MY PLACE, MY VIEWS FUTURE TALKING POINTS
1. About My Place, My Views
We are trialling ways to improve the way we consult our residents on the Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan (JLP). We have set up My Place, My Views as a forum for future conversations and are testing new ways of feeding back to our residents though our My Place, My Views Dashboard.
Last year we decided to restart long term conversations about the JLP and the areas where we live in order to:
• Improve our understanding of how our residents use and feel about the areas they live in following a period of rapid change during COVID-19 lockdown.
• Understand more about the challenges places have in fulfilling the strategic roles recognised in the JLP.
• Know more about our residents’ priorities for the future to supplement the important information included in Neighbourhood Plans where they have already been made.
This report provides a summary of key talking points bought up by respondents between July and October 2022 across our three authorities (Plymouth, South Hams and West Devon). These will continue to be considered as part of future My Place, My Views conversations and will be an important part in helping shape our future work on the JLP. You can also view our interactive My Place, My Views dashboard at www. plymouth.gov.uk/my-place-my-views-consultation. The dashboard lets you choose the area you live and see all the subjects people raised when talking about it.
The consultation was the start of the conversation about the JLP, but we will be sharing your comments with our colleagues across our services and Devon County Council to ensure they have your views on record to help inform broader future work.
If you have not already, we recommend you sign up to our mailing list at plymswdevonplan. co.uk/news/joint-local-plan-newsletter for future updates on the Joint Local Plan which will include notifications on future opportunities to take part in the process.
2. Who took part?
Overall, we had 1,800 survey responses providing over 18,000 separate question responses including 3,000 open text comments about locations in Plymouth, the South Hams and West Devon. Older age groups were best represented in the survey group. 81% of our respondents were over 44 compared to the 68% that this age group represents within our population using estimates in the 2021 Census. The most underrepresented groups were those in their 20s and 30s. This trend is consistent with national trends for planning participation and can be associated with multiple different factors, most commonly reported to be:
a) The time required to engage in the planning system and length of time to see meaningful change in the built environment from planning policy; and,
b) The lower chance of existing long term buy-in to place associated with land ownership, identity and community.
An important part of land use planning is to consider the needs of both current and future generations. There will therefore be specific conversations for younger age groups in future which will take a more targeted approach to consultation. This will ensure we understand more about how younger people feel about the future and their priorities for the places they live or would like to live, and the world they will inherit.
We were pleased to have a better geographic spread of respondents than in previous consultations on the Joint Local Plan, with more people taking part in the majority of our electoral wards than we have ever had before. We naturally hear most from residents in our most populated areas even though participation rates are similar in many of our rural areas. We know our Parish Councils, community groups and Neighbourhood Plans will continue to play an important role in helping set out local priorities in our rural areas as we plan for the future.
30% of respondents who took part told us they live with a disability. We are pleased to have collected a wide range of views from many residents with disabilities, who sometimes are underrepresented in consultations on future planning. These comments will continue to help us understand the challenges our disabled residents face when accessing services and facilities in their everyday lives in our future planning decisions and in our broader services.
As with many consultations, we know that many residents have not shared their views. My Place, My Views is only intended as a starting point for future conversations, and as an initial indicator of local opinion. There will be more opportunities to share opinions as work on the Joint Local Plan continues.
3. Summary of talking points
This page provides a summary of the main recurring talking points raised by comments from respondents during My Place, My Views, and longer lists are provided at the end of each chapter. These talking points will help shape future thinking and conversations about the Joint Local Plan and can be used by neighbourhood plan groups or others keen to understand their area.
How do we plan for the needs of future generations to ensure there are enough affordable homes for local people and workers which include attractive places for them to socialise and enjoy?
How can we plan better for an ageing population?
How can we do better to shape new development to be more attractive and accessible for all?
How do we ensure new places provide attractive and functional green spaces for new and existing residents and respect the social value of existing spaces?
