Policy DM22 Provision and enhancement of community facilities
Development of new or enhanced community facilities will be permitted and encouraged where they contribute positively to the well-being and social cohesion of local communities, with preference being given to locations within or adjacent to the city centre or existing and proposed local and district centres in accordance with the hierarchy of centres set out in JCS policy 19. Proposals within centres will be accepted where their location is appropriate to and their scale and function is compatible with the centre in which they are proposed.
The provision of new community facilities outside or not adjacent to centres will be acceptable where there is a clear community need for such a facility and:
a) it can be demonstrated that there are no suitable premises within or adjacent to centres; or
b) the proposal is predominately for outdoor sport or recreation activities (including recreational buildings provided in association with and ancillary or complementary to those activities) and is consistent with the requirements of policy DM8; or
c) there are overriding community, amenity and environmental benefits deriving from an out of centre location.
Schools and other educational development
Proposals involving the construction of new or replacement schools and other educational facilities, extensions to existing educational establishments and (where permission is required) changes of use for school or other educational and training purposes, will be accepted and permitted where:
a) they would not undermine the objectives for sustainable development set out in policy DM1, in particular by increasing the need to travel by private car;
b) they would not give rise to significant impacts on the environment, highway safety or traffic arising from locational constraints or the particular configuration of the site or premises which could not be overcome by the imposition of conditions;
c) they would result in the efficient and effective use of existing school sites and/or an accessible distribution of school places or other educational opportunities;
d) appropriate and adequate provision can be made for the residential accommodation needs of students (where required) in accordance with the criteria in policy DM13.
Particular support will be given to proposals which provide for the shared use of schools facilities by the wider community.
The local community must be consulted to ensure that new and enhanced community facilities of all types best meet their needs and aspirations.
Protection of community facilities
Development resulting in the loss of an existing community facility (excluding community public houses listed in Appendix 5) will only be permitted where:
a) adequate alternative provision exists or will be provided in an equally accessible or more accessible location within 800 metres walking distance; or
b) all reasonable efforts have been made to preserve the facility but it has been demonstrated that it would not be economically viable, feasible or practicable to retain the building or site for its existing use; and
c) evidence is provided to confirm that the property or site has been marketed for a meaningful period and that there is no realistic interest in its retention for the current use or for an alternative community use.
The involvement of the local community will be sought in identifying the importance of local facilities; including them (where appropriate) on the statutory list of assets of community value and developing appropriate solutions for their retention and enhancement.
Development resulting in the loss of historic and community public houses listed in appendix 5 will only be permitted where criteria b) and c) above are satisfied.
Where it is demonstrated that an existing community use is not viable, preference will be given to the change of use or redevelopment to alternative community uses before other uses are considered. Proposals for development which involve the unavoidable loss of community facilities for which there is a proven demand will be required to consider the scope for relocating or reproviding the facility either within the new development or on an alternative site within the locality and to make such provision where feasible and practicable.
Supplementary text
22.1 This policy also responds to the requirements of the NPPF in relation to promoting healthy communities, as detailed in the supplementary text to policy DM21. It seeks to ensure that an appropriate and accessible range and choice of community facilities and services is maintained within Norwich and to protect viable facilities so far as is practicable unless there is an overriding justification for their loss or exceptional benefits deriving from alternative forms of development.
22.2 Community facilities are essential to ensure and maintain a high quality of life for those that live, work and visit Norwich city centre and its suburban residential neighbourhoods. The council seeks to support and where possible, enhance, viable and necessary community facilities which play an important role in social interaction and community cohesion. The Site allocations plan makes provision for community facilities in a number of key development allocations: where need is demonstrated it is envisaged that the Community Infrastructure Levy will be the primary mechanism for funding and securing additional community facilities for which a need can be justified. For the purposes of this policy, a ‘community facility’ is as defined under ‘community facilities/uses’ in the glossary.
