APPEAL STATEMENT WILSON AND SHARP INVESTMENTS

Transcription

1 APPEAL STATEMENT WILSON AND SHARP INVESTMENTS APPEAL AGAINST THE REFUSAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION REF: PA16/10836 FOR PURPOSE BUILT STUDENT HOUSING WITH A MIXTURE OF STUDIO ROOMS/CLUSTER ROOMS AND TOWN HOUSE ROOMS, ASSOCIATED AMENITIES SPACES AND STAFF OFFICE AT LAND AT FISH STRAND HILL, FALMOUTH

2 APPEAL STATEMENT On behalf of: Wilson and Sharp Investments In respect of: Appeal Against the Refusal of Planning Application Ref: PA16/10836 for Purpose Built Student Housing with a Mixture of Studio Rooms/Cluster Rooms and Town House Rooms, Associated Amenities Spaces and Staff Office at Land at Fish Strand Hill, Falmouth Date: June 2017 Reference: Author: OR / GH DPP Planning Sophia House 28 Cathedral Road Cardiff CF11 9LJ Tel: info@dppukltd.com CARDIFF LEEDS LONDON MANCHESTER NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE

3 Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION THE APPEAL SITE APPEAL PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND TO THE APPEAL PLANNING FRAMEWORK APPLYING TO APPEAL SITE THE CASE FOR THE APPELLANT SUMMARY OF CASE Appendices APPENDIX A Decision Notice APPENDIX B Site Location Plan APPENDIX C Delegated Officer Report APPENDIX D Delegated Officer Report Residential Scheme APPENDIX E Key Application Documents APPENDIX F Cornwall Local Plan Policy Extracts APPENDIX G 2016 Cornwall Site Allocations Development Plan Document APPENDIX H 2017 Cornwall Site Allocations Development Plan Document APPENDIX I Falmouth Neighbourhood Plan APPENDIX J The National Planning Policy Framework APPENDIX K 2016 Falmouth and Penryn Town Framework APPENDIX L 2017 Falmouth and Penryn Town Framework APPENDIX M Unilateral Undertaking APPENDIX N 2016 Sustainability Appraisal of Cornwall Site Allocations Development Plan Document APPENDIX O Correspondence from Falmouth University Falmouth 3

4 1.0 Introduction 1.1 This Appeal Statement has been prepared by DPP Planning on behalf of Wilson and Sharp Investments (the appellant ) as part of the appeal against the decision of Cornwall Council (the LPA ) on 27 th April 2017 to refuse planning permission for the following development at Land at Fish Strand Hill, Falmouth, TR11 3BD: Purpose built student housing with a mixture of studio rooms/cluster rooms and town house rooms, associated amenities spaces and staff office. 1.2 This Statement has been prepared in accordance with the PINS Procedural Guidance Planning Appeals England (August 2016). 1.3 On 27 th April 2017, the Council refused the application for the following reason (Appendix A): Policy 3 of the Cornwall Local Plan states that the delivery of growth in main towns will be managed through site allocations in order to ensure that growth is genuinely plan-led. The application site is not an allocated site for development and the scale of the proposed development is so substantial that it is considered that the granting of permission would prejudice the community-led Neighbourhood Plan process by determining decisions about the scale and location of new development in and around Falmouth. Planning applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case by reason of its location in Falmouth Town Centre the proposal would be contrary to the Council s strategy for providing a range of sites in and around the existing University campus at Penryn where students can both live and study in and around the same location, as set out in the Council s Site Allocations Development Plan Document March 2017 (Cabinet version) further to the requirements for delivering sustainable development that reflects the vision and aspirations of local communities through Local Plans set out in Paragraph 154 of the NPPF. The proposed development is therefore contrary to policy 3 of the newly adopted Cornwall Local Plan and guidance contained within paragraphs 2,11, 16, 17 and 50 of the National Planning Policy Framework and the long standing fundamental of the UK planning system namely utilising a plan led approach to development. Falmouth 4

