Norwich Local Plan
Consultation on Open Space and Play supplementary planning document
RESPONSE FORM
About this consultation:
The Open space and play SPD gives further detail to support Development management
policies local plan policy DM8. This policy means that developers of new housing schemes
over a certain size must include areas of open space within their schemes, and may either
provide children’s playspace as part of the scheme or, in limited circumstances, make a
financial contribution toward improving or extending play areas nearby. This approach will
help to implement the Joint core strategy for greater Norwich, which requires major
enhancements and improvements to open space, tree planting, biodiversity and informal
recreation as part of the city’s green infrastructure network.
The document:






Explains the city council’s approach to funding and delivering open space and
playspace from new development;
Gives further detail on how minimum policy requirements for open space and
playspace should be interpreted
Explains the distinction between strategic open space and play projects meeting
wider community needs in Norwich and local provision intended to serve a specific
new development. These two categories of scheme will be funded differently.
Describes the procedure for negotiating open space and playspace within
development schemes when a planning application is made;
Describes how development viability will be taken into account;
Describes the city council’s preferred approach to maintaining and managing open
space where it is provided as part of new development.
Have we got it right?
Please use this response form to tell us whether you think the approach we are proposing in
the draft SPD is the correct one.
The response form is in two sections:


Section A is your contact information and must be completed in full;
Section B sets out a series of questions relating to the sections detailed in the
consultation document
How do I make representations?
You can make representations in the following ways:
 [Recommended] Complete this form electronically and submit it by e-mail to
LDF@norwich.gov.uk
 Print out a paper copy of this form, complete it and post it to: The Planning Policy
team, Norwich City Council, City Hall, St Peter’s Street, Norwich, NR2 1NH.
All comments must be received by 5:00pm on 18 August 2015. Comments received after
this deadline will not be considered.
All duly made (valid) representations will be made publicly available through the Council’s
website. Personal contact details will remain confidential. Details relating to a company or
business will remain public.
Rep Number:
(For official use only)
SECTION A – ABOUT YOU
Title
First Name
Last Name
Job title (where
relevant)
Organisation
(where relevant)
Address line 1
Address line 2
Town
County
Post Code
Telephone number
E-Mail address
SECTION B – QUESTIONS
General approach to funding open space and playspace (Section 2 of the draft SPD)
1) Looking at paragraphs 6 to 13 of the SPD, do you support the Council’s proposed
approach to developer funding of off-site playspace in circumstances where it is
required directly to serve a development?
Yes
No
If not, why not?
Approach to providing playspace off site (Section 3 of the draft SPD)
2) Looking at the practice examples in section 3, are these sufficiently clear?
Yes
If not, how could they be made clearer?
No
The city council’s local plan policy approach in Policy DM8 means that on site open space
must be provided in larger housing schemes, and dedicated children’s playspace must be
provided on sites which are large enough to generate significant playspace demand over
and above what exists now (schemes of over 100 child bedspaces).
Negotiating with applicants (Paragraph 23 and Appendix 1 of the draft SPD)
Because there will be fairly limited circumstances where a one-off payment toward
providing or upgrading open space and playspace off site can be sought from developers,
the SPD promotes a flexible, case by case approach to negotiating with developers on this
issue when planning applications are made.
3) Do you support the flexible approach to negotiation being proposed by the Council in
this SPD, with particular regard to:
 Whether the approach gives sufficient clarity to
Yes
No
developers on the scale of costs likely to be payable?
 Whether a fixed charge approach (for example a
standard charge per child bedspace or charge per
square metre) would be more effective?
 How the playspace demand generated from new housing development and the need
to improve and upgrade local play areas as a result might be evaluated and costed?
Please use the space below for any comments to explain your answer.
Strategic and local scale (Paras 8 and 9 and Appendix 7, page 28)
Government guidance on planning obligations states:
Where the [Community Infrastructure Levy] is in place for an area, charging authorities
should work proactively with developers to ensure they are clear about the authorities’
infrastructure needs and what developers will be expected to pay for through which
route. There should [not be] actual or perceived ‘double dipping’ with developers paying
twice for the same item of infrastructure.
Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the SPD explain the distinction in the city council’s Regulation 123
list between the kinds of open space and playspace projects and facilities which meet
larger scale strategic needs serving the wider Norwich area and those which meet purely
local needs, including needs arising from a specific new development. The definitions on
page 28 expand on this further. Categories of infrastructure project which will be funded
by the Community Infrastructure Levy on new development (CIL) are set out in the
Regulation 123 list. The principle of this guidance is that investment in open space, green
infrastructure and play and recreation facilities which serve the wider Norwich area and
are obviously strategic in scale will be funded by CIL, whilst purely local facilities may be
funded by other means including additional contributions from developers toward
facilities serving a specific site. To promotee sustainable development it is important to
ensure that contributions toward infrastructure required from developers are reasonable
and proportionate and that there is no double charging.
4) Looking at the definitions on page 28, do you consider that these definitions are
sufficiently clear?
Yes
No
We are looking in particular for views in relation to:
 Defining what is and is not a strategic green infrastructure project.
 Defining what is and is not a strategic sport and play project.
If you answered No to question 4, please specify below how you think these definitions may
be improved.
General Questions
5) Is anything missing from the SPD that you would welcome more detail on?
6) Do you have any additional general comments?
Thank you for taking the time to complete this response form. Consultation responses will
be taken account of in finalising the document. All contact details will be kept
confidential.