Item 7 - Schedule of Planning Applications

Transcription

Item No 001
Application Number : S/2006/1655/PO
Parish : Harpole
Case Officer : Michael Warren
Applicant : English Partnership Redrow Homes (South Midlands)
Location : Norwood Farm land bounded by
Berrywood Road/Sandy
Lane/Weedon Road/Upton
Lodge
Description : Development of housing and country park.
Recommendation - Approval
Conditions to follow
S/2006/1655/PO
WARD:
WARD MEMBERS:
1.
Harpole and Grange
Cllr Mrs Ann Addison and Cllr Mrs Janet Eliot
INTRODUCTION
The development proposals and background
1.1
Two outline planning applications for a major development proposal known as
‘Upton Lodge’, located on the western edge of Northampton and adjoining the
existing urban area, were submitted by joint applicants: Homes and Communities
Agency (formerly English Partnerships) and Redrow Homes. The proposed
development area is about 150ha in total (i.e. for both applications).
1.2
The first application (the subject of this report) is for development on land at
‘Norwood Farm’ (approx. 66ha), and proposes providing up to 781 dwellings and
part of a new country park (29ha) on land within South Northamptonshire District,
bounded by Berrywood Road, Sandy Lane and Weedon Road. The application
forms part of the ‘Upton Lodge’ development proposals, and will be determined by
SNC, as it falls outside the ‘WNDC Urban Development Area’. Should Members be
minded to approve this application, it would first need to be referred to GOEM as a
‘departure’ (as the site is not allocated for residential development in the
Development Plan), for the Secretary of State to consider whether he wishes to call
the application in or not.
1.3
The second application, is on adjoining land at ‘Upton Lodge Farm’ (approx. 84ha),
and proposes providing up to 1,784 dwellings, 22,000m2 of employment floorspace,
a 3.8ha site for community facilities (including a new primary school), a 1,000 space
‘park and ride’ facility and the smaller part of a country park (7.7ha). That site is
bounded by the Princess Marina Hospital to the east, St Crispins to the north and
Weedon Road to the south. That application relates to land within Northampton
Borough for which WNDC is the local planning authority. WNDC’s Northampton
1
Unitary Development Area (UDA) Committee resolved to delegate authority to their
Director of Planning to grant permission for the application in November 2008,
subject to: it first being referred to GOEM as a ‘departure’ (in respect of a small part
of the site, only) for the SoS to consider whether he wishes to call the matter in or
not; the resolution of outstanding highway and drainage issues; the completion of a
S.106 Agreement; and conditions set out in the report, as well as any additional
conditions or amendments to conditions as the Director of Planning may consider
necessary to secure an acceptable form of development. The permission has not
been issued, to date.
1.4
The applicants make the case that a large extent of ‘greenspace’ would be retained
within the development and extensive public open space is offered in mitigation in
the form of a Country Park, which would be mainly within this site (within South
Northants) and a much smaller part on the adjacent application site, at Upton Lodge
Farm (within Northampton Borough). The adopted South Northamptonshire Local
Plan allocates the site at Norwood Farm, as an area of restraint and it is regarded in
policy terms as open countryside (partly within a Special Landscape Area and all
within an Important Local Gap policy area).
1.5
In 2004, the South West District (SWD) Strategic Planning Review was approved by
Northampton Borough Council as the preferred strategy for the development of the
SWD (not including ‘Norwood Farm’ site, within South Northants). Upton Lodge is
specifically included in that Review as one of six sustainable communities that will
make up the Northampton SWD. Around 6,000 new homes are planned to be built
in the SWD, as a whole, along with about 120 hectares of employment/industrial
land. Development has already started in parts of the SWD. A total of 1900 homes
have been built, or have planning permission, at Upton, Berrywood Fields and
Banbury Lane. Around 1200 homes will eventually be provided at St Crispin. About
35ha of employment land has already been developed at Swan Valley and planning
permission has been granted for a further 70ha at Swan Valley and Pineham.
1.6
Upton Lodge (including the Norwood Farm application site) and Upton Park (to the
south of Weedon Road) are intended to be the next two communities in the South
West District of Northampton to be brought forward on land mainly owned by the
HCA. A key element of Northampton Borough’s SWD Strategic Planning Review
has been the development of the Cross Valley Link Road (CVLR) and the Sandy
Lane Relief Road (SLRR). The SLRR has planning permission which was granted
in February 2008, and the southern section of this road (within Northampton
Borough) has been constructed. The remaining northern section of the SLRR, which
will cross this application site (i.e. Norwood Farm), has yet to be constructed. The
CVLR (now called Upton Valley Way North) was granted planning permission in
December 2006 and was completed and opened to traffic in December 2009. The
SLRR will link the A45 Weedon Road with Berrywood Road, and will provide one of
the primary points of access into the application site whilst, at the same time,
relieving traffic from the existing Sandy Lane.
1.7
The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES) which
assessed the likely significant environmental effects of the proposed development
and identifies appropriate mitigation measures. The ES has been independently
assessed by consultants Entec. In addition, further specific site investigations have
been conducted on land stability matters.
1.8
Until recently, there were three principle issues outstanding; that relating to
transport planning, sewage infrastructure planning and the need for an additional
landscaped area or belt at the northern end of the proposed country park. The
2
Highway Agency (HA) and Northamptonshire County Council (NCC) as the local
highway authority are still working with SNC, WNDC and the applicants to address
the matters relating to the impact of the development on the strategic and local road
network and the need to tackle modal shift. The parties expect that these matters
will require a S.106 planning agreement to enable their resolution, alongside an
area based approach to transport infrastructure planning. Discussions with the
respective parties to secure delivery of this approach are near finalization, and are
not considered likely to involve changes to the design and configuration of the
current proposed development.
1.9
The Environment Agency (EA) similarly had raised concerns regarding the impact of
the development on water infrastructure planning, particularly foul water treatment
and transfer. In particular, the need to consider this development alongside other
planned and potential developments in and around Northampton. Discussions
between SNC, WNDC, the Environment Agency and Anglian Water (as the water
authority) have only recently concluded, to the satisfaction of all parties, and these
did not have any implications for the form and layout of the proposed development
as detailed in this application.
1.10 One of the key functions of the proposed country park would be to provide an
effective ‘buffer’ between all of the proposed Upton Lodge development, on the
edge of Northampton, and the adjoining countryside and Harpole village, to the
west. Following negotiation with the applicants, they have provided an additional
plan (Ref CBB-ALX-001 October 2009) showing a northern extension to the area of
the country park, so that a landscaped belt with a minimum width of 10m would
continue to the Sandy Lane / Berrywood Road junction, at the northern boundary of
the application site. The overall effect would be to provide a continuous parkland
area along the full extent of the western boundary of the application site.
1.11 In the event that any matter still outstanding cannot be resolved promptly, or that
the resolution of the matter results in material changes to the form of the
development or its potential impacts, this application would be returned to
Committee for re-consideration.
Description of Site
1.12 The application site is approximately 66 hectares in area and lies to the west of
Northampton, close to the edge of the current urban area. The boundary between
Northampton and South Northamptonshire runs broadly north south through the
overall site. Of the total area of 150 hectares, 84 hectares lie within the UDA for
Northampton and 66 hectares within South Northamptonshire. As previously
mentioned, separate applications have thus been submitted to WNDC and South
Northamptonshire Council, for the respective site areas within their jurisdiction.
1.13 The overall Upton Lodge site is bounded by the following: to the north by Berrywood
Road and the community of New Duston; to the east by areas of new housing at St
Crispin and Berrywood Fields, and by Princess Marina Hospital; to the south by
Weedon Road and exiting residential development at South View, and beyond this
by agricultural land (proposed Upton Park development area); and to the west by
further agricultural land and then the village of Harpole.
1.14 The application site currently comprises agricultural land and is called ‘Norwood
Farm’, with ‘Upton Lodge Farm’ adjoining to the east (within Northampton). This
land is crossed by a number of hedgerows, field boundaries and ditches. Crossing
the middle of the site (east/west) is a public bridleway (KP16). There are no
3
significant buildings on the site, with the only built development consisting of four
co-located agricultural barns/sheds, near the centre of the site. The whole site lies
on the northern flank of the Nene Valley, although the lie of the land is such that
many slopes face west rather than south. No part of the site lies within the River
Nene flood plain.
1.15 When viewed from the west, it is clear that topography plays an important role in
how to plan the site, as this is a very strong feature of it. The levels change
significantly across the site with changes of some 20 metres. The cross sections
submitted with the application show clearly how the proposed development is
intended to use the slopes and the changing levels throughout the site.
1.16 The site (the subject of this application), is not allocated for development in the
1997 South Northamptonshire Local Plan (SNLP), and is not, therefore, included as
part of the adjoining proposed development in the Northampton South West District,
but rather is identified as an area of ‘restraint’ in the open countryside (Special
Landscape Area/Important Local Gap) on the SNLP Proposals Map.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
2007: Planning permission was granted in November 2007 by WNDC for the
southern part of the Sandy Lane Relief Road (SLRR), from the Weedon Road
northwards (located within NBC’s administrative area). Construction of this section
of the SLRR has since been completed.
2.2
2008: NCC granted Planning Permission in February 2008 for the northern part of
the SLRR, from Berrywood Road southwards (located within SNC’s administrative
area). Work on construction of this section of the SLRR has not yet started.
2.3
November 2008: WNDC resolved to grant planning permission for the ‘Upton
Lodge’ development (Para 1.3, above, refers), within Northampton Borough, and
which may be considered ‘complementary’ to the application being considered here.
SNC was consulted on the scheme within Northampton, and Committee responded
to WNDC as follows:
That the West Northamptonshire Development Corporation be advised that South
Northamptonshire Council does not object to the principle of the development
proposed on this site (which is located within Northampton Borough). However, the
Council requests that the application not be determined by the WNDC Planning
Committee before the following matters have been adequately addressed:
-
The Environment Agency does not currently regard the flood risk assessment as
providing sufficient basis for understanding how any flooding and drainage issues
will be effectively dealt with. Existing sewerage infrastructure is inadequate and it
has not yet been adequately demonstrated how this will be addressed prior to the
commencement of any development.
-
A number of the transportation solutions required to enable any development,
including highways, currently remain to be fully resolved.
-
Members wished to indicate their strong concerns that Northamptonshire County
Council have stated that secondary school provision to serve this and other nearby
development is not now intended to be made within the Northampton South West
District developments (i.e. Upton, Upton Lodge, Upton Park, Pineham).
4
-
Full details regarding the level of developer contributions to support the
development, including the Heads of Terms for any Section 106 legal agreement,
need to be adequately addressed before the application is determined.
-
There is insufficient clarity on how and where open space will be provided in this
development, in the event that planning permission for the development of the
country park on the neighbouring Norwood Farm site, within South
Northamptonshire, is not forthcoming.
-
Great care will need to be taken to ensure that any floodlighting of the proposed
‘Park and Ride’ facility does not spill out of the site, adversely affecting the amenity
of nearby residents.
-
Any pedestrian and cycle crossings of the Weedon Road, required in connection
with this development, must be made completely secure and safe.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
Upton Lodge is not seen as a standalone development; it is intended to form part of
the wider growth of Northampton’s South West District. In particular, it is intended to
build upon the developments at Upton (Phase One), and the applicants propose
that it will adhere to best practice urban design principles. The application suggests
that many of the same sustainability features used at Upton (Phase One) would be
implemented at Upton Lodge (incl. Norwood Farm), as well as the use of design
coding, to ensure a similar high standard of development.
This application:
3.2
This application is effectively for part of a proposed mixed-use urban extension, and
is in outline form, with all details reserved for subsequent approval. However, the
applicants have submitted an illustrative masterplan and other drawings, sections
and information (incl. Urban Design & Development Principles document) as part of
the Design and Access Statement, and the Environmental Statement, to indicate
the likely form of the development. Alongside this proposal for up to 781 homes and
a new Country Park, constituting this application, would be employment, community
and education uses, a new ‘park and ride’ facility, and up to 1784 homes (within the
adjoining site – ie not part of this application). All of these together, are intended to
form a cohesive and sustainable urban extension. It is expected that 40% of the
new houses would be ‘affordable’ homes, in accordance with SNC’s policies.
3.3
The site layout (illustrated in the updated Masterplan) has been informed by the
topography of the site. The applicants development principles seek to:
-
Work with the landform to minimise earth moving;
-
As far as possible, align new streets along the existing topography lines;
-
Establish a series of connected, open water features down the hillsides to form a
SUDS network;
-
Locate taller structures and highest densities along lower slopes to minimize visual
impact;
5
-
Orient buildings, with large glass areas, to the south and west to take advantage of
natural daylight and solar heat gain, as well as views; and
-
Plant open spaces with indigenous material and street trees along the streets to
help preclude erosion.
3.4
The proposed residential development has been organised into three bands of
density: Low to Mid-Density, Mid-Density and Mid to High-Density. The proposed
density of development varies from lowest at the top of the slopes, adjacent to
existing residential development in Northampton, to highest on the lower slopes and
adjacent to the primary circulation routes. The Masterplan also locates a portion of
the highest density homes and flats along a proposed site spine road where
residents will have easy access to local bus services, and buildings could
incorporate local shops and services on the ground floors. The other locations
identified for the higher density development are alongside the SLRR and Weedon
Road frontages. Buildings along these roads are intended to provide a positive
‘face’ to the development and serve to define the eastern boundary of the proposed
new Country Park.
3.5
Illustrative plans and sections to show intended typical house designs, have been
provided, and are based on the following criteria:
-
Single family detached homes to match the scale of adjacent properties at the
Berrywood Fields and St Crispin developments.
-
Semi-detached units are shown with a footprint of 6m x 8m plus off-street garaging.
The typical plot is configured with a street frontage of 10m in width and includes a
12m deep rear garden. In simple arrangements this unit type could achieve a parcel
density of approx 35dph (dwellings per hectare).
-
Terrace units are shown with a footprint of 6m x 8m, and would incorporate ground
floor car parking within the building and/or utilise on-street parking. The typical plot
is 6m in width and includes a 12m deep rear garden. This arrangement could yield a
parcel development density of over 50dph.
-
Higher density flats would be located along the Spine Road and the SLRR frontage.
As appropriate, these buildings would incorporate convertible ground floor space
that could accommodate: flats, shops, offices and/or live-work units (not currently
part of the application). Car parking would be provided at the rear of the building or
on the ground floor, cut into the hillside.
3.6
With regard to the mixed-use and community facilities, some of the flats to be sited
along the main Spine Road will incorporate convertible ground floor space that
could accommodate flats, shops, offices and/or live/work units. This traditional
building form is common throughout Europe, and has recently come back into
favour in the UK, as sustainable, higher density housing development is required.
The Primary School and Community Facilities will be designed to a similar high
standard. The facilities will be visible to passing motorists and be an effective
symbol of the new community. Along with the Employment uses and some of the
adjacent flats, some of these buildings are likely to feature flat roofs that could
incorporate ‘green-roof’ technology. As with the residential uses, a Development
Framework and Design Code will be prepared to guide the design of these
buildings. (Note: The development described in this paragraph is within the
6
adjoining site, and is not part of this application, but information is provided for
completeness.)
3.7
The only existing buildings on the site are four sheds/barns, located near the centre
of the application site, with access off Sandy Lane. Some of these farm buildings
could be retained for future use (eg as a ‘Resource Centre’) on the proposed
Country Park.
3.8
A 420-place primary school would be located as part of the mixed-use community
facilities (within adjoining site – ie not part of this application), and as required by
NCC Education. Secondary school provision would be made off-site at existing and
proposed schools (Campion School, Bugbrooke; Dallington, Northampton and New
Duston, Northampton). Developer contributions would be required for this off site
provision.
3.9
The proposed employment area comprises 4.5ha of land and is situated towards
the south-western corner of the site, adjacent to the SLRR (within adjoining site – ie
not part of this application). The uses proposed are B1 (Offices) and B2 (Industrial)
uses only, with no B8 (Warehouse) uses. This could deliver about 22,500 sq m of
building space and could mean space for creation of up to 900 new jobs. Opposite
the employment area, to the west of the SLRR, would be a proposed 4.8ha ‘park
and ride’ which would provide up to 1,000 car spaces, with access via the SLRR
and off the Weedon Road (within adjoining site – ie not part of this application).
3.10 The proposed Country Park is split between the two applications, with the majority
in the SNC area, and forming part of this application. The area is extensive, 36.9ha
in total, and could provide a variety of roles and spaces from formal play areas to
simple parkland. A pavilion could be included to provide changing facilities for the
area. This park would also act as a permanent ‘buffer’ between the proposed
development and the village of Harpole, and between the ‘park and ride’ and
existing Sandy Lane/South View residents.
Intended Phasing:
3.11 A table showing the applicant’s indicative phasing plan is set-out at Para 3.13,
below. Broadly speaking, this plan shows development beginning at the site's
northern end, and continuing southwards along the SLRR. The four phases would
be as follows:
Phase One comprises the northern third of Parcel A. This phase may be accessed
directly from Berrywood Road (as per the SLRR extant planning permission), so
would not necessarily require the SLRR to be in place.
Phase Two comprises the southern two thirds of Parcel A. This phase would be
accessed from the SLRR, with a spur taken in the vicinity of the nursery on Sandy
Lane. This spur would then connect to the access from Berrywood Road serving
phase one.
Phase Three comprises Parcels B and C, with access taken from a spur off the SLRR (as
per the SLRR extant planning permission) in the vicinity of the Norwood Farm
barns.
Phase Four comprises Parcels D and E, using the same access provided for phase three.
The intention is to connect this access road through to Upton Lodge, where it would
join the spine road near the local centre. Should Upton Lodge not be delivered, or
7
not be ready in time, the access road would need to connect back to the SLRR in
the vicinity of the bridleway.
3.12 Indicative start and end dates for each phase are given below:
Phase One
110 - 140 dwellings 2012 - 2015
Phase Two
220 - 280 dwellings 2012 - 2017
Phase Three
55 - 75 dwellings
Phase Four
220 - 280 dwellings 2015 – 2020
Total
605 - 775 dwellings
2015 - 2016
2012 - 2020
3.13 The delivery and timing assume there would be two house builders on site. In
addition, the phasing strategy takes into account that drainage will need to be
provided from the south northwards. As such, advance drainage infrastructure will
need to be provided on the southern part of the site. This approach has been
agreed with the Environment Agency, who have recommended a condition
requesting details of this infrastructure at the reserved matters stage.
Supporting Documents:
3.14 The planning application comprises or is supported by the following documents:
-
Environmental Statement, Technical Appendices and Non-Technical Summary
(October 2006)
Planning Statement (October 2006)
Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy (October 2006)
Transport Assessment and Travel Plan - Vol. 1, 2 & 3 (October 2006)
Statement of Community Involvement (October 2006)
Phase I Geo-Environmental Audit (October 2006)
Design and Access Statement (January 2007)
Sequential Test (February 2007)
Health Impact Assessment (October 2007)
Technical Note on Open Space (November 2007)
Urban Design & Development Principles (March 2008)
Site Stability Assessment Report (March 2008)
Revised Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Strategy
(March 2008)
Energy Statement (March 2008)
Waste Audit and Waste Management Facilities Strategy (March 2008)
Ground Investigation – Final Report (June 2008).
In addition, the following documents were subsequently submitted:
Ground Investigation Reports:
Norwood Farm Land - June 2008
St Crispins West - June 2008
Upton Lodge and Sandy Lane - April 2008
Halcrow Slope Stability Reports:
Norwood Farm Stability Assessment - May 2008
St Crispins West Site Stability Assessment Report - July 2008
Upton Lodge Site Stability Assessment Report - March 2008
8
-
Revised Flood Risk Assessment - March 2008
Upton Lodge Sequential Test Exercise - February 2007
Energy Audit - March 2008
Waste Audit - March 2008
Health Impact Assessment - October 2007
Open Space Requirements - November 2007
Revised Site Masterplan - March 2008 and October 2009
Supplementary Landscape Proposals Plan – October 2009
Norwood Farm Surface Water Drainage Strategy Assessment – May 2009
Upton Lodge/Norwood Farm Transport Assessment - February 2010
Upton Lodge/Norwood Farm Framework Travel Plan - February 2010
Norwood Farm Traffic Noise Analysis – January 2010
Various written responses to consultation responses, from applicants’ consultancy
team.
These documents have gone through further consultation and the various
comments made have been taken into consideration. As the report indicates there
may be further comments to take into account from the Highways Agency/NCC
Highways, and negotiations with those organisations are now substantially
complete. From representations made further work has been done on the highway
matters and specifically in relation to land stability, which has been the subject of
three further reports from March to July 2008. Those reports have been given
careful consideration and consultations undertaken. Any further representations
have been taken into account.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
ANGLIAN WATER: Initially advised that there was insufficient capacity in the
sewerage network, which would require a further detailed analysis of upgrades
required to drain the site. However, the developers would, in any event, need to
agree a drainage strategy with Anglian Water before any development could
commence.
Note: Further discussions have taken place between Anglian Water and the
applicants, and this matter has been resolved. Anglian Water have confirmed that
WNDC commissioned a water cycle strategy, which provides a plan and
programme of water services infrastructure implementation, and includes WNDC
taking a lead on requisitioning a new foul sewer to serve the Dallington Grange,
Upton Lodge (including Norwood Farm) and Upton Park proposed developments.
Anglian Water further stated that to achieve the Government’s key aim of
sustainable development, infrastructure needs to be in place alongside new
development and combined with resource efficiency measures. Development
proposed will take place over many years and by several different developers, and
unless drainage and water infrastructure is fully funded and implemented in a timely
manner, this could adversely affect the pace of growth or lead to environmental
damage.
Reconsultation (March 2010): Anglian Water have confirmed that, having examined the
additional documents submitted by the Applicants, the surface water drainage
scheme relates to a SUDS scheme, which is not their area of responsibility or part
of an Anglian Water public surface water system, and therefore have no comments
to make.
9
Note: An appropriate ‘Grampian’ condition to ensure provision of the necessary SW and
FW infrastructure to serve the development, should be attached to any permission
granted.
4.2
BRITISH GAS TRANSCO: No response received.
4.3
BRITISH HORSE SOCIETY: No response received.
4.4
BROCKWATCH: No response received.
4.5
COUNCIL FOR THE PROTECTION OF RURAL ENGLAND: No response received.
4.6
CYCLING TOURING CLUB: No response received.
4.7
EAST MIDLANDS DEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Generally support the proposals, in
respect of both the employment and housing development proposed, and commend
that WNDC and SNC should ensure that adequate infrastructure requirements are
addressed in good time, and that the whole development helps create a sustainable
and integrated community.
4.8
NATURAL ENGLAND: Have stated that they are satisfied that no designated nature
conservation sites would be impacted upon, as a result of the development
proposed, and that the site is dominated by large arable fields and improved
pasture, which are of low biodiversity value. There are no objections provided that
the following issues are addressed by way of condition / obligation:
-
Ecological management plan to be submitted and approved before any
development begins.
-
An agreement regarding future management and maintenance of the country park.
-
Method statement regarding works to mitigate any undue adverse effects on
badgers and bats to be submitted and approved.
-
Removal or destruction of vegetation or buildings not to be undertaken during
March to August, to protect breeding birds.
4.9
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY: The EA have withdrawn their initial objection over
concerns over flood risk, following the submission of a revised Flood Risk
Assessment in 2008. The EA have confirmed that the FRA and the suggested
mitigation measures are proportionate to the scale, nature and location of
development. However in the EA’s letter of 24th October 2008, they maintained
their objection due to a lack of a water cycle strategy. They sought further evidence
to demonstrate that the development would be served by adequate water
infrastructure and will not increase the risk of pollution or flooding.
Note: The applicants responded to the EA’s objection regarding water cycle
infrastructure. They advised that it is legally the responsibility of Anglian Water (AW)
to provide the necessary infrastructure for the new development. The applicant has
met with AW who have expressed their satisfaction with the proposal and confirmed
that the sewage treatment capacity needed can be accommodated. AW will require
improved sewer capacity to connect the development to the Northampton network
and this would be prior to the development being occupied, but not prior to consent
being granted. It is considered that this information should be sufficient to alleviate
the EA’s concerns, and further formal comments have since been provided by both
the EA and AW to confirm this.
10
The EA’s final concern related to the increase in the number of dwellings proposed
and the increased demand for sewerage infrastructure. Again the applicant has met
with AW and been advised that the increase in the capacity of the sewage treatment
works required is likely to be minimal.
Reconsultation (March 2010): Following submission of additional information and
reports in respect of drainage, the EA have withdrawn their previous objections, and
now comment as follows:
The EA considers that the Halcrow Norwood Farm Surface Water Drainage
Strategy, dated June 2010, has been undertaken in line with Annex E of Planning
Policy Statement 25 'Development and Flood Risk' (PPS25), and that it is
considered appropriate for the scale and nature of the proposed development.
Accordingly, we are prepared to withdraw our previous objection, subject to the
imposition of the following five conditions on any subsequent planning permission
granted:
Condition 1: No building works which comprise the erection of a building required
to be served by water services shall commence until details of a scheme, including
phasing and future management and maintenance arrangements, for the provision
of mains foul water drainage has been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The works shall be implemented prior to the occupation of
any buildings within the relevant phase(s) of the development.
