HOUSING

Introduction

This chapter of the UDP explains how new housing development required over the plan period will be accommodated. It also includes general policies for residential development which aim to ensure that new housing is directed to appropriate locations; that they provide a mix of house types (including, where appropriate, elements of affordable housing) and a good environment for their residents. Other policies seek to protect the environment in existing residential areas.

National Planning Policy Guidance

PPG3 'Housing' sets out the Government’s approach on a range of issues relating to the provision of housing. Circular 6/98 provides additional guidance on ‘Planning and Affordable Housing’.

The Government’s objectives are that everyone should have the opportunity of a decent home; that there should be greater choice of housing; and that housing should not reinforce social distinctions. To promote more sustainable patterns of development and make better use of previously-developed land, existing towns and cities should be the focus for additional housing. New housing and residential environments should be well designed, and make a significant contribution to promoting urban renaissance and improving the quality of life.

In pursuit of these objectives, PPG3 says local planning authorities should:

• plan to meet the housing requirements of the whole community, including people in need of affordable housing and with special housing needs;
• adopt a plan, monitor and manage approach to housing provision, and a sequential approach to the allocation of housing land;
• widen housing opportunity and choice by improving the mix of dwellings in terms of size, type and location, and seek to create mixed communities;
• provide sufficient housing land, giving priority to re-using previously developed land within urban areas, bringing empty homes back into use and converting existing buildings, in preference to the development of greenfield sites;
• create more sustainable patterns of development by promoting new development that is accessible by public transport to jobs, education and health facilities, shopping, leisure and local services;
• make more efficient use of land by reviewing planning policies and standards with a view to encouraging higher density development and reducing parking standards;
• facilitate mixed-use development; and
• promote good design in new housing developments in order to create attractive, high-quality living environments in which people will choose to live.

Regional Spatial Strategy

The Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West (RPG13) was being drafted whilst the UDP was in preparation. Just prior to the publication of the Revised Deposit Draft UDP the Secretary of State published his proposed amendments to RPG and the Council placed a high degree of reliance upon them. UDP policies HOU1 'Housing', EMP1 'Employment Development' and GRN1 'The Green Belt', in particular, were substantially led by, the draft RPG’s Core Development Principles and Spatial Development Strategy. This approach was later vindicated as final RPG adopted the Secretary of State’s approach, and became the Regional Spatial Strategy in 2004.

RPG (now RSS) seeks to secure an urban renaissance in the region’s cities and towns. To this end, it contains policies dealing with the following housing issues: -

• Prescribing annual average rates of housing provision (net of clearance) for (inter alia) individual unitary authorities’ areas (380 per annum in Warrington), with local authorities being expected to monitor and manage the availability of land identified in development plans to achieve the annual build rates up to 2016; the build rates to apply initially in the period up to 2006, whereafter they are expected to be reviewed, with any adjustments to be incorporated within a roll-forward of RPG (now RSS), as presently envisaged.
• Setting targets, for sub-regional groups of authorities, for the proportion of new dwellings to be constructed on previously-developed land or through the conversion of existing buildings between 1996 and 2016, to be reflected in local authorities’ development plans.
• Reviewing existing development plan commitments in terms of their current suitability for the use proposed.
• Making best use of the existing housing stock.
• Phasing housing land release as part of the ‘Plan, Monitor and Manage’ approach.
• Addressing the need for affordable housing (based on up-to-date housing needs studies) and defining appropriate policies where they are needed.

RPG (now RSS) also contains policies which impinge upon the decisions made in development plans on the amount and distribution of land to be allocated and maintained for employment development and on long-term green belt boundaries and other mechanisms for promoting protection and enhancement of environmental assets.

In preparing development plans, local authorities are expected to reflect RPG (now RSS) policies which inter-relate to support a set of ‘Core Development Principles’ and an associated ‘Spatial Development Framework’. Those aspects of RPG (now RSS) policies which inter-relate to provide the context for decisions on the key strategic elements of the UDP are as set out below.

The four linked policies, which express the Core Development Principles are:

DP1 – ‘Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings’ – Under this policy:

• New development and other investment in infrastructure and services should be located so as to make the most effective use of land, promote appropriate mixes of uses within a site and its wider neighbourhood, make efficient use of transport facilities and assist people to meet their needs locally;
• Local Authorities and others should ensure the continual identification and prompt appraisal of vacated land and buildings, make plans and take measures to ensure their speedy redevelopment and re-use;
• Development plans should adopt the following sequential approach to meeting development needs, taking account of local circumstances, the characteristics of particular land-uses and the Spatial Development Framework:-
  1. the effective use of existing buildings and infrastructure within urban areas, including the re-use or conversion of empty buildings – particularly those which are accessible by way of public transport, walking or cycling;
  2. the use of previously-developed land, particularly that which is accessible by public transport, walking or cycling; and then
  3. the development of previously-undeveloped land, where this avoids areas of important open space, is well-located in relation to houses, jobs and other services and infrastructure and is or can be made accessible by public transport, walking or cycling.

DP2 ‘Enhancing the Quality of Life’ – requiring an enhancement in the overall quality of life experienced in the region. Under this policy, development plans should contain policies which promote the protection and enhancement of economic, social and environmental capital.

DP3 ‘Quality in New Development’ – recognising that new development must demonstrate good design quality and respect for its setting. As regards the context for housing policies to be contained in development plans, these should:

• set out key design principles for land allocations and more detailed design briefs for land;
• encourage the provision of an appropriate range of sizes and types of housing;
• set minimum densities for housing based on the individual circumstances of each site, Urban Potential Study results and guidance set out in national planning policy/guidance;
• consider the transport implications of development proposals.

DP4 ‘Promoting Sustainable Economic Growth and Competitiveness and Social Inclusion’ – recognising that economic growth and competitiveness, with social progress for all, is required in the region. Under this policy, development plan policies should include guidance to ensure that development and investment will, to the fullest extent possible: -

• help to grow the region’s economy in a sustainable way, and
• produce a greater degree of social inclusion

In support of this policy, RPG (now RSS) recognises that opportunities should be taken to re-shape and re-structure land uses to establish well-designed and compact, mixed-use and mixed-tenure neighbourhoods with good facilities and linkages. A key aspect is to ensure that new housing is built at a sufficiently high density so that the local population is of a size that can support good quality facilities located in centres within walking and cycling distances. It will also be necessary to ensure that there is a stock of attractive, better quality and affordable houses available to encourage the development of diverse and socially-inclusive communities. Reference is made to the urban village concept having already proved successful elsewhere in the region in reflecting those objectives.

The Spatial Development Framework establishes guidelines for the distribution of development and for resources to achieve urban renaissance. In setting the context for the 8 policies which combine to express the Spatial Development Framework, it is emphasised that the policies apply to locations and that they should not be read as applying rigidly to specific local authority or other administrative areas (except in regard to definition of the ‘North West Metropolitan Area’ in a way which is of particular relevance to Warrington). The policies indicate areas/localities where development and urban renaissance resources need to be focussed, and should not be read as a simple sequential preference for development. It is recognised that, given the complexity of the region and its geography, the work of informal sub-regional and cross-boundary groupings will be very helpful to the implementation of the Spatial Development Framework.

Specific policies making up the Spatial Development Framework which are of particular relevance to the overall strategy set out in the UDP are as follows:

SD1 ‘The North West Metropolitan Area’ – establishing that a significant proportion of the urban renaissance resources of the region should be focussed on the North West Metropolitan Area, which is defined as consisting of the major part of the area contained within the Merseyside metropolitan authorities’ areas, the whole of the Greater Manchester area, the whole of Halton borough, other towns on the outer edges of the metropolitan authorities’ areas, and (of specific significance to the UDP) the town of Warrington (north of the Ship Canal) and its urban area to the south.