22.3 Proposals for community uses which are also main town centre uses will be expected to accord with the provisions of policy DM18: the principle being that the most appropriate location for a new facility will depend on its intended scale and catchment with most purely local services being best located in or close to local and district centres and facilities serving a wider catchment area being best located in or on the edge of the city centre. Exceptionally a new facility may be accepted in accessible locations outside centres where there is a clear community need and where a more central location is demonstrated to be impractical. Sports facilities in association with an existing formal recreational open space may also be accepted where there are exceptional benefits to sport arising from the new facility, in accordance with policy DM8.
22.4 The NPPF (paragraph 72) states that the Government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing communities, Local planning authorities should take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to meeting this requirement, and to development that will widen choice in education. To this end, policy 7 of the JCS provides for “sufficient, appropriate and accessible education opportunities for both residents and non-residents, including wider community use of schools, including through design”, also accepting new primary and new or expanded secondary schools to serve the major growth locations and enhancement of further and higher education facilities.
22.5 Much of the responsibility for planning future schools provision formerly rested with Norfolk County Council as local education authority. The county council is also responsible for deciding planning applications affecting its own schools, with the city council involved as a statutory consultee. In more recent years the trend to greater self-government of schools and the emergence of academy schools and free schools will mean that a generally higher proportion of applications for schools development may need to be determined directly by the city council. It is likely that any significant requirements for new schools will have already been identified through the Site allocations plan but there will be instances where a smaller scale proposal for a school or other education or training facility comes forward outside the local plan process.
22.6 Following the extension of permitted development rights for state funded schools in 2013, the change of use of a wide range of non-residential buildings to school use no longer requires planning permission. Accordingly this policy will apply primarily to proposals for new build schools and other forms of educational development which do not fall within the definition of a state funded school. In accordance with the NPPF the council will adopt a positive and collaborative approach to such proposals and will work closely with providers to identify and overcome any constraints on development, including the need for any on-site or off-site accommodation for students.
22.7 The local community must be fully involved in order to gain a proper understanding of the importance of any community facility and the implications of any proposal which may affect it. Applicants proposing to redevelop or convert facilities which are of established community value will be expected to engage with local communities at an early stage in the planning process about the relative importance of the facility to its users.
22.8 The Localism Act 2011 requires assets of community value to be included on a list maintained by the local authority, allowing duly constituted community and voluntary bodies to nominate land and buildings for inclusion on that list and enable those bodies to exercise community right to buy and community right to challenge powers in respect of any community facility on the list which is under threat of disposal. The Assets of Community Value (ACV) provisions are set out in Part 5 Chapter 3 of the Act, and accompanying Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations came into force in September 2012.
22.9 Whilst the designation of a site or building as an asset of community value may be important, its weight as a material planning consideration may be limited. The process of listing assets of community value is separate from the planning process, which should only assess the planning merits of a scheme. Inclusion on the ACV list simply confirms assets nominated by community groups which are considered by them to have some community worth; however it is not an objective assessment of community value.
22.10 For the purposes of this policy, therefore, the community value of individual assets affected by development proposals would need to be objectively assessed on a case-by-case basis, irrespective of whether they are included on the ACV list or not. In appropriate cases it may be necessary for developers to consider how the exercise of any statutory community right to buy or community right to challenge under ACV legislation might affect the timescale for the delivery of a scheme.
22.11 As opportunities emerge and the neighbourhood planning system evolves over the plan period, it is expected that community and voluntary bodies in Norwich would have more formal and direct involvement in planning and protecting local community facilities in the context of this policy and the community rights set out in the Localism Act.
22.12 The principles of policy DM9 in relation to previously unrecognised heritage assets may also be relevant here, since the intrinsic merit of a heritage asset may rest not only in its historic fabric but in its social history and role in the community over a number of years. Reference should be made to the Community engagement strategy and Statement of community involvement, which are codes of practice of how people can expect to be involved in the planning process.
22.13 Whilst it is not the role of this plan to seek to protect facilities indiscriminately which are clearly not economically viable or feasible to retain in any form, it is reasonable to require that the loss of any community facility of value should be justified by evidence before development proceeds and it is important that sufficient evidence is provided to enable a proper assessment. The city council will require any application involving the loss of any community facility or land last used for community purposes to be supported by written evidence and applicants should contact the council at the earliest stage to discuss the details. The level of detail will depend upon the nature of the proposal but could be expected to include evidence such as:
i) in the case of a business, the current and projected trading performance;
ii) in the case of a community facility, the current and projected patterns of use;
iii) the nature and condition of the building or site and the cost of repairs, renovations or improvements needed to allow the facility to continue in operation;
iv) the nature and location of comparable facilities;
v) the potential to relocate the use into other premises or to another site in the area;
vi) evidence that the premises has been actively marketed for a period of not less than nine months at a realistic commercial rent (or sale price) with no interest being shown from potential occupiers. Evidence might include sales literature, details of approaches, and details of offers. (It should be noted that any evidence of a commercially sensitive nature or which breaches commercial confidentiality would not be made publicly available);
vii) evidence that the local community has been notified in writing of the intention to close the facility and detail of representations received.
22.14 Norwich is fortunate in offering a vibrant and distinctive pub culture appealing to all ages and social groups. Pubs can contribute greatly to social interaction and community cohesion in residential neighbourhoods, help to support and promote the evening economy and the cultural life of the city centre, act as repositories of social history and (if they are buildings of historic interest) be valued heritage assets and memorable tourist and visitor attractions in their own right. In a period when many towns and cities are suffering from widespread closures and loss of community pubs, Norwich has been able to retain a wide and diverse choice of public houses particularly in the inner urban areas to the north and south-west of the city centre. However, the city has not been immune to pub closures and over the past few years many long-established pubs have closed, been converted to other commercial uses or demolished altogether, often without the need for planning permission.
22.15 In areas of the city where pubs are more sparsely distributed (especially the outlying housing estates), a single pub closure may have a disproportionate impact, particularly if it has a wider role in supporting a community which may be suffering from some degree of deprivation. Whilst the council recognises the value of protecting public houses for their intrinsic merit as social and community hubs, it is just as important to ensure a beneficial role for these more vulnerable and perhaps less well regarded public houses.
22.16 No policy can require a pub to be kept open if there is no realistic prospect of its continuing as a going concern, and it could be contrary to national guidance to insist on this. Rather, policy DM22 continues the approach of the previous local plan in seeking to identify selected public houses which have special historic or community significance and requiring substantive evidence to justify their loss. This will afford a degree of protection from indiscriminate redevelopment and, so far as is practicable, from change of use. However, the General Permitted Development Order permits a wide range of changes of use of pubs without the need to apply for planning permission. Appendix 5 identifies the community public houses to which this policy will apply.
22.17 In many cases the pub’s heritage interest will already be subject to protection from statutory listing or its inclusion on the council’s local list but a selected number of additional pubs have been identified which are of value for other reasons: most notably that they may be the only remaining pub serving a substantial residential area.
22.18 The evidence to be provided in support of a proposal affecting protected public houses should have regard to the criteria outlined above for other forms of community facility. While no endorsement of the organisation is implied or should be inferred, the Campaign for Real Ale’s Public house viability test is considered to be a useful reference in setting out the most relevant matters the council would need to consider in reaching an informed judgement for such an exercise.
22.19 The potential loss of a pub within a district or local centre will also need to be considered in relation to policy DM21 where it is likely to affect the vitality, viability or diversity of the centre concerned.
References
- NPPF: CLG, 2012: Deliver community facilities and local services: safeguard against the unnecessary loss of valued facilities and services, particularly where this would reduce the community’s ability to meet its day-to-day needs.
- National Planning Practice Guidance, CLG 2014: Health and well-being: Local plans (need to address needs and opportunities for community facilities).
- Proposals to introduce a Community right to buy - assets of community value: Consultation paper, CLG, February 2011.
- Proposals to introduce a Community right to challenge: Consultation paper, CLG, February 2011.
- Community right to challenge - Policy statement, CLG, September 2011.
- Assets of community value - Policy statement, CLG, September 2011.
- The Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012.
- JCS policy 7: Supporting communities.
- Norwich community engagement strategy.
- Norwich statement of community involvement.
- Campaign for Real Ale Public house viability test
