Analysis of Long Questionnaire Responses received to ...€¦ · Analysis of Long Questionnaire Responses and Letters received to West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Issues

Joint Core Strategy Issues and Options – Summary of Long Questionnaire and Letter Responses

Analysis of Long Questionnaire Responses and Letters received to West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy

Issues and Options Consultation NB. This is a summary of the responses received to the questions (known as the long questionnaire) included in the Joint Core Strategy issues and Options Discussion Paper that was issued as part of the Joint Core Strategy Issues and Options consultation in September and October 2007. This summary also includes responses that were received in the form of letters. It is not intended to contain the full detail of all responses received, copies of which are available at the West Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit, Cliftonville House, Bedford Road, Northampton, NN4 7NR.

1


Introduction This paper is based on the responses received in the form of long questionnaires and letters. All the short questionnaires have been analysed separately, and are the subject of a separate report. For clarification each letter or questionnaire is treated as a response. In some cases each response has contained several points, which are termed representations. This is particularly true of the analysis relating to the directions of growth for Northampton. The Draft Vision Issue V1 Do you support the draft Vision or do you think changes should be made to it? 65 responses were received in response to this Issue, of which 42 (64%) supported the Draft Vision.

Issue V1

SupportDo not support

Based on 65 responses. 36 general comments were received in relation to Issue V1, which included:

V1 • Open to multiple interpretations, should be more specific/focussed and detailed. • Too long. • Relate the vision to the whole area, not just the towns. • Add cultural/historic assets and facilities, green infrastructure, leisure aspirations,

social and physical infrastructure, climate change, environmental issues and biodiversity.

• Vision treats towns and rural areas as if they are unconnected but large scale development will have an impact on surrounding villages in terms of the physical development and on the infrastructure.

• Building a range of high quality housing in sustainable locations. • Change "Development in the rural areas and market towns" to "Development

may take place when proven through democratic consultation, that the majority of people want it." Put people first.

• Growth in rural areas should not be restricted to where local people want it.

2


V1

• Does not address local distinctiveness, character and function of rural areas. • Should include revitalising/sustaining rural communities. • Support for the increase in new jobs. • Support for Northampton as a model of sustainable community. • Supports Northampton as a principle, dynamic, vibrant town. • Reference to the whole area and not just the towns. • Reference to sustainable development alongside social and economic issues. • Include Brackley in the Vision. • More commitment towards housing growth. • The Vision is in accordance with national guidance & MKSM SRS. • Support the University and its partners to achieve the vision in relation to higher

skill levels. • Support given to encouraging a network of the three towns. • Reference Northampton as a Strategic location for logistics and distribution

Nationally. • Stronger emphasis on delivery. • Concerns that villages will have to accommodate a rising number of dwellings.

Issue V2 What changes would you like to see made to the draft vision? 61 comments were received in relation to this issue which included:

V2 • Provide clearly defined, concise and attainable steps that everyone can understand. • Open space and indoor and outdoor facilities for sport and active recreation should

be safeguard and enhanced. • Vision is inconsistent with Regional Guidance in terms of the future growth of

Daventry town. • Time frames not identified. • Reference to climate change. • Reference to economic development. • Delete last sentence and final paragraph. • Reference to enhancing biodiversity. • Reference to frailty of rural settlements and sustainable development within them. • Provide greater commitment to the growth agenda. • Reference to housing and employment requirements. • Reference to the whole area, not just the towns. • Reference to the delivery of growth; necessity of delivery and timeframe. • More Brownfield development rather than Greenfield development. • Underline level of change needed to 2021 and the nature of this change. • Acknowledge the needs of the growing elderly population. • Reference to sustainability, housing & employment balance, sustainable travel to

work patterns, availability of facilities and services to meet the tests of soundness. • Reference to high technology sector at Towcester is too specific, replace with

development of the local economy. • Reference to LSCs contributing to the JCS's aims. • Committed sites will act as a catalyst for achieving Northamptons aims. • Separate town sections convey a piecemeal approach. • Development should only take place within or accessible from and to Northampton. • Reference to Northampton as the primary economic hub of WN. • Justification for expanding Daventry in such a significant way and ensuring it is a sub-

regional centre and not a multi-regional centre.

3


V2

• More emphasis and investment in community and infrastructure. • More emphasis on regenerating existing housing stock in urban areas. • Higher priority for rural areas with a plan/design statement.

Draft Spatial Objectives Issue SO1 Do you support the six themes? 62 responses were received in response to this Issue, of which 51 (82%) supported the six themes.

Issue SO1


Based on 62 responses. If not, what do you suggest instead? 29 comments were received in response to Issue SO1 which included:

SO1 • Reference to the inter-relationships between towns and other settlements. • Infrastructure should be listed as a separate objective. • Reference to economic prosperity and the creation of a centre of excellence. • Reference to the community spirit through the provision of community facilities. • Reference to 'Health and Well-being' to create healthy sustainable communities. • Reference to adequate utilities and infrastructure to service development and avoid

unacceptable impacts on the environment. • Reference to what section of the community is to be served by these proposals. • "Environment and Climate Change" includes a range of social and economic issues

as well as environmental aspects. • No mention of the need to support sustainability in rural areas. • Support Daventry's identification as sub-regional centre. • Identify hierarchy of towns in diagrammatic form to illustrate how the towns relate to

one another. • Reference to an explicit spatial theme that ensures growth requirements are

achieved.

4


SO1

• Include sub-objectives for key settlements. The central theme should be delivering the identified growth.

• A canal system can contribute to all 6 themes and add benefits to health. • The six themes provide a clear structure upon which to focus the spatial objectives. • Themes should be expanded to refer to the need to accommodate growth beyond

towns into rural areas. • Add theme in relation to requirement of housing needs in West Northamptonshire. • The role of Towcester needs to be strengthened to serve the town itself and its rural

catchment. • There should be a seventh theme of Leisure and recreation. • Encourage a diverse range of employment opportunities. Sui generis uses are an

important part of the economy. • Strongly support a good range of jobs in the right places to match housing. • Theme 6 should be split into two parts; climate change and environment. • Consideration should be given to designated sites, landscape character and prudent

use of natural resources. • Support the theme for West Northamptonshire to remain competitive and to gain the

investment that it needs in infrastructure, people and enterprises in order to do so. • Provide a definition on "infrastructure" and explain why Transport is themed

separately? As this is confusing. • Dallington Grange should be treated as an existing commitment. • The identification of Northampton as a Major Regional Centre is supported. • Reference to a step-change in housing supply needs to be made to achieve the

growth associated with the New Communities agenda. • The strategy should take a proactive role in re-evaluating the role of villages. • Each settlement should be considered on its own merits. • ‘Relationships’ in theme 1 should be replaced by a hierarchy from town to rural

hamlets with their needs identified. • Should encompass city centres and their commercial and retail functions, out of town

developments, employment nodes and leisure zones. • There should be a separate theme on housing affordability and clarity about its

definition. • Faith communities have a crucial role to play in community building. • Reference to environmental quality being a key catalyst to regenerating areas and

attracting new development. • Sustainable construction is strongly supported. • 'Clean' should relate to pollution management as well as cosmetic aspects. • Central theme should be delivering the identified growth. One comment specifically supported the themes stating that they provide a clear structure for the spatial objectives. In addition the following more general comments were made:

• Stating that this section was not easy to understand. • Opposing further growth and development in West Northants.

Issue SO2 Do you support the draft objectives or do you think changes should be made to them?

5


Issue SO2


Based on 55 responses. 55 responses were received in response to this Issue, of which 28 (51%) supported the draft objectives. The consultation asked whether changes should be made to the draft objectives, to which question 45 comments were received including:

SO2 • Build communities not just homes. • Economic prosperity based on what WN has to offer. • Reference to safeguard and enhance the provision of open space and indoor and

outdoor facilities for sport and active recreation. • Community facilities and green-spaces are essential for a good quality of life. • The role of Brackley needs to be strengthened and developed. • A vision to protect and enhance the Daventry Country Park. • Delete objective 3 (3 Respondents). • Add natural and historic assets • Add low carbon energy or carbon neutral developments • Reference to tourism • Reference to waste reduction • SO1 should address the linkages between Northampton & Milton Keynes. • There is limited emphasis on maintaining and delivering future housing supply. • Developers should make appropriate contributions to infrastructure. • Clarification of the meaning of "green infrastructure" is needed, Environmental

Infrastructure and Green Infrastructure are distinct and both need reference or further definition.

• "Delivery" of development should be a theme. • The proposed development of the Grosvenor Centre will help to meet the objectives. • Reference to the integration of new communities. • The contribution made by previously developed land, vacant buildings and Greenfield

sites should be noted (2 Respondents). • Reference to strengthening the role of Daventry at the sub-regional level. • Economic prosperity should be elevated to the second SO. • Support the objective that seeks to reduce the need to travel to services and facilities.• Recognition that attracting both jobs and skilled labour is highly dependent on the

perceived quality of the environment. • Sustainable construction is strongly supported including setting minimum

6


SO2

achievement standards for the Code of Sustainable Homes. • Add reference to quality of life in villages. • Add reference to meeting the requirements of Policy NP1 of the MKSM SRS. • SO1 should recognise the benefits of allowing some growth in rural areas (4

respondents). • SO2 – The use of the term ‘adequate’ suggests a lack of aspiration for the area. • Should reflect the wishes of communities such as places of worship and community

buildings, especially for the young and faith communities.

In addition the following more general comments were made:

• Support is given to the objectives generally, but modifications are required to make them truly sustainable and realistically deliverable (2 respondents).

• Objectives are generalised statements of intent and do not define specific measurable outcomes.

• More detail should be added to the objectives and additional objectives created. • Changes needed (4 respondents). • Objectives are just generalised statements of intent and do not define specific

measurable targets. Issue SO3 What changes would you like to see made to the objectives? 50 responses were received to Issue SO3 which included:

SO3 • Transport should include methods of improvement • WN has much to offer tourism • Improve green infrastructure and include woodland and other areas of high

biodiversity value. • Reference to the high level of existing leisure and tourism and the need to

promote these areas. • Need to give greater emphasis to rural issues in relation to the proposed growth

agenda. • Reference to developing and prioritising sustainable/greener public transport

infrastructure (2 respondents). • Reference to culture and creative facilities. • Replace the word 'clean' with ‘healthy’ to give it an extra dimension. • Better public transport - especially to the rural areas. • Refer to National and International links. • Reference to safeguard and enhance provision of open space and indoor and

outdoor facilities for sport and active recreation. • Prioritise health care and education facilities before any development is

approved. • Clarify the term "knowledge based industries" and provide commitment to

manufacturing. • Reference to the provision of housing in the context of local needs. • Acknowledge the need to develop Greenfield sites, which are efficient and

effective, to provide housing early on in the process. • Reference to securing the required step-change in Delivery of growth. • Contributions to be made by developers, including mechanisms and timetables. • Clarification on the meaning of "local distinctiveness". • Refer to 'access for all’. • Reference to ‘Spatial Growth’ to deliver the required levels of development.

7


SO3

• Reference to limited amount of development in rural settlements and villages. • Add objective to integrate new communities with existing urban areas. • The Role of Northampton as a PUA should be fully acknowledged. • "Ready access" should be clarified - walking, cycling, public transport. • Support businesses in villages and plan residential growth to avoid villages

becoming dormitories. • Reference the efficient and effective use of previously developed land and vacant

buildings. • Accessible urban green space. • Give protection to irreplaceable semi-natural habitats. • Acknowledge the linkages between Northampton & Milton Keynes. • Have patterns of mixed development to reduce the need to travel. • Develop a transport interchange and offices/employment at Castle Station. • Promote sustainable patterns of development. • Reference to strengthening the economy is welcomed. • Growth should be located close to large employment areas and higher

educational establishments • The creation of a Water Cycle Infrastructure will require a positive and committed

approach. The wording 'are improved' or ‘strengthened' should be used. • Add an objective relating to biodiversity. • The role of local service centres contributing towards sustainable communities

should be recognised. In addition the following more general comments were made:

• The 8 draft spatial objectives are broadly supported. • No objectives should be made • Use of the word 'adequate' suggests a lack of aspiration for the area. • Support is given to spatial objective 2. • The objectives are lacking in detail and do not recognise the current situation. • Add monitoring objectives. • Support given to objective 6.

The following comments were provided which suggest specific amendments to the Spatial Objectives:

• SO1 should refer to strengthening the role of identified larger rural centres where appropriate and sustainable to do so.

• SO1 - should refer to the inter-relationships between towns and other settlements and emphasise primacy of Northampton over subsidiary role of Daventry and other towns.

• SO2 - needs to be clear on current infrastructure deficiencies and contributions that will be required to support the development strategy (2 respondents).

• SO3 - set out objective targets for provision of sustainable transport infrastructure. • SO4 needs to be re-worded to afford equal weight to strengthen and diversify the

economic base. • SO4 - should refer to the advantage of opportunities for knowledge-based industries,

logistics and distribution. • SO5 - Lifelong learning and skills development has nothing to do with spatial planning

objectives. • SO6 - Adds little to National and Regional policies should not contain bland PR

statements but should assist in creating locally distinctive places. • SO6 add "attractive" after "clean" • SO6 and SO8 should be combined. • SO7 - Key objective because it forms the basis of a sequential approach towards

meeting future development needs. • SO8 - Reinforcement of local distinctiveness and respecting landscape character. • SO8 - There should be no requirements for standards to exceed current building

8


SO3

regulations on energy/ carbon saving. Building to Level 6 will mean a move away from historic themes and qualities. But needs to include preservation of the historic environment.

• SO9 - Add protection and enhancement of natural and built environmental assets and wider settings.

Issue SO4 Do you think any of the objectives are more important than others? 45 responses were received to this question of which 26 (58%) considered that some of the objectives were more important than others.

SO4 Priorities 1. Roles and relationshipsof the towns

2. Infrastructure Provision

3. Transport

4. Economic prosperity

5. Building and integratingcommunities

6. Improved quality of life

7. Maximise opportunitiesfor sustainabledevelopment

8. Development sensitive tothe local environment

Based on 45 responses.

Objective No. supporting as most important

objective

Percentage of responses

1. Roles and relationships of the towns

6 9%

2. Infrastructure Provision 7 10% 3. Transport 12 17% 4. Economic prosperity 14 20% 5. Building and integrating 2 3%

9


communities 6. Improved quality of life 13 19% 7. Maximise opportunities for sustainable development

8 12%

8. Development sensitive to the local environment

7 10%

Economic prosperity therefore came out as the objective that respondents considered should be the most important, followed by the need to improve the quality of life for residents and transport. 36 comments were received as to why individual objectives were considered as the most important. These are as follows:

SO4 Order of importance

• SO1 is the overarching objective that all the others contribute to (2 respondents). • SO2 Infrastructure is the most important because without this you cannot achieve the

others and it is critical to efficient and sustainable delivery (4 respondents). • SO3 is the most important, this area has been neglected for years, it should be a high

priority, it is a key factor of sustainability and ensuring integrated new communities (5 respondents).

• SO4 is paramount and is the most important because it will deliver the prosperity, which provides the basis for achieving other objectives and ensures development, is achieved in a sustainable manner (9 respondents).

• SO5 is the most important SO. • SO6 should be the main focus in advance of any building and is particularly endorsed

to such an extent that we think it should be included in the vision for West Northamptonshire. The other seven objectives will contribute to this all-embracing objective (9 respondents).

• SO 7 & SO8 should be the dominant objectives because of the considerable challenges of climate change (3 respondents).

General Comments

• Particularly endorse the inclusive nature of Spatial Objective 6 and believe it should be included in the vision for West Northamptonshire.

• Maximise opportunities for sustainable development. • Development sensitive to the local environment. • The achievement of each objective depends on its interdependence with other

objectives. • The principles of sustainable development, economic, social and environmental

objectives should all be given equal importance. • The existing order is sensible and all are as important as each other when related to

sustainable large-scale growth. • Objectives should seek to deliver more homes in line with Government policy -

Growth Area status and RSS growth. • The objectives are interdependent. • More emphasis on improving existing housing/commercial buildings. • Greater emphasis on sustainability, design, quality, affordable housing, and

recreation is needed. • The objectives should be seen as a package and not as individual elements. • Focus should be on delivering the identified growth. • All the themes are important and interrelate to some degree. However Employment

Opportunities and Infrastructure Provision are the key drivers.

10


SO4

Additional comments included:

• You don't reply to emails now. Your questionnaire is ridiculously complicated and full of jargon.

• Most objectives seem to have been put in place by an unelected body who’s credentials are uncertain and cannot be checked.

• Do not waste time by debating what is more pressing. The whole process is now so delayed that it will struggle to influence the direction of applications being determined by WNDC.

11


West Northamptonshire Issues Issues Issue WN 1 Given the general strategy for housing growth in the RSS where are the most sustainable locations to accommodate this growth? Should we prioritise certain locations for development? 51 responses were received to this question, of which the vast majority (74.5%) considered that the most sustainable locations to accommodate the housing growth allocated to West Northamptonshire in RSS8. Six responses (12%) were of the opinion that Rural Service Centres should be prioritised as a location for growth.

Issue WN1

NorthamptonOther Urban CentresRural Service CentresBrownfield SitesNew Town

Based on 51 responses. 70 comments were made in respect of this issue, which included:

WN1 • Less development in Daventry should be on Greenfield sites. • Use locations that result in less pollution and flooding • Infill between town centres and ring roads • Provide a new town. • Nowhere. • Less development for the Daventry, avoid flood risk areas. • Well served by public transport. • To the north of the town out towards Duston and Harlestone provided a ring road is

built of course. • All of the edges of Northampton. • Prioritise locations for development. • Northampton and Daventry are the most sustainable locations for major growth. • Towcester and Brackley as Rural Service Centre locations for smaller scale urban

extensions. • Small scale housing in rural areas. • Northampton M1 Corridor to Milton Keynes.

12


WN1

• Need for careful phasing. • Against development. • The most sustainable locations are within the existing urban areas. • Adequate advice in RSS8 to arrive at decisions about the most sustainable locations

for growth. • Priority locations for development are Northampton, Daventry, Towcester and

Brackley (2 responses). • Need for effective transport infrastructure. • Focus on brownfield sites. • Northampton’s size and transport links make it the most sustainable location • Need to identify a settlement hierarchy. • Daventry is a key location. • Development should be near existing roads. • Focus on existing settlements. • New town on the Rugby radio mast site. • Need to take into account environmental constraints. • Potential of A5 and A43 corridor should be examined. • Towcester and Brackley are sustainable locations. • Development in rural areas to support local facilities. • Dallington Grange should be developed. • There should be growth at Silverstone. • Sustainable Urban Extension at Wootton. • Prioritise sites with public transport links. • Regeneration of the existing built-up areas of the town. • In accordance with MKSM Strategic Policy 3.

Issue WN 2 How do we make West Northamptonshire an economic success without prejudicing its character? 51 comments were received relating to this question. The main points made were:

WN2 • Lack of a major university limits solution. • Build on existing success and unique strengths of West Northants. • Provide opportunities to grow within existing structure. • Avoid over-specialisation. • Leave it as it is. • Knowledge based industries. • Invest in football ground and Silverstone. • Eco centre for the County. • Work with existing character. • Need to ensure necessary infrastructure is in place. • Northampton town centre needs to be larger. • Retain as many historic buildings as possible. • Need to improve skills level. • Need to reduce out commuting. • Increase the number of jobs available. • Ensuring that the character and diversity of the wider countryside is protected. • Focus development in and around Northampton. • Need for 600ha of employment land. • Do not build on unspoilt countryside.

13


WN2

• Provide infrastructure from the outset. • Avoid flood risk areas for new development. • Improve road network. • Allow Sywell to build an all weather runway. • Need for creative, forward thinking and innovative approaches. • Ensure sufficient land for warehousing and logistics sector. • Policy that supports sustainable development. • Flexible approach that encourages diversity and quality of employment opportunities.• Good design guidance. • Reduce out commuting. • Economic growth in rural areas. • New employment development at Brackley. • Careful Planning with local consultation. • Environmental assets should be enhanced

Issue WN 3 How do we develop the West Northamptonshire economy? Should we specialise or not? 8 responses agreed that the West Northamptonshire economy should specialise. 3 responses suggested that Towcester should specialise in high-tech motor sport. A number of suggestions were put forward as to how the West Northamptonshire economy should be developed, which include the following: 50 more general comments were received to this issue including:

WN3 • Leave it as it is. • Lack of a major University is a key problem. • Promote, niche markets and high quality high-density jobs. • Don’t over specialise. • Work with advanced technology industries in Oxford and Cambridge. • Towcester area probably needs to specialise in hi-tech/ motor sport industry. • No, let market forces prevail. • Need for a positive strategic framework for retail development. • Need to work in partnership with other economically developing areas eg. Milton

Keynes. • Market forces have served us well over the centuries. • Make the trains cheaper. • Entice cultural and creative industries. • Northampton will always be a transport related economy. • Use Northampton to drive the economy of WN. • Important to broaden economic base of an area. • Aim for achieving balanced local economy. • Weedon Depot can provide a range of employment opportunities. • Investment in and development of the University and Further Education • Major on water and energy efficiency. • Capitalise on success of motor sports industry. • Allow warehousing and logistics to grow. • Invest in and devt the University and further education.

14


Issue WN 4 How do we ensure that all necessary infrastructure is delivered and at the right time? 65 comments were received in response to this question. There were some common themes, which were as follows:

- Build infrastructure before new housing/ commercial development (9 responses)

- Agree S106 before planning permission is given (6 responses) - Agree delivery timetable plan for new development (5 responses) - Seek funding from central government (7 responses).

Other responses to this issue included:

WN4 • Focus on problematic areas and resolve before development • Build infrastructure before new housing/ commercial development • Agree S106 before planning permission is given • Agree delivery timetable plan for new development • Seek funding from central Government • There will never be a right time. • Need to ensure proper co-ordinated provision of infrastructure. • By prioritising the big wins such as football and motorsport. • Need for effective local policing. • Adequate provision of open space and sports facilities. • Better education and Health facilities. • Use a tariff system to fund infrastructure. • Improve links between Northampton/Kettering. Improve A43/A14 link. • Public and private sector agencies need to work together. • Infrastructure must include Green Infrastructure.

Issue WN 5 How do we ensure that the growth in West Northamptonshire minimises the impact on climate change in general and flooding in particular? 49 responses were received in relation to this question. The responses received included:

WN5 • Do not build at all. • No building on land that has flood risk. • Utilise the beauty of the river/ flood plain (no building). • Invest in waterways to increase capacity. • Flood mitigation and measures in new housing estates (2 responses). • Need to co-ordinate provision of infrastructure. • Invest in tree planting and open spaces. • Energy efficiency in new building. • Increased public transport to persuade people away from cars. • Low resource housing - solar panels, fully insulated. • Develop brownfield sites prior to Greenfield. • By limiting development and growth.

15


WN5

• Increase recycling, cut down on waste. • Small developments are more easily integrated into existing communities. • Enhancing and promoting public transport links. • Concentrate development in urban areas.