For practical purposes, it is considered appropriate that the “urban area to the south” should be defined by the Green Belt boundary. Additionally, those areas with approval under S7(1) of the New Towns Act 1981 that abut or are adjacent to the built up edge of the town of Warrington and Grappenhall Heys Inset Village shall fall within North Cheshire.

Policy SD1 specifies that, within that overall area, first priority will be given to development which will enhance significantly the economic strength, complementarity of roles and overall quality of life in the two ‘Regional Poles’ (the city centre areas of Liverpool and Manchester/Salford) and which will enhance the major strategic infrastructure which supports them.

It also gives high priority to ensuring significant physical changes, environmental enhancement and social regeneration within the inner city areas contiguous with those two ‘Poles’.

Within the rest of the North West Metropolitan Area, priority will be given to developments which will enhance the overall quality of life in the central and inner areas of named ‘Metropolitan Towns’ (a list which does not include Warrington).

In elaborating upon that policy, RPG (now RSS) states that, in the North West Metropolitan Area, the emphasis should be on encouraging new development and redevelopment of good quality which will provide a significant portion of the new and better housing and other redevelopment required to cope with anticipated household growth in the region as a whole, and that this must be coupled with economic development through urban regeneration.

It is emphasised that development should be accommodated without encroaching on green belt areas, areas of nationally and internationally recognised ecological importance, or other open land that is protected for its agricultural, amenity, recreation or wildlife value.

RPG (now RSS) recognises that the North West Development Agency’s Regional (Economic) Strategy identifies both Liverpool and East Manchester as Regional Regeneration Challenges within the ‘Mersey Belt’ Regeneration Priority Area, thus ensuring that a significant amount of public resource is available over the next several years to underpin policy SD1.

SD2 ‘Other Settlements within the North West Metropolitan Area’ – indicating that, elsewhere within the North West Metropolitan Area, wide-ranging regeneration and environmental enhancement should be secured and most especially in the older parts of a number of ‘Metropolitan Settlements’ which include the town of Warrington.

It is stated that, in Warrington, the focus should be on achieving regeneration and re-structuring of the older areas and not allowing further significant outward extension of the settlement onto open land beyond existing commitments, current at the start of the calendar year 2002, thus curtailing further sprawl of the settlement into the North Cheshire countryside, unless fully justified by reference to the new RPG (now RSS), its Core Development Principles and the Spatial Development Framework.

RPG (now RSS) recognises that a focus on development within the North West Metropolitan Area will create a need for improved public transport networks between and within all the specific areas and towns covered by policies SD1 and SD2, particularly rail services, and the introduction of management and other measures to ease traffic flow on the motorways.

SD3 ‘Key Towns and Cities outside the North West Metropolitan Area’ – providing guidance in relation to the areas to the north and south of the Metropolitan Area. One part of SD3 is accepted as applying to villages and open land areas within the North Cheshire area of the borough. That is that most development requirements south of the Metropolitan Areas, which are not met in the named towns, will be met within smaller market towns and large villages which are able to provide a range of services, and which have the potential to provide good public transport links to outlying settlements. RPG (now RSS) expects such settlements to be identified as ‘key service centres’ in development plans, and that development in those centres should complement existing settlement character and be of an appropriate scale and nature to accommodate or fulfil the needs of local communities for housing, employment and services, and to deliver an enhanced quality of rural life.

RPG (now RSS) elaborates upon this policy by recognising that, to the south of the Metropolitan Area, the environment and prosperity of the local economy may well generate demand for housing and other land uses over and above locally-arising needs, and indicates that this demand should continue to be resisted to support urban regeneration and relieve pressure on areas of constraint within Cheshire (including Warrington outside the main Warrington town settlement), together with potential traffic congestion. It is concluded that provision for housing and other land uses should therefore be based principally on meeting the needs of the area’s current population and its housing needs.

SD4 ‘Maintaining Urban Form and Setting and the Treatment of North Cheshire’ – indicating that development plans should contain policies which will help both to maintain urban form and enhance urban living and ensure a visually attractive and accessible setting around the Metropolitan Area and all other settlements. The policy states that, to that end, it will be necessary to ensure that:

• the overall physical extent of the Metropolitan Area remains reasonably stable;
• development on the urban/rural edge respects and enhances the urban setting and countryside character;
• positive land-use planning and management of the land on the edge of settlements is encouraged in development plans, and
• the recreational potential of urban edge environments is enhanced.

Continued and extensive use of green belt policy is identified as an essential tool to that end.

For the purpose of this policy RPG (now RSS) defines North Cheshire in Warrington as that part of the borough which lies outside the North West Metropolitan Area.

In support of the policy, RPG (now RSS) recognises that the discouragement of urban sprawl is, for a variety of reasons, a crucial element of the Spatial Development Framework for the region and that, in particular, the green belt is an essential means of assisting urban regeneration. The maintenance of urban form is thus a central principle of that framework and supports policies for urban renaissance.

SD5 ‘The Green Belts’ – confirming that, in Warrington, a detailed green belt boundary is to be established in the UDP for the first time and that there will be no need to undertake a further study of strategic or detailed boundaries before 2021.

Whilst not applying in principle to Warrington, which is to be dealt with through this UDP, policy SD5 identifies considerations which should be addressed in any strategic studies required to inform exceptional substantial change to green belts elsewhere in the region. Since the decisions as to boundaries being proposed in this UDP inherently address the issue as to whether it is appropriate to change the strategic extent of the green belt in Warrington, as indicated in the extant Cheshire Replacement Structure Plan (Cheshire 2001), it is, arguably, proper that those considerations should be applied in Warrington’s circumstances. They are:-

• identification of the extent of allocated, undeveloped, safeguarded and redevelopable brownfield land;
• identification of any green belt land which does not serve the purpose of its designation;
• trends in the rate of consumption of both greenfield and brownfield land for both residential and all forms of non-residential development, and
• assessment of the feasibility of individual districts’ housing and employment needs being met by provision in adjoining districts, consistent with the principles of social inclusion and sustainable development.

Considerations applying to any subsequent changes to green belt boundaries that may be at issue in other parts of the region are also, arguably, relevant to the issues in Warrington which have been addressed in preparing the UDP. Matters to which changes to (or, in the case of Warrington, establishment of) green belt boundaries should have regard are:

• the principles of sustainable access;
• the relation to social inclusion and economic competitiveness of any release of green belt land for employment uses;
• the effect of any release on urban regeneration;
• the guidance in National Planning Policy Guidance Notes on the density of residential development;
• the potential robustness of revised green belt boundaries;
• the intentions of the Spatial Development Framework;
• the need to preserve the extent and quality of the countryside, and
• conformity with the purposes of green belts as set out in National Planning Policy Guidance.

Relevant policies for ‘Economic Growth and Competitiveness with Social Progress’ are:

EC1 ‘Strengthening the Regional Economy’ – requiring development plans, in conjunction with local economic development strategies, to identify a range of suitable sites and premises for employment purposes which:

• complement sectoral priorities identified in the NWDA’s Regional Economic Strategy;
• take account of the needs of local businesses and need to ensure the modernisation and diversification of older manufacturing industries and their premises;
• are based on a review of existing commitments (see policy UR5 below);
• have the potential to promote clustering;
• take account of the ‘sequential approach’ (as set out in policy DP5);
• support the Spatial Development Framework, and
• take account of the availability of skilled labour and wider employment and training opportunities.