5 CHAPTER 2 THE APPEAL SITE

6 2.0 The Appeal Site Site Description 2.1 The appeal site comprises approximately 0.13 hectares of brownfield land just off Fish Strand Hill, Falmouth. A Site Location Plan is included at Appendix B. 2.2 The site is currently used as a private pay and display car park, and lies on a steeply rising north east facing slope. To the south east and west of the site are a number of residential properties (Class C3 use). Market Street, which comprises the primary shopping frontage, lies to the north and north east of the site and is predominantly commercial in character. The site is accessed via the road of Fish Strand Hill. 2.3 The site has previously housed the Grand Cinema, which the officer s delegated report (Appendix C) on the appeal proposals states cast significant shadows on surrounding buildings (Page 30). 2.4 The site is located within the Falmouth Conversation Area. To the north east of the site are a number of listed buildings, including the Grade II listed Former Royal Hotel, now occupied by HSBC. Numbers 26, 27 and 27A Market Street are also Grade II listed. 2.5 On the south-western boundary of the site is a substantial retaining wall, and the site bound by a footpath on its western and southern sides which connects Smithick Hill to Market Street. A group of mature trees and shrubs lies on the western corner of the site and to the south of the retaining wall. 2.6 The site is located within the central urban area of Falmouth, and within the Town Centre boundary. 2.7 The Officer s Delegated Report (Appendix C) at page 27 confirms that it is agreed that the appeal site is: i) Previously developed land; ii) Is located within the urban area of Falmouth; and iii) Is within easy walking distance of a wide range of services and facilities that would cater for the day to day needs of prospective occupiers. Relevant Planning History 2.8 In June 2001, an application for the extension of 33 sheltered flats, a warden s flat and 2 screen cinema with associated car parking on the site was refused. A subsequent appeal was dismissed. 2.9 In 2009, consent was granted for the erection of 20 flats with 20 on-site parking spaces. Although this permission was renewed in October 2012 under application PA11/07650, it lapsed in October Falmouth 6

7 2.10 In considering the renewal of this residential scheme in 2012, the officer s delegated report concluded that The redevelopment of this site is a necessary part of the regeneration of this part of town (Appendix D page 9) and that the proposed development subject to appropriate conditions can achieve the regeneration of the site in a way that preserved and enhances the character of the area In considering the appeal proposals, the Officer s Delegated Report (Appendix C) at page 27 confirms the relevance of the previous residential consent at the site, stating that the site also recently benefited from planning permission, which although now lapsed established the acceptability in principle of a substantial residential building on the site. Falmouth 7

8 CHAPTER 3 APPEAL PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND TO THE APPEAL

9 3.0 Appeal Proposal and Background to the Appeal The Appeal Proposals 3.1 The appeal proposal seeks consent for the following development: Purpose built student housing with a mixture of studio rooms/cluster rooms and town house rooms, associated amenities spaces and staff office. 3.2 The proposals comprise 112 self-contained student studios and cluster rooms with shared communal rooms. 3.3 The appeal proposals reflect detailed discussions between the applicant and the LPA over a period of over five months. During this period the applicant engaged with statutory and non-statuary consultees and refined the proposals to reflect the comments received. This resulted in several changes being made to the proposals, the largest being the reduction in the quantum of development from 116 units to 112. The addendum to the Design and Access Statement (Appendix D) provides more detail on the feedback received and the amendments made, which include alterations to the desig and breaking up the mass unto smaller components to mitigate the obstruction of views from Smithick Hill. 3.4 The main part of the proposed development comprises of a large building with a tile hung façade and a traditional pitch and gabled roof with the main frontage to Fish Strand Hill, a mansard style roof with dormer elements on the remainder. 3.5 Access is proposed from Fish Strand Hill, which is a narrow side street leading off from Market Street which, although open to vehicles, is pedestrian friendly and provides access for visitors to many shops and businesses in the town centre. Although vehicular access is proposed, this is for service and delivery vehicles only and is to be obtained by means of an undercroft entrance to a small courtyard with space for vehicle turning, a loading/unloading parking bay and a large cycle storage area. 3.6 The key documents which supported the application proposals are included at Appendix E Background to the Appeal 3.7 This appeal is being submitted following the refusal of planning permission for the above proposal. 3.8 The refusal of planning permission followed five months of detailed dialogue with the LPA and statutory consultees. The refusal of planning permission under delegated powers came despite previous indications that the application was heading towards approval. 3.9 The technical acceptability of the proposals is reflected in the officers delegated report on the application (Appendix C) where the assessment of the application proposals concludes that they are acceptable except for the officers view that the proposals were in direct conflict the Council s Falmouth 9

10 strategy for providing student accommodation as set out in the Site Allocations Development Plan Document,which was adopted by Cornwall Council Cabinet on 16 th March 2017, just 42 days prior to the decision notice being issued. Falmouth 10

