Local Government Reforms - How could this affect Alton Towers?

[Bert2theSpark]

So as many of you will be aware, due the overlap in interest between theme parks and politics on this forum. The new Labour government is wanting to reform many councils across England into Unitary councils, removing the two layers of Council that we see across a lot in places including Staffordshire. Current proposals from Stoke-On-Trent City Council want to merge the councils across North Staffordshire (Staffordshire Moorlands, Newcastle-Under-Lyme and Stoke) to form North Staffordshire Council (Source). This would mean that any planning documentation would solely go to the new North Staffordshire council, which would likely be in Stoke-On-Trent. Currently the local authorities for Alton Towers are Staffordshire Moorlands (who enforce the industry-famous treeline rule) and Staffordshire County Council (based in Stafford).

Alongside the proposals for Unitary Authorities, the Labour government wants significant reform to the planning application process, primarily to try and increase the growth rate within the UK, and to make the planning process less complicated and less strict. This seems to be an anti-NIMBY movement and as Towers enthusiasts, we know the troubled history that Alton Towers has had with planning in the past. It's currently unclear what these reforms will be, or whether Labour has the political bandwidth right now to enact these changes, especially if they end up getting kicked out again if they remain as unpopular as they are currently at the next general election.

There's also a lot of discussion at the moment with the development of Universal Great Britain receiving preferable planning treatment, with unanimous support for the project across all the relevant authorities in Bedford currently and the resort likely receiving preferential treatment with being granted a Special Development Order as well as additional favourable tax treatment as an incentive to Comcast (Source), much to the annoyance of Merlin.

However, despite being fairly well-informed about the planning reform and the planning application process due to having a passing interest in both theme parks and national politics, I struggle to really understand the details in how these reforms will have a material impact on how Alton Towers develops going forward. Will we see the planning application process relaxed to permit more development in areas of the park currently restricted by General Development Orders? Will we just see less documentation when Alton Towers applies for planning? Or will it be as extreme as removing the treeline restriction removed entirely?

I'd like to open the floor for other people's opinions and have a thread to discuss how these developments play out, or whether this all ends up being a farcical.

 

[Martin]

If the Districts are abolished and covered by a single UA I'd imagine the UA will just inherit any localised planning restrictions, although perhaps any changes will become easier or harder depending on the political makeup of the larger authority compared to what it is currently. Perhaps the influence of the more urbanised areas will make the Council more inclined to be pro development and therefore make it easier for Towers to have some of the restrictions eased?

 

[Rob]

I don't think it will change a whole lot for Alton Towers, they're certainly not going to suddenly be able to build a 300ft coaster dominating the Staffordshire Moorlands skyline! Unless local policy changes completely (unlikely) there will still be a desire to protect the character of areas such as around Alton.

Maybe some of the national planning changes will make things a tad easier for them when it does come to planning applications. But in recent years Alton Towers have been able to get through everything they've wanted to. Granted, we don't know of what they might like to do but are unable to due to likelihood of not getting planning permission.

 

[MrTowers]

What are the rules around removal of trees? I sort of understand the tree height rule as frustrating as it is but it does add a little magic that you can't see the park until your in the park.

When you look at the area around Alton Towers it seems to be desolate of trees however the park itself is a haven of untouched woodland.

I'm not saying let's chop it all down but if they wanted to create new areas within the park could they?

I'm sure at one point in time all of the current areas were probably covered in trees. Did the park extensively remove trees for the hotel development for example or was this area always clear for them to build on.

 

[AT86]

This photo, likely from the 1950’s shows that the areas developed into the theme park of today are largely on land that did not have trees.

In the foreground you have X-Sector, and in the distance the areas that are now Katanga, Gloomy Wood and Forbidden Valley.

 

[Ash]

So as many of you will be aware, due the overlap in interest between theme parks and politics on this forum. The new Labour government is wanting to reform many councils across England into Unitary councils, removing the two layers of Council that we see across a lot in places including Staffordshire. Current proposals from Stoke-On-Trent City Council want to merge the councils across North Staffordshire (Staffordshire Moorlands, Newcastle-Under-Lyme and Stoke) to form North Staffordshire Council (Source). This would mean that any planning documentation would solely go to the new North Staffordshire council, which would likely be in Stoke-On-Trent. Currently the local authorities for Alton Towers are Staffordshire Moorlands (who enforce the industry-famous treeline rule) and Staffordshire County Council (based in Stafford).