EC1 is supplemented by a range of policies relating to specific employment sectors which are referred to in detail, as appropriate, in explaining and justifying various UDP part 1 and 2 policies. Those policies are: -

EC2 : Manufacturing Industry

EC3 : Key Growth Sectors

EC4 : Knowledge-Based Industries

EC5 : Business Clusters

EC6 : Regional Inward Investment Sites (with particular relevance to Omega)

EC8 : Warehousing and Distribution

EC9 : Town Centres – Retail, Leisure and office Development

EC10: Tourism and Recreation

Relevant policies for ‘Delivering an Urban Renaissance’ are: -

UR4 ‘Setting Targets for the Re-cycling of Land and Buildings’ – identifying the redevelopment and re-use of vacant sites and buildings within urban areas as a priority and guiding development plans to include policies which encourage best use of such sites in sustainable locations.

Under this policy, local authorities are expected to make full use of their extensive powers to ensure that any existing or emerging areas of derelict and abandoned buildings are immediately identified and swiftly addressed.

The regional target is that at least 70% of new dwellings, including conversions, constructed in the region between 1996 and 2016 should use previously-developed land and existing buildings in sustainable locations in line with the approach to development set out in the Core Development Principles and the Spatial Development Framework. However, recognising that variations exist in the amount of previously-developed land and buildings in sustainable locations across the region, and in preparing development plans, local planning authorities should aim to achieve targets which are at variance with, but contribute towards the overall target for the region; this to be carried out through co-operative working within specified areas and in conjunction with adjoining authorities. By way of context for this UDP, on average at least 80% of new development on previously-developed land is to be aimed for in an area comprising Warrington and those parts of Greater Manchester lying outside the Manchester/Salford ‘Regional Pole’, i.e. the combined centres of these cities.

In explaining this policy, RPG (now RSS) acknowledges that the proportions of new development on previously-developed land that can realistically be aimed for will be dependent upon many variables, including the level of development activity proposed and the capacity of an area to accommodate it, particularly in terms of planning for a variety of uses.

UR5 ‘Existing Commitments in Development Plans’ – requiring that, in reviews of development plans, local authorities should re-consider existing allocations in line with the requirements set out in the Core Development Principles and the Spatial Development Framework. It expects authorities, in particular, to assess the suitability of existing employment land commitments in the light of a variety of factors. Factors which impinge upon the major strategic land policies of the UDP are:

• whether, if housing is considered more appropriate than retention of employment commitments, this would accord with the approach of ‘Plan, Monitor and Manage’ set out in policies UR6, UR7 and UR8 (see below);
• whether those commitments provide a focus and support for urban renaissance by regenerating and consolidating existing urban areas through the promotion of mixed-use, efficient use of land and car parking provision.

In carrying out these assessments, local planning authorities are expected to: -

• ensure that land allocations in development plans provide for development to meet identified needs only;
• minimise the amount of take-up of additional greenfield land for development, and
• review, as a matter of urgency, all unimplemented planning permissions and development plan allocations, especially for housing, respecting the Spatial Development Framework, in order to maximise the re-use of previously-developed land and, through development plans, de-allocate sites and set policies for non-renewal of permissions for housing where alternatives are available in more sustainable locations.

Local authorities are also asked to consider the scope for encouraging mixed-use developments as alternatives, including partial re-use for housing, particularly on larger sites.

UR6 ‘Existing Housing Stock and Housing Renewal’ – through which local authorities should develop an understanding of local and sub-regional housing markets, taking into account changing labour demand patterns, in order to adopt a concerted and comprehensive approach to influencing housing supply across all tenures and values, in the interests of greater regional competitiveness. This should inform a comprehensive approach to housing renewal, clearance and urban regeneration.

UR7 ‘Regional Housing Provision’ – requiring local planning authorities to monitor and manage the availability of land identified in development plans to achieve annual build rates up to 2016 and, in doing so, to seek to minimise the amount of land needed for new housing by:

• making full allowance for a reduction in vacancy rates, to 3% in the existing dwelling stock and 2% within the new stock;
• maximising the re-use of vacant and under-used land and buildings;
• making allowances for the contribution that can be made by conversions to residential use and sub-division of existing dwellings;
• considering the impact of new housing development upon the existing housing stock and market in the immediate area and adjoining districts.

This is complemented by a requirement that, in considering the allocation of land for new housing in development plans, local planning authorities should:

• adopt the sequential approach to development location as outlined in the Core Development Principles and the Spatial Development Framework;
• use the results of up-to-date Urban Potential Studies to inform the allocation of specific sites;
• introduce phasing policies in line with policy UR8 (as summarised below), as part of the ‘Plan, Monitor and Manage’ approach;
• allow for clearance replacement to reflect local circumstances, as a mechanism for the recreation of viable and sustainable neighbourhoods, and
• take account of the need for affordable housing provision in line with policy UR9 (as referred to below, and summarised in detail as part of the supporting text to UDP policy HOU14).

The level of planned housing provision for Warrington is expressed as an annual average rate of housing development (net of clearance) of 380 to be provided for in the 2002-2016 period.

In establishing levels of planned provision (including that for Warrington), RPG (now RSS) has taken account of a range of factors, notably as regards the context for UDP policy HOU1, the following:

• the potential for new housing to be accommodated on previously-developed land;
• the results of Urban Potential Studies undertaken in the North-West;
• the housing land supply and development plan allocations already committed within the region;
• environmental and other policy considerations.

RPG (now RSS) emphasises that it is an essential feature of the ‘Plan, Monitor and Manage’ approach that housing provision and the ways of meeting it should be kept under continuous review at regional level. Thus, appropriate indicators will need to be monitored and recorded in annual monitoring reports. They should form the basis for review and roll-forward of RPG (now RSS), which will take place at least every 5 years, and more frequently if there are clear signs of either under- or over-provision of housing land. The annual build rates (380 per year net of clearance in Warrington) should apply to the period from 2002 to 2006. Where development plans are reviewed (or adopted for the first time in the case of this UDP) and extend beyond 2006, they should continue to provide for additional dwellings at the same annual average rate until such time as any different rate is adopted following review of RPG (now RSS). ¹

In elaborating upon the policy, it is explained that the annual provision rates can be used by development plans to plan housing provision and allocations and set a contextual figure for longer-term planning in sub-regional areas. This provides a basis for the UDP to develop phasing mechanisms for up to 20 years ahead, based on these rates.

UR8 ‘A Phasing Mechanism for Release of Housing Land’ – providing for land allocated for housing to be released in an orderly managed manner. To this end, development plans should incorporate phasing mechanisms which:

• are underpinned by housing capacity studies prepared in accordance with PPG3 and in the Good Practice Guide ‘Tapping the Potential’;
• secure the development of previously-used land and buildings in urban areas as a first priority;
• allow for the release of land for housing in phases over the period of the plan, the timing of release to take account of the need for co-ordinated provision of the necessary infrastructure and the overall studies, and
• take account of the potential housing land provision and policy framework in place in adjoining local authority areas to ensure a sub-regionally consistent approach that does not undermine urban renaissance in other districts (for this purpose, Warrington and the Greater Manchester authorities constitute a sub-region).

In support of this policy, local authorities are required to commit to ensuring that none of them will pursue development plan allocations or grant planning permissions which result in the over-provision and early release of open land in one district to the detriment of urban renaissance in other local authority areas.

Local authorities are advised that existing housing land availability studies should be replaced by regular housing provision studies, undertaken jointly by groups of local authorities, together with the house-building industry and other parties to take account of sub-regional circumstances.

UR9 ‘Affordable Housing’ – asks that development plans across the region address the need for affordable housing, and should make provision for a range of dwelling types and sizes to meet the assessed needs of all sectors of the community, based on up-to-date local housing needs studies. UDP policy HOU15 is supported by more detailed references to UR9.

