Our Friend, the PPS6

in Forum > Writing to the Council re ASDA

gaby 115 posts Wednesday, 04. June 2008 10:31AM

"The What?" I hear you ask... The PPS6 is the Planning Policy Statement 6, introduced by the Conservative party in 1997 in an attempt to reverse the decline of town centres caused by out of town developments. It is the policy that ASDA and the Council are referring to when they are arguing that the Government no longer wants supermarkets on the outskirts of town. This is the Policy which states that supermarkets should, wherever possible, be built on the edge of existing town centres. It would appear that this policy is our enemy because it is the single biggest argument I have heard from Councillors in favour of the ASDA development. (aside from the jobs, but that's easier to contradict)

There are some good things in this policy and we should use it in the same way as ASDA are using it, i.e. we need to know it and to quote from it in our objections to the Council.

Here are the sections that are in our favour:

gaby 115 posts Wednesday, 04. June 2008 10:43AM

I'm beginning to like this PPS6. Here is what I found in it about traffic:

gaby 115 posts Wednesday, 04. June 2008 10:48AM

And here is what may well be a killer argument. Please quote this in your objections. The PPS6 is a powerful document. ASDA are saying they found the perfect site in accordance with PPS6. The Council are saying their hands are tied and they will find it difficult not to allow the development because of PPS6. So we should be using it too!

This is what it says, and as far as I can see, ASDA have not shown that there is a need for this development, on the contrary, I believe it is clear that there isn't.

lak 3 posts Tuesday, 10. June 2008 03:21PM

If paragraph 3.9 is a potentially killer argument can you please explain it in common English? I don't understand what it is saying. I would also like to know what ASDA are basing their statement on when they say it's the perfect site in relation to the PPS6 document. Can you post the paragraphs that they are using in relation to this? We need to be able to counter them.

LAK

gaby 115 posts Tuesday, 10. June 2008 03:40PM

At the public meeting we held at the Church hall last year, we were informed that Councillors' hands are tied with regard to the ASDA development because it is an "edge of centre" development. The Government's Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS6) says that supermarket developments should no longer be allowed on the outskirts of towns but, wherever possible, be encouraged on the edge of existing town centres. This is done in order to stop people using their cars to drive to places such as Ravenside for example, but stay near their homes and walk to supermarkets. From that point of view, ASDA have found the perfect site, on the surface anyway.

However, PPS 6 also has some other directives in it, which we can use as arguments. I am in the process of putting a document together with all the Government directives which I think we can use and will put that on the forum as soon as it's ready.

We were also told that simply saying "there is no need for another supermarket" is not a valid argument. This directive in PPS6, however, says that, on the contrary, they have to show that there is a need if the development is not in line with an up to date Development Plan. The part that talks about need is PPS6, paragraph 3.9 and 3.10.

This refers to the Council's own Local Development Framework which does not envisage retail on Ponswood. All of the Council's published policies state that regeneration will be achieved by supporting small local businesses.

That's why I think it's a good argument. They didn't show need because they said they didn't have to. According to PPS6 they do have to show need. They can't show a need, because there isn't one.

Does that help?