OPEN SESSION: There were 20 members of the public present, regarding agenda items.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING, TOWN & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
Held on Friday 13th July 2012 at 2.00pm
Cllr Mark Steele (Vice-Chairman) Cllr Neville Chard Cllr Steve Rippon-Swaine until 2.20pm Cllr Stephanie Stokes Cllr Angela Wiseman
IN ATTENDANCE: Jo Stannard, Deputy Town Clerk Claire Perrens, Meetings Administrator Sam Poulter, Student Advisor Jenny Baldwin, Student Advisor Cllr Ford Cllr Heron until 2.20pm Terry Simpson, Town Clerk until 2.30pm
The Deputy Town Clerk reported that apologies for absence had been received from Cllr Burgess-Kennar. In the absence of the Chairman, Cllr Steele chaired the meeting.
P/4971 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Cllr Stokes declared a personal interest in a planning application – see P/4974 below.
P/4972 MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Meeting held on 22nd June 2012, having been circulated, be approved and signed as a correct record.
The Town Mayor introduced the Clerk and two Members of Devizes Town Council who were attending to observe the meeting, in order to see how the Student Advisor scheme worked in practice.
The Chairman warmly welcomed the Devizes delegation, and also the 13 children and 2 teachers present from Ringwood Junior School, present for the first agenda item.
P/4973 PRESENTATION FROM RINGWOOD JUNIOR SCHOOL
Members had previously received copies of original letters written by Junior School students regarding the empty shops in the Town and suggestions for improvements. The students were encouraged to add further comments. They were concerned that the current range of shops included little for children in the way of clothing, toys and pet shops. Some felt that if the Town had more large well-known stores, more shoppers would be attracted to visit, which would benefit the smaller shops. They also felt that if there was more choice in Ringwood, they and their parents would no longer need to Page 1 of 4 travel to other shopping centres, saving petrol and bringing custom to Ringwood. The fact that the rent for shops in Ringwood is high, and many retailers do not survive long, was highlighted.
Cllr Wiseman congratulated the students on their letters, and their excellent handwriting. There was some further discussion about the impact of internet shopping on high street shops. On the issue of lack of parking, one student suggested that a multi-storey car park could be considered. Sam Poulter, Student Advisor, asked whether the students agreed there was a lack of entertainment for young people. It was generally agreed that a cinema, games arcade and more festivals and events would be welcomed.
The teacher commented that the Year 3 students had recently conducted a survey of visitors to the Town, which revealed that most people were attracted to the Furlong Centre, but there was a lack of awareness of the other shops in the Town Centre.
The Chairman congratulated the teachers and students on their contribution and said they would always be welcome to attend any of the Town Council committee meetings if they wished to raise an issue. The delegation from the School then left the meeting.
There was some further debate about what practical steps could be taken to address the concerns of the school students. Although the Town Council has no direct powers over matters such as the rent charged for retail units, the Town Clerk suggested that the letters provided an extremely valuable source of evidence. They could be included in the Council’s presentation at the Public Examination into New Forest District Council Sites and Development Management Plan, in support of this Council’s objections to the Plan P/4953 – 27.04.12 - refers.
Cllr Wiseman voiced concerns about the suggestion there should be more large stores. As a market town, Ringwood’s attraction lay in the artisan stores. Cllr Chard stressed the importance of retaining the historic character which makes Ringwood unique. The Town Clerk said that it should be understood that the proposed ‘retail space’ in the District Council’s long-term strategy was unspecified. It would not necessarily be a large supermarket, this would depend on market forces. The District Council had now recognized the importance of future retail development as close as possible to the Town Centre.
RECOMMENDED: That the letters of the Ringwood Junior School students on empty shops in Town be put forward as evidence as part of the Town Council’s response to the New Forest District Council Sites and Development Management Plan at the Public Examination.
ACTION Jo Stannard
The Chairman congratulated Sam Poulter and Jenny Baldwin on completing a year as Student Advisors. He noted that both hoped to be appointed for a second year. He presented them with certificates of recognition, signed by the Town Mayor.
P/4974 PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Cllr Stokes declared a personal interest in Planning Application 12/98896 as both she and the applicant are school governors.