Reason: To prevent flooding, pollution and detriment to public amenity and
biodiversity through provision of suitable water infrastructure.
In order to satisfy the above condition, an adequate scheme would need to be
submitted demonstrating that there is (or will be prior to occupation) sufficient
infrastructure capacity existing for the connection, conveyance, treatment and
disposal of quantity and quality of water within proposed phasing of development. A
review may be required depicting how the infrastructure operates within
environmental limits and in light of forecast demand for these facilities.
Condition 2: Prior to the submission of Reserved Matters, a scheme for the
provision, implementation, ownership and maintenance of the surface water
drainage for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment
of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the development, has been
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme
shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before
the development is occupied. The scheme shall also include:
-
Full detailed surface water calculations to ensure adequate surface water drainage
facilities on site;
-
An assessment of overland flood flows; and
-
Details of how the scheme shall be maintained and managed after completion.
Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, to improve and protect water
quality, improve habitat and amenity, and ensure future maintenance of these.
Condition 3: All reserved matters application shall be submitted with a detailed
(Stage 2) FRA, submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
11
The detailed FRA for the individual sites/land parcels shall, as a minimum:
-
demonstrate that the proposed development is compliant with the recommendations
and constraints detailed within the outline/Stage 1 FRA; and
-
include a Certificate of Compliance issued and authorised by a suitably qualified
engineer, to demonstrate that the detailed FRA conforms to the strategy, constraints
and parameters set out in the outline/Stage 1 FRA.
Reason: To ensure that future proposed developments comply with the strategy,
constraints and parameters set out in the outline/Stage 1 FRA.
Condition 4: Prior to any development on the site as a whole, a phasing strategy
shall be completed and submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority for
approval. The strategy shall detail the timing and phasing of the proposed
development in relation to the provision and implementation of surface water runoff
mitigation measures. The strategy shall be implemented as approved unless
otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that any proposed development does not increase flood risk
whilst under construction.
Condition 5: Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning
permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing
with the Local Planning Authority), a scheme to deal with the risks associated with
contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local
planning authority. That scheme shall include all of the following elements unless
specifically excluded, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.
1.
A desk study identifying:
-
all previous uses
-
potential contaminants associated with those uses
-
a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors
-
potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.
2.
A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for an
assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those
off site.
3.
The results of the site investigation and risk assessment (2) and a method
statement based on those results giving full details of the remediation
measures required and how they are to be undertaken.
4.
A verification report on completion of the works set out in (3) confirming the
remediation measures that have been undertaken in accordance with the
method statement and setting out measures for maintenance, further
monitoring and reporting.
5.
Any changes to these agreed elements require the express consent of the
Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that any potential sources of contamination present on site are
12
adequately investigated and addressed with respect to the risk posed to controlled
waters (including any risk that may be associated with SUDS).
As you are aware the discharge of planning conditions rests with the Local Planning
Authority. It is, therefore, essential that you are satisfied that the proposed draft
condition meets the requirements of Circular 11/95 'Use of Conditions in Planning
Permission'. Please notify us immediately if you are unable to apply our suggested
conditions, as we may need to tailor our advice accordingly.
4.10 HIGHWAYS AGENCY: The HA’s initial review of the Transport Assessment (TA)
indicated that trip generation from the development proposed was likely to be in
excess of 2000 vph anticipated at peak periods. The TA predicts that this would
have a significant impact on the M1 at Jct 15A and Jct 16, and that these junctions
do not have sufficient capacity to accommodate the development traffic. Further, no
mitigation measures were identified in the TA, which was incomplete, and the HA
did not have sufficient information to make a substantive response.
Note: The applicants’ consultants have responded to the above and the HA have
commented further that an improvement will be required at Jct 16 in order to safely
accommodate traffic from the wider Northamptonshire growth, particularly Daventry
and Northampton. The impact from Upton Lodge (incl Norwood Farm) would be
small and an improvement would not be required as a result of that development.
With regard to the Queen Eleanor Interchange, the HA are supportive of any
measures that will reduce the impact of development traffic. The Queen Eleanor
Interchange is currently being assessed as part of the HA’s A45 study. This will
identify what improvements need to be undertaken to the A45 corridor in order to
safely accommodate future levels of traffic. A contribution to the resulting corridor
strategy may also be required either financially through an appropriate ‘ringmaster’
or physically through the provision of part of the overall scheme. In any event, the
agency may require that any permission granted for Upton Lodge be conditioned
against the A45 improvements.
Regarding Jct 15a, discussions are ongoing around modelled outputs. In summary,
the HA have advised that they have no objection in principle, but that there are
three principal areas for their consideration:
• M1, Jct 15a - it has been agreed that improvements to the south bound on-slip
would be based on DMRB criteria rather than outputs from the VISSIM model. The
on-slip will still need remodelling.
• M1, Jct 16 – improvement will be required in order to safely accommodate traffic
from wider Northamptonshire growth and there are discussions with WNDC
regarding the cumulative effect of development and they may have a view on
possible contributions to the wider strategic highway improvement costs.
• Queen Eleanor Interchange – HA are supportive of any measures that will reduce
the impact of development traffic.
Reconsultation (March 2010): The following further response was received from the
HA, on 16th August 2010:
You will be aware from my previous letter of May 2010, that we have been engaged
in ongoing discussions with the applicants over the last few months which have
been productive and which have lead to resolution of a number of matters. At the
time of writing, whilst we are not yet in a position to formally lift our existing holding
13
direction, we are nonetheless confident that the outstanding matters are capable of
resolution and are unlikely, in our opinion, to compromise the overall planning
outcome in this case.
Access Management Strategy
The Highways Agency has now completed its study of the A45/M1. Arising from
this, we have also now developed an Access Management Strategy which is
specifically intended to enable this, and other committed development sites in
Northampton (including the wider Upton Lodge Masterplan area) to be satisfactorily
accommodated on the SRN.
The principles of the Access Management Strategy have been shared with NCC,
WNDC, the JPU and other partners and we are currently in the process of refining
final details, including preliminary junction designs and relevant cost information to
enable the Strategy to be completed. Once the Strategy is complete, this will be
used to guide our responses to development proposals in and around Northampton
and provide a consistent and clear reference for all developers and planning
authorities in the area.
It is also envisaged that the Strategy will be embodied within the emerging
Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) for the area and that, as such it will be integral to
any future decisions in relation to the allocation of planning obligations, tariffs or CIL
provisions, for example. We anticipate working in partnership with the District
Councils, WNDC and NCC in this regard to enable the timely delivery of the defined
infrastructure.
In the case of Norwood Farm, we have identified that the delivery of this site, as part
of the wider Masterplan area, will require the whole of the Access Management
Strategy to be in place, which includes specific improvements to 7 junctions along
the M1 and A45.
Accordingly we are likely to be seeking the imposition of a ‘Grampian’ type of
condition which restricts occupation of the site until such time as these
improvements have been constructed and are capable of being fully operational.
We consider that such a condition would be in accordance with circular 11/95 and
be an entirely appropriate means of enabling this development to proceed.
At this stage, therefore we are seeking to conclude the A45/M1 Access
Management Strategy at the earliest opportunity, which we anticipate could be
towards the end of September. We will be seeking endorsement of the Strategy
from the relevant planning and highways authorities at this time and will thereafter,
anticipate being in a position to direct suitable conditions and to lift our existing
holding direction on this application.
Framework Travel Plan (FTP)
We have worked closely with the applicants over the past few weeks to provide
input to a draft S.106 Agreement. We are now content that the agreement will
incorporate detailed provisions for travel plan preparation, co-ordination and
monitoring, including ongoing engagement with the Highways Agency to assist in its
delivery. We are also content that adequate mechanisms have been incorporated
to enable modal shift targets to be met and, in circumstances where these are not
being achieved, for the implementation of additional ‘Failsafe Measures’.
14
Summary
In summary, subject to completion of the Highways Agency’s A45/M1 Access
Management Strategy and the imposition of a related Grampian condition in respect
of the delivery of this Strategy prior to occupation – and also the completion of a
S.106 Agreement incorporating the draft terms recently agreed with the applicants
in relation to Travel Plans and Failsafe Measures, the Highways Agency are hopeful
that the existing holding direction might be lifted.
(Note: On the basis of the above response, any recommendation for approval of this
application should include a requirement that the HA’s TR110 Holding Direction
would first have to be lifted, before any permission could be issued.)
4.11 HARPOLE PARISH COUNCIL: Raise concerns about the effect the proposed
development could have on the rural nature of Harpole village, particularly its rural
setting and environment. They are however pleased to see that comments made
about the Sandy Lane Relief Road and proposed country park have been taken into
account, and agree about the importance of maintaining a ‘strategic gap’ to act as a
buffer between the proposed development and Harpole village, that is referred to
regularly by the applicants in their submissions.
Consider that too little attention has been paid to how the appearance and effect of
the development on the special landscape area (within South Northants) and the
wider Nene Valley will be adequately mitigated. Such mitigation should include
retention of existing features (e.g. hedgerows), wherever possible, as well as
extensive new planting (e.g. semi-mature trees). The long-term management of the
country park and landscaped areas is of great concern too, and should be properly
secured through a S.106 legal agreement.
Harpole PC does not see the need for more sports pitches, a pavilion or playing
fields, given those existing at Harpole, Kislingbury, Upton and Duston. They are,
however, supportive of proposed provision of youth facilities in the local centre, as
well as the ‘downgrading’ of existing Sandy Lane, and are concerned that adequate
provision should be made to mitigate run-off of rain water, as well as increases in
noise levels, air pollution and light pollution, emanating from the new development.
Reconsultation (March 2010): No response received.
4.12 KISLINGBURY PARISH COUNCIL: Strongly object to the application as the PC
sees the proliferation of an insidious urban sprawl, which will engulf villages within
South Northants, such as Kislingbury and Harpole, and continue until it reaches the
M1 motorway. Raise issues regarding the overall impact of the development on the
natural beauty of the Nene Valley, and note that the Environment Agency objects to
the application as not being fully compliant with PPS 25: Development and Flood
Risk. The PC also does not consider that the flood model used has been based on
the correct levels, which they consider to be the 1947 flood.
4.13 BUGBROOKE PARISH COUNCIL: Have no objections, in principle, and comment
as follows:
Proposal appears well thought-out with a good balance of housing, community
facilities, green space, and transport links. 781 dwellings on this site would reduce
pressure for (piece-meal) development on other villages in the district, which might
15
not have the adequate infrastructure.
4.14 UPPER HEYFORD PARISH COUNCIL: No response received.
4.15 ROTHERSTHORPE PARISH COUNCIL: No response received.
4.16 DUSTON PARISH COUNCIL (N’hampton Borough): No response received.
4.17 UPTON PARISH COUNCIL (N’hampton Borough): Wish to raise strong objection to
the development proposal, as a whole, for the following reasons:
• In the original plans a ‘green corridor’ was shown stretching from St Crispins to the
Weedon Road, but this does not appear on the submitted plans.
• The increased numbers of houses, plus education and employment facilities etc,
would result in a higher flood risk into the river, with the increased run-off of
rainwater.
4.18 NORTHAMPTON BOROUGH COUNCIL: The consultation was considered by
NBC’s Planning Committee at a meeting on 2nd April 2008. This resulted in the
following comments being made:
That the Council raise significant objection to this application in that significant
issues remain outstanding and unresolved, which will have a marked impact on the
success of the new community if not appropriately addressed at this outline stage.
The following are the principle issues that are currently outstanding (not
exhaustive):
• There is insufficient clarity on the extent of recreation space that will be provided in
the development in reasonable proximity to residents, in particular local and
neighbourhood play and playing pitches.
• The Environment Agency does not regard the flood risk assessment as a sufficient
basis for understanding how flooding issues will be effectively dealt with. Existing
sewerage infrastructure is inadequate and will not be up to the required standard
prior to the commencement of the development. (Note: EA and AW have since
withdrawn their
objections).
• Transportation solutions, including highways, are unresolved.
• NCC have identified that insufficient primary school provision has been identified
and there is also uncertainty about future secondary school provision as part of the
southwest district. (Note: NCC have since confirmed that they are satisfied with the
primary school provision proposed, and have clearly indicated how they anticipate
future secondary school provision would be made.)
• There is insufficient detail of the level of Section 106 contributions to support the
development, including whether a standard tariff will apply or the traditional
approach will apply. Heads of Terms also need to be agreed.
• A waste audit is required. (Note: A satisfactory waste audit has since been
submitted.)
It is therefore considered that it would be premature, to grant consent for the
16
proposal.
4.19 DAVENTRY DISTRICT COUNCIL: No response received.
4.20 WEST NORTHANTS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: No response received.
4.21 NCC – GROWTH MANAGEMENT (Planning Policy): The County Council wishes to
ensure sufficient services are provided within areas of new development, such as is
proposed here. It is as important that these services are located and configured in a
sustainable way that fully integrates with neighbouring existing and planned
development. NCC has also made comments on a number of key areas, as follows:
• Health Impact Assessment required. (Note: This has since been submitted, and
the PCT have confirmed that they are satisfied with it – refer Para 4.35, below).
• School provision – a development of this size will generate an overall need for
primary school provision of 630 places - 420 to serve the Upton Lodge development
(and 210 to serve Norwood Farm). A developer
contribution will be required
towards additional secondary
school places.
• NCC has a statutory duty to ensure adequate pre-school childcare facilities and
further discussions will be required regarding this issue.
• Fire & Rescue service is investigating the potential impact of the proposal.
• Northamptonshire Police will be seeking contributions, as a requirement for large
developments, and details of these have been forwarded to the applicants.
• Waste Management - The proposal is currently contrary to the NCC Waste
Local Plan and a Waste Audit has not been submitted as required by the adopted
SPD. (Note: The Waste Audit has since been submitted (March 2008) and is
considered satisfactory by NCC and raises no issues or implications for the
Environmental Statement.)
• Library – A financial contribution will be required from the developers either to
provide a facility on-site or to improve existing local and central library facilities.
S.106 contributions will be required to support library provision.
• Public Art – A financial contribution towards the provision of some form of public
art should be made by the developers. It is recommended that an Artist be included
in the development design team.
• Residential areas should include areas of innovative playspace.
4.22 NCC – RIGHTS OF WAY: Recent response received, as follows:
I attach a working copy of the Definitive Map for the Bridleways affected. KP16 is
the main one crossing the Norwood Farm site.
Please ensure that these are not incorporated into the street network, ref DoE Circ
1993/Annex D. I am happy to see from the masterplan that the bridleway routes
have been retained, however I am a little concerned that these may be along a road
17
network?
Does the park and ride facility allow for cyclists to park and cycle, this should be
encouraged as part of the travel plan at the reserved matters stage.
It doesn’t look like anything needs diverting but temporary closures (under S14 of
Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984) will be required during construction of
development and potential improvements for KP16, with alternative routes being
available where possible. Can you confirm if they are proposing to improve the
bridleways surfaces? Such improvements can be dealt with at later stages with
drawings.
Awarded widths are as follows:
1.
KP16 is 20 foot wide
2.
LB1 is 3m and is part subject to previous Diversion Order in 2005, I would
recommend the improvements widen where possible within this
development.
3.
LB8 has no awarded width, but would required 3m surfaced track for cyclists
within a 5m corridor, which includes grass to 1 each side of the hard surface.
The standard advisory comments are:
With respect to construction works to be carried out in close proximity to and using
Public Rights of Way as access, please note the following standard requirements:-
The routes must be kept clear, unobstructed, safe for users, and no structures or
material placed on the right of way at all times.
-
There must be no interference or damage to the surface of the right of way as a
result of the construction. Any damage to the surface of the path must be made
good by the applicant, specifications for any repair or surfacing work must be
approved by this office, under s131 HA1980.
-
As a result of the development the Rights of Way, Bridleways KP16, LB1 and LB8
need to be closed by applying for a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order. An
application form for such an order is available via Northamptonshire County Council
website, a fee is payable for this service and a period of six weeks notice is
required.
Please
follow
the
link
below:
www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/en/councilservices/transport/row/legal/pages/temptro
s.aspx
-
Any new path furniture (e.g. gates preferred over stile) needs to be approved in
advance with the Access Development Officer, and standard examples can be
provided.
At the reserved matters stages I would like to ensure that:
With reference to the supplementary planning guidance: Planning Out Crime in
Northamptonshire, NCC would like to make the following comments with regard to
design. We would like to suggest a post and rail fence up to a height of 1.2m along
the gardens of the new properties, which border the public bridleways KP16, LB1
and LB8, in relation to safety issues of enclosed Public Rights of Way between
houses. It is best practice that streets and spaces should be well overlooked, lit and
18
busy in order to reduce crime and access requirements comply with Disability
Discrimination Act 2005 regulations.
Providing enough convenient and secure cycle parking at people’s homes, schools,
businesses and other locations for both residents and visitors is critical to increasing
the use of cycles and achieving the 20% modal shift target published in the Local
Transport Plan 2006/7 -2010/11. Please refer to the SPG on Parking for the
recommended standard level of cycle parking provision for new properties.
This response is without prejudice to any Public Right of Way which may exist
across the site, but whose presence is not recorded on the County Council’s
Definitive Map and Statement.
4.23 NCC – TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS: Initially expressed concerns because NCC
was of the understanding that, in agreement with WNDC, SNC and the developers,
that this application (and the associated Upton Lodge Farm application) was
deferred pending a resolution regarding the growth areas for Northampton. This
would allow for a more robust decision to be made in respect of highway
infrastructure. Should this not be the case a package of transportation measures
would be required in order for the development to proceed.
NCC have confirmed that this site (and the associated Upton Lodge Farm site) were
not included in the original Multi-Modal Study carried out for Northampton, and that
a package of transportation measures would be required to enable any
development to proceed. This should include the following developer contributions:
• Provision of the SLRR (approx contribution £10million) (Note: Section of SLRR
within Northampton Borough constructed.)
• The Cross Valley Link Road (£5million) (Note: Now complete and open to traffic.)
• Northern orbital route (SLIN) (£5million)
• Weedon Road bus corridor (£2million)
• Provision of new and extended bus services to support modal shift (£2million)
NCC further states that the total figure for the above (approx £24million) is broadly
in line with the cumulative figure that would be sought in support of a development
of 3,500 dwellings, and is set against the suggested transport infrastructure element
of the ‘standard charge’ currently being considered by WNDC. NCC also expects to
receive a comprehensive travel plan detailing the applicants’ proposals towards
achieving a 20% modal shift, as required by NCC’s Strategy for Growth Policy.
Highway Officer further comments that the applicants’ consultants have been in
discussion with the HA and NCC regarding supplementary transport information to
finalise their consultation requirements. These requirements for Upton Lodge (incl.
Norwood Farm) include the use of the new NCC multi-modal traffic model to
determine traffic flows and junction capacity assessment for the development and
impact on the local network. These flows will also be plugged into a separate HA
model. The timing of the completion of work is subject to the completion/verification
by both NCC and the HA of their models in order to enable the work to be complete.
This work may take time, two to three months. EP (now HCA) has agreed to fund
this additional work. Final discussions are taking place on the Travel Plan, which is
already at an advanced stage.
4.24 NCC – EDUCATION: Primary School Provision – A 420-place primary school
(approx. 2ha) will be required to serve the adjoining Upton Lodge Farm site, within
19
the Borough, with a further 210-places (approx 1.1ha) to serve the Norwood Farm
site. Funding for the site and building costs will be required.
Secondary School Provision - Although a site for a secondary school is
‘safeguarded’ on the proposed Upton Park development site nearby (to the south of
the Weedon Road), it is intended that provision to serve the Upton Lodge (incl.
Norwood Farm) development will in fact be made in a proposed school at the
Dallington Grange proposed development. In view of this, there will not be any
requirement for a secondary school on the Upton Lodge site. However, a developer
contribution towards funding the additional secondary school places that will be
needed, will be required.
Childcare Provision - As of 2008, NCC has also had responsibility for ensuring an
adequate supply of childcare facilities for preschool and school-aged children.
Some of this will be provided at the primary school(s). However, it is likely that other
childcare services will be required, and further discussion between NCC and the
developers is needed, to ensure adequate childcare places will be available.
4.25 SNC – PLANNING POLICY: Initial comments made in 2007 are now out of date,
and a revised response has been made (see ‘reconsultation’, below).
Reconsultation (March 2010): In Development Plan Policy terms the application lies
in open countryside and as such the proposed development needs to be assessed
against ‘saved’ Policy H6 and EV2 of the South Northamptonshire Local Plan.
These policies state that development in the open countryside should be necessary
for the reasons specified or involve a conversion; this application fails to fulfil the
exceptions in these policies.
However, the Local Plan is ageing and in terms of housing requirements was
superseded by the Sub Regional Strategy for Milton Keynes South Midlands Growth
Area (part of the East Midlands Regional Plan). This set out a minimum annual
requirement of 330 dwellings to be completed between 2001 and 2021 as well as a
figure for the Northamptonshire Implementation Area that was aimed at meeting the
growth requirements of Northampton. The Minister has now revoked the RSS
including the housing targets. It is no longer a material consideration in the
determination of planning applications. More information on the implications of this
is set out below.
Whilst the revocation of the RSS removes the current housing targets in the RSS,
advice provided to Councils from the Government’s Chief Planning Officer makes
clear that the requirement for a five-year and 15 year housing land supply remains,
and that the calculation of revised housing targets should be evidence based. In
addition the Government has made very firm statements that it expects local
authorities to cater for housing growth which it considers to be an important national
issue. In the Minister’s view the inability to demonstrate a five-year supply of
housing land remains a relevant and important consideration in determining
planning applications and appeals.
Local Planning Authorities will now able to identify an appropriate annual housing
requirement; but this will need to be robust, evidenced and defensible at appeal.
The advice provided considers that this should be achieved through the LDF
examination process.
The advice considers that local authorities may base revised housing targets on the
level of provision submitted to the original Regional Spatial Strategy examination
(Option 1 targets), supplemented by more recent information as appropriate. There
20
are no ‘Option 1’ figures for Northamptonshire because the RSS housing targets
were derived through the MKSM national growth area identified in the Sustainable
Communities White Paper 2003 and subsequently the MKSM Study (2005). For this
area the MKSM Study figures are the equivalent to ‘Option 1’ figures. For South
Northamptonshire these are 330 dwellings per annum. The MKSM Study has also
been revoked as part of the development plan.
At its meeting on July 12th 2010 Cabinet agreed that in the absence of robust
revised housing targets for South Northamptonshire, and until such time that these
revised figures have been prepared and agreed through the preparation of the Core
Strategy, this Council would continue to provide for a housing target of 330
dwellings per annum based on the figure set out in the revoked RSS.
The requirement also remains within Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) to ensure
a five-year supply of housing land within the District and this is a material
consideration in the determination of this application. The 2009/2010 South
Northamptonshire Council Housing Land Availability Study shows a 4.1 - year
supply of housing land. The study identifies those sites which are available,
achievable and suitable for housing within the next 5 years (2010 – 2015). These
identified sites include remaining allocated housing sites, sites with existing
planning permission, other sites identified as being suitable for housing within
documents approved by the Council and an allowance for windfalls. In April 2010
there was a shortfall of 326 dwellings.
Although the NIA was never defined in an LDF document, before the revocation of
the RSS and MKSM SRS; for monitoring purposes it was agreed that most housing
commitments on the edge of Northampton, but within SNC, formed part of meeting
the NIA housing requirement set out in the RSS. However, the revocation of the
RSS and MKSM SRS means that the NIA and its housing requirement no longer
exists. It therefore follows that the NIA should not be referred to or used in the
calculation of any new housing targets. Accordingly the issue of housing supply will
need to be considered at district level.
The Council has argued at a planning Inquiry (August 3rd and 4th) that housing
approved within the administrative boundary of South Northamptonshire District
must now be used in meeting its own requirement. It was argued that figures can no
longer count towards Northampton Borough Council’s figure as they are in this
Council’s administrative area and the NIA does not exist. If there is a need for joint
working in the future between this Council and Northampton Borough Council
(NBC) in respect of housing provision, then this will be done by agreement and cooperation and not by imposition as was the case with the RSS. Time will be needed
to both determine new locally based housing targets and the implications thereof for
the future planning of the area. This argument is due to be repeated before a
second inspector at a second Inquiry on August 17th and 18th 2010. In the meantime
the approach set out in this response is considered reasonable and the only
appropriate arrangement.
Clearly there are implications arising from the decision to revoke the RSS, and the
consequential removal of the NIA from the Development Plan, on this Council’s five
year supply of housing land. This is set out below.
The latest Five-Year Housing Land Supply Report published by the Council was in
June 2010 with a base date of May 2010. This showed the Council as having a 4.1 year supply of housing land. It should be noted that the appellant at both the
inquiries has questioned this figure and these issues are also being considered by
21
the Planning Inspectorate.
The May 2010 Report did not include any sites that have approval for housing land
as these were considered to lie within the NIA and should therefore contribute to the
NIA housing target. As has already been stated the NIA no longer exists and the
land therefore reverts back to meeting this Council’s target that in the interim
continues to be 330 dwellings per annum.