How do we provide better guidance on building resilient and adaptable buildings?
What is the future of physical retail and public service provision, what land will it require and how will it relate to online service provision?
How do we address the impact of increasing traffic in some of our villages, towns and neighbourhoods to make them more attractive places to live, work, shop or travel whilst recognising the distinct difference in travel needs and opportunities across the plan area?
How do we guide the retrofit or redevelopment of spaces which are no longer up to modern standards or needs?
How can we improve the linkages between strategic planning and Neighbourhood Plans on important issues such as the impacts of second homes on house prices and maintaining our community infrastructure?
4. Services, facilities and public spaces
General feelings
When asked how they felt about being able to access services and facilities where they live, the majority of respondents across the Local Plan area (65%) told us they were either happy or satisfied. 22% of respondents felt neutral about accessing services and 12% said they felt either unhappy or dissatisfied. Generally those who felt negatively about accessing services and facilities were more likely to leave detailed comments in other parts of the survey.
Participants were offered a choice of positive and negative tags to apply to the area they live. The greatest amount of positive sentiment related to the general availability of services available to travel to and the availability of fields, parks and natural spaces to relax, exercise and play sport.
The largest areas of negative sentiment related to the quality of the bus service and feeling safe to cycle, walk or wheel to the nearest services and facilities to where our residents live. While this trend was consistent across all three authority areas, generally people felt most negative towards these factors in West Devon and South Hams and in the areas outside of our main towns.
Throughout the survey respondents told us about the challenges presented by increases to the cost of living, effecting all aspects of their lives, whether it be the ability to afford a home to live, to travel on the bus, use the local leisure centre, or afford to shop.
Respondents also told us about the important roles of community and charity organisations where they live providing a wide range of support services, most notably social and wellbeing support and maintenance and improvements to public open spaces.
Public spaces
Respondents told us about the public spaces they use where they live.
The majority of comments focused on the importance of local open spaces and desire of respondents to ensure that they could be maintained for future generations to enjoy. Some comments highlighted that they would like to see investment into more planting and seating in these spaces to enhance the environment and make them more suitable for older generations to visit, stop and relax. In Plymouth some respondents wanted
more consideration given to spaces for sun shade or the potential for informal sports and leisure activities reflected within planting and maintenance strategies for those spaces. Some respondents also stated they would like to see a greater variety of community uses in our public parks with suggestions for new community food growing areas, formal allotments and community events.
Respondents told us about factors which deter them from using our parks and public spaces. These included the perception of safety in poorly lit locations, anti-social behaviour, and the dominance of dog walking in parks and other green spaces. Other respondents told us there was a lack of choice for open spaces when wanting to exercise outdoors or walk their dogs where they live.
Respondents told us about the impact of high quantities and/or fast moving road traffic. In rural areas, respondents told us that fast moving traffic made it feel unsafe to walk in their area. This was worst in areas with no pavement and/or on major strategic routes without formal crossing points.
In some areas of Plymouth and our main towns which have traditional linear high streets respondents told us that the volume of car traffic impacted their feeling of safety, some indicated that it also lead them to be concerned about local air quality and reduced the general attractiveness of the area to visit for shopping and other activities.
Comments across the plan area raised several instances where there were no formal road crossings on busy roads impacting how safe respondents felt to traverse roads to access their nearest services and facilities.
Respondents told us about their concerns about the maintenance of transport routes, most commonly mentioned were pavements being in disrepair or overgrown raising safety concerns. Respondents with disabilities told us that some of these spaces were not suitable for those in wheelchairs, particularly areas with uneven surfaces or no dropped curbs in place at desired crossing points. Potholes was one of the most frequent future concerns of respondents on our comments map from road users.
Other comments included:
• The desire to see greater consideration of landscaping and land uses at entrance points to our cities and towns from rail stations and major roads to enhance the feeling of arrival.
• The desire for rivers to become focal assets for towns for investment and the design of public realm, walking routes, public open spaces and meeting places.