Page 2 of 4
Members considered the planning applications as detailed in Annex A attached.
Application No 12/98820 18 Seymour Road – raising of roof in association with new second floor; side dormer; rooflights; two-storey rear extension
The applicant, Mr Steve Simpson, was present to comment. There had been objections to the original plans for extension some ten years before, but he said that he had spoken to his neighbours on each side of 18 Seymour Road and they were happy with the current proposals. After some further discussion, Members agreed that the current proposals appeared appropriate and the observation as shown in Annex A was agreed.
RESOLVED: That the observations summarised in Annex A be submitted.
ACTION Claire Perrens
P/4975 PARKING STANDARDS
Members considered the New Forest District (Outside the National Park) Local Development Framework Draft Supplementary Planning Document: Parking Standards – see Annex B attached.
RESOLVED: 1) That the Council’s response highlight the need for more cycle parking stands in the main car park, especially at the new Ringwood Gateway building; and 2) The possibility of providing parking for disability scooters be put forward.
ACTION Jo Stannard
P/4976 PLANNING APPEALS BY TOWN AND PARISH COUNCILS
Members considered the report attached as Annex C regarding the Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Bill. After some discussion, Members agreed that the current planning system worked well and they did not wish to support the campaign for local councils to have the same right of planning appeal as developers.
RESOLVED: That the campaign be not supported.
ACTION Jo Stannard
P/4977 NAVITUS BAY WIND PARK
Members considered the consultation with respect to the onshore cable route as detailed in Annex D.
RESOLVED: That in view of the proximity of the onshore cable route to the parish boundary, the Council respond to the consultation to ensure that the ground is fully reinstated following construction.
Page 3 of 4
ACTION Jo Stannard
P/4978 SAFETY MEASURES ON THE A31 WORKING PARTY
Members considered the notes of the meeting held on 28th June 2012 – Annex E. The Deputy Town Clerk commented that the A31 Ringwood Section report (Annex F) did not currently contain reference to a future housing development proposed for Ringwood, which would result in more traffic and potential problems at the junctions to the A31. It was agreed that this could either be added to the document or raised during discussions with the Highways Agency, once a meeting had been arranged.
Jenny Baldwin, Student Advisor, said she had recently passed her driving test, and found the slip roads at Ringwood ‘horrific’. Sam Poulter added that all the slip roads at Ringwood were too short. It was noted that all age groups were experiencing problems, experienced as well as new drivers.
The Deputy Town Clerk mentioned the strategic plans for a third lane, which might improve the problem, but it was agreed that due to the high costs involved, it was very unlikely this would happen in the next few years.
The Chairman commented on the fact that this was a comprehensive and impressive document and Cllr Thierry should be congratulated.
RECOMMENDED: 1) That the notes of the Safety Measures on the A31 Working Party held on 28th June 2012, and the proposals therein, be approved; and 2) That the A31 Ringwood Section report (see Annex F) be approved, with the suggested addition of reference to the impact of future housing developments on traffic and congestion.
ACTION C Perrens
There being no further business, the Chairman closed the meeting at 3.25pm.
RECEIVED APPROVED 25th July 2012 17th August 2012
TOWN MAYOR COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN
Note: The text in the Action Boxes above does not form part of these minutes.
Page 4 of 4
Annex B
REPORT TO PLANNING, TOWN & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 13TH JULY 2012
NEW FOREST DISTRICT (OUTSIDE THE NATIONAL PARK) LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK DRAFT SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT: PARKING STANDARDS
1. Current saved residential parking standards for the New Forest District (outside the National Park) are detailed in the “The Provision of Car Parking Space in Residential Development (outside the New Forest National Park)” Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) adopted in February 2008. That SPD sets out guidance to developers and others on the provision of car parking space on residential developments and was originally supplementary to Policies DW-E1 and DW-T9 of the New Forest District Local Plan (First Alteration) (August 2005). It also had regard to the Housing design, density and character SPD (April 2006) and to Hampshire County Council’s document: Hampshire Parking Strategy and Standards (Summer 2002).