The following sites are affected:
S/2007/0813/PO
Wootton Fields
300
08/0208/DCNWS
Grange Park Saxon Avenue
450
Sub total
750
Pending:
S2006/1655/PO
Norwood Farm (781)
781
Total
1531
There is no certainty that all of these will be developed within the next five years.
Based on the phasing plan supplied by the applicants for Norwood Farm, some 275
dwellings could be developed within the next five years. It is estimated that 225
could come forward from Wootton Fields and 320 of the Grange Park (Saxon
Avenue) (these are the figures used in the current NBC five - year housing land
requirement, where these sites can currently be found).
This results in 545 dwellings that can now be included in the SNC five - year supply
calculation from committed sites.
By including the two committed sites the Council would have a 5.5 - year supply of
housing land based on the current housing target of 330 dwellings per annum.
Whilst this is over the minimum five - year requirement it is important to note that
the need to have a five - year housing requirement is a rolling process and it will be
important that it is sustained over time. There is a need for some 30 new dwellings
to come forward every month to sustain the supply. Also it is still unclear as to what
the new ‘locally derived’ housing figure for South Northamptonshire will be. The only
certainty is that there will be a housing requirement in the future.
Clearly the outcome of the appeals mentioned previously, will be a critical factor in
how the Council will then need to approach IRHP applications. It is understood that
the decisions on the appeals will be made available in approximately two months
time. If the above housing calculations are accepted, then the IRHP can be revoked
and planning policy will revert to the Local Plan. If it is not proven then the Council
will need to continue with the IRHP for the short-term at least, until it has secured an
adequate supply of housing land. Either way the approval of the Norwood Farm site
would contribute to the housing supply, and further reduce the Council’s need to
rely on the IRHP.
If the Norwood Farm application were to be approved then this would make a
significant contribution to this Council’s housing requirement either now, if the
Planning Inspectorate support the Council’s case, or in the future once a revised
locally based housing figure is derived and agreed.
22
In policy terms the Norwood Farm application is considered to in a sustainable
location as it forms part of a larger development proposal within Northampton
Borough and provides for a strong and permanent green wedge in the form of a
country park. It will have less of an impact on existing communities than some of
those developments currently being considered in villages.
In Policy terms the application is supported.
4.26 SNC – STRATEGIC HOUSING: Initial comments made in 2007 are now out of date,
and a revised response will be made (see ‘reconsultation’, below).
Reconsultation (March 2010): Response awaited and will be provided in the
Committee Updates or at the Meeting.
4.27 SNC - ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: Generally support the proposal provided
appropriate safeguarding conditions are imposed. Comments primarily relate to the
development within the South Northamptonshire District (ie Norwood Farm).
However, the close proximity of the ‘park and ride’ and employment land in
Northampton Borough to existing and proposed sensitive receptors within the
district, necessitates making observations regarding the whole scheme.
The submitted Environmental Statement rightly identifies contaminated land, noise
and air quality as potential areas of concern. The actual location of proposed
residential and other sensitive developments in relation to the approved Sandy Lane
Relief Road and the existing Weedon Road will determine how significant the
impact is. The master plan appears to generally avoid the adjoining of incompatible
land-uses so inherently provides a reasonable environment for future occupiers.
Air Quality
Air quality has been considered and there are no observations regarding this issue.
Noise
The baseline survey was conducted during August 2006. The noise climate during
school holidays is not characteristic of the predominant remainder of the year.
Therefore, predictions could be under-estimated. However, it is accepted that the
predominately rural setting is unlikely to have significant seasonal variation in its
existing noise climate, so overall do not object to the reliability of the data. It is
recognised that development along Sandy Lane Relief Road and Weedon Road
could be adversely affected by traffic. A mitigation scheme is needed to protect the
amenity of future occupants in these areas. The mitigation measures will only
provide protection within the homes (and school and community facilities) so the
use of garden areas will not have the same level of protection. The scheme for
SLRR should include protection measures such as bunds, fences, screening and
sacrificial buffer zones (such as amenity areas, landscaping etc) but the extent of
this will depend on how much was known about this development when considering
SLRR. It is therefore, incumbent of the applicants for this proposal to properly
consider the effect of the measures with the SLRR approved scheme and how they
can complement that with their own scheme.
A condition is needed for land development parcels A,B,D,H and I, (and N,O and
the community/school area in NBC) requiring prior approval of noise mitigation
measures to afford the necessary protection of amenity to the anticipated noise
23
climate (day and night).
Contamination
Preliminary surveys have identified potentially contaminative former uses of the land
as well as naturally occurring arsenic and radon. Standard conditions relating to the
approval and implementation of a remediation scheme related to the sensitivity of
the specific end use of the land, validation of remediation and a final report should
be imposed. Radon protection measures should be addressed through Building
Regulations but the LPA may consider it prudent to impose a condition requiring the
submission and approval of a scheme, as proposed by the applicants. Particular
care has to be given to any integral garages. Should they not be provided with
radon protection then subsequent conversion to domestic occupation will have to be
prohibited by way of condition. Similarly it is prudent that permitted development
rights are lifted for conservatories and extensions in the affected area to control the
risk of future alterations compromising existing protection measures or not providing
the same standard of protection as the main dwelling.
Light
This gets limited attention in the Landscape and Amenity chapter. Whilst the layout
and design does minimise the impact of the development and provide some
protection of amenity to occupants I recommend that a condition is added in relation
to the park and ride so that the lighting scheme is submitted and approved by the
LPA. It should also be 'tested' after installation to ensure light spillage is minimised.
This not only provides protection to existing development at South View (in SNC
area) but also ensures impact on biodiversity is minimal. There is increasing
scientific evidence that large areas of artificial light interfere with nocturnal fauna as
well as potentially causing nuisance to residents. The scheme can also ensure
energy efficiency is properly considered.
Waste
Council guidance on storage and access for waste collection should be considered
in the subsequent detailed schemes for development. This is to ensure there is
adequate provision for separation of wastes in the home and suitable storage areas
for communal and commercial areas without affecting the amenity of adjoining
properties. Road schemes need to be sufficient to allow safe and unhindered
access for waste collection vehicles.
Reconsultation (March 2010): Response refers to consultation on the revised
transport and drainage assessment for the proposed development of housing and
Country Park at Norwood Farm land nr Harpole and makes no adverse comment
regarding these.
4.28 SNC – HERITAGE & LEISURE: No response received.
4.29 SNC – BUILDING CONTROL: State that consideration should be given to potential
geotechnical and foundation problems that are associated with hill slopes,
particularly those greater than 7 degrees, in the Northampton area. In particular, all
land of a greater than 7 degree slope should be considered as potentially
hazardous unless a rigorous geotechnical report has proved otherwise.
The proposed development could be affected by the reactivation of ancient/relic slip
planes following disturbances caused by the earthworks associated with the
development. In essence a geotechnical report should be prepared that verifies that
the land is stable enough to build on. (Note: An addendum to the Site Stability
24
Assessment Report, specifically relating to the Norwood Farm Land, was submitted
in May 2008.)
4.30 SNC - ACCESS OFFICER: Has no comments to make on the application at this
‘outline’ stage.
4.31 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE POLICE/CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR: Wish
to make observations relating to Policing, Community Cohesion, Community Safety
and Secured by Design. This broad based policing response will be added to by
more site specific response once the planners have given approved planning
consent. Note that this response regarding Norwood Farm applies equally to the
wider development incorporating Upton Lodge Farm, (1784 dwellings, school,
employment area etc) which is being determined by WNDC
Executive Summary
The following key policing and community safety issues need to be covered:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Norwood Farm Design and Access Statement should promote the principles
of ‘Designing out Crime’ and ‘Safer Places’, through Secured by Design and
Safer Car Parks.
The Norwood Farm vision should include references to Community Safety.
A stronger reference to actions to reduce crime, anti social behaviour, the fear of
crime and improving road safety should be included.
It is important to guard against too much permeability within the development.
It is essential that appropriate youth provision be provided. Positive youth activity
results in reduced anti social behaviour and crime.
Police Safer Community Team accommodation, within a Multi-Use centre, will
put community safety at the heart of this new development.
Ian Ledingham, Traffic Management Unit, Northamptonshire Police will make
separate and specific comment relating to the highway proposals.
Background
There is virtually no reference in the Design and Access statement to crime and
disorder, and the potential effect on communities if poor design is permitted. Issues
of community safety and crime and disorder are relevant to any development, and if
due consideration is not made at the outset, the future residents of the development
are left with the consequences. There needs to be a commitment to the adoption of
certain security standards throughout the development to ensure these aspirations
are achievable.
While design cannot be expected to eradicate crime, well-planned spaces
experience lower levels of vandalism, violence and anti-social behaviour. Equally,
sustainable neighbourhoods thrive in areas where communities have a sense of
ownership over their surrounding spaces. Recognising this, the Government has
made the creation of ‘Safer Places’ a core objective, highlighting the role that high
quality design can play in reducing the occurrence and fear of crime.
The remainder of this response provides detailed comments on the design and
access statement.
The Case for Action
My major concern relates to the complete lack of reference to Community Safety
and Designing out Crime from the Design and Access statement. I wish to see a
much stronger commitment to these vitally important issues in the creation of ‘Safer
25
Places’. Please refer to the guidance contained in PPS1, the CABE publication,
‘Design and Access statements – how to read, write and use them’, and ‘Safer
Places’.
Community Safety
Community safety is vital to the establishment of a successful environment in which
people can live and work. This should be included in the pre-planning and design of
business, retail and housing developments, bearing in mind, and where appropriate
taking advantage of, their location and natural characteristics.
Reducing crime, anti-social behaviour and fear of crime should be a high priority,
with the realisation that low crime and low fear of crime will encourage potential new
residents and businesses to view South Northamptonshire as an area in which they
would want to live, work, invest and play.
Designing out crime
A priority should be to design out crime – all new developments whether residential,
commercial or educational should adopt Secured by Design (SbD) and Safer Car
Park award principles for buildings, external areas and car parks. SbD is a police
initiative to encourage the building industry to adopt crime prevention measures in
the design of developments to assist in reducing the opportunity for crime and the
fear of crime, thus creating a safer and more secure environment.
The preferred approach of the Police towards issues affecting neighbourhood
renewal is to have them addressed in the planning and designing of new
developments and through the masterplanning process to avoid creating future
areas of deprivation at the outset. A key feature of this is the community
development approach whereby the local communities are involved in the design
process and ensuring that there are good community networks and facilities. The
adopted SPG on ‘Planning Out Crime’ highlights spaces that could be used for antisocial behaviour and how these should be designed out of the development. Mike
Scragg and David Lancaster can assist with the detail of the SPG, a guidance
document that South Northamptonshire Council are signatories to, with NCC and
the other districts.
Safer Community Team (SCT)
All areas of Northamptonshire have Safer Community Teams (SCTs) dedicated to
local areas, although few are based within the heart of the community, mainly
accommodated within existing police premises. We are currently seeking multi
agency accommodation within the heart of the new and the existing communities
through Section 106 contributions towards multi use centres, housing a number of
service agencies.
Effective policing relies on sound infrastructure. Policing teams should be locally
based and readily accessible. This does not mean that every development should
have its own police station but rather a local office, equipped with police systems
and support from which staff can operate, thus reducing the need to return to police
stations to complete routine administration.
The development of Norwood Farm and Upton Lodge will require additional police
officers in order to provide an adequate service to the existing and the new local
residents of the area. A Safer Community Team unit comprising 2 Sergeants, 4
Police Constables and 8 Police Community Support Officers, plus support staff will
be required (currently 1 Sergeant, 2 Police Constables and 2 PCSO’s).
26
The Safer Community Team base should ideally be provided in the first phase of
the development. This facility should be part of a multi-use building, with shared
facilities used by other services as well to both reduce the amount of space required
by each service individually and reduce both capital and revenue costs for the
building. The facility would need to be c. 140 square metres including showering
and changing facilities that it is envisaged would be shared with other users of the
building.
In addition to the building, there is a requirement for both an outside store and
securing parking for police vehicles to enable them to be left on site over night.
The Planning Statement and Design and Access Statement
Delivering a Sustainable Community (1.11)
I ask that you consider including an additional Community Safety bullet point,
focusing on the role of the area Crime & Disorder Reduction Partnership, within the
list of what the development will provide.
We wish to work with the planners and developers to ensure the local centres,
neighbourhood centre, extensive areas of public open space and mixed use area
are designed to reduce the likelihood of youths congregating resulting in anti social
behaviour, minor crime and fear of crime. In addition to the primary and secondary
schools we would wish to see youth provision for out of school hours. This should
not just be outdoor provision but all year round indoor provision as well.
Housing
We strongly request Secured by Design full accreditation for both the owner
/occupier and affordable housing elements so that we can ensure a level of security
is delivered by the developers. Alternatively the housing should be built to Code for
Sustainable Homes level 3 including the security elements so that Secured By
Design part 2 accreditation can be awarded. Mike Scragg is available for
discussions at any stage in the process to advise on all aspects of security and
crime prevention.
We welcome the commitment to construct all dwellings to the Eco Homes Excellent
rating, which I believe has been superseded by the Code for Sustainable Homes.
We would expect to see a reference in any Master Planning documentation to a
commitment to build 'all new homes in Norwood Farm to a minimum of the Code for
Sustainable Homes level 3, including the crime prevention elements'. This would
then allow the police to award a part 2 Secured by Design accreditation on all
houses.
Car Parking
I note that car parking will consist of a mixture of on street and courtyard parking.
No mention is made of in-curtilage or garage parking, which are the preferred
methods from a crime prevention point of view. Where courtyards are used the car
parking will need to be in clusters of no more than 10 cars, visible from routinely
inhabited windows (not bedrooms) and if Secured By Design is to be achieved then
the courtyards will need to be gated. Courtyard parking areas give access to the
rear of dwellings and this is not acceptable from a crime prevention point of view.
We would be interested to know what form the ‘discrete security measures’
intended for the parking courts will take.
27
Communal car parking areas at the school and the local centre, and particularly the
park and ride facility, should be designed to achieve Safer Parking standard.
Public Space/ Greenspace/Landscape/ Open space
We have a major concern regarding the location of these facilities. The proposal
places them on the opposite side of the Sandy Lane Relief Road from the
residential areas, and away from any meaningful natural surveillance. This is
contrary to good practice and guidance, and is particularly relevant to the Adventure
Playground area, which is likely to be frequented by younger children. The open
spaces will need careful design to prevent them from becoming havens for under
age drinking, drug use and anti social behaviour including motorcycle nuisance. In
addition, the rear garden security of the houses fronting Sandy Lane and Weedon
Road will be compromised by the formalization of the area as a public open space.
This can be ameliorated by the planting of thorny (defensive) species along the
back fences of the dwellings.
Ongoing long term management and maintenance of the public realm will be
required to ensure the sustainability of any new proposals within Norwood Farm.
Some means of ensuring the revenue funding for this will need to be factored into
any application to cover such issues as soft landscaping maintenance, rubbish
clearance and street cleansing. There will need to be a very robust on going
management and maintenance regime with employed ‘green space’ wardens to
provide a capable guardian. Failure to do so has resulted in other newly developed
areas becoming crime hotspots validating the ‘broken windows theory’ (Kelling and
Wilson 1982).
Footpath and Cycle strategy
Parking facilities, bus, taxi, cycle and pedestrian routes are all key to the success of
this new area. However it is important to guard against too much permeability
within the development.
Pedestrian routes should be clear and direct and reflect the needs of the
neighbourhood. Unnecessary routes should be avoided especially when they
create a low footfall, undermine defensible space, are too long, have little
surveillance and where there is little community ownership of the route. Manual for
Streets (DfT March 2007) states that footpaths should avoid access to the rear of
dwellings, should not be segregated, and should be necessary - leading directly to
where people want to go.
Pedestrians and cyclists should generally be
accommodated on streets rather than on routes segregated from motor traffic.
Segregated footpaths provide anonymity for the legitimate user and burglar alike
and can provide a choice of escape routes for an offender. ‘Crime Free Housing’
Poyner and Webb 2006 concludes ‘avoid networks of separate pedestrian footpaths
to unsupervised areas. It is better to use the street network for most pedestrian
movements’
I am concerned to see reference to pedestrian and cycle routes in the document.
These are contrary to best practise advice detailed above.
Design Codes
We would support the publication of a Norwood Farm site specific design code. The
aim of design coding is to provide clarity as to what constitutes acceptable design
quality and thereby a level of certainty for developers and the local community alike
that can help to facilitate the delivery of good quality new development. The police,
28
through Crime Prevention Design Adviser Mike Scragg, would be able to contribute
much to this process. A recent local example of site specific design codes, including
police community safety provisions, has been produced for Priors Hall, Corby.
Youth Facilities
There needs to be further evidence that their will be appropriate youth provision
within the development. Local youths should be consulted on their requirements.
Failure to consider appropriate youth provision will result in an increase in anti
social behaviour and an increase in the fear of crime by other members of the
community.
Community Cohesion
It is important to recognise the changing ethnic mix of the Northamptonshire
population – particularly Polish, Lithuanian, Rumanian and Hungarian resulting from
international in-migration to the area.
New communities, in our experience, are more likely to be the victims of crime than
the perpetrators. A reference to international in-migration may be considered
appropriate.
Conclusions
The conclusions should have a strong reference to the importance of Community
Safety provision making Norwood Farm a place where people really will want to live,
work invest and play. The Local Strategic Partnership and the Crime & Disorder
Reduction Partnership are very important in raising the profile of the area.
4.32 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE WILDLIFE TRUST: Raised some initial concerns and
queries, which were responded to and dealt with by the applicants. The Wildlife
Trust subsequently confirmed that, having read a letter dated 17/09/07 from the
applicants, all of their issues and concerns had been addressed; and that, therefore,
there were no outstanding points to be dealt with from their point of view.
4.33 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE PRIMARY CARE TRUST: The PCT is keen to see all new
developments consider health as two main strands:
1) Health Services and
2) Healthy Environments
The PCT have reviewed this application (incl. Upton Lodge Farm) and their
recommendations are outlined below:
Population Growth and Health Provision
The health service in Northamptonshire is operating at or above capacity in some
areas. In order to expand this capacity the PCT will require substantially increased
resources for all areas. The financial allocation to the PCT is based on historic
estimates of population and consequently there is unavoidable lag between the
need being generated and the resources being made available to meet it
adequately. Given the rapid population growth occurring within the Local Planning
Authority areas, because of the number of large and smaller residential
developments, the PCT will inevitably experience serious funding gaps and
workforce shortages leading to a growing and unsustainable difficulty in meeting
patient need. The PCT will therefore need to be assisted with the means to meet
this additional need for the region’s NHS services.
29
Section 106 - Estimating the Health Needs of the Proposal
The PCT uses the NHS Healthy Urban Development Unit (HUDU) Model as a basis
for quantifying contributions. By calculating the new population over the phases of
development and the usage of health services and facilities amongst the general
community, the HUDU Model is able to estimate the need of the new population and
the cost of meeting that need. The HUDU Model works out the capital and revenue
finance required to provide the appropriate level of health care needed to service
the new development, before NHS funding cycles catch up with the new population.
The use of the HUDU Model and the assumptions behind it is supported by the
ODPM Circular 5/05 on Planning Obligations (C5/2005), which is the justification for
the provision of health facilities required by an increasing population, via Section106
developer contributions. All the people from the proposed development will require
a range of NHS services. Planning obligations (Section 106) would assist the PCT
to satisfy the need in these areas during the funding-gap period. (Note: The issues
raised will be addressed through a S.106 Agreement and/or WNDC’s ‘standard
charge’, but this will only deal with capital costs and not revenue issues, which will
be an issue for the PCT to take up with their own funding sponsors.)
The Creation of Sustainable Communities
The PCT has reviewed the submitted Health Impact Assessment (HIA). English
Partnerships (now HCA) and Redrow Homes are to be congratulated on providing
an excellent HIA for this development, and this highlights their commitment to
creating sustainable communities. We would wish to see all future HIAs submitted,
to be of an equivalent standard. The PCT had the opportunity to review and
comment on the draft HIA and since the changes suggested have been made, the
PCT does not require any further amendments to be made. However, the HIA
rightfully scopes a number of different disciplines and agencies and therefore the
PCT would require that the HIA be reviewed by all relevant parties. The HIA should
be reviewed by all contributors, as this would enable cross agency ownership (see
key contact list on page 39 and Table 5 and 6). The cross agency partners will need
to discuss how to take the recommendations forward so that these are implemented
on the ground. We are unsure at this stage who should lead on setting up the
steering group suggested in the HIA (WNDC, SNC or the PCT public health
department)? The set up of a group is backed by the PCT as this will help enable
the creation of social cohesion within the new community and facilitate the
implementation of the HIA recommendations on the ground. The PCT would be
pleased to support this development if the above is addressed and the S.106
Obligation incorporates a fair share to mitigate against the impact of the new
development.
4.34 RAMBLERS ASSOCIATION: No response received.
4.35 GOVERNMENT OFFICE EAST MIDLANDS (GOEM): No response received.
4.36 DEFRA EAST MIDLANDS REGION: No response received.
4.37 SPORT ENGLAND: Raise no objection to the proposals, subject to the following
conditions, as well as requirements via a S.106 Agreement, being incorporated into
any planning permission that might be granted:
Section 106:
30
A review of existing indoor and outdoor sports facilities, to establish current supply,
capacity, quality and accessibility issues; to be undertaken within six months of any
permission being granted. The results of the survey to be used to identify what new
or improved facilities are required to meet the needs of the new development, and
create a formula by which developer contributions towards providing appropriate
indoor and outdoor sports facilities would be made.
Conditions:
1. Details of phasing of development with regard to provision of sports facilities to
be submitted and approved before commencement of development.
2. A detailed assessment of ground conditions affecting the land proposed for public
/ school playing fields (including drainage / topography) to identify constraints that
could affect playing field quality, and how any such constraints would be addressed,
to be submitted and approved before commencement of development.
3. Before commencement of development, details of the construction, design and
layout of all playing fields/facilities (indoor and outdoor) to be submitted, approved
and then implemented, also to take account of the assessments submitted pursuant
to Conditions 1 and 2, above.
4. A management and maintenance scheme for the playing fields and sports
facilities to be submitted approved and implemented, prior to commencement of any
use of these facilities.
4.38 THIRD PARTIES: The application has been advertised through a press release, by
press notices, site notices as well as extensive notification of adjoining and nearby
occupiers by letter. The proposed development was also subject to pre-application
community consultation, through local workshops held by the applicants. Copies of
the application have been available at WNDC Offices, NBC Offices, SNC Offices,
Duston Library and on-line.
Some 30 letters have been received from adjoining or nearby residents, raising
numerous issues which are summarized below:
- Insufficient green space within proposed development.
- Insufficient detail regarding the design of the Weedon Road corridor.
- Concerns regarding deliverability of the community facilities.
- A more up to date framework for coherent development of the South West District
of Northampton is needed.
- There are better (and allocated) sites within the NIA, more suited to development.
- An inaccurate assessment of increased traffic generation and road capacity has
been submitted. This will exacerbate the situation on already-congested roads.
- Support the creation of a Country Park, but its location is wrong, away from the
centre of the development and cut-off from the housing by the very busy SLRR. It
could become little used and there would then be pressure for further development
31
on this land.
- Support the realignment of Sandy Lane.
- Road safety on surrounding roads would be made worse by the increased traffic
volumes generated by this and other development in the area.
- The pleasant approach to Northampton from Jct 16 of the M1 would be spoiled by
building on this land. ‘Brownfield’ sites in the town should be regenerated first.
- No ‘need’ for more housing in this area, which would simply create an additional
‘commuter-belt’ of people living in Northampton and out-commuting for work.
- ‘Park & Ride’ location is misguided, and is not likely to be much used, as
Northampton offers very little in the way of shopping attractions.
- Insufficient dedicated provision for cycling is proposed.
- No provision for secondary school accommodation and existing schools are
already over-subscribed.
- The development would encroach onto the ‘green-belt’ around Northampton, and
outlying villages such as Kislingbury and Harpole will become part of the town and
lose their individual identities.
- Would be detrimental to wildlife and add to species decline.
- Too much development already going on in the area, and this proposal would be
the ‘last straw’.
- Building on this site will remove views into and out of the surrounding area (eg
views of The White House listed building could be obstructed).
- Noise that will be generated by building works and additional traffic.
- Inadequate provision for infrastructure such as sewage treatment, flood defence,
medical services, local shopping and transport, is proposed.
- Development would result in the loss of important green fields and countryside,
when it would be better to build on ‘brownfield’ sites within the town first.
- Insufficient car parking proposed and the main routes in and around the site are
already heading towards ‘gridlock’.
- ‘Park & Ride’ facility would create an unnecessary further traffic burden on roads.
- ‘Park & Ride’ should make provision for station/terminal for a future ‘Rapid Transit
System’.
- Important to retain as many hedgerows and bridleways in any new development,
as possible.
- Loss of green fields not compensated for by insufficient provision of open space in
new developments, including this proposal.
32
4.39 DUSTON ACTION GROUP (DAG)/NORTHANTS RESIDENTS’ ALLIANCE:
Requested that additional independent reports be carried out, but fundamentally
request that the application(s) be refused on the basis that the extent of the ground
instability is far greater than reported by the applicant. Following a response to this
letter by the applicant, a further letter was received from DAG dated 12th November
2008. Fundamentally DAG still questions the accuracy of the stability report and the
provenance of the evidence produced. A combined site visit is requested to clarify
arguments over pictures and maps contained within the report.
