Logistics 2013: John Roberts
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Logistics 2013: John Roberts

on

  • 430 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
430
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
430
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Logistics 2013: John Roberts Logistics 2013: John Roberts Presentation Transcript

    • Planning for LogisticsJohn RobertsSolicitorPlanning Team
    • Introduction• Planning system increasingly complex• Planning permission required for operational on-sitefacilities• Focus– Overview of the planning system– Key themes in planning development– Case studies – demonstrate planning policies in action
    • Background• 2 tiers of planning policy for England: national & local• Previously intermediate third tier – regional– Regional Spatial Strategies– Abolished by Coalition Government• National and local tiers in state of transition
    • National Planning Policy• National Planning Policy Framework– Introduced on 27 March 2012• Previously:– PPS’s, PPG’s, Circulars, Letters to Chief Planning Officers– 44 documents– Over 1,300 pages– 2 decades of policy development• New document:– Single document– 59 pages
    • What does it do?• Sets out the Government’s planning policies for Englandand how these are expected to be applied• Guidance for local planning authorities– Drawing up local plans– Determining planning applications• Local plans should be consistent with the Framework
    • Aims• Decision-making driven down to the local level– Ties in with localism agenda• Replaced documents were very detailed and prescriptive• New approach: just bare bones within national policy– Local councils to produce their own distinctive plans
    • Controversy
    • Opposition“(The) Slim, 52-page draft National Planning PolicyFramework… more unexploded mines per square inchthan the most liberally strewn battlefield”Daily Telegraph“… a public relations exercise which will in effectencourage privatisation of services, open market sale ofpublic assets and, through the presumption to develop,render all communities defenceless in the face of thegreed of developers”Morning Star
    • Local Planning Policy• Where detail is found• Currently Local Plans or Unitary Development Plans– Set out policies thematically• Local policy changing– Local Development Frameworks– Local Plans• Few local authorities completed process in timely manner– Result is “Saved” policies• Draft policies can be taken into account
    • Presumption in favour of sustainabledevelopment• At the heart of the planning system is a presumption infavour of sustainable development, which should be seenas a golden thread running through both plan-making anddecision-taking• Reference to UN definition of sustainable development• 3 dimensions: economic, social & environmental
    • Key Considerations• Key: frontload preparation work– Within planning application– Also at pre-application stage• Identify requirements and stumbling blocks as early aspossible– Talk to Planning Officers– Sound them out on their requirements– Make application documents detailed• If anything is missing, somebody will spot it!– Delays
    • 24/7 Working
    • Lighting
    • Refrigeration Units
    • Environment & Protected Species
    • Lorries
    • Drainage & Flooding
    • Substations
    • Statutory Agreements
    • Planning Policy in Action• 3 case studies:1. World Logistics Hub, Manchester Airport2. New Hythe Industrial Estate, Kent3. Lancashire Business Park, Leyland
    • Case Study 1 – World Logistics Hub
    • The Proposal• Airport related freight logistics hub• Up to 1.4 million square feet– Units ranging from 7,500 to 200,000 square feet• Retail and amenity facilities for future workforce• Nearly 1,500 car parking spaces• Site: 51.7 hectares– Mainly grazing land, surrounded by hedgerows, contains ponds– Bordered by farmland and woodland: SSSI & SBI
    • Main Issue – Green Belt Location• Proposal within draft Manchester Airport Masterplan, 2006– Identified extensions to Airport’s Operational Area and land to be removedfrom the green belt• Masterplan considered in preparing Core Strategy– This reviewed the green belt boundary• Core Strategy considered at Public Inquiry, 2011– Exceptional circumstances to justify altering green belt boundary• Council considered principle of logistics hub acceptable– But … other issues required consideration
    • Other Issues• Visual amenity– Council accepted there would not be an unduly adverse impact• Residential amenity– Conditions dealing with dust control and acoustic insulation• Highway network– Able to take advantage of highways improvements connected to thesecond runway at Manchester Airport• Nature conservation– 14.8 hectares proposed as landscape and ecological mitigation area– Enables compliance with the European Habitats Directive
    • Case Study 2 – Aylesford, Kent
    • The Proposal• 3 warehouse units– One of just over 9,000 square metres– One of approximately 6,500 square metres– One of just under 4,000 square metres• Full provision for car and lorry parking• Site has long history of industrial use– Safeguarded for employment use in Tonbridge and Malling Council’sLand Allocations Development Plan Document, 2008• 6.81 hectares & within wider industrial estate– New housing development to the west
    • Principle of Development• Acceptable as site within area allocated for employmentuse• Long previous use of site formed basis of Council’sassessment of other issues– Existing buildings remained on site at time application was considered– Could have been fully reoccupied at any time without further approval– Application was assessed against this background of historic use of site• Key: Impact be no worse than and, if possible, less thanthe previous unfettered use rights of the site
    • Other Issues• Design– New warehouses cumulatively smaller than existing building• Lorry routing– Access only from eastern side (away from housing development to west)– Buildings on industrial estate act as noise buffer between traffic & houses• 24 hour operation– Historically, no controls over hours of use• Conditions to mitigate impacts of development– Acoustic barrier to be installed before units can be operational– Details of external lighting submitted & agreed prior to installation
    • Case Study 3 – Leyland, Lancashire
    • The Proposal• 3 storage and distribution warehouses• Nearly 400,000 square feet of accommodation– 2 units of 166,000 square feet each– 1 unit of 50,000 square feet• Associated car parking and secure compound areas• Replace large warehouse destroyed by fire in 2011• Surrounded on three sides by industrial units & offices– West Coast Mainline to the east
    • Principle of Development• National Planning Policy Framework– Planning system should support sustainable economic growth– Encourage, rather than impede, sustainable growth• Local planning policy – South Ribble Local Plan– Within main existing employment areas, planning permission should begranted for expansion/redevelopment of industrial & business purposes• Scheme in accordance with both national and local policy– No problem with principle of development
    • Other Issues• Design– Local policy requires well related to neighbouring buildings and the locality– Modern, standard industrial buildings, finished in metal cladding, proposed– Existing buildings within Business Park of similar height and materials• Parking– Local policy requires adequate level of car parking and servicing– County Highways objected to initial plans – revised to deal with this• Landscaping– Six silver birch trees to be removed to facilitate development– Replacement planting to compensate– Conditions for landscaping plan and management regime
    • Conclusion• Identify the issues• Work around them• Explain how an application complies with planning policy– National and local• If compliance is not possible, justify any departure frompolicy thoroughly