olney neighbourhood plan · 2015. 8. 28. · it will guide the future development ... neighbourhood...

Olney Neighbourhood Plan

Site Allocations Plan - Consultation

OLNEY TOWN COUNCIL

August 2015

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

There are technical aspects to planning which may present challenges for those unfamiliar with the

planning system. The table below is a simplified explanation of the key terms in the Document. A

comprehensive glossary of planning terms can be found in Annex 2 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/

Term Definition

Affordable housing Social rented, affordable rented and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market. Eligibility is determined with regard to local incomes and local house prices

Community Right to Build Order

CRtBO allows a community to draw up an Order which, if supported in a local referendum, enables small local development to go ahead without going through the normal planning application process and can be used to ensure that affordable housing remains affordable in perpetuity

Core Strategy The Milton Keynes Core Strategy was adopted in July 2013. It will guide the future development of the Borough and contains strategic policies and sets the framework for future detailed policies and Neighbourhood Plans

Intermediate housing Homes for sale and rent provided at a cost above social rent, but below market levels subject to the criteria in the Affordable Housing definition above. These can include shared equity (shared ownership and equity loans), other low cost homes for sale and intermediate rent, but not affordable rented housing

NPPF National Planning Policy Framework is a document setting out the national government’s main policies on planning.

Plan:MK Plan:MK will be the new local plan for Milton Keynes which, once adopted, will determine how much new development is needed and where it should go, and include detailed policies that will be used when making decisions on planning applications.

Section 106 Section 106 agreements, are legally enforceable obligations entered into under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to mitigate the impacts of a development proposal.

Settlement Boundary The dividing line, or boundary, between areas of built/urban development (the settlement), and non-urban or rural development – the open countryside.

http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/

OLNEY NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION PAPER

SITE ALLOCATIONS PLAN

WHAT IS NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING?

Neighbourhood planning gives communities direct power to develop a shared vision for their

neighbourhood and shape the development and growth of their local area. Local people are able to

choose where they want new homes, shops and offices to be built, have their say on what those new

buildings should look like and what infrastructure should be provided, and grant planning permission

for the new buildings they want to see go ahead. Neighbourhood planning provides a powerful set of

tools for local people to ensure that they get the right types of development for their community when

the ambition of the neighbourhood is aligned with the strategic needs and priorities of the wider local

area.

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT?

The Steering Group set up by the Town Council is developing the Neighbourhood Plan for Olney which

will cover all the issues that were raised in the questionnaire that came out last autumn. The plan will

be issued later in draft form so that you will be able to comment on all the policies that will be

proposed. This Community Consultation Paper deals only with the number of dwellings to be included

in the plan, the location of these dwellings and the location of sites earmarked for employment. Your

responses will give the Steering Group an important guide on how to proceed with the plan, and will

be combined with the results of our obligatory consultations with landowners and their agents to

produce proposals that are both acceptable to the community and that are also deliverable.

CONTENTS:

1. Housing numbers

2. Proposed Housing Numbers

3. Site Locations

4. Additional sites

5. Preferred options for housing

6. Employment

7. Preferred option for employment

8. Preferred option for retail

9. Consultation questions

HOUSING NUMBERS:

MILTON KEYNES PLANNING REQUIREMENTS:

In the autumn of 2014, the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group issued a questionnaire to all the

households in Olney. It said that Olney had to identify sites for 325 – 350 homes to be built by 2031. The

figure quoted in the questionnaire was Olney’s share of the total to be built in the rural areas as specified

by the Milton Keynes Council (MKC) Core Strategy, and based on previous delivery.

Since that time, Newport Pagnell, in developing its Neighbourhood Plan, has proposed to develop the

Tickford estate which will give it far more houses than it needs to fulfil its share of the rural total.

MKC’s current position is that the additional houses planned for Newport Pagnell which may affect the

rural total ‘will not be developed over the short term’, and ‘there is no certainty the site will be allocated

in the near future’. MKC have indicated that in these circumstances it is difficult for them to provide an

exact figure for the number of houses required in Olney. The advice we received was that ‘there

continues to be a need to allocate a range of deliverable housing sites in Olney. MKC have mentioned

the figure of 200 to 250 homes but said it is up to the Olney Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group to make

the decision on the number of houses.