Reconsultation (March 2010): Respond as follows (Note: NRA/DAG have asked
that references to ‘WNDC’ in these comments, should also be read as references to
‘SNC’):
Northants Residents Alliance are acting on behalf of its members and also we are
authorised to represent the Duston Action Group Limited in this matter.
We raise the following list of objections to this planning re-consultation. A number of
the objections are technical and may require further detailed investigation by your
officers to evaluate their importance and the likely effect that some of the issues will
have on matters of public safety. The leaders of NRA are always prepared to
engage and assist with such investigations wherever possible. We have access to
properly independent qualified engineers and are willing to share their findings with
WNDC.
2. Re-consultation letter doesn't include all the revised subjects that are
covered by new documentation from the applicant.
WNDC's letter (undated and received by NRA as late as 2nd March 2010) suggests
that the revision of documentation submitted by the applicant is confined to
‘Transport Assessment and Framework Travel Plan’ documents. However, looking
at the documents listed on WNDC web site, we notice that revised documents have
also been submitted in respect of a ‘REVISED FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT’. It is
our assertion that members of the public and consultees have been misinformed
about the extent of the revision to the original application and therefore the
consultation exercise has not been properly conducted. In addition, we advised
WNDC yesterday (via email) that the 'Submit Comments' pages of the WNDC
planning website do not allow submission of comments at all in their present state –
because of a design error. Northants Residents Alliance are of the opinion that
members of the public can expect at the very least, accuracy and efficiency from
Planning Officers and recommend that, to avoid a future legal objection on this
point, the consultation should be re-run and the application hearing postponed
accordingly.
3. Solifluction. Misleading figures in Halcrow's original submission have not
been amended.
Inaccurate Slope Measurement
In advance of the original application hearing in December 2008, Duston Action
Group, advised that they had employed a surveyor to check the angle of slopes at
Upton Lodge farm and discovered that the various Halcrow surveys had
understated the angle of several slopes which were, by DAG's findings, at 7-8
degrees. Halcrow had earlier submitted slope surveys for this application as well as
using the application for the unfortunate Sandy Lane Relief Road that contradicted
each other, but which gave the impression that nearly all of the site's slopes were
33
only at 6 degrees. (Experts agree that the critical angle where Solifluction becomes
a real threat is 7 degrees). During the application hearing, Roger Kingston,
representing DAG, raised this matter and the meeting was told by the Halcrow
representative that they knew this was probably true and that Developers would just
‘have to be careful’ when planning construction. We note with disdain that this
admitted inaccuracy was not minuted and has not been rectified in the Applicant's
submissions. NRA take the position that since the currently available documents are
misleading to the Planning committee, either by omission or intent, a valid and
informed decision about the safety of the slopes for construction cannot be arrived
at. The decision to award planning permission when these inaccuracies have been
brought to the attention of WNDC would be ‘Unreasonable’.
4. Sustainable Urban Drainage Designs and Their impact on Land Instability.
Whereas Halcrow have now identified the extent to which the conditions for
Solifluction exist across two-thirds of the proposed site, there is an omission in the
Applicant's submissions regarding the deleterious effect of ground water being
retained on the site and infiltrated into the ground. Indeed, it would appear that
much of the drainage strategy for this site is based upon improved water retention
and permeability of the site.
It will be seen from the Applicant's reports on Solifluction, the effect of groundwater;
its presence, its quantity and pressure is likely to increase the possibility of land
instability in ground that is susceptible to Solifluction. i.e. the Upton Lodge site. The
NRA's qualified engineer has commented that the use of ditches to contain water on
hillsides that are too steep for pools or lagoons, will cause water to permeate into
the soil in a more concentrated manner, thus increasing the possibility of landslip
conditions in thaw/freeze/thaw conditions. In his experience, landslip was caused in
this way by the use of such water retention techniques at Cherry Orchard Farm,
Hardingstone and, even though the engineers anticipated this problem by lining the
ditch with impermeable material, in practice the water got behind the liner and
caused the slope to collapse.
The imperative with sloping sites comprising Northamptonshire Sands and Whitby
Mud (Lias Clay) is to reduce ground water to a minimum to improve stability. The
concept of SUDS contradicts this requirement. Assumptions that SUDS water
retention measures will not affect the water content of the underlying soil are proven
to be unsustainable in practice.
5. Information provided by local historians has not been updated in the
Applicant's submission.
During the original planning application hearing, a local and well-respected Historian
made strong representations to the Committee regarding the historical importance
of the proposed site. Whereas the Committee took on board the news about the
important status of the Upton Lodge farm buildings – a point which had escaped the
Environment Agency's report. Following the meeting, we would expect to have seen
a revised submission showing the listed status of the Upton Lodge Shire Horse Stud
Farm buildings. However, the original document has not been revised, therefore
making this item invalid for submission.
6. Revised Transport Assessment
Much of the report is obfuscated by reference to computer models, assuming that
the data upon which their models are based are accurate. However, it seems from
34
some of the resulting calculations that the number of vehicle movements expected
per day per household has been significantly reduced from the manual models used
prior to computerisation. Whereas we appreciate that computer models are capable
of more sophisticated modelling of the likely impact of increased traffic under many
different scenarios, we still question why the expected number of vehicle
movements per dwelling appears to have been reduced from a familiar 7 per day
(used by Northamptonshire County Council prior to computer modelling) to less
than 4 per day. Especially at a time when Northamptonshire is reported in the press
as having the distinction of being the County with the fastest growing number of car
users in the country.
We prefer to use a common-sense approach to calculating the number of car
journeys that are likely to be generated. For example, the majority of homes these
days possess two cars. Some, with teenage children can have up to four cars. So,
the modest case with one partner at work and one school age child, we can expect
that one partner will drive to school and then to home in the morning. The same
partner may drive to school again in the afternoon and return home once more = 4
journeys. The other partner may simply drive to work in the morning and return
home by evening = 2 journeys. Notwithstanding deviations that would exceed this
movement count such as: Children who can drive, people operating vans and cars
from home as part of their business, it would seem that 6 vehicle movements per
household per day would be a reasonable supposition upon which to base traffic
movement calculations. Any less would be ‘unreasonable’. Multiply the number of
houses planned for this site by an average number of 6 vehicle movements per day
per household and this results in 10,200 total vehicle movements per day. Since
there is no provision for a Secondary school on this site and since the level of onsite employment to be provided is very small, it is unlikely that this figure can be
easily reduced by computer modelling.
A point is made in the Transport Assessment about the much vaunted sustainable
transport system reducing the need for personal transport by the achievement of a
significant modal shift to other means of transport. The problem with this theory is it
cannot be taken as fact when considered in relation to this application, because
there is no evidence of successful modal shift anywhere in the United Kingdom
achieving more than a 5% difference. Awarding planning approval on the figures
provided would be both ‘unreasonable’ and irresponsible.
7. Revised Transport Assessment and WNDC Tariff Funding for Infrastructure
We are advised in the revised assessment that funding for the enormous amount of
additional infrastructure that will be required to support the increase in traffic from
this large site will be by WNDC tariff. Northampton Residents and local politicians
alike have made their feelings quite clear on this point through various protest
meetings and a public march in Northampton last year. The statement they have
collectively and firmly made is ‘No expansion without Infrastructure first’. Of course,
this applies to the lack of up-front funding for many of the essentials of supporting
new developments such as secondary schools, medical centres, sewage, drainage
and flood management, etc. But it also includes proper road networks that are
strategically planned and in place just before new housing is occupied. Clearly the
WNDC Tariff in this case does not fulfil the essential function required of any proper
town planning, which is the provision of a strategic road network. We fail to be
convinced that so-called 'affordable housing' loaded with an unaffordable £20,000
premium per house can in any way provide the funding for a strategic road network.
Mysteriously, we are not supplied with any details in this revised application of what
would be involved in such a network improvement. We can be certain, however,
35
that with or without a Local Planned strategy, the roads will not be built until long
after the houses are occupied. Therefore, unlike the way that Northampton
Development Corporation operated during the extension of the town to the East in
the 70's/80's where there was a natural understanding that roads were essential
before houses could be built, this application seems to be 'fudging' around the issue
that there is no funding for proper infrastructure before the housing is occupied.
Given the heightened state of public feeling and the clarity of the wishes of the
public, we feel that a decision to approve this retrospective funding of a piecemeal
approach to road network provision will cause a general outcry and will also be
considered as ‘Unreasonable’. Evidence that may be used to support this belief is
the failure of the ‘West Northampton Orbital Bypass’ that was proposed 5 years ago
by WNDC, but has merely ended up being the ‘Road to Nowhere’ and has
destroyed much agricultural land, without any improvement in traffic flows. Our
members and the wider public have every reason to believe that the WNDC Tariff
funding approach is inadequate as a protection for their current standard of living at
would ‘unreasonable’ for the Planning Committee to award this application under
this proposed arrangement.
4.40 NENE FLOOD PREVENTION ALLIANCE: No comments received.
5.
POLICY
5.1
Following revocation of Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) by the Secretary of State
in July 2010, the Development Plan consists of the ‘saved’ policies in the South
Northamptonshire Local Plan (SNLP) and any adopted Supplementary Planning
Guidance/Documents.
5.2
South Northamptonshire Local Plan – The following ‘saved’ policies are relevant:
G2 – General
G3 – General
H6 – Restraint Villages and Open Countryside
H7 – Affordable Housing
EV1 – Design
EV2 – Development in the Open Countryside
EV7 – Special Landscape Areas
EV8 – Important Local Gaps
EV21 – Hedgerows, Ponds and Other Landscape Features
EV29 – Landscape Proposals
RC10 – Amenity and Children’s Play Areas
RC14 – Noisy Sports in Special Landscape Areas
IMP1 – Planning Obligations
Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents:
The following are relevant to this application:
SNC Five-Year Housing Land Supply Assessment (June 2010)
SNC Affordable Housing SPG (December 2003)
SNC Developer Contributions SPG (August 2001)
SNC / DDC Energy and Development SPD (March 2007)
NCC Local Transport Plan (2006)
NCC Planning Out Crime (2005)
NCC Parking SPG (March 2003)
36
NCC Planning Obligations and LEA Schools Provision (2003)
NCC Draft Developer Contributions Document (2010)
5.3
National Policy – Relevant Planning Policy Statements and Guidance include:
PPS1 - Sustainable Development & Climate Change
PPS3 – Housing
PPS4 – Economic Growth
PPS5 – Planning for the Historic Environment
PPS6 – Planning and Town Centres
PPS7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas
PPS9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation
PPS10 – Planning for Sustainable Waste Management
PPS 11 – Regional Spatial Strategies
PPS12 – Local Spatial Planning
PPG13 – Transport
PPG14 – Development on Unstable Land
PPG17 – Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation
PPS22 – Renewable Energy
PPS23 – Planning and Pollution Control
PPG24 – Planning and Noise
PPS25 – Development and Flood Risk
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
Having regard to the development plan for the area and the location, scale, nature
and type of application and representations received to the consultation exercise,
the following are considered to be the principal matters for consideration:
-
The principle of development and the development plan and the need for further
residential development.
Sequential test under PPS3.
Design, visual impact and relationship to the surrounding area.
Transport – including traffic capacity issues.
Infrastructure provision (Sandy Lane Relief Road - SLRR).
Sustainability issues.
Environmental impacts including noise, air quality and light pollution.
Flood-risk and drainage.
Land stability issues.
Housing, including ‘affordable’ housing.
Employment.
Local Centre.
Education.
Country Park & Open Space – including potential loss of open countryside.
Phasing of development.
Developer Contributions - Section 106 Legal Agreement - Heads of Terms
-
The principle of development
6.2
The main policy considerations, particularly in relation to the issue of Housing land
supply, are well-rehearsed and considered at Para. 4.25, above (to which Members
are referred), and it is not intended to repeat these here.
37
6.3
In essence, if the Norwood Farm application were to be approved then this would
make a significant contribution to this Council’s housing land requirement either now
(if the Planning Inspectorate support the Council’s case), or in the future once a
revised locally based housing figure is derived and agreed.
6.4
In policy terms the Norwood Farm application is considered to be in a sustainable
location as it forms part of, and would complement, a larger development proposal
within Northampton Borough. It would also provide for a strong and potentially
more-permanent ‘green wedge’ in the form of a country park. It would have less of
an impact on existing communities than some of those developments currently
being considered in some South Northants villages.
Sequential test
6.5
Consideration was given to this application in respect of whether the site is still a
sustainable location to bring forward such a development, against current planning
guidance. The site is well located to transport links, employment opportunities,
public amenities and retail and would be well served by public transport into
Northampton. In the absence of a core strategy for long term growth there are few
alternative, available sites that benefit from support, to the level that this site does.
Where such sites do exist (eg Dallington Grange, in Northampton), they may be
considered to be no more sequentially preferable to that at Norwood Farm/Upton
Lodge, at the current time. Clearly, in respect of other areas within South Northants
(eg to the south of the district boundary and adjoining Northampton Borough),
Norwood Farm may be seen as ‘sequentially preferable’ in meeting housing land
supply and development needs.
Design, visual impact and relationship to surrounding area
6.6
The application is in outline form and therefore little detailed information regarding
the public realm and design is required to be included at this stage. It is, however,
essential that this development contributes towards a high quality design throughout
the wider area. It is anticipated that there will be design codes applied to the site,
and these would need to be agreed before any reserved matters applications are
submitted. The codes will relate to both residential and non-residential areas.
Particular regard will need to be given to principal road frontages such as Weedon
Road and the SLRR, as well as any areas of heritage sensitivity. The existing
Masterplan and development principles outlined in the application documents,
demonstrate an awareness of the design and development opportunities provided
by the site.
6.7
With regard to density of development, higher densities are proposed:
•
•
•
6.8
along the spine road within the site, to take advantage of the public transport
corridor
along the SLRR, to help provide a firm and definitive boundary to Northampton
on the lower slopes, where urban form will have less impact on long distance
views
In other locations, and in particular on the higher slopes, densities will be lower.
This, in turn, reduces the impact the new development will have on the existing
buildings adjacent to site parcel ‘A’. Views into, out of and around the site are all
important, with views into the site perhaps being of most significance. Visual
connections and sight lines to St. Crispin’s clock tower and the White House former
nurses’ home are expressed in the Masterplan. Landmarks, which might include
38
distinctive buildings, building features or public art, will assist in providing reference
points and a hierarchy of place throughout the proposed development. These will
need to be carefully considered with regard to the impact on existing views into the
site, particularly as and when any reserved matters applications come forward.
6.9
With regard to scale and massing of development, a maximum building height of
four-storeys is proposed. However, most development will be two or three-storey.
Heights are likely to be lowest on parcels A, F and G where the development is
adjacent to existing homes at Berrywood Fields and St. Crispin (within
Northampton). The consequent impact upon those existing properties, some of
which may suffer a loss of view will accordingly be determined by normal planning
criteria applied at the reserved matters and design codes stage. There is nothing
within the application documentation to suggest that the scale and massing of the
development on these upper slopes will be incompatible with or unacceptably
harmful to the amenities of neighbouring properties.
6.10 With regard to potential impacts on existing housing within South Northants, the
only residents potentially directly affected, are those living at South View/Sandy
Lane, immediately adjoining the south-western corner of the application site.
However, as these properties all back onto the site, and as the proposed country
park would adjoin them, they are unlikely to suffer any unacceptable loss of
amenity.
6.11 Buildings up to four-storeys are most likely to be located close to the SLRR, where
there is an intention to create a pronounced edge to the development, and where
there is no other built development nearby. This would have a similar appearance to
Upton (Phase 1) in Northampton, in terms of views from the south. Buildings up to
four-storeys may also be provided along the spine road and adjacent to the local
centre, consistent with the potential areas of higher density. Building heights, scale
and massing will require careful consideration where the site borders the proposed
country park / open countryside, and the St Crispin Conservation Area (within
Northampton).
6.12 Any design codes will also need to include details of principles adopted for energy
efficiency (as outlined in PPS 22 – renewable energy), although requirements for
building to Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes as a minimum, and a
minimum level of landscaping (including details of future maintenance) would apply.
There are requirements too for seeking 10% of on site energy use to be from
renewable sources. The design codes should further take a holistic view of the
various development parcels, to ensure that adjoining parcels compliment each
other and maximise the opportunities of the proposed development. A Section 106
Legal Agreement would require that reserved matters applications fulfil all the
design principles identified in the codes. The application nevertheless demonstrates
that the development proposed is capable of delivering an appropriate form and
quality of built development, consistent with national and local planning policy
aspirations. From the information provided, there are considered to be no reasons
why the development, if permitted, should not achieve a good sense of place and a
quality environment that people would want to live and work in.
Transport (including traffic capacity)
6.13 The street patterns and footpaths that characterise the masterplan should
encourage walking and cycling throughout the community. The walking routes will
directly link into the wider local footpath and bridleway network. The spine road
intended to run through the centre of the development would form a logical route for
39
local bus services. There is, however, limited detail on the frequency of bus services
at this stage, and whether local bus operators have agreed that it is likely that the
service will be sustainable in the longer-term and provide a commercially attractive
route. This will need to be further addressed through any Section 106 Agreement
via a detailed travel plan that sets out clear targets and addresses any failure to
achieve a modal shift. SNC and WNDC Officers are working with the Highways
Agency and the County Council to further-develop an effective green travel strategy,
as part of the strategic planning of the wider area. This may, in turn, require further
financial measures to be put in place over a number of years. This will be part of the
S.106 process, which will seek to pool some contributions and then, in turn, monies
can be available to address bus service frequency issues.
6.14 Park & Ride: (Note: This does not form part of the application being considered
here, but the information is provided for completeness.) A site of approximately 4.8
hectares is proposed to accommodate up to 1,000 cars. This is to be located to the
west of the proposed SLRR with an access directly off Weedon Road (intended to
lessen traffic movement through the proposed controlled junction at Weedon
Road/SLRR/CVLR). This prominent location will require very careful treatment to
ensure that it does not undermine the appearance of the proposed employment site
opposite. Careful consideration will need to be given to boundary treatment with the
Weedon Road and other neighbouring sites (eg the residential properties that
adjoin), on what is an important approach into Northampton, to screen any
appearance of a ‘sea of parked cars’. As yet, NCC has not confirmed the required
phasing of the facility, which is provided for in the strategic plan for the Northampton
SW District. The Section 106 Agreement would therefore need to ensure that the
land is given to WNDC at an appropriate trigger point.
6.15 Access to the park and ride facility will also be available from the east-west spine
road and SLRR. A bus lane is proposed for the eastbound carriageway of Weedon
Road, to encourage use of the park and ride facility. Car parking levels throughout
the development are proposed to be consistent with adopted guidelines and
provided in a variety of ways depending on what is most appropriate for a particular
use in the location proposed. The park and ride site could provide opportunities for
shared parking facilities within the employment area and, to a lesser extent, the
local centre, which would all be in close proximity.
6.16 Negotiations to finalise and fully-resolve outstanding transport and transport-related
issues are ongoing with both the Highways Agency and NCC as Highway Authority,
as part of a committed programme of works to examine and mitigate wider strategic
impacts from this and other development proposals. These discussions have moved
forward in a positive way and have focussed on managing impacts of traffic on the
wider traffic network, alongside a strategy for modal shift to public transport and
more sustainable modes of travel. Large scale off-site highway infrastructure
provision will not be required solely as a consequence of this specific development.
6.17 The Highways Agency has previously reviewed the traffic assessment for the SLRR
on the trunk road network at the M1 junctions 15a and 16. It had been concluded
that the proposed road should not have a significant impact in terms of
reassignment of flows on these junctions. The Highways Agency and County
Council had no objections to that proposal and accordingly it is considered that the
principle accesses into the site via the SLRR (and the St Crispins site access on
Weedon Road) are appropriate.
6.18 A further response was received on 16th August 2010, regarding the Highways
Agency’s stance in respect of highway and transport issues that they consider still
40
need to be fully-resolved (refer Para. 4.10, Reconsultation - March 2010, above).
On the basis of this more-favourable response, highway and transport issues are
no-longer considered an obstacle to being able to recommend approval of the
application, but any such recommendation should include a requirement that the
HA’s TR110 Holding Direction would first have to be lifted, before any permission
could be issued.
Infrastructure provision (Sandy Lane Relief Road)
6.19 The proposed Sandy Lane Relief Road (SLRR) forms part of the site access to
service the proposed development (incl. the rest of the proposed Upton Lodge
development, adjacent). The SLRR is, thus, important in enabling full development
of the Upton Lodge area. The approved SLRR forms part of the Northampton
western route linking with the Cross Valley Link Road (CVLR) through Upton Park
and Pineham, to the south, and the proposed northern link road - Sandy Lane
Improvement North (SLIN).
6.20 The completion of the northern section of the SLRR currently has some uncertainty
attached, due to land ownership matters (ie Norwood Farm). The applicants have
stated that the landowner is not prepared to release the land needed for completion
of the SLRR, until such time as planning permission for the development of
Norwood Farm has been granted. Alternatively, completion of the road, which has
planning permission, could be secured through other statutory processes, if
required. Control of the phasing of development, to ensure that the northern link is
completed may however still be required by the County Council.
6.21 It is considered through the Northampton Multi-Modal Model (approved by NCC for
use in traffic modelling), that the proposed development of the wider South West
District cannot be achieved without the SLRR, because the existing infrastructure
will be unable to accommodate the likely traffic levels. As previously stated, there
may be a delivery problem in that the landowner would apparently be unwilling to
release land for the northern part of the SLRR (i.e. crossing the Norwood Farm site,
within South Northants), should planning permission for the current application not
be granted by SNC. In that event, this could result in a requirement for the use of
CPO powers (in regard to Norwood Farm section of SLRR), but this, in turn, might
result in significant delays in the delivery of the wider development and a key
section of the West Northampton orbital route. However, the adjoining application
which WNDC have already resolved to approve, could still be built out, as it is not
dependent on the northern section of the SLRR being constructed first.
6.22 The proposed SLRR (which has planning permission) would be approximately 1.1
miles (1.7km) in length and link Berrywood Road and Weedon Road (A45). The
road will be a 7.3m width single-carriageway, but with the potential for dualling in
the future. The SLRR is also intended to form the western edge of the developed
area of the application site, with the developed area being to the east of the new
road, and the proposed country park (and park & ride facility) located to the west.
The delivery of the SLRR is therefore a major concern as it affects the potential
timing of delivery of other development. There will be a need to control the phasing
of development to restrict the amount of development that could be built until the
SLRR is built to the northern boundary of the application site. It should also be
noted that agreed developer funding of the SLRR, is dependent on a resolution to
grant planning permission for the development of Norwood Farm. This would be
secured via a S.106 Obligation.
41
Sustainability
6.23 It is intended by the applicants that all homes will be built to Code for Sustainable
Homes Level 3, as a minimum, in line with the applicants’ current national
development standards. Flood attenuation will be provided on site through the use
of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS), primarily consisting of swales,
wet/dry areas, soakaways and balancing ponds. These will occupy large areas of
open space and, like the Upton Phase 1 development, nearby, are likely to help by
bringing forward more green space and contributing towards biodiversity within the
development.
6.24 A requirement for at least 10% of the development’s energy needs to be provided
from sustainable sources, should form part of a S.106 Obligation.
Environmental impacts (including noise, air quality & light pollution)
6.25 The Environmental Statement assesses four potential scenarios for development.
The options to be assessed are ‘Do minimum’ and three options of ‘Do something’.
These options consider the impact of the proposed Upton Lodge (incl Norwood
Farm) development and other proposed development on the application site and
surrounding areas. The scenarios are summarised as follows:
-
Option 1 – ‘Do Minimum’ - Assumes that the proposed development is not provided
and the existing Sandy Lane is retained at present.
-
Option 2 – ‘Do Something 1’ - Proposed Upton Lodge development (incl Norwood
Farm) is provided with access from the existing Sandy Lane.
-
Option 3 – ‘Do Something 2’ - Proposed Upton Lodge development is provided, and
Sandy Lane Relief Road is assumed deliverable.
-
Option 4 – ‘Do Something 3’ – SLRR provided as Option 3, together with Cross
Valley Link Road, Sandy Lane Improvement North and Dallington Grange
Development (within Northampton).
6.26 The submitted Environmental Statement has been independently assessed and
reviewed by Entec, for SNC & WNDC. As a result of this review, and following
further discussions with the applicants, recommendations were made in respect of
the following areas: socio-economic effects, biodiversity, landscape and visual,
ground conditions and contamination, water resources, noise and vibration, air
quality, archaeology and cultural heritage and transport, movement and access, all
as follows:
6.27 Socio-economic effects: It is recommended that planning conditions and/or S.106
obligations are put in place to require the implementation of:
-
a medical facility to be included in the detailed design of the proposed development
as this will avoid significant effects on the new residents and users of existing local
medical facilities. (Note: This does not form part of the application being considered
here, but would form part of the adjoining and associated development.)
-
The detailed design of the development to provide affordable housing in accordance
with the needs set out in local authority local housing need studies.