Other RPG (now RSS) policies framed with the commitment to delivering an urban renaissance are considered in relation to specific UDP part 1 and 2 policies.

Local Strategy/Part 1 UDP Policies

HOU1 Housing Land

On the basis of policy UR7 of RPG13 (now RSS), the Council considers it both unnecessary and inappropriate to allocate any greenfield (i.e. previously-undeveloped) land for housing development in the period up to 2016. This is borne out by the schedule attached at appendix 3, which provides an assessment of net dwelling completions from April 1996 to April 2005; commitments to continuing development, through full and outline planning consents and of the contribution that can reasonably be expected to be made from previously developed but presently unidentified (‘windfall’) sites.

RPG (now RSS) Policy UR7 sets an annual average housing requirement for Warrington of 380 dwelling units. This figure is intended to be used for the period 2002-2006, but where – as with the Warrington UDP – the plan is intended to extend beyond 2006 that rate can continue to be used. Thus it is appropriate for the rate to be used up to the 2016 end date of the Plan. The requirement for the Plan of 5,320 (14 years x 380) is not open for discussion as part of the UDP adoption process.

Appendix 3 demonstrates that the requirement will be more than met by completions, sites under construction, and commitments alone. Indeed there is an over-provision for all assessment periods. Support for the non-allocation of additional land is given by PPG3, which urges local planning authorities not to identify more land than is needed to meet the requirement.

Policy HOU1 accordingly expresses the need for restraint on further permissions for housing development in the borough. The importance of ensuring that the housing requirements set out in policy HOU1 are not substantially exceeded by 2016 arises from the Council’s recognition that any avoidable over-supply could contribute to bringing about a reduction in the potential capacity of land which should remain available for possible development beyond 2016 (to support policy GRN1 'The Green Belt' and potentially undermine the prospects for regeneration in other authorities’ areas. It is thus considered appropriate to regulate the supply of housing land by reference to an ongoing assessment of requirements to 2016, In October 2004 the Council approved a Supplementary Planning Guidance Note on Restricting the Housing Supply. This set out the criteria for which proposals would be accepted in the absence of any adopted policy. This SPG will continue to be implemented and monitored over time until the UDP is adopted. At such time the terms of the SPG will be reviewed in the light of the adopted status of Policy HOU1 and HOU2A, and the most recent information.

Appendix 3 also shows that, subject to continuous and rigorous application of the ‘Plan, Monitor and Manage’ approach, it will be unnecessary, during the plan period, to release any parts of the areas of South Warrington for which approvals were granted under section 7(i) of the New Towns Act, but which have not, to date, been subject to commitments through the section 7(ii) approval process. These consents are not ‘time-limited’, as with planning permissions granted by a local authority. English Partnerships has, however, now agreed with Government that the sites will only be released for development if, and when, needed, they meet the PPG3 sequential search criteria.

The sites in question, together with their assessed capacities (totalling 1,237 units) are listed in appendix 3 under the heading 'New Town Approvals on Greenfield Sites', and are therefore available to be considered for possible release, if needed, after 2016.

Appendix 3 takes account of housing clearance to April 2005. At the present time, the Council has no planned clearance programme and, consequently, has made no provision for further clearance in the remainder of the plan period. This reflects the generally good condition of the borough’s dwelling stock and the absence of major schemes requiring clearance in order for them to proceed.

Appendix 3 also includes an analysis of recorded and forecast contributions to housing completions taking place on previously developed land, under the heading 'Previously Developed Land (Brownfield)'. This demonstrates that expected completions in the borough are now likely to exceed both the national (79% against a 60% target) and sub-regional (86% against 80%) targets for the percentage of dwellings on previously developed land

The UDP strategy seeks to rely entirely on:

• recorded (net) completions;
• commitments through planning permissions which are not conditional on any phasing requirements; and

In view of the extent of oversupply against requirements, the Council will exercise restraint when suitable and available brownfield windfall sites come forward for housing (including those where housing forms part of a mixed-use scheme). The Council will wish and expect to see the development of appropriate sites proceed expeditiously in the interests of sustainable urban regeneration, the vitality and viability of the town centre, and meeting identified need for affordable housing.

The analysis set out in appendix 3 does not arise from a housing capacity study carried out in accordance with advice in PPG3. The Council along with other authorities in the North West did, however, carry out an urban potential study prior to the publication of revised PPG3. The results of these studies helped to inform the regional housing distribution in RPG (now RSS) and an update to that urban capacity study was undertaken in November 2003 and submitted to the Inquiry in support of the UDP.

The information set out in Appendix 3 is updated on an annual basis and is published in the Annual Housing Report. This information is also used in the Regional Annual Monitoring Report to address regional housing issues and will inform future reviews of the RSS. Within the Council the information gained will be used to monitor the rate of housing development against regional requirements and targets, to monitor the effectiveness of Policies and associated SPG for restricting the housing supply, and to inform the debate as to whether remedial action is necessary through a review of the SPG or the UDP.

Policy HOU1 and the part 2 UDP policies which complement it are considered to be supportive of and, in many respects, justified by reference to a number of specific RPG (now RSS) policies, as follows: -