11 CHAPTER 4 PLANNING FRAMEWORK APPLYING TO APPEAL SITE

12 4.0 Planning Framework Applying to Appeal Site Background 4.1 This section sets out the planning framework applying to the Appeal Site. It covers policies of relevance from the development plan. It also covers other local planning guidance along with relevant policies from National Planning Policy Guidance ( the Framework ). Development Plan 4.2 The development plan comprises the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies ( the Local Plan ), adopted November The policies relevant to the consideration of the appeal proposals are as follows: 4.3 Policy 1 of the Local Plan sets out a presumption in favour of sustainable development. 4.4 Policy 2 sets out the spatial strategy for growth and states that strategic scale growth will be accommodated in main towns and city, where they can best support regeneration and sustainable development. 4.5 Policy 2a sets out the key targets for growth and refers to student accommodation and the need for additional bed spaces within purpose-built accommodation commensurate with the scale of any agreed expansion of the University. 4.6 Policy 3 relates to the role and function of places and states that the scale and mix of uses of development and investment in services and facilities should be based on the role and function of places. Policy 3 states that delivery of housing, community, cultural, leisure, retail, utility and employment provision will be managed through a Site Allocations DPD or Neighbourhood Plans. Policy 3 is silent on student accommodation. 4.7 Policy 12 relates to design and states that the council is committed to achieving high quality safe, sustainable and inclusive design in all developments. It goes on to require that development must ensure Cornwall s enduring distinctiveness and maintain and enhance its distinctive natural and historic character. 4.8 Policy 13 sets out the standards which will be required by all developments. 4.9 Policy 16 sets out a number of requirements for new development, which seek to improve the health and wellbeing of Cornwall s communities, residents, workers and visitors Policy 21 requires the best use of land and existing buildings and states that encouragement will be given to sustainably located proposals that use previously developed land and increase building density where appropriate. Falmouth 12

13 4.11 Policy 22 relates to European Protected Sites and states that mitigation measures for recreational impacts on European Sites will be required where development is proposed within the identified zones of influence around those European Sites that are vulnerable to adverse recreational impacts Policy 23 relates to the natural environment and requires that development proposals sustain local distinctiveness and character and protect and where possible enhance Cornwall s natural environment and assets according to their international, national and local significance Policy 24 states that proposals will be permitted where they would sustain the cultural distinctiveness and significance of Cornwall s historic rural, urban and coastal environment by protecting, conserving and where appropriate enhancing the significance of designated and nondesignated assets and their settings Policy 25 states that development proposals should contribute to an enhanced connected and functional network of habitat, open spaces and waterscape Policy 27 relates to transport and accessibility and requires new development to provide safe and suitable access to the site for all people and not cause a significantly adverse impact on the local or strategic road network that cannot be managed or mitigated Policy 28 states that developer contributions will be sought to ensure that the necessary physical, social, economic and green infrastructure is in place to deliver development The Cornwall Local Plan is included at Appendix F. Cornwall Local Plan Site Allocations Document 4.1 A 6-week public consultation on the preferred options (Regulation 18 Consultation) Site Allocations Development Plan Document ( DPD ) was undertaken between October and November 2016 (Appendix G). This informed the final submission version of the DPD which was approved at Council in March The Regulation 19 consultation of this document commenced on 12th June 2017 and is due to run until 7 th August 2017 (Appendix H). 4.2 With further steps in the preparation of the DPD entailing Regulation 22 (submission to the Secretary of State), Regulation 24 (Examination), and finally Regulation 26 (Adoption). Evidently therefore, the DPD remains in a relatively early stage of preparation, the formal policies of which have not been subject to public scrutiny and comment. As outlined later in this Statement, we contend that in refusing the appeal proposals, the Council afforded the DPD too greater weight. 4.3 The Regulation 19 DPD states that the core principal of the strategy for Falmouth and Penryn is to focus on their assets and maximise the opportunities arising from, amongst other assets, the Universities. 4.4 The Regulation 19 DPD state that to support the future expansion of the University, student accommodation needs to be provided strategically to ensure it does not adversely affect the Falmouth 13

14 existing housing stock. It highlights that a range of purpose built accommodation should be delivered to cater for varying requirements. 4.5 Contrary to the October 2016 consultation document, the Regulation 19 DPD states that the growth in student accommodation should be focused on the delivery of further managed accommodation on site and adjacent to the existing Penryn campus. 4.6 The Regulation 19 DPD highlights that having this dedicated provision will help to reduce the reliance on the existing housing stock and other smaller urban sites within the community, which can instead be released for much needed housing, particularly affordable housing. 4.7 At Para 7.42, the DPD highlights that Falmouth and Exeter Universities have ambitions to expand, with an aspiration to increase the number of under-graduate and postgraduate students at the Penryn Campus, to accommodate a further 2,500 students within the next 6-8 years. 4.8 The DPD highlights that the expansion of the Universities offers many benefits to Cornwall including to local suppliers and the facilities and services within the towns that the additional students would utilise; plus the significant economic opportunities arising from the business growth that is being generated by the Universities, through their various academic support programmes, undergraduate activity, and expanding research programmes. 4.9 The DPD states that additional unmanaged growth would continue to have significant detrimental impacts upon the local housing market, with the loss of further housing and vacant sites within Falmouth and Penryn to student accommodation, displacing local residents The DPD proposes a three pronged approach to managing the growth, one element of which is the allocation of three sites on/adjacent to the University campus. This element of the Regulation 19 DPD differs from the October 2016 consultation document, which included three off-campus sites as possible alternative locations to meet the varied needs of students In addition to the provision of allocated sites, the Regulation 19 DPD proposes the introduction of an Article 4 Direction seeking to prevent the further loss of existing housing stock to houses of multiple occupation. Contrary to the previous versions of the document, the Regulation 19 DPD also proposes a limit on the lifting of the student cap at the University directly linked to the provision of new purpose built student accommodation It is evident that there is considerable difference between the strategy for meeting the identified need for additional student accommodation between the initial and latest versions of the DPD. As outlined later in this Statement, there is a lack of evidence provided by the LPA in support of this significant change in a policy, which has implications for one of the key objectives of the adopted Local Plan, namely securing economic growth for the county by harnessing the potential opportunities afforded by the University. Falmouth 14