• The desire to make places more navigable through clear signage and promotion of linkages and attractions.
• The desire for investment into renewing the appearance and functionality of Plymouth City Centre and Plymstock Broadway.
Local facilities
Respondents told us about the facilities which were important to them or could be improved.
The most common area of comment surrounded the desired improvement to, or new provision of, facilities and spaces for children, teenagers and young adults. Some comments from respondents suggested that teenagers and young adults using public spaces for socialising in their area impacted their own feeling of safety and security when wishing to go outside or use public spaces. The most common facilities respondents’ referenced when discussing provision of new facilities, improvements or expansion where they live were children’s play areas and skate parks.
Respondents also told us about the local importance of retail services. The services stated most were post offices and bank branches, some respondents also told us about previous losses of independent fresh food retailers. Respondents stated they felt it was important that local retail services remained open, whilst in other areas residents told us about how the loss of these services had impacted the way they experience their local area; including reducing chances for social interaction and likelihood to shop on the high street.
Other important facilities respondents mentioned throughout the plan area included railway services, leisure centres, parks, village halls, libraries, public toilets and pubs.
The most common comments around built facilities on our ‘comments map’ tended to focus on community buildings including references to town and village halls. Respondents supported any potential opportunities to invest in refurbishing and modernising buildings for a mix of community uses recognising their existing or potential future roles as local community hubs.
Some respondents also told us about their concerns about the level of second home ownership where they live and how they felt it was affecting the viability of local shops and services.
Online service use
Respondents told us how often they used online services. Throughout the Joint Local Plan Area the majority of respondents told us they use online services. Most respondents (61%) told us they use services either ‘quite a lot’ (26%) or ‘all the time’ (35%) within both urban and rural locations.
Around 5% of respondents told us they never used online services. Contrary to expectations, of the three JLP authorities, respondents in West Devon had the lowest percentage of respondents who told us they do not use online services. However, it is worth considering that because the majority of survey responses were received online thus this figure may be unrepresentative.
Of respondents who use online services over half told us they use online services for clothes shopping, other non-food shopping and GP services. Around a third of respondents told us they used online services for food shopping and working from home. These trends were the same across respondents in all three authority areas.
In every authority area non-food shopping other than clothes were by far the most used online services with over 70% of respondents buying items online, rising to around 75% or respondents in West Devon. This trend will also be considered later in the retail section of this report when discussing high streets and retail choice.
Potential future talking points...
• Recognising the increased dependence on volunteers, communities and charities to provide key social services, what opportunities are there for groups to be more involved in shaping future policies?
• Can we better evidence the social and recreational needs for younger people and design better places for them?
• Is there more opportunities for communities to take direct control of assets of community value through the Community Right to Bid and can we do more to share information with our Neighbourhood Plan groups?
• Can we collect evidence to better indicate the impacts of second home ownership on our communities to demonstrate more robust policies securing primary residence of new homes?
• Are there opportunities associated with planned development to secure investment into retrofitting the built environment to be more accessible to pedestrians and people with disabilities?
• Does design policy and guidance provide due considerations to pedestrian accessibility?
• Can design guidance be better at addressing strategically important locations such as our rivers and arrival points into our towns and at key public transport hubs?
• What is the future vision for out of use retail spaces?
• As physical retail models continue to decline, what is the future of service provision in urban and rural areas?
• Can the types of open spaces and their specific social and recreational roles be better addressed within our policies for new places?
• Can future development allocation policies secure open spaces which are better located to serve both existing and new populations?
• What are the wider options for investment into making our important open spaces feel safer and how do we ensure new spaces are designed to offer safe spaces for residents?
• What effect is an increasingly ageing population going to have on the way are residents interact with spaces, services and facilities and what are the best ways to factor these considerations into the design of new places?
5. Getting around Travel choices
When telling us about how they travel to access facilities, residents told us their primary considerations were safety, reliability and convenience.
