Northcliffe
Lodge: Faulty assessment for “sustainability” of the location
The Council
planning report (5 Jan 2017 committee) shows officers willing to reduce parking
spaces:
“The
Council’s Parking Standards SPG require one space per bedroom, and this equates
to two spaces for each of the 23 two bedroom flats and 3 spaces for the 7
larger units. Six spaces are required by the standards for visitor parking,
based on a requirement of 1 space per 5 units. However, the SPG allows for a
relaxation if the site is located sustainably, with good access to local
services and other modes of transport. The site scores well on
sustainability points due to its close proximity to bus stops, a public
house, schools, a restaurant, public open space, community hall and a church.
Consequently, the parking requirements are reduced in accordance with the SPG
to 1 space for the 2 bedroom units and 2 spaces for the three bed units. The
development makes provision for the necessary visitor parking and each of the
30 units would be served by a single parking space. This equates to a shortfall
of 7, when compared against the Council’s Parking Standards”
The Planning officer calculated 37 parking
spaces – at one space per two-bed flat, 2 per 3-bed flat. The new scheme has 24 two-bed and 6 larger;
including visitor spaces (1 per 5 flats) the requirement is now said to be 42 (Highway Authority
Observation Sheet, 23 June 2017). In
comparison, the original 1984 approval for 30 units (84/0206) required 55
parking spaces; that was recognised as inadequate in the adjacent Mariner
Heights decision (~2005) when 1 space per bedroom plus visitor spaces at 1 per
5 units was prescribed.
The Parking Standards SPG says they follow the CSS Parking
Standards 2008, but they categorised the whole north Penarth area and
Penarth Haven as:
Zone
3 - Urban - Very much part of a substantial built up area with a number of
basic local facilities within 400m walking distance. (400m from the Clock reaches the top of
Albert Rd).
Objective people would look at
the dearth of “basic local facilities
within 400m, and categorise Northcliffe and Penarth Haven as
Zone 4 - Suburban or Near Urban - This zone comprised the outer edges of the
largest towns; suburban locations in towns.
The CSS Parking Standards 2008
document is restricted to CSS members, but can be found on the internet. Its Appendix 5 has a prescription for
allocating “sustainability points”, which must total 7 or more for a
“sustainability” reduction.
Local
facilities (a foodstore, PO, health facility, school etc.): access to two
of these within a 400m walking distance scores 2points, access to more than two
– 4 points. For two within 400-800m
walking distance, the score is 1 point, or for more than two - 2 points.
Access
to a bus stop or railway station: 300m – 3 points; 400m – 2 points, 800m
1-point.
Frequency
of public transport: if does not operate consistently between 7am and 7pm,
deduct 1 point.
The planning officer states “close proximity to bus stops, a public house, schools, a restaurant,
public open space, community hall and a church”. Let’s measure distances using the google-map
facility, though real distances are further than the map projection, because of
the strongly sloping ground.
► Bus Stops – about
100m, on Paget Place
► A public house
- The Clive in John St is about 300m
► Schools – the officer
apparently included Headlands special school (250m), which is not available to
the local public; Albert Rd primary
school is 450m.
► A restaurant – the
Custom House is close as the crow flies, but the walking route round by road is
450m; the Pilot on Queens Road is 500m away.
► Public open space
– the Paget Road play area and pocket park is 300m away
► Community Hall –
St Pauls is closed; Belle Vue Park hall is hardly used except by the Bowling
club and for special events; it is 580m away
► Church – St
Augustines is 480m by the most direct route (plus some increase for the steep
slopes)
Sustainability Score Within 400m – a Pub and Play area - scores 2 points. The officer wrongly included
Headlands school and/or the Custom House restaurant to score 4 points.
Within 800m, there is a
school, GP surgery (unmentioned by the Planner), restaurants etc., but these
still score only the two points.
Rail stations are too far away
(1000m), regular buses near the roundabout are 850m away, but anyway score just
1 point – the Paget Place bus-stop scores just 2 points, because of limited
hours (first bus to Cardiff workplaces is 9.25am) and no Sunday service.
Total Sustainability
Score - 4 points: does not
qualify for any reduced parking spaces.
Even if the Officer included Headlands school and the Custom House
restaurant within the 400m facilities, the score is only 6 points. The Officer might have wrongly taken the bus
service to meet the 7am to 7pm standard (to gross 7 points), though objectors
wrote in on the point.
Walkability the steepness of hills needs to be taken into account
(above assessment assumes it’s flat, when 400m is a brisk five minute
walk). The standard for high
accessibility to the range of services is 10 minutes walk. The
850m walk to the Town Centre bus-stops, foodstores is
a) Well
over 10 minutes for fit adults, due to the hill (eg. via St Augustines Cres)
b) The
very steep hill is challenging, even impossible for many elderly people or
parents with laden buggies; routes avoiding the steep hills via Paget Road are
much longer to the town.
Why?? The officers’ £300k is based on a secret “viability report” – they normally accept the developers’ viability report without independent scrutiny. It doubtless includes notional construction costs and contingency for the difficult cliff-side site, which are essentially unknown but have been maximised. The officers do not propose a claw-back arrangement in case the secret assumptions turn out to give the developers huge profits.
What the Council should do is say the development scheme is wholly “unviable”, being unable to provide the necessary S106 funds and failing include the 40% social housing needed for developments in Penarth (under the newly adopted LDP). Good rounds for rejection, on top of ecology, landscape, heritage, land instability and all the other reasons.
NEW PLANNING-BATTLE LOOMS AS CONTROVERSIAL NORTHCLIFF LODGE SCHEME RE-EMERGES