15 Falmouth Neighbourhood Plan 4.13 The Falmouth Neighbourhood Plan pre-submission draft was published in December 2016 and consulted upon until 17th February 2017 (Appendix I) The Neighbourhood Plan endorses the economic plan prepared by the Falmouth Coastal Community Team which is: To take Falmouth forward into the 21st Century through a strategy that builds on the town s unique and traditional sea-port character whilst providing exciting new opportunities for housing, retail, tourism, industry and bringing improved environment and facilities for its residents. To do so in a way that ensures that the town becomes a sustainable place to live, work, visit and learn in In respect of student accommodation, the Neighbourhood Plans states that: To maintain community balance, and protect the character and amenity of residential areas that may be subject to changes of use to houses in multiple occupation; To minimise harm to the living conditions of existing residents of such areas; To maintain a diverse housing stock which caters for all sections of the population including families; To optimize the availability of private rented accommodation to meet the housing needs of all Falmouth s residents; To ensure that the economic benefits to be derived from the expansion of the Universities of Falmouth and Exeter are enabled to come forward for the benefit of Falmouth and Cornwall. To ensure that the likely growth in student numbers is absorbed in ways that are sustainable and work to the benefit of both Falmouth and the Universities To support the Cornwall Local Plan Site Allocations Development Plan Document strategy for student accommodation 4.16 The Neighbourhood Plan acknowledges that unless purpose-built student schemes come on stream quickly, then the unmet demand for student accommodation will significantly impact on the local private rental housing market In terms of the likely location for new student accommodation, the Neighbourhood Plan acknowledges that given the availability of the retail, leisure and community infrastructure found within Falmouth, it is likely that many students (it estimates up to 80%) will choose to live in the town within reasonable walking distance of public transport routes to Tremough and Woodlane Policy HMO3 of the Neighbourhood Plan states that new build student accommodation will be permitted if: 1. It is located: Falmouth 15

16 2. The design: a. On sites close to the town centre and along sustainable transport corridors easily accessible to the university campuses or other educational establishments by walking, cycling, rail services and existing or proposed bus routes; or b. On sites identified within the Cornwall Local Plan Site Allocations Development Plan Document and c. Where it will not exacerbate any existing excessive concentration of student accommodation; a. shows respect for existing street patterns, form, scale and massing; and b. would not have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring residential amenities through reduced levels of daylight, sunlight, outlook or privacy; and c. ensures that servicing and parking requirements can be achieved without impacting unacceptably on the residential amenities of neighbouring residents; and d. provides for the safety and security of occupants whilst respecting local character and permeability of the area via footpaths, cycleways, opes and traditional routes. 3. Twenty-four hour/seven-day week on site management presence is provided. 4. On sites accommodating more than 199 students, contributions to fund off-site policing/street angels will be provided; 5. The development is occupied solely as student accommodation (including onsite management staff accommodation); 6. For developments that includes 10 or more flats a financial contribution is secured towards delivering affordable housing for rent elsewhere in Falmouth It is understood that following the change in approach in the emerging DPD towards the provision of future student accommodation, with the focus just on-campus provision, the Town Council are required to remove Policy HM03 from the Neighbourhood Plan. However, we contend that the removal of Policy HMO3 will have wider implications for the Neighbourhood Plan as a whole, including the economic and regeneration priorities, which it links to the growth of the University. Relevant Policy and Guidance from the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 4.20 The NPPF (Appendix J) sets out the Government s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied (paragraph 1). Falmouth 16

17 4.21 At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. For decision-taking this means: approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless: any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in the Framework indicate development should be restricted (paragraph 14) The Government is committed to securing economic growth in order to create jobs and prosperity, building on the country s inherent strengths, and to meeting the twin challenges of global competition and of a low carbon future (paragraph 18) The Government is committed to ensuring that the planning system does everything it can to support sustainable economic growth. Planning should operate to encourage and not act as an impediment to sustainable growth. Therefore, significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system (paragraph 19). Falmouth 17