• DP1: through the commitment to continuous and rigorous application of the sequential approach to meeting housing development needs.
• DP3: through recognition of, and commitment to achieving good design quality and, in particular, encouraging the provision of an appropriate range of sizes and types of housing, on the variety of sites, by both size and location that exist and are expected to continue to come forward from previously-developed land.
• DP4: through a commitment to seizing opportunities to re-shape and re-structure land uses to establish well-designed and compact mixed-use and mixed-tenure neighbourhoods and, in particular, a clearly-expressed affordable housing policy, providing a framework for widening and extending the range of housing to meet identified local needs. The Council’s confidence that this approach can be successful is underpinned by its record of partnership working to develop housing or mixed-use schemes which contribute significantly to sustainable development, notably the Chapelford Urban Village and Ryfields Care Village. The contribution that those two schemes have made to the substantial nature of the continuing housing land supply in urban Warrington is evident from reference to the schedules of sites contained in appendix 3, and has been crucial to the Council’s having reached a position in which it is unnecessary to make fresh greenfield allocations to meet RPG (now RSS) requirements to 2016.
• SD1: through recognition that a reduction in the annual rate of housing development to be achieved in Warrington (in relation to the requirement of about 800 new homes per year set by the most recently-approved structure plan applying to the borough – the Cheshire Replacement Structure Plan) is entirely consistent with RPG’s (now RSS) primary focus on investment in regeneration of the ‘Regional Poles’.
• SD2: through the contribution that both the reduced annual housing requirement and the reservation of capacity with the English Partnerships’ greenfield sites for release, if necessary, beyond 2016 will make towards minimising the risk of allowing outward expansion of Warrington beyond existing commitments, not only during the plan period but in the longer term.
• UR4: through a commitment, confidently-based on the Council’s past record, to identifying sustainable mixed-use and housing development opportunities on previously-developed land and the seizing of an opportunity to hold back the release of substantial greenfield sites in English Partnerships’ ownership, through application of the sequential approach, which has enabled the 1996-2016 target for new housing development to be raised to 70%. The Council is committed to strengthening its arrangements for joint working with neighbouring authorities to ensure that progress towards achieving targets set by RPG (now RSS) is monitored, to provide an informed framework for future reviews of RPG (now RSS) and sub-regional strategies.
• UR6: through a commitment to improving understanding of local and sub-regional housing markets demonstrated by incorporation of market considerations in an updated housing needs assessment which has informed UDP policy HOU14 'Affordable Housing'.
• UR7: through preparation and publication of the full details of the results of an urban potential study, which helped to inform the review of RPG (now RSS). Whilst the Council has not carried out an urban capacity study according to PPG3 requirements, it will do so, once a revised methodology has been agreed by authorities within the region. Completion of such a study in preparation for the UDP was not regarded as an urgent matter, in view of the excessive amount of committed and previously-developed land in relation to RPG (now RSS) requirements that has already been identified and included in appendix 3. This shows an expectation of housing completions significantly exceeding RPG (now RSS) requirements in the 2002-2006 period. This arises from a combination of the high level of commitments made by the former New Town Development Corporation which are still being ‘built out’, the large amounts of previously-developed land that have continued to come forward as ‘windfalls’ and capacity contained within a number of greenfield sites, proposed as ‘Areas of Search’ (safeguarded land) in the discontinued Warrington Borough Draft Local Plan, upon which planning appeals against refusal of permissions on prematurity grounds have been upheld. Whilst the intended monitoring, at regional level, of annual housing completions over the 2002-2006 period will, almost inevitably, show completions outstripping requirements to a considerable degree, the situation demonstrates the importance bringing Warrington’s role of absorbing excessive housing development pressures under control, such that over-provision in relation to RPG (now RSS) requirements to 2016 is minimised, in support of both regional and local interests. Policy HOU1 adopts all achievable measures to secure that position.
• UR8: through the application of a phasing policy to English Partnerships’ greenfield sites in South Warrington, covered by section 7(i) approvals and undertaking to apply phasing mechanisms to any other greenfield sites that may come forward. These measures are indicative of the Council’s commitment to ensuring that it will not pursue development plan allocations or grant planning permissions which result in the over-provision and early release of open land in the borough to the detriment of urban renaissance in other local authority areas. The Council’s approach is, in fact, based on a commitment to minimising virtually-inevitable over-provision, especially in the early years post-2006.
• UR9: through policy HOU14, which is considered to be soundly-based on an up-to-date assessment of housing needs and the local housing market and recognises the complementary contributions to meeting as wide as possible a range of needs that can be met from formally-negotiated affordable housing, relatively low-cost housing available on the open market, and provision of generally affordable new housing on windfall sites, where proposals conform to the criteria set out in policy HOU1.
• SD3: Is in part relevant to Warrington to the extent that the open land and settlements in the North Cheshire part of the borough is to the south of the Metropolitan Area. The villages in that area, particularly Culcheth, Lymm and Oughtrington, have been subject to development pressures with substantial amounts of development having taken place or been committed in recent years on previously-developed land and (through the allowing of appeals) on greenfield sites, creating a significant overall impact on the form and character of these villages. None of the borough’s villages is remote from the main town of Warrington, either geographically or functionally. As such, none warrants designation as a ‘Key Service Centre’ and the assimilation of continuing pressure would be unacceptable in terms of any contribution that this would make to the villages themselves or to urban regeneration in Warrington or the region as a whole. It is important that, depending upon their status as either inset villages or green belt villages, they be protected by tightly-drawn green belt boundaries or by application of green belt policies (as elaborated upon in UDP policy GRN1).
• The North Cheshire area includes Grappenhall Heys, an area of approved and part completed new town development that is detached from the town of Warrington. This area is encircled by green belt as a consequence of the deletion of the safeguarded land policy at revised deposit stage. In order to establish an appropriate policy framework for Grappenhall Heys, in the context of the managed release of further land for development as set out in policy HOU2A, It is proposed as an “inset village” in the North Cheshire green belt, and added to the list of such settlements in policy GRN4.

HOU2 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - RESTRICTIONS

1. In considering whether or not to grant planning permission for further housing development, the Council will need to be convinced that the effect of the approval is not simply to add unnecessarily to the surplus of available housing supply in the borough, in the strategic context set out in policy HOU1.

Housing development that does not contribute to:

• the regeneration of inner urban areas in need of investment and improvement;

• the available supply of affordable or social housing in relation to identified needs; or

• the vitality and viability of the town centre,

will not be approved.

Policy Derivation:

PPS1, PPG3.

Reason and Explanation:

1. The government’s objectives for planning policy relating to housing are set out in PPG3 and make it clear that, in order to promote more sustainable patterns of development and make better use of previously developed land, the focus for the provision of additional housing should be within existing towns and cities. The need for new housing and residential environments to be well designed, and to make a significant contribution to promoting urban regeneration and improving the quality of life are given particular emphasis.

2. Local planning authorities are specifically advised to:

• plan to meet the housing requirements of the whole community, including those in need of affordable and special needs housing;
• provide wider housing opportunity and choice and a better mix in the size, type and location of housing than is currently available, and seek to create mixed communities;
• provide sufficient housing land but give priority to re-using previously developed land within urban areas, bringing empty homes back into use and converting existing buildings, in preference to the development of Greenfield sites;
• create more sustainable patterns of development by building in ways which exploit and deliver accessibility by public transport to jobs, education and health facilities, shopping, leisure and local services;
• make more efficient use of land by reviewing planning policies and standards;
• place the needs of people before ease of traffic movement in designing the layout of residential development;
• seek to reduce car dependence by facilitating more walking and cycling, by improving linkages by public transport between housing, jobs, local services and local amenity, and by planning for mixed use; and
• promote good design in new housing developments in order to create attractive, high quality living environments in which people will choose to live.

3. Part 1 policy HOU1 sets out the housing requirement to be met in Warrington throughout the plan period, as established in RPG (now RSS). From the analysis of the borough’s current housing land supply position, in the explanatory text to policy HOU1 and appendix 3, it is apparent that there is currently an excess of approved housing land in relation to the UDP requirement, and that all of this supply to at least 2016 consists of the re-use of previously developed land and inherited greenfield commitments

4. In these circumstances, there is no prevailing need for the Council to add to the supply of available land, either to meet requirements or to prevent the loss of greenfield sites. As long as ongoing monitoring continues to confirm that this situation prevails, this will be the primary consideration when the Council considers further planning applications for housing development on previously developed land, in that the Council will need to be satisfied that the remaining objectives set out in paragraph 2 above have been fully addressed and that the benefits of granting permission outweigh any adverse implications arising from creating or adding to the over-supply of land for housing.

Area of Coverage:

All sites within the town of Warrington, inset villages, and green belt villages.

Other Related Policies:

HOU1, HOU3, HOU4, HOU6, HOU13, HOU15, LUT1, LUT2, EMP4, EMP8, DCS2, DCS4, DCS5, DCS6, DCS7

HOU3 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT – DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

1. All housing development in the borough should be well designed and well planned so as to enhance the local community and the character and quality of the local environment. In considering development proposals, the Council will take into account:

• neighbouring buildings and the townscape and landscape of the wider locality;

• the local pattern of streets and spaces, building traditions and materials, and the street scene;

• the appropriateness of the density, size, type, affordability and mix of the housing development proposed in relation to local needs and circumstances;

• the amount of space around buildings and the proportion of the site and plots within it occupied by buildings and hard surfacing;

• the need to protect and enhance important landscape features and habitats and create greener residential areas;

• the need to promote designs and layouts which are safe and take account of public health, crime prevention and community safety considerations, including road safety and safe play provision;

• the quality of the environment created for occupiers of the proposed development and neighbouring properties, including daylight and sunlight requirements and privacy;

• the effect on levels and quality of open space in the local area;

• the need to improve poor quality environments and areas lacking local identity by imaginative designs and layouts;

• impacts on access to jobs, shops and services and on the capacity of physical and social infrastructure, in terms of the need to introduce mixed use or make provision for improvements;

The extent to which the applicant has had regard to the above criteria should be expressed in a Design Statement (as required by UDP policy DCS6) to demonstrate how the need for good layout and design has been taken into account and how the proposals make efficient use of land without compromising the quality of the environment. Development proposals that fail to fully address these considerations will not be approved.