Issue WN 6 How do we ensure that the growth in West Northamptonshire does not add to congestion and enables a modal shift away from use of the car? 52 responses to this question were received. A common theme was the need to provide improved public transport, which was mentioned by at least 23% of respondees. Other comments received include:

WN6 • Provide improved public transport. • Ensure public transport links areas. • Build ring road to the north of Northampton (2 respondants). • Encourage employers to adopt transport methods. • More emphasis on non-car modes of transport. • You will never stop people using their car. • Need for a co-ordinated approach. • Companies should have flexible working hours to ease congestion. • Promote the use of the bike through more traffic free cycle ways. • Concentrate development in sustainable locations. • Give incentives to those who drive gas/ electric vehicles. • Park and drive will not work it only helps those who live away from the town. • It is flying in the face of reality to realistically expect a shift from the car. • Better bus services, cheaper trains, more cycle paths on pavements. • Park and ride for Northampton. • New South-North Motorway to add to the M1 rather than its widening. • Balance between new jobs and new housing. • Encourage walking and cycling. • Create mixed-use development. • Adequate community amenities within new developments. • Focus growth on Northampton as the largest town. • Develop in sustainable locations. • Further employment provision in Brackley will create more local jobs. • Difficult to achieve without some radical re-engineering. • New infrastructure in association with Upton Lodge. • There should be a strategy for keeping cars on main roads. • Encourage developers to fund bus passes for new occupants.

Issue WN 7 How do we provide more affordable homes in West Northamptonshire to meet local needs? 55 responses were received to this issue, of which the main comments received were:

16


WN7 • More housing for local people to meet local needs. • Provide more rented accommodation. • Should not specify threshold for affordable housing. • You don't. • Stop supplying houses to immigrants and allow local people priority access! • What is an affordable home? • By ensuring all developments have a good mix of homes from 4 bed to flats and

bungalows. • There is a need for more rented accommodation. • Combination of covenants, restricting purchase to first time buyers and different

house types. • Affordable houses are needed by the elderly as well as first time buyers. • Increase housing supply in rural areas. • Engage more with Housing Corporation. • Build on brownfield sites and pull down redundant factories on existing industrial

sites. • Needs to be available in rural areas, not just the 4 towns. • More shared ownership should be available. • There should be clear targets for affordable housing in place. • Need for market housing to subsidise affordable housing in rural areas. • Base provision on housing market assessments. • Convince central government to provide very large amounts of money to build council

& housing association dwellings. • By using the Scandinavian style modular buildings. • Flexible approach needed to definition of affordable housing to recognise contribution

of low cost and key worker housing. • Releasing sufficient land quickly, ensuring a sufficient housing land supply in the long

term. • Councils should not specify the threshold for the provision of affordable housing or

tenure split as this may affect viability on some sites. • Specific targets for affordable housing should be included in smaller developments as

well as large urban extensions. This is particularly relevant in villages. • Provide affordable dwellings for key workers.

West Northamptonshire Possible Options Option WNO 1 Concentrate all development in the towns or direct some growth to the villages to sustain the rural way of life.

17


Option WNO1

AgreeDisagree

Based on 32 responses. 32 responses were received in response to this Issue, of which 27 (84%) supported Option WNO1. This suggests strong support to the option of concentrating development in the towns or directing some growth to the villages to sustain the rural way of life. 32 more general comments were also received in answer to this option including:

WNO1 • Towns should have a larger proportion of new development. • Provide affordable dwellings for key workers. • Dependent on the provision of infrastructure. • Concentrate on affordable housing in villages. • Growth in larger villages. • Concentrate on not developing at all. • Sustainable development must come from villages as well as towns. • Mainly in Northampton with limited development in villages to ensure they keep their

unique character. • Small amount in villages but particularly affordable housing. • The settlement structure of the Growth Area and its linkages and interdependencies

are more complex than a simple urban/ rural split. • Define what the 'rural way of life' is and what we are seeking to sustain. • Majority of development must be in extensions or within the existing main towns. • A strong focus of growth on Northampton is advocated. • Concentrate all the development in the towns. • Relate growth to DIRFT and Silverstone. • The appropriate number of houses allocated to Brackley would be 750-1,000 units. • It is not a choice of concentration in towns or in villages but rather a range there are a

range of options in between. • The most sustainable locations are in urban extensions with good linkages into the

towns and brownfield locations within the towns. • Re-use of vacant and derelict sites or industrial and commercial sites for mixed-use

schemes. • Object to rural dispersal. • Weedon Bec support the regeneration of Weedon Depot to provide the National

Museum - FireWorld. • All development should be directed to the towns because they are the most

sustainable.

18


Option WNO 2 Encourage developments that are of the highest design standards and eco friendly. 34 responses were received relating to this option, of which all agreed that we should be encouraging developments that are of the highest design standards and eco friendly. Various general comments were received in response to the option, which included: Comments received

WNO2 • Don't encourage any development • Completely agree. • Buildings should be future proofed. • Developments need to recognise the importance of Northamptonshire 'traditional'

architecture and the use of local materials if the county is to maintain its unique character.

• Access to good quality Housing is a key component of a healthy life. These should include Lifetime Homes Standards, Secure by Design and BREEM standards as a minimum.

• Build a new town not latching onto an existing one without any infrastructure. • Older buildings should be redeveloped rather than knocked down to make way for

more eco friendly alternatives. • If possible not essential. • Subject to balance with financial viability and market demand. • Central to achieving Spatial Objectives 6 and 8. • Eco-friendly should not however be at the expense of good design and therefore the

character should be retained. Option WNO 3 Consider alternative ways of prioritising infrastructure e.g. available funding, local needs or to fit with others’ strategies Again there is strong support for this option, although only 20 responses were received. General comments received included:

WNO3 • Base on local need. • Available funding. • Fit with others strategies. • Make Sixfields more of an all round facility for the town by simply following the MK

model. • A robust backbone of infrastructure and appropriate transport links will offer a good

basis for growth. • More funding needed at a national level to provide adequate roads, schools and

colleges and health and social provision. • It is important to recognise the importance of green and cultural infrastructure. • Improve the roads and developers will follow. • Roof tax. • The needs of local communtiies should be prioritised but within the context of regional

and sub-regional plans and relevant programmes. • Deliverable sites are important in ensuring a constant supply of developable land. • Provide positive policies to enable planned urban extensions to proceed promptly,

19


WNO3

making use of government funding. • No development without infrastructure. • Work with other community and voluntary sectors, including faith communities to

release additional funding and provide sustainable management and finance. • Where the funding comes from is irrelevant.

Option WNO 4 Develop an environmentally led strategy and policies 32 responses were in support of this option, supporting the development of an environmentally led strategy and policies. Only 1 response was received that did not agree with this proposed option. A number of comments were received on this option, which stated:

WNO4 • West Northamptonshire should lead on being eco friendly and green. • Social and economic factors must be equally considered. • Consult local environmental trusts and organisations for the best solution. • Protection of the environment has to be of paramount importance in the development

of the county. • Green spaced strategies must be developed. • Strategy and policies should be led by the needs of local people and businesses. • In moderation. • As long as it doesn't impact on other policies. • Extend Green-corridors around villages to retain rural identity. • The environmental issue is of great significance but social and economical factors

must be equally considered. • What is an environmentally led strategy? • Core Strategy should be based on development needs. • The importance of sustainability has to run throughout all the objectives and policies. • This should be planned in and not an 'Option'.

Option WNO 5 Adopt a strategy and policies which promote non-car modes in the towns and rural areas

20


Option WNO5

AgreeDisagree

Based on 25 responses. 25 responses were received in response to Option WNO5, of which 21 (84%) agreed that we should adopt a strategy and policies, which promote non-car modes in the towns and rural areas. A number of general comments were received in relation to this option, which included:

WNO5 • Improve bus services. • Yes - a bus service, which is on time all the time and such good value for money that

a car would be deemed expensive. • Promote traffic free cycle networks. • Public transport has to have a high level of priority. • Asking people in rural areas not to use the car is a little naïve. • The car is at the core of all business and commercial development. • Perhaps the walk into town could be made more appealing from all directions. • We have noticed the aims of people appointed to District Council salaried positions

are becoming more "anti car". • Use car clubs/pooling, car sharing. • The canal system offers considerable opportunity for further non car travel. • Further work is required on how this will be achieved in practice. • This policy should be based on allocating growth to main towns and LSCs to

minimise reliance on private transport. • Not possible now. • If these modes are brought in this will create 'death knell' towns because people will

commute to out-of town' shopping facilities. Option WNO 6 Look at ways to encourage developers to build a greater proportion of affordable housing in their developments. There is general support in relation to this option, with 14 responses (87.5%) supporting the option and only 2 (12.5%) not in support. A varying range of 41 comments were made in respect of this option, including the following:

21


WNO6

• Plan for good mixed-use building. • Engage housing corporations and give planning permission on land that can only be

used for affordable housing. • Developers should be encouraged to build a greater proportion of well-designed and

attractive affordable homes in their developments. • Make a move back to terraced housing. • 40% must be seen as a maximum. • Increase overall supply of housing. • Subject to the need for affordable housing being demonstrated and that it is viable

and sustainable to deliver. • A 'tariff' that is set too high will discourage landowners from selling their land for

development. • Affordable housing should be determined by analysis of known and identified

requirements and delivered through policy requirements. • The delivery of affordable housing also needs to match the capacity of RSLs to

manage it. • We would recommend that further text be provided in relation to the vision for a mix of

tenures in the area. • Against mixing market and affordable housing. • The requirement of elderly persons housing needs to be quantified and addressed

and included as a specific issue. • Set % targets and avoid the stigma of 'cheap housing'. • More than encourage - 'Require'.

22


Northampton Implementation Area Issues Northampton – Possible Options for Directions of Growth Issue N1 Taking into account your views on V1 & V2, how and where do you think Northampton should grow? Option 1 South Eastern Extension Option 2 South Eastern/Western Extension Option 3 North Eastern Extension Option 4 Supplementary Option - Southern/South of M1 This was probably the issue with the greatest number of responses. The diagram below shows the proportion of support in relation to each option or direction of growth, with 185 responses (86%) supporting a north eastern extension to Northampton, however this has come about largely as a result of the opposition to growth in the other 3 proposed directions.

Issue N1 Northampton Direction of Growth - Options

South-EasternExtensionSouth-Eastern / WesternExtensionNorth Eastern Extension

Supplementary Option -Southern/ South of M1

Based on 215 responses. In relation to the individual directions and the amount of support and objection in each, this detail is shown in the following series of diagrams:

23


0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

South-EastExtension

South-East/West Extension

North-EastExtension

Southern/ Southof M1 Extension

N1: Northampton Directions of Growth - Options

DisagreeAgree

Based on 532 representations. A large number of representations were received on this issue, many of which supported or objected to the specific proposed directions of growth for Northampton. The main comments were as follows:

N1 Option 1 Support

• Support Option 1 and also consider that the "Collingtree/ Maple Farm" site can make a useful contribution to meeting the growth requirements.

Option 1 Objections

• Residential areas close to J15 are desirable for people commuting to London, but need to grow Northamptonshire's economy rather than serve as a commuter town to London.

• Land west of A45 should be excluded from option 1 The other 3 options all have some development potential.

• Growth to the southeast is limited by the River Nene and its floodplain. • M1 J15 is already congested.

Option 2 Support • The A45 corridor and M1 J16 are under-utilised and could accommodate the access

to the M1. • Good links to Daventry and to the rest of the Midlands. • Nearby Sixfields provides a good supermarket and retail parks that would avoid the

need to take the car into more congested areas of the town for everyday shopping. • The South West District of Northampton is already a growth area. It has the ability to

expand further • Development to north will provide opportunity to deal with most deprived areas of

town. • Offers best means of driving up quality of life and balancing inequalities of wealth and

value between north and south. • Link to improvement of educational base to meet visionary aspirations for the town. • Northern option runs less risk of encouraging dormitory commuting away from new

24


N1

settlements. • Development to south needs to be managed to lessen default to distribution and

related businesses and secondly, lessen concerns about out commuting and dormitory towns.

• Concern about flood risks to south, and present paralysing state of traffic congestion. • Development to west and north provides scope for promoting commuting to other

places but has a chance of creating new opportunities for balancing housing and employment.

• Some of the key infrastructure for Option 2 is already in place and there are reasonably strong communities in places from which to build.

• Areas of countryside around M1 & other transport corridors have already been so compromised by development that further infill along these corridors is a sounder option that risking areas of countryside that are more pristine and have less spoilt character.

• To the west of Northampton with existing SSL store forming part of new Sixfields District Centre to serve local area.

• The southeast is the most logical area to expand as it is close to the town centre and benefits from existing public transport routes connecting to the town centre. The Wooldale Centre for learning has been built on the east side of Wootton and land is available for its expansion. The Panel Report (June 2000) on the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan also states that the most sustainable location for a Strategic Development Area is in a southerly direction.

Option 2 Objections • There is relatively limited scope to the north of the A45 without impinging on the

setting of Harpole. • This would constitute a sporadic extension in which it would be difficult to coordinate

expansion, extension and improvement of education provision. • Does not offer the opportunity for strategic employment growth. Is wholly dependant

upon the completion of the northwestern ring road link. Option 3 Support • Juncion 16 of the M1 has a better lay-out for accessing Northampton • Will help to move employment away from its distribution base • The out-commuting from Northampton, in all options other than the NE expansion, is

over simplified • Most preferable option in terms of infrastructure, educational and local employment

areas. Combined with appropriate devt of main roads, including completion of the Ring Road, and easy access to the Eurostar Rail Terminal as well as neighbouring towns

• Possible to integrate development with minimum disruption of Northampton's existing balance.

• The other options are much less sustainable, and particularly that the M1 boundary should be preserved as a boundary between town and country.

• NCC has control of sites within this area which could be delivered by 2026. • Growth in accordance with option 3 would better link Northampton to the growing NN

urban centres • Moulton College has extensive land holdings north of the village. A significant part of

the land which could form part of a northern expansion is in the public realm already. The economic return from development of part of this land can be re-invested 100% in educational provision.

• Land at Overstone Farm as part of northern expansion of the town can play an important role in meeting the growth objectives.

• Development should occur in the direction of Moulton, either in line with option 3, or a variation on this option that may include lesser elements of growth in other directions.

25


N1

Option 3 Objections • It is the opposite side of town to the M1 with no motorway or dual carriageway around

the north side of town. • Given the location, shape and nature this would represent a fringe development of

the existing boundary of Northampton. • The NE expansion will impinge on the separate village environments of Ecton,

Sywell, Overstone, Moulton and Boughton. • NIA does not include any part of the Borough of Wellingborough. NN have own

growth to accommodate. • Countryside between Northampton and Brixworth a valuable resource. • Brings no advantages to the town, will further congest the Weedon Road, A508 and

A43. • The potential extension to the cross valley link will not assist the congestion into the

town. • This development will also spoil substantial agricultural and green belt areas. • Constraints on the accessibility of the areas to the north, and growth to the east

would prejudice the potential relationship between Northampton and neighbouring towns and villages

• Is removed from the principle road and rail connection. Option 4 Support • Develop Option 4 • A whole new district centre would be needed, which should be centred on the

proposed station. • This could complement the Western expansion option. • An unconstrained area • Has railway potential for either inter or intro-urban travel, • In the ownership of only three parties • Is the direction with the strongest market support. • Concerns about the conclusions of the EDAW study but conclusion is not supported

by the analysis which talks of public transport interchange and critical mass, as well as market interest, which are sound ingredients for "place making".

• Being able to serve the demand for quality employment sites. • Access to Northampton London, Milton Keynes, Oxford, Brackley, Towcester,

Daventry and Wellingborough • Potentially of equal sustainable importance to option 1 and has a number of

advantages • Will provide the greatest number of benefits for a society dependant on transport and

communication for both employment and social needs, easy access to junctions 15 & 15A of the M1 together with the proposed railway station this gives an ideal employment rail link to Birmingham, Milton Keynes and London.

• Area is on the crossroads for the existing east/west road system. • Option 4 is more stand-alone, so that necessary and proper infrastructure can be put

in place before or during expansion. • Is an interesting option only if the parkway station goes ahead. Option 4 Objections • Has no "sense of belonging" to Northampton. • Necessary infrastructure expensive to develop due to physical limitations. • The road system in these areas only really provides for local access could not cope

with large scale housing or industrial devt. • Should be deleted, will drain into the river Nene at Sixfields, causing further flooding

in Northampton • Least sustainable • Concentrating growth around M1 J15 without major investment in infrastructure will

cause even more congestion around the junction and along the key routes into the

26


N1

town centre. • The proposed residential development south of the M1 would lead considerable traffic

through the village of Roade. • Option 4 crossing over the motorway sets a precedent that will allow much greater

expansion in the future setting a precedent that will enable uncheck sprawling growth across virgin agricultural land.

• Developing a parkway railway station will further weaken the "Castle Station" • No additional rail station within 5 miles would attract commuters from further north

creating additional congestion around J15 of M1 • The M1 provides a clear boundary between the large urban area of Northampton and

the countryside of South Northamptonshire. Most villagers value this clear division between town and country. Keep separate from MK. There is sufficient development land available to the North of the Motorway

• Congestion at J15. • No justification for growth South of the M1, infrastructure not adequate. No growth

South of M1. Should be in areas less prone to flooding. • The pressure on Junction 15, already at bursting point during rush hours, would

increase of traffic on the A508 and drivers would seek 'rat-runs' to access Roade, Blisworth or Northampton.

• M1 corridor to link with Milton Keynes another development area. • Development south of the M1 would lead to Urban sprawl and coalescence. General Comments of Support • Options 1, 2 & 4 allow for more sustainable directions of potential growth and allow

more sustainable development of the Collingtree Park, Wootton, Collingtree and Grange Park areas.

• Options 1 & 2. Are the most sustainable locations as they have new roads and school facilities, will also have the least environmental damage and will ensure better utilisation of the infrastructure investment is made.

• Options 2 & 3 should be combined. Norwood Farm should be perceived as a natural extension of Upton, delivering the necessary new housing.

• The options do not identify the 'capacity' of each one or its sub-areas. EP supports options 1 & 2 as sustainable growth areas. The indicative shaded areas are, however, confusing as growth areas are shown on existing residential sites.

• It is considered that rather than a single option being progressed, that large elements of one or more will provide the growth areas required. Of more importance that deliverability is delivery of a sustainable pattern of development.

• The JCS should look at other options, including new settlement linked to Northampton. Support option to north of Northampton, north of Moulton adjacent to A43.

• The Northampton Implementation area should be drawn as a wider policy area, including the urban area and surrounding villages and should not be restricted to the urban areas and land required to meet future growth requirements in specific directions.

• Develop to the south, west and east in that order. Use M1/A45 corridor focus on Northampton is strongly supported.

• Maximise urban capacity. • Regeneration should take place towards the east and north-east. • Development in North and NW would result in fewer flooding problems. • Greenfield sites abutting urban areas should be developed before those in rural

areas. • Support general. • Develop denser Eastern District. • Develop throughout the town. • At all edges of the town to ensure equal increase on infrastructure. • Growth in Northampton should be focused upon communication routes.

27


N1

• Preference should be given to developments towards the M1 & the A14. • Towards the M1 as the land is already affected. • M1 should remain as boundary between urban development and countryside. • Ample land available north of M1 motor way for further development over next 20

years. • Junction 16 is underutilised for to the M1 ensure no further traffic accessing M1

junctions 15 or 15A as they are heavily overloaded. • Land at Collingtree/ Maple Farm. • May be better to spread any development as thinly as possible all around

Northampton avoiding building on greenfields or absorbing villages wherever possible.

• Alternative location should be considered, comprising some extension to the east of Wootton, linking Grange Park and Brackmills, some extension to Collingtree making use of the relationship between the area and Northampton centre and growth to the south of the motorway but extending westwards to the A43.

• Most appropriate location is within the area of Brackmills and land extending east to Gt Houghton - south of A428 providing growth at a sustainable location with good access to the A45.

• Growth should be located to the North of Northampton to the south of Boughton and Moulton.

General Comments of objection

• It shouldn't grow at all. • Object due to (inadequate) road infrastructure. • Inadequate infrastructure north of the town. • None of the 4 options for the NIA seem satisfactory. • Infrastructure before houses. • Need to take account of existing residents. • Public transport improvements essential. • The Environment Agency, 3 of the 4 potential options are for development upstream

of Northampton, which could potentially increase flood risk in centre of Northampton. Development steered to locations downstream of Northampton may help to prevent an increase in flood risk within and upstream of the town.

• None of the options show what is expressed to be a sequential approach to delivery. It is necessary to deliver strategic growth and urban regeneration in parallel.

• Key settlements in the vicinity of Northampton will look to Northampton for employment and a range of social, community, retail, leisure and educational facilities beyond day to day needs, consequently it would be appropriate to define the NIA to include a wider policy area extending beyond the immediate boundaries of Northampton and any land that might be required to support its future growth.

• The boundary should not be drawn to include areas to the east of Northampton. The north and east of Northampton has expanded up to the Borough’s boundary, beyond which lies the separate villages. There are only limited opportunities to the north, which are already under consideration by certain authorities. To the west there is a need to avoid coalescence with villages and the River Nene respectively. The South has already experienced significant growth in recent years up to the flood plain of the brook connecting to the River Nene. Beyond Collingtree is the M1 and any development would be remote from Northampton and would not be a S.U.E.

Miscellaneous

• Key issue is the location of growth. This area should be developed using sound planning principles, addressing key priorities. Key criteria might be: - Good links with existing communities and town centres. - Capacity to maximise the use of PT, the effective use of the transport infrastructure and the potential to improve it. - Impact on farming land and visual and environmental impact.

28


N1

- Minimising the use of commuting. - Capacity to provide infrastructure. - Making maximum use of previously developed land, but not to the detriment of community facilities and green space. Therefore a further detailed evaluation is required taking forward the work in the LTGOS.

• Please keep Milton Malsor as it is. I would not like to be inundated with extra traffic. • No artificial impetus. • As a Parish Council we would stress that Quinton Parish Council will always wish to

maintain the identity, atmosphere and uniqueness of this South Northamptonshire village.

• Land currently designated for employment development within the Northampton Local Plan should be retained, new growth in employment provision should be encouraged on allocated sites, in preference to areas outside existing urban boundaries. In addition, it should be confirmed that all types of B class employment generating development will be encouraged on employment designated land.

• Growth at Northampton should maximise opportunities for usage and improvement of the Northampton arm.

• Land north of Bedford Road, immediately east of the Lakes business area would not prejudice the consideration or delivery of any of options. Do not favour any one of the four options that have been put forward.

• Welcome recognition that the SRS requires new devt within the NIA to be delivered through a combination of options and that the majority of WN's growth should be located within the NIA.

• Northampton should grow in a way which facilities balanced development between housing and employment land. The extension to Pineham is supported particularly in a northwesterly direction and it is disappointing to see that this area does not form an option.

• Buckton Fields forms part of a saved policy of Daventry's extant development plan and is a location capable of accommodating a sustainable urban extension.

• Object strongly to the Buckton Field’s area. Over urbanisation, joining of villages, closure of farm shop/business, infrastructure issues and traffic problems.

• Mixed developments with easy access to major highways. • Grave concerns regarding the encroachment into the neighbouring parts of Daventry

and South Northampton by Northampton Borough. • Growth should be in blocks of at least 6,000 - 8,000 dwellings to sustain a new

secondary school. One new school will be needed on the west side of Northampton. The level of growth indicates a need for at least one further secondary school, but this would depend on the growth option.

• Town centre is most sustainable. • New sites will need to be made available for development outside the existing built up

area and most of the development options would appear to be in different configurations on the south side of the town. Exemplar flagship developments such as Upton should be applied elsewhere.

• People living in one quadrant will vote for development in other quadrants and the results will therefore do little to inform as to what is the best option. There should be a new town created so that infrastructure issues can be dealt from the start. Failing that, the development should be divided equally between all four quadrants.

• Major urban extension at junction 15 for Turismo - an integrated, leisure destination including a mix of world class attractions with a unique mix of participation, competition and spectacle that will offer multi-visit appeal. A range of major competitions and events to create a high level of activity and animation throughout the year.

