The Lymington Society Evidence to the McCarthy and Stone Public Inquiry
The 21st of March 2007
The Lymington Society which has been established for over 40 years is an established part of the local planning consultative framework for the Lymington area and is widely consulted by the New Forest District Council on such matters as Conservation Area designation and other important planning matters affecting the Lymington area.
It has over 440 members and is often described in the press as the local Planning Watchdog. We have successfully protected buildings by obtaining Listing Building status where necessary and have tried to play a responsible but not reactionary part in the necessary ongoing development of the Town as an attractive modern place to live.
Due to the excessive amount of overdevelopment currently affecting, not only Lymington but many areas of the country, after the disastrous excesses caused by local authority over-adherence to PPG3, we have been forced to take a more active role in opposing development which damage the underlying character of Lymington.
To this end we successfully petitioned the New Forest District Council last year with the result that a special motion was passed by the Full Council instructing the Planning Officers to have more regard to the damaging effects of large developments on the character of the surrounding area.
If ever a development was likely to be described as damaging the character of the surrounding area then this particular development would adequately fit the bill.
As my colleague Mr Clive Sutton has indicated in more detail, the size of this development compared with surrounding buildings or even compared with some of the larger more recent developments nearby is simply huge.
Despite attempts to disguise the bulk and mass of the building with vernacular styles drawn from most parts of the country (many of which bear little resemblance to local buildings), the sheer size of the building simply cannot be hidden. Any pretence that this building does not damage and degrade the environment and the character of the area is simply laughable.
Sitting as it does directly opposite and adjacent to a Conservation Area and in one of the most high-profile profile junctions in the town, this development should be a high-quality development which reflects the changing street scene from small-scale conservation area housing to the traditional suburban leafy owner occupied houses to the north.
It is plain to everyone except the developers, that this huge imposing and vast development is not what is required on this important and sensitive site in the geography of the town.
We are not the only ones who feel that these super-large, totally out of character developments which characterise the type of development favoured by McCarthy and Stone, constitute overdevelopment.
A search last night in Google using the name McCarthy and Stone and “overdevelopment” produced a large number of entries from planning applications all over the country from areas such as Leeds, and Epping, where planning committees have rejected similarly large developments as being likely to harm the area in which they are built, by their scale and mass and by the harm they do to the character of the area they are placed in.
I want however to concentrate on other aspects of the development.
In other words does it fill a need for local residents, or will it simply pull in residents from all over the country, who have little or no connection to Lymington.
How will this development affect the age balance in the community?
What impact will be the supposedly frail elderly have on the local social services?
How could such a big and busy building be located safely so near the busiest intersection in the town?
Whatever happened to biodiversity? Apart from a few token trees the current green open space will be almost completely lost to building and car park
Is there any need for this development?
Let's first of all look at the question of the need for the type of accommodation that is planned for this building. There can be little doubt that the type of accommodation provided by firms such as McCarthy and Stone has proved extremely popular over the years as is demonstrated by the spectacular growth of the firm from its beginnings here in Lymington many years ago.
However there can also be little doubt that this market is showing severe signs of over-oversupply and if Google is anything to judge by, planning permission is becoming harder to obtain for similar developments.
Research amongst estate agents in the town and with other providers of similar accommodation, points to an overhang of unsold property. Andrews Lodge not very far away in Southampton Road reportedly has six unsold flats nearly 3 years after opening out of a total of 36 original units.
A local estate agent has two flats for sale at nearly £30,000 less than the current asking price of new flats and is unable to sell them. Local estate agents that we contacted, are adamant in their opinion that this development is not needed in the Town, as there is adequate supply of this type of accommodation as well as similar unsheltered conventional one and two-bedroom apartments.
Enter the new concept of Assisted Living. This appears to be McCarthy and Stone’s answer to the difficulty of obtaining planning permission around the country for conventional retirement flats.
Certainly in many areas of the country there is a shortage of high quality care home and nursing home accommodation and Lymington is no exception.
However is Assisted Living so very much different from conventional retirement accommodation?