18 CHAPTER 5 THE CASE FOR THE APPELLANT

19 5.0 The Case for the Appellant 5.1 The case for the appellant is as follows: The Role of Planning Policy and how it Should be Interpreted 5.2 The NPPF stresses the importance of having a planning system that is genuinely plan-led (paragraph 17 of Framework). 5.3 To the extent that development plan policies are material to a planning application for planning permission, any decision on the application must be taken in accordance with the development plan. This is unless there are other material considerations that indicate otherwise (s70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and s38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). 5.4 Where a proposal accords with an up-to-date development plan it should be approved without delay. Where the development plan is absent, silent or the relevant policies are out of date, the Framework requires the application to be determined in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development unless otherwise specified (paragraph 14 of the NPPF). 5.5 Setting aside the presumption in favour of sustainable development as set out above, the Framework has the status of an important material consideration in planning decisions (paragraph 13). These provisions also apply to planning appeals. Policy 3 of the Adopted Cornwall Local Plan 5.6 The first policy cited in the reason for refusal is Policy 3 of the Cornwall Local Plan, which is titled Role and function of place. Policy 3 Relates to Residential Development 5.7 Policy 2A of the adopted Cornwall Local Plan sets out a key target of the provision of additional bed spaces within purpose-built accommodation commensurate with the scale of any agreed expansion of student numbers at the Penryn campus. 5.8 Policy 3 states that the scale and mix of uses of development and investment in services and facilities should be based on the role and function of places. In terms of the location of new development, it states that up to 2030, this will be accommodated in accordance with a hierarchy of settlements, which the policy outlines. Falmouth 19

20 5.9 Whilst Policy 2A refers to the target of providing additional student accommodation, it is Policy 3 which seeks to direct such growth and does not refer to the provision of student accommodation, either within Town Centres, or at the specific campuses in Cornwall, albeit it confirms that the Site Allocations DPD or Neighbourhood Plans will manage the delivery of housing, community, cultural, leisure, retail, utility and employment provision The supporting text to Policy 3 refers to meeting housing needs and to the requirement to address the five-year housing supply, but it does not address the university s needs for student accommodation, which is specifically identified in the emerging DPD (see p.129 Targets ). Indeed, at Paragraph 1.56, the Local Plan confirms that it does not include for this aspiration As such, Policy 3 of the adopted Cornwall Local Plan is silent on the provision of student accommodation and we contend that the application proposals are not contrary to it, they do not prevent the housing growth of Falmouth. Moreover, as set out below, we assert that the application proposals assist in delivering the objectives of Policy 3 and are, therefore, consistent with the requirements of the policy We assert that for the purposes of paragraph 14 of the NPPF, the development plan is silent on student accommodation. In this case, national policy would require that planning permission should be granted unless the adverse consequences significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits, which as we outline below, is not the case. The Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development 5.13 The reason for refusal cites Paragraphs 2 and 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which state that planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise The reason for refusal also cites Paragraph 15 of the NPPF, which states that policies in Local Plans should follow the approach of the presumption in favour of sustainable development so that development which is sustainable can be approved without delay. All plans should be based upon and reflect the presumption in favour of sustainable development, with clear policies that will guide how the presumption should be applied locally Paragraph 14 of NPPF sets out a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which it sees as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. For decision-taking this means: Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless: any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted. Falmouth 20

21 5.16 As set out above, the adopted Cornwall Local Plan; the development plan; is silent on the provision of student accommodation. Therefore, Paragraph 14 of the NPPF requires the consideration of whether the appeal proposals would result in any adverse impacts which would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits; and also whether there are any specific polices in the Framework which indicate that development should be restricted, which as set out below, there are none. Alleviating Pressure on the Local Housing Market 5.17 At paragraph 1.56, the Local Plan refers to the desire for purpose built student accommodation to be provided in Falmouth and Penryn, which it states, is specifically to alleviate the very specific pressure that is placed on the local housing market in those towns and to allow for future expansion of the university The appeal proposals will cater for 112 students. If the appeal is unsuccessful, then we estimate that these students would occupy approximately 30 traditional houses within the town. As such, the appeal proposals are making a valuable contribution to meeting one of the key objectives of Policy 3, by alleviating pressure on the existing housing stock in Falmouth and Penryn The ability of the appeal site to meet this need quickly (from September 2018) means that it also meets the requirements of the Falmouth Neighbourhood Plan to provide an alternative to HMO s without delay The appeal site previously benefitted from residential consent (Reference PA02/1053/08/M renewed by application Reference: PA11/07650). This lapsed in October This proposal was for the creation of 20 flats. As such, it can also be said that the appeal proposals make a greater contribution to the objective of Policy 3 of the adopted Local Plan, to alleviate pressure on the local housing market, than the development of the site for residential use could. Previously Developed Land 5.21 At Paragraph 1.68 Policy 3 states that in principle the use of previously developed land within the settlement will be permitted provided it is of a scale appropriate to the size and role of the settlement. Furthermore, Policy 21 of the adopted Local Plan specifically refers to the use of previously developed land ensuring the best use of land and ensuring sustainability At Page 27, the delegated officer s report confirms that the site is previously developed land. As such, the proposals are consistent with the national and local priority as set out in the adopted Local Plan for the re-use of such sites. Falmouth 21