29


Issue N2 To what extent do you think the provision of a new parkway station to the south of Northampton is a realistic proposal, and to what extent should this influence the choice of directions of growth?

Issue N2

Yes - it is a realisticoptionNo - it is not a realisticoption

Based on 127 responses. 127 comments were received in respect of this issue, the majority of which (91%) did not consider that the proposed parkway station to the south of Northampton was a realistic proposal. This perhaps echoes the opposition to a southern extension to Northampton. A large number of representations were received in respect to Issue N2, the main focus of which included:

N2 • Not realistic at all • A train link from Grange Park into London would be excellent as this would reduce trips

into town for public transport Good idea and could promote a southern expansion. • Build a station away from the middle of Northampton; make it easier to get to. About

time. • In view of the growth of the urban area it is essential that a parkway station be provided

for travel into and out of the area. Northampton's Castle Station is limited in the amount of commuter traffic and parking facilities that can be accommodated.

• It is both realistic and necessary if growth is to be focussed on an area this far from the existing town centre. It also caters for the inevitable growth in London commuters and keeps them from clogging up the town's roads and J15 of the M1.

• There should not be an additional station within 5 miles of existing, as this would mean more stops for trains to London, increasing journey time. Additional station would attract commuters from further north to use station creating additional congestion around J15 of M1.

• Attempting to establish a parkway on the Northampton loop should not dilute the policy of improving Castle Station. Together with Milton Keynes the whole area has more than adequate access to railways. The provision of an additional station on the loop, or at Roade, would create demand for considerable residential development in the village and its surrounding area.

• This would be a disaster. It would further weaken Castle Station that is having enough trouble competing with Wellingborough, Kettering and Milton Keynes. Why would we want another Long Buckby station?

• Northampton is a realistic proposal, and to what extent should this influence the choice of directions of growth.

• This is surely against your policy of moving away from cars as a means of transport.

30


N2

This would increase cars to the station. • Trains to London are now faster and more regular, stopping once again before Milton

Keynes is a false economy and no direct benefit to Northampton. • A new station south of Northampton is essential in order to reduce traffic congestion

around Castle Station. A facility south of the town should impact upon housing growth proposals in the nearby villages.

• The station need not be designed for commuters, but would allow people to travel into the centre of Northampton without using a car. The 'parkway station concept' is based on a different strategic concept, as it would in effect be a park and ride for Milton Keynes, Leighton Buzzard, Watford or London.

• Improve London to Birmingham route and speed up trains. Development should be beneficial to Northampton. Parkway station would only have limited effect.

• New station to provide for commuting should not count against options 1 and 2. • Interchange at South Northampton is an important catalyst, should serve local residents

and businesses and attracting rail users off the motorway would be an additional advantage. Needs funding from development, train operators, Network Rail, third parties.

• The Environment Agency would support the provision of a new parkway station to the south of Northampton, provided it is located in a sustainable location avoiding areas of flood risk and particular environmental sensitivity. New development should be in locations where housing, services, retail and employment can easily be accessed by public transport or other sustainable forms of transport.

• The new parkway proposal has no firm planning policy basis to be included in the WNJCS. In the short term, a parkway station would detract from the role of Castle Station, which is an important focal point for the regeneration of Northampton town centre.

• Any suggestion that a parkway station should be used to support growth south of the M1 motorway is unsound.

• New parkway station to the south of Northampton is not realistic or effective as part of the sustainable growth of Northampton. It is in the wrong location.

• A station would source external users, which would result in further increased traffic movements.

• This is potentially a realistic option and should be a key factor in the choice of growth. • This is supported. However the provision of this station is a solution to a particular

problem and not a main pillar of the strategy as in itself it cannot effect significant modal change within Northampton. The potential for growth in this area should therefore not be influenced substantially by this proposal.

• Very realistic if we are to achieve a radical modal shift in transport. • Should not influence the choice and direction of growth. Suitable gradients for platforms,

the ability to sustain another station on the line and the ability to make suitable timetable and signalling adjustments.

• The station would not be constructed from the outset, this would mean the ability to affect travel patterns from the start of development would be severely compromised, resulting in an increased pressure on the local highway network.

• This may influence the directions of growth. Further details are required but as it is proposed to the south of Northampton, this precludes Option 3 as a viable option. The parkway would offer 'in-commuters' to Northampton. This could mean fewer vehicles on key routes into and out of Northampton. Would only be of benefit for those travelling long distances.

• A high frequency and quality bus service could provide a similar, more cost effective solution.

• Should not influence the direction of growth. Such as station would simply be a facility to accommodate daily out commuting to Milton Keynes and London.

• Should not influence the choice of directions of growth. A strategy based upon issues directly related to congestion and modal shifts should be explored.

• If development is close and a sensible service can be assured for the future. • Possible, but would need infrastructure. See need to develop current station but not

31


N2

demolish it. • A station south of Northampton, whether a free-standing parkway station or one

integrated with a new development area, is likely to be used mainly for long-distance out-commuting and have little impact on local trips.

• The London and South Midlands Multi-Modal Study suggested that a parkway station in such a site could serve a strategic purpose in relieving the M1. Need to question then whether such a station would be consistent with wider objectives of the JCS. Certainly it should not compromise the role of Castle Station in serving Northampton.

• Focus should be on improving the existing station. Issue N3 Should those parts of the Borough of Wellingborough that neighbour Northampton be included in the consideration of the definition of the Northampton Implementation Area? There was a limited response to this question (30 responses), of which 63% of respondees were of the opinion that parts of the Borough of Wellingborough should not be included for consideration in the definition of the Northampton Implementation Area.

Issue N3

YesNo

Based on 30 responses. The main comments received in respect of this issue were:

N3 • Must not affect quality of life of existing residents • Strongly do not support, no to development. • As there will be a growth in trade along the A14 corridor those areas of Wellingborough

that have access to Northampton and the A43 should be included within the NIA. • Every action has a reaction and too much is done without due consideration of the

knock-on effects. • The NE expansion will impinge on the separate village environments of Ecton, Sywell,

Overstone, Moulton and Boughton. • NIA does not include any part of the Borough of Wellingborough. NN have own growth to

32


N3

accommodate. The out-commuting from Northampton, in all options other than the NE expansion, is over simplified.

• The southern expansion is preferred. Eastern expansion would overlap and undermine the North Northants growth area strategy.

• No strong specific view. • Find it difficult to see how this would work in practice, given the cross-boundary

administrative complexities of involving another Local Planning Authority (Borough Council of Wellingborough).

• No provision for such growth in the NNJSS and so no policy basis for it. • Any major development (wherever it is located around Northampton or in West

Northamptonshire) will need to comply with the required overall strategic approach to water infrastructure planning (through a Water Cycle Strategy).

• Borough of Wellingborough does not form part of the NIA as defined in the MKSM. • Development to the east of Northampton would impact on the gap between Northampton

and Wellingborough. • Omitting the Borough of Wellingborough undermines Option 3. • Full recognition is needed to the extent to which development in the Borough of

Wellingborough relates to the needs and opportunities in WN. • The NIA boundary has not been clearly defined in the Core Strategy. • The NIA is already broadly described in MKSMSRS and is confined to those parts of

south Northamptonshire and Daventry Districts, which immediately adjoin the Borough boundary.

• The NIA should be defined on a tighter area based on the NBC boundary with additional locations to meet existing and future growth requirements in order to plan more effectively for infrastructure in the future.

• The NIA is broadly described in the MKSMSRS and this does not include Wellingborough.

• This would only seem fair. • Increased traffic into Northampton along the Kettering and Wellingborough Roads. At

peak times it can take up to 54 minutes to reach Northampton town centre from Ecton Brook, while it only takes 15minutes to reach Wellingborough town centre. Increased traffic flows will further impact upon congestion.

• Building upon current farmland east of Northampton will encroach on limited areas of green belt between Northampton and Wellingborough. This will create a dangerous precedent and could even result in the two towns becoming linked.

• Could lead to future flooding. • Wildlife in the area would suffer and this would impact upon the linear park. • Parking problems will be exacerbated. • If the Sub Regional Strategy does not include Wellingborough then it would be wrong to

include it. • No mention of avoiding coalescence between Northampton and Ecton. Strategic gap

identified in NN CSS. Issue N4 Should development take place at a high density to reduce the amount of land needed to accommodate the growth?

33


Issue N4

YesNo

Based on 19 responses. There was quite a limited response to this issue, with only 19 responses. Of these, slightly more (55%) were in favour of growth being at a high density in order to reduce the amount of land needed to accommodate the growth. A variety of comments were received in relation to this issue, the main comments being as follows:

N4 • Support. • This will also lead to the housing being more affordable which is one of the objectives.

However, problems of car parking, noisy neighbours and giving children room to play should be considered.

• It is not viable. • Medium to high density. Move towards terraced housing. Lots of housing keeps it

affordable. No high-rise blocks of flats. • Should not be seen simply as a means of reducing the amount of land to accommodate

the development and lessening impact on greenfield development, promote the efficient use of land.

• A means to create vibrant new urban space in the towns through this form of development, which could be intrinsic to revitalisation and regeneration of the town space and economic growth.

• There needs to be a balance between creating attractive places to live and making the best use of land. Policies are already in place for a minimum density of 35 dph, which is likely to be exceeded.

• Ambitious design and architecture should be incorporated, along with art and culture. • Density appropriate to location. • High density needs balancing against character and may lead to out-migration. • Research the effect that high density has on health, well being and crime rates and then

consider whether the social cost is greater than the amenity / production value of the land• The density of development should, while facilitating a high quality environment. • High-density development will often be appropriate, to prevent urban sprawl and to avoid

having to build in areas of higher flood risk (in accordance with the PPS25 Sequential Test), higher environmental sensitivity or ecological value.

• Important to 'make space for water' and allow sufficient area for sustainable drainage systems (SUDS, such as soakaways and swales) and green infrastructure within development layouts. The benefits of this will include higher quality of life for occupants, and habitat for wildlife.

• Density should be reflective of design and character of an area .

34


N4

• Policies should be put in place to ensure a mix of densities. • Maximising densities across the board to minimise land take would not in our opinion

assist the JCS in achieving its spatial objectives particularly in relation to "Building and Integrating Communities".

• Density should be influenced by a number of factors including policy, infrastructure capacity, and site-specific constraints. Some areas can have high densities and some low. Traditionally villages often have high densities in their core.

• Medium. • Prescribing a minimum or average density would introduce an unnecessary constraint in

the master planning process • Within reason. Landscape impact and the density of surrounding development should be

taken into consideration. • Delivering high-density mixed-use sustainable development in locations close to existing

or proposed services such as public transport, amenities and education. High-density developments reduce the distance needed to travel and encourage shorter journeys to be made on foot or by cycle. The density percentages should not be fixed but made flexible.

• Should not prejudice the quality of development, expansion into green areas is inevitable.• Possibly, although this must take account of the risks of overcrowding, anti-social

behaviour and peoples need for open spaces. • But good design, use of perimeter blocks, best qualities of local distinctiveness. Issue N5 Do you think that employment is the key to Northampton’s future success and should there be more high quality employment particularly knowledge based ? A total of 33 responses were received to this question, of which the vast majority agreed that employment is the key to Northampton’s future success. Several general responses were also received to this issue, including:

N5 • Unclear what "knowledge based" employment really means, but we should also be

protecting manufacturing to give less academic young people, particularly young men, decent employment proposals. We have also to address the issues of a low existing skill base.

• Balanced, but what does ''Knowledge base' mean? • But you need an educated population to start this off. Make the schools better. • It is an important element in the mix that creates success and high quality business. A

generally diverse approach on new and high tech industries is needed, perhaps linked to ICT, is perhaps a critical success factor here.

• Employment is key, quality knowledge based jobs, linked to the University need to develop university arc.

• Must be a sufficiency of jobs to houses to avoid creating dormitory towns. Improve skills and training to create labour force- with jobs to match.

• Employment development is essential to success. • Employment needs to be provided for. Sustainability is important to ensure the quality of

the employment offered. • Unemployment does not help the future success of any town and more knowledge based

high quality employment would not be harmful. • Whilst employment within mixed-use development is important, the quality of the built and

natural environment in and around Northampton is also an important factor in adding to (or detracting from) the attractiveness of the area for potential investors and new or relocated employers.

35


N5

• The key to future success is developing the transport infrastructure so that the potential in Northampton's natural location can be exploited.

• Employment should be run in tandem with new development, as it is key to implementing a suitable strategy.

• Appropriate for new employment sites to cater for a range of employment sites of varying sizes, types and locations to ensure a flexible range of premises for all sectors and firms. Employment should be part of any SUE.

• Development should be based around Moulton College and other educational establishments. It makes sense to capitalise upon the strengths in this area.

• The University believes that the delivery of adequate graduate level employment opportunities is a vital ingredient of successful growth, an important element of which is the attraction of knowledge-based industries. The University further believes that the devt of a university Arc is the most effective way of attracting, nurturing and then growing such industries.

• The provision of additional housing resources in and around Northampton may serve to provide housing opportunities to encourage more people to live in Northampton who already work here.

• An essential pre-requisite for meeting objectives for growth is the successful creation of a University Arc for Northampton, stretching north from the town centre and incorporating the campuses of the University of Northampton, Northampton College and Moulton College. Expansion of higher education facilities, in tandem with economic growth, would help to create the new identity Northampton.

• The employment polices should reflect those for wider west northeast and provide for growth in sectors which are key drivers of economic growth. This is likely to be more economically sustainable than focusing primarily on the knowledge sector.

• High quality employment provision (i.e. knowledge based & blue chip) will be particularly important and JCS should support and encourage these.

• In appropriate locations and driven by market demand. • linking existing knowledge -based industries to proposed new development can create

cohesive employment bases and promote the competitiveness of Northampton. • The key is to create mixed-use developments. • Sufficient land needs to be available to accommodate new housing in support of the

continuing economic growth of Northampton. Existing employment areas within the urban fabric of Northampton should be safeguarded. Many employment areas are already in sustainable locations, being on public transport routes well related to residential areas. Sufficient employment land should be provided.

• But there must be adequate full-time employment for people of all ages and abilities. Public transport must be considerably improved to enable people, especially young people, to get to places of employment. Accessing work on out of town industrial estates can be difficult. More though needs to be given to local employment opportunities, especially for the young and for those who are less mobile.

• One of them. High time knowledge-base is attracted but good quality environment and good education essential to attract employers.

Issue N6 How can we increase and improve Northampton’s cultural image and identity? 21 comments were received in response to this issue, the main comments being as follows:

N6 • Celebrate its heritage – eg. boot and shoe industry • Recognise its assets and get out there and promote them.

36


N6

• Pull down the bus station and make the town an easy place to visit that is pretty, offers a diverse range of shops, restaurants, leisure time facilities etc.

• We have a fantastic Theatre complex in the Royal and Derngate - it was almost under threat - this is not what Northampton should be losing but investing in and promoting to the whole of the East Midlands/ Midlands region.

• Develop an Arts Quarter around the Guildhall area. • There is a need for more open spaces and a 'greening' of the town centre, landmark

features in the growth areas and/ or country parks? • The proliferation of 'bars' in the town has led to it becoming a no-go area for many during

the hours of darkness. Perhaps Northamptonians are just not ready for a café society. Restrict number of bars in town.

• Town should have a local DAB multiplex and the huge spaces on the FM band should be opened up.

• Regarding the growth plans, keep the architecture sympathetic to the adjoining areas, particularly where new houses are placed near Victorian terraced streets. By keeping the old buildings. Not allowing old buildings to be demolished (e.g. the old malt house).

• Start to advertise nationally. • The county is beautiful and should be left for our grandchildren to enjoy instead of

mindless building, which would destroy it. • Keep the museum free! • The recent reduction in support for arts & culture in order to limit the Council Tax

implications demonstrates the need for a fully balanced and considered policy. We cannot expect funding from central resources to provide this.

• Invest in it and recognise that it can have a massive impact on regeneration and in stamping the identity and presence of a place. Culture and its importance needs to become an intrinsic element to the framework of development and the infrastructure that supports the same. Need collective ownership that a place is special.

• If I knew the answer to this I would be famous. • Strengthen identity and image. • By making sure that the Development Control staff fully understand the cultural

significance of the town in respect of the built and hidden heritage and robustly implement PPG16 & 17.

• Analyse what is special about the present culture and provide the relevant bodies with adequate staff and budget for the long-term.

• Enhance the eastern (Bedford Road) gateway to the town by means of a very high quality development at this location, complementing such development that has occurred at the town's western gateway (the most recently developed phase of the Upton scheme).

• By holding more national rallies like the balloon festival by reinstating the Northampton show.

• S106 contributions resulting from large urban extensions could include investment to enhance cultural facilities. Collaborative planning, design and community engagement will encourage a shared understanding of issues and ensure cultural image and identity is maintained.

• Retain and maintain historic buildings and make them more of a tourist attraction. • Stop demolishing historical buildings. The recent loss of many of our school buildings will

have badly impacted upon out sense of identity. Celebrate our part and have confidence in our future.

• Respecting urban heritage/design and promoting arts/theatre, not simply pubs, clubs, amusements and fast food outlets.

Issue N7 How can we improve the overall performance of the town centre?

37


Again, there were a variety of comments received (27 comments) in response to this question. Several responses mentioned the need to encourage local independent shops (3 responses) and make more user friendly transport system (2 responses). Other responses included:

N7 • Encourage local independent shops. • Provide links to other attractive parts of town. • Make more user friendly transport system. • Encourage businesses and local enterprise into town by making it affordable for both

smaller bespoke, individual companies and the larger companies alike. • Restore Market Square to its former glory. • Create an attractive and expanded retail offer in the town centre. • It has to become more 'user' friendly. Better off-street parking with pay on exit. • Better public transport links from the outlying suburbs and centres of employment will

attract more shoppers into the area. • Ensure that a new shopping centre has large sized units that will attract large branches

of major chains. Also ensure that local niche retailers are allowed to prosper. • Clean it up. • Realise the importance of the car in bringing customers to shop. • Tempt offices back. • It must become a destination of choice for shoppers. • Identify why people will travel to Milton Keynes or Oxford and Cambridge by preference

and provide something that has equal allure. Might be most effectively done by a powerful investment in Culture in its widest government defined sense.

• If I knew the answer to this I would be famous. • No pedestrianisation. • Provide an interchange with links to Castle Station and bus links to the town centre. • By having a sufficiently resourced and professional local authority with clear aims and

knowledgeable council members who will support the staff. • Limit the number of bars. • Modelling exercise is required to determine the relationship between a healthy town

centre and its surrounding area. • Northampton Central Area Action Plan must not be seen in isolation from other planning

issues in the area. • Development (of a wide range of types) should be promoted in the town centre. • By improving access to it. • Attract investment brought about by mixed-use development in and around the town

centres. • Improving the retail offer of the town and aiding the delivery of key regeneration projects

such as the proposed redevelopment of the Grosvenor Centre can increase the overall performance of the town centre.

• Redevelopment of the centre will help to draw people to the town thereby improving performance.

• Protect the town centre from major out of centre retail developments, which could compromise the future growth of the town centre and result in a negative effect upon the vitality and viability of the town centre.

• The provision of realistic employment polices will encourage inward investment an economic development. Higher levels of economic activity and rates of employment are likely to result in greater levels of disposable income.

• Growth option 1. Would facilitate high quality pedestrian, cycle, public transport and vehicular links from sustainable urban extensions to the town centre.

• Improve the aesthetics of the main streets. • Keep the bus station but decorate it, return the mural of the town’s history to the

Grosvenor Centre.

38


N7

• Stop complaining about part developments and build on what we have. • Concentrate significant new retail development in the town centre.

Issue N8 What measures should we take to deal with capacity problems on the M1 and A45 and their junctions and with town congestion? 30 responses were received to this issue including: Improve bus services (3 responses) Encourage employers to find solutions for staff (2 responses) Complete the Northampton ring road (3 responses). Other responses included:

N8 • Improve bus services. • If the bus service was widespread, regular, reliable and cheap then traffic would drop.

Trams would be a major benefit. • The quality, frequency and accessibility of public transport links should be significantly

improved. Bus-only lanes could be considered. • Get companies to encourage alternative ways of getting to work than the motorcar. Get

them to run their own bus services/ link into the local bus services. • Develop the Northampton Orbital route around the town. • The completion of the Northampton ring road will help dissipate the volume of traffic on

the A45. • A realistic approach to 'park and ride' could help maintain the volume of visitor traffic at

current levels. • Staggered working hours will also reduce the level of congestion at peak periods. • Build a flyover at J15, for through traffic on the A508. • Build better access roads. Stop relying on traffic lights and roundabouts to manage

traffic flow. Invest in more slip roads and multi-lane access to roads. Think BIG like the Americans and not like 'Little Englanders'.

• You can queue for 20 minutes now to get on the M1 at junction 15, so your plan is of no use, it is self defeating your main criteria.

• Bring in a single lane for HGVs. • Keep a through lane on the A45 for traffic continuing way past Northampton. • Roads are significantly undersized for their present loading. National funding must be

provided to widen these roads. • Improve the junctions and build bypasses for the likes of villages such as Flore. • Education as well as creating new roads otherwise they will soon become paralysed.

Concentrate the growth, seek to use the minor transport network and create more of the same to make multi-user routes generally available to serve new and existing communities, and support this with a massive campaign of a cross cutting nature that advertise the impacts of climate change and impending health problems as key drivers for action and change.

• Encourage use of J16. • Support development north side of motorway. • Enhance existing facilities. • Improve bus and rail connections to employment sites, town centre and rest of County. • Extra lanes at junctions related to park and ride and rail stations, develop parkway

station, maximise use of intelligent transport systems. • Use the best traffic management system available.

39


N8

• Northampton Multi-Modal Study, which is scheduled for completion in December 2007. • Allow Sywell Aerodrome to build an all weather runway. • Improve the exit at Junction 14 Milton Keynes on the M1. Generally lengthen the slip

roads at the exits. • TSFG is a useful initial framework to promote non-car modes. • Need a specific transport strategy for Northampton and this should be subject to wider

consultation and then included in WNJCS. Need to avoid hot spots and increase funding to address current highway problems.

• Demand management initiatives, such as Green Travel Plans. • Spatial investment plans and the use of a tariff system. • Parkway Station. • A modal shift and ensuring development is located in sustainable locations where key

amenities are available. High quality alternative to the car must be available to enable safe and direct accessibility. The impacts of increase traffic needs to be identified and appropriate mitigation provided and secured via S106 and 278 Agreements and the possible introduction of roof tax.

• Reduce the need to travel. High tech facilities within dwellings to facilitate home working and provide real time passenger information. High quality sustainable routes in the town centre would demonstrate a commitment to sustainable transports and enhance the priority for travel to central areas. Highway improvements to the M1 and A45 should be the last resort.

• Congestion charges, park and ride, designated routes of high standards and actively discourage rural rat-runs.

• Traffic congestion in and around the town is partly due to the complicated one-way systems. The M1 should be provided.

• Plan road works to limit congestion, improve public transport both to and within the town.• The issue of capacity on the A45 & M1 is likely to be a critical one for the growth of

Northampton, particularly given the Highways Agency targets for reliability and congestion on the strategic road network and their ability to issue directions with respect to new development. Important to engage with not only Highways Agency, but also Department for Transport and DCLG in addressing such difficult issues. Improvements to the trunk road network, especially motorways, are very expensive and can take a long time to deliver. In addition to modal shift, the Highways Agency is likely to be keen on demand management issues. Controlling access to the A45 would prove a particularly challenging issue to the East and South of Northampton where few alternative access routes exist.