2. All applicants will be required to provide evidence that local consultation has taken place prior to the submission of their proposals, and to indicate in the Design Statement how the consultation has influenced the submitted proposals.

3. When considering development proposals that will result in the loss of a building that provides a use that is of significant social or community value, the Council will take into account the effect of such loss on community life and will require evidence that the market for continuation of the existing use has been adequately tested.

4. Housing layouts should:

• limit traffic speed;

• meet the mobility needs of the disabled;

• provide for access and movement in accordance with the transport priorities set out in policies LUT1 and LUT2 to prioritise walking, cycling and public transport, and minimise trips by car;

• make provision for car parking that does not exceed the Council’s maximum standards, and take into account the need for cycle storage space.

Layouts developed fully in accordance with the design principles of ‘home zones’ will be welcomed.

Policy Derivation:

PPG1, PPG3, PPG6, PPG9, PPG13, PPG17

Circular 1/97 'Planning Obligations'

Reason and Explanation:

1. Policies HOU2A and HOU2B set out the criteria against which such applications will be considered. The criteria build upon the objectives of PPG3 in relation to widening the choice of available housing, securing affordable housing, bringing about urban regeneration, designing for quality, greening the residential environment, and promoting sustainable transport. These are set out in terms of also ensuring that new development is integrated into existing residential areas with no insurmountable adverse impacts on local communities.

2. Other policies in this and other chapters of the UDP, as listed below, shed further light on the application of these criteria and give related policy guidance in relation to specific regeneration areas and the Council’s approach to planning applications for other uses on land currently or previously in use for employment purposes.

3. Development proposals should have close regard to the guidelines laid down in ‘Places, Streets and Movement; Residential Roads and Footpaths’, published by the DETR in 1998.

Area of Coverage:

All sites within the town of Warrington, inset villages, and green belt villages.

Other Related Policies:

HOU1, HOU2A, HOU5, HOU12, HOU14, LUT1, LUT2, EMP4, EMP8, DCS2, DCS4, DCS5, DCS6, DCS7

HOU4 OPEN SPACE PROVISION IN NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS

Housing development that does not make adequate provision for the recreational needs of its future residents, and especially for the provision of children’s play areas and facilities, will not be permitted. In determining planning applications, the Council will assess schemes against the following minimum standards:

Children’s play:

All housing schemes incorporating family housing will be required to make provision for children’s play, usually by direct on-site provision, unless a contribution to the provision or enhancement of off-site facilities capable of serving the development safely and conveniently would be more appropriate.

The Council will base its requirements for provision on the NPFA minimum standards and should consist of LAPS, LEAPS, and NEAPS (as specified in the NPFA ‘Six Acre Standard’ and summarised in appendix 11 to the UDP) in proportion to the scale of the development. The majority of houses in the development should be within:

• 1 minute’s walking time of a LAP (100m)

• 5 minute’s walking time of a LEAP (400m)

• 15 minute’s walking time of a NEAP (1000m)

off site provision will generally be more appropriate:

for developments of less than 15 dwellings (not forming part of a larger scheme), unless the layout is designed on ‘Home Zone’ principles; and

for developments of a size where the 5 or 15 minute walking times extend beyond the site boundary but encompass an existing public open space suitable for children’s play.

Public open space:

In developments of 40 dwellings or more, and in addition to the provision made for children’s play, a minimum provision of 40 sq.m of public open space per dwelling should be provided. This should generally be provided in a single area and designed as an integral part of the scheme layout to provide a focal point in the development. A more flexible approach may be desirable in village areas, and applicants should have regard to advice in approved Village Design Statements as appropriate.

The requirement may be waived in special needs or sheltered housing developments provided that private communal open space is provided for the benefit of their residents.

In schemes of less than 40 dwellings in areas where there is a demonstrable deficiency of nearby public open space, the Council will seek a contribution, towards the provision or enhancement of nearby public open space.

Sport and recreation facilities:

Public open space provision should include the provision of suitable sports and recreation facilities appropriate to the scale of the development and the needs likely to arise from it. In considering schemes where the required open space provision amounts to less than 0.2ha in extent, the Council will seek to negotiate a contribution, the extent of which will be commensurate with the need arising directly from the development in question, towards the provision or improvement of nearby playing pitches, or other sports and recreation facilities.

In applying this policy the Council will take account of the need to redress local deficiencies in the provision of sports, recreation and open space provision as assessed in the Open Space Report.

Policy Derivation:

PPG3, PPG17

Circular 1/97

Reason and Explanation:

1. This policy sets down guidance to ensure that within new residential areas enough open space is provided in the right place to cater for the normal out door activities of the residents, including children’s play. The actual level of open space will be a matter for negotiation in each case, guided by the application of these criteria, and other relevant plan policies. The quality of open space and housing layouts is perhaps more important than the quantity and guidance as given in policy LUT4, DCS6 and DCS7. In this regard, HOU4 sets minimum standards and landscape features should not be sacrificed in order to bring open space provision down to the minimum standard. Similarly, the protection of landscape features will not in itself secure compliance with this policy if the resulting open space is not suitable for children’s play or informal recreational activity.

2. The children’s play standards are expressed in terms of types of provision and accessibility to housing groups. They do not apply to single bedroom accommodation. The underlying objective, however, is to secure compliance with the National Playing Fields Association (NPFA) minimum standard for children’s play of 0.6ha per 1000 people, as part of its overall standard for provision of 2.4ha per 1000 people. The NPFA standard does not include public open space (parks and general amenity space) for which the Council’s standard is established at 1.6ha per 1000 people. This equates to the 40 square metres per dwelling expressed in the policy. Hence the overall open space standard applying in the borough is 4ha per 1000 people.

3. In 1992 the Council undertook a comprehensive survey of open space throughout the borough and prepared an assessment of open space provision against its standards. This appraisal of neighbourhood provision was published in the ‘Open Space Background Paper’. This assessment has now been updated and published within a Supplementary Planning Document (issued for consultation in May 2005), ‘Open Space and Recreation Provision’. This document also sets out the basis on which the Council will seek payments in lieu of on-site provision where appropriate.

4. It will be the responsibility of the developers of housing schemes to provide the appropriate level and standard of open space. Where the Council deems it appropriate and necessary to make provision for the future maintenance of open space this may be done by way of the imposition of conditions on the planning permission or, in exceptional circumstances and subject to the provisions of Circular 1/97, by way of seeking payment from the developer of a commuted sum.

5. On the issue of maintenance, Circular 1/97 makes it clear that the costs of subsequent maintenance and other recurrent expenditure should normally be borne by the body or authority in which the open space is to be vested, and that, as a general rule, the Council should not attempt to impose commuted maintenance sums when considering development proposals. Exceptions may be made, however, including for the maintenance of small areas of open space, recreational facilities, children’s play space, woodland or landscaping which principally benefit the development itself rather than the wider public.

6. PPG17 places an obligation on the Council to seek to redress existing deficiencies in open space, sports and recreation facilities in considering development proposals, including changes of use and conversions.

Area of Coverage:

This policy applies to new housing development throughout the borough.

Other Related Policies:

DCS6, DCS7, LUT4

HOU5 TOWN CENTRE LIVING

The Council will encourage and permit proposals which promote town centre living through new build, conversion of buildings, and conversion of upper floors for residential use. The Council will not permit proposals to alter or extend shops if they eliminate separate access to vacant upper floors with the potential to provide living accommodation.