The majority of our respondents across all three authority areas told us their preferred mode of travel for work or for food shopping was using their car. This is consistent with overall trends for Travel to Work responses in the Census 2021. With West Devon being the area with the highest level of car use, followed by South Hams and then Plymouth.
Throughout the survey respondents told us about their experiences using different travel modes:
Where residents told us about their experience walking or wheeling comments focused on:
• The lack of facilities within walking distance.
• Uneven or overgrown pavements without dropped curbs making it difficult or unsafe for prams, wheelchairs and mobility scooters.
• Major roads and fast or heavy traffic forming a barrier to facilities and services where there are not direct routes with safe crossings.
• Physical barriers to accessibility in the form of bins or cars and mopeds parked on pavements, stairs, bollards and gates which lead to wheelchairs, prams and pedestrians being forced onto the roads.
Where residents talked to us about cycling comments focused on:
• A lack of a feeling of safety when sharing space with car traffic particularly in narrow or congested spaces with low visibility or where there is high speed traffic.
• The lack of continuous safe cycle paths with existing routes being disjointed, blocked or surfaces being unsafe in places.
• The lack of cycle parking facilities at key local and strategic destinations such as parks, transport hubs and retail outlets.
• In rural areas, a lack of safe cycle routes to the closest town or Plymouth.
Where residents talked to us about public transport services comments focused on:
• Feeling public transport is either too infrequent or unreliable where they live so it is most practical to use their car.
• The walking distance to a bus stop and rail station with the desired route being too far.
• The lack of availability of routes to locations outside of central destinations necessitating using a car for all other trips.
• Hilly areas making it difficult to walk to a bus stop or train station.
• The lack of direct linkages between bus and rail services or the lack of coordination in timetabling.
• Feeling of isolation without access to a car or van.
Where residents talked to us about driving comments focused on:
• A preference to drive over other transport modes.
• The lack of choice other than using a car or van because of mobility issues.
• Stress relating to traffic and parking at peak times at popular destinations and pinch points.
• Concern that road traffic will continue to increase as the population increases.
• Concerns regarding the layout, safety and maintenance of existing roads.
• The lack of choice due to where a resident lives and the geographic spread of facilities they use and/or school or GP catchment areas.
• Frustration about the increase of cars parking in their area impacting their ability park on street after work or shopping.
• Anxiety about how they will access facilities should they no longer be able to drive as they get older.
Hard to reach facilities and services
We asked our respondents to tell us about hard to reach services and facilities. In Plymouth respondents told us the hardest to reach facilities were swimming pools followed by spaces for their children to play, bus stops with frequent services, and Derriford Hospital.
In the South Hams respondent views varied. Within our towns the most named facilities and services were hospital services, affordable shopping choices, skate parks and children’s play areas. Outside of our main towns, the bus service was by far the highest recurring service mentioned by respondents, followed by hospital services, local shops, and doctors surgeries.
In West Devon respondents’ views again varied between our towns and more rural areas. In our towns, the most named services were rail services, affordable shopping choices and GP and dental services. In rural areas, the most commented services were bus services, shopping choices, and GP and dental services.
Comments relating to public transport reflected the challenges of the maintenance of practical regular bus and rail services and the impacts in reduction or absence of services throughout communities in the Joint Local Plan Area. Comments suggested
the rural areas are most impacted by service reductions as they tend to not have alternative facilities and services within a walkable distance. In rural areas, some respondents who did not own motor vehicles told us how they felt isolated due to the lack of local bus connections, while others who do own a car said there was never an expectation that it would be easy to access services where they live.
Throughout the survey, respondents were supportive of rail services. In several locations respondents told us they felt they lived in a location which would benefit from access to rail services in and around the JLP area. These included Tavistock, Plympton and South Brent.
Respondents described the frustration of being able to physically reach their GP or dental practice but not being able to get an appointment. This concern was also cited when discussing new housing development and increases to the population with residents expressing anxiety over the ability of healthcare infrastructure to manage further increasing local demand when they perceive the service to be struggling at existing levels.