The Steering Group have taken into account the evidence gathered through the public consultation

undertaken in November 2014 and the Housing Needs Assessment from March 2015. The Group has

also considered the preliminary fact finding discussions with landowners or their agents, and carried out

our own assessment of each site.

We want to emphasise that the important issues that were raised in all the consultations about the need

for community infrastructure are being considered by the Steering Group and proposals will be included

in the draft Neighbourhood Plan.

The analysis of the questionnaire responses was carried out independently of the Steering Group by

Community Impact Bucks and can be accessed on line at OlneyPlan.com or can be inspected at the

Council Offices. Our Site Assessments can be accessed on the website.

OTHER FACTORS TO CONSIDER:

1 It is generally acknowledged that there is a national housing shortage, and that there is a buoyant

market for houses in Olney.

2 In parallel to the preparation of the Neighbourhood Plan by Olney Town Council, Milton Keynes

Council are working on their new Local Plan entitled Plan:MK, the successor to the Core Strategy. As

part of the preparation of Plan:MK, they are also preparing a Site Allocations Plan. Their view is that

they need a plan in place in case the Neighbourhood Plan does not get adopted. The adoption of a

Neighbourhood Plan lets local people decide on the location and number of homes rather than have

the location and number imposed from outside.

3 The adoption of the Plan gives protection from developers’ applications for unallocated sites.

http://olneyplan.com/

4 The questionnaire responses show that there is a strong demand from residents for small and

affordable homes for young people and downsizers. It is a requirement that 30% of all homes on all

new developments are affordable. Thus this demand for affordable homes can only be met if there

are a larger number of homes built for sale on the open market.

5 There is also a strong demand that these affordable homes be reserved for local people.

6 A substantial number of houses would yield significant amounts of Section 106 money, the levy that

is payable on all new developments. A proportion of this would be retained for use in the town and

would be used for infrastructure improvements.

PROPOSED HOUSING NUMBERS

Our recommendations based upon the above are:

• That sites are allocated to provide a total of 300 dwellings up to the end of the plan period in 2031,

with 90 of these being affordable dwellings and the remainder being sold on the open market.

• That the affordable dwellings be reserved for local people.

• That a proportion of the affordable dwellings be covered by a Community Right to Build Order to

ensure that they are reserved for local people in perpetuity.

SITE LOCATIONS:

All of the seven possible sites A – G are listed below with information from the answers to the public

questionnaire, and the September 2014 Site Allocations Plan consultation document, issued by MKC. We

have carried out a desktop assessment of all sites against the following criteria:

Access, proximity to schools, doctors, town centre, recreation space, impact from sewage works, and

impact on landscape/views.

Where available a summary of landowners or their agents’ comments are included.

SITE A – SOUTH OF LAVENDON ROAD

Approximate capacity: 60 homes

Questionnaire results: Yes – 294 (3rd out of 7)

No - 200 (3rd out of 7)

Site Allocations Plan Summary:

The site is a greenfield site in an area of attractive landscape. However, it is well located to the existing

settlement and close to facilities. There are potential issues on the site including, flooding and wildlife.

Site Assessment: No major constraints to development.

Owner/agent: A preliminary plan has been produced showing a 50 house development. A

topographical survey, ecological survey, and a flood risk assessment (1 in 200

years including climate change) have been carried out.

SITE B – WEST OF WARRINGTON ROAD


Questionnaire results: Yes – 236 (6th out of 7)

No - 227 (1st out of 7)


The site is a greenfield site and not well-located to the existing residential development. It has few

constraints though, and is sizeable enough to make a significant contribution to the existing housing

stock.

Site Assessment: Visual impact on gateway entrance to town. Proximity to sewage works a major

constraint to residential use. Separated from residential boundary.

Owner/agent: Preliminary proposals include a mixture of commercial and housing

development with perhaps a care home.