Policy Derivation:

PPG3, PPG6

Reason and Explanation:

A resident, town centre population can contribute significantly to the vitality and security of the town centre, particularly at night. Many first-floor premises in the town centre are underused or vacant. A recent government initiative has sought to encourage ‘living over the shop’ and this policy is designed to promote the re-use of first-floor (and above) levels and to prevent development that would preclude the separate use and occupation of upper floors in the town centre. It is not intended to prevent the incorporation of upper floors as ancillary space to ground floor shop units where this is a viable proposition.

Area of Coverage:

This policy applies within and on the edge of all the centres in the borough’s retail hierarchy as defined in policy TCD1.

Other Related Policies:

HOU6, EMP8

HOU6 HOUSING DENSITY AND MIX

1. New housing development within the borough should achieve net site densities of 30-50 dwellings per hectare. The Council will seek net densities exceeding 50 dwellings per hectare on sites within walking distance of public transport nodes, including railway stations, corridors well served by public transport, and the town centre.

2. New housing development should also help to create mixed and inclusive communities and avoid the creation or extension of large areas of housing of similar characteristics by providing an appropriate mix of dwelling size, type and affordability in relation to identified local housing needs. The Council will give careful consideration to housing mix in all schemes of 25 or more dwellings.

Policy Derivation:

PPG3

Reason and Explanation:

1. In keeping with the Government’s commitment to the principles of urban regeneration and sustainable development, national planning guidance seeks to ensure more efficient use of land through increased housing densities in the most sustainable locations.

2. PPG3 gives clear guidance that developments of less than 30 dwellings per hectare net constitute an inefficient use of land, and seeks to encourage net densities of between 30-50 dwellings per hectare, with a greater intensity of development at places with good access to public transport.

3. PPG3 also urges local planning authorities to plan for the housing requirements of the whole community; provide wider housing choice, opportunity, and a better housing mix than is currently available; and to seek the creation of mixed communities. The Council will have regard to its local housing needs assessment in seeking an appropriate mix of house types on individual developments.

Area of Coverage:

Borough-wide

Other Related Policies:

HOU14, DCS4, LUT20, BH7

HOU7 THE RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT

In order to ensure a safe, pleasant and healthy living environment, planning permission will not be granted:-

1. For residential development where existing or anticipated sources of noise, smell, land contamination, or air pollution exceed acceptable levels and mitigation measures would not be effective, or would be environmentally or aesthetically undesirable.

2. For new development or changes of use near to existing or proposed residential areas, where that development would cause or exacerbate existing noise, smell or air pollution beyond acceptable levels set by the relevant regulatory bodies.

Policy Derivation:

PPS1, PPG3, PPS23

Reason and Explanation:

The quality of the residential environment can be seriously impaired by external pollutants, especially where housing is situated near to non-residential uses. This policy provides the basis for the Council to take such factors into account in determining applications for development.

Area of Coverage:

Borough-wide

Other Related Policies:

REP8, REP9, REP10, REP11, REP12.

HOU8 EXTENDING AND ALTERING YOUR HOME

House extensions and alterations within the built-up areas of the borough will be permitted provided that:-

1. The extension or alteration respects the character of the original dwelling and harmonises with it in scale, proportions and materials.

2. It preserves the essential character of the street and surrounding area.

3. It does not cause unreasonable harm to the amenity of occupiers of adjacent properties through overlooking or overshadowing of living rooms or garden areas.

4. It does not create dangerous highway conditions by obstructing visibility for pedestrians or drivers of motor vehicles, and can be accommodated without compromising the Council’s approved maximum parking standards.

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Home Extension Guidelines

Dormer Extensions

Policy Derivation:

PPS1

Reason and Explanation:

Over the years the Council has drawn up a variety of development control guidelines to assist in the determination of planning applications for home extensions. Government guidance on the content of development plans recommends that where such guidelines constitute a material consideration in determining applications, they should be included as development control policies in statutory development plans. Accordingly, this policy draws together the various material considerations from those development control guidelines and lists them as the criteria which will be taken into account in determining applications for domestic extensions. These criteria are intended to protect the amenity of neighbours. Policy HOU9 refers to house extensions in green belt locations.

Area of Coverage:

Borough-wide. Within the green belt, policy HOU8 will also be applied.

Other Related Policies:

HOU9, HOU11, HOU13, DCS9

HOU9 HOUSE EXTENSIONS WITHIN THE GREEN BELT

The provisions of policy HOU8 will also apply to proposed house extensions in the green belt and special regard will be had to criteria (1) and (2). Within these areas, extensions must be subordinate to the original building and must not substantially increase the residential accommodation, nor be capable of independent occupation as a separate dwelling.

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Home Extensions Guidelines

Dormer Extensions

Reason and Explanation:

In considering domestic extensions in the green belt particular attention must be paid to the rural setting and the existing spread of development. Extensions which would substantially change the character and appearance of a small cottage into a larger dwelling will not normally be acceptable. Development involving an increase in the spread of outbuildings may be equally unacceptable. Particular vigilance is needed to prevent paddocks and contiguous agricultural land from becoming absorbed into domestic curtilage and thus ‘lost’ to green belt. This process can be cumulative and over time can lead to the erosion of important gaps between settlements.

Area of Coverage:

The green belt as defined on the Proposals Map.

Other Related Policies:

HOU8, GRN4, GRN5, DCS9

HOU10 EXTENSIONS OF RESIDENTIAL CURTILAGES IN THE GREEN BELT

The Council will oppose proposals to extend the curtilage of dwelling houses onto adjoining open land within the green belt where this would be contrary to the purposes of including land in the green belt or harmful to the character of the countryside.

Policy Derivation:

PPG2, PPS7

Reason and Explanation:

In considering domestic extensions in the green belt, particular attention must be paid to the rural setting and the existing spread of development. Extensions which would substantially change the character and appearance of a small cottage into a larger dwelling will not normally be acceptable. Development involving an increase in the spread of outbuildings may be equally unacceptable. Particular vigilance is needed to prevent paddocks and contiguous agricultural land from becoming absorbed into domestic curtilage and thus ‘lost’ to green belt. This process can be cumulative and over time can lead to the erosion of important gaps between settlements.

Area of Coverage:

The green belt as defined on the Proposals Map.

Other Related Policies:

HOU8, GRN4, GRN5, DCS9

HOU11 SELF-CONTAINED RESIDENTIAL ANNEXES

The creation of additional self-contained living accommodation by either:-

• extending an existing dwelling, or

• conversion of an outbuilding

will be permitted provided that it remains incidental to and within the curtilage of the original dwelling and complies with other relevant policies of the plan.

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Home Extension Guidelines

Policy Derivation:

PPG3

Reason and Explanation:

This policy provides guidance for applicants wishing to provide additional self-contained accommodation, for example for elderly or infirm relatives, within the curtilage of their existing home. It is intended to safeguard residential amenity by establishing firm guidelines against which such applications may be tested.

Area of Coverage:

Borough-wide

Other Related Policies:

HOU8, HOU9

HOU12 CREATION OF ADDITIONAL ACCOMMODATION WITHIN EXISTING PREMISES

Within the built-up areas of the borough the conversion of properties and non-residential buildings to form multiple residential units will be permitted provided that: -

1. The development does not harm the amenities of nearby residents or the character of the locality by reason of design, appearance, noise transmission or traffic generation.

2. The property is well placed in relation to public transport, shopping and community facilities.

3. Provision for off-street parking is made in accordance with the Council’s approved maximum standards.

4. The proposal would not result in an over-intensification of use inappropriate to the property, its site or surroundings.