Having spoken at length to a salesman for McCarthy and Stone Assisted Living, our contention would be that there is not that much difference between Assisted Living apartments and regular warden assisted retirement accommodation.
Certainly there is a greater range of services available to the residents. Bearing in mind however the extremely low level of support for residents in conventional retirement accommodation despite the large maintenance payments, it is not surprising that people are willing to pay for such items as cleaning, food being brought to the rooms, laundry, and on-site restaurant, and full 24-hour availability of staff.
I'm informed however, that despite being available 24 hours a day, none of the staff have any medical training at all and that if the resident is taken, ill a local doctor will be called. Bearing in mind the appalling collapse in the “out of hours” emergency care across the country since it was taken over by the Primary Care Trusts, this is not a very reassuring picture.
We would therefore make a strong case that this accommodation is not as has been suggested in the press for the frail elderly and it certainly not anywhere near the level of a nursing home or proper care home where nurses are on call round-the-clock.
In other words whilst there are additional facilities available in the Assisted Living package including maybe some occasional help with dressing, and washing, this is not by any means a substitute for proper nursing home care, or for a fully staffed care home.
As such we would submit that this accommodation is very close in concept to conventional retirement accommodation and should be judged as such when it comes to considering whether it is actually needed in Lymington and whether there is in fact any demand for it.
Another aspect which we must consider is whether such accommodation meets local needs or not.
I'm reliably informed that 75% of retirement accommodation in seaside areas comes from outside the area and only 25% from local people.
This is a very telling statistic, which indicates that generally speaking, this type of accommodation pulls people in from outside the area. This is another indication that this development is not required to meet local need.
Effect on the age profile and population balance of Lymington
Lymington already has an extremely skewed age profile with large numbers of geriatric residents being looked after by declining number of younger people.
Again I am rather reliably informed that in a large development locally the average age at which people first move in 78- 79
Such a large development of almost 60 apartments, one quarter of which are likely to be occupied by couples, making a and total of 70 residents with an average starting age of 78-79, is only going to further skew the demographics of the town making the population even more unbalanced.
A thriving and healthy community needs a range of ages to make it a balanced community with a population spread out through the age ranges as in the country as a whole.
Lymington very much used to be a retirement and retirement community. The building of a large number of starter homes and new estates on the outskirts of the town, in the 80s and 90s changed the demographics somewhat to produce a more balanced population with children in the schools and a vibrant feel to the community.
However in 2004 according to a Hampshire County Council study of the population of the New Forest
In fact in the year under study in the report 2001 a net total of 620 people in the age group 16 -24 left the New Forest area.
Consequently whereas the dependency ratio of the UK is five working people to three nonworking people, the dependency ratio in the new Forest area in 2004 was four nonworking residents to every five working residents.
Whilst I do not have figures to back this up, it is certain that the dependency ratio in Lymington is even higher than for the New Forest as a whole
The continual addition of ever more retirement accommodation and small flats aimed at retired people, if allowed to proceed unchecked will exacerbate this trend and lead to an unbalanced community with no one to look after the elderly and carers’ having to be bussed in from outlying areas, as is already beginning to happen.
In addition the extremely high prices charged for this accommodation and the competitive pressures on land supply for conventional family homes, caused by competition from retirement accommodation developers, can only continue the upwards spiral of house prices in this area pushing young people out of the area as is currently the case. It is well-known that Lymington already has some of the highest property prices in the UK and the continued development of high-priced retirement flats can only exacerbate this trend.
Effect on the Infrastructure of the Town
As has been indicated above, a large amount of development has taken place in the area in the last five years aimed at the retirement market with small flats and retirement accommodation,
The continued migration of older people through the area and the high average age of occupants in new retirement accommodation of 78 to 79 years old, can only affect adversely the provision of medical care in the area.
As has been described above, although described as Assisted Living which is apparently for the frail elderly, no medical care is provided in the new proposed development and the burden will fall on overstretched local medical services.
The influx of continuing numbers of residents in the age range of almost 80 years old without additional medical care being provided cannot continue unchecked without a diminution of service for local residents.