22 The Need to Consider the Cornwall Local Plan as a Whole and Apply Flexibility 5.23 Section 38(6) of the 2004 Act requires the decision maker to assess whether a proposed development complies with the development plan and not just a single policy. However, although section 38(6) requires a local planning authority to recognise the priority to be given to the development plan, it leaves the assessment of the facts and the weighing of all material considerations with the decision-maker. It is for the decision-maker to assess the relative weight to be given to all material considerations, including the policies of the development plan (Lord Clyde at pp. 1458C-1459A, and Lord Hope in City of Edinburgh Council v. The Secretary of State for Scotland [1997] 1 W.L.R at p.1450b-h) We contend that the appeal proposals are consistent with the Cornwall Local Plan when taken as a whole In respect to Policy 1, we contend that there is no policy relevant to the consideration of student accommodation and, therefore, the proposals are assessed against whether there would be any adverse impact of granting permission which would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole. As set out elsewhere in this statement, we contend that the proposals will not result in adverse impacts which would fail this test. Moreover, there are no specific policies in the NPPF which indicate that development should be restricted In respect of Policy 2, we contend that the proposals meet the objective of locating growth in main towns where it can best support regeneration and sustainable development. As confirmed in the officer s delegated report, the proposals respect and enhance the quality of place and maintain and respect the special character of Cornwall. The proposals re-use a previously developed site and will create a modern purpose built scheme which encompasses the latest building requirements. The proposals will generate and support the economy of Cornwall, creating jobs and making a major contribution to the growth of the University and the benefits associated with its growth. The proposals will regenerate a vacant site and enable wider regeneration of the public realm through financial contributions The proposals are consistent with the aims of Policy 2a, which seeks the provision of additional bed spaces within purpose-built accommodation commensurate with the scale of any agreed expansion of student numbers at the Penryn campus In respect of Policy 12, which relates to design, it has been accepted by the LPA that the proposals are of a high-quality design, are safe, sustainable and inclusive. Moreover, the proposals have been found to be consistent with Cornwall s enduring distinctiveness. Similarly, as required by Policy 13, it has been accepted by the LPA that the proposals meet the required levels of provision. Falmouth 22

23 5.29 In respect of Policy 16: Health and wellbeing, the proposals will minimise the use of private car and promote sustainable forms of transport, thereby minimising the impact on air quality The proposals res-use a previously developed site at a central, sustainable location and are, therefore, consistent with Policy 21 which seeks the best use of land and existing buildings. In addition, the proposals represent an appropriate high density solution to the site which takes account of its surroundings In respect of Policy 24, it has been accepted by the LPA that the resultant impacts on the historic setting of the site are acceptable In respect of Policy 26, subject to the imposition of conditions, the LPA have accepted that the proposals are acceptable and can provide a suitable surface water drainage scheme In terms of transport and accessibility, the proposals are consistent with the objective of Policy 27, providing safe and suitable access to the site for all people and will not cause a significantly adverse impact on the local or strategic road network that cannot be managed or mitigated In relation to infrastructure provision, the proposals meet the requirements of Policy 28 by securing a financial contribution towards the enhancement of offsite public realm The LPA only cite Policy 3 of the Development Plan as a reason for refusal of the proposals, thereby accepting compliance with all other polices in the adopted development plan As set out above, we contend that Policy 3 is silent in respect of student accommodation and, therefore, Paragraph 14 of the NPPF is relevant. However, even if this is not accepted, the development plan must be taken as a whole and, as is demonstrated above, it is clear that the proposals are compliant with the overall thrust of the adopted Cornwall Local Plan and should be approved without delay. The Proposals Prejudice the Community-led Neighbourhood Plan Process 5.37 Given the stage in the preparation of the Falmouth Neighbourhood, the appeal proposals would not prejudice it In the officers delegated report on the application proposals, the LPA concede that it can carry only limited weight in planning decision (Page 26). Approval of the proposals, together with conclusions of the Regulation 19 consultation on the Site Allocations DPD, would simply be factored into the revised draft of the Neighbourhood Plan As highlighted above, the appeal proposals are consistent with the current development plan and, therefore, the presumption in favour of sustainable development should be applied. Falmouth 23