Residents told us how important being able to access public open spaces and leisure facilities is to them. Respondents told us that local parks, the countryside, the sea and other natural spaces play an important part of their lives. Many respondents told us about how they would like it to be easier to safely access these important spaces on foot through changes to walking routes and access arrangements.
Accessibility and the ageing population
The Census 2021 highlighted the average age of the population across the plan area is getting older consistent with national trends. The average ages in Plymouth, South Hams and West Devon are now estimated to be 40, 51 and 51 respectively.
Our respondents highlighted some of the limitations with the existing built environment which do not meet modern requirements, particularly for disabled or elderly residents which may become of increasing concern as the largest demographic group in our local population continues to age. Limitations cited include: travel distances, hilliness of walking and wheeling routes, the lack of resting places or shelters or shade in public spaces, the lack of dropped curbs, obstruction to pavements from vehicles, wheelie bins or street furniture, and pavement widths or wall openings being too narrow for shared use by pedestrians or single wheelchairs/mobility scooters.
Respondents also told us about existing shops and homes which were not originally built to a standard to accommodate wheelchair use forming a barrier to accessibility and limiting available choice.
Potential future talking points...
• Are these factors adequately considered within design guidance for new development and future land use change?
• What is the future role of the bus service and how will future changes affect the way residents can access services and facilities?
• Do planning policies and decisions for regeneration projects reflect modern standards and enable local improvements to active travel choices and wheelchair accessibility wherever viable?
• Are there emerging Central Government funding initiatives outside of land use planning to support investment into retrofitting the existing built environment?
• How do we best adapt/adjust dependency on motor vehicles with traffic congestion impacts on places and wellbeing when designing or retrofitting public spaces?
• How can we work together to support initiatives which increase the options and attractiveness for travelling to major destinations by walking, wheeling and cycling to help manage pressure on road space?
• How are we future proofing places for the ageing population?
6. Shopping Shopping choices
Respondents had the opportunity to tell us about their experiences shopping locally. The most common considerations mentioned in the survey were affordability, community value, convenience, and choice.
We asked respondents where they prefer to do their food shopping and how often. The majority of respondents told us they tend to shop more than once a week and usually shopped at supermarkets supplemented with trips to local shops for top up shopping for essential goods. Some respondents told us they only shop as part of other journeys and others told us they try to shop as infrequently as possible, sometimes as little as once a month.
In many locations, respondents told us that the closure of banking branches and post offices has affected the way they shop, requiring them to travel further to access services and reducing the likelihood for incidental visits to other shops on the high street during regular journeys.
In locations where development is planned as part of the Joint Local Plan, some respondents questioned whether there could be the opportunity to incorporate retail into land use allocations to serve the existing and future population.
Some respondents were concerned about changes in the market leading to reduction of choice and higher vacancy rates in their high street, town or city centre. Respondents told us they would like to see investment into these areas to make them more appealing and increase the variety of activities available within them to address feelings of neglect. Other respondents expressed the desire to see more initiatives for ‘meanwhile uses1’ for vacant buildings until future uses of buildings had been confirmed.
Independent retailers
Respondents told us about the importance of local shops and independent retailers where they live. In some areas, particularly within our main towns, respondents told us they were proud of their local independent shops and stated the personal importance of supporting local businesses. In other areas respondents were concerned at the loss of independent retailers from their high streets over a prolonged period of time or
were concerned about the potential of new supermarkets and online retailers to further impact local independent retailers on the high street.
In some of our towns which are popular with tourists, respondents expressed concern that independent retailers were increasingly targeting tourists shopping choices over local residents.
In some of our rural areas, respondents told us that they tend to use their local shop for top up shopping, but felt limited opening hours outside of work hours reduced the likelihood of more frequent usage.