2. When the District Council’s Core Strategy was adopted in 2009, Local Plan policies DW-E1 and DW-T9 were not saved. The new development plan policy to which the Parking Standards SPD provides supplementary guidance is Core Strategy Policy CS24: Transport Considerations.
3. It is now proposed that a new Parking Standards SPD is prepared to provide one composite document detailing standards for all development types in the New Forest District (outside the National Park). The proposed new standards are closely related to previous standards in operation as the District Council considers that the current standards have generally operated well. An extensive review of existing car parking standards is not considered to be necessary.
4. The proposed standards, once adopted, will only apply to New Forest District outside the National Park. The New Forest National Park Authority has its own standards.
5. The consultation draft Parking Standards SPD (attached to this report as an appendix) incorporates standards for provision of cycle and vehicle parking for all development types. It also identifies thresholds for travel plans and transport assessments. It has been prepared in consultation with relevant officers at both the District and County Councils.
6. It is proposed to carry forward, unchanged, the parking standards for residential development from the 2008 SPD. The non-residential standards are largely based on current HCC recommended standards, although it is not proposed to prescribe different levels of parking between town centres and peripheral locations. This is to help ensure that town centres remain attractive locations for development and are not undermined by easier parking elsewhere.
7. The new parking standards aim to encourage efficient use of land by preventing over or under provision of parking, as both scenarios can have severe road safety hazards or lead to serious environmental damage.
8. The production of one composite policy document covering all development types will help provide clarity for developers and other interested parties.
Page 1 of 2 9. Once adopted, the Parking Standards SPD will replace the current SPD “The Provision of Car Parking Space in Residential Development (outside the New Forest National Park)” (February 2008).
10. It is RECOMMENDED that Members consider the draft Parking Standards SPD and that any comments raised at the Committee meeting form the basis of the Council’s response.
For further information, contact:
Jo Stannard Deputy Town Clerk
Direct Dial: 01425 484721 Switchboard: 01425 473883 [email protected]
Page 2 of 2
Annex C
REPORT TO PLANNING, TOWN & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 13TH JULY 2012
PLANNING APPLICATIONS (APPEALS BY TOWN AND PARISH COUNCILS) BILL
1. The Council has received a copy of a letter from Brockenhurst Parish Council (Appendix 1) to two MPs regarding the Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Bill (Appendix 2).
2. The letter appears to suggest that the Bill has strong support from local councils and from the Hampshire Association of Local Councils (HALC) and the National Association of Local Councils (NALC). However, your officers do not recall having been consulted on this matter.
3. Clarification has been sought from NALC and it appears that local councils were not consulted and that support for the Bill was largely driven by the Suffolk Association of Local Councils, with help from NALC and a few other County Associations (including HALC).
4. It should be noted that the Bill was not adopted by an MP, so will not be progressing through Parliament. However, NALC is now seeking to alter the Sustainable Communities Act 2007 to achieve the goal of giving local councils the same right of planning appeal as developers.
5. A copy of the letter from Brockenhurst PC has been circulated to Members, and the following observations have been made:
i) In principle, people with local knowledge should have greater influence, as supported by the Localism Act 2011. However, increased power brings greater responsibility. ii) The planning authority must determine applications based on policy, both national and local. Planning authorities employ professional officers to interpret these policies and evaluate applications. The majority of local councils do not have officers with these skills. iii) The proposal could increase the time taken to determine applications. This in turn could have a negative impact on economic activity. In addition, local councils would need to shoulder the responsibility for delivering regional and national targets. iv) A planning system that could be stalled or dictated by the smallest of the administrative authorities could upset the balance; ensuring that each development fits perfectly in the local environment could have a detrimental impact on the housing and economic needs of the wider area. v) If the appeal is unsuccessful, local councils would be liable for the costs associated with the appeal, which could amount to thousands of pounds.
6. One suggestion to make the proposal work would be for the planning authority to indicate its decision to the local council. If the local council felt strongly that an application should be refused but the planning authority thinks otherwise, then providing the local council provides a bond to underwrite all costs associated with the planning authority backing the local council, then it could take the local council decision.
Page 1 of 2 7. It is RECOMMENDED that, in principle, the campaign for local councils to have the same right of planning appeal as developers could be supported, with the strict understanding that the parish or town council submitting the appeal should be responsible for all associated costs.