• Do not permit further car dependant housing outside the town. • Ensure DIRFT businesses actually use the railway that exists. Issue N9 How can we improve and increase public transport patronage? There were some common themes in the 31 responses to this issue, including: Make buses cleaner (2 responses) Increase the numbers if buses (6 responses) Make cheaper (3 responses) Make safer (2 responses)

N9 • Improving the bus service. I don't even look for a bus anymore because I know they are

too few and far between.

40


N9

• Buses don't necessarily help people to get where they need to get to. Most people will just drive because it takes them less time.

• Create a tram network. • Better security for those using public transport in addition to improvements in reliability. • Northampton should be considering mass transit as well as buses. • Make it regular, affordable, comfortable and safe. Make pick up points safe and

comfortable too. • Free travel to all. • Existing roads couldn't cope with the number of buses to take 150,000 passengers daily,

that's on existing figures. • Better bus services until later in the evening and more frequently. • Make the train cheaper or at least rise with RPI. • Reliability, cost, frequency of service and the ability to get where you need to go within a

reasonable time. • Embedding awareness of the impacts of climate change and the need for everyone to

get involved in making a contribution and applying peer pressure to encourage others is fundamental. Yoking this to the Health problems faced by the nation is also essential. Use tariff to improve quality of public transport.

• Sufficient mass of development will provide basis for improved public transport. • Regular cheap services. • Promote use of public transport, through routing including buses and rail, marketing of

public transport, provide an attractive high-quality product in terms of vehicles, service routeing, journey times, frequency, stop infrastructure, marketing, ticketing offers, etc.

• Subsidise it more. • The orientation of development to public transport corridors would facilitate the

achievement of this objective. One such corridor is the A428 (Bedford Road). • TSFG is a useful initial framework to promote non-car modes. Need a specific transport

strategy for Northampton included in WNJCS. Need to avoid hot spots and increase funding to address current highway problems.

• University supports the recent County Highway Authority initiatives seeking to achieve challenging modal soft targets. Improvements to PT and creation of comprehensive walking and cycling networks will need to be an important part of the links between the town centre, the University campuses and Moulton College.

• New parkway station. • Green Travel Plans. • There should not solely be a reliance on roof taxes or tariffs to fund PT infrastructure will

need other sources to provide PT up front in devt. • Development of a settlement near to and linked to Northampton provides excellent

opportunities to design development that is properly focused on PT infrastructure. This approach is fundamental to achieving increased PT patronage & modal shift.

• Public transport needs to be of high quality, providing access to key destinations and amenities on a frequent, viable and reliable basis. Shelters, real time information and raised kerbs and located in close proximity to dwellings. Bus routes should be direct and given priority and travel plans should be established with incentives such as free bus passes.

• Support the Corby Star Model. Ensure public transport is marketed and incentivised as part of the workplace and residential travel plans.

• A transportation policy that responds directly to issues of congestion and modal shift should be created. Planned urban extensions can assist in the creation of a quality bus network serving the town as a whole.

• By consideration of the interrelationships between land uses and the patterns of movement between them e.g. planned urban extensions can assist in the creation of a quality bus network serving the town as a whole.

• Money from congestion charges. • The lack of public transport and the infrequency of buses. • Regular, reliable bus service with across town routes and links to industrial areas. Stop

41


N9

cutting and changing routes and timetables. • Integrating ticketing, including the use of smartcards. • The use of bus priority measures, including the reallocation of road space, is likely to be

key to ensuring that buses can provide attractive journey times. • Whilst there would be considerable scope for introducing the concept of Bus Rapid

Transit, even a considerably expanded Northampton would be too small to support a viable rail-based rapid transport system.

• Unwise to suggest other schemes e.g. Personal Rapid Transit until they have been proven elsewhere to deliver value for money.

• Make buses cleaner. Issue N10 How do we regenerate existing run down parts of the town? 22 comments were received to this issue, including:

N10 • Encourage investment from retail outlets and give the whole area a face-lift to make it all

look and feel much cleaner and safer. • Improve employment to overcome deprivation. • Offer grants to landlords/ homeowners to improve properties to a minimum standard.

Incentivise the developers will council tax/ rate holidays. • Encourage community activities to avoid the ghetto type scenario. • Develop and implement in the town and along the river to promote the town’s economy. • The disparity between poor and rich neighbourhoods is increasing and is part of the

economic malaise that affects Northampton. Poor employment prospects exist for many who live in the most deprived areas just because they live there. New employment opportunities have to be created first.

• Make them safe and invest in accommodation, which can be secure. • Develop and implement reinvestment in these areas. • Adopt a realistic understanding to the uses of the car in promoting access to the town

and get rid of the idea that people will cycle to work, they haven't, and it is doubtful that they will.

• Encourage builders to redevelop not just build new houses. • Demolition and rebuilding will be required in some places. However, this could support

the shift to higher density development. Could be intrinsic to the revitalisation and regeneration of the town centre and benefit their economic growth by supporting inward investment and dynamism.

• Finance. • Restrict development outside town boundary. • Out of town development will make town more attractive to investors in other parts of the

town. • Provide a sense of identity. • Local youth employment schemes based on civic amenities such as parkland. • Adequate policing. • Provide a high level of maintenance to public infrastructure. • Policies should recognise the positive contribution that avoidance and management of

flood risk can make to the development of sustainable communities, including…better overall quality of life."

• Regeneration should take place in accordance with the Sequential Test and sequential approach to flood risk required by PPS25 and this may best be implemented by preparing master plans or Area Action Plans for particular regeneration areas.

• Regeneration will often present an opportunity to remediate land affected by contamination. Such opportunities should be promoted and taken.

42


N10

• L&G considers that allowing comprehensive development of key sites in Northampton town centre would help to regenerate the town.

• The provision of realistic employment land polices is likely to encourage inward investment and economic development. This is likely to result in higher levels of economic actively. Improved public transport services will provide run-down areas with access to new employment opportunities.

• Provision of improved infrastructure is critical to regenerating run-down areas. Improvements elsewhere can also help these areas.

• One way of regenerating existing run-down parts of the town is to promote joint public-private ventures to acquire and develop sites.

• Regeneration in the form of vibrant, cultural and attractive town centre would encourage more people to visit Northampton. A new waterfront area with shops, parking, bars and restaurants could be created possibly linked by footpaths to new hosing developments.

• By focusing development in the town first investment will be directed to these areas. Issue N11 How do we deal with the potential conflict of growth and flooding? 32 comments were received in response to this issue. The main points coming out of the responses were:

N11 • Resist growth if no government investment for drainage. • No development on floodplain, do not expand or build near flood plains. No growth

should be allowed where it has any negative impact on flooding both locally and in the wider area.

• Recognise that flooding WILL take place and build any property in an impending area of flood with floods in mind i.e. Electric points are well up off the ground. Design Drainage/ sewers/ means to disperse water into any new developments.

• By investing in new drainage facilities, deepening and where necessary widening rivers and in spending more on maintaining the natural waterways so that increased drainage takes place.

• Define the flood plain. • Get current flood defences up to date; don't allow any building on flood plains. • Avoid building residential near to flood plains. • Don't meddle with nature; it will have the last word. • Reduce the growth. • More open spaces with grass and trees. • By concentrating development in the and by a risk aware and risk managed approach to

flood risk built on the most up to date predictions of the impacts of Climate Change. Using predictions such as 'one in 200 year' event is old thinking.

• Make use of watercourses as green corridors within development. • Good planning. • By appropriate management, especially of surface water, through SUDS • Development should not exacerbate such risk elsewhere, in accordance with

Government policy in PPS25. • Strategic flood risk management measures, and developer contributions towards these,

should be required. • If brown sites built on must increase capacity of the floodplain. • Use floodplains for recreation facilities. • Develop land where there is no extant flooding risk and where arrangements can be

made to deal with surface run-off and management at the outset. EG A43 north of Moulton.

43


N11

• Concerns about growth around Wootton as all new drainage would flow into Wootton Brook, which cannot cope as it stands.

• Early consultation with the Environment Agency. A review of strategic flood risk assessments taking guidance from PPS25. Flood evens need to be accurately modelled to ensure no develop takes place in inappropriate areas. SUD including soak ways, swales and attenuation basins. Provision of comprehensive mitigation if flooding is an issue.

• Flooding issues should be defined through the sustainability appraisal of the preferred options.

• New flood schemes can be tied to specific developments. The EA and other public bodies should identify future funding for strategic flood schemes.

• Upton is built on flood plain and should not be extended further. Change the word 'potential' to 'definite'.

• Consider whether the town has the capacity for more growth (re flooding impacts) and make appropriate representations of central government.

• Build up (financial) contributions to improve drainage infrastructure. Issue N12 How do we deal with the current shortage of employment land bearing in mind the need to accommodate significant housing growth? 32 responses were received to this issue, including:

N12 • What kind of employment land do we need? • Avoid warehouses which offer little employment. • Need to identify the kind of economic growth/ industry growth the county is looking to

attract. If retail growth is reinstated in towns for example, there will be a natural growth in the associated retail jobs market plus the leisure industry from increased footfall to pubs and restaurants.

• Perhaps encourage large warehousing units to be made into two units? • Build units or business places into the ground as well as upwards e.g. for underground

parking provision or a half floor for storage. • This could be part of a wider strategy to make Northampton a good place to invest with

clearly identified land to attract business. • Need to concentrate on higher added value employment. • Multi-storey use of the available land has to be a serious consideration. • Introduce house/ business modules where owners live on the premises. • Build employment in the town and along the river to promote the towns economy. • Large employers won't come, not when Milton Keynes is nearby - build a town like it. • Look at the unused units on Brackmills, why do we need the significant housing growth? • Use empty buildings. Offer incentives for use of vacant buildings. • Housing growth without employment opportunities creates an unsustainable area, there

should be no development without jobs locally at a ratio of at least 1 per housing unit. • Mixed use developments in locations that are attractive to the market. • By maximising densities. • Allocate more employment land. • Urban extensions should be for mixed uses. • Need to maintain flexibility in deciding whether to retain employment land, particularly in

light of changing local context. NELS study indicating need for more employment land has not been tested.

• Don't increase the housing by such drastic levels • Support development of strategic warehousing • Intensification and growth of the town centre of offices and elsewhere. Develop land

44


N12

south of Northampton • Early release of the site north of Bedford Road, east of The Lakes business centre. • Redevelop/ regenerate the run down parts of the town with small industrial units. • Utilise Northampton's location to encourage distribution companies to locate here. • The JCS should where appropriate encourage employment developments in the urban

extensions and include policies to encourage the redevelopment of existing poor quality sites

• Must maintain existing employment sites in the urban area particularly for small firms. • Mixed-use developments as proposed. • JPU should adopt a flexible employment strategy of providing offices upon viability of

development and the best possible mix of uses in large developments schemes. • In the very centre of Northampton offices may not result in the most efficient use of

space. Office uses could be provided in extensions to the town centre. • The JCS should make adequate provision for employment land over plan period and

support the expansion of Pineham. • JCS must recognise importance of employment development in ensuring sustainable

growth of Northampton by creating balance of jobs with the area's population increase and a more diverse economic base.

• JCS should recognise the importance of new large-scale development close to Northampton and this should be balanced.

• Land to the east of Brackmills should be considered. • Mixed-used developments are more sustainable and the councils should aim to retain

employment land as well as encourage linkages between existing and new development proposals.

• Existing employment areas within the urban fabric of Northampton should be safeguarded and not utilised to accommodate new housing.

• Existing employment areas in sustainable locations and on public transport routes should be re-invigorated for new housing.

• There shouldn’t be housing development unless there is a clear view on employment issues, particularly with respect to car use. As the government has decreed the housing, they should make it easier to procure employment land.

• Utilise Brownfield sites rather than just for dwellings. • Ensure that unused offices and premises in the town are utilised, there are offices over

the bus station that have long been empty. Northampton Implementation Area Possible Other Options Option NO1 Develop Northampton as a specialist knowledge base in employment terms 18 responses were received to this option, of which a large proportion (94%) supported the option of developing Northampton as a specialist knowledge base in employment terms.

NO1 • If you can determine what the specialist knowledge is or should be. • This is the most important issue as far as sustainable development is concerned. A range

of specialised knowledge-based industries is required if economic downturns are to be avoided.

• These can either be new technologies or support services to the new technology industries based upon the universities of Cambridge and Oxford.

• This could be part of a wider strategy to make Northampton a good place to invest with clearly identified land to attract business.

• Get employers to commit to the area first before wasting our money.

45


NO1

• Encouraging specialisations is critical to success and offers scope for shaping and creating character.

• A generally diverse approach on new and high tech industries is needed perhaps linked to ICT, is perhaps a critical success factor here.

• But competing with Milton Keynes. • Market forces will always determine. • High value knowledge industries can be beneficial to economic growth - maximize links

to the University. • Strongly endorse this option. • Motor racing, the Northampton area already has strength in this. Focus on its location

and easy access to most parts of the country. • Welcome the proposal for a University Arc but concerned that if University were to

relocate to new premises this proposal would be undermined. Should redirect knowledge to other locations on the edge of Northampton.

• The University is concerned that the term University Arc is more than just a name. To maximise the success in generating knowledge based employment it is important that business developments in the Arc are synergistic with and linked to the expertise in the University and in other knowledge bases in the Arc, The land necessary to deliver such a facility is critical and needs to be recognised in the JCS.

• The employment polices should reflect those for wider west Northamptonshire and provide for growth in sectors which are key drivers of economic growth. This is likely to be more economically sustainable than focusing primarily on the knowledge sector.

• St Andrew's Hospital strongly supports this option being an organisation which has an established reputation nationally in the field of mental healthcare. St Andrews acquired the former Cliftonville Middle School. This site should be given some strategic recognition as a priority for expanding this national profile further increasing Northampton’s image as a centre for healthcare excellence.

• The value of specialist knowledge should not be underestimated in an economic culture where specialises provide comparative advantages.

• This is vital to meeting the spatial objectives and the JCS should encourage and support the location of such industries.

• In order to develop Northampton as a specialist knowledge base in competition with many other locations the criteria for successfully attracting these types of industries need to be identified.

• Could be utilised for the employment of disables. Option NO2 Adopt a more restrictive approach to the re-use of employment land to prevent it being lost to housing 15 responses were received to this option, the main comments being:

NO2 • Perhaps there are places which would be appropriate to offer both employment and

housing land e.g. Work on ground floor, housing above. • It is pointless to build more housing without there being employment opportunities that

funds the community. • Employment land tends to have the necessary infrastructure and local services to

support employment. • Why, the days of the large factory are over. • Think this is probably essential. Otherwise Northampton will be just commuter belt. • Site specific matter • Need to maintain flexibility in deciding whether to retain employment land, particularly in

light of changing local context. Northampton Employment Land Study indicating need for more employment land has not been tested.

46


NO2

• Do not expect that there will be significant pressure to reduce employment floorspace in the town.

• We would suggest a more flexible approach to the provision of land for employment or housing and to the re-use of employment land for housing development (if such land is in a low flood risk location). If any development has to be located in areas of higher flood risk, the preference should be for lower-vulnerability uses (such as employment) rather than residential use.

• In our opinion the JCS should encourage employment development in the urban extensions and include policies to encourage the redevelopment of existing poor quality sites

• We consider that it is appropriate for the JCS to be flexible in its treatment of proposals to re-use existing employment land and that a more restrictive approach is not necessarily the best strategy.

• The JCS would benefit from the inclusion of a policy, which protects employment land from housing development. A policy should also be provided on the transfer of land. There should be a criteria based policy to both keep and restrict the reuse of employment land.

• Less reliance now in PPS3 to using Brownfield land for housing. Need a range of sites to meet growth.

• As the government has decreed the housing, they should make it easier to procure employment land.

Option NO3 Enhance public spaces and buildings in the town including through using public art, design and materials and features in public spaces and building iconic buildings 18 responses were received to this option, all of which were in support. Several comments were received including:

NO3 • Yes, please make our town pretty again. Re-instate the market! • New buildings should enhance environment. • Make it appropriate to the county by using local trades, craftsmen and artists, works to

be created by school projects and get young people. • Where it is affordable, the public amenities should be enhanced. Increased leisure time

requires that new centres for sports and the arts be created. Buildings should be designed with a view to their impact on the environment and on the landscape of the area.

• Strongly agree. Couldn't agree more with this. • More waste of money. • Like the Needle, I don't think so. • Not at the cost of balanced and sustainable development. • Reinvigorating and promoting existing quality architecture is a valid point. Ambitious

design and architecture, art and culture should be seen as important parts of new development.

• Refurbish and enhance what we have and it will be appreciated. • There is potential for the pursuit of such an approach in association with high quality

development at the town's eastern gateway from Bedford Road to enhance the eastern gateway to the town.

• Welcomes proposals to encourage high quality design. Enhancing public spaces is welcomed. The preservation of the Market Square is particularly important to Northampton town centre.

• Would welcome a policy which provides clarity on the types of development where these features would be required, The Strategic Distribution Sector can deliver on-site

47


NO3

contributions of a significant scale to create and enhance high quality public spaces, public art and public amenity space.

• Important role to play in ensuring Northampton becomes a model of sustainable development and design excellence. Public realm also important in new developments.

• A % sum of all major projects (over a certain limit) should be set aside for public art and public space. This is an effective policy, adopted in some major cities of the US.

• But forget 'iconic buildings'. • Maybe.

Option NO4 Carry out selective redevelopment and refurbishment 18 comments were received in response to this option, all of which were in support. Comments made in response included:

NO4 • Can be and is a good approach, but often, without planning terms, the bigger picture is

not considered in sufficient detail e.g. Building new houses in an already run down area - what does this actually achieve other than hostility and no doubt more issues to the existing residents.

• Yes, where there is an identifiable return on the capital employed. • Make it less selective, do more of it. • Good idea. • Who will pay for this? • Make it less selective, do more it. • But ensure that the public have ownership and some opportunity to contribute to this

process. • Not a core Strategy matter/policy. • L&G considers that allowing comprehensive development of key sites in Northampton

town centre would help to regenerate the town. • Very high priority. • Needs to be very selective.

Option NO5 Look at better ways of accessing the town centre 13 comments were received supporting the proposal including:

NO5 • Provide out of town parking that for example offers safe and pretty walks into town -

utilise the walks along the river from St James, Midsummer meadows, etc. • There is a need to improve access not only to the town centre but also between

employment centres that are to be found on the outskirts of the town, between schools and health service facilities and housing.

• This must be a priority. Road access and car parking is difficult at the moment and will only get worse if the town centre is expanded and starts to draw trade away from Milton Keynes.

• More cycle paths, better and safer walkways into town. If the view is nice people might actually enjoy it!

• Northampton is over a 1000 years old, not designed or intended as a large town. • Inspiring words. • Making access easier and perhaps making parking free. Parking charges in the evening

for instance are not attractive and put the town out of line with other neighbouring places.

48


NO5

Keeping traffic away from pedestrians is important in the town. • Must be the basis of any new development. • Need efficient transportation routes in and out of the town centre. A43 corridor has a

crucial role to play given its importance as a major inter-urban route. Number of options should be explored e.g. bus rapid transit systems, park and ride, transport interchange but needs substantial investment.

• As part of the overall transportation proposals, the consortium will consider access to the town centre in consultation with NNC highways Dept.

• Especially from new sustainable growth areas. Option NO6 Locate development so as to have minimal impact on major roads and junctions 17 comments were received in respect of this option, of which most were in support. Comments received included:

NO6 • Very important the traffic gets worse daily! • This would be ideal, however people are looking for easy access to the transport

network….. • Logic dictates that all new developments must be accompanied by developments on

major roads and at junctions. • Can't be done, all feeder roads are heavily used already. • Inspiring words. • Bearing in mind the M1 corridor from J16 to J19 is predominantly devoted to logistics

operations. • The best option here is the urban focus. • More important for industrial development to have good access Clearly Distribution sites

have a particular set of land-use requirements which demand their location typically away from urban areas and in close proximity to the Strategic Road Network

• Industrial and commercial development needs good access. • Not sure. • Could prove difficult, as development still requires good accessibility to a wide range of

transport nodes. • Do not locate growth away from the urban area of Northampton, which will necessitate

commuting by car through the 'hot spots'. • University supports the recent County Highway Authority initiatives seeking to achieve

challenging modal shift targets. Improvements to PT and creation of comprehensive walking and cycling networks will need to be an important part of the links between the town centre, the University campuses and Moulton College.

• Little to be gained from an approach that seeks to locate development in major roads and junctions. This will result in incremental growth and not deliver growth and infrastructure. Should encourage and support development that centres on existing transport corridors and nodes in and around Northampton. By focusing growth at such locations, the problems of congestion can be tackled head-on through linking new development to infrastructure improvements.

• The current levels of congestion on the Northampton road network will mean that both urban concentration and strategic expansion will need to focus on improvements to public transport as the first priority.

• This must be undertaken in terms of sustainable transport and in conjunction with demand management strategies, which focus on sustainable transport.

49


Option NO7 Look at adopting alternative means of, and greater investment in, public transport Again, this option was supported and was the subject of 14 responses. The comments received included:

NO7 • First priority apart from Sixfields Development. • Without increased security the use of public transport will remain low. • Who is going to pay for it, the government is cutting aback on everything. • Are we getting near to the bottom of the barrel? • Yes, yes and yes. • Modal shift alongside culture change. • ‘Transport For Growth’ is a useful initial framework to promote non-car modes. Need a

specific transport strategy for Northampton and this should be subject to wider consultation and then included in WNJCS. Need to avoid hot spots and increase funding to address current highway problems.

• Need to improve public transport in Northampton is supported in principle. It is likely that the development of the Grosvenor Centre would involve the redevelopment/ demolition of Greyfriars bus station and the provision of a new interchange.

• Although PT needs to be improved there is a need to maintain provision for other modes of transport. Short stay car parking is important for the viability of the Grosvenor Centre and other retail businesses in Northampton town centre and should be improved.

• Need to enhance North/ south linkages in the town centre in line with draft Central Area Action Plan.

• Clearly Distribution sites have a particular set of land-use requirements, which demand their location typically away from urban areas and in close proximity to the Strategic Road Network.

• Critical to realising the vision for Northampton. New settlements focused on existing transport corridors offer excellent opportunities and to design development, which is properly focused in alternative PT infrastructure, e.g. bus rapid transit.

• The old idea of the tram system should be re-investigated. • The current levels of congestion on the Northampton road network will mean that both

urban concentration and strategic expansion will need to focus on improvements to public transport as the first priority.

• Focus development areas where good links to the city centre and the wider area or where there is the potential to provide future high quality opportunities e.g. bus rapid transit on disused railways.

• Providing it is in a sensible location. Option NO8 Provide greater co-ordination and partnership working to improve run-down and deprived areas General support for this proposal was received from 9 respondents. The comments received in relation to the option included:

NO8 • Give low rates to national retail chains in return for re-development investment. Either for

housing estates, local shopping areas or sports facilities. • Ensure that a bigger picture of ideas and approaches are considered (and the

development is not carried out in isolation). • Joined-up strategic planning will help! • Improve schools and the rest will follow. • Might work.

50


NO8

• We have been here before. • Improve schools and the rest will follow. • Prioritise this so these areas are improved before developing new areas, and do so with

the agreement and support of those residing in the affected areas. • The most effective way of improving deprived areas is through the provision of job

opportunities and making those opportunities accessible. A JCS policy, which supports growth of Strategic Distribution, is a guaranteed way of continuing the supply of employment opportunities. Long-term aspiration skills strategies to improve these areas are supported by ProLogis, but are likely to take a number of years to deliver.