Many respondents told us they like to or would like to use independent farm shops to access fresh locally grown food. However, some respondents also told us that such shops were often too expensive to choose them for regular shopping visits. Some of our respondents highlighted the role of suppliers providing direct delivery services for fresh food as a viable alternative to supermarket shopping.
Supermarkets and discount retailers
Some respondents’ comments reflected on the loss of local independent food retailers where they live. This change was a predominant trend in the 1990s as the market and shoppers shifted their preferences towards newer supermarket and discount retail models.
Throughout the JLP area, the majority of respondents told us that the supermarket was their preferred location for food shopping. Many respondents told us the supermarket was the most convenient and affordable option for shopping where they live. The desire for affordable shopping choices was widespread in our respondents’ comments. Many told us about the increase in prices when shopping and the importance of discount retailers in allowing them to shop to a budget. In some areas respondents told us they were willing to travel further in order to access discount retailers. Others told us they would like to have a discount retailer in their area or another supermarket to encourage local competition on service and price.
Traditional supermarket stores require large footprints so tend to be located in edge of settlement locations where land was available at the time, meaning shoppers are most likely to drive to them with less likelihood for local linkages with other shops and services as you may expect on a tradition high street. Locating a large amount of services and goods within a single location often draws a large number of people causing congestion on roads at peak times. This trend was reflected in our respondents comments towards
supermarkets and retail parks, most notably in and around Okehampton where traffic and parking at supermarkets was a major cause of stress for respondents causing some to prefer to travel further away to shop.
Non-food shopping
Respondents told us about the loss of non-food retail choices on the high street. These comments reflect national market changes towards the development, including:
• The development of retail parks and shopping centres which directly compete with existing high streets and often offer a better specification of retail unit and/or more competitive rents in out of centre locations.
• The subsequent increases in market share of online retail models for non-food goods.
Over 50% of respondents who talked to us about online services told us they use online shopping for clothes shopping and over 70% stated they use online services for other non-food shopping. This shopping behaviour has had clear impacts on the high street and the choices available from both national chains and independent retailers who struggle to compete with the low prices and product range available from online retailers who have lower cost margins. This change in balance was reflected in comments from respondents who do not use online shopping on the lack of local choice and the need to travel long distances to access their preferred shops.
In Plymouth in particular, this trend and associated vacancy rates were recognised in comments about the City Centre. Notably this challenge has been made more difficult by stores understandably not being built with the potential need to retrofit for other uses in mind when they were designed.
In rural areas, respondents also told us about the other effects of online shopping where they live with concerns raised about their safety due to the increase of delivery vans throughout the rural road network.
Potential future talking points ...
• Can more be done to make walking routes and the public realm more inviting for pedestrians to walk and cycle to their local shops where possible?
• Can more be done to promote the existing, meanwhile use projects in areas with persistent vacancy?
• Is there the need or market appetite for greater provision of retail within existing retail areas recognised in the Joint Local Plan?
• How do we better review, evidence and visualise the health of our high streets to inform future policies, community visions and economic strategies?
• What is a viable vision for reimagining struggling spaces and who will use them in the future?
• Does greater consideration need to be given to potential alternative shopping choices to relieve congestion associated with supermarkets and retail parks?
• What are the physical future needs of online led retail models and how can they be delivered most sustainably?
• How do we future proof the design of new retail buildings to ensuring they have the potential for adaption or retrofit for other community, retail and leisure uses in future?
• Can we better understand the barriers to retailers entering the market where potential retail capacity has been identified on allocated development sites in the Joint Local Plan?
7. The role of land use planning
The planning system is complex and sometimes it is not clear what it controls and what it does not, who it is for and what it is trying to achieve. This section will provide some further commentary about the purpose and role of land use planning in the context of some of the comments and queries received within the consultation responses. If you would like to learn more, we would also recommend visiting our Questions and Answers page on My Place My Views
Planning for housing development
When commenting on accessing services and facilities and within the comments map, some respondents expressed concerns about planned development in the Joint Local Plan. The most concern expressed was around new housing development with some respondents stating they did not feel there is need for the proposed amount of housing to be built and the affordability of new homes.