Policy Derivation:

PPG3

Reason and Explanation:

The change of use of single household dwellings for multiple occupation can result in the over-intensification of residential use in a particular area with a resultant loss of amenity. It is therefore necessary to limit such development to the type of property capable of accommodating it adequately without detriment to its future occupants, neighbouring properties and the surrounding area in general. The criteria listed in this policy provide the basis for determining which properties are suitable for multiple occupation.

Changes of use of other properties can also make a valuable contribution to satisfying the demand for special needs and flatted accommodation in appropriate locations. However, not all properties are suitable for conversion or sub-division, and an over-concentration of such premises can have a detrimental effect on the character and amenity of an area. Parking standards are included in the plan at appendix 5.

Area of Coverage:

Borough-wide

Other Related Policies:

HOU2, HOU3, HOU5, HOU6

HOU13 PRIVACY AND DAYLIGHT IN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

In considering proposals for housing development the Council will assess privacy and daylighting standards by reference to the following recommended distances:-

1. For conventional house types up to two storeys in height:

• a minimum distance of 21 metres between main face elevations containing windows of living rooms; and

• a minimum distance of 13 metres between main face elevations containing windows of living rooms, and windows of living rooms and a gable or windowless elevation.

2. These distances may need to be increased where:-

• there are significant differences in site levels; or

• residential properties of three storeys or more adjoin conventional house types.

3. The Council will give favourable consideration to relaxation of these standards distances in relation to the conversion of non-residential buildings or upper floorspace over shops to residential use, or where innovative design solutions can be used to maintain adequate levels of privacy and daylighting, particularly for:-

• high density developments near to public transport nodes/interchanges;

• conversion of non-residential buildings or upper floorspace over shops to residential use.

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Home Extension Guidelines

Policy Derivation:

PPG3

Reason and Explanation:

This guidance is intended to safeguard the amenity of housing areas and will apply to new housing development and to house extensions. Where new housing is to be created by the conversion of non-residential buildings or the use of upper floorspace over shops, it may not be possible to achieve the recommended distances specified for new buildings. In such cases the Council will give favourable consideration to detailed design solutions - for example in the use of glazing materials, skylights or screening features - which maintain acceptable standards for residents.

Area of Coverage:

Borough-wide

Other Related Policies:

HOU2, HOU3, HOU5, HOU8, HOU11, HOU12

HOU14 DOMESTIC RADIO MASTS, AERIALS AND SATELLITE DISHES

1. Proposals for the erection of masts and aerials in residential areas for use by amateur radio operators will be permitted if: -

• their height does not exceed the ridge height of the operator’s dwelling, and

• they are located unobtrusively and close to the dwelling, usually in the rear garden.

2. Exceptionally, higher structures may be permitted if:-

• they can be easily retracted when not in use, or

• the apparatus is screened from public view and its design and scale is unobtrusive.

3. Unless technical considerations dictate otherwise, satellite dishes which require planning permission will normally only be allowed if:-

• they are located in the rear gardens of dwellings, or

• they are otherwise screened from public view.

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Telecommunications Masts

Policy Derivation:

PPG8

Reason and Explanation:

There is an increasing demand for the approval of radio masts, aerials and satellite dishes, both for private and commercial use. As a result of their size and appearance, these can often be intrusive features in the local environment. By virtue of the General Development Order, a large number of such installations do not require planning permission; however, where permission is required, it is appropriate to control their siting and appearance.

Area of Coverage:

Borough-wide

Other Related Policies:

None

HOU15 PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING

1. The Council has identified a current shortfall in the provision of affordable housing throughout the plan area (i.e. the borough) of 42 dwellings per annum for the period 2001-2006. Waiting List trends since 2002 indicate that this shortfall is likely to increase significantly during the plan period. Accordingly, in determining planning applications for residential developments on suitable sites, the Council will negotiate for an element of affordable housing as a proportion of the proposed residential floorspace on individual schemes, and will undertake financial appraisals in support of its negotiations. The identified level of need will be reviewed at regular intervals and the Council will continue to negotiate for affordable housing as long as an unmet need can be identified.

2. The affordable dwellings shall be provided either through a partnership between the developer and a Registered Social Landlord for rent or shared-ownership, the provision of serviced land for development by a Registered Social Landlord, or by the construction of low-cost units for sale.

3. The Council may accept the payment of a financial contribution by the developer towards the provision of affordable housing on another site in the borough where practical and appropriate, having regard to the need to create mixed and inclusive communities.

4. The level of affordability will be determined by reference to local incomes, house prices and rents, and the type of accommodation required. As the basis for negotiations, the Council will have regard to the following indicators:-

(i) Average annual full-time gross earnings for all employees in Warrington as set out in the New Earnings Survey, in assessing the affordability of low-cost housing for sale and shared-ownership dwellings;

(ii) Target rent levels for social rented housing derived in accordance with the guidelines produced by the Housing Corporation on rent restructuring.

5. In assessing the suitability of sites and the appropriate number and mix of affordable dwellings on individual developments, the Council will have regard to:

(i) The location of the development and its proximity to local services, community facilities and access to public transport;

(ii) The scale of development - negotiations will be sought on developments of 25 or more dwellings or residential sites of 1ha. or more;

(iii) The Council’s current Local Housing Needs Assessment for the period 2001- 2006, and future reviews as appropriate;

(iv) Whether there will be particular costs associated with the development of the site which would adversely affect the economics of provision; and

(v) Whether the provision of affordable housing would prejudice the realisation of other planning objectives for the site.

6. With the exception of schemes where a Registered Social Landlord is to manage the affordable dwellings provided, developers will, where appropriate, be required by condition and/or expected to enter into a legally-binding agreement to establish occupancy criteria and ensure that the benefits of affordability are reserved for successive occupiers in need.

Supplementary Planning Guidance:

Provision of Affordable Housing (in preparation)

Policy Derivation:

PPG3

Circular 6/98 Planning and Affordable Housing

‘Local Housing Needs Assessment - A Guide to Good Practice’, DETR 2000

Reason and Explanation:

1. The government has issued planning guidance which enables local authorities to include policies in their development plans to negotiate for an element of affordable housing on sites brought forward for general market housing. Under the terms of this guidance, affordable housing may be either low-cost market housing or subsidised housing for sale or rent that will be available to people who cannot afford to rent or buy houses generally available on the open market.

2. The Council has undertaken a local housing needs assessment using the methodology set out in the DETR’s good practice guide. The base data for the needs assessment is taken from the Housing Needs Study 2002, and supplemented by reference to other published indicators as recommended in the DETR good practice guide. It should be borne in mind that this methodology is principally focused on the shortfall in supply in the social rented sector in Warrington, and does not explicitly address the role of “low-cost market housing”, or affordable homes in neighbouring areas within acceptable travelling distance, in meeting at least some categories of housing need. It is recognised that the effects of local and sub-regional housing markets need to be better understood and the Council will work closely with neighbouring authorities to research this issue further.

3. The needs assessment undertaken in 2002 indicated a shortfall in the provision of social rented housing of 42 dwellings per year. This shortfall is identified in the policy as an indication of the base annual requirement for additional social housing or other forms of affordable housing. In the period since the 2002 assessment there has been a major increase in the number of households included on the local Housing Register, from 3,381 in 2002 to 7,928 as at April 2005. Whilst the Council has not yet carried out a formal review of the local housing needs assessment, this increase in the waiting list is likely to substantially increase the shortfall figure currently quoted in the policy. Assuming no change in the other variables used in the assessment methodology, the annual shortfall would leap to 342 social rented dwellings. F