Option NO9 Increase the number of high rise developments in the town centre.

Option NO9

AgreeDisagree

Based on 14 responses. There was quite strong disagreement with this option, although only 14 responses actually stated whether they agreed or disagreed with the option. General comments were also made including:

NO9 • If you can't build out, build up. • There are already some high buildings in the town thus further high buildings should not

be an issue. But careful design and attention to detail needed. • Yes, but only if this leads to an increase in public access areas of open space and

leisure facilities. • Is this in keeping with Northampton's architectural heritage as a market town? Or do we

want to look to the future as a city? I vote for the latter. • Yes for employment use but no for living. • No, this has never worked anywhere. People need outdoor space. • Beware of the history of high-rise residential developments, will breed criminal habitat -

Tower Hamlets, Glasgow, Easterhouse etc. These can easily become tomorrow's slums. Leeds & Manchester have vibrant centres without building very tall buildings; will need more schools, hospitals etc.

• Yes though this does not need to compromise quality and appeal and the potential to create vibrant communities.

51


NO9

• Site specific not core strategy. • The most success examples of high buildings can be found in cities offering a view, The

Manhattan skyline, over looking the Thames. Where there is a pretty depressing view the high-rise building are generally not successful. The town centre does not offer a view for high-rise buildings.

• Should be design led. • Increasing the density of the town centre would help to make efficient use of land and

help develop a more sustainable strategy for land use. Need to be conscious of the conservation areas located in the town centre and the need to preserve buildings of historic importance to protect the character of the town.

• Limitations on the market for apartments/city living within Northampton place a constraint on the effectiveness of this option.

• The local housing market is already overloaded with flats and apartments. There is a need top provide adequate levels of family housing. An urban extension will provide the opportunity to secure a balanced portfolio of house types needed.

• Too ugly. • The skyline should be preserved. The prominence of the view of the church off Market

Square, it is essential that this be retained. So much of the town has been ruined by poorly designed development.

Sixfields Redevelopment 37 comments were received supporting the proposals for the redevelopment of Sixfields and the Football Stadium. Other comments made were that the redevelopment of Sixfields and the Football Stadium is vital to the growth of Northampton, that more housing should be allowed on Sixfields, and that the area around Sixfields is suitable for a mixed use development. 4 respondents stated that Sixfields presents an opportunity with its designation as a District Centre enabling the town to accommodate new retail services. This should be mentioned in the CS because it is an appropriate and sustainable location. This will help the town to maintain its market share and prevent further economic leakage to neighbouring towns.

52


Daventry Issues Issue D1 Do we want to put knowledge based employment at the heart of the growth of the town which would improve the skills offer? 16 comments were received in response to this issue, the main comments being as follows:

D1 • Depends on the definition of knowledge-based employment. • May or may not be appropriate for Northampton, Daventry, Towcester but more for a

bespoke business park, such as the Cambridge IT corridor that stretches along the M4.

• The Dantree Village expansion will make provision for a combination of knowledge-based industries and a range of general business uses.

• It is important that emphasis is given to attracting knowledge-based industries, which will contribute towards a more balanced local economy.

• Need to include flexibility to ensure it can meet the demands of the regional and local market

• Knowledge-based employment should not be pursued exclusively as Daventry may not prove a successful location for business.

• We need a more broad-based approach. • Encouraging the growth of knowledge-based employment in Daventry town would

help to bring in new skills and revitalise the town centre. • Create opportunities for local residents. • Allow growth of other sectors that are drivers of economic growth. • Need to move away from warehousing. • What will be the alternative employment? • The aim of introducing community renewable energy infrastructure and innovative

public transport will hopefully lead to the location of associated industries in the town. Issue D2 How do we deal with the under performance of the town centre? 19 comments received in respect of this issue, the main points raised were:

D2 • Reduce the rents and rates to encourage businesses. • Reduce the number of charity shops and estate agents • Improve the appeal to make people stay longer • Make it cleaner. Make more appealing. • Improve access: car parking, bus station, bus stops. • Provide investment through new development. • Provide park and ride, rather than “pods” • Improve town-centre management • Pedestrianise the high-street • Preserve independent retailers • Make more of the historic buildings • Establish high street chains alongside smaller specialist shops and good leisure and

cultural attractions • Increase tourism • Develop the infrastructure alongside the growth

53


D2

• Direct a significant proportion of the growth towards Daventry and do not spread it across all the villages

• Make the town complimentary to larger towns, rather than compete with Rugby and Northampton

• Create a large amount of additional retail floorspace to prevent leakage to other retail centres.

• Encourage businesses into the town so their employees spend money in the town. Higher incomes needed to attract spend.

• Increase retail provision. • Increase the incomes of local people to ensure there are better prospects for retailers

in terms of turnover and profitability. Issue D3 How do we provide the additional infrastructure (including community infrastructure) to meet the growth of the town? 23 comments were received in respect of this issue, the main concerns being:

D3 • Build new schools that are large enough to accommodate intended growth • Replace or regenerate existing facilities such as the Community centre and the Band

Hall. • Make facilities easily and safely accessibly by foot and bike • Provide a good public transport system • Consider impact of development on surrounding villages • Access to strategic road network is often congested and single carriage way - this

needs to be improved. • Planned development in housing has to be matched by funding for infrastructure • Ensure infrastructure is delivered before housing • The government should pay for the strategic infrastructure • Local infrastructure should be funded by developers and central government • Crate a standard charging system where developers’ contributions directly benefit the

town and the district • Use planning obligations and conditions • Avoid onerous phasing policies • Make developments large enough to sustain community facilities. • Ensure urban containment • Re-use previously-developed land and regenerate existing communities • Avoid infrastructure delivery in flood-risk areas • Improve the quality of Green Infrastructure • Use Sustainable Urban Drainage techniques to mitigate flooding.

Issue D4 How can we help to improve educational standards? 14 comments were received in respect of this issue, the main points raised being:

D4 • Spend more on books etc

54


D4

• Reinstate traditional schooling values. Teach children respect. • Decrease class sizes • Implement single sex education • A number of smaller schools • Develop outreach facilities from the University of Northampton • Engage with Moulton College • It is not required, we need practical, manual workers and not just doctors and

accountants Issue D5 How should the Country Park be enhanced to provide for the needs of the growing population? 13 comments were received in regard to this issue. The principal points raised were:

D5 • Sustainable programme of improvement • Retain as open space • Don’t build near to the country park. Development should not go up to boundaries of

Country Park. • Improve links from town/ residential areas to the country park through sympathetic

methods • Recognise and protect the amenity • Progress in tandem with strategic River Nene Regional Park Proposals • Enlarge the park • Cycle tracks • Play areas • More dog bins • Guided walks • Heritage trail incorporating significant Scheduled Monuments of Borough Hill and

Burnt Walls • Cafes • Improve the refreshment facilities at the visitor centre. • Educational programmes for schools

Issue D6 What should be done to regenerate the Southbrook, Grange and Headlands estates? 7 responses were received to this issue, the main points raised were:

D6 • Housing Associations should adopt existing housing stocks • Improve appearance • Demolish disused garages • Knock down in stages and replace with high-quality • Reduce densities • Alter mix of housing • Create a meeting place/ community facilities

55


D6

• Involve residents • Allow the adoption of housing stock by housing associations to provide better

financing prospects • Regenerate before allowing new development

Daventry – Possible Options Option DO1 Provide more diverse employment base and provide complementary skills training and education 9 responses were received, all supporting this option. The main issues raised were:

DO1 • Make skills and trades something that will and can be upheld within the county • Employers should be supported by education and training facilities • Do not ignore the strength of the region and its distribution and logistics industry • Provide complementary skills training and education.

Option DO2 Base future employment and investment on green technology development 7 responses were received, all supporting this option. The main issues raised were:

DO2 • Should be part of a wider range of options. • Green technology should be required for all new developments. • Innovative measures for resource efficiency should be encouraged. • Should not be pursued at the expense of other sectors. • Encourage education and training in this area. • Retain and promote existing skill areas e.g. motor and engineering trades.

Option DO3 To facilitate mixed-use development in the town centre and improve connectivity 7 responses were received, all supporting this option. The main issues raised were:

DO3 • Promote 24-hour use of town centre. • Combine Housing and retail to encourage more people to be in and around the town• Increase housing within the central area • Level of growth will attract further inward investment into the area • Invest in town centre • Create out of town retail for bulky goods

56


Option DO4 To seek to influence funding streams and greater co-ordination and partnership working with relevant partners 7 responses were received, all supporting this option. The main issues raised were:

DO4 • Push back to some of these partnerships for extra funding or involvement in a project

from start to finish • Working with strategic organisations would ensure that Daventry does not become

isolated from the overall development of the county. • Essential to achieve timely and sustainable delivery of the infrastructure • Ensure that the development does not take place before the necessary infrastructure

capacity is secured • Essential that funding streams and partnerships are relevant to development.

Option DO5 To provide further education opportunities at Danetre and William Parker schools 6 comments were received supporting this option. Comments received were:

DO5 • There is a need for higher education facilities within these schools • This is already underway with 6th forms being re-introduced • Ensure they are energy efficient • Minimise waste • Ensure good transport links • Only if they support the employment strategy

Option DO6 To develop a greenspace strategy and the designation as a conservation area 7 responses were received, all supporting this option. The main issues raised were:

DO6 • Greenspace can help the feel of an area • This will be needed to ensure a future of a market-town. Important to market town

character. • The urban extension at Daventry will damage ecology in the area • It would limit the expansion opportunities • Conservation areas need to have a benefit to the residents • The Northamptonshire Green Infrastructure (GI) strategy approach should be

followed, and a finer GI strategy for Daventry should be developed. • Do not build below the dam at Monksmoor. Turn the Country Park into a

Conservation Area • Borough Hill, although it is a historical monument, should also have a Conservation

designation to prevent unwarranted development on its hillsides.

57


Option DO7 Selective redevelopment and greater partnership working 5 responses were received, all in support of this option. The main points raised were:

DO7 • Where there are demonstrable benefits • Particularly endorsed • In line with the DMP and regeneration of the existing industrial areas.

Daventry Town – Possible Options for Directions of Growth

Possible Options for Direction of Growth - Daventry

East of Borough Hill,North of the A45Along Long BuckbyRoadMonksmoor Farm, Eastof Welton LaneNorth of Daventry, Eastof the A361 North of Daventry, Eastof the A45

Based on 14 representations.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1 2 3 4 5

Options DO8 - DO12: Possible Options for Daventry

DisagreeAgree

Based on 32 representations

58


Whilst the number of comments received in relation to the growth of Daventry provides quite a small sample, the directions of growth in Daventry that received most support were Option DO8 – Growth to the East of Borough Hill north of the A45 and Option DO12 – Growth to the north of Daventry and east of the A45. The second table above indicates that most objection was received to Option DO11 – North of Daventry, East of the A361. Option DO8 Growth to be located to the East of Borough Hill north of the A45 This option appears to have received most support. Various comments were received relating to this option including:

DO8 • No growth to take place • Strongly do not support. • The identified town options all stand in open countryside at a distance from the town

and are likely to function as dormitory estates for Northampton, Leamington and Rugby.

• Restrict Growth • This option was roundly condemned at the last local plan exercise by the inspector • Area needs to be larger to ensure sufficient infrastructure provision is delivered • There should be opportunity for growth in all the areas • Not on a mass scale • Make it as close to M1 as possible • Should be where there are good public transport routes • Direct towards Daventry Town • Area is separated from the town by Borough Hill • Difficult to integrate residential development in this location with the existing pattern of

neighbourhoods. • Consider settings of Scheduled Monuments • Well positioned for employment uses • Should not add to risk of flooding, pollution or deterioration of air, water and land.

Option DO9 Growth to be located along Long Buckby Road The comments received in relation to this option included:

DO9 • No growth to take place • No, as this will involve a further loss of rural landscape in the Watford Gap area. • Restrict Growth • Lower areas of this proposal are at risk from flooding from both reservoir dams. It also

would enclose the country park, thereby making it a town park. • There should be the opportunity for growth in all these areas but not on the mass

scale • There should be a very wide protection zone along the edge of the Country Park

where no development of any kind should be permitted. • Land in this area represents the most appropriate location for a major sustainable

urban extension to Daventry town • Well-related to the existing town centre • Opportunity to accommodate a substantial proportion of the desired growth • Development in this location would also constitute the missing north eastern quadrant

59


DO9

and result in a more balanced urban area. Option DO10 Growth to be located at Monksmoor Farm, east of Welton Lane The comments received in relation to this option included:

DO10 • No growth to take place • Restrict Growth • There should be the opportunity for growth in all these areas but not on the mass

scale that is currently being discussed • This area is at risk of flooding from both reservoir dams. • The proposal with WNDC at present shows the primary school and playing fields

located in the highest flood risk area. • Support.

Option DO11 Growth to be located to the North of Daventry, east of the A361 This option received the largest proportion of objection. The comments received included:

DO11 • No growth to take place • Restrict Growth • Strongly do not support. • There should be opportunity for perhaps growth in all these areas but not on the

mass scale that is currently being discussed. • No, this will fill in the space between Daventry and Braunstone • This exceeds the boundary of Daventry UDA; it is at risk from the dam of the Drayton

Reservoir, it impinges into the parish of Welton and must be discarded. • Growth here will have to consider the constraints caused by the Daventry reservoir's

safety zone • A very strong case would have to be made to justify the release of this land for

development • Development in this location would need to carefully respect the landscape context

and the setting of the Grand Union Canal Conservation Area. • Should be served by Public transport • Growth should not lead to more road congestion and the more rapid deterioration of

highways and footpaths in the rural areas. • This development would finish off the development in that area thus making it more

viable for a school and other community buildings and therefore more sustainable. Option DO12 Growth to be located to the north of Daventry and east of the A45 This was one of the 2 options that received the most support. Other comments received in relation to the option included:

60


DO12

• No growth to take place • Restrict Growth • Strongly do not support. • Regret that so much of the development suggested for the Daventry area is proposed

for greenfield sites. • There should be opportunity for perhaps growth in all these areas but not on the

mass scale that is currently being discussed. • It would not have a very nice outlook, behind the industrial units and warehouses. • Industrial use. • This location would appear to offer a sensible location for a general extension to the

town's employment provision • This option offers an opportunity to provide for large-scale strategic distribution uses

in a sustainable manner, adjoining an established and successful employment area.

61


South Northamptonshire Issues Issue SN1 How should we distribute the future growth between Brackley and Towcester and the rural areas? 33 comments were received in relation to this issue, which included:

SN1 • Focus on areas that can manage growth • Concentrate on existing urban areas • Some development in larger villages. • No Growth required • RSS numbers are a minimum. • Concentrate development in the Towns. • Development should be restricted in the villages. • Minimise impact on surrounding countryside. • Permit only restricted and limited infill in villages with emphasis on preserving and

enhancing the character and appeal of this place and their environments. • Identify locations for growth in rural areas and villages that are outside key policy

designations such as conservation areas. • Rural services should be conserved. • Rural areas have suffered harmful effects due to extremely restrictive policies;

therefore, an objective review of the role and future of rural settlements is required. • Should allow dispersed development, as countryside is not a museum piece. In

particular should allow development of elderly persons housing. • Distribute growth between Brackley, Towcester and the rural areas in SN in a manner

that allows limited development to be located either in, or next to, existing rural settlements. This reflects PPS3 and PPS7.

• The villages should not just be given the leftover housing from allocation at Brackley and Towcester.

• Some larger villages may benefit more from growth than Brackley. • Consider modest development villages with larger populations. • Growth concentrated on existing urban areas and limited to villages. • Growth in Towcester and the villages. • In the West Northants area, outside of Northampton, 80% of Residents live outside

urban areas of Towcester and Daventry but there are no principal objectives for such areas.

• The growth should all be put to one centre for example concentrate all West Northamptonshire requirements in Northampton.

• Develop Northampton hugely; do not have development in other areas. • 80% of all dwelling requirement should be met by development within and adjoining

the existing urban areas. • The RSS does not differentiate between Towcester's & Brackley's roles and the Joint

Core Strategy should not either. • Expansion of Towcester would not meet Brackley's needs. • The growth of Towcester and Brackley is capable of delivering growth at these

centres at the same time as delivering growth within the NIA associated with the growth of Northamptonshire.

• Growth should be to the South and West of Towcester. • There should be some sharing of the growth, 4,000 homes is too much additional

growth for Towcester. • Direct majority of development to Towcester and to a lesser degree Brackley with a

further proportion to the villages. • The future growth in South Northants should be directed in major part towards

Towcester. • Towcester will cope with the number of new homes needed to support the

enhancement of its infrastructure but should not be the only settlement to grow.

62


SN1

• 3000 additional homes (in Towcester) by 2026 are sufficient to allow for growth in other areas.

• Concentration (In Towcester) would help to deliver significant new infrastructure both to support new development but also to deliver key elements of required infrastructure, particularly the A5 bypass.

• Funding for a bypass should be met by public funding. • The scale of any proposed development in Towcester should not be determined by

the need and cost of an A5 bypass. • Growth should be concentrated in Towcester with remaining growth located in

Brackley. • Growth should be commensurate between settlements with the emphasis on

employment growth in Brackley so that levels of out-commuting are reduced. • Brackley and Towcester are rural service centres, therefore, should be the focus of

any new development. • Brackley has had significant development in the past and now needs a period of

consolidation. • Emphasis on Towcester, especially to secure heritage-led regeneration. • No specific housing figures allocated for either Towcester or Brackley. • Long-term vision needs to be developed for both Towcester and Brackley. • Scale of growth should be informed by a sustainability appraisal. • All developments should meet energy efficiency standards. • Growth locations need to take into account locating places dwellings within walking

distance from places of work. • Growth locations need to take into account existing transport. • Growth locations to take into account health. • Growth locations to take into account water & drainage. • Sequential Test should be applied to any potential developments within Flood Zones

2 and 3 and then if passed, subject to the Exception Test. Development should be steered to - areas with lowest probability of flooding.

• Any proposed development in either towns would place an increased demand on the sewerage distribution and sewage treatment infrastructure.

• Capacity of proposed sites should deal with adverse climate changes. • Housing types should be mixed styles and occupancy. • Affordable housing should be integrated throughout the development areas. • Should be co-ordinated with growth strategies of adjoining authorities such as Milton

Keynes because all authorities are located within the MKSM area. South Northamptonshire – Possible Options

63


Options SNO1 - SNO3: South Northamptonshire -

Possible Options

Option SNO1Option SNO2Option SNO3


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

SO1 SO2 SO3

Options SNO1 - SNO3: Possible Options for South Northamptonshire

DisagreeAgree

Based on 87 representations. The strongest support was received in relation of Option SNO2 – to concentrate growth at Towcester (eg. 3,000 homes) and direct the remaining growth to Brackley (eg. 5000 homes) to develop their roles as sustainable rural service centres and to key sustainable villages (eg. 500 homes). The option to which the largest proportion of objections was received, and also the option with least support was Option SNO1 – to allow growth solely at Towcester in order to develop its role as a sustainable Option SNO1 To allow growth solely at Towcester (e.g. 4,000 homes by 2026) in order to develop its role as a sustainable rural centre and to enable the delivery of essential infrastructure. This was the least popular option, to which the following comments were received:

64


SNO1

• No growth to take place. • Scale of growth at Towcester is excessive. • No justification for the provision of 3,000 houses at Towcester. • Untenable in housing land supply terms as it would not achieve the required rate of

housing delivery. • Locating all growth at Towcester would not be sustainable. • Would result in the overdevelopment of a single settlement. • Towcester MUST and can only have any development assigned to it if the A5 is

rerouted and a suitable ring road is built. • More housing in the town will not make the town’s facilities financially viable. • It would not allow the natural growth of rural settlements and would stifle economic

development in these areas. • Concentrating development in Towcester would be to deny all development in

villages, which would lead to their stagnation and decline. • At least 1,000 houses should be allocated to the larger sustainable villages. • Proposal does not comply with PPS3 and PPS7. • This option would not accord with MKSM SRS. • Brackley is equally well placed for development. • Option would not enable Brackley to develop its role as a sustainable rural centre. • Brackley has an element of ring-road in place so perhaps initial development should

be in the area until roads around Towcester are constructed. • Missed opportunity to develop Brackley's role as a sustainable location for

development and a rural service centre with a wider hinterland. • Balanced growth across the area represents the most appropriate strategy. • Any policy, which allows no growth in the rural areas is unrealistic and fails to

recognise the importance of villages and their surroundings as sustainable communities offering housing and jobs to the local population.

• Providing all of the bulk of the housing required for the district in one settlement is likely to result in delivery problems.

• The need for infrastructure funding - albeit acknowledged - must not take precedence or override the need to consider the future of settlements.

• It would have been helpful if the term 'sustainable rural service centre' had been defined in the glossary on p.22.

• The Sequential Test should be applied to any potential developments within Flood Zones 2 and 3 and then if passed, subject to the Exception Test.

• Development should be steered to areas with lowest probability of flooding. • Need to clarify the position of the infrastructure in being able to cope with the

proposed growth. • Option SNO1 is supported. • It would stop housing development elsewhere.

Option SNO2 To concentrate growth at Towcester (e.g: 3,000 homes) and direct the remaining growth to Brackley (e.g: 1000 homes) to develop their roles as sustainable rural service centres and to enable the delivery of essential infrastructure. Development would be restricted in the villages. There was a mixed response to this option. The main comments received in relation to this option were:

SNO2 • No growth to take place. • Why does there have been be so many homes in Towcester? Brackley is equally well

65


SNO2

placed for development. • This scale of growth at Towcester is excessive. • Strong support. • No • To concentrate development in Towcester would be to deny all development in

villages, which would lead to their stagnation and decline. • Brackley has the potential to accommodate at least 1,000 dwellings. • Brackley is already over-provided with housing without having the requisite

infrastructure. • 3000 new dwellings in Towcester will not be matched by supporting land uses,

employment, shops and services. • The underlying reasoning is understood, but reducing the overall scale of

development at Towcester would inhibit the potential of the town to achieve the critical mass required.

• This would not meet the needs of most of SN district particularly rural areas. • Does not comply with PPS3 and PPS7. • This strategy also remains too restrictive and would not allow villages to develop as

sustainable communities. • Brackley would benefit from this level of growth.

Option SNO3 To concentrate growth at Towcester (e.g: 3,000 homes) and direct the remaining growth to Brackley (e.g: 500 homes) to develop their roles as sustainable rural service centres and to key sustainable villages (e.g: 500 homes). This option was the most favoured of the 3 relating to South Northamptonshire possible growth options. Additional comments received included:

SNO3 • No growth to take place. • Why does there have to be so many homes in Towcester? Brackley is equally well

placed for development. • This scale of growth at Towcester is excessive. • Would support this option. • Some development should be allowed in villages to enable existing facilities to be

supported and strengthened. • No. • Current planning policies and guidance seeks to maintain community facilities in

villages and the best way is to allow new development both to meet specific local needs and general market housing in order to allow a choice of locations for people to live.

• I am not convinced that a very modest 500 homes in the rural areas will make any perceptible difference to the current problems. A robust study of all villages should be undertaken leading to an increased rural housing allocation.

• Some support. Primarily concentrate the development in the towns. • No growth at Brackley. • Need to ensure sufficient development in larger villages, not constrained by 500

upper limit. • Would prefer not to see growth in the villages. • Distribution needs to be spread across SN to suitable, sustainable locations.

66


SNO3

• This option would avoid over-reliance on any one settlement and provide housing in rural areas including affordable housing.

• A larger amount of growth should be directed to sustainable villages, which are close to existing infrastructure and facilities.

• This option is the most appropriate as it recognises the rural character of South Northamptonshire.