Despite the welcome provision of a new hospital in Lymington, nationally local authorities are extremely stretched in the area of social care, with in some areas only elderly people in extreme difficulty being looked after by social services was their relatives are left to provide what used to be considered the remit of social services
When the inevitable happens and the newly arrived Assisted Living residents require more permanent round-the-clock medical care, the burden will inevitably fall on the local social services or NHS services and their already overstretched budgets.
Similarly NHS dental care has all but vanished in much of the area with dentist’s income severely capped with no additional capacity to increase NHS provision likely in the near future.
Traffic Problems likely to be caused by the development
As the inspector will be aware, the original refusal for this development included a refusal on the grounds of traffic considerations at the busy junction of Avenue Road and Southampton Road controlled by traffic lights.
This is not at all surprising, as the proposed exit for this development is extremely close to a very busy traffic junction controlled by traffic lights with a very quick change modern system designed to change rapidly to keep traffic moving.
The siting of the exit is just sufficiently far from the junction to be initially invisible to traffic turning left into Avenue Road from Southampton Road.
As vehicles start to speed up thinking they have successfully negotiated the traffic lights, they will shortly be faced with vehicles pulling out from the development only a few yards from the traffic lights.
Similarly vehicles pulling out of the development will be faced with cars turning left or right at the traffic lights into Avenue Road and accelerating away from the lights and towards them, making exiting the development dangerous and difficult.
In addition if McCarthy and Stone are to be believed and many of these residents are frail elderly and in wheelchairs, they will be imposing extra delays on traffic through the use of the pedestrian crossing phase of the traffic lights, adding to congestion at peak times.
Inexplicably this objection has now been withdrawn in what the Society considers rather strange circumstances by Hampshire County Highways Development Control.
The reason for this is that unexpectedly a previous Planning Inspector at appeal rejected a similar condition related to the previous planning permission for three houses on this site.
Hampshire County Highways Development Control had argued that the exiting of traffic from these three houses so near to a busy set of traffic lights was a compromise to public safety.
This was rejected by the inspector and subsequently Hampshire County Highways Development Control have withdrawn their objection to this application apparently mainly due to concerns over costs should they lose at appeal.
They have been provided with traffic movement figures from McCarthy and Stone, apparently demonstrating a comparable traffic load emanating from the proposed new development as from the previous proposed three dwellings.
Apparently the three houses were likely to generate in the region of 30 traffic movements a day whereas the proposed new development is likely to generate 70 traffic movements a day. By some clever calculations apparently 70 traffic movements a day from an Assisted Living development has the same impact as the much lower number of traffic movements from the three houses.
We find these figures extremely hard to accept.
Firstly if there are almost 70 residents living on this site together with large numbers of staff visiting the site, together with visitors, medical personnel, delivery firms, etc, it seems extremely unlikely to the Society, that the traffic movements will be as low as 70 movements a day, if three normal houses generate as many as 30 movements.
Secondly, for whilst accepting that the pattern of the traffic movements will be different for the two different dwelling types, we find it extremely hard to accept that 70 movements a day is equivalent in any respect to 30 movements a day.
Had their position not been undermined by the unexpected overturning by a previous Inspector of the refusal for the previous application for three houses on the same site, it is very likely that Hampshire County Highways Development Control would have opposed this application as they had originally planned to do.
We urged the inspector to seriously examine the safety implications of an extremely high density residential development being placed so near to an extremely busy and complicated traffic junction with all the dangers that this must inevitably incur.
Loss of biodiversity caused by this overdevelopment
The increasing importance of biodiversity in planning and redevelopment was highlighted in September 2005 when the office of the Deputy Prime Minister released
Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation.
In PPS 9 the guidance is clear: under the section “The Government’s Objectives” it states:
“Working with the grain of nature”: a biodiversity strategy for England sets out the Government’s vision for conserving and enhancing biological diversity in England, together with a programme of work to achieve it. It includes the broad aim that planning, construction, development and regeneration should have minimal impacts on biodiversity and enhance it wherever possible.
