Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
Search representations
Results for Forte Developments Ltd search
New search
New search
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
QUESTION 34: Do you agree with the requirements of Policy BEX8? If not, how would you wish to see it amended?
Respondent: Forte Developments Ltd
Agent: Plainview Planning Limited
Representation Summary:
This site should be included as a sole residential allocation:
-Has potential to deliver between 26-30 dwellings (sustainable location, in easy of key services/facilities and public transport).
-The site is underused and does not constitute employment (B use classes) as defined by the Core Strategy or preferred options document.
-The Council has not produced evidence to justify mixed-use at this location.
-The site is not included within the Employment Land Review.
-A mixed-use scheme would be unviable and short/long-term market conditions dictate an office development here is not deliverable.
Additional supporting information was supplied which can be viewed here:
http://www.rother.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=28079
Full text:
1. Introduction
1.1 This representation is prepared on behalf of F Forte Developments Ltd in response to Rother District Council's 'Development and Site Allocations Local Plan' preferred options consultation document.
1.2 F Forte Developments Ltd is a privately funded company that owns and is promoting land south of Terminus Road, Bexhill-on-Sea for residential development. The site plan is contained within Appendix A.
1.3 Following its review of this representation, we respectively request that the Council amend its proposed designations to include this site as a residential allocation.
2. Policy BEX8: Land South of Terminus Road
2.1 Our client who owns the land at Terminus Road, which is cited in Policy BEX8, strongly objects to this policy designation as it runs contrary to the requirements set out in the NPPF. Our client instead would support the redevelopment of this site for residential purposes only and it has potential capacity for 26 to 30 dwellings.
2.2 Whilst the site is currently being used for car sales and a car wash, it is not currently viable or even desirable in its current use. The extant planning position for the current use places a number of highly restrictive planning conditions upon the use, in order to protect the neighbouring residential amenity, that it makes the current operations highly inefficient. It has been very difficult for the existing uses to keep within these limitations and as a result there have been a number of enforcement cases against the site and complaints from neighbours when such limitations are breached. It is not desirable for the existing use to continue at this location and a residential redevelopment would be entirely appropriate.
2.3 This proposed mixed-use designation in Policy BEX8 has not been based on up to date evidence and no assessment of development viability has been carried out.
2.4 The only reference to this site is made in Appendix 3 of the preferred options
consultation document, under the site ID BX81. This assessment has made an incorrect and misleading assessment of this land. The footnote on page 72 of the preferred options document clearly states that 'employment sites' are defined as those providing for business uses falling with Class B of the Use Classes order together with similar 'sui generis' uses. Whilst the site contains a car wash and car sales business it has not historically been designated for employment purposes. A car wash and car sales use falls under Sui Generis use and is more akin to a retail use than a Class B employment use. The land south of Terminus Road does not contain any Class B uses and therefore does not meet this criteria and has never been allocated for employment purposes. However, the assessment in Appendix 3 has wrongly stated that land south of Terminus Road is an existing employment site.
2.5 The assessment claims that this site would be well suited to a more intense business use such as offices, however there is no evidence to justify this claim. There is also no desire on the landowner's part to develop this site for office use.
2.6 Paragraph 158 of the NPPF requires each local planning authority to ensure that the Local Plan is based on adequate, up-to-date and relevant evidence about the economic, social and environmental characteristics and prospects of the area. Paragraph 160 requires local planning authorities to have a clear understanding of business needs within the economic markets operating in and across their area. Paragraph 161 requires local planning authorities to use this evidence base to assess the needs for land or floorspace for economic development. Paragraph 173 states that in pursuing sustainable development careful attention should be given to viability and costs in planmaking and decision-taking. Paragraph 182 requires a local plan to be justified through proportionate evidence.
2.7 The NPPG provides further guidance of evidence and viability. Paragraph 004
(Reference ID: 10-004-20140306) states that assessing viability requires judgements which are informed by the relevant available facts. It requires a realistic understanding of the costs and the value of development in the local area and an understanding of the operation of the market.
2.8 Paragraph 014 (Reference ID: 12-014-20140306) states that the evidence should be focused tightly on supporting and justifying the particular policies in the Local Plan. It also states that the evidence needs to inform what is in the plan and shape its development rather than being collected retrospectively. It should also be kept up-to-date.
2.9 In light of the national policy requirements, it is clear that the designation of land south of Terminus Road for a mixed-use development has not been evidenced and justified.
2.10 The 'Employment Sites Review: Background Paper', which was published in November 2016 provides a full review of the Council's existing employment sites and was included as a core evidence base document for this DPD. Paragraph 1.1 set out the function of this document:
1.1. This Study has been carried out to inform the Council's forthcoming
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan in relation to meeting the identified need for land and premises to support the economic well-being of the District. It considers the continued suitability of both existing and allocated industrial estates/areas and sites, as well as the potential of further sites, for business use.
2.11 Paragraph 9.30 of the Development and Site Allocation DPD states that a full review of existing and potential sites for employment use was carried out in tandem with looking to allocate sites, to ensure that the requirements are secured in an effective way.