• The development in rural areas should also provide scope for economic growth associated with housing provision in order to promote sustainable communities.

67


Towcester Issues Issue T1 What measures should be taken to ensure that the town centre remains economically viable following the construction of the A5 bypass. How will the bypass change Towcester’s role as a Rural Service Centre? 13 comments were received in relation to this issue, the main ones being:

T1 • Towcester is an attractive town and has good quality and varied shops. Has much to

offer visitors. • Most existing trade is local residents so bypass will have minimum impact • Bypass should be aimed at removing lorries/ motorway overflow from Towcester.

Removing HGVs from town will make it more attractive. • Moat Lane should accommodate a mix of small and large shops. • The bypass coupled with weight restrictions for vehicles passing through Towcester

would still allow some car movements through the town to create some passing trade.• Effective highway provision on major surrounding roads that moves through traffic

around the town whilst enabling local traffic to exit and enter the town efficiently. • A larger extension is required to ensure the longer-term sustainable growth of

Towcester and ensure a fit for purpose bypass is constructed. • Towcester will change with the bypass and the increasing population of the town. The

centre will become an urban service centre rather than a rural one. • The alignment of an A5 relief road should represent a physical boundary to the south

and west of the town. • The Environment Agency requests that the A5 bypass avoids crossing the

watercourse. • Improved public transport provision that delivers adequate service both within the

town and links to adjoining settlements and major towns. • The provision of an Integrated Public Transport Hub in the town that serves both

settlements within the town and surrounding villages. • Provision of new and improvement of existing cycleways to enable access both within

the town and surrounding countryside. • Places for local traffic to cross the A43 and A5 in safety, to encourage non-town

people to access services in Towcester. • An increased tourism offer needs to be supported with increased accommodation,

signage, and publicity. • More parking in the centre of Towcester e.g. Multi-storey by Waitrose or on Masonic

car park. • Review of car-parking provision in the town to balance sustainability with ease of

access. • To remain viable it is desirable that Parking should be free. • A mix of small and larger shops (e.g. New Look), selling basics, should be put in

place in Moat Lane to ensure that people do not have to travel to Northampton/ Milton Keynes to shop.

• Towcester should retain a higher proportion of retail expenditure of the town's (future) population than it does at present.

• Towcester will not be able to compete in terms of its potential commercial offer, with Milton Keynes, Northampton or Oxford.

• The town centre is not geographically at the centre of Towcester. Options for Future Growth would however necessitate a large district centre as part of the development, which is more likely to detract from the town centre than support it. A series of smaller urban extensions located closer to the town centre is more likely to support this role.

• Environmental improvements. • Events can be held in the Market Square to promote a community spirit.

68


T1

• Longer term potential for development will increase the economic viability of Towcester

• Need to ensure that suitable employment opportunities are provided, in and around the town, to support the additional housing that will be constructed.

• Use should be made of existing commercial sites outside of the town with expansion. • Play/ community facilities integrated into the revised centre.

Issue T2 How can we most appropriately regenerate the town centre? 13 comments were received in relation to this issue, including:

T2 • The town just needs to be easily accessible with free parking only a short distance

from the central town. • Bypass should be aimed at removing lorries/ motorway overflow from Towcester. • A mix of small and larger shops (eg. New Look), selling basics, should be put in place

in Moat Lane to ensure that people do not have to travel to Northampton/ Milton Keynes to shop.

• Increased retail provision in the Towcester to support the increasing population. • Town Centre Management scheme to support and enhance the commercial and retail

centre experience. • Events can be held in the Market Square to promote a community spirit. • Improved and supported Tourism offer to attract more visitors. • Increased accommodation, signage, and publicity. • Ensure sufficient housing in the town. This will provide a pool of locally generated

expenditure for local retail and service activities to increase. • Places for local traffic to cross the A43 and A5 in safety, to encourage non-town

people to access services in Towcester. • More parking in the centre of Towcester eg. Multi-storey by Waitrose or on Masonic

car park. • Build more car parking facilities and make the centre traffic free. • Unclear why regeneration has been highlighted as a key issue. • The town centre does not have high vacancy rates and offers a good range of local

services. • There are underutilised areas with development potential and in need of

environmental enhancement, such as Moat Lane. • The town centre is physically constrained and subject to important heritage

constraints, both of which prevent further significant expansion. • The development of urban extension on the scale suggested in the options would not

assist the regeneration of the town centre, but could have the opposite effect. • Local employment provision of a mixed range of employment types that aims to

provide sufficient employment for at least 50% of residents of Towcester of employment age.

• Conservation areas and regeneration causes considerable amount of conflict, especially, as in Towcester, where the need for regeneration has not been based on serious research but political whim.

• Heritage led regeneration. • Exceedingly carefully. • The Sequential Test should be applied to developments within flood zones 2 and 3.

The more vulnerable classification developments should be allocated to sites of lowest flood risk.

• The relocation of Sponne School to a new site within the southern expansion area will enable the current site to be vacated and reused to provide additional facilities to

69


T2

support the role and function of the town centre, e.g. retail, offices, parking, open space.

Issue T3 How do we deal with the high levels of out commuting for work? 17 comments were received to this issue including:

T3 • Towcester is well placed for commuting and unless a huge amount of business is

brought to this town this will remain the case. A result of Towcester’s easy accessibility.

• Too late. • Almost impossible and not necessarily desirable. • Need more jobs locally. • Should ensure that local planners respond positively and creatively to initial

approaches from prospective employers. • It is suggested that a study is conducted to ascertain the types of jobs residents are

commuting out for. • Make access easier….'unfortunately' we can't all choose to work close to home. • Public transport could be enhanced to serve the local community. • Land for employment needs to be allocated but will only have a marginal affect on

outward bound commuting. • By accepting that Towcester is, and will continue to be, a dormitory town for both

Northampton & Milton Keynes. • Highly sceptical about growth in local industry occurring without any significant

incentivisation for businesses to establish in Towcester, rather than the established nearby hubs of Milton Keynes, Banbury, Northampton and Daventry.

• What measures are being taken to promote and seed new business into Towcester? • Is there any data available to support the assertion that increased local economic

activity justifies the need for the proposed number of houses? • New employment sites of the right quality, in the right locations with the right profile

and strategic & local connectivity to increase availability of local jobs. • Allocations need to provide for a range of employment types and should be

integrated, where possible, with new and existing residential development and linked to new and existing transport infrastructure so that the land, once allocated, is in fact taken up.

• The expansion of existing commercial sites in rural areas close to the town should be promoted in order to ensure a satisfactory supply of a range of sites available for businesses

• Mixed allocation to the south of Towcester, together with the provision of the A5 by-pass, would allow for the creation of marketable "business park gateways".

Issue T4 How can we deal with the identified shortage of playing fields and sports pitches? 12 comments were received to this issue including:

T4 • Identify possible sites outside present town.

70


T4

• Provide facilities within the Urban Extension • Support new proposals for playing fields and sports pitches. • Stop selling them off. • Prevent the sale of current facilities and pay premiums to acquire land solely for this

purpose. • Old Towcestrians have a huge sports ground area - why cannot this be utilised? • Identify possible areas outside the present town (as there is clearly nowhere inside)

where pitches may be possible, and advise clubs of these. • Support planning proposals for these by advice, help, and where necessary practical

assistance with eg. Traffic assessments. Compulsory purchase Castle Park. Then wait for urban extension.

• Ensure that new development makes adequate provision in line with open space standards and locating such facilities in positions where they are readily accessible to existing dwellings.

• Expanded sports and leisure facilities to include both formal sports pitches and localised recreation areas within settlements in line with the NPFA guidelines.

• Provision of Public/ Street Art and adequate Public Open Space to enhance the quality of life.

• Integration of new development with surrounding landscape to provide easy access to green spaces both within the town and in the adjoining countryside through the provision of green corridors and nature reserves.

• Improved public access to the Easton Neston parkland adjoining the town to create a public recreational facility.

• Provision of a Performing Arts facility. • Section 106 agreements. • Through Green Infrastructure, allocation of playing fields and sport pitches could

become a multi-functional use by making space for water. The primary purpose being that for flood storage.

Issue T5 How can we ensure that the infrastructure required to meet Towcester’s needs is delivered and on time? 14 comments were received on this issue including:

T5 • Restrict housing development until infrastructure provided. • By no growth taking place. • Enforce dependencies on housing development on the road and infrastructure

changes being in place first. • Continuing to engage proactively with the WNDC process. • Ensure that the bypass is front-ended on any development, and certain housing

levels trigger other infrastructure projects. • By securing an appropriate level of developer contributions, preferably based on a

tariff system as applied in Milton Keynes for example and by phasing development so that infrastructure is delivered in tandem with development and not some time afterwards.

• A policy stating that no expansion of the town will be permitted until the finance and timetable for the provision of the necessary infrastructure to cope with the planned population increase of Towcester has been securely obtained

• Remove unnecessary traffic from the town centre and to provide a perimeter boundary to the town.

• Once bypass is completed, there should be restricted access through the town

71


T5

centre. • Improvements to the junctions on A43 should also be in place before work

commences on the bypass. Investment in the town centre to support it and integrate with any new developments.

• Review of and improvement to signage, lighting, seating and other street furniture. • Review of existing public service buildings to ensure existing buildings are used

effectively and key public services have sufficient infrastructure - to include police, fire and rescue, health, county, district and town centre facilities.

• Expanded Waste recycling facilities. • The Water Cycle Strategy will guide the timetable for the delivery of infrastructure and

development should be phased in accordance with this. • The only practical way to ensure that the infrastructure, required to meet the current

and future needs of Towcester, is for the various elements of infrastructure - both utility and community- to be linked directly to the phased development of land.

• Conditions and legal agreements, requiring the provision of elements of infrastructure in advance of, or at the same time as the development occurs.

• Identify land for commercial use, which does not rely on large infrastructure schemes and can deliver the growth required immediately and contribute to consistent, balanced growth for the town.

Towcester Possible Options

Possible Options for Directions of Growth - Towcester

TO1TO2TO3


72


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

TO1 TO2 TO3

Options TO1 - TO2: Possible Options for Towcester

DisagreeAgree

Based on 27 representations Whilst the number of responses received in relation to these options was again small, there appears to be clear support for possible growth to Towcester to be located to the south and west. Of the comments received to this option around 40% were objections, however this is the smallest proportion of objection received for all 3 options. Option TO1 Growth be located south and west of Towcester Whilst being the option that has most support, a number of comments were received in relation to the option including:

TO1 • No growth to take place. • 3000 homes lots for small town. • Not all of the land depicted would necessarily be suitable for development. • Growth should be the most appropriate so as to not detriment existing residents and

make it more difficult for them to enjoy their residential space. • It should coincide with the plans for the A5 bypass to ensure there is minimal impact. • Although the land to the south and west of the town are the only feasible directions

for major expansion, the areas identified are far too extensive. • Strong support. • The general principle of development to the south and west of Towcester is

supported. • This already appears to have been decided. • The Water Cycle Infrastructure may provide details of which locations may require

fewer updates to water infrastructure. • The Sequential Test will need to be applied to any proposed development in these

areas, as there will be flood risk implications. River corridors should be maintained and enhanced.

• The large bulk of growth will be provided in the form of an extension to the urban area and this represents the most appropriate direction for this growth.

Option TO2 Growth be located south and west of Towcester (extended area)

73


This option had the largest proportion of objection to it. The main comments received in respect of this option were:

TO2 • No growth to take place. • Growth should be the most appropriate so as to not detriment existing residents and

make it more difficult for them to enjoy their residential space. • It should coincide with the plans for the A5 bypass to ensure there is minimal impact. • This is outside the WNDC area, bit late to start considering this. • This area is too remote from the town and would mean that the A5 bypass will be

located even further away from the town than under option T01. • Strong support. • The Water Cycle Infrastructure may provide details of which locations may require

fewer updates to water infrastructure. • The Sequential Test will need to be applied to any proposed development in these

areas as there will flood risk implications. • River corridors should be maintained and enhanced. • This should only be considered if the non-sustainable present situation of part of the

application being considered by WNDC and part by SNC is resolved. • General development to the south & west of Towcester is supported. Option TO2 in

association with Option TO1 is considered superior to Option TO1 alone. • Combined options together can provide the overall scale of residential & employment

land, and associated supporting land uses, that can deliver the critical mass of development in line with the strategic requirements from MKSM and RSS8.

• Combined options can deliver the entire associated physical and community infrastructure that is required to remedy current deficiencies in Towcester and accommodate the scale of growth required.

• Combined options can create the critical mass of sufficient scale to provide an effective local public transport service for Towcester.

• Combined options would, with certain safeguards, not entail development that would affect adversely any area of environmental sensitivity.

• It is essential that sufficient land is allocated to meet the needs of the area. • Should not however ignore the opportunities, which exist in other locations including

villages and existing commercial sites. • The proposals by Bloor Homes and Permission would deliver 3,000 homes and 21ha

of employment land and additional infrastructure in a package sufficient to fun the A5 bypass and junctions with the A5 and A43.

Option TO3 Growth be directed to other areas around Towcester. This option received around 30% of support as a proportion of all those who supported options. The main comments received in relation to this option included:

TO3 • No growth to take place • Growth should be the most appropriate so as to not detriment existing residents and

make it more difficult for them to enjoy their residential space. • It should coincide with the plans for the A5 bypass to ensure there is minimal impact. • The map is of insufficient quality to enable identification of this area. • Development needs to be contained within the A43 /A5 /Bypass triangle. • The Water Cycle Infrastructure may provide details of which locations may require

74


TO3

fewer updates to water infrastructure. • Parts of Towcester falls within Flood Zones 2 and 3. The Sequential Test will need to

be applied to any proposed development in these areas as there will flood risk implications.

• River corridors should be maintained and enhanced. • There are no other practical options beyond Options TO1 and TO2. • The allocation of additional land to the south and west of the town would be the most

appropriate option to accommodate further commercial development.

75


Option TO4 In addition to Moat Lane further underused or vacant land is allocated for re-development for uses that support the vitality and viability of the town centre.

Option TO4

AgreeDisagree

Based on 8 responses Although there were only 8 responses to this option there does appear to be clear support for allocating further underused or vacant land for redevelopment for uses that support the vitality or viability of the town centre.

TO4 • No growth to take place. • This is in very limited supply in Towcester, efforts are best directed elsewhere. • We promote the development of Brownfield land, however potentially contaminated

land should be identified and remediated. • The Sequential Test may apply and should be used to match developments

vulnerability with the risk. Potential sites could also be used to make space for water. • Growth should be the most appropriate so as to not detriment existing residents and

make it more difficult for them to enjoy their residential space. • It should coincide with the plans for the A5 bypass to ensure there is minimal impact. • Strong support.

76


Option TO5 Additional employment land be allocated to reduce out commuting

Option TO5

AgreeDisagree

Based on 8 responses Again there were a limited number of responses to this option (8), however there does appear to be clear support for allocating additional employment land to be allocated to reduce out commuting. This is a common theme within the responses received to the Issues and Options document, reflecting one of the key issues within the sub-region. Additional comments received to the option include:

TO5 • No growth to take place. • Not necessarily - perhaps a small area for industrial park in the Focus/ Tesco area. • Strong support. • Yes to more employment land but reasoning is not sustainable. • Mixed-use development could be more sustainable and provide more Public transport

options. • Additional land must be allocated for employment uses. Such land allocations need to

provide for a range of employment types and should be integrated, where possible, with new and existing residential development and linked to new and existing transport infrastructure.

• Existing employment sites within the urban area are unsuited to the needs of most modern employment activity. Need for the right quality, right connectivity and the right profile. In addition, Silverstone area offers good potential for new employment activity as part of the redevelopment of the Circuit.

• This is essential if the issue of out commuting is to be seriously addressed. • Additional land closely associated with the south and west extension of the town

represents the most appropriate location for additional employment land. • Important that a range of sites are provided and reliance is not placed on large

schemes. Premises, which are available to smaller businesses, are essential if the local economy is to be allowed to grow and local companies provided with land and buildings to meet their needs to establish and grow.

• Shacks Barn Farm is a successful rural development providing premises for a number of local firms. Expansion of this site to provide small units for local businesses would be a logical means of providing the accommodation necessary in

77


TO5

an accessible location. • Query need for additional housing in Towcester on sustainability principles. • Towcester in recent years and the already significant and established pattern of

commuting from Towcester to Northampton, Milton Keynes and other large centres. • In the absence of sufficient new local industry the alternative to a large commuter

population is large-scale unemployment. • Is there a proven and fully costed benefit, given the consequential need for improved

infrastructure? If no incentives are provided to attract commerce, then the development initiative will simply generate small cottage industries to support a commuter population.

• Why has the Milton Keynes model not been replicated for the area? MKDA learned that defined development zones, each aiming to create small ecosystems of industry through provision of appropriate buildings, infrastructure and significant economic incentives, were created to give local focus for industries to develop.

• A dedicated new town must be considered if the housing growth and economic need is truly justified.

Option TO6 Land within or outside an urban extension be identified for playing fields

Option TO6

AgreeDisagree

Based on 7 responses Although there were only 7 responses to this option there is strong support for identifying land within or outside an urban extension for playing fields. Again the lack of existing playing fields is recognised as a key issue within Towcester.

TO6 • No growth to take place. • No extension. • Too far away from the housing areas to be of maximum use. • Strong support. • Within urban expansion to reduce car-journeys and increase sustainability.

78


TO6

• Through Green Infrastructure allocation, playing fields and sport pitches could become multi-functional by making space for water.

• The only practical way for new playing fields to be delivered is through the allocation of land for residential development and the agreement, in association with planning permission(s) for such land to be made available in a phased manner.

79


Brackley Issues Issue B1 What should be done to regenerate the town centre? 8 comments were received in respect of this option, the main comments being as follows:

B1 • Improve the retail offer and other associated facilities and services. • Information signs on the roads as to what goods, services are available in the town

centre. • Build more car parking facilities and make the centre traffic free. • Good bus service into Brackley • Encourage local employment • Reduce business rates • Increase retail provision in Brackley to support the population • Bring vacant retail units and offices back into use • Encourage regeneration proposals, particularly for modern shop units to meet

retailers' demands • Unlikely more housing will alter changes to local shops.

Issue B2 How can we reduce the high levels of out commuting for work? 9 comments were received in respect of this issue, the main points being:

B2 • Almost impossible and not necessarily desirable. • Too late. • Make access easier • Encourage local employment. Provide more employment sites in and on the edge of

Brackley. • Mixed use development could be more sustainable and provide more Public transport

options • By promoting more high quality employment opportunities as part of sustainable

urban development and growth. • The concept of a self-contained community is clearly illusory and may not be

desirable • Land to the east of Brackley would be the most suited to accommodating this new

employment development as it has good access to the A43 and would be less sensitive to the traffic noise generated by this major arterial route.

Issue B3 How can we ensure that the need for improved health provision, through the relocation of Brackley Cottage Hospital, is delivered? 6 responses were received to this option, the main points made being:

B3 • This is the subject of a review between the GP practices in Brackley and

Northamptonshire Teaching PCT.

80


B3

• One stop hospital facility equal distance from Brackley, Daventry and Towcester • A local hospital is essential • Locate in the proposed growth area and fund accordingly • Through a mixed use scheme on the edge of Brackley • Broad location BO1 is of a sufficient scale to enable local facilities to be safeguarded

for new healthcare facilities. Such arrangements could be secured through S106. Issue B4 How can we improve the provision of education and community infrastructure? 6 comments were received in respect of this issue, the main points being:

B4 • Through S106 agreement. • More small schools • Brackley needs more schools and dental facilities • An allocation of growth at Brackley of a strategic scale provides the opportunity to

enhance education and community infrastructure through planning obligations, Unlikely to get these benefits if the development was minor

• Urban extension would generate developer contributions that could be invested in education and community facilities

• A new secondary campus on a new site, however, this is unlikely to be affordable unless funds can be realised through the ‘Building Schools for the Future’ programme.

Issue B5 How can we deal with the problems of town centre parking? 4 comments were received to this issue, which included:

B5 • More car parking on the perimeter with the centre being a pedestrian area • Provide park and ride • Remove parking restrictions • Ensure that convenient town centre parking is not occupied throughout the day by

employees in shops and offices.

81


Brackley – Other Options

Possible Options for Directions of Growth - Brackley

NorthWestEast


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

North West East

Options BO1 - BO3: Possible Options for Brackley

DisagreeAgree

Based on 30 representations There were few long questionnaire responses received in relation to Brackley, and therefore the 2 charts above are based on only a small sample. However, they appear to give the message that growth to Brackley to the north and the east are the preferred directions of growth. However, more objections were received to the concept of proposed growth than support. Option BO1 Growth is located to the north of Brackley. Additional comments relating to this option included:

BO1 • No growth to take place. • Strongly oppose this because of the problem of access on to the Halse Road. • No more than 500 dwellings should be directed to Brackley.

82


BO1

• Land to the north of Brackley is remote from the town centre and other facilities and services.

• Parts of Brackley fall within Flood Zones 2 and 3. The Sequential Test will need to be applied to any proposed development in these areas as there will be flood risk implications. River corridors should be maintained and enhanced.

• Strong support. • Should be strategic scale and mixed use with BO3 for employment. • 1,000 - 1,200 dwellings with new social infrastructure including health and education

facilities, substantial affordable housing, new employment will enhance the town centre.

Option BO2 Growth is located to the west of Brackley. Additional comments relating to this option included:

BO2 • No growth to take place • Oppose this because of the problem of access on to the Halse Road. • Parts of Brackley falls within Flood Zones 2 and 3. The Sequential Test will need to

be applied to any proposed development in these areas as there will be flood risk implications. River corridors should be maintained and enhanced

• Land to the west of Brackley is not subject to any National or Local Planning Policy designations and is not an area at risk from flooding.

• There are numerous opportunities to provide new access points into the proposed expansion area

• Expansion of Brackley in this direction would be sustainable as new development would be closely related to sites for recreation, community and retail facilities

• Suitable for sustainable growth and to support and strengthen the town. • Land to the west of Brackley could be more readily integrated with the existing urban

area than land to the east. Option BO3 Growth is located to the east of Brackley. Additional comments relating to this option included:

BO3 • No growth to take place • Up to A43 dual-carriageway • We would support industry here • There is limited scope to integrate residential development with other existing

residential areas, due to severance and the employment development along Northampton Road and Top Station Road.

• The site would represent a sustainable location that is conveniently related to the remainder of the town

• BO3 is supported, with emphasis on the part south of Turweston Road. • The devt of a range of units offering a variety of jobs will go a considerable way

towards contributing to a reduction in the current high levels of out commuting. Option BO4 Additional employment land is allocated to try to reduce the level of out commuting

83


Option BO4

AgreeDisagree

Based on 6 comments Again, there were few responses to this option but most were of the opinion that additional employment land should be allocated to try to reduce out commuting. Other comments received included:

BO4 • Strong support • The allocation of additional employment land at Brackley is supported • Land to the east of Brackley would be most suited to accommodating this new

employment development, as it has good access to the A43 • You cannot easily change existing patterns or tie a house to local employment.

Option BO5 Ensure that the scale of new development maximizes education opportunities

4 comments were received in relation to this option, with most being in support. Additional comments received included:

BO5 • Strong support • New developments should include additional educational and community facilities

84


Silverstone Circuit Issues Issue SC1 How much and what type of development is appropriate at the Circuit? 25 comments were received in relation to this issue, the main points raised were:

SC1 • Encourage motor racing specialisms/ businesses. • Encourage tourism and leisure facilities. • Provide housing growth and community facilities. • No development to take place. • The circuit is not nearly as good as others around the world and is a show place for

our county. Hotels, new grandstands, new paddock, purpose built camping area, theme park. It could be a real jewel in the counties crown.