24 The Proposals Are Contrary to the Council s Strategy for Providing a Range of Sites in and Around the Existing University Campus 5.40 The reason for refusal states that the appeal proposals would be contrary to the Council s strategy for providing a range of sites in and around the existing University campus at Penryn where students can both live and study in and around the same location We contend that the LPA s justification refusal is wrong and set the case for this out below: The Weight to be Afforded to the Emerging DPD 5.42 Paragraph 216 of the NPPF identifies that: From the day of publication, decision-takers may also give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the policies in this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given) A 6-week public consultation on the Site Allocations Development Plan Document was undertaken during October and November 2016 on the preferred options (Regulation 18 Consultation). This informed the final submission version of the DPD which was approved at Council in March The Regulation 19 consultation of this document commenced on 12th June 2017 and is due to run until 7 th August With further steps in the preparation of the DPD entailing Regulation 22 (submission to the Secretary of State), Regulation 24 (Examination), and finally Regulation 26 (Adoption). Evidently therefore, the DPD remains in a relatively early stage of preparation, the formal policies of which have not been subject to public scrutiny and comment. As a consequence, we assert that too much weight has been afforded to the emerging DPD. This assertion is supported by the consideration later in this statement of the significant changes which have been introduced to the emerging DPD during its preparation to date, indicating that there is still inconsistency in approach, which may yet change again. Falmouth 24

25 Refusal on the Grounds of Prematurity 5.45 It is for the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate how the proposals are premature. In refusing the appeal proposals, the officer s delegated report refers to the proposals prejudicing the neighbourhood Plan, which we interpret as claiming prematurity The National Planning Policy Guidance on Determining a Planning Application sets out the basis on which a justification on grounds of prematurity is warranted. These are as follows: (a) the development proposed is so substantial, or its cumulative effect would be so significant, that to grant permission would undermine the plan-making process by predetermining decisions about the scale, location or phasing of new development that are central to an emerging Local Plan or neighbourhood planning; and (b) the emerging plan is at an advanced stage but is not yet formally part of the development plan for the area The University s aspiration for the growth in students not living at home is referred to as being 2,375 (Falmouth and Penryn Town Framework: September 2016, Para Appendix K). As such, at just 112 beds, the appeal proposals cannot be described as substantial, when it represents just 5% of the growth aspiration In terms of the cumulative effect, the only consented student accommodation scheme in Falmouth and Penryn beyond the campus is the land at Packsaddle Tremoughdal (Ref: PA16/03030) approved in February This scheme comprises just 125 bed spaces Whereas there have been several other student accommodation schemes submitted in Falmouth and Penryn in the past 12 months, they have all be refused planning permission. As such, treating each application on its individual merits, we contend that the cumulative effect of the appeal proposals can only consider the Packsaddle scheme, which when taken together would provide a total of 237 beds, less than 10% of the growth aspiration In refusing the appeal proposals and in developing the emerging DPD, the Council have produced no evidence which demonstrates that the three on/adjacent to campus sites would not be viable if they were reduced in quantum by 112 bed spaces to accommodate the appeal proposals proceeding In light of the above, we assert that the appeal proposals would not, individually or cumulatively, prejudice the continued delivery of the proposed allocations in the emerging DPD and, therefore, cannot be considered premature The Guidance goes on to states that refusal of planning permission on grounds of prematurity will seldom be justified where a draft Local Plan has yet to be submitted for examination, or in the case of a Neighbourhood Plan, before the end of the local planning authority publicity period. Falmouth 25

26 5.53 The Site Allocations Development Plan Development Plan Document has not yet been submitted for examination, and we understand it will not be for several months. The Falmouth and Penryn Neighbourhood has also not yet been submitted for examination and will not be until late As such, we contend that the appeal proposals cannot be considered premature against this criterion Crucially, the Guidance states that where planning permission is refused on grounds of prematurity, the local planning authority will need to indicate clearly how the grant of permission for the development concerned would prejudice the outcome of the plan-making process At Page 28, the officer s delegated report on the application proposals states that the emerging proposal for the creation of a student campus to the north of the existing Penryn Campus ( Treliever ) requires a sizeable quantum of student accommodation to make it deliverable. The report goes on to state that the sizeable quantum is required to provide value to help to cover the cost of the infrastructure needed to unlock the site. No evidence is presented to support these claims The officer s delegated report on the application proposals goes on to state that in order to make it a desirable alternative location for students to live, as opposed to Falmouth town centre, it needs to offer various services and facilities, which also need a quantum of development to make it sustainable. The report does not outline what services and facilities are envisaged and nor does it provide any evidence that demonstrates that the granting of the appeal proposals would make these facilities unsustainable Crucially, the officer s delegated report on the application proposals confirms that the Treliever site would be last of the four emerging sites in the DPD to come forward making it more sensitive to the quantum of development granted permission elsewhere as there is only a finite demand that will come from the Universities We contend, therefore, that the appeal proposals will have very little impact on the delivery of the Treliever site or the wider economic ambitions for Falmouth and Penryn and cannot be considered premature. Inconsistency in the Evidence Base Supporting the Emerging DPD 5.59 The evidence base produced in support of the Regulation 18 Site Allocations Development Plan Document consulted upon in October 2016 included the Falmouth and Penryn Town Framework dated September 2016 ( 2016 Town Framework ) (Appendix K) The 2016 Town Framework highlights the importance of the university for the future economic growth of the Cornwall. It sets out the provision of quality student accommodation as one of its aims (Para 2.3.1) and states that a key principal for Falmouth and Penryn will be maximising the opportunities arising from the Universities (Para 3.1.2) In respect of student accommodation, the 2016 Town Framework states at Para : Falmouth 26