2.12 This document makes no reference to land south of Terminus Road. No other evidence base document considers this site. As such it can be assumed that site does not constitute an existing employment site and is not important for the Council's employment strategy in the Development and Site Allocations DPD.
2.13 Despite the clear policy position set out in the NPPF and PPG, the Council has not undertaken any viability analysis of its preferred site allocation. Nor do they have any up to date evidence base that considers the market demand and market values for office space in Rother.
2.14 The Council has given no thought to the viability and deliverability of the mixed-use allocation on land south of Terminus Road. No discussions with the land owner has taken place about taking this site forward as a mixed use scheme. It is not the landowner's intention to develop an office-led mixed use scheme as the designation referred to in this document is not viable and as such there are deliverability concerns.
2.15 Our client accepts that the existing car sales/car wash land use represents a poor use of space and in accordance with paragraph 17 of the NPPF, should seek to encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed. Our client is committed to the redevelopment of this site, but given the short and long-term commercial market context within Bexhill-on-Sea, there is no prospect that this site could be developed for office space. This site would provide a more appropriate residential development site.
2.16 Our client therefore requests that this site be designated for residential purposes. It has the potential to deliver between 26 and 30 dwellings in a sustainable location that is within easy of a number of key services and facilities and a range of public transport options.
3. Policy DEC3: Existing Employment
Sites and Premises Effective use of existing employment sites
3.1 Our client objects to Policy DEC3 as it provides a restrictive policy that could potentially sterilise employment space, particularly in times of economic uncertainty.
3.2 Our client would instead support Option B that also gives consideration to
redevelopment of existing employment sites for housing purposes. This approach
would accord with the principles set out in paragraph 17 of the NPPF, which seeks to
encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value. Rother does not have a lot of previously developed land and the Council should be exploring all opportunities in which to deliver new development on such land.
4. Conclusion
4.1 Our client also requests that land to the south of Terminus Road be allocated for
residential development as:
- The site has the potential to deliver between 26 and 30 dwellings in a
sustainable location that is within easy of a number of key services and
facilities and a range of public transport options.
- The site is currently underused as a car sales and car wash and does not
constitute an employment site as defined by the Core Strategy or
preferred options document, i.e. it does not contain Class B use classes.
- The Council has not produced any evidence to justify a mixed-use
development at this location.
- The site is not included within the Employment Land Review assessment.
*
-A mixed-use scheme would be unviable at this location and short and
long-term market conditions dictate that an office development at this
location is not deliverable, even as part of a mixed-use scheme.
Additional supporting information was supplied which can be viewed here:
http://www.rother.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=28079
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan - Options and Preferred Options
QUESTION 17: Do you agree with the policy approach to existing employment sites and the proposed policy wording?
Respondent: Forte Developments Ltd
Agent: Plainview Planning Limited
Representation Summary:
Our client objects to Policy DEC3 as it provides a restrictive policy that could potentially sterilise employment space.
Our client would instead support Option B which gives consideration to redevelopment of employment sites for housing. This approach accords with the principles set out in paragraph 17 of the NPPF, which seeks to encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value. Rother does not have a lot of previously developed land and should be exploring all opportunities to deliver new development on such land.
Full text:
1. Introduction
1.1 This representation is prepared on behalf of F Forte Developments Ltd in response to Rother District Council's 'Development and Site Allocations Local Plan' preferred options consultation document.
1.2 F Forte Developments Ltd is a privately funded company that owns and is promoting land south of Terminus Road, Bexhill-on-Sea for residential development. The site plan is contained within Appendix A.
1.3 Following its review of this representation, we respectively request that the Council amend its proposed designations to include this site as a residential allocation.
2. Policy BEX8: Land South of Terminus Road
2.1 Our client who owns the land at Terminus Road, which is cited in Policy BEX8, strongly objects to this policy designation as it runs contrary to the requirements set out in the NPPF. Our client instead would support the redevelopment of this site for residential purposes only and it has potential capacity for 26 to 30 dwellings.
2.2 Whilst the site is currently being used for car sales and a car wash, it is not currently viable or even desirable in its current use. The extant planning position for the current use places a number of highly restrictive planning conditions upon the use, in order to protect the neighbouring residential amenity, that it makes the current operations highly inefficient. It has been very difficult for the existing uses to keep within these limitations and as a result there have been a number of enforcement cases against the site and complaints from neighbours when such limitations are breached. It is not desirable for the existing use to continue at this location and a residential redevelopment would be entirely appropriate.
2.3 This proposed mixed-use designation in Policy BEX8 has not been based on up to date evidence and no assessment of development viability has been carried out.
2.4 The only reference to this site is made in Appendix 3 of the preferred options
consultation document, under the site ID BX81. This assessment has made an incorrect and misleading assessment of this land. The footnote on page 72 of the preferred options document clearly states that 'employment sites' are defined as those providing for business uses falling with Class B of the Use Classes order together with similar 'sui generis' uses. Whilst the site contains a car wash and car sales business it has not historically been designated for employment purposes. A car wash and car sales use falls under Sui Generis use and is more akin to a retail use than a Class B employment use. The land south of Terminus Road does not contain any Class B uses and therefore does not meet this criteria and has never been allocated for employment purposes. However, the assessment in Appendix 3 has wrongly stated that land south of Terminus Road is an existing employment site.