• The circuit remains important to the status of high performance engine development in Northamptonshire, therefore the needs of this high added value industry should be given priority.

• Significant business development - related to Motor Sport - should be allowed. The circuit and its immediate environs are unsuitable for residential use.

• Potential development at Silverstone needs to be considered in terms of its compatibility with efforts to concentrate development in urban areas.

• Decisions on the scale and type of development around the Silverstone Circuit should carefully take into account the limited capacity of the local watercourse to accept effluent and additional surface water run-off.

• I appreciate development is required at the Circuit. However I have concerns regarding destroying the village community of Silverstone Village.

• Enough to maintain it as a centre for excellence and world beater. • Housing development is not appropriate at Silverstone. • Some additional growth at the circuit might secure its longer term future but this is not

definite. Too flexible an approach at the circuit, with a wide range of uses will fundamentally affect the character of the area but may still not guarantee the longer term presence of the British Grand Prix.

• There do not appear to be exceptional circumstances to justify a concentration of new housing growth at the circuit and within the rural area.

• The circuit is an unsustainable location for growth, despite the intention to sustain the circuit's ability to hold the grand prix.

• Retain circuit as focal point for related employment but with some spare land being used for housing.

• Commercial/ light industrial development should be encouraged. No housing. • The only new development to be permitted should be that essential and ancillary to

the use of Silverstone as a motor racing circuit. Issue SC2 Should we work proactively with the owners and other relevant partners to secure the long-term retention of the Grand Prix? 13 comments were received in relation to this issue, with a large proportion of respondents saying that we should work proactively with the owners and other relevant partners to secure the long-term retention of the Grand Prix.

85


Issue SC2

AgreeDisagree

Based on 17 comments. Additional comments received in respect of this issue were:

SC2 • Not sure. • It generates millions for the county. • Proactive is new, necessary and long overdue. Encouraging involvement of the circuit

with the area would also do the circuit nothing but good. • Yes, believe it is good for the local economy. • Vital for tourism and industry. • Whilst this is a laudable objective, the price should not be the creation of a large

unsustainable form of development which could last long after the Grand-Prix has moved on.

• Invest in circuit and unlock development potential. Issue SC3 Should future employment be restricted to motor related uses only?

86


Issue SC3

AgreeDisagree

Based on 12 responses. Although the piechart above is only based on 12 responses, there does appear to be a preference for future employment not being restricted to motor related uses only. Additional comments received included:

SC3 • Not in its entirety - there are engineering facilities and many other technology based

businesses that may feed into the motor racing/ motorbike racing industry. • Preferably, although new propulsion technologies should be included. • Predominantly but this level of technology means advances in other fields may well

become part of the core requirements of motor sport in the future. • There should be a focus on motor related uses. • Given its unsustainable location, the answer must be yes

Issue SC4 Should the proposals include education in the form of a university campus?

Issue SC4

AgreeDisagree


87


Again, although there appear to have been a limited number of responses to this issue, there does seem to be support for a university campus at or near to the Circuit.

SC4 • Link in with existing facilities such as University of Northampton. • This would be a real bonus for Silverstone and the county. • We've got enough universities. But a tertiary education college teaching practical

skills to apprentices would be useful. • With a strong emphasis on engineering. • A university campus in a location divorced from the main urban areas does not

represent the most sustainable option. • Some limited education facility directly associated with the motor racing business may

be appropriate but a general campus would not be acceptable. Issue SC5 Should the development opportunities at the Circuit influence and enhance the role of Silverstone village as a location for modest growth? 18 responses were received to this issue, including:

SC5 • No way. • Yes. • Only if this facilitates sustainable growth. • Silverstone village should not become a large village off the back of the Circuit being

there. It does, however, offer opportunities for growth as, when and if businesses are brought to the area.

• Concern that development would affect character of village. • Very modest growth. • Commercial and Leisure development at the circuit will enhance the sustainability of

Silverstone village but needs to be carefully located and not simply incorporated in the circuit's proposals.

• The potential development of the circuit is recognised and if commercial development proceeds then there is no good reason why residential village expansion should be restricted to Silverstone.

Silverstone Circuit – Possible Options Option SCO1 To allow a wider range of investment opportunities at the Circuit to enable its role to develop.

88


Option SCO1

AgreeDisagree

Based on 10 responses. The majority of comments received in response to this option supported allowing a wider range of investment opportunities at the Circuit to enable its role to develop. Other comments received included:

SCO1 • Hotels/ retail investments. • The limited provision of housing growth and community facilities is considered

necessary for future development of the motor-sport industry. • Only in areas connected with motor sport to avoid future conflicts. • Support a flexible approach and allowing a broad base of employment opportunities

Option SCO2 To allow for a more flexible approach towards development to incorporate, for example, leisure, tourism, retail.

Option SCO2

AgreeDisagree

89



There was a limited number of responses to this option, however there seems to be relatively strong objection to the proposal of allowing for a more flexible approach towards development to incorporate, for example, leisure, tourism, and retail. Several comments were received in relation to this option including:

SCO2 • In my opinion, I would promote the need for leisure and tourism but not necessarily a

retail park or retail opportunities unless directly related to the circuit eg. Motorbike garage, a driving school.

• Would support a hotel within the grounds of the circuit. • This kind of development would make good use of the investment that was made in

the A43. • No housing

SCO3 To allow new employment that has less of a direct link with motor racing but is nevertheless related to knowledge based, research and high technology industry.

Option SCO3

AgreeDisagree

Based on 11 responses The responses received to this option indicate strong support for this option of allowing new employment that has less of a direct link with motor racing but is nevertheless related to knowledge based, research and high technology industry. Additional comments received included:

SCO3 • Yes but still with some linking. • Whilst a greater range of uses may be acceptable it remains important to ensure that

any uses would not undermine wider objectives for the area.

90


Option SC04 To create an educational facility at the Circuit centred on technology and engineering

Option SCO4

AgreeDisagree

Based on 11 responses. There appears to be strong support for this option, that an educational facility should be created at the Circuit centred on technology and engineering. Two other comments were received that stated:

SCO4 • Ideal location for engineers to study. • Make Northamptonshire a place where budding engineers would wish to study for a

degree. Based within Silverstone circuit. • This may be appropriate if linked to the motor racing industry, however more general

education facilities would not be appropriate in this location. • A degree in Motor Racing Management.

Option SCO5 The expansion of development of the Circuit could make it a more sustainable place if this were to be accompanied by some housing growth and other community facilities.

91


Option SCO5

AgreeDisagree

Based on 9 responses. The final option relating to the expansion of the Circuit to be accompanied by some housing growth and other community facilities has received a more mixed reaction. Other comments included:

SCO5 • No way. • This would seem appropriate to the scale of the businesses that are attracted to use

the circuit area. • Development of residential properties could be problematic due to noise from motor

sports at the circuit. Other UK circuits have suffered as a result of adjacent residential.

• Growth of the circuit enhances the sustainability of the village of Silverstone and therefore the appropriateness of accommodating additional housing

92


Daventry International Rail Freight Terminal (DIRFT) Issue DT1 Do you consider that further expansion of DIRFT should be provided for, and whether it should be restricted to rail connected development only? 16 comments were received to this option, including:

DT1 • Are the existing buildings used to their full height potential? • Support, but questioned how much freight is moved in and out of DIRFT by rail and

how many of the businesses need to use the A5. • As a centre for distribution the needs of the industry must be considered as a priority. • Support the current extension at DIRFT as the site is a highly strategic location and

benefits from an established rail link. The area is often referred to as the 'Golden Triangle' (3 respondents).

• Support, but rail-only development (3 responses). • Support, but should not be restricted to rail connected development only (3

respondents). • The site may be limited by floodplain and capacity should be carefully investigated. • Further development may require land in Rugby District. The Rugby Radio Station is

excellently located for strategic logistics and distribution development and can take advantage of both rail-linked and non rail-linked development (3 respondents).

• DIRFT is an important economic asset and represents the UK's leading Strategic rail freight interchange (2 respondents).

• Any expansion of this rail connected distribution facility will provide wide-ranging positive benefits including skills, wealth creation and health improvements.

• New employment leads to a demand for new facilities relating to sport and recreation. Infrastructure provision must be provided for through developer contributions.

• Further expansion should be allowed only where it provides local employment opportunities.

• MKSM SRS identifies the freight and logistics industry as one of the sub-region's growths sectors. LPAs are required to provide sufficient land to meet market expectations.

• The East Midlands Strategic Distribution Study identifies a requirement for new warehousing across the East Midlands by 2026.

• The area is ideally located to strategic transport networks - roads: the M1, M6 and M45 motorways as well as the A14 and A45 trunk roads (2 respondents).

• Transportation of goods by rail to improve sustainability is increasingly a high priority for Government.

In addition the following comments were also made:

• Not sure • No need to expand beyond what is already permitted. • A proposal for 'further expansion of DIRFT' would be inappropriate because it is anti-

competitive, the CS should set out broad locations for strategic development. Options Option DT01 No further expansion beyond that already permitted.

93


Option DTO1

AgreeDisagree

Based on 10 responses. Comments received in relation to this option disagreed with this option, suggesting that there should be further development at this site. Other comments received included:

DTO1 • Questioned whether the buildings at DIRFT are used to their full height potential? • Further growth should be allowed. • The distribution sector to the sub-regional economy and the suitability of the DIRFT

area is supported and for these reasons it would be inappropriate to seek to limit further expansion.

• Preventing further expansion of DIRFT would damage the economy and would not be in accordance with Regional and National Government Guidance: PPG4, PPG13, The Future of Transport White Paper, sustainable Distribution strategy RSS8.

• The areas adjacent and adjoining DIRFT are ideally located for strategic logistics and distribution development and is capable of taking advantage of both rail-linked or non-rail linked development.

• The area has been identified in documents such as the East Midlands Strategic Distribution Study as an appropriate location for further logistics development until 2026.

Option DT02 A monitor and manage approach, reviewing the need for further expansion throughout the plan period

94


Option DTO2

AgreeDisagree

Based on 9 comments 9 comments were received in relation to this option, a slightly larger proportion of which supported the proposal. Additional comments received were:

DTO2 • There must be good reason to allow further development for storage and distribution

purposes. • DIRFT may be limited by floodplain hence any limited capacity should be carefully

assessed prior to development. • Preferable to provide a small number of large sites as it makes rail freight more

viable. • The overriding policy approach should be for the enhancement of DIRFT as the

strategic "jewel in the crown" for the sub-region. • Whilst a monitor and manage approach may have some merits, the production time

of planning policy documents scheduled within the LDS are such that reviews are unlikely to occur.

• A supportive planning policy framework is required at the outset of a plan in order to provide necessary certainty for long-term investment plans.

• The East Midlands Strategic Distribution Study has already identified significant need for strategic logistics and distribution development across the East Midlands Region.

• West Northamptonshire should not delay in identifying locations for potential growth. Option DT03 Allow further expansion only where it is directly connected to the rail network.

95


Option DTO3

AgreeDisagree

Based on 9 comments Although there appears to have been only a limited response to this option, there is support for this option, to allow further expansion only where it is directly connected to the rail network. Other comments received included:

DTO3 • Support as this is in line with suggested green policies (2 respondents). • Possibly if it provides local employment opportunities. • It is not necessary to have direct rail connections to warehousing; the flexible

approach works well at DIRFT. Some of the largest users of the terminal do make use of rail without having rail-linked warehousing.

• Object. The East Midlands Strategic Distribution Study indicates there will be a need for both rail-linked and non-rail linked distribution to 2026. Government policy supports the movement of road to rail, but the largest proportion of freight will remain on the road.

• Object. This may undermine the viability of the development. • It is not always necessary for sites to be rail-connected; functionally many occupiers

do not require it. • The RSS study recommends 386ha for strategic distribution, of which 308ha of this

should be principally served by rail. Additional comments made include:

• The JCS should provide a definition for the term ‘directly’. • The terminal is not used enough for rail freight because there would be less lorries on

the road easing congestion.

96


Weedon Depot Issues Issue WD1 Given its rural location and the size of the depot what uses could the buildings be put to which would secure their retention without having a negative impact on nearby towns and villages. 15 responses were received to this issue which suggested a number of possible uses that the buildings could be put to including:

WD1 • Niche/specialist shopping (2 respondents). • Employment uses. • Office employment (2 respondents). • Small business units. • Historic visitor/ tourist attraction (4 respondents). • Suggested use as a prison as there is apparently a shortage of prison places. • High value retail development. • Apartments. • Cultural (3 respondents). • County Museum plus a regional archaeological store. • Craft workshops. • Community facilities. • Potential for recreation and sport/leisure. • New build (2 respondents). • A site of national or regional importance. • Improved transport/infrastructure routes – A Flore/ Weedon bypass. • A heritage site (2 respondents) with small-scale housing and an alternative road into

the site from the A45. • Reinstate the canal arm to complement existing Grand Union Canal • Encourage specialist businesses to the site.

In addition, some general comments were made: • Support the proposals. • Do not knock it down. • These buildings are listed and their character and immediate surroundings must not

be developed with any further detriment to the Depot. • The buildings offer huge potential to enable people to see important buildings in situ

and respect them for the purpose they were originally intended. • Commercially viable uses necessary to ensure the restoration and long-term

maintenance of the buildings whilst retaining the character. Weedon Depot – Possible Options Option WDO1 Use the depot for large-scale retail, residential, offices, cultural, tourism (or a combination of each) that may not normally be acceptable.

97


Option WDO1

AgreeDisagree

Based on 9 responses. The responses received to this option indicate support for this option of using the depot for large scale retail, residential, offices, cultural, tourism (or a combination of each). The responses received included:

WDO1 • Large Scale retail is not an option for this site • Residential should not be an option • The depot deserves to be a special site that enables the buildings to be protected,

offering visitor accessibility. • Niche shopping and/ or major office employment and/ or as a historic visitor

attraction. • Use as prison as there are a shortage of prison places. • This is acceptable and preferable to knocking it down. • Support except for large-scale retail. • Retain the existing structural designs and facilities. • Any development must not detract from the importance of Daventry. • All are potential uses for the Depot, but in practice a mixed-use development would

be necessary (3 respondents). • Fireworld is an important opportunity for the West Northants area (2 respondents).

In addition a general comment was made:

• The policies for the Depot will have to be broad and flexible allowing for a range of opportunities but for the detail to be considered in the context of a planning application or applications.

Option WDO2 Allow new development as part of the regeneration of the site

98


Option WDO2

AgreeDisagree

Based on 6 responses. There was no clear preference in respect of whether new development should be allowed on the site. The responses received stated:

WDO2 • Allow modest new development as part of regeneration. • No new development but preserve existing buildings. • Only limited development. • Not without improved access and egress points. • The site should be preserved as much as possible in its present state and there

should be no additional development at this site. • Only to reinstate a building that was perhaps once in situ and was for some reason

lost. • The existing primary school could accommodate a limited amount of growth say up to

100 dwellings. Any growth beyond this would be difficult to manage. • New development could easily destroy the special interest of the site. • Support attempts to bring about re-development of site and employment to village. • Develop it as a heritage site with small scale housing in appropriate areas. • Construct an alternative road into the site from the A45 so impact on nearby towns is

minimal. • Support. A commercially viable mixed use development will have to include some

element of new building. • The Weedon Depot Conservation Plan (Adopted SPD) will provide the management

and protection required.

99


Rural Areas Issues Issue RA1 Should we allow further development in our villages, particularly employment development, and if so which villages would be most appropriate for development and why?

Issue RA1

AgreeDisagree

Based on 44 responses. There was therefore strong support for allowing further development in the villages. A number of general comments were received including:

RA1 • Dependent on infrastructure availability. • Allow modest development to enable village life to be sustained. • No development to take place. • Villagers should have more say as to what happens in their villages. • Each possible case/ request for development should be considered on a case-by-

case basis. • The development of employment opportunities in villages tends to increase commuter

traffic from the urban centres. • Employment will probably need to be linked to the provision of affordable housing. • West Haddon Parish Council is opposed to any major housing development in the

village. • Most villages can take a little development. This will help to regenerate rural areas

and businesses, which should not be allowed to stagnate. • Where appropriate, some employment provision could be made in the larger villages. • Require settlement hierarchy. • A limited new build should be allowed, subject to design favouring low cost (not social

housing). • Our village is too small to incorporate employment development and is typical of

many in the area. • Settlements in the Northampton - Milton Keynes axis should be targeted (Cogenhoe,

Roade, Ashton, Hartwell, and Cosgrove), • Must not let growth degrade quality of villages. • Those villages with an existing range of services. • Need to allow development in villages to meet local needs where there are existing

services.

100


RA1

• This could include linked villages. Tri-village area of Eastcote, Astcote and Pattishall. • Additional supply should be provided in all towns and villages in the area without

exception. • Consideration should be given to spreading development to match the facilities

already in place. • Development should be promoted in those locations, which benefit from a range of

services and facilities. EG Middleton. • Not sustainable to have moratorium on development in rural areas. • The following villages have also been suggested as places for further development,

Old Stratford, Deanshanger, Stony Stratford, Crick, Long Buckby, Silverstone, Brixworth, Moulton, Paulersbury.

Issue RA2 Should we define village confines boundaries?

Issue RA2

AgreeDisagree


This shows strong support for the definition of village confines boundaries. Various comments were also received in response to this issue including:

RA2 • Village confines boundaries are an essential mechanism by which villages define and

maintain their character. • This indicates that in-filling housing can take place within the village boundary. • But infilling can also result in loss of open space and lead to village cramming. • Short term, yes. But eventually these could prove to kill the village by preventing

growth they need. • Small-scale village expansion should remain an option. • Existing development boundaries should be honoured, and not just in villages. • Extremely restrictive policies in rural areas have had harmful effects, and therefore

there is a need for an objective review of the role and future of the rural settlements. • A key geographical area for search would be on radial transport routes that carry

public transport or close to any proposed location for a new railway station to serve the area south of Northampton.

• This should be a matter for the Rural Areas DPD. • Enlarge village boundaries. • The compilation of the Joint Core Strategy is an opportunity to re-define not only the

101


RA2

village confines, but also the status of each village. • This is not necessary. Often landscape features can define the built extent of a

settlement or existing pattern of built form. Use DC policies to control inappropriate development.

• Defining village boundaries can be a double-edged weapon. They can provide certainty but lose credibility if drawn with little or no regard to physical features or the need for flexibility.

• Undertaken with understanding of settlement role.

Issue RA3 Should we be seeking to increase the provision of housing that is affordable to meet local needs?

Issue RA3

AgreeDisagree

Based on 33 responses. This suggests a strong preference for seeking to increase the provision of housing that is affordable to meet local needs. Various comments were also received including:

RA3 • Yes with the proviso that affordable housing should meet demonstrable local needs in

the immediate locality. • Housing association properties should be in areas that have sufficient facilities for

transport, schooling, and schools thus making the setting self-sufficient. • Local people cannot afford houses. • There seems to be a significant focus on affordable housing for the young where the

growing problem is providing protected/ accessible housing for our ageing population.• Brownfield sites close to town and village centres need to be exclusively reserved for

this purpose. • Very difficult to do this in rural areas without having a detrimental effect. • 40% is the maximum figure that should be applied otherwise housing land will not

come forward. • For local people who work locally. • Minimum threshold of 6 houses. • The provision of affordable housing is essential, especially within villages and rural

102


RA3

areas. • Must only be based on local needs, through verifiable survey. • Need to define what is meant by "affordable". • In areas that adequate infrastructure.

Issue RA4 How can we improve accessibility to services and facilities for those without a car within and beyond West Northamptonshire? 38 comments were received in respect of this issue, including:

RA4 • Rail and bus services should be reliable and well publicised. • Taxis can help accessibility. • Get better public transport. Build more cycle paths in safe and scenic areas. • Get rail transport links/ stations improved. • Improve bus services into nearest service centres. • With difficulty. Cars are essential for homes and businesses in rural areas. Measures

to control cars will affect people who live in rural areas disproportionately. • Provide highly subsidised on-call taxi services. • Vibrant communities will help one another internally. Strategic bus services are still

required. • More services with increased frequency. • Encourage development in sustainable locations where access to services and

facilities is realistic on foot and by existing and improved PT facilities. • Need development of a scale that will be sufficient to genuinely support rural facilities.• Need to consider provision of services to ageing population.

Issue RA5 How can we support and protect village facilities and local economic needs? 40 comments were received in response to this issue, including:

RA5 • Improved access (disabled and otherwise) to local shops and businesses; better

publicity and signage so that visitors can more easily find the businesses and services, and fair rents and rates for the shops, businesses and service providers.

• Listen to what the villagers have to say. • Ensure the local shop remains but could also be developed with the local community

centre or pub. • Encourage individual residents to support such services on a voluntary basis. • Determine a lower limit to the facilities in each village, support local shops and post

offices with grants if necessary. • Allow sensitive development in villages for businesses and houses. • Repair the footpaths and roads to begin with…they are a disgrace. • Restrictive policies will lead to demise of facilities and amenities. • Permit more development to make settlements viable and to balance viability against

sustainability. • A thriving community will look after its own facilities. • Grants.

103


RA5

• Close the supermarkets but as this is unlikely to happen ensure the supermarkets are only opened in the confines of the town.

• A strategy, which includes a settlement hierarchy for the West Northamptonshire Area to provide a framework for managing the scale of new development in different locations.

• Justification on a case-by-case benefit and pay for the privilege. Issue RA6 Should we continue to be supportive of farm diversification? 18 responses were received to this issue, all of which supported the issue and the need to continue to be supportive of farm diversification. General comments were also received on this option including:

RA6 • Keep produce local and lessen the carbon footprint. • Bed & breakfast-based tourism is one thing but light industrial development should be

discouraged as this seldom involves increased employment in the villages for local residents.

• Need to keep farmers on the land. • We must be supportive unless we want the countryside to change to barren fields. • Strongly supported, need to give emphasis to the benefits. • Provided it does not impact the "look and feel" of the village. • Farm diversification schemes are of pivotal importance to rural prosperity. • Not at expense of local amenities and not generating nuisance of any sort. • Only if it is true diversification and farming continues to be the main activity. • Only where it is consistent with seeking to reinforce local landscape character.

Issue RA7 How do we ensure the provision of services and facilities to meet the needs of our rural population? 32 responses were received in regard to this issue, the main points raised being:

RA7 • There has to be more provision of mobile services and adequate transport links for

those needing to access major service centres. • Support local community initiatives rather than imposing solutions from outside. • Infrastructure development needs to precede housing development. • Consult each village through open meetings; undertake an independent audit. • Provision of affordable housing should be restricted to identify local needs. • Brackley cottage hospital- key function for elderly people; need to retain services that

currently exist. • Subsidies are the most appropriate route. • We have an ageing population, therefore public transport, mobile shops, mobile

surgeries become more important. Affordable housing encourages people into villages. Keep post offices.

• Rural population is more self-sufficient and in less need of help apart from post office and/or shop and good public transport.

• Strong transport and business links. Needs a significant injection of funding.

104


RA7

• Development of both market and affordable homes and employment opportunities at a suitable scale and in sustainable locations should continue to occur in the rural areas.

• For rural schools a balance between sustaining a viable primary-aged population in the local area and not overwhelming existing provision should be maintained.

