016 Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd historic settlement which includes the listed asset or non designated asset – church and several the site is close to the All Saints buildings of local interest. Church (Grade I Listed( but the setting of the church is obscured by existing development along Church Lane including Church Farm Nursing Home, and also topography – the site is lowlying. The development on this site will certainly not have an adverse or significant impact on the setting of this heritage asset. Assist in urban 3 Provided Local Plan 3 If Rushcliffe adopted the same regeneration policies restrict retail uses approach as Gedling and outside the town centre, Broxtowe in their assessment of Cotgrave’s town centre Green Belt sites, then this regeneration project or purpose would be excluded the redevelopment of from the analysis as the scores Former Cotgrave Colliery would be the same for all sites should not be jeopardised (ie neutral impact on Green Belt by the removal of this site Assessments) from the Green Belt Green Belt Score 14 7 Strategic Green Belt 13 13 Assessment (Score/Importance) Low/ Low/ medium medium

Geoffrey Prince Geoffrey Prince Associates Limited 16 Kimble Close Knightcote Southam Warwickshire CV47 2SJ Tel 01295 770772 Mob 07767 488724 [email protected]

March 2016

5 March 2016 Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

6 March 2016

Rushcliffe Borough Council Representations prepared by GPA Ltd LAPP Part 2(b) Green Belt Review for Langridge Homes Ltd

7 March 2016