6.28 Biodiversity: It is recommended that planning conditions and/or S.106 obligations
42
are put in place to require the implementation of a number of elements of the
schemes design and construction management measures, as outlined in the ES.
Construction management measures should be incorporated into a Construction
Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), which should be approved by SNC (&
WNDC) prior to any development commencing.
6.29 Landscape and visual: It is recommended that conditions and/or S.106 obligations
are put in place to require the implementation of the following measures:
-
The planting proposals outlined as part of the scheme, as the mitigation of potential
landscape and visual effects is dependent on planting and landscaping proposals
being implemented.
-
Planning conditions and/or obligations should also be used to implement an
appropriate phasing plan. It is important that consideration be given to implementing
elements of the landscape planting scheme from the very first phase of
construction, particularly planting which will screen some views of the new
development from existing receptors (eg as those along Berrywood Drive).
-
The appropriate long term management and maintenance of landscape planting will
be essential to ensure mitigation of the impact of the scheme. Therefore, it is
recommended that a long-term planting management plan be produced, and if
possible linked with the habitat management plan. This together with the funding of
the long-term maintenance of the planting should also be ensured through planning
obligations.
-
In addition to the above recommendations, consultation responses received have
recommended that a planning condition is developed to ensure that a lighting
scheme is submitted and approved by WNDC for the park and ride facility and that
the scheme should also be 'tested' after installation to ensure light spillage is kept to
the minimum. In particular, this would be necessary to protect the amenity of
residents of South View/Sandy Lane.
6.30 Ground conditions and contamination: It is recommended that planning
conditions and/or obligations be put in place to require the implementation of a
Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which should incorporate
the mitigation measures outlined in the ES (see Section 8.5 of the ES). The CEMP
should be approved by SNC (& WNDC) prior to any development commencing.
6.31 Water resources: It is recommended that planning conditions and/or obligations
are put in place to require implementation of the following:
Ensure a CEMP, which incorporates the mitigation measures in relation to water set
out in Section 9.5 of the ES, is implemented. Any measures set out in the CEMP
should comply with the Environment Agency’s Pollution Prevention Guidelines as
well as their requirements for discharge consent procedures. Furthermore, the
CEMP should include additional information on measures to prevent and minimize
the mobilization of arsenic, which is naturally present within local soils. A detailed
drainage strategy, based on the Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SUDS) to be
submitted as part of the application.
6.32 Noise and vibration: It is recommended that planning conditions and/or obligations
be put in place to require the implementation of the following measures:
-
A CEMP, which incorporates the measures set out in Sections 10.5.1 and 10.5.2 of
the ES. The measures set-out in the CEMP should ensure that no working takes
43
place during night-time hours and that there is a requirement for vibration
monitoring and mitigation, should there be any need for piling activities to take place
within 40m of residential properties.
-
An appropriate scheme of mitigation for new residential properties and community
and school buildings within the development. The mitigation scheme should set out
the level of attenuation to be provided by glazing in order to achieve appropriate
internal night-time and day-time noise levels. It should also consider appropriate
measures to protect external areas from undue noise.
-
Noise limits for fixed building plant within the employment area (as specified in
Table 10.16 in the ES), in order to avoid noise effects. If such plant is to be
operational during night-time hours, appropriate limits should be set relating to
night-time noise levels. (Note: This relates to the adjoining site, and does not form
part of the current application.)
-
Restrictions on the operating hours of employment development. This will aim to
ensure that local residents are not disturbed by the operation of any employment
development during night-time hours. (Note: This relates to the adjoining site, and
does not form part of the current application.)
6.33 Air quality: It is recommended that planning conditions and/or obligations be put in
place to require the implementation of a dust management plan during construction
phases. This should be incorporated into the Construction Environmental
Management Plan (CEMP).
6.34 Archaeology and cultural heritage: It is recommended that planning conditions
and/or obligations are put in place to require the implementation of the following
measures:
(i) The proposed and agreed archaeological evaluation;
(ii) a watching brief during construction work, where appropriate. Such measures
should be incorporated into the CEMP, which should also outline measures
regarding the excavation and recording of any archaeological remains, should any
be found during the watching brief.
6.35 Transport, movement and access: That planning conditions and/or obligations
are put in place to require the implementation of the following measures:
-
Mitigation measures outlined in Section 13.5 of the ES in relation to increased traffic
flows and pedestrian and cycle access.
-
A construction traffic management plan, which should be incorporated into the
CEMP.
6.36 A number of documents, which form part of the planning application, have been
submitted since the Environmental Statement (ES) was first produced. These
reports include further Ground Investigation and Land Stability reports. However it is
not considered that these reports raise any additional or new material
considerations that could result in any likely significant environmental effects that
have not previously been assessed in the ES. Consequently it is considered that the
ES satisfactorily covers all of the potential significant environmental effects and
subsequent mitigation measures. The assessment of the Environmental Statement
has been undertaken with full support of independent professional expertise. This
44
has concluded that to mitigate the impacts identified provisions will need to be made
in the Section 106 Agreement, and/or in the final planning conditions to be attached
to any permission granted, in order to secure the necessary and relevant mitigation
measures as explained above, and to secure the parameters of development
assessed in the ES.
Flood risk and drainage
6.37 Discussions on these matters between the Applicants, SNC, WNDC, Environment
Agency and Anglian Water have recently been successfully completed. From the
discussions the EA had been raising issues surrounding strategic water
infrastructure management rather than site specific matters relating to the form and
layout of the development. The principle issue raised related to not all of the site
being ‘allocated’ in the local plan, and programmed improvements to capacity within
the sewage system. The applicants have also provided a specific ‘Norwood Farm
Surface Water Drainage Strategy Assessment’ (May 2009), and the EA have
recently confirmed that they have withdrawn their objections to the proposed
development, subject to requested conditions being attached to any permission
granted.
6.38 The Environment Agency have indicated that they are satisfied with the updated
Flood Risk Assessment details submitted (March 2008). None of the site falls within
the River Nene Flood plain. In response to the EA’s concerns with regard to a
potential increase in proposed dwellings over the Local Plan allocation, the
applicants have advised that HCA developments are required to reach Level 4 of
the Code for Sustainable Homes, with regards to water consumption. This would
lead to a reduction in water consumption and sewerage, when compared with the
levels that were originally envisaged for a lower number of dwellings.
Land stability
6.39 A Geo-Technical Report originally accompanied the application when it was
submitted, but in view of the importance of the issues raised by SNC, WNDC and
third parties with regard to slope stability, further Site Stability Assessments have
been undertaken in accordance with the guidance in PPG 14 (and its appropriate
companion guide). These include the sinking of trial boreholes and excavation of
pits across parts of the site. Further site stability reports have been submitted during
the application process and have been subject to limited consultation with the
concerned parties. These reports arrived at the conclusions set out below.
6.40 The Upton Lodge site (incl. Norwood Farm) has been investigated by means of a
Desk Study Interpretation, a Geomorphological Walkover Survey and a Ground
Investigation. A stability analysis was undertaken, based on all relevant site
information that has been derived from the above survey work. The results of this
analysis indicate that certain slopes within the site will require remedial measures in
order to create sufficiently stable slopes for the proposed development. Further, the
development areas in the original Masterplan have been slightly adjusted to reflect
the findings of the studies and to remove small parts of the site from future
development. The reports conclude that in relation to the proposed development a
number of more specific measures should be undertaken, to include the following:
6.41 The design of the estate road that crosses the Red Zone (Figure 4 in the Report)
incorporates drainage measures to control groundwater, in order to ensure the
slope remains stable, or a revised alignment is required. The road level and
alignment should be designed to avoid undercutting of the 7-degree slope, unless
45
compensatory retaining measures are provided. Where slopes are typically less
than 5.5 degrees (i.e. Green Zone, on Figure 4 of the Report) the existing natural
factor of safety for stability should be adequate (subject to further confirmation and
mitigation of any adverse affects of the development) and housing development
should be possible. Where development loads are exceptional (e.g. more than a 3storey development) piled foundations should be provided.
6.42 Following the outline planning process, detailed ground investigations should be
undertaken in the low to medium risk areas (Orange Zone; shown on Figure 4 in the
Report), unless these are to be excluded from the development areas, to confirm
where and what remedial works are required (if any). Groundwater monitoring of
existing boreholes should continue on a monthly basis for at least a full cycle of
seasons.
6.43 Any development on the site close to the Red Zones or Orange Zones should not
use soakaways as these could locally cause an unacceptable rise in groundwater
levels. Piled foundations may be required in some areas within the Orange and Red
Zones, in order to transmit loads to deeper strata.
6.44 Ponds/water attenuation features should be avoided within the Orange and Red
Zones of the development site. It is understood that the water attenuation ponds for
the site are to be located west of the proposed SLRR route (close to the existing
brook/water channel) and at the toe of the Red Zone slopes. It is recommended that
the proposed pond at the toe of the Red Zone slope be engineered to ensure that
there is no reduction in slope stability (e.g. by reducing the excavation of the pond
to a minimum and by engineering the base of the pond to provide an ‘impermeable’
base). Ground investigations should be undertaken within the proposed pond area
to provide appropriate information to design the pond and to enable confirmation of
measures required to ensure that the pond does not impact the stability of Weedon
Road. Similarly, soakaway drainage should not be permitted in the development;
the natural soils present are in any case poorly suited to this process.
6.45 PPG14 makes clear the requirement for development to have regard to land
stability. Whilst confirming that LPAs owe no duty of care to individuals on this
matter, the guidance outlines the LPA's responsibility to ensure that the following
issues are addressed by the development:
- the physical capability of the land to be developed;
- possible adverse effects of instability on the development;
- possible adverse effects of the development on the stability of adjoining land; and
- possible effects on the local amenities and conservation interests of the
development and of any remedial or precautionary measures proposed.
6.46 The original geotechnical reports prepared by consultants on behalf of the
applicants do not refer to the ‘Tapsell Wade’ report of 1983. The Tapsell Wade
report was commissioned for a particular area of Northampton (East Hunsbury) and
does not include the area within which the Upton Lodge site is located. Following
the concerns raised by the Northampton Residents Alliance/DAG in relation to land
stability, the applicants’ consultants have reviewed the Tapsell Wade report against
their own assessments. The applicant’s consultants have confirmed that the Tapsell
Wade report has no impact upon their conclusions on land stability matters affecting
the development of the site, an investigation of which was carried out on behalf of
the applicant to inform the design and construction process of the development site.
Representations received from the Duston Action Group, continue to question the
reliability of the applicants assessments of land stability and highlight concerns with
regard to the impact upon existing properties at the tops of slopes. As the Local
46
Planning Authority, SNC (and WNDC) have sought to establish from the applicants
the stability of the slopes in line with advice in PPG14. Investigations and an
appropriate technical report have been prepared by named specialist consultants,
that seek to explain observed conditions on the site.
6.47 Officers are satisfied that, based upon the investigations carried out, the principle of
development at Norwood Farm/Upton Lodge, in accordance with the planning
application(s), remains acceptable. It is for the applicant to ensure that such
development, if approved, proceeds in a way that does not cause harm to the
interests of adjoining landowners. As a precautionary measure it is proposed that an
appropriate condition be imposed securing a scheme for the on-going monitoring of
land stability during the construction process and to ensure that all development
drains by way of pipes rather than soakaways, unless otherwise approved.
Housing (including ‘affordable’ housing)
6.48 Residential development would cover approximately 35ha of the site, which would
give an average net density of development of about 22 dwellings per ha. The
applicants suggest that a density of up to 35 dwellings per ha could be considered
appropriate for the development, but this is unlikely to be achieved with the
maximum number of dwellings proposed being 781.
6.49 The application proposes that the exact density of each developable parcel should
be considered later, at reserved matters stage. However, it is considered that a
proposed maximum number of dwellings should be established at outline stage, to
allow a clear understanding of the infrastructure required to support the residents of
the development, rather than run the risk of insufficient on-site infrastructure having
been provided as the number of houses increases. Capping the total number of
units (at 781) may therefore be considered essential, at this stage. Key factors such
as topography, key frontages and sensitive neighbouring sites should be considered
when deciding the density of the various parcels that make up the overall housing
total (this would also happen at reserved matters stage).
6.50 A range of building types is proposed, including detached, semi-detached,
townhouses and flats, with the different building types being mixed through the
development. These will be expressed in the required design codes, to be
submitted and approved prior to any consideration of reserved matters applications.
6.51 The affordable housing requirement of SNC is 40%, provided on site. The
Strategic Housing team has advised of the required affordable housing tenure-split
and requires this to be ‘pepper-potted’ (in small clusters rather than in large groups),
throughout the development area. Strategic housing have requested that they be
involved in negotiations with potential affordable housing providers. In addition 10%
of the houses should be built to SNC’s mobility standard, again ‘pepper-potted’
throughout the development. This would usually require the cluster sizes to be
between 5 – 9 for houses and up to 12 units where any flats are involved, although
recent development in the marketplace may justify a review of these arrangements,
particularly in the early years, to ensure any development approved proceeds
promptly. If required, some form of financial appraisal linked to a ‘cascade’
mechanism should be included, if the tenure split cannot be made to work and may
require other financial assistance to make it work. This will need to be set out in
detail in the S.106 Agreement.
Employment
47
(Note: This section relates to development on the adjoining site, and does not form
part of the current application, but details are relevant and included for
completeness.)
6.52 An area of approximately 4.5 hectares is proposed for employment purposes at the
junction of Weedon Road and the SLRR. The employment area is proposed for B1
(office/light industrial and research & development) and B2 (general industrial) uses
– no B8 (warehousing) uses are proposed. The proposed inclusion of employment
space is consistent with WNDC’s objectives for sustainable urban extensions.
6.53 On-site car-parking requirements would be reduced, due to the proximity of the
proposed park and ride facility. The employment area occupies a prominent location
on a principal route into Northampton and it will be essential that a high quality of
design for these buildings be achieved, reflecting the importance of the location.
6.54 The Use Classes Order specifies that changing a B1 or B2 use to a B8 use is a
permitted change (not requiring an application), where the floorspace of a building is
less than 235m2. To manage such changes and secure an appropriate balance of
employment on the site, it is considered that a condition be applied preventing any
future changes to B8 (warehouse) use, without an application first having been
made and determined. Controls on mezzanine floors may also be appropriate at the
reserved matters stage depending upon building design, site coverage and parking
provision.
6.55 Given the importance attached to making growth employment and not just housingled, and in the interests of sustainability, it will be vital to ensure that employment
development is delivered in tandem with any housing. This could best be promoted
through specific phasing requirements included in any S.106 Obligation. There is a
related issue to job creation and that being the provision of the required skills for the
wider area. Therefore, the skills training is an essential part of the delivery of
sustainable communities and will be picked up via the S.106 Agreement or
conditions.
Local Centre
(Note: This section relates to development on the adjoining site, and does not form
part of the current application, but details are relevant and included for
completeness.)
6.56 This would occupy an area of approximately 3.8ha located close to the centre of the
development site. It is proposed that the local centre includes a primary school,
shops (including a convenience store, A1, A2, A3 and B1 uses as well as a
children’s nursery) and other community facilities (which may include a community
centre - Policy R11 of the Northampton Local Plan refers). It is essential that the
long-term management of such a community centre be considered at an early stage
and secured as part of any planning permission. The Northampton Local Plan sets
out a minimum floorspace of 325m2 for new community centres. Any S.106
Agreement should set out who will provide the facilities, to what specification, and
the long-term management of the facilities. The local centre is not referred to in the
phasing programme, which is considered a significant omission, but ideally such a
centre should be provided in early phases of development and fixed via the S.106
Agreement.
6.57 The actual mix of the local centre would be determined at a later date, through the
design codes and subsequent reserved matters applications, but it is suggested that
48
the design be sufficiently flexible to accommodate future changes and needs. The
precise schedule of uses will need to be determined through the design codes but
the overall quantum will need to be controlled through the outline planning
permission. To prevent unsustainable patterns of development and in the absence
of detailed floorspace figures at this stage, conditions limiting the floorspace of any
local centre uses are proposed.
Education
(Note: This section relates to development on the adjoining site, that does not form
part of the current application, but details are relevant and included for information
and completeness.)
6.58 The application proposes the initial provision of a 420 place primary school, to be
located in or adjoining the proposed local centre. NCC has identified a total need for
630 primary school places, of which 210 would be needed to serve the Norwood
Farm development (ie this planning application). Whatever provision is required by
NCC, this would be able to be met on (and adjoining, if necessary) the 3.8 ha site
needed for the local centre. This will be further addressed, at the appropriate stage,
through the submission of reserved matters applications, should outline permission
be granted.
6.59 The closest secondary school was intended to be at the envisaged Upton Park
development (south of the A45), requiring students to cross the busy Weedon
Road. It had always been anticipated that a secondary school would be provided as
part of the Upton Park development, however, more recently, NCC has changed
their position. The County Council now consider that the Dallington Grange
development should accommodate a new secondary school, as an alternative
location for the secondary school previously proposed at Upton Park. The
development at Norwood Farm/Upton Lodge would now fall within the catchment of
the existing Duston School (on Berrywood Road), Campion School at Bugbrooke
and the proposed school at Dallington Grange.
Country Park / Open Space – including loss of open countryside
6.60 The proposed country park has 37ha set out, in total, and could provide a
considerable asset for the area, including nearby villages (eg Harpole and
Kislingbury). The majority of the proposed country park would, be located within
SNC’s administrative area (29 ha), leaving 7.7ha within the adjoining site, in
Northampton. The whole country park would be located to the west of the SLRR. It
is proposed that the country park could incorporate sports provision and changing
facilities, new wetland habitats, a network of footpaths and cycleways and
improvements to landscaping. Any formal sports provision would be located in the
south of the area, with the informal recreational opportunities located to the north
where the topography is steeper. The precise extent of any pitches and the size and
type of any sports pavilion would fall to be considered and determined at a later
stage, through reserved matters applications.
6.61 Although this may be considered somewhat distant from a good proportion of the
residential development proposed on the Upton Lodge site, it is recognised that the
topography of the rest of the application site is such that it would require significant
additional earth works for any sports pitch provision elsewhere. Open space
requirements for residential developments are outlined in the Council’s Open
Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy. For this requirement the Council analysed all
49
the open space in the District and has split it into the following categories:
Amenity Open Space
Children’s Play Space
Outdoor Sports Facilities/Playing Fields
6.62 Each of these categories of space is expected to be provided in major housing
developments, such as Norwood Farm/Upton Lodge. The following standards have
been set per one thousand population:
-
Amenity Open Space - 0.6ha
-
Children’s Play Space - 0.4ha
-
Outdoor Sports Facilities/Playing Fields - 2.0ha
6.63 Children's play areas were factored into the development parcels when the
Masterplan was drawn up. While this does mean it is not possible to give an exact
area for this category, it can be confirmed that enough land has been provided to
meet the Council's standards for play space.
6.64 The developers would provide the country park and arrangements for its future
maintenance (for 30 – 40 years) and management would need to form part of the
terms of a S.106 Agreement. Some 29ha of the park (the remaining 7.7ha being in
Northampton, adjoining) constitutes part of this application. The long-term
management of the country park is a potentially significant issue, but is one that
needs to be addressed through the S106 agreement, ahead of any decision to
approve being issued. It is possible that this country park would be jointly managed
with the proposed Nene Valley Country Park (located to the south of the A45
Weedon Road), to which it would be linked by a controlled pedestrian crossing
(details of which would be approved at reserved matters stage).
6.65 The development of this site would result in a loss of open countryside, with
Important Local Gap and Special Landscape Area designations in the Local Plan.
This would be mitigated by the fact that about half of the application site, would
consist of the country park and, therefore, be a key component in helping to
maintain an effective Local Gap. It would also help to provide a transition between
existing and proposed development on the western edge of Northampton, and the
Special Landscape Area. Following negotiation, an agreement has been reached
with the applicants to provide a northern extension of the proposed parkland area,
up to a new roundabout junction on Berrywood Road. This should further enhance
the country park’s potential mitigating effect.
Phasing of development
6.66 A potential phasing programme was included with both applications, when they
were originally submitted to SNC and WNDC. Broadly speaking development was
intended to commence in the south of the site, towards Weedon Road, spreading
north along the proposed SLRR.
6.67 The applicants have recently provided updated forecast completion dates,
specifically for the various phases of the Norwood Farm application, as follows:
Phase One
110 - 140 dwellings 2012 - 2015
Phase Two
220 - 280 dwellings 2012 - 2017
Phase Three
55 - 75 dwellings
2015 - 2016
50
Phase Four
220 - 280 dwellings 2015 – 2020
Total
605 - 775 dwellings
2012 - 2020
6.68 This shows that most of the housing should come forward between 2012 and 2020
and that even if Upton Lodge (incl. Norwood Farm) is fully built out by 2020, there
may still not be enough housing land identified to meet local needs. The
development of Norwood Farm is important if SNC is to continue to meet targets,
even once these have been revised following abolition of the RSS, to the end of the
Plan period in 2026.
6.69 The phasing programme does not include the provision of the Country Park, which
is considered a principle omission. The country park should be included in the
overall phasing programme and should be delivered at an early stage in the event
that Members resolve to grant planning permission. The phasing programme also
excludes the provision of the local centre / school, employment land and POS and
the necessary links to the uses. Again, these important components of the
development (many of which relate to the associated, adjoining site) would need to
be secured through a S.106 Agreement.
Developer Contributions (Section 106 Agreement)
6.70 The development is of a significant scale and raises on and off site infrastructure
issues, alongside the future management of the development outlined throughout
this report. The applicants have indicated that, in principle, they are prepared to
make the necessary developer contributions, to enable the development to proceed.
6.71 It is proposed that a single S.106 Agreement be drawn-up, in conjunction with the
adjoining WNDC site, which is complementary to the Norwood Farm element of the
proposals. WNDC would be using their ‘Standard Charge’ to secure most of the
developer contributions, and if it does not prove possible for SNC to be party to this
type of legal agreement, then a separate S.106 Agreement between SNC, the
developers and other parties, would have to be completed.
6.72 There will still be a requirement for site-specific issues to be set out in any S.106
and these are indicated below, based upon the current assessment and matters
identified through the consultation process, to date:
Masterplan: Submission and approval of a masterplan prior to the submission of
any reserved matters applications.
Transport Infrastructure: To be determined following the conclusion of current
modelling. Delivery of the SLRR across the site, required to facilitate development.
Design Codes: Submission and approval of Design Code prior to the submission of
any subsequent Reserved Matters Application. Reserved matters applications must
fulfil all of the design principles identified in the Code(s).
Affordable Housing: 40% of units to be affordable homes. The design of the
affordable housing will need to be in accordance with local needs as established in
local authority housing studies.
Sustainability: All residential units to be built at Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable
Homes as a minimum. All non residential buildings to be constructed to BREEAM
very good standard. Sustainability Strategy including the provision of SUDS and the
51
future maintenance and management of SUDS. Submission of a Green Travel Plan
to set out clear targets and penalties addressing any failure to achieve a modal
shift.
Community Facilities & Recreation: Provision of community facilities including
school and medical facilities and their subsequent transfer to the relevant
authorities. Phasing programme for the delivery of community facilities. Open space
and play equipment provision, phasing and management. Review of indoor and
outdoor sports facilities to be undertaken to inform the spending on S.106
contributions, to ensure the appropriate provision of facilities including sports
facilities.
Delivery of Green Infrastructure: Provision of the country park, its maintenance (for
30-40 years) and management. Pedestrian link between Country Park and Weedon
Road (leading to proposed Nene Valley Country Park).
Employment: Provision of employment facilities, restricted to B1 and B2. Phasing
requirements within S.106 to secure the provision of employment in tandem with
residential development, to secure a sustainable development. Local skills
provision/training. (This relates to the application on the adjoining site.)
Park and Ride: Provision of Park and Ride facility and its completion following the
occupation of a specified number of units. Subsequent transfer to NCC. (This
relates to the application on the adjoining site.)
Development Phasing: A phasing programme will need to be submitted to restrict
the amount of development that can be built until the SLRR is built to the northern
boundary of the application site and to secure the provision of the country park.
Lastly, the phasing programme does not include the provision of the local centre /
school, employment land and POS and the necessary links to the uses. Again, a
S.106 Agreement should ensure the timely provision of all community facilities as
the wider development proceeds, should permission be granted.
Others: Public art and place making. SNC monitoring and staff costs.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
The proposed development would introduce new buildings onto the site. Through
pre- and post-application discussions the applicants have attempted to respond to
the visual impact of the proposals with a combination of landscaping, layout and
building design changes. The environmental impact of the development has been
subject to consideration as set out in the Environmental Statement. Further
technical investigations have been provided in respect of matters raised through the
consultation exercise.
7.2
The only matter not fully-resolved relates to strategic highway infrastructure,
although a programme for resolution is clear and is unlikely to have implications for
the detailed design or associated impacts of the planning application. The
representations made are considered in the respective sections of the report.
Although the matter of land stability appears to have prompted renewed or
continuing concerns from a local residents group, this is considered to be
adequately addressed, insofar as it is relevant to the grant of planning permission,
through the provision of further reports by the applicants’ consultants.