The lack of affordability of homes is well documented. The latest ONS figures suggest the ratio of house prices to average pay has doubled throughout the plan area since the turn of the millennium with the South Hams being the worst affected as house prices in 2022 were 12.79 times the average local wage. This far outstrips previous rises in house price in relation to wages over the previous fifty years. The housing market clearly is not functioning as intended and the only tool land use planning has is to designate land for homes to be built to increase the potential supply of homes which includes market subsidised affordable housing. However, in reality the only way to provide more truly affordable housing, particularly social rent, would be for the state to intervene and to build homes directly.
Successive Governments have identified a shortage of housing to meet the needs of the current and future population, and have set national house building targets. The current Government have a target of building 300,000 homes a year across the country to make up for previous under provision while also accommodating future population growth. All adopted local plans are required to identify a ‘housing needs figure’, which states the minimum number of homes that will be built during the lifetime of the plan (usually 20 years).
The current planning system requires Local Authorities to work with communities to choose the most sustainable of the deliverable and developable options presented by prospective developers and landowners who act to promote land for development when requested as part of a “call for sites”. The process of selection includes detailed
analysis of potential social, environmental and economic impacts and is subject to negotiation and consultation. If land has no realistic prospect of being developed based on evidence provided it is unlikely to pass the relevant national tests for land use allocation within a plan. A 5 year land housing land supply is required to be demonstrated at the point of adoption in order for the local plan to be found sound. The Local Planning Authority then needs to show, on an annual basis, which sites are going to contribute to (at least) 5 years-worth of our housing needs. If the Local Planning Authority cannot satisfactorily demonstrate that it has at least a 5 year housing land supply, its local plan is no longer considered ‘up-to-date’.
Once land has been allocated for development in a plan, there is still the opportunity to affect the design of any site through the planning application process which requires each planning application to be considered on its own merits against the policies of the Joint Local Plan and relevant Neighbourhood Plans. This includes a legal period of public consultation on any proposals before any decision is made.
If you want to find details of what land has already been allocated for the construction on new housing up to 2034, details can be found on our adopted policies maps
Retail operators
As part of comments received around retail services, respondents asked if the council could protect banks and post offices through planning policies. Respondents also asked if land could specifically be allocated for new discount retailers.
The planning system controls development and land use change. The uses of land are defined in law and can only be amended by Parliament. Where uses of land fall within the same legal use classification, planning permission is not usually required to change the operation of a building, although planning permission would still usually be required for alterations to the exterior of the building. In the instance of banks and post offices, these uses currently fall within Class E of the Use Class Order. This means that usually the change of the use of such buildings to any other use within Class E would not require planning permission and would be outside the scope of land use planning so no protection can be offered within the system.
Land use planning cannot limit existing buildings to their current operator as planning permission is granted on land rather than the individual. This means that retail services such as banks and post offices currently could change to a variety of uses without ever having to submit a planning application to the relevant local planning authority. This would however be different where an investor or developer wanted to change to a use
outside of Class E where planning permission would usually need to be sought for a change of use as well as for any required building works. In this circumstance the Joint Local Plan does already provide protection to retail uses with consideration of local community importance and local access to services. The planning system cannot however be used to order an operator to reopen a facility or service if it that operator has decided they no longer wish to run that service on that land.
Healthcare
Many respondents told us about their concerns about GP and dentist appointments and their desire to see new facilities to meet the needs of existing and new residents. Concerns around NHS capacity are well documented nationally, with reports showing there have been an ongoing increase in the demand for services outstripping funding. This is as a result of the increase in the amount of the population living for longer and requiring health treatment in combination with workforce supply and retention challenges within the healthcare sector. These factors have in combination made it difficult for healthcare providers to fund, maintain and expand existing public services. A position made worse by the COVID-19 pandemic.