For further information, contact:
Jo Stannard Deputy Town Clerk
Direct Dial: 01425 484721 Switchboard: 01425 473883 [email protected]
Page 2 of 2
Appendix 1 BROCKENHURST PARISH COUNCIL The Parish Council Office Highwood Road, Brockenhurst SO42 7RY T: (01590) 622829 W: www.brockenhurst.gov.uk E: [email protected]
Peter Aldous MP House of Commons London SW1A 0AA. [email protected]
Neil Carmichael MP House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. [email protected]
25th June 2012
Dear Mr. Aldous and Mr. Carmichael
Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Bill
On behalf of Brockenhurst Parish Council I am writing to congratulate you on your success in the Private Members’ Ballot and to request that you adopt the Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Bill. It has widespread support amongst town and parish councils (local councils) in the country and is a major community empowerment policy of the National Association of Local Councils, representing 9,000 local councils in England and Wales.
As you will be aware local councils have a statutory right to be notified of planning applications and they serve the important function of informing the community about those planning applications, acting as their voice in making recommendations on applications to the planning authority.
This Early Day Motion (2824) was successfully tabled by Martin Caton on 6th March 2012 with nearly 60 signatories across all parties: “That this House supports the Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Bill introduced by the Hon. Member for Gower with the support of the Norfolk, Suffolk, Kent, Hampshire and Hertfordshire associations of local councils; notes that the Bill would give town and parish councils the right of appeal against the granting of planning permissions to which they had objected and that this policy is backed by the National Association of Local Councils in England and by One Voice Wales/Un Llais Cymru which represents Welsh town and community councils; and hopes that the Bill will become law soon.” Appendix 1 Brockenhurst Parish Council urges you to support this Bill to give local people a proper voice in the planning system and an opportunity to work with developers to shape communities within a fair framework.
Here in the New Forest, as in most National Parks, the planning function is currently administered by a non-directly-elected National Park Authority. We therefore believe the right of appeal is especially important to us in reflecting the needs of local populace.
Thank you, in anticipation.
Our contact for support to you on this matter is Cllr Ron Bailey [email protected] or [email protected] (tel. 07951 761 229). Cllr Bailey has had considerable experience in helping MPs to be successful with Ballot Bills.
Yours sincerely
Mary Pattison (Mrs.) Brockenhurst Parish Clerk
Copies
HALC NFALC Dr Julian Lewis MP
Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Bill
A BILL
To allow town and parish councils the right to appeal against the granting of planning permission in their area in certain circumstances; to make provisions for Wales; and for connected purposes.
Presented by Martin Caton, supported by Philip Davies, Mr Elfyn Llwyd, Andrew George, Caroline Lucas, Bob Blackman, Paul Flynn, Kate Hoey, Robert Halfon, Steve McCabe, Kelvin Hopkins and Sir Bob Russell.
Ordered, by The House of Commons, to be Printed, 6 March 2012.
© Parliamentary copyright House of Commons 2012 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through The National Archives website at www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/our-services/parliamentary-licence-information.htm Enquiries to The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU; email: [email protected]
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS LONDON — THE STATIONERY OFFICE LIMITED Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery Office Limited £x.xx
Bill 314 (xxxxxx) 55/1
xxxbarxxx Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Bill 1
A BILL
TO
Allow town and parish councils the right to appeal against the granting of planning permission in their area in certain circumstances; to make provisions for Wales; and for connected purposes.
E IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present BParliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—
1 Rights of town and parish councils to appeal against the granting of planning permission (1) A town or parish council shall have the right to appeal against the granting of planning permission in its area in the circumstances stated in subsection (2). (2) The circumstances referred to in subsection (1) are— 5 (a) that the town or parish council has recommended on planning grounds that an application for planning permission in their area should be rejected by the local planning authority; and (b) the local planning authority has granted the application. (3) In this section a recommendation on planning grounds means a 10 recommendation based upon— (a) material considerations as specified by planning law; or (b) any other considerations that may be specified in regulations by the Secretary of State. (4) A statutory instrument containing regulations under this section is subject to 15 annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament. (5) Any appeal pursuant to this Act must be made within 6 weeks of the granting of the application. (6) The costs of any appeal made pursuant to this section shall be paid by the unsuccessful party. 20
Bill 314 55/1 2 Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Bill 2 Application to Wales The Welsh Assembly may make a statutory instrument applying this Act to town and community councils, subject to such modifications as may be specified in the instrument.