52
7.3
Subject to a S106 agreement and appropriate conditions and following the
resolution of the outstanding issue on transportation, there are considered to be
significant material considerations as set out in the report to justify a departure from
Local Plan Policy in this case and the application should therefore be referred to the
Secretary of State as a departure from the development plan with a
recommendation for approval.
53
8.
REASON FOR APPROVAL
8.1
The principle of development in this location is considered to be acceptable having
regard to the local housing need and the policy objectives for the area, set out in
Local Plan Policy and Supplementary Planning Guidance and specifically, the
planning objectives set out in
relevant ‘saved’ policies of the South
Northamptonshire Local Plan 1997 (Para. 5.2, above, refers).
8.2
The proposed development would introduce new buildings onto the site. Through
pre- and post-application discussions the applicants have responded to the visual
impact of the proposals with a combination of landscaping, layout and building
design changes. The environmental impact of the development has been subject to
consideration as set out in the Environmental Statement. Based upon all material
planning considerations the impacts identified are considered to be capable of
satisfactory mitigation by specific terms and conditions.
8.3
Whilst the proposed development is covered by Policies H6, EV2, EV7 and EV8 in
the SNLP; in this case it is considered that assisting with the delivery of a
sustainable urban extension together with the provision of new on-site landscaping
and public open space provision, supports the delivery of other development plan
policy objectives, so that development of the land covered by Policies H6, EV2, EV7
and EV8, as a departure from policy does not result in significant harmful impacts to
the Development Plan policy objectives for the area or impacts upon other material
planning considerations that cannot be mitigated through resolving to grant
permission, subject to conditions being attached and an appropriate legal
agreement being entered into.
54
_______________________________________________________________________________
Item No 002
Application Number :
S/2010/0320/MAO
Parish : Middleton Cheney
Case Officer : Paul Seckington
Applicant : BHF BSSA
Location : Land at Main Road Middleton
Cheney
Description : Residential development of 16 houses
(outline)
Recommendation - Refusal
Reasons :1.
The proposed development would not accord with the relevant Development Plan
in particular ‘saved’ policies G2, H6 and EV2 of the adopted South
Northamptonshire Local Plan which seek to concentrate future developments
primarily in the rural service centres of Brackley and Towcester, whilst strictly
controlling development in the remainder of the rural areas in order to provide
sustainable growth and to protect the intrinsic character of the countryside and
rural area. It is not considered that there are material planning considerations that
would outweigh this conflict as the Council has a 5 year land supply of housing in
accordance with PPS3 ‘Housing’.
2.
In the absence of a satisfactory signed unilateral undertaking or any other form of
Section 106 legal agreement the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the
proposed development provides for appropriate libraries, fire and rescue,
healthcare and education facilities required as a result of the development, to the
detriment of both existing and proposed residents and contrary to ‘saved’ Policy
IMP1 of the adopted South Northamptonshire Local Plan and the Council’s
adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance on Developer Contributions (2001).
S/2010/0320/MAO
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Middleton Cheney
Cllr John Kilmister and Cllr John Rakestraw
The application was subject to a pre-committee members site visit, which took
place on Tuesday 25th May 2010, the application was also removed from the
agenda of the committee meeting on the 3rd June to seek clarification
following a letter received from the Secretary of State for Communities and
Local Government (dated 27th May) regarding the intention to abolish the
Regional Spatial Strategies.
1.
INTRODUCTION
55
_______________________________________________________________________________
1.1
This 0.645 hectare site lies on the eastern side of Middleton Cheney. The majority
of the site lies within the built-up limits of the village, with the exception of the
eastern end of the site which falls outside. The site comprises of two bungalows at
the front of the site (Nos. 4 & 6 Main Road), enclosed by a high stone wall. To the
rear is an office (No. 2A) housed in a single-storey converted stone barn, with a
gravelled parking area. The remainder of the site is grassed and there is a belt of
trees along the northern boundary.
1.2
Beyond the northern boundary of the plot are some agricultural buildings and a yard
which house cattle and are used for general agricultural storage. Also to the north,
and west, of the site are residential dwellings of various ages and heights. The
western plot boundary is demarcated by a 2.0 metre (approx.) high stone wall. The
land in the northwest corner of the site is up to 2m higher than the road and the
adjacent bungalow at No. 8.
1.3
The site is in the ownership of British Shops and Stores Association (BSSA) who
occupy the Grade II Listed Middleton House, 2 Main Road, to the south of the site.
1.4
The site falls within the Aynho, Cherwell Valley and Eydon Special Landscape Area.
1.5
The land already benefits from its own vehicular and pedestrian access to Main
Road in the south-western corner.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
In 2009 outline planning permission was granted for a bungalow and detached
garage on part of the application site lying between Nos. 6 and 8 Main Road
(S/2009/0785/OUT refers). The same development had been approved in outline
on this site in 2006 and represents the renewal of a series of outline permissions for
a dwelling on this piece of land which began in 1989.
2.2
Planning permission was also granted last year to allow the continued use of No. 4
as an office (S/2009/0317/P refers – renewal of S/2004/0272/P). This also follows a
series of renewals of planning permission for the same development which were
granted for a temporary period only. However, No. 4 is currently unoccupied and its
use can therefore refer back to a residential use.
2.3
The barn was converted to an office in 1987 (S/1987/1063/P refers).
2.4
At the beginning of this year an outline application to demolish all buildings on the
site and erect 19 dwellings was withdrawn following concerns of officers regarding
the loss of the employment use of the site and ecological issues in the absence of
appropriate surveys (S/2009/1277/MAO refers).
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
This application seeks outline planning permission for the erection of 16 dwellings,
retaining the converted barn as an office. All matters are reserved for later approval
except for the access. However, the applicants have submitted an illustrative layout
to show how the development might be accommodated within the plot along with
illustrative aerial views and street views of the development. The majority of the
dwellings would be two storey with a 1.5 storey dwelling proposed for the land
between No’s 6 and 8.
56
_______________________________________________________________________________
3.2
The existing access onto Main Road would need to be widened and the existing
stone wall to the front (west) of the site would need to relocated behind its current
alignment in order to provide improved vehicle to vehicle visibility.
3.3
The two existing bungalows on the site would be demolished to make way for the
proposed dwellings; as such there is a net gain of 14 residential units on the site.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
MIDDLETON CHENEY PARISH COUNCIL. Object to the application on the
following grounds: Concern that the proposed housing to the entrance of the site
would be out of scale with surrounding dwellings, dominate the street scene, result
in overlooking and could be affected by smoke from the chimney of the
neighbouring bungalow; overdevelopment; the properties at the front are still too
close to the front of the road and the building line should be further back;
inadequate off-road parking; inadequate turning area for refuse vehicles; concern
about the proximity of the proposed dwellings to the neighbouring agricultural use;
foul water problems do not seem to have been addressed.
4.2
NCC HIGHWAYS. In principle support the application, subject to conditions and a
revised transport statement to make reference to the application for 86 houses
further along Main Road.
4.3
STRATEGIC HOUSING. As the proposal falls below the 15 threshold which would
trigger 40% affordable housing, we appreciate that an affordable housing element is
no longer appropriate for this site.
4.4
NHS PRIMARY CARE TRUST. No comments received to date.
4.5
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH. No objections subject to the imposition of a standard
condition requiring a contaminated land investigation and mitigation as necessary.
4.6
CONSERVATION OFFICER. I have no objection to the principle of development on
this site. As it forms part of the wider setting of Middleton House, the design, layout
and materials of the development will need to have regard to its historic context.
However, this is not a matter for consideration in the present application. The
means of access as proposed does not appear to harm the listed wall to the south
of the site.
4.7
ARBORICULTURAL OFFICER. No objections but would recommend that a
condition is imposed on the reserved matters application or any subsequent full
planning application to ensure that the tree protection plan and arboricultural
method statement is adhered to in line with the recommendations of their
consultant. Does not consider any of the trees to be worthy of statutory protection.
4.8
ARCHAEOLOGY. No objections and no conditions recommended.
4.9
ANGLIAN WATER. No response received to date, but on previous application
advised the following: No objection subject to the following informatives: Anglian
has assets crossing/close to the site which must be adopted or diverted; the
development should seek to minimise water use; the development can be supplied
by the existing network; the views of Thames Water should be sought on the issue
of sewage.
57
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.10 THAMES WATER. No objections subject to the imposition of a ‘Grampian’ style
condition to require a waste drainage strategy for on and off site works to be
submitted and agreed prior to the commencement of the development. The
applicants have been copied in on the reply from Thames Water which sets out how
surface water drainage should be dealt with and stating that permission must be
obtained from TW to discharge to a public sewer.
4.11 NATURAL ENGLAND. Have no objections
4.12 NCC POLICY. The net additional 14 dwellings would trigger a contribution towards
libraries (£3,206), fire and rescue (£1,204), and education. In terms of education, A
development of 14 dwellings would add some 3 - 5 primary-aged pupils and 3 - 4
secondary and sixth form aged pupils. In September 2009, Middleton Cheney
Community Primary School had 349 pupils on roll compared to a capacity of 378
places. At the same date, Chenderit School, Middleton Cheney, the roll was 1,130
compared to the school’s capacity of 1,106. The roll is expected to increase over
the next five years. Middleton Cheney also has two other significant planning
applications of 86 and 79 dwellings respectively (S/2010/0301 and S/2010/0473).
The pupil roll of Chenderit School already exceeds its capacity; therefore, we would
seek the full contribution towards secondary and sixth form places. The contribution
based on the latest cost multipliers would be:
1 bed units = £0 per unit
2 bed units = £588 per unit
3 bed units = £2,756 per unit
There is some surplus capacity at the primary school, however, the three
developments combined are expected to generate approximately 55 Primary School
pupils. This would take the Primary School 26 pupils over capacity. We would
therefore be looking to apportion the cost of the pupil places between the three
developments. One Primary School place (according to the Department for
Education) costs £12,322. This development represents 8% of the total number of
dwellings generated from the three developments. Therefore: Primary contribution
= (26 x £12,322) x 0.08 = £25,630.00 We request this contribution in order to
expand the school and mitigate the impact of the development.
4.13 SNC LEISURE: Request a contribution of £1,255 per dwelling (£17,570) along with
funding for a commuted sum for strategic facilities.
4.14 POLICE CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR: No objection in principle to the
application. Whilst the layout is indicative, it indicates a short, straight cul-de-sac in
an infill plot giving the benefit of mainly back to back gardens which is a good
secure from of development. There are concerns over the parking court to the rear
of plots 1-4 due to lack of surveillance. If the court is retained it should be gated to
make it more secure and appear a private area. Suggest the attachment of secure
by design conditions.
4.15 THIRD PARTIES. Twelve letters received to date objecting to the application on the
following grounds:
58
_______________________________________________________________________________
•
overdevelopment; out of character with rest of the village;
•
increased pressure on village amenities and infrastructure (specifically the
secondary school, primary school and preschool);
•
increase in traffic and parking which would be detrimental to highway safety;
•
the pavement network in the village is not adequate for the additional residents
in terms of its poor condition/lack of maintenance and narrowness at various
points;
•
the main village facilities (e.g. shops) are too far away from this site for elderly
residents walk to and buses may not be affordable;
•
turning right towards Banbury at the junction of Main Road with the A422 is
hazardous leading to more residents driving through the village for alternative
access to Banbury;
•
increased on street parking would be harmful to highway safety;
•
this part of the village experiences frequent electricity power cuts;
•
the water treatment works are near capacity;
•
loss of privacy/overlooking;
•
because of the topography of the site (which lies higher than the highway and
No.8 Main Road) the development would be dominant and visually overbearing
for neighbours;
•
concern about the safety of the retaining wall at the front of the site;
•
the proposed highway layout/lack of footpaths within the site would be unsafe for
highway users;
•
concern about how refuse collection would be dealt with;
•
the proposed access would be detrimental to highway safety due to its proximity
to BSSA’s access and Hailsham Court;
•
fumes/smoke from the chimney at No.8 would be at the same height as second
floor windows of the proposed dwellings;
•
concern that some of the proposed dwellings would back onto a building/yard
used by livestock in Winter;
•
slab level should be reduced to highway level;
•
request that a condition be attached to prevent boundary enclosures or garden
buildings being erected along the boundary with No.8 to prevent loss of light;
•
no play area;
59
_______________________________________________________________________________
•
concern that the green in front of their property would be used for ball games;
•
inappropriate design;
•
the buildings should be set further back from Main Road;
•
inadequate parking provision resulting in on-street parking;
•
a mini-roundabout may be required at the access;
•
the layout allows for further extension of the road in the future;
•
detrimental impact upon the Special Landscape Area;
•
concern that the narrow street form would result in problems for emergency and
delivery vehicles, refuse collection and visitor parking;
•
concern about the impact upon the setting of the listed Middleton House;
•
no provision for bin storage;
•
no provision for surface water drainage;
•
the illustrative images are misleading and underplay the difference in heights
between the site and neighbours.
5.
POLICY
5.1
This application falls to be considered in the light of Policies, G2 (location of new
development), G3 (general development strategy), H6 (residential development in
the open countryside), E4 (loss of existing business uses resisted), EV1 (design),
EV2 (development in the open countryside), EV7 (special landscape area), EV12
(settings of listed buildings), EV21 (landscape features), EV29 (landscaping) and
IMP1 (developer contributions) of the South Northamptonshire Local Plan.
5.2
The development must also be considered with regard to this Authority’s Interim
Rural Housing Policy (July 2009) and national guidance; PPS1: Delivering
Sustainable Development, PPS3: Housing, PPS7: Sustainable Development in
Rural Areas, PPS 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, PPG 13: Transport
and PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment.
5.3
Relevant South Northamptonshire Council Supplementary Planning Guidance
includes Developer Contributions (2001), Affordable Housing (2003), Residential
Extensions, Residential Design in the Countryside and Middleton Cheney Village
Design Statement.
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues arising from this application are:
6.2
THE PRINCIPLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. The site is comprised of three main
parts. That which is currently in residential use, that which is currently used for
employment purposes and that which is Greenfield/open countryside.
60
_______________________________________________________________________________
6.3
The western part of the site adjacent to Main Road already benefits from
established residential use and would lie within the recognised built-up limits of the
settlement. It is therefore considered that a residential development is acceptable
‘in principle’ for this part of the site. This would account for a section of the site
which would contain 10 dwellings.
6.4
As the latest scheme proposes to retain the existing business use, its loss is
therefore no longer an issue. The retention of a business use as part of the
development would provide a mixed use scheme, and one which would not be to
the detriment of future occupiers. Office uses, by definition, are appropriate within
residential areas. The parking area for the office is proposed behind the office
building itself and therefore away from the residential properties. It is considered
that the office use would provide activity and natural surveillance of the site during
weekdays, and at the evenings and weekends the houses would provide
surveillance of the office.
6.5
The eastern part of the site lies beyond the built-up limits of Middleton Cheney on a
site which is considered Greenfield. This section of the site would contain 6
dwellings. This would be contrary to the adopted Local Plan in that it comprises
development outside the built up area and therefore within the open countryside.
The development is therefore in conflict with Policies G2, EV2 and H6. Local
Planning Authorities also have to have regard to other material considerations,
including national policy. Of particular relevance is PPS3 which still requires
Councils to provide a five year housing land supply.
6.6
The report of the Director of Service Delivery at item 6 on this agenda sets out the
Council’s latest 5 year housing land supply position and the consequent implications
for Planning Applications. In accordance with the above report, it is considered that
this development does not comply with the relevant development plan and that
there are no material planning considerations that would outweigh this conflict
because the Council has a 5 year land supply of housing.
6.7
Accordingly it is considered that the proposed development is unacceptable in
principle and that permission should be refused. However, in accordance with the
report at Item 6 it is recommended that the issuing of the decision notice be delayed
until the outcome of the recent appeal is known. In the event that the appeal
decision confirms that the Council does have a 5 year land supply, then the
application decision notice will be issued.
6.8
However, in the event that the appeal decision confirms that the Council does not
have a 5 year land supply and Members are satisfied that they would have granted
permission if this had been clear at the time, that officers are given the delegated
authority to change the decision and grant permission (with appropriate conditions
and legal agreement) on their behalf.
6.9
THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT UPON THE CHARACTER AND
APPEARANCE OF THE AREA, THE SETTING OF THE ADJACENT GRADE II
LISTED BUILDING AND THE SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREA. As this is only an
outline application the detailed design and layout are not to be determined at this
stage, although an indicative layout and design details have been supplied to
demonstrate how such a proposal could be realised. The illustrative layout and
design of dwellings has been informed by an assessment of existing development in
61
_______________________________________________________________________________
Middleton Cheney and a conscious effort has been made to reflect the older and
more attractive parts of the settlement rather than the less appropriate, post-war,
suburban areas. Officers support this approach and are satisfied that an
appropriate layout and dwelling design could be achieved on this land by following
this method.
6.10 It is considered that it would be necessary to undertake excavation/levelling works
to ensure that the proposed dwellings to the Main Street frontage would not appear
too dominant in the street scene. Officers are convinced that such changes could
be made in order to produce a development which respects the character and
appearance of the area, would not detract from the Special Landscape Area and
which would preserve the setting of the adjacent listed building. The agent has
confirmed that this could also be achieved and at the time of writing this report a
letter from the agent’s Building Engineers/Surveyors has been requested and
awaited to demonstrate that this is feasible and could be achieved in the reserved
matters application. The stone wall on the frontage of the site is to be retained.
6.11 The density of the residential element of the site (i.e. minus the office and its
parking area) is almost 29.5 dwellings per hectare and is considered to be
acceptable bearing in mind its context on the edge of Middleton Cheney. The
Parish Council and some local residents have expressed concerns that the
development has too high a density for this setting but Officers do not believe this to
be the case or that this would form a sustainable reason for refusal. The density
and layout are similar to nearby, historic parts of Middleton Cheney which it would
be desirable to reflect rather than the lower density suburban developments which
have taken place more recently but which are not compatible with a rural setting.
6.12 The retention of the converted stone barn is continued to be an important element
of this latest application, as it retains the heritage asset, respects the setting of the
adjacent listed building and would result in an improved streetscene within the site.
6.13 HIGHWAY SAFETY AND PARKING. Only the access is to be considered as part
of this outline application and initial concerns raised on the previous application
about gradient and visibility have been addressed by this latest submission, subject
to conditions.
6.14 The Parish Council and some local residents have objected to a perceived lack of
off-street car parking for the proposed development. However, it is noted that there
is sufficient space within the site to allow for at least two dedicated off street parking
spaces per dwelling. This exceeds the maximum car parking standards for
residential developments of 1.5 spaces per dwelling and therefore Officers consider
that a refusal on these grounds would be unsustainable at appeal. Conversely,
despite Middleton Cheney’s sustainable status, it is acknowledged that this is still a
rural setting where a more flexible approach to maximum car parking standards
could be applied and therefore a refusal based upon an overprovision of parking is
not thought to be appropriate.
6.15 In the light of the above assessment and the comments of the Highways Authority it
is contended that the development would not be seriously detrimental to the safety
of highway users subject to the imposition of conditions. However, the County have
requested a revised Transport Statement from the applicant so that it has regard to
the application for 86 houses further along Main Road. The applicant has queried
62
_______________________________________________________________________________
this request and considers that this scheme for 14 net additional dwellings does not
require a revised Transport Statement and that in any event they consider that
when considered together with the other site would not result in an unacceptable
level of additional traffic. A response is awaited from County Highways in relation to
this.
6.16 THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT UPON PROTECTED SPECIES. The
applicants have submitted an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Natural
England have no objections to the application, subject to conditions.
6.17 THE EFFECT OF THE DEVELOPMENT UPON THE RESIDENTIAL AMENITIES
OF NEIGHBOURING OCCUPIERS. Due to the topography of the site some
residents on Main Road have expressed concern about a loss of privacy caused by
the higher two storey dwellings overlooking their dwellings and that the houses
would be visually overbearing. However, Officers believe that there would be no
serious loss of privacy for neighbours for two main reasons.
6.18 Firstly, whilst it is acknowledged that the proposed plots 3 and 4 would be only 18
metres from a first floor window on No. 17 Main Road this is only indicative at the
outline stage and the dwellings would be separated by a road and the retained wall
along the frontage, rather than a back to back relationship. Therefore, the
development could easily provide appropriate separation distance. Furthermore,
Plot 1 on the illustrative layout has no window openings which would face towards
No. 8 and a dwelling for this site could be similarly designed to ensure that the
neighbouring dwelling is not overlooked.
6.19 Secondly, Officers believe that ground works at the front of the site could be
conditioned as part of any approval to ensure that proposed dwellings would not sit
significantly higher than neighbouring sites thus reducing any sense of their being
overbearing for neighbours and preventing harmful overlooking of adjoining plots.
This site levelling is also necessary in order to provide an acceptable access to the
development which complies with the gradient requirements of the Highways
Authority.
6.20 IMPACT
UPON
VILLAGE
INFRASTRUCTURE
AND
DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTIONS. One specific issue that has been raised by local residents is
how the village primary school and secondary school, would accommodate the
additional pupils that would be generated by the scale of development proposed.
The County in their comments at para 4.12 above have stated that there is not
capacity at the Secondary School to cater for this development, and that whilst
there is currently spare capacity at the primary school, the three applications
submitted for additional housing in Middleton Cheney [for 86 (subject to an appeal
against non-determination) and 79 (reported separately in this agenda)], in addition
to the net additional 14 dwellings here) would take the Primary School 26 pupils
over capacity. As such financial contributions are sought towards additional
secondary school places and towards primary school places, but proportionate to
this smaller development, as detailed at 4.12 above.
6.21 The ability of the local doctors’ surgery to cope with the additional residents is also
an important consideration. In respect of the local surgery, the developers could be
expected to make a financial contribution towards the provision of additional
medical services. No consultation response has yet been received from the
63
_______________________________________________________________________________
Primary Care Trust. It would, nevertheless, be reasonable to expect that this matter
could be satisfactorily dealt with, along with other developer contributions, through a
Section 106 Legal Agreement, should the application be approved.
6.22 Leisure have requested a financial contribution towards open space and NCC have
requested monies towards fire and rescue and libraries. As the net gain in
residential properties falls below 15 units then there is no requirement for affordable
housing provision on this site.
6.23 The agent has confirmed a willingness to provide appropriate financial contributions
to the above, but to date this a signed Unilateral Undertaking or S106 agreement
has not been signed , in the absence of whicjh this forms an additional reason to
refuse the application
6.24 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MATTERS. Three issues have arisen pertaining to
Environmental Health matters; the proximity of the proposed residential use to an
agricultural use, contaminated land and smoke pollution.
6.25 It has been noted that adjacent to the northern boundary of the site is an agricultural
building and yard used for Wintering cattle. Environmental Health state that there is
little guidance on exactly what degree of separation should be provided in such
situations. On the basis that cattle are housed in the building and that there is no
pollution complaint history from this use, despite the fact that there are existing
residential dwellings a similar distance from the building and yard as the application
site, it is suggested that this may indicate that there is little adverse impact. The
indicative layout sites the proposed dwellings as far from the building as possible
and seeks to retain a significant amount of the existing tree screen on the land.
Environmental Health therefore have no objections to the development on these
grounds.
6.26 Environmental Health recommend a standard condition to ensure that a
contaminated land survey is carried out which should give details of any
remediation measures where necessary and to require that such measures are
carried out.
6.27 A neighbour on Main Road has raised concerns about the potential nuisance which
could be caused to future occupiers of the development due to smoke from their
chimney. Their property is a bungalow and because of the topography of the land
the 1.5 storey and 2 storey dwellings adjacent to their house could be affected by
fumes. Environmental Health consider that the risk could be made acceptable by
ensuring that the roof ridge heights are kept as similar as possible or that a wider
degree of separation could be employed between the dwellings (20 metres). In
view of this assessment it appears that this issue could be satisfactorily resolved at
the reserved matters stage. Furthermore, the previously mentioned works to
reduce the ground levels at the front of the site would bring the proposed dwellings
closer to the ridge height of the existing bungalow.
6.28 UTILITIES. Thames Water has identified an inability of the existing waste water
infrastructure to accommodate the needs of this development. However, they state
that this could be overcome through the imposition of a ‘Grampian’ style condition
which would require the developer to formulate a drainage strategy for the site as
detailed in their comments above (paragraph 4.13). Thames Water advise that this
64
_______________________________________________________________________________
inability is unclear until a survey is undertaken of the local network, but it is
understood that the worst case scenario is having to lay a pipe for 300m to the
sewage treatment works, which is considered to be deliverable and could be
achieved. As such a Grampian style condition is considered appropriate in this
instance.
6.29 Anglian Water, who are the water provider for this area, have no objection to the
development subject to the imposition of a number of informative statements on any
permission.
6.30 In light of these responses it is not considered that a refusal of planning permission
could be sustained on the basis of a lack of water and waste utilities.
The principle of the development.
The impact of the development upon the character and appearance of the
area, the setting of the adjacent Grade II Listed Building and the Special
Landscape Area.
Highway safety and parking.
The impact of the development upon protected species.
The effect of the development upon the residential amenities of neighbouring
occupiers.
Impact upon village infrastructure and developer contributions.
Environmental Health matters.