Sewage Works: Proximity of site to sewage works needs to be carefully considered.

Anglian Water state that the process of the Water Recycling Centre is inherently

prone to short periods of relatively strong odorous emissions, against which

there is little practical mitigation.

SITE C – EAST OF YARDLEY ROAD



No - 227 (1st out of 7)


The site is a part greenfield / part brownfield site which is currently allocated for employment use.

Development on the site would be isolated from the existing settlement while there may be constraints

in terms of access, and the neighbouring sewage works.

Site Assessment: Loss of employment land. Proximity to sewage works a major constraint to

residential use. Separated from residential boundary.

Owner/agent: Outline planning consent was granted for 33 dwellings on the eastern end of

the site, adjacent to the office developments. Outline planning consent was

refused for a further 33 dwellings on the western end of the site.

Sewage Works: Proximity of site to sewage works needs to be carefully considered.

Anglian Water state that the process of the Water Recycling Centre is inherently

prone to short periods of relatively strong odorous emissions, against which

there is little practical mitigation.

SITE D – SOUTH WEST OF YARDLEY ROAD


Questionnaire results: Yes – 396 (1st out of 7)

No - 104 (7th out of 7)

Site Allocations Plan Summary: (also applies to sites E and G)

The sites are greenfield with an attractive landscape and notable species designation. Their large size

means a sustainable community with its own facilities would be deliverable. Due to the designations

they may be more sustainable if considered in part (i.e. without the constraints presented by the

southern site G, which has the greatest visual/landscape impact on the river valley and views from

Weston Underwood).


Owner/agent: Detailed studies on highways and transport, ecology and landscape for all their

three sites have been prepared.

SITE E – ASPREYS NORTH END


Questionnaire results: Yes – 327 (2nd out of 7)

No - 150 (6th out of 7)

Site Allocations Plan Summary: See Site D Above


Owner/agent: Detailed studies on highways and transport, ecology and landscape for all their


SITE F – ASPREYS NORTH OF SCHOOL


Questionnaire results: Yes - 286 (4th out of 7)

No - 176 (5th out of 7)


The site is a greenfield site and is well located in terms of existing development. It is within walking

distance of town centre facilities.

Site Assessment: Impact on ridge line to the west of town. Could constrain future expansion

needs of school.

SITE G – ASPREYS SOUTH END



No - 196 (4th out of 7)

Site Allocations Plan Summary: See Site D Above

Site Assessment: Landscape impact on River Great Ouse valley, and views to and from Weston

Underwood.

Owner/Agent: Detailed studies on highways and transport, ecology and landscape for all their


Least desirable of sites D, E and G due to its visual impact on the landscape.

ADDITIONAL SITES

After our initial questionnaire had been completed, MKC issued a ‘Call for Sites’. As a result, three

potential additional sites have come forward. One of the sites is small and not of a sufficient size to be

included in the Neighbourhood Plan. The other two are:

RIVERSIDE:


Site Assessment: Site lies predominantly within Flood Zone 3

Owner/Agent: Development would be restricted to those areas outside the flood plain.

LAND WEST OF OLNEY


Site Allocations Plan Summary: The site is a greenfield site west of Sites D and E.

Site Assessment: Outside the protected bypass route, and is physically separate from the town.

PREFERRED OPTIONS

PREFERRED OPTIONS FOR HOUSING

Option 1

This involves the part allocation of Sites D & E for a phased development of up to 300 homes (including

30% affordable), open space, children’s play area & a convenience retail outlet on site D as shown in the

plan below.

Reason: With the exception of Sites B and C, there are no major constraints to development on any

of the sites.

Sites D and E are the two most preferred sites of the public, and also the two least

unpreferred sites. They therefore have most public support.

Choosing a part development of both sites, will create a more connected development

adjacent to the existing urban boundary, closer to facilities in the town centre.

It will also allow for two access points, one on Yardley Road, and the other on Aspreys. It

will allow for better connected footpath links to the town and local schools.