2.5 The assessment claims that this site would be well suited to a more intense business use such as offices, however there is no evidence to justify this claim. There is also no desire on the landowner's part to develop this site for office use.
2.6 Paragraph 158 of the NPPF requires each local planning authority to ensure that the Local Plan is based on adequate, up-to-date and relevant evidence about the economic, social and environmental characteristics and prospects of the area. Paragraph 160 requires local planning authorities to have a clear understanding of business needs within the economic markets operating in and across their area. Paragraph 161 requires local planning authorities to use this evidence base to assess the needs for land or floorspace for economic development. Paragraph 173 states that in pursuing sustainable development careful attention should be given to viability and costs in planmaking and decision-taking. Paragraph 182 requires a local plan to be justified through proportionate evidence.
2.7 The NPPG provides further guidance of evidence and viability. Paragraph 004
(Reference ID: 10-004-20140306) states that assessing viability requires judgements which are informed by the relevant available facts. It requires a realistic understanding of the costs and the value of development in the local area and an understanding of the operation of the market.
2.8 Paragraph 014 (Reference ID: 12-014-20140306) states that the evidence should be focused tightly on supporting and justifying the particular policies in the Local Plan. It also states that the evidence needs to inform what is in the plan and shape its development rather than being collected retrospectively. It should also be kept up-to-date.
2.9 In light of the national policy requirements, it is clear that the designation of land south of Terminus Road for a mixed-use development has not been evidenced and justified.
2.10 The 'Employment Sites Review: Background Paper', which was published in November 2016 provides a full review of the Council's existing employment sites and was included as a core evidence base document for this DPD. Paragraph 1.1 set out the function of this document:
1.1. This Study has been carried out to inform the Council's forthcoming
Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan in relation to meeting the identified need for land and premises to support the economic well-being of the District. It considers the continued suitability of both existing and allocated industrial estates/areas and sites, as well as the potential of further sites, for business use.
2.11 Paragraph 9.30 of the Development and Site Allocation DPD states that a full review of existing and potential sites for employment use was carried out in tandem with looking to allocate sites, to ensure that the requirements are secured in an effective way.
2.12 This document makes no reference to land south of Terminus Road. No other evidence base document considers this site. As such it can be assumed that site does not constitute an existing employment site and is not important for the Council's employment strategy in the Development and Site Allocations DPD.
2.13 Despite the clear policy position set out in the NPPF and PPG, the Council has not undertaken any viability analysis of its preferred site allocation. Nor do they have any up to date evidence base that considers the market demand and market values for office space in Rother.
2.14 The Council has given no thought to the viability and deliverability of the mixed-use allocation on land south of Terminus Road. No discussions with the land owner has taken place about taking this site forward as a mixed use scheme. It is not the landowner's intention to develop an office-led mixed use scheme as the designation referred to in this document is not viable and as such there are deliverability concerns.
2.15 Our client accepts that the existing car sales/car wash land use represents a poor use of space and in accordance with paragraph 17 of the NPPF, should seek to encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed. Our client is committed to the redevelopment of this site, but given the short and long-term commercial market context within Bexhill-on-Sea, there is no prospect that this site could be developed for office space. This site would provide a more appropriate residential development site.
2.16 Our client therefore requests that this site be designated for residential purposes. It has the potential to deliver between 26 and 30 dwellings in a sustainable location that is within easy of a number of key services and facilities and a range of public transport options.
3. Policy DEC3: Existing Employment
Sites and Premises Effective use of existing employment sites
3.1 Our client objects to Policy DEC3 as it provides a restrictive policy that could potentially sterilise employment space, particularly in times of economic uncertainty.
3.2 Our client would instead support Option B that also gives consideration to
redevelopment of existing employment sites for housing purposes. This approach
would accord with the principles set out in paragraph 17 of the NPPF, which seeks to
encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value. Rother does not have a lot of previously developed land and the Council should be exploring all opportunities in which to deliver new development on such land.
4. Conclusion
4.1 Our client also requests that land to the south of Terminus Road be allocated for
residential development as:
- The site has the potential to deliver between 26 and 30 dwellings in a
sustainable location that is within easy of a number of key services and
facilities and a range of public transport options.
- The site is currently underused as a car sales and car wash and does not
constitute an employment site as defined by the Core Strategy or
preferred options document, i.e. it does not contain Class B use classes.
- The Council has not produced any evidence to justify a mixed-use
development at this location.
- The site is not included within the Employment Land Review assessment.
*
-A mixed-use scheme would be unviable at this location and short and
long-term market conditions dictate that an office development at this
location is not deliverable, even as part of a mixed-use scheme.
Additional supporting information was supplied which can be viewed here:
http://www.rother.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=28079
For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our
help guide.