27 To Support the future expansion of the University, student accommodation needs to be provided strategically to ensure that it does not adversely affect the existing housing stock. A range of accommodation should be delivered to cater for varying requirements; this should include the delivery of further accommodation on campus, plus delivery of managed, purpose-built, accommodation within easy access to Penryn and Falmouth centre and their facilities, with a focus on Falmouth. Having this dedicated provision will help to reduce the reliance on the existing housing stock and other smaller urbane sites with the community, which can instead be released for much needed housing, particularly affordable 5.62 At Paragraph the 2016 Town Framework refers to the anticipated need for accommodation to house an additional 2,375 students At Paragraph the 2016 Town Framework highlights the many benefits to Cornwall and the Falmouth/Penryn area associated with the expansion of the University. The 2016 Town Framework goes beyond the benefits to the skills agenda that the Local Plan focuses on, and highlights the additional employment that would come with the expansion as well as the economic benefit to local suppliers and the facilities and services within the towns that the additional students would make use of At Paragraph , the 2016 Town Framework highlights the risk of unmanaged growth on the local housing market. Accordingly, at Paragraph , the 2016 Town Framework sets out a three pronged approach to managing the growth. The third prong of this being the identification of a small number of sites that could appropriately deliver managed student accommodation. Crucially, it states that the site identified are both off-site and on-site to satisfy future needs At Paragraph , the 2016 Town Framework highlights three on-site sites it identifies as options to support the delivery of managed student accommodation. The supporting text states that the three sites could cater for at least half of the Universities aspired growth. To support the remaining growth, the 2016 Town Framework then identifies a further four off-site options At Paragraph , the 2016 Town Framework states that the off-site options would offer an attractive alternative to the existing rented housing stock within the community, which might help to reduce demand for students for existing HMO s 5.67 The 2016 Town Framework sets out options for the managed growth of purpose built student accommodation. It confirms the growth aspirations of the University and identifies both on-site and off-site options for meeting this growth. Crucially, the 2016 Town Framework suggests that the on-site options could accommodate at least half of the growth. This suggests that these options could not accommodate all the growth, which appears to be supported by the suggestion at that a combination of the on and off site options should be taken forward Finally, the 2016 Town Framework acknowledges that economic benefits will be experienced by Falmouth and Penryn because of students using facilities and services within the town. Falmouth 27

28 5.69 The Regulation 18 Consultation version of the Cornwall Site Allocations Development Plan Document, published for consultation in October 2016 took forward the proposals in the 2016 Town Framework, consulting on the same on and off-site options for meeting the identified need for purpose built student accommodation Cornwall Council are currently consulting on the Pre-Submission Version of the Cornwall Site Allocations Development Plan Document (Appendix H). This consultation commenced on 12 th June 2017 and was supported by an evidence base which includes an updated Falmouth and Penryn Town Framework (2017 Town Framework) (Appendix L) As with the 2016 version, the 2017 Town Framework highlights the many benefits to Falmouth, Penryn and Cornwall associated with the anticipated growth in the University. It also reproduces the references to the challenges resulting from unmanaged growth of student accommodation. However, the 2017 Town Framework only suggests on-site options for meeting the identified need. There is no justification within the 2017 Town Framework for this change In addition to the omission of the off-site options for accommodating growth, the 2017 Town Framework also proposes a measure for controlling the lifting of the student numbers cap on the University linked to the delivery of bed spaces. The proposal being that the cap be increased by 1 place for every 0.85 bed spaces delivered. There is no evidence to support the proposed ratio and no consideration of the impact that this will have on constraining the expansion of the University and the resultant negative impact that this will have on the economic benefit to Falmouth and Penryn The reason for refusal refers to the failure of the appeal proposals to comply with the Council s strategy for providing a range of sites in and around the existing University campus at Penryn, however, the emerging strategy on delivering student accommodation has been significantly amended from the initial preparation of the evidence base to the publication of the Pre-Submission DPD There is no evidence in the 2017 Town Framework or the Pre-Submission DPD to support this change, which runs counter to the justification set out in the 2016 Town Framework and Preferred Options DPD for a combined approach; meeting different needs and facilitating the benefit of locating student accommodation within Falmouth to maximise the economic and regeneration benefits It appears that the significant change in approach has been based on local opposition to the recent planning applications for student accommodation, which as the officer s delegated report on the appeal proposals confirms, do not warrant reasons for refusal. As such, we contend that the unjustified significant change in the policy for delivering student accommodation is evidence that the emerging DPD should not be afforded the amount of weight it has in refusing the application The Council has at least at the earlier stage believed that an alternative approach, consistent with the appeal proposals was appropriate. Furthermore, as set out below, it is evident that the Falmouth 28