Utilities.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
In conclusion it is considered that the principle of development is considered
unacceptable due to the encroachment beyond the built up area of the village onto
open countryside. As such, it is recommended that permission be refused for the
reason above but to delay issuing the decision notice until the outcome of the recent
appeal is known (see the report at Item 6 of the Schedule). In the event that the
appeal decision confirms that the Council does have a 5 year land supply, then the
application decision notice can be issued as it stands.
7.2
In the event that the appeal decision confirms that the Council does not have a 5
year land supply that officers are given the delegated authority grant permission
(with appropriate conditions and subject to an appropriate legal agreement) on their
behalf.
65
_______________________________________________________________________________
Item No 003
S/2010/0329/MAO
Parish : Paulerspury
Case Officer : Peter Bateman
Applicant : The Grafton Hunt
Location : Grafton Hunt Kennels High Street
Paulerspury
Description : Residential development of 14 two storey
dwelling associated parking, garaging
and access road.(Outline).
1.
The application is contrary to Local Plan policies G2, H5, H6, EV1, EV2 and G3, the
Council’s adopted Interim Rural Hosing Policy (IRHP) as well as Government
Guidance contained in PPS1, PPS3 and PPS7. In this instance the application fails
to comply with the aims and objectives of the Council’s IRHP and there are no
material considerations which would outweigh the lack of compliance with the
policy. The development fails to accord with the IRHP as the new site boundary is
not adequately justified and that the density does not represent the most effective
use of a Greenfield site and the land proposed for development is unnecessarily
large and therefore unnecessarily intrusive in the open countryside.
2.
The proposed development would not accord with the relevant Development Plan in
particular ‘saved’ policies G2, H6 and EV2 of the adopted South Northamptonshire
Local Plan which seek to concentrate future developments primarily in the rural
service centres of Brackley and Towcester, whilst strictly controlling development in
the remainder of the rural areas in order to provide sustainable growth and to
protect the intrinsic character of the countryside and rural area. It is not considered
that there are material planning considerations that would outweigh this conflict as
the Council has a 5 year land supply of housing in accordance with PPS3 ‘Housing’.
Reasons :-
S/2010/0329/MAO
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Tove
Cllr Mrs Sandra Barnes
This application was subject to a Pre-Committee Members Site Visit which
took place on Tuesday 27th July 2010.
1.
INTRODUCTION
66
_______________________________________________________________________________
1.1
The application site lies on the southern edge of the village of Paulerspury and
comprises a number of buildings formerly used by the Grafton Hunt together with a
section of open grassed ground. The site has a total area of 0.6 hectares.
1.2
The site is adjacent to a recent Bloors development being constructed off the High
Street for 14 units. The site is therefore adjacent to the village confines of
Paulerspury as outlined by Policy H5 of the Local Plan.
1.3
A large proportion of the site is occupied by buildings associated with the Grafton
Hunt including Kennels and some larger more modern buildings all of which are to
be demolished. A proportion of the site can therefore be considered previously
developed.
1.4
The access (vehicular and pedestrian) is shown indicatively as being though the
Bloors site, which is under construction, and ultimately onto the High Street, which
is the main road through the linear formed village and leads east bound onto the A5
and west bound to Pury End the neighbouring settlement.
1.5
To the south the application is open into open fields where the only means of
enclosure for the fields is timber post and rail fencing. To the West is Kingston Farm
which is accessed off Lumber Lane.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
The most relevant history for this site is application S/2010/0001/MAO which was an
application for 25 houses on the same application as the current application, but
which also included the Kingston Farm site to the west. This was withdrawn early in
2010.
2.2
Prior to the above the main history relates to the adjoining site (14 units being
constructed by Bloors) which was granted planning permission under reference
S/2009/0348/P. This followed a number of applications to secure outlined
permission and then reserved matters from 2002 to 2007. The first outline on the
site was granted in 1999 under reference S/1999/0217/PO.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
The application seeks outline permission (principle and point of access are the
matters applied for) for 14 two storey dwellings, associated parking and garaging at
Grafton Hunt Kennels Paulerspury. The application has been amended at officer
request to remove the internal access road from the list of matters being considered
as there was concern over whether the layout initially applied for would be a
consistent design approach to the Bloor site which is being developed adjacent to
this site.
3.2
The proposal would form a significant landscape barrier to the southern and eastern
boundaries which is shown indicatively (as landscaping is a reserved matter) on the
submitted block plan to be 5 metres in width with the intention of creating a robust
and defensible boundary to the site.
3.3
The application has been submitted with a topographical survey, ecological
assessment, transport assessment, design and access statement, an indicative
layout plan and context site analysis plan.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
67
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.1
PAULERSPURY PARISH COUNCIL: Objection – The site is outside the confines,
contrary to village design statement and historical ribbon development of the village
for. Access through the Bloors site makes for a block of 28 houses the largest
estate type development in the village which would effectively double the traffic on
the main road through the village. Drainage concerns have been expressed.
Concern expressed regarding the capacity of the primary school. Lack of affordable
housing despite in effect 28 houses being provided on one site.
4.2
SNC POLICY: The proposed development is considered not to be in accordance with
the Council’s adopted IRHP Policy and the advice contained in PPS3. Officers do not
consider that this development accords with the IRHP as the new site boundary is
not adequately justified and that the density does not represent the most effective
use of a Greenfield site and the land proposed for development is unnecessarily
large and therefore unnecessarily intrusive in the open countryside.
4.3
In addition, the report of the Director of Service Delivery at item 6 on this agenda
sets out the Council’s latest 5 year housing land supply position and the consequent
implications for Planning Applications. In accordance with the above report, it is
considered that this development does not comply with the relevant development
plan and that there are no material planning considerations that would outweigh this
conflict because the Council has a 5 year land supply of housing.
4.4
SNC HOUSING: Clearly the application falls one dwelling short of the 15 dwelling
threshold which would allow consideration of 40% affordable housing on this site, in
accordance with the Affordable Housing SPG.
4.5
NCC COUNTY HIGHWAYS: No objection in principle. The section through the
Bloors Site needs to be constructed to adoptable standards.
4.6
NCC EDUCATION: Require key service contributions as follows:
Libraries:
1 Bed + £116
2 Bed = £155
3 Bed = £229
4 Bed = £290
5 Bed = £326
Fire and rescue contributions at a rate of £86 per dwelling 14 X £86 = £1204
Education: Contributions required towards primary places at Paulerspury Primary School
1 Bed = £0
2 Bed = £509
3 Bed = £ 3490
4 Bed = £7798
68
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.7
CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR: No objection, the scheme reflects preapplication advice.
4.8
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: No objection subject to conditions relating to
contaminated land.
4.9
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY: No objection subject to conditions.
4.10 ANGLIAN WATER: No objection, the site has sufficient capacity in all relevant
areas.
4.11 NATURAL ENGLAND: No objection.
4.12 WILDLIFE TRUST: Insufficient resources to comment
4.13 PRIMARY CARE TRUST: Not received
4.14 ARCHAEOLOGY: In order to satisfy PPS5 it is recommended that any planning
consents granted contain conditions for an archaeological evaluation of the site plus
a condition to record the Grafton Hunt kennel complex.
4.15 THIRD PARTIES: Two third party letters received – one supporting the application
as submitted and one objecting to it:
4.16 Gardens End Plum Park Lane – Supports the proposal (having objected to
S/2010/0001/MAO for 25 units). From a village point of view the development would
have little impact other than extra traffic coming onto the High Street. Wherever the
housing is sited in Paulerspury (the 15 allocation) will eventually converge on the
High Street and A5. The Kennel already exists and there will be less disruption to
all concerned. The development appears to be well set out and would sit well with
its neighbour. Parking would be contained within the site.
4.17 Bletsoe and Sons on behalf on the Whitlock family (the promoters of Grays Lane)
objecting to the proposal. The proposed application is phase 2 of the Bloors scheme
currently being built. Bloors are using the site as a store/compound and will
continue to do so for a further 12 months making this application undeliverable.
Given the previous design concerns and the fact this is an outline application there
is no certainty it will be delivered in two years. Lack of affordable housing when in
effect a 28 house scheme. Boundaries follow an arbitrary line - beyond which lies
further land in the same ownership. This is backland development unlike the Grays
Lane design which has strong street frontages. This is more in keeping with the
prevailing pattern of Paulerspury which is linear in style.
5.
POLICY
5.1
The relevant Development Plan consists of the ‘saved’ policies of the South
Northamptonshire Local Plan (SNLP). Note - the RSS8 document was deleted by
Central Government in June 2010 and therefore forms no part of the development
plan for the consideration of this application.
5.2
The relevant Policies of the Local Plan comprise; Policies G2, G3, H5, H6, H7, EV1,
EV2, EV21 and IMP1.
5.3
Supplementary Planning Guidance is also of relevance to this proposal and
constitutes a material planning consideration, particularly; Developer Contributions
69
_______________________________________________________________________________
(2001) and Affordable Housing (2003).
5.4
Government Guidance is also a material planning consideration. Of particular
relevance is guidance in PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS9, PPS25 and PPG13. PPS3
relates to the amended version June 2010 particularly in relation to density
requirements.
5.5
In addition, the Council has the adopted the Interim Rural Housing Policy (IRHP)
adopted 29th July 2010.
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues in consideration of this application are
THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE
SCALE AND INDICATIVE LAYOUT
DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS
HIGHWAYS CONSIDERATIONS
IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA AND LANDSCAPING
EFFECT ON BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY
DRAINAGE AND FLOODING CONSIDERATIONS
ARCHAEOLOGY
IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
6.2
THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE: The site subject to this
application lies outside but adjacent to the Village Confines for Paulerspury. In
policy terms this means that the site lies in the open countryside and should be
assessed against ‘saved’ Policies H6 and EV2 of the South Northamptonshire Local
Plan. These policies state that development in the open countryside should be
necessary for the reasons specified or involve a conversion; this application fails to
fulfil the exceptions in these policies. As the site is adjoining the Village Confines
then another exception to policy would be Policy H8 (Exceptions Housing) where
the housing, if there was clear evidence of local need could develop a group of
appropriate dwellings outside but adjoining the Village Confines. I note the
application is for market housing which does not fulfil this policy requirement and
does not include any provision of affordable houses to meet local needs.
6.3
However, the Local Plan is ageing and in terms of housing requirements was
superseded by the Sub Regional Strategy for Milton Keynes South Midlands Growth
Area (part of the East Midlands Regional Plan). This set out a minimum annual
requirement of 330 dwellings to be completed between 2001 and 2021. The
requirement for housing in South Northamptonshire District (as part of the Growth
Area) is therefore significant. The Minister has now revoked the RSS including the
housing targets. It is no longer a material consideration in the determination of
planning applications
70
_______________________________________________________________________________
6.4
While the revocation removes the current housing targets in the RSS advice
provided to Councils from the Government’s Chief Planning Officer makes clear that
the requirement for a five-year and 15 year housing land supply remains and that
the calculation of revised housing targets should be evidence based. In addition The
Government has made very firm statements that it expects local authorities to cater
for housing growth which it considers to be an important national issue. In the
Minister’s view the inability to demonstrate a five-year supply of land remains a
relevant and important consideration in determining planning applications and
appeals.
6.5
Local Planning Authorities will now able to identify an appropriate annual housing
requirement; but this will need to be robust, evidenced and defensible at appeal.
The advice provided considers that this should be achieved through the LDF
examination process.
6.6
The advice considers that local authorities may base revised housing targets on the
level of provision submitted to the original Regional Spatial Strategy examination
(Option 1 targets), supplemented by more recent information as appropriate. There
are no ‘Option 1’ figures for Northamptonshire because the RSS housing targets
were derived through the MKSM national growth area identified in the Sustainable
Communities White Paper 2003 and subsequently the MKSM Study (2005). For this
area the MKSM Study figures are the equivalent to ‘Option 1’ figures. For South
Northamptonshire these are 330 dwellings per annum.
6.7
At its meeting on July 12th 2010 Cabinet agreed that In the absence of robust
revised housing targets for South Northamptonshire, and until such time that these
revised figures have been prepared and agreed through the preparation of the Core
Strategy, this Council would continue to provide for a housing target of 330
dwellings per annum based on the ‘Option 1’ equivalent as set out in the MKSM
Study (or should this be revoked then from the revoked RSS).
6.8
There is a also a requirement within Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) to ensure
a 5 year supply of housing within the District and this is a material consideration in
the determination of this application. The 2009/ 2010 South Northamptonshire
Council Housing Land Availability Study shows a 4.1 years supply of housing land.
The study identifies those sites which are available, achievable and suitable for
housing within the next 5 years (2010 – 2015). These identified sites include
remaining allocated housing sites, sites with existing planning permission, other
sites identified as being suitable for housing within documents approved by the
Council and an allowance for windfalls. In April 2010 there was a shortfall of 326
dwellings.
6.9
The requirement also remains within Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) to ensure
a 5 year supply of housing within the District and this is a material consideration in
the determination of this application. The 2009/ 2010 South Northamptonshire
Council Housing Land Availability Study shows a 4.1 years supply of housing land.
The study identifies those sites which are available, achievable and suitable for
housing within the next 5 years (2010 – 2015). These identified sites include
remaining allocated housing sites, sites with existing planning permission, other
sites identified as being suitable for housing within documents approved by the
Council and an allowance for windfalls. In April 2010 there was a shortfall of 326
dwellings.
6.10 Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing) (PPS3) states: ‘Where Local Planning
71
_______________________________________________________________________________
Authorities cannot demonstrate an up-to-date five year supply of deliverable sites,
for example, where Local Development Documents have not been reviewed to take
into account policies in this PPS or there is less than five years supply of deliverable
sites, they should consider favourably planning applications for housing, having
regard to the policies in this PPS including the considerations in paragraph 69
6.11 Paragraph 69 states: In general, in deciding planning applications, Local Planning
Authorities should have regard to:
Achieving high quality housing.
Ensuring developments achieve a good mix of housing reflecting the
accommodation requirements of specific groups, in particular, families and
older people.
The suitability of a site for housing, including its environmental sustainability.
Using land effectively and efficiently.
Ensuring the proposed development is in line with planning for housing
objectives, reflecting the need and demand for housing in, and the spatial
vision for, the area and does not undermine wider policy objectives e.g.
addressing housing market renewal issues.
6.12
It is clear from the Guidance that that where the 5-year supply cannot be
demonstrated an application should be ‘considered favourably’ i.e. there is a
presumption in favour of a scheme. However, it is important to note that this
‘presumption’ is not freestanding and is expressly qualified by reference to the rest
of the PPS and in particular the general considerations in paragraph 69, one of
which is ensuring that the application is in line with the spatial vision for the area
and a second relating to sustainability.
6.13 As a result of the recognised lack of five year land supply, the above guidance in
PPS3, and given recent appeal decisions in the District, the Council has adopted
the IRHP which is a material planning consideration. This seeks to establish
objective criteria in determining those villages that are ‘most sustainable’ and
therefore where a more positive and flexible approach could be taken towards
development with the aim of delivering sufficient housing sites in appropriate
locations so the Council has at least a five year supply of housing land.
6.14 The IRHP seeks to establish objective criteria in determining those villages that are
‘most sustainable’ and therefore where a more positive and flexible approach could
be taken towards development. Paulerspury is considered to be a ‘Reasonably
Sustainable’ village capable of accommodating an indicative total of 15 dwellings.
6.15 The relevant Policy as expressed in the IRHP is that proposals on sites outside but
adjoining the village confines of those villages considered ‘reasonably sustainable’
will be permitted where;
It can be demonstrated that there are no suitable and deliverable brownfield
sites within or adjoining the village confines;
The proposed extension to settlement form reflects and respects natural and
other long term features
The scale of the proposal does not exceed the percentage as stated in table
6 of the policy statement except where it can be demonstrated that the
proposal would result in environmental improvements (e.g. re-use of
previously developed land or best practice in density or design issues) OR,
where it is required to support the retention or improvement of essential local
services (particularly health care or education) AND where it has been
72
_______________________________________________________________________________
formulated with meaningful discussions with the Parish Council.
6.16 There is clear evidence that the IHRP will meet, if not exceed its indicative targets.
The latest Housing Land Supply Availability information has seen a reduction in the
April 2009 shortfall of 909 dwellings to 326 dwellings in April 2010.
6.17 There are also current planning applications for 3841 dwellings in Towcester,
Deanshanger, Brackley, Bugbrooke and Middleton Cheney and In fact, 15 of the 16
villages identified in the IRHP as most or reasonably sustainable have had some
developer interest shown in them. The Council has also recently approved a Draft
Roade Masterplan for consultation. If approved this could result in some 500 new
dwellings for the village including significant areas of previously developed land.
Consultation on the Masterplan is likely to take place during the summer 2010 and a
final document approved thereafter. I remain convinced that the new policy
approach set out in the IRHP is working and that together with other housing
schemes currently under consideration in Brackley and Towcester will be successful
in addressing the shortfall in housing land in a consistent and sustainable way.
6.18 Current 5 Year Supply of housing land: The report of the Director of Service
Delivery at item 6 on this agenda sets out the Council’s latest 5 year housing land
supply position and the consequent implications for Planning Applications. In
accordance with the above report, it is considered that this development does not
comply with the relevant development plan and that there are no material planning
considerations that would outweigh this conflict because the Council has a 5 year
land supply of housing.
6.19 Accordingly it is considered that the proposed development is unacceptable in
above report it is recommended that the issuing of the decision notice be delayed
6.20 However, in the event that the appeal decision confirms that the Council does not
authority to change the decision and grant permission (with appropriate conditions)
on their behalf.
6.21 In the event that the appeal decision confirms that the Council does not have a 5
year land supply that officers are given the delegated authority to issue the refusal
but to remove this reason for refusal from the decision notice (reason 2).
6.22 SCALE AND LAYOUT: The IRHP sets out an indicative target of 15 dwellings for
Paulerspury. It is noted that this application is for 14 dwellings that is a single
dwelling under the threshold where affordable housing would be required. The
layout includes the formation of an artificial boundary across the site and is at a
density of 23 dwellings per hectare. It is important to note that the Government has
recently amended PPS 3 to remove the previous requirement that new housing was
supposed to be built at a minimum density of 30 units per hectare. Densities will
now need to be considered on a site by site basis in the context of the setting of the
site and neighbouring development. The proposed layout comprises 3 and 4 bed
detached houses. In September 2009 the Council approved an application for 14
units on the adjoining Grafton Hunt Kennels site (S/2009/0348/P). This site has
established boundaries comprising an area of 0.48 ha. The density was 30
73
_______________________________________________________________________________
dwellings per hectare that conformed to PPS 3 policy.
6.23 Para. 10 of PPS 3 considers that the Planning system should deliver ‘A mix of
housing, both market and affordable, particularly in terms of tenure and price, to
support a wide variety of households in all areas, both urban and rural’. Para. 16 of
the PPS states that a new development ‘Is well integrated with, and complements,
the neighbouring buildings and the local area more generally in terms of scale,
density, layout and access’. This application proposes development at a density
significantly lower than that proposed for the adjoining Kennels site and
notwithstanding the changes to PPS 3 in this regard, I am concerned that the
layout, density and house type proposed has been engineered so as to fall under
the threshold for affordable housing without appropriate justification. The proposal
includes the formation of a new artificial boundary that is inadequately justified. A
density that better reflects the recently approved kennels site would be more
appropriate and in turn this would also allow for the provision of some affordable
housing to meet local needs.
6.24 DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS: Affordable Housing contributions have been
covered by the previous paragraph. However the scheme as currently proposed
would provide the contributions outlined in paragraph 4.5 of the report. A draft S106
has been submitted and is acceptable to both the County Council and South
Northants Council solicitors, but it has not been signed at the time of writing.
6.25 HIGHWAYS CONSIDERATIONS: The application has been submitted with a
comprehensive Transport Assessment which the Local Highway Authority (NCC
County Highways) have considered when making their representations on the
application. They have recommended a series of conditions and informatives that
should be imposed should permission be granted.
6.26 In terms of the access point this is proposed to come through the Bloors site which
has been constructed to adoptable highways standards. However significant care
was taken with the design and layout of the neighbouring site to retain rural design
to preserve the village character. Officer were concerned about the initial road
layout demonstrated feeling it was not the most appropriate design solution and to
this effect the internal road layout has been reserved for future consideration.
6.27 IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA AND LANDSCAPING: Paulerspury
is a very linear village in terms of character running from the A5 to Pury End with
the majority of the development positioned either side of a single road. There are a
couple of exceptions such as Lumber Lane, but the majority of the urban form is
linear. The proposal would not extend in this fashion, but officers have considered
the status of the land which is the subject of this application and have concluded the
scale of the development would not in itself be harmful. The site is previously
developed and is largely screened from the High Street (the north) by the new
Bloors scheme. To the west is Kingston Farm which also screens the site.
Therefore in two directions the proposal will have little visual impact.
6.28 The IRHP requires sites to make use of robust existing natural feature as a means
of boundaries. In this instance the proposal fails to achieve this on the southern and
eastern boundaries where is proposed to formulate a 5 metre wide landscaping
buffer. This approach has been used on other IRHP sites but in this instance
officers are not satisfied that the reasoning for choosing this particular boundary are
justified in planning or function terms. The indicative allocation for Paulerspury in
the IRHP is 15 units. The boundary shown fails to follow any identifiable feature and
74
_______________________________________________________________________________
in this sense is completely false. The application therefore fails to meet the
indicative need of Paulerspury by 1 unit and also therefore fails to make any
affordable housing contribution to the established need in the village of 12 units. In
the absence of any suitable justification for this boundary choice the Local Planning
Authority considers the proposal to not meet the aims and objectives of the IRHP.
6.29 Additionally in June 2010 the Central Government Guidance on Housing (PPS3)
was amended to remove reference to maximum and minimum densities. In effect
the onus was shifted to the Local Planning Authority making a judgement on what
level of density was appropriate in the particular context of a site rather than
imposing simply numbers. The Council’s policy department have assessed the site
in light of this change in guidance (as outlined in paragraphs 6.18 and 6.19) and
have concluded that the density applied for would be harmful to the character of the
area.
6.30 EFFECT ON BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY: The application has been submitted
by a full ecological assessment which considered the impact on bats, nesting birds,
Great Crested Newts and Barn Owls. The report recommended a series of
mitigation measures (despite there not being any protected species found) which
have been endorsed by Natural England. In this sense the proposal accords with
the best practice advice contained in PPS9 relating to biodiversity.
6.31 DRAINAGE AND FLOODING CONSIDERATIONS: Both water capacity and
drainage capacities have been considered by Anglian Water and the Environment
Agency. Both organisations raise no objection subject to the Local Planning
Authority imposing a series of conditions and informatives should consent be
granted. In this sense the proposal is satisfactory in principle in terms of drainage
and water supply. In terms of local flooding concerns at reserved matters stage
local flooding engineers can also be involved in the discharge of conditions and
have involvement during pre-application discussions to ensure the agreed drainage
methodology is appropriate.
6.32 ARCHAEOLOGY: The proposed scheme will involve the demolition of the late 19th
kennels and will affect any potential archaeology within the site. In this instance
there is the medium potential for early medieval features as the site is within the
multi-centred settlement of Paulerspury which was probably founded in the 9th or
10th century. There is low archaeological potential for late medieval features and
unknown potential for Roman and prehistoric features. In order to satisfy PPS5 it is
recommended that any planning consents granted contain conditions for an
archaeological evaluation of the site plus a condition to record the Grafton Hunt
kennel complex. The latter buildings are of both local and regional interest and
should be recorded as a monument associated with hunting which had a significant
impact on the post-medieval development of the Northamptonshire landscape.
6.33 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES: The application site is bounded on
three sides by agricultural/equestrian uses consisting of open fields to the east and
west and an equestrian incinerator to the south and therefore there will be no
impact on residential amenity in these directions. To the north the access passes
through the Bloors development which will soon be occupied and therefore sensitive
to traffic passing through. As the road is to be constructed to adoptable highways
standards and the fall back was there would always be an access to the land to the
south this is not considered likely to be harmful to residential amenity. In terms of
loss of light and privacy the precise arrangement, position of windows and siting will
all need to respect the new dwellings at reserved matters stage.
75
_______________________________________________________________________________
6.34 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Council’s Environmental Protection
department has identified that contamination may be present on the site given its
former uses. To this extent it is recommended to impose conditions to undertake
investigative works and agree suitable mitigation strategies should adverse levels of
contamination be found.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
In conclusion whilst the site lies outside the village confines and does not accord
with the adopted Local Plan, RSS8 suggests that locational and sustainability
criteria should be used when considering the location of new development. The
Council’s adopted IRHP considers this village to be reasonably sustainable and
seeks to take a more flexible approach to development outside the village confines
in such settlements in the short term in order to try and meet the housing supply
shortfall in an appropriate way in light of Government advice.
7.2
for Planning Applications.
7.3
In accordance with the above report, it is considered that this development does not
7.4
However, on balance however officers do not consider that this development
accords with the IRHP as the new site boundary is not adequately justified and that
the density does not represent the most effective use of a Greenfield site and the
land proposed for development is unnecessarily large and therefore unnecessarily
intrusive in the open countryside.
8.