As can be seen from pictures of the current houses on the site, this is indeed England's green and pleasant land with large and attractive gardens, hedges, trees and no doubt a large number of God's creatures accommodated in this little nature reserve, just off the main road in Lymington.
It is this type of quintessentially English townscape with the sound of birdsong in the garden every spring as an expected backdrop that brought people to towns like Lymington over the years.
The importance of town gardens for biodiversity is increasingly being recognised. The gardens of Britain provide far more area for biodiversity than all the National Parks Alike put together.
Increasingly big businesses agricultural has sterilised the countryside of habitats for a wide range of wildlife and plants, making the importance of garden spaces even greater.
A recent initiative by DEFRA and the Royal Horticultural Society has highlighted the importance of gardens in maintaining the biodiversity and the quality of life of towns.
Under legally binding international obligations signed at the Earth Summit in June 1992 in Rio de Janeiro and confirmed in the Earth Summit of 2002 in Johannesburg, the UK Government is legally committed to protecting Biodiversity in the UK.
The UK Biodiversity Plan states that:
The International Convention on Biodiversity was signed at the 1992 Earth Summit. As a signatory, the UK was required to produce a national biodiversity action plan. This was published in 1994, with the overall aim being to: ‘Conserve and enhance biological diversity within the UK and to contribute to the conservation of global biodiversity through all appropriate mechanisms,
The Defra policy statement on Biodiversity and development states that:
“If Brownfield sites which are rich in biodiversity are to be lost to development, the developer must provide replacement areas of similar biodiversity value”
It is quite apparent that despite the stated government policies outlined above and repeated in the local structure plans and local plans, this aspect of planning control has been very much neglected until more recently.
The Society believes that this aspect of planning must be given much more importance if we are to maintain any semblance of the natural environment remaining in our towns.
The current application results in a very much reduced area cultivated garden compared with the current use, with the subsequent loss of much of the biodiversity currently on the site.
We would urge the inspector to take note of this aspect of the development which is another indication of the extreme overdevelopment of the site.
Summary.
The decision that the Inspector makes on this application is in effect one of the most important planning decisions that will be made in Lymington form some time to come.
At stake is the future character of the town as a pleasant residential town mainly characterised by owner occupied houses in moderate sized gardens with tree-lined streets etc.
If this application is allowed to proceed in anything like its current size, then future similar applications will almost be impossible to resist and residents will be under increasing pressure both financially and from the presence of such large commercial undertakings in the garden next door, to sell up to the highest bidder.
This will set up a domino effect which will soon see the loss of most of the houses in the main thoroughfares of Lymington, leaving only a residual core of Georgian and listed houses surrounded by canyons of high-rise three and four-storey retirement flats.
We are truly at a crossroads at this important junction of Avenue Road and Southampton Road, where the decision made on this application will set the precedent that will determine the type of town that Lymington becomes in the years ahead.
The Lymington Society does not argue purely for the status quo and has not resisted applications for quite large developments of much needed family houses in many parts of the town, which has enabled a more economic the use of land and has helped to spare the green belt from overdue pressure whilst providing more family homes.
The pressure from developers of retirement and Assisted Living homes however is of a different nature, which threatens to completely change not only the appearance and feel of the town but also the age profile and demographic balance of the community which already has a very high dependency ratio. We feel that we have convincingly shown that there is no demand for this type of accommodation in the town according to surveys of local estate agents, and that whilst described as Assisted Living, as though they were completely different to conventional accommodation, these apartments are really little different to conventional retirement warden assisted apartments.
In addition the age profile of the incomers who buy these apartments dictates that within a very short time they are likely to need much greater care in residential or nursing homes which there is a severe shortage of in the area thus posing even greater problems for the care of local people.
This is likely to place an ever greater strain on overstretched health and social services which are inadequate for local people at the current time.
For these many reasons and that the sake of the quality of life of future generations of Lymington Residents in the years ahead we urge the Inspector to reject this application as a gross overdevelopment of this unsuitable site.
Dr Donald F. Mackenzie
Press Spokesman for the Lymington Society