3 Short title, commencement and extent 5 (1) This Act may be cited as the Planning Applications (Appeals by Town and Parish Councils) Act 2012. (2) This Act comes into force on the day on which it is passed. (3) This Act extends to England and Wales.
Annex D
REPORT TO PLANNING, TOWN & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE 13TH JULY 2012
NAVITUS BAY WIND PARK
1. Attached is a copy of the Non Technical Summary of the Preliminary Environmental Information 2 (PEI2), which is currently the subject of formal pre-application consultation. The document gives a summary of the proposed Wind Park and associated infrastructure, and the process that will be followed prior to submission of the application for a Development Consent Order.
2. Members received a presentation on the proposals at a meeting of the Full Council on 25th April 2012. Since then, the Onshore Cable route has been released. It should be noted that the cable route does not enter the parish of Ringwood, although it comes close to the southern boundary.
3. The full consultation document consists of 181 pages and is available to view in the office or online at http://www.navitusbaywindpark.co.uk/news- detail.aspx?newsID=526.
4. In view of the proximity of the onshore cable route to the parish boundary, it is RECOMMENDED that the Council should respond to the consultation to ensure that the ground is fully reinstated following construction. Members will recall that, at the meeting on 25th April, it was stated that it had been proven with previous schemes that habitat and species regenerated very well, land would be reinstated back to its former use and farming and general access could continue.
For further information, contact:
Jo Stannard Deputy Town Clerk
Direct Dial: 01425 484721 Switchboard: 01425 473883 [email protected]
Page 1 of 1 Annex E
Ringwood Town Council
Safety Measures on the A31 Working Party
Notes of a Meeting held on 28th June 2012 at 2pm
Present: Cllr Thierry (Chairman), Cllr Ford, Cllr Wiseman, Cllr Stokes (Vice-Chairman), Cllr Chard, Cllr Rippon-Swaine
In Attendance: C Perrens, Meetings Administrator
1. There were no apologies for absence
2. The draft Report ‘A31 Ringwood Section’ prepared by Cllrs Thierry and Ford was considered in detail.
Cllr Thierry reported that the petition was proving popular in the town. The local MP Desmond Swayne was to be asked to support the petition. Support would also be sought from the District and County Council.
Information obtained by Cllr Woodifield from the crashmaps website (accidents 2005- 2010) was reviewed and it was agreed that this would be adequate to replace the data from 2007. It was noticeable that the number of accidents on the St Leonards stretch of the A31 (where the speed limit is 50mph) was less than at Ringwood.
It was agreed that the possibility of traffic lights at the junction with the A338 should be included in the report, in order to relieve congestion and improve safety.
There were a number of anomalies along the A31 at Ringwood, such as unused bus stops and out of date pedestrian signs.
AGREED: MT to finalise the document and provide CP with a digital copy on 5th July – in order for colour copies to be printed to go out with the Planning Committee Agenda for the meeting on 13th July, for recommendation to Full Council on 25th July.
AGREED: A copy of the final document and a request for a letter of support to be sent to local councils to include Ferndown, Burley, Bransgore, Ellingham, Harbridge & Ibsley, Verwood, St Leonards & St Ives and Fordingbridge.
AGREED: Although the deadline for the petition is 30th June, a copy will be kept available for signature at Ringwood Gateway, after this date ‐ CP. All ~Wo od Section
Vtiony Ringwood Towfl unciI
S Council Motion in the names of Councillor Christine Ford and Councillor Michael Thierry
That Ringwood Town Council, having deep concerns related to the number of vehicle accidents on the urban stretch of the A31 in Hampshire from Picket Post to the Ashley Heath interchange, and having regard to public opinion, petitions the Highways Authority to once again review, in consultation with this Council, measures which implemented, would have a beneficial impact on the accident rate on that section of the A31.