Engaging developments

The Localism Bill, published in December, is vast in its scope as it seeks to empower local communities giving them greater control over their own affairs. Reform of the planning regime is a central theme to the Bill which, among other things, includes consulting with local communities prior to the submission of major planning applications.

At first glance, developers may view these changes with some trepidation; yet more hurdles to overcome and further expense at a time the industry can ill-afford. While it is a valid concern, it is only part of the picture; community engagement programmes are likely to prove valuable vehicles in helping developers secure land allocations and planning permissions, particularly on challenging sites.

The Localism Bill, clarified by further guidance published this January, will require compulsory consultation for all residential developments of 200 units, or four hectares, or more, and on all other developments exceeding 10,000 sq m, or two hectares. The new regulations also mean that it will no longer be acceptable to consult on schemes which are ‘fixed’. The applicant will now have a duty to have regard to any responses received and modify their proposals, or to explain why they have not done so.

Neighbourhood planning
Parish Councils and Neighbourhood Forums will have new powers to prepare Neighbourhood Development Plans and Neighbourhood Development Orders. To become part of the local development plan, Neighbourhood Plans must be in general conformity with the development plan’s strategic elements. These will be defined in the National Planning Policy Framework and it is expected to include scale and broad location of housing and economic development. Neighbourhood Development Orders are subject to the same test, but can go further by granting planning permission in full or an outline for certain types of development. Neighbourhood planning is ultimately intended to deliver more not less development.

Although the emphasis is on communities taking the lead, the Government recognises that much of what is needed to deliver new homes, workplaces and infrastructure – the land, the finance and the expertise – will come from the private sector. It remains early days for neighbourhood planning, but we expect it will be an attractive proposition in some places where communities want to see more development and reap the benefits of it. In others, we can anticipate more traditional planning routes and ‘informal’ partnerships to continue.

What will a community engagement programme look like?
While each development proposal will present different challenges and opportunities, Turley Associates has developed a series of practice guidance and methodologies which can assist in the delivery of community and stakeholder engagement. This includes Plan to Provide which involves the exclusive combination of the Chelmer household forecasting model and Turley Associates’ strategic planning expertise to promote residential development; Plan to Engage whereby we offer a spectrum of consultation and participation approaches which genuinely engage communities and stakeholders in planning projects; and Plan Together which will involve partnering neighbourhood groups and providers in the preparation of future plans for their neighbourhood.

Greater community involvement should lead to development which is more in line with community wishes, and should also reduce the level of antagonism with the planning system. For developers, greater and early engagement is likely to lead to any objections being raised earlier and thus providing greater certainty over what needs to be done to make a proposal acceptable. Below are two case studies where community and stakeholder engagement has resulted in successful outcomes for our clients. In the first example the local community was cynical that the development being promoted would have any local benefits; and the second example, demonstrates the effectiveness of good consultation in terms of securing community support and a subsequent planning permission, following the refusal of an earlier development scheme.

Noss on Dart
A former shipbuilding yard located on the banks of the River Dart to the north of Dartmouth, the site has been redundant for over 47 years. Noss Marina Limited brought the site in 2005 and proposed comprehensive redevelopment for a mix of uses including a marina, boatyard, hotel, housing, and workshops.  However the local community was inevitably sceptical about the new benefits it would bring, and initially regarded it as another Devon gated second home development.

A comprehensive consultation strategy was undertaken prior to the application being made, with a further exhibition to explain the final scheme post submission. In addition, focus groups were set up to obtain an independent assessment of the views of the local community, rather than rely entirely on the self-selecting sample of those attending the exhibitions.

As a result of the engagement and consultation with the public and stakeholders leading up to submission, the masterplan and the general disposition of the proposed uses on site changed in a number of key respects, including the reduction of the marina, the establishment of South Devon College Marine Academy and a club house for the local charity Dart Sailability. When the application was considered by the Council, 270 responses had been received in support of the application.

The Chocolate Works, Terry’s York
Following the refusal of the client’s first scheme by an unanimous Committee decision in 2008, Turley Associates was appointed to advise on the complex planning and masterplanning issues. Critical to securing a successful outcome was the need to re-engage with local residents, stakeholders, council officers and members. The aim was to start the design process again and engage with all groups at each stage, building trust and consensus in order to develop a cohesive, sustainable and locally distinctive piece of the town that people would feel ownership of.

This included a project community forum steering group; interactive workshops and design days; exhibitions, regular newsletters; and a ‘drop in shop’ on site where residents could visit to discuss the scheme with members of the client/design team. As a result, the application was approved in February 2010.

Community engagement going forward
It is clear that developers will need to do more than the legal minimum requirement if they wish to progress schemes quickly and as smoothly as possible. As the two examples above demonstrate, developers must also be prepared to take on board and reflect community concerns in schemes that are brought forward – community engagement must be just that and not a hollow exercise.  For those developers who continue to promote schemes in isolation of the communities they impact, life will be increasingly difficult.