Testun llawn:
Mr R Todd, of Interlocks Surveys Limited, owns and occupiers St Andrews House for business purposes. The premises comprise a building, originally erected as a Parochial Hall, together with an extensive area for car parking and turning. In addition, the ownership includes an area of grass between the car park and the road known as Hallfields. This grassed area, which is fenced off from the car park, contains a few shrubby trees and bushes and is of no special amenity or ecological significance.
However, the Regulation 16 draft Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) proposes to include the grassed area as a protected open space to be protected under Policy RS3 of the NDP (RS3/12). RS3/12 covers two small areas of land and the justification given in Appendix 2 of the draft NDP is that the two areas provide a green ‘lung’; are of beauty; and have trees and recreational value. The comment is made that the areas add a pleasant aspect to the A425 as it narrow, and are used by children’s societies for environmental activities.
Objection is raised to the inclusion of that small area of grass between the car park of St Andrews House and Hallfields, which is in the ownership of Mr R Todd.
The justification to Policy RS3 comments “As well as the “demonstrably special” Local Green Spaces, the village also has some smaller, sometimes incidental open spaces, such as grass verges. Whilst not meriting the protection of designated local green spaces, these Smaller Open Spaces still play an important role in maintaining the village’s quality of life by providing visually attractive areas, breaks from built development and areas for people to pass the time of day. The analysis of the role and function of these spaces is set out in Appendix 2.”
Appendix 2 of the draft NDP states that “every green space, however small, within the village is (therefore) very important in helping maintain its openness, of vital importance to the population. The gradual development of the village over time has not left much open space, so that which there is, is of special significance and should be retained. This applies to all the green verges and small green spaces such as the green in front of the village shop. There is little space for provision of extra open spaces, so any future development should seek to include spaces to enhance and extend those in the old part of the village.”
Evidently however this blanket approach to the possible designation of areas of open space throughout the village fails to apply a rigorous and robust assessment which is required by national planning guidance before land is identified as warranting special protection beyond normal development management considerations. There is no evidence in the draft NDP that the particular parcel of land is ‘very’ important in helping to maintain the openness of the village, or that it is of ‘vital’ importance to the population. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the parcel of land is of ‘special significance’ to warrant additional protection. In this respect, the attributes given to the land in Appendix 2 of the draft NDP cannot be supported:
• the land does act as a green lung and is little more than a small piece of land left over following the development of Hallfields;
• it is of no special beauty or of high visual amenity;
• there are a few trees but these are not good specimens and are not of any significance in terms of visual amenity; and
• the land is in private ownership and should not be used for public recreation or considered as being otherwise accessible by the general public.
In conclusion the proposed identification of the land as a protected small open space is not justified and results in the draft NDP failing to comply with the Basic Conditions. The land to which this objection refers (RS3/12) should be omitted from Policy RS3. There should be consequential revisions to the relevant maps in the draft NDP.