Option 2

Involves the part allocation of Sites D & E as in Option A, but for a smaller development of up to 250

dwellings (including 75 affordable homes), open space, children’s play area, and a convenience retail

outlet on site D as shown in the plan below.

The remainder of the 300 homes requirement will also be delivered by a 50 dwelling development on

site A (including 15 affordable homes).

Reason: With the exception of Sites B and C, there are no major constraints to development on any

of the sites.

Site A benefits from its proximity and connectivity to the town centre, compared to sites

along Aspreys. It will also be a natural infill site if the Sainsburys supermarket is built on the

opposite side of Lavendon Road.

ALTERNATIVE APPROACH for SITE A

An emerging idea is that we allocate Site A for a mixed development of 50 smaller dwellings to meet

local needs, with a particular emphasis on sheltered and retirement homes. Our independent analysis

concluded that there was a strong demand for such housing. For this idea to be taken forward would

require the agreement of the landowner to this approach.

As noted this document only covers housing numbers and location and the allocation of employment

sites. The independent analysis of the questionnaire concluded ‘that the majority of the people who

responded support a mix of housing development in the town. The most popular choices, almost

equally supported were:

Smaller homes for elderly downsizers, for sale on the open market

Sheltered homes

Affordable homes for local people.

These factors will be taken fully into account during the next stage of the process which is the

production of the draft of the complete Neighbourhood Plan.

PREFERRED OPTIONS FOR RETAIL

Whether or not the Sainsbury’s supermarket is built, the Steering Group envisage that, eventually, the

site will be developed as the town’s “Settlement Boundary” is extended in line with Plan:MK. The

Sainsbury’s application achieved considerable local support and the Town Council did not submit an

objection to the application. In view of this, the Steering Group is minded to allocate the Sainsbury’s

site for retail use as part of the Neighbourhood Plan.

EMPLOYMENT

The results of the question ‘Which sites do you consider suitable for other development such as

industrial, commercial and retail’ are as follows:

SITE YES Preference NO Preference

A 197 3rd 224 5th

B 320 2nd 134 6th

C 365 1st 109 7th

D 88 4th 252 4th

E 31 5th 315 3rd

F 26 7th 317 2nd

G 30 6th 318 1st

PREFERRED OPTION FOR EMPLOYMENT

The preferred option for employment use is Site C, with Site B reserved for future consideration for

employment use.

Reason: There are no constraints to the sites being used for employment use.

Sites B and C are the least preferred, and most unpopular sites of the public for housing.

They have least public support for housing development.

The sites are in an area of existing employment use. The viability of Site C as an employment

site, has been demonstrated by two recent planning applications on the approved Osier

Way site

CONSULTATION QUESTIONS

Housing Numbers:

Q1. Do you support the proposal for an additional 300 dwellings?

Yes ☐ No ☐ If not, why?

Q2. Do you support the proposal that affordable dwellings should be reserved for local people?

Yes ☐ No ☐

Q3. Do you support the proposal for a Community Right to Build Order?

Yes ☐ No ☐

Comments:

Housing Sites:

Q4. Do you support:

Option 1 ☐ Option 2 ☐ Neither ☐

Comments:

Q5. Do you agree that we should pursue the alternative approach for Site A?

Yes ☐ No ☐

Comments:

Retail:

Q6. Do you support the Lavendon Road site for retail use?

Yes ☐ No ☐

Comments:

Employment:

Q7. Do you support Site C being allocated for employment use?

Yes ☐ No ☐

Comments:

Q8. Do you support Site B being reserved for future employment use?

Yes ☐ No ☐

Comments:

How to respond

Your response must be received by 16 October 2015 and may be completed online at

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/OlneySites

Alternatively, send in your response to:

FREEPOST RTHY-ZXGT-TKKA Name: Olney Town Council Address: The Olney Centre High St Town: Olney Postcode: MK46 4EF Email:

Thank you for taking the time to respond to our consultation.

The personal data collected will be processed by Olney Town Council in accordance with the Data Protection Act, and will not be accessed by third parties

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/OlneySites

olney neighbourhood plan · 2015. 8. 28. · it will guide the future development ... neighbourhood...

Documents