REASONS FOR REFUSAL
8.1
The application fails to comply with the aims and objectives of the Council’s IRHP
and there are no material considerations which would outweigh the lack of
compliance with the policy. The development fails to accord with the IRHP as the
new site boundary is not adequately justified and that the density does not
represent the most effective use of a Greenfield site and the land proposed for
development is unnecessarily large and therefore unnecessarily intrusive in the
open countryside.
8.2
The Council has a Five Year Supply of Housing.
8.3
The application is therefore recommended for refusal for the reasons outlined at the
beginning of the report.
76
77
_______________________________________________________________________________
Item No 004
S/2010/0332/MAO
Parish : Brackley
Case Officer : Peter Bateman
Applicant : Providence Court Investments (Brackley) Ltd
Location : Brackley Sawmills Northampton
Road Brackley
Description : Residential development of 130 dwellings
(outline)
Conditions :1.
Application for the approval of all the reserved matters shall be made to the Local
Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this
permission and the development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the
expiration of two years from the date of this permission or before the expiration of
one year from the date of the approval of the last of the reserved matters to be
approved whichever is the later.
2.
No development shall take place until approval of the details of the layout,
appearance, landscaping and scale of the development (referred to as the ‘reserved
matters’) has been obtained from the Local Planning Authority and the development
shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
3.
The landscape works required by condition 2 above shall include planting plans;
written specifications; schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed
numbers/densities where appropriate; tree protection measures; existing and
proposed finished levels or contours and all hard landscaping.
4.
Prior to the approval of the reserved matters, a plan showing the details of the
finished floor levels of the proposed dwellings in relation to existing ground levels on
the site and adjacent dwellings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority The development shall be carried out in accordance with
the approved details.
5.
No more than 130 dwellings shall be accommodated on the site.
6.
All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping
shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first
occupation of any of the dwellings or in accordance with any other program of
landscaping works previously approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Any trees and shrubs which within a period of five years from the completion of the
development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be
replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless
the Local Planning Authority gives written consent for any variation.
78
_______________________________________________________________________________
7.
Prior to the approval of the reserved matters full details of the means of enclosure
along all boundaries and within the site shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority, and such means of enclosure, shall be
erected prior to the first occupation of those dwellings.
8.
Prior to first occupation of the first phase of the development hereby permitted the
following highway works shall be completed in accordance with full engineering,
drainage, signal, and constructional details, to be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. Southern access junction (Trade Counter) –
Ghost Island Right turn priority junction on Northampton Road, to include pedestrian
refuges on Northampton Road. Shown indicatively on Cannon Consulting Engineers
drawing B311- SK014 (Rev.B). Northern access junction (Residential) – 50m ICD, 4
arm roundabout access on Northampton Road. Shown indicatively on Cannon
Consulting Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B). Link Road from Northern
Access Junction to northwest boundary of the site to be 7.3m wide, with 2 simple
priority junctions for residential access. Shown indicatively on Cannon Consulting
Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B). Revised priority junction (as per extant
2007 permission) at Northampton Road/Turweston Road, required if a roundabout
in this location has not already been provided by others. Footways adjacent to
Northampton Road and new link road, Shown indicatively on Cannon Consulting
Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B), including a connection to the existing
petrol filling station to the north of the site. A signal controlled pedestrian crossing
on Northampton Road, and any footways required to tie in to existing footways,
south of junction with Turweston Road, Shown indicatively on Cannon Consulting
Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B).Two Bus stops located between the two
site access junctions on Northampton Road, one either side of Northampton Road,
shown indicatively on Cannon Consulting Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B),
to include the provision of shelters, bus boarders, truform poles, timetable
information, real time information, and appropriate road markings.
9.
Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted full engineering,
drainage, signal, and constructional details, of the internal highway layout, including
roads, junctions, driveways, garages, parking, and footways etc shall be submitted
to and agreed by the local planning authority, and no work is to begin on site until
full technical approval has been granted by the local highway authority. Once
agreed the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority.
10.
Prior to first occupation of the first phase of the development hereby permitted all
highway crossovers, other than those shown indicatively on Cannon Consulting
Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B), must be reinstated as footway in
accordance with details to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and
approved in writing. Once agreed the reinstatement shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved details unless otherwise approved in writing by the
local planning authority.
11.
Prior to the commencement of any part of the development hereby permitted, a
Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
local planning authority. The construction of the development shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved Construction Management Plan unless otherwise
approved in writing by the local planning authority.
12.
No development shall take place within the application site until the applicant, or
79
_______________________________________________________________________________
their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme
of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which
has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning
authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
13.
No dwelling shall be occupied until any approved remedial works to mitigate any
potential site contamination, have been carried out and a full validation report has
been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The developer
shall draw to the attention of the Local Planning Authority the presence of any
unsuspected contamination found during the development. In this event, no
development shall continue until a programme of investigation and/or remedial work
to include methods of monitoring and certification of such work undertaken has
been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No
dwelling shall be occupied until the approved remedial works, monitoring and
certification of the works have been carried out and a full validation report has been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
14.
The mitigation measures identified in section 4 of the ecological report received by
the Local Planning Authority on the 16th March 2010 (and any subsequent updated
ecological reports which form part of the application submission) shall be fully
implemented and the precise management plan submitted to the Local Planning
Authority and agreed in writing. No dwelling shall be occupied until the approved
management plan and works have been carried out and a full ?………..........?and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
15.
All site clearance (including vegetation removal and work to existing hedgerows)
should be timed so as to avoid the bird nesting/breeding season. If this is not
possible, then a pre-works check and if necessary mitigation methodology should
be carried out by a suitably qualified ecologist in accordance with details to be
submitted and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before such works
commence.
16.
No new building required to be served by water services shall commence until
details of a scheme, including phasing and future management and maintenance
arrangements, for the provision of mains foul water drainage has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved works shall
be implemented prior to the occupation of any buildings within the relevant phase(s)
of the development.
17.
Development shall not begin until a surface water drainage scheme for the site has
been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The
scheme shall be in accordance with the principles as set out in the Flood Risk
Assessment by Cannon Consulting Engineers, reference CCE/B311/FRA, dated
March 2010. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with
the approved details before the development is completed.
18.
Notwithstanding the submitted details, Piling or any other foundation designs using
penetrative methods shall not be carried out other than with the express written
consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the
site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to
groundwater.
80
_______________________________________________________________________________
19.
No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground shall be carried out, other
than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be
given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no
resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters.
20.
F31 Prohibited working hours during construction
21.
K2 Samples of materials - single or few buildings
22.
Prior to the approval of the reserved matters, details of the proposed location and
method of bin storage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance
with the approved details.
23.
I14 Floodlighting/security lighting prohibited without consent
24.
Prior to the approval of the reserved matters, the siting, design and colour of any
external meter boxes, external oil or LPG tanks, or other similar structures shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and
thereafter so retained.
25.
Notwithstanding the submitted details the dwellings herby permitted shall achieve a
minimum of Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. No dwelling shall be
occupied until a final Code Certificate has been issued for that dwelling certifying
that Code Level 3 has been achieved.
26.
Prior to the approval of reserved matters a detailed noise assessment indicating any
proposed mitigation measures and monitoring methodology (as a follow on the to
the submitted noise report) shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and
agreed in writing. Once approved the mitigation measures shall be fully
implemented, maintained and monitored in accordance with the agreed details. Any
variation shall require the written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reasons :-
1.
RA1
2.
This permission is in outline only and all these matters are reserved.
3.
To define the landscaping requirements.
4.
In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and appearance of the
area and the amenities of adjoining neighbours.
5.
To define the permission and for the avoidance of doubt.
6.
RC5
7.
In the interests of visual and residential amenity.
8.
RE1
81
_______________________________________________________________________________
9.
RE1
10.
RE1
11.
RE1
12.
RF12
13.
To ensure that any ground and water contamination is identified and adequately
addressed to ensure the safety of the development, the environment and to ensure
the site is suitable for the proposed use.
14.
To ensure the development will not cause harm to protected species or their
habitats and to ensure the mitigation and management of the ecology
recommendations are satisfactory, precise and carried in a sustainable manner.
15.
To ensure the development will not cause harm to protected species or their
habitats.
16.
To prevent flooding, pollution and detriment to public amenity and biodiversity.
17.
To prevent the increased risk of flooding, to improve and protect water quality,
improve habitat and amenity, and ensure future maintenance of the system.
18.
The site overlies principal aquifer. The EA recommend that piling on contaminated
sites underlain by aquifers is avoided where possible, and that non-invasive
methods, such as rafts, should be used instead.
19.
To prevent the pollution of controlled waters.
20.
RG3
21.
RK1
22.
In the interests of visual amenity.
23.
To preserve the amenities of the locality and prevent adverse light pollution.
24.
25.
To define the permission.
26.
To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of the properties and those in the
surrounding area from the adverse effects of noise.
S/2010/0332/MAO
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Brackley East
Cllr Geoffrey Nuelle & Cllr Blake Stimpson
The application was subject to a Pre-Committee Members site visit, which
took place on Tuesday 25th May 2010.
82
_______________________________________________________________________________
The applicant also undertook a Pre-Submission Presentation followed by an
open Questions and Answer Session to Members at the Council Offices in
March 2010.
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
This triangular-shaped site, historically known as Brackley Sawmills, has a total
area of some 7 ha although this application relates to only 5.62 ha. The site is
relatively flat although the design and access statement states that the site slopes
gently eastward and there is a fall in height of approximately 10 m across the site’s
width. This equates to a gradient of approximately 1:23.
1.2
There are a number of disused and recently demolished commercial buildings
which were the former Hawkins and Salmon sawmill. A wholesale builders’
merchant (Gibbs & Dandy) and a mobile catering facility are located on the northern
part of the site, with gated access from Northampton Road.
1.3
The site is bounded by the Northampton Road to the east, with a long-disused
railway cutting to the west, beyond which is residential development including John
Clare Close and Wordsworth Close which are modern housing developments of
brick construction. To the south west are older industrial buildings which are
occupied by H. Bronnley soap works. To the north of the Sawmills site is a parcel of
land referred to as ‘Robson Land’. This is a greenfield location identified for
residential use in the emerging Brackley Master Plan. To the north west is Radstone
Fields where there is a current application for a Sustainable Urban Extension (SUE)
for 1000 houses, site for primary school and local centre currently being considered
by this Council. To the north east is a BP petrol filling station incorporating a Marks
& Spencer shop. To the east is a parcel of land referred to as ‘Smyth Osborne land’
which is greenfield, but has a committee resolution (and master plan support) for
commercial use. Beyond this is the A43 dual carriageway, the main trunk road
linking the M40 and M1 motorways.
1.4
Vehicular access to the site is currently possible at four different points along the
Northampton Road although to secure the site (as a large proportion of it is disused
and in the process of being dismantled) and to prevent unauthorised access three
have been blocked up. This is because the buildings are structurally unsound and
some contain asbestos. Many views into the site from the Northampton Road and
from the existing residential development, adjoining to the west, are screened by
mature trees and shrubs. There is a pavement from the site all the way down
Northampton Road into the town centre around 1.6 km to the south.
1.5
The site has been subject to contamination in part due to its previous use as a saw
mill where tanalising of timber has taken place over a long period of time and also
from the infilling of the former railway cutting to the western edge of the site.
1.6
The very northern end of the site is within the area of land identified as the preferred
route for Central Government’s proposed High Speed Rail 2 (HS2) which was
released earlier in the year.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
83
_______________________________________________________________________________
2.1
S/2007/0824/PO Demolition of existing buildings and development of a business
park comprising uses within Class B1, Class B2 and Wholesale Builders'
Merchants/Trade Counter uses (sui generis uses comprising mainly of B8 with
ancillary offices and trade counter), new roundabout access, internal roads,
alterations to public highway, structural landscaping, surface water balancing facility
and open space. Approval (30/08/2007)
2.2
park comprising uses within Class B1 (light industry, offices, research &
development), Class B2 (General Industrial) and Wholesale Builders' Merchants,
plus new roundabout access, structural landscaping and open space. Approval
(17/05/2006)
2.3
park comprising uses within Class B1 (light industry, offices, research &
development), Class B2 (General Industrial) and Wholesale Builders' Merchants,
plus new roundabout access, structural landscaping and open space. Refusal
(23/02/2006)
2.4
park comprising Class B1 and B2 employment uses together with a hotel, leisure
and conference centre, residential care home and crèche, car show rooms,
wholesale builders merchants, plus new roundabout access, structural landscaping
and public open spaces with other ancillary works. Withdrawn (13/09/2005)
2.5
S/1998/0793/P Change Of Use To Storage And Refurbishment Of Portable
Buildings Approval (05/10/1998)
2.6
S/1997/0247/P Use Of Land For Storage Of Pallets (Retrospective) Approval
(10/04/1997)
2.7
S/1997/0208/P Use Of Part Of Land For Trailer Storage (Retrospective) Approval
(10/04/1997)
2.8
The current application was subject to some pre-application discussions under
reference P/2010/0019/PRE although these had not been fully concluded at the
point of submission.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
The application seeks outline residential development of 130 dwellings including the
construction of a roundabout on the Northampton Road and the formation of public
open space.
3.2
The application is an outline application in which the matters of principle and access
are applied for with the following aspects reserved for later consideration:
Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale. The application shows a link road
coming off the Northampton Road and travelling across the site to access the
Radstone Fields SUE and Robson Land.
3.3
The application site is the northern end of the Sawmills site only i.e. 5.62 ha. The
southern end is the site identified as a possible hospital site for Brackley in the
master plan. There have been extensive pre-application discussions with the
Primary Care Trust and the relevant developers, but this aspect of the site is not
84
_______________________________________________________________________________
related to this application. However, for information and to ensure the scheme is
considered in a holistic manner a plan has been provided showing the hospital and
care home indicatively as well as the Robson Land to the north in an attempt to
show how the Sawmills site (subject of this application) would fit in with the strategic
vision for the development of the northern part of Brackley.
3.4
The application has been submitted with a number of technical reports and other
information including: A Design and Access Statement, Transport Assessment,
Travel Plan, Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Cultural Heritage
Assessment, Air Quality Assessment, Noise Assessment, Flood Risk Assessment,
Contamination Report, Ecological Assessment, A Statement of Community
Involvement, an Employment Land availability study, Green Infrastructure Strategy.
A number of these reports have been amended following requests from Statuary
consultees during the application process. One such example is the draft heads of
terms have been expanded to a full draft S106 legal agreement which is nearing
completion at the time of writing this report.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
BRACKLEY TOWN COUNCIL: No observations
4.2
BRACKLEY RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION: Not received
4.3
TURWESTON PARISH COUNCIL: Expressed concern about traffic management
and the scheme needs to ensure further traffic does not go through Turweston
where existing problems exist.
4.4
ADJOINING LOCAL AUTHORITIES:
AYLESBURY VALE DISTRICT COUNCIL: No objection
BUCKINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL (adjoining Local Highway Authority
LHA): Not received
4.5
NCC HIGHWAYS: The LHA has no objection to this application, subject to
conditions and S106 Heads of Terms being imposed to accompany any subsequent
planning permission. The conditions relate to the following elements of the
development: Highway mitigation; internal layout; construction management and
S106 contributions towards public transport; travel plan and implementation. A
financial contribution of £200,000 is to be provided to the Local Highway Authority to
enhance the existing Brackley Buzzer bus service to provide an hourly service to
the site utilising the proposed bus stops on Northampton Road, Monday to
Saturday, for a 5 year tender period. The Brackley Buzzer is a local bus route which
links the following locations in Brackley - Tesco via Oxford Road, Bridge Street,
Market Place, High Street, Halse Road, Pavillons Way, Springfield Way, Leisure
Centre (for Surgery), Springfield Way, Pavillons Way, Martial Daire Boulevard,
Stuart Road, Pavillons Way, Banbury Road, Westhill Avenue, Waynflete Avenue,
Manor Road, Banbury Road, Bridge Street, Churchill Way, Bridge Street, Oxford
Road, Tesco's Store, Oxford Road, Bridge Street to Market Place. The service
operates Monday to Friday only and is subsidised by Northamptonshire County
Council and Brackley Town Council.
4.6
HIGHWAYS AGENCY: Originally raised some concerns with the scheme as
submitted, subject to some alteration stated the following: A43 Contribution We do
not consider that the contribution of £12,000 offered is consistent with the nil
detriment costing methodology that has been used to determine contributions for
85
_______________________________________________________________________________
other applications. It is our view that the Brackley Sawmills development would
warrant a contribution of between £25,000 - £30,000. If your client is willing to make
an offer in line with this, such an offer be accepted with no further
justification. However, you are free to undertake a full nil detriment costing
exercise (in line with the nil detriment costing methodology) to determine the exact
amount that a nil detriment scheme would cost.
4.7
Travel Plan I note that the revised Travel Plan has been modified, and is now
generally acceptable. However, the word ‘should’ at 5.1.2 should be replaced with
‘will’. Following this amendment, the Plan will be acceptable. I would conclude that
once the A43 Contribution and Travel Plan issues identified above have been
resolved, I will be in a position to remove the holding direction, subject to the
necessary wording being inserted into the Section 106 agreement for the
development.
4.8
SNC STRATEGIC POLICY (including Economic Development): No objection to the
principle of change of use subject to the applicant contribution to offsetting the loss
of an employment site. If we are to accept the argument from the applicant that
employment land is not a viable option at this time, we are allowing the applicant to
take a short term view which was at odds with the view taken by both the applicant
and SNC in 2007 when planning permission was granted for employment use.
Given the Councils remit to consider longer term implications, if employment use is
now to be lost in favour of housing, then there needs to be some form of financial
contribution to other employment projects to enable the Council to invest in projects
that will bolster existing employment in the town which has an under provision of
employment within it.
4.9
SNC LEISURE SERVICES: In terms of the contributions guide it’s laid down as
£1255 per dwelling i.e. 130 x 1255 = £163,500 within the leisure contributions guide
the threshold of 50 – 199 would trigger the need for a small community facility at
level one as well as a commuted sum for strategic facilities 2-6 as described in
paragraph 4.2. In terms of POS A commuted sum for the provision of new or
improvements to, small community facilities (Level 1 of the Strategic Recreational
and Leisure Facilities) and more strategic facilities (levels 2-6 of the Strategic
Recreational and Leisure Facilities set out in paragraph 4.2. Types of provision
could include a pocket park or play area.
4.10 Sites of 50 – 199 dwellings. On site provision of for the provision of new or
improvements to small community facilities (Level 1 of the Strategic Recreational
and Leisure Facilities) and a commuted sum for the more strategic facilities (levels
2-6 of the Strategic Recreational and Leisure Facilities set out in paragraph above).
In terms of provision it would be anticipated that public amenity space as well as
play space would be applicable, the maintenance figures are depicted below. Public
Amenity Space maintenance costs £3 per dwelling per year x 15 years = £5850
Equipped Play Area maintenance costs £44.60 per dwelling per year x 15 years =
£86,970 In addition £300 per dwelling for ‘strategic facilities’ will be requested. £300
x 130 = £39,000 Total contribution £295,320
4.11 SNC STRATEGIC HOUSING: Housing Needs - The West Northants Housing
Market Assessment (2007) and the West Northants Housing Needs Estimates
(2008) all highlight the increasing shortfall of affordable housing across the district.
The most recent of these documents estimate an annual need for 191 affordable
dwellings per year. A housing need survey in Brackley in September 2008 identified
the following housing need for the town. This identified need from the existing local
86
_______________________________________________________________________________
community and did not take into account households that wish to move to this
market town.
48 units for rent
30 x 1 or 2 bed flat or house
5 x 1 or 2 bed bungalows or ground floor flat
1 x 2 or 3 bed bungalow or ground floor flat
5 x 2 bed house
7 x 3 bed house
4 units for shared ownership
1 x 1 or 2 bed flat or house
1 x 2 bed house
2 x 3 bed house
4.12 A further check of the housing register has revealed that there are currently 209
households expressing a preference to live in Brackley. This demonstrates that
there is significant housing need in the town to be met and that this far exceeds the
levels of need identified by the housing need survey. A variety of household types
are in need, however, the largest need is among young single people, single people
over 60 years of age and small families. In terms of the council’s current allocation
policy this translates into a need for 2 and 3 bedroom properties. However further
discussion on the appropriate affordable housing mix would be sought at early
stage in this application.
4.13 With the current proposal for 130 dwellings, we would expect to achieve 40%
affordable housing for this site (52 units) in line with the affordable housing SPG
(2003), with a split of 75% rented and 25% as an intermediate product. The type of
intermediate product will be dictated by the market conditions, however it is likely to
be either NBHB or Rent to Homebuy.
4.14 Housing Mix - It is expected that the affordable housing provision be of a suitable
size and mix. The applicant will need to satisfy the local planning authority that the
mix of unit types address the local housing need based on up-to-date housing
market intelligence. Due to their limited scope for sustainable living we would not
encourage the development of 1 bedroom properties. We would want full input in
discussions on this at an early stage should outline planning permission be granted.
4.15 Design Standards - All affordable housing is expected to meet as a minimum the
Homes and Communities Agency ‘Design and Quality Standards.’ We would expect
the units to meet, as a minimum, the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3. We
would welcome design proposals that went beyond the minimum standards.
4.16 Funding - Affordable housing provided on development sites is secured through
legal agreements under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Acts. The
Council expects developers to have considered the financial implications of the
affordable housing policy requirements when purchasing the land for development.
It is expected that should an applicant consider they are unable to provide the
required planning contributions (including affordable housing) then they would need
to support their case with financial evidence. Where applicants submit evidence of
non-viability the Council will expect to see the calculations set out in enough detail
87
_______________________________________________________________________________
for viability to be properly assessed.
4.17 In terms of public subsidy for affordable housing, the availability of grants is likely to
decrease in coming years. Developers should not expect as a matter of course
grant financing from the Homes and Communities Agency unless added value is
included and can be demonstrated. This applies to social rented and intermediate
housing. Added value can include such things as higher standards of development,
unusually high elements of social rented development and extra energy efficiency
measures, which would meet a higher level of the Code for Sustainable Homes. If
the applicant can demonstrate that levels of grant funding are required for the
development to be delivered then the Strategic Housing Team will utilise the Three
Dragons South Northamptonshire Council’s Development Economics toolkit to test
varying grant scenarios and what added value grant would bring to the
development.
4.18 NATURAL ENGLAND: Request additional information in the form of amended
surveys and a Green Infrastructure. The applicant has provided a document
following this request.
4.19 Biodiversity – We believe there is low impact to the Helmdon SSSI to the north with
the current scheme but if access to the north is planned it should be in line with a
management plan to prevent harm to the SSSI. Some of the surveys (newts and
bats) are dated and need updating. Surveys in relation to Badgers are satisfactory.
Concurs with Wildlife Trust comments relating to the small blue species of butterfly.
Landscape The site is not within a special landscape designation. Green
Infrastructure improvements are needed which should be through a strategy or
management plan.
4.20 NORTHANTS BAT GROUP: Further detail with regard to the bat survey is needed.
Bats are known to be in the area. Comments concerning the revised bat survey
have not yet been received – please await update
4.21 NORTHANTS WILDLIFE TRUST: Contributions to a Green Infrastructure network.
By constructing a housing development in the proposed location, within the corridor
route of a disused railway line, the potential for Green Infrastructure (GI) delivery, in
the form of wildlife habitats connectivity, could potentially be significantly reduced.
On the other hand, by constructing a housing development in the proposed location,
the potential for GI delivery, in the form of corridor / habitat connectivity, will be a
highly significant opportunity which we would recommend that your Authority
capitalises upon to the full. Increasing connectivity of habitats is a priority for this
location due to the concentration of both existing and potential designated wildlife
site areas that lie either along, or adjacent to, its linear route.
4.22 Increasing connectivity of habitats should be a top priority for all areas of the county
in order to provide for both sustainable and robust areas of the countryside under
suitable ecological management and for a joined-up ‘Living Landscape’ that will
allow species and habitats to better adapt to the effects of climate change. This
Application Site lies right in the heart of a Sub-Regional GI Corridor. It also
coincides with a GI route formed by the Great Central Railway disused line corridor
too. These GI links will provide a valuable addition to this area of the county in
terms of biodiversity along with the nearby SSSI and the other established areas of
wildlife habitats. In light of this then, it is disappointing to note that the application
does not appear to provide any real detailed treatment of, or precise information
about, the Green Infrastructure element to its proposal.
88
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.23 Cumulative Impacts on local biodiversity and potential GI networks. The Wildlife
Trust is of the view that this Application does not adequately deal with the potential
‘pinch-pressure’ effect that this particular residential development scheme, taken
together with the proposed urban extension at the ‘Radstone Fields’ site to the
north-west of it and the proposed healthcare facility to the south of it, will
cumulatively have upon the potential to deliver a high-quality, sustainable GI
network link north-to-south along the route of the disused railway line. Of particular
concern, is the depiction, on the ‘Illustrative Landscape Masterplan’ Drawing, Ref.
P.0245_17-2, dated 8th March 2010, of a potential access route, for vehicles,
pedestrians and cyclists, from this proposed residential development here at the
Sawmills across the width of the disused railway line GI link and on into the
proposed ‘Radstone Fields’ site. This potential ‘locking-out’ of strong GI linkages
and biodiversity resources goes against the policy and guidance given within
national (PPS9).
4.24 Mitigation, enhancements and