Rural Areas – Possible Options

Possible Options of Growth for the Rural Areas

Option RAO1Option RAO2Option RAO3


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

RAO1 RAO2 RAO3

Possible Options for Growth in the Rural Areas

DisagreeAgree

Based on 121 representations. Option RAO1 Disperse development to villages to meet identified local needs regardless of their size and range of services and facilities

105


A clear message was received that those making representations to Option RA01 did not favour this. General comments received in respect of this option included:

RAO1 • Provided need is agreed, and services and facilities can be upgraded. • We would support this option to include development at Litchborough and Culworth. • Strongly oppose. • It is important that the urban areas do not swallow up rural villages. • We feel this will destroy villages and communities. • Agreed. The potential of individual villages to accommodate housing development is

not directly proportional to their existing size although the facilities and services they offer is paramount.

• Such an option is both unsustainable and contrary to Government advice in the form of PPS3.

• There should always be regard to size, services and facilities. • Development should only go to those villages with existing services.

Option RAO2 Allow for some modest new development in the larger villages possessing a good range of services and facilities This issue was received more favourably; suggesting that consideration needs to be taken of the size of the settlement and the number of services and facilities it has, when deciding where new development should be located. Various comments were also received in relation to this option, including:

RAO2 • No growth to take place. • Possibly and only if appropriate development i.e. within curtilage of village. • Yes, where there is demonstrable benefits to the communities involved. • Where appropriate, some employment provision could be made in the larger villages,

providing that the jobs created are likely to meet local needs. • As long as it is compatible with the village. • For the very large villages. • Development should only go to those villages with existing services. • Modest development within villages should be supported where there are good

transport links. • Service centres that provide a significant range of facilities should be prioritised. • Brixworth provides a good range of facilities and services and should therefore be

identified as a location for accommodating further housing growth. • The amount of development in each village should be considered on its own merits.

Option RAO3 Adopt a ‘cluster approach’ towards the provision of new development where a small group of well connected villages would provide a range of key services and facilities for its hinterland. 30 responses were received to this option. Most supported the option, and also made the following comments:

RAO3

106


RAO3

• This is a good offering but unsure if there are close-by almost joined up villages that would offer that in the West Northants district.

• Only if there is no longer village nearby to act as a hub. • Worth investigating. • Strongly support. • In practical terms the larger villages provide the cluster for smaller surrounding

villages in the rural areas. • This may work in the more rural areas to the west of the area. • Provide peripatetic services. • Sounds like the start of a 'new town'. • This would not result in an appropriate level of services and facilities required to

promote sustainable principles and self contained communities. Option RAO4 Provide greater investment in rural public transport to provide links to services, facilities and employment. 28 comments were received in regard to this option, which indicated strong support for providing greater investment in rural public transport to provide links to services, facilities and employment. The comments received included:

RAO4 • Yes, but on a limited scale as the take up of such facilities is likely to remain low. • Bus routes are at present provided to enable the provider to access grants, not to

serve the community. This needs to change. • But will this work? Too often we see bus drivers and no one else on rural buses. • Strongly support. • Public transport has to be affordable. • This is essential. • Subsidise local transport links.

Option RAO5 Provide additional resources and investment to assist and encourage villages in maintaining services 24 comments were received in relation to this issue, which again indicated strong support for this option. Other comments received included:

RAO5 • Depends how much EU money can be accessed. • Strongly support • Obviously, but what would this entail? • But there has to be a balance between provision and development to encourage

villages to maintain services. • Maybe provide favourable weighting on the council tax to encourage small/ cottage

businesses to open/ continue to trade in these communities. • Developer contributions resulting from new residential development help to maintain

rural services.

107


Tables and Diagrams in Core Spatial Strategy F1 Diagram 1: West Northamptonshire The following comments were received in respect of Diagram 1:

F1 • The diagram does not accurately reflect the wider connectivity to the area as a whole • No reference to Peterborough or the A14 trans-European route. • The diagram only shows certain specific sites, included within the Paper for

discussion. This gives the impression that decisions on which sites are strategic and which are not has already been made.

F2 Diagram 2: West Northamptonshire LDF The following comments were received in respect of Diagram 2:

F2 • It is noted that it is intended to proceed with a Silverstone Circuit SPD. • Is it appropriate to pursue as an SPD as opposed to a development plan document,

when the issues and development under discussion now appear to be far more significant than development associated with and ancillary to the race circuit itself.

• Helpfully details the component parts of the West Northamptonshire LDF. • The Diagram could also usefully show where a DPD or SPD is to be produced either

jointly or specify the individual local authority responsible for its production.

F3 Table 1: Timetable for preparation of core strategy The following comments were received in respect of Table 1:

F3 • We question the shortness of the Feb-March 2008 period as this would indicate less

than the statutory period for public consultation on strategic planning issues relating to major growth.

• The third stage of the preparation of the JCS is referred to as 'Strategic Options and Issues (Pre-submission consultation) taking place from March to October. The 'Pre-submission consultation' reference is incorrect as both the Issues and Options and Public Participation on Preferred Options constitute stages prior to the formal submission.

F4 Diagram 3: Themes No comments received. F5 Table 2: Housing requirements 2001-26 The following comments were received in respect of Table 2:

108


F5

• Strongly support inclusion of a plan period 2001-2026 and the requirement for 62,125 dwellings for WN sub-region.

• Bring forward table to before vision and themes identified. • Outstanding planning permissions should not be included in determining how much

land is required unless there is robust evidence that land is developable and will contribute to delivery at the point envisaged.

• Should remove windfall calculations. • Outstanding permissions are from 1st April '06- should be more up-to-date i.e. April

'07. • 62,125 should be treated as a minimum. • A further column should be added before the "remaining housing requirement"

column to acknowledge that 3,500 dwellings are planned at Dallington Grange. This column should also include reference to the development planned at Upton.

• The Northampton Implementation Area (NIA), yet undefined, will include parts of Daventry and South Northamptonshire Districts. This needs to be made clear in the table so that all participants are fully aware of the housing requirements and district locations where dwellings are scheduled to be built.

• The housing figures are based on the replacement housing figures for the NIA. The JCS will need to be sufficiently flexible to ensure that it remains in conformity with the RSS when finally approved.

• Is it difficult to quantify how much development for the town and rural areas is proposed; is it all to be directed to the town?

F6 Table 3: Jobs 2001-21 The following comments were received in respect of Table 3:

F6 • Bring forward table to before vision and themes identified. • Plan for job growth is less than housing by 5 years. • CS should not be undermined and made unsound by the lack of job growth.

requirement in last 5 yrs of plan. Consider role of reserve employment sites in CS. • Table should make allowance for jobs that will be created within existing development

sites such as Dallington Grange. • Support the requirement for improving the skills base of Northampton • It would also be helpful if the JCS could also refer to employment floor space targets

as well as job creation so that this better relates to the evidence base set out in the Northampton Employment Land Study.

F7 Appendix 1: Key Facts and Figures The following comments were received in respect of Appendix 1:

F7 • The key information which could have been drawn out into the Paper as a way of

identifying the issues and drawing out the options for addressing the issues appears to have been included within the appendices.

• Appendix 1, Key Facts and Figures contains information on the key issues for the area, which has not been analysed and used to inform the consultation document.

109


F7

• Appendix 1 states that West Northamptonshire has the 3rd lowest renewable energy generating capacity of the UK regions at 2% and that there are no large scale renewable energy schemes in West Northamptonshire. This would appear to be a key strategic issue for the area that should be addressed within the JCS with options proposed as to how to address it.

F8 Appendix 2: Evidence Base The following comments were received in respect of Appendix 2:

F8 • Make reference to key PCT policy and strategy documents in the evidence base

section including the Healthy Communities and Old People element of the LAA and the emerging 'Being Healthy' strand of 'Our NHS, Our Future - the Next Stage Review'.

• The growth agenda is an ideal opportunity to develop the "Fully Engaged" scenario identified in the Wanless report - 'Securing our Future Health: Taking a Long-Term View'.

F9 Appendix 3: Potential directions for growth The following comments were received in respect of Appendix 3:

F9 • Dallington Grange is a commitment as it is a saved LP allocation. It should be treated

as such and not referred to as a potential development site. • Acknowledge that DG is identified in all 4 options but it should be re-titled "Existing

Development Site". • Alignment and route of NW bypass is incorrect. Proposed extension to CVLR should

be amended to broadly follow NW bypass identified in NLP. • Turning to the four options on pages 32-35 of the Issues and options - only a

cartoonist could have drawn the line for the northwest bypass indicated. • The line running through the residential area should be withdrawn immediately to

prevent those people being able to sell their homes through planning blight. • Object to the plans in this appendix as they describe an unreasonable and illogical

distinction between Dallington Grange/southwest District and Buckton Fields where none occurs.

• No definition is provided as to 'Proposed Development Site' however it probably related to existing allocations within the development plan. Therefore Buckton Fields must be shown in a similar manor to Dallington Grange to ensure the JCS is prepared in an even-handed manor.

• It would be useful to have maps identifying options in the main body of the document rather than as appendices.

• The Growth Options outlined are an example of a good use of diagrams and provide an idea of where the growth may go in relation to the area as a whole. This style could have usefully been followed through for the towns of Towcester, Brackley and Daventry.

• The diagrams showing options for the growth of the towns detail a series of sites and do not show connectivity to the area as a whole (such as the town centres). This could also give the impression that decisions for the locations for future development have, to a certain extent, already been made.

110


F10 Appendix 4: Glossary No comments received. Joint Core Strategy General 51 comments were received as general comments that did not relate to a specific section of the Issues and Options. These have therefore been incorporated below:

CSS General

111


CSS General

Delivery/Implementation & Monitoring:

• No reference to monitoring and implementation framework. • A phased approach towards the release of land can help control the supply but the

LPA’s need to take a realistic view about the timescale for delivery of development. • The JCS should strive to present a realistic trajectory for housing delivery and to

ensure it provides a robust framework against which delivery monitoring and subsequent housing supply management can be measured.

• A contingent approach that will enable LPA’s to deal with unforeseen delays, should not occur, and should not blow the overall strategy off course.

• Adherence to the timetable for the preparation of the JCS is essential if growth is to be delivered.

Growth:

• Some of the detail is out of date, in particular the potential growth option as much of this is now decided and planning applications have been lodged, this work does not identify any of the development constraints and therefore makes it difficult for individuals to make an informed response to the issues and questions raised.

• West Haddon Parish Council is opposed to any major housing development in the village and they will seek to get the village classified as a 'Non' or 'Limited' Growth Settlement in the District, County or Regional Plans.

• This is a substantial representation on behalf of Hallam Land Management in the South East, which sets out in detail the merits of the SE Option.

• The unproven need for additional housing should be proven rather than imposed and there should be a full review of all of the strategic options.

Affordable housing:

• The JCS will need to incorporate considerations on viability when determining the final projection and tenure mix of any affordable housing provision.

• The ratio of homes for affordable rent and other tenures should be negotiated on a site-by-site basis.

Retail:

• Any policies regarding retailing should incorporate the key tests of soundness set out in PPS6: Need, Sequential test, Scale, Impact. Include the following: reference to retail needs assessments, placing greater weight on quantitative need for specific types of retail floor space proposed, phasing policies, clearly identify the size of development that is appropriate for each centre.

Infrastructure/Transport:

• The scale of the growth proposed in West Northamptonshire presents significant challenges to the current infrastructure but also provides an ideal opportunity to 'build in health' and create 'real' sustainable communities.

• For all regions urban expansions should be so as not to create inner city deprivation by the creation of well-balanced communities that encourage social cohesion between old and new communities.

• The Core Strategy needs to make reference to the provision of adequate utilities infrastructure to service development to avoid unacceptable impacts on the environment such as sewage flooding of residential and commercial property, pollution of land and watercourses plus water shortages with associated low-pressure water supply problems.

• The evidence base at Appendix 2 has been reviewed and there are other documents that could be referred to. Major strategic level planning applications have been submitted, particularly in the Daventry area, but also around Northampton. Accompanying these applications has been Environmental Statements and other reports providing a wealth of factual information.

• The definition of infrastructure is inadequate. Infrastructure should support not only

112


CSS General

the development but also the surrounding area. The definition of infrastructure should tally with references to infrastructure in paragraph 1.7 and SO6. The 5th bullet point, the wording should emphasise the priority to be given to infrastructure. We propose the following wording: "when and how infrastructure should be provided in step with development".

• On the theme of transport there is no indication as to how transport currently works and whether capacity or constraints exist in West Northamptonshire for growth, although some facts are presented in the appendix.

• The most important pre-requisite is certainly in the planning process, particularly in terms of infrastructure.

Environment, Green Infrastructure and Landscape Designation:

• No reference to green infrastructure. • Themes of green infrastructure, environmental character and the role of the River

Nene Regional Park need to be given more emphasis. • Green Infrastructure is mentioned once in Spatial Objective 2 (infrastructure

provision) but there is no subsequent explanation of the concept of green infrastructure, or indeed any further mention.

• An example of how GI can be included at this stage is the North Northants CSS which identifies green infrastructure as a separate objective, referring to a network of green spaces, and referencing key green infrastructure assets.

• There is no mention of the character of the environment, nor of the environment character strategy. This provides an objective baseline that identifies and maps the character of the environment, and provides guidelines on how the character should be conserved and enhanced.

• Need for carbon neutral development. • Has the local environmental impact been considered (e.g. floodplains, fresh water,

sewage, landfill, etc) of such a large population increase? • As the RNRP is the county's GI delivery partnership, we would suggest that reference

be made to the importance of GI in enabling sustainable growth, and to the role that the RNRP plays in this important area.

• The Issues & Options paper appears to contain little reference to the need to plan and prioritise Green Infrastructure. GI is referred to once in SO2 but there is no subsequent explanation of the concept of GI, or indeed any further mention of it. This is a key omission and a missed opportunity. The lack of robust references to GI is very disappointing. We hope that these key omissions can be remedied and coherent references to GI and Biodiversity baseline will be made in the PO draft of the JCS. GI should be included as a key component of the environment objective, the spatial GI framework for the area is illustrated, GI corridors are identified, specific policies and supporting text all serve to explain GI and point to the Northants GI strategy for further information. This level of importance for GI should be replicated, if not enhanced, in the WN documents.

• Special Landscape Areas have outlived their usefulness. A significant amount of work has been undertaken including ECA, however none of this appears to have filtered through into the JCS or other DPDs.

Open Space, Sport and Recreation:

• JCS must include attractive green space, a range of play areas for children, recreational and sporting facilities and allotments as key to building healthier lifestyles.

• Enhancing open space, sports and recreation in Northampton. Important to improve Open Space, Sport & Recreation especially when town expanding but difficult to gain resources to achieve quality public places.

• Must recognise importance of public open space and not assume bringing private open space into public use is suitable.

• Need to make use of S106 contributions to fund existing sport and recreation rather

113


CSS General

than insisting on inappropriate on-site provision e.g. the former Cliftonville Middle School, Northampton.

Archaeology:

• Need to recognise potential for the presence of important archaeological remains that may not be recognised during the planning process so that important remains could be destroyed without record.

Previously Developed Land /Brownfield Sites:

• Make the maximum use of previously developed land, but not to the detriment of community facilities and green space.

Ecology & Protected Species:

• Badgers are widespread in the county. The development proposed around Northampton, Daventry, Brackley and Towcester would have a detrimental impact on the badger population.

• Without crucial biodiversity and ecological evidence base, it is considered that the JCS for WN is fundamentally flawed and open to significant challenge at Inquiry. However, these issues can be addressed and the Wildlife Trust can provide advice and work with the JPU to incorporate these important issues.

Gypsies & Travellers:

• Policy 16 of draft RSS contains regional priorities on gypsies & travellers. Interim minimum additional pitch requirements are set out in Appendix 3 of draft RSS and these need to be considered.

Canals, Waterways and Marinas:

• Emphasise the importance of the canal system in the sub-region. It is an important part of the green infrastructure and brings many benefits economically, socially and environmentally. Canals can contribute also to urban regeneration.

• In the rural areas would like to see development of marinas, for which there is an urgent need in view of congestion on the canal system as well as exploiting the potential for recreation of the reservoirs.

Social /Community:

• Community safety is vital to the establishment of a successful environment for people to live and work.

• Reducing crime, anti-social behaviour and fear of crime should be a high priority but should be part of the consideration of all facilities rather than as a topic alongside other services and facilities.

• New development can be low crime, low disorder and relatively incident free if it follows the principles of designing out crime including the creation of defensible space, reduction of permeability, secure public spaces and restricting escape routes open to criminals.

• No reference to housing to meet the requirements and needs of the elderly. • There is an existing and future need for a district centre to provide services and

facilities for the western part of Northampton. Public Consultation and Engagement:

• Churches wish to bring 6 principles to the consultation process, based on the Christian faith developed and applied to our current situation: - The importance of people, their relationships, families, the place of children and the needs of all people - physical, social and spiritual. - The importance of community and the building and maintaining of an inclusive and welcoming community.

114


CSS General

- There should be good governance. - There should be social justice with the vision of creating a better society especially for those less well off. - That we live in a created and dynamic world and we are stewards of that world and so should care for the environment. - That lessons from past developments.

• It was appreciated that the opportunity was provided to attend the workshop for PC's and to take part in some discussion of the issues.

• Inadequate publicity has led to most people being unaware of the options and issues and their implications for people living in or around Northampton.

• Representatives from rural areas should be involved in future plans. • The consortium would wish to assist the JPU in the preparation of the preferred

options as a major stakeholder. • The involvement of NCC as highway authority has a key role is assessing the

implications of growth on the highway. • The role of WNDC is welcomed as the local delivery vehicle. • Concerned that the consultation process is an empty process with a predefined end-

point, and will result in overburdened existing infrastructure, about which residents can do nothing, even though they are later told that they were fully empowered to contribute to the extensive consultation process.

Education:

• University of Northampton already plays an important role in the social, economic and cultural development of the region. It plans to ensure that its course portfolio meets the needs of both individuals and employers, equipping graduates for careers in an increasingly competitive job market, while growing links with the business and wider community. Its research base will continue to grow, providing the expertise necessary to support the needs of a growing economy and providing a rich source of innovative ideas for new businesses.

• Educational facilities available at Moulton are of sub-regional importance, and should be promoted accordingly.

Economy:

• Strongly support the Potential Employment and Learning Cluster.

Daventry & Weedon: • Daventry remains amazed that no development is proposed for the areas to the south

of the A45 and towards Newnham. These locations could be easily incorporated into the town through the existing road networks and are close to, but not adjacent to, the existing industrial areas.

• Insufficient houses allocated in Daventry, should be 21,843. • Why is Weedon Depot not being promoted as a Site of Outstanding Historical worth?

Northampton:

• NIA should include urban areas and surrounding villages. • Castle Station should be included for office uses if not already included in the town

centre. • The NIA should be defined as a wider policy area including the urban area and the

surrounding countryside and villages. • Term NIA should be downplayed or changed as it is not user friendly. It is effectively

the functional urban area that will be in place in 2006. • Para 45 sets out 2 options for defining the NIA. Either option is valid, although the first

option would be more appropriate if it is found that there is insufficient land adjoining the urban area to accommodate the growth without harming planning interests, e.g. unacceptable flood risk & high landscape value.

115


CSS General

• JCS should include greater recognition of the housing requirement of the NIA as set out in the MKSM SRS.

• Ransome Road at Northampton is a Brownfield site within the urban areas, supported by facilities located in central Northampton and Delapre. This site should be considered for a site-specific policy to meet housing needs in the NIA. Subject to relocation of the existing CEMEX facility to another location in the Northampton area.

• Point out that by including the Cattle Market on a site-specific option that its relocation site should also be identified at the same time.

• It is imperative that the NIA is defined on geographical terms and recognise that this appears to have been problematic for the JPU in arriving at a boundary that is acceptable to the three planning authorities.

• There should be no spatial prioritisation for the delivery of Northampton's development. The importance is to ensure there is a constant supply and adequate supply of housing sites that are genuinely available as expressed in PPS3. It is important to supplement the consideration of overall housing numbers with a consideration of the type of housing that is being provided in order to ensure that all market sectors are being properly addressed.

Towcester & Brackley:

• A significant amount of South Northants is rural in nature and there are significant benefits to be gained from planning for and accommodating an appropriate level of future development in these areas. Potential to create the critical mass of development needed to maintain and support local services, facilities or enterprise.

• The growth of Towcester and Brackley is consistent with the MKSMRS.

Rural Areas: • This parish has opposed further development of "executive" houses within the

building area of the parish as all recent development has been of this type. We favour a balance where development provides affordable, regular and executive houses.

• Our parish has very few houses that could be deemed as "second homes". A noticeable proportion of the parish's working residents commute more than 20KM.

• The importance of the rural areas must not be underestimated. There is a need for sustainable development in rural areas and the focus on the creation of sustainable communities within rural areas.

General comments about the JCS:

• Each individual section for the area contains a list of Issues and then Options. In most cases the issues are not identified issues, which are relevant/ specific to the area but rather a series of questions. The Options therefore appear to be a series of proposals, which do not link to the 'issues'.

• Needs to be an integrated spatial plan for West Northamptonshire, yet one that is very much around how to manage the major growth to be accommodated in the area.

• Needs to be a clear Spatial Plan that is forward looking. • Should be written around how West Northamptonshire is proposed to function at

2026 and what needs to come forward to make this a reality. • JCS should not fall into trap of seeing itself as only setting broad guidance, and

therefore delegating key choices and decisions to lower level DPDs. • Other matters set out in National and Regional Policy should be considered: Urban

renaissance, regeneration, environmental improvements, sustainable construction, improved infrastructure and sustainable communities.

• JCS should construct a policy framework to promote a step change in the rate of housing completions, this underpins Government policy.

• JCS should incorporate appropriate tracts of land to ensure necessary infrastructure, associated with urban extensions, can be provided promptly.

• The overall impression is one of disparate areas with separate issues rather than West Northamptonshire as a whole area.

116


CSS General

• We object strongly to the term "this growth" (as opposed to "major growth") and to the arrogant sound of "not open to debate". We suggest the following wording: "The decision to establish major growth in West Northamptonshire has already been taken at the National and Regional level’s.

• A Settlement hierarchy should be provided, giving proper attention to the rural communities as well as the town.

• The location of development zones based on sound planning principles should be provided.

• Clarification of the relationships between the various planning and delivery authorities should be provided.

• Population growth will have an impact on housing availability and the existing stock must receive appropriate investment.

Specific Paragraphs:

• Page 4 Section 1.9: No clarity on responsibilities of the Councils and WNDC, specifically for determining planning applications.

• Page 5 Sections 1.10 - 1.12: No reference is made to the Urban Development Area. This makes it difficult to understand who is responsible for which decisions, and what geographic and numerical limits there are to growth in the area.

• Disagree with Paragraph 3.7 'any approach to increase the rate of delivery would have little chance of success'.

• Paragraph 3.7 - Inappropriate for JCS to seek to restrict the delivery of new housing as demand is high and restricting supply will exacerbate affordability problems.

• Paragraph 3.7 - welcome recognition that a continuous supply of available and deliverable housing land is needed over the JCS period.

• The estimates of future housing requirements set out at Paragraph 4.8 - 4.10 are broadly agreed, subject to the outcome review of RSS8 and the final total requirement figure for the NIA period 2001-2026.

• Paragraph. 4:15: The possible extension to Brackmills is supported, which would provide more diverse employment opportunities.

• Paragraph 6.7 - Welcome recognition given to the role of villages in terms of accommodating future development in SN.

• Paragraph 12.1 - There may be a need for some development to be planned for within the rural areas of WN.

• Paragraph 12.3 agree with this statement but wider policy has created this scenario.

117

Documents

Analysis of Long Questionnaire Responses received to ...€¦ · Analysis of Long Questionnaire Responses and Letters received to West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Issues