As part of our land use planning function, we consult with the NHS on future needs alongside other infrastructure providers to discuss their strategic plans to ensure we accommodate them within the allocation of future land uses. However local plans cannot make providers to build facilities which they will not be able to fund or operate. Nor can local plans currently safeguard a preferred site owned by a third party for a potential future facility without the potential need for significant public compensation to a perspective landowner at public cost.
Potential future talking points...
• What is the future role of Neighbourhood Planning in any housing and employment land use allocations should they be required?
• How can we do more to encourage the market to build new homes best suited for those who are looking to downsize or buy their first home?
• How do planning polices need to be adapted to still reflect community priorities for uses within the new flexible class E use class?
• What are the future strategic plans of strategic infrastructure providers to meet the needs of the population and what are the land requirements to deliver them?
• How can we best plan for community infrastructure needs if operators are unable to invest or operate new facilities?
• What is the future balance of roles between the public sector and community and charity organisations in delivering public goods and services?
• How can planning policies encourage new buildings to be designed to be future proof for potential conversion to reduce the potential for long term vacancies and enable start-up businesses or conversion to community uses?
8. Find out more
My Place, My Views - Interactive Dashboard
Our dashboard lets you take an interactive look at what people have been saying about the Joint Local Plan area in more detail based on an analysis of recurring subject matter mentioned during the consultation in any given area.
www.plymouth.gov.uk/my-place-my-views-consultation
My Place, My Views - Frequently Asked Questions
Once the survey closed, we populated some responses to the most frequently asked questions we received about the survey and Joint Local Plan based on our first read through of responses.
pshwd.commonplace.is/en-GB/proposals/commonly-asked-questions/step1
The Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan
The Joint Local Plan is part of the development plan which is the basis for council decisions on planning applications for new building works and land use changes in Plymouth, South Hams and West Devon.
www.plymouth.gov.uk/plymouth-and-south-west-devon-joint-local-plan
The Authorities Monitoring Report
We have a single Authorities Monitoring Report which provides updates on change within the Joint Local Plan area since the plan was first adopted in March 2019.
www.plymouth.gov.uk/authorities-monitoring-report
www.southhams.gov.uk/article/6578/Authorities-Monitoring-Report
www.westdevon.gov.uk/article/6578/Authorities-Monitoring-Report
Neighbourhood Plans
Where made, Neighbourhood Plans are part of the development plan which is a basis for council decisions on applications for new building works and land use changes in their designated area.
www.plymouth.gov.uk/neighbourhood-plans
www.southhams.gov.uk/article/5958/Neighbourhood-Planning-Made-Plans
www.westdevon.gov.uk/article/5960/Neighbourhood-Planning-Made-Plans
Community Grant Funding
There are many sources for information on potential funding to support community-led initiatives for local led improvements.
www.devon.gov.uk/communities/how-do-i?open=getting-support-and-funding
www.plymouth.gov.uk/community-and-local-grants
www.southhams.gov.uk/article/3854/Community-Grants-Funding
www.westdevon.gov.uk/article/5425/Community-Grants-and-Funding
www.seamoorlotto.co.uk
www.plymouth.gov.uk/city-change-fund
www.devoncommunities.org.uk/small-registered-charity-grants
www.plymouthoctopus.org/funding
Community Right to Bid
The Community Right to Bid enables the opportunity for communities to nominate and take ownership of local Assets of Community Value.
www.plymouth.gov.uk/assets-community-value
www.southhams.gov.uk/article/3851/Assets-of-Community-Value
www.westdevon.gov.uk/article/3850/Community-Right-to-Bid
Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Department
Plymouth City Council
Ballard House
West Hoe Road
Plymouth PL1 3BJ
E plymouthplan@plymouth.gov.uk or strategic.planning@swdevon.gov.uk
www.plymouth.gov.uk/plymouth-and-south-west-devon-joint-local-plan