Alongside the proposals for Unitary Authorities, the Labour government wants significant reform to the planning application process, primarily to try and increase the growth rate within the UK, and to make the planning process less complicated and less strict. This seems to be an anti-NIMBY movement and as Towers enthusiasts, we know the troubled history that Alton Towers has had with planning in the past. It's currently unclear what these reforms will be, or whether Labour has the political bandwidth right now to enact these changes, especially if they end up getting kicked out again if they remain as unpopular as they are currently at the next general election.

There's also a lot of discussion at the moment with the development of Universal Great Britain receiving preferable planning treatment, with unanimous support for the project across all the relevant authorities in Bedford currently and the resort likely receiving preferential treatment with being granted a Special Development Order as well as additional favourable tax treatment as an incentive to Comcast (Source), much to the annoyance of Merlin.

However, despite being fairly well-informed about the planning reform and the planning application process due to having a passing interest in both theme parks and national politics, I struggle to really understand the details in how these reforms will have a material impact on how Alton Towers develops going forward. Will we see the planning application process relaxed to permit more development in areas of the park currently restricted by General Development Orders? Will we just see less documentation when Alton Towers applies for planning? Or will it be as extreme as removing the treeline restriction removed entirely?

I'd like to open the floor for other people's opinions and have a thread to discuss how these developments play out, or whether this all ends up being a farcical.

Great post

As reasonably close to the subject and being local to the area, it’s worth saying that fundamental change to local democracy is coming. No matter who likes it or not.

The government has set out a mandate that it wants a simpler local democratic framework that is broadly defined as (unitary +, mayoralty and mayoralty +) in any arrangement each of these areas MUST have over 500k+ size populations and make sense locally/geographically.

They have also said that all existing local government structures will be scrapped. That means locally the Staffordshire county council, stoke on trent city council (unitary authority) and other boroughs and districts will cease to exist. And they have the option now to present a plan or have it thrust upon them.

The shameful actions of some local politicians now not pulling out these facts, with the aim of turning people against each other and harvesting their “petitions” for data is shameful.

Nevertheless the proposal as currently presented by Stoke on trent city council and supported by Staffordshire moorlands district council is that Newcastle under Lyme borough counil, Stoke on trent city council and Staffordshire moorlands district council join forces which would take a combined population to just over 500k. It would also follow existing borough/district lines so need no movement there either. (As much as I disagree it should include further south)

The area also shares lots of shared history, population, travel etc and on that basis makes sense. As the travel movements show, many people work in the city but live and spend in the surrounding areas. Including south Cheshire.

As has been pointed out this will then mean the following changes:
- Planning under the control of the new North Staffordshire combined authority
- Parish councils will remain as existing
- Dependent on the option gone for will mean a change in devolved power as well.
- Transport/roads/local plans can be controlled locally rather than the county council
- Wider geographical and populous area planning
- wider scale tourism planning (maybe a north staffs wide ticket/bus offer)
- Give the area a bigger voice to ask for larger government support. If universal are getting new roads/stations etc why aren’t existing new UK businesses?

In terms of Alton specific it should mean they are only dealing one local authority for all matters, and hopefully would result in better transport planning (I.e new transport for north Staffordshire organisation with dedicated buses from Stoke station and Hanley bus station, along with longer term ambition of extending the CVR back to Alton) now it’s nearly finished phase 1 of its major terminus in leek.

All in all I think it’s a sensible change and should give the area a louder voice. The moorlands and Newcastle has been let down by the county council and it doesn’t get anywhere near its share of investment compared to Stafford and it should removes the control the county council had over development (they own the trackbed from Oakamoor to Alton)

 

[James]

To add to AT86's post, even by the hotels, everything was built on land with little trees. This picture shows the accommodation area before Splash and Enchanted Village were added.



I'm not sure what the rules are surrounding tree removal, but you only have to look at Th13teen to see some barriers. The outdoor layout was limited due to the rare trees that needed protection, and unique foundations were made to prevent tree roots from being disturbed.

Saying that, Alton Towers has planned several coasters over the years that have included significant tree felling, so it's likely possible. However, I would imagine they would have to come up with a bargaining chip (restoration of a part of the Towers/gardens) to do something like that.

 

[Ash]

All things considered Alton has always done an excellent job with development, having a lessened effect on the wider surroundings.

As a minimum they should be up keeping the gardens better and spending more for maintain the towers. But on the whole it’s worked well all things considered.

Looking at opportunities for future development, the obvious ones are the car parks around the edge of the park. VIP, disabled car park, coach parks, behind CBeebies/towers street, outside magic hq.

Then there is the larger car parks which could be moved to “the meadows” if it was converted into some form of hard standing. If they were able to get all of meadows converted within reason it would replace the main car parks in terms of size.

They also have the option of a multi storey somewhere too to save space.

I’ve always thought the air/main car parks could support some form of second gate if the parking could be accommodated elsewhere.