July 2021 campaign bulletin

East Anglia 1(North) and East Anglia 2 Windfarms – SPS calls for a split decision

The Examination closed at the beginning of the month after a 3-month extension. Of particular interest to SPS was a specific question by the Examining Authority to Historic England regarding the historic value of the parish boundary which is to be lost as a result of the siting of one of the substations. Historic England have finally confirmed that the historic footpath makes an important contribution to the wider setting of the grade II* Friston church by physically and visually connecting a nearby listed farmhouse. This is a significant development and one that SPS and the campaign groups are encouraged by.

SPS has made a final submission adding its voice to the local campaign groups and the MP, Dr Therese Coffey, that a split decision is the only appropriate outcome, thereby permitting the offshore elements, while withholding consent for the onshore infrastructure and calling for these to be “pathfinder” projects for the proposed offshore connection which is set to come forward post 2025.

McCarthy and Stone coming to Lavenham?

A site within the Lavenham Conservation Area is to become vacant as Lavenham Press intend to relocate their business.  We support the reuse of the site for residential development but have joined others including Historic England and many local residents in questioning whether the proposals are appropriate for this very sensitive prominent site.  The medieval core of Lavenham is one of the best preserved in the country and we strongly object to the scale and design of the proposed two storey block of retirement apartments. 

We have also challenged the applicant and Babergh heritage officer’s conclusion that an existing 19^th century horsehair factory building on the site should be demolished.  We believe it is an important, prominent remnant of the industrial heritage of Lavenham, is functionally linked to a factory building on Water Street, dating from the 15^th century, and its retention and conversion to living accommodation must be considered.

The White Horse Pub facing demolition

SPS has shown its support to the huge number of local objections to proposals to demolish the White Horse Inn in Felixstowe and replace with an uninspiring scheme comprising a convenience store and housing. In June we called for a Heritage Assessment to be provided to understand the value of the current building in its own right and its contribution to the local area.  This has now been provided but SPS has carried out a thorough assessment of the report and found it lacks important details including confirmation that the building was designed by Thomas Cotman, an important local architect of the late C19/ early C20. 

We understand that the local community has applied to register the pub as a community asset, and we continue to object to the planning application, urging that the building is retained.

SPS supports Heritage Officer’s objection to plans for Eye’s Vine Church

Whilst supporting the aspiration of the church to grow and thrive, SPS has objected to the planned single storey glazed link extension to the front elevation.The Vine Baptist Church is a handsome and elegant building, retaining original fenestration and high-quality brick detailing.  It is set back from the street, but its imposing character can be fully appreciated from the forecourt. It makes an important contribution to the history of the town, and is a good surviving example of a non-conformist chapel that retains all of its external architectural features.

We therefore wholeheartedly supported the view of the heritage officer that a proposed front extension will cause harm to the building and the conservation area. The extension will involve a substantial loss of historic fabric and will obscure the entire ground floor destroying the strong symmetry of the façade and significantly eroding the forecourt. We have suggested an alternative location for the proposed new café facilities within the site.

At a ‘Building Beautiful Places’ event on 20 July, the Government announced new planning measures, through which it aims to improve local infrastructure, help the environment, champion neighbourhood design and boost health and wellbeing. The measures include a National Model Design Code – a toolkit to enable every council and community to create their own local design requirement. Guidance is provided across all aspects of new development including tree-lined streets, sustainable drainage and design to support walking and cycling. An updated planning framework (NPPF) has been published placing greater emphasis on beauty, place-making, the environment, sustainable development and underlining the importance of local design codes. There will also be an Office for Place to drive up design standards, piloting the National Model Design Code with around 20 local councils and communities.

A greater emphasis than ever before on quality and design in the planning system is welcomed. Local communities should be more involved in how they want new developments to look and feel. The changes to the NPPF set an expectation that good quality design should be approved, while poor quality should be rejected and includes a commitment to ensure that all streets are lined with trees. The word “beauty” will be specifically included in planning rules for the first time.

Meanwhile, the Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee has published a report on the government’s proposed planning reforms included in a 2020 White Paper and concluded that they would not speed up housebuilding or make the process cheaper. The cross-party committee of MPs has urged the government to reconsider the reforms. They are unpersuaded that the proposed zonal planning will produce a quicker, cheaper and democratic planning system, and call for further details to be provided. The removal of the right for individuals to respond to planning applications is particularly contentious and the Section 106 proposal could jeopardise the availability of affordable housing. They also argued that the government should provide an extra £125m a year for local planning departments.

Together with CPRE, we have raised strong objections to the Planning White Paper not least because it seriously undermines the democratic principles of public participation in the planning process. We hope that the growing hostility to the reforms amongst Tory MPs will result in significant amendments before the changes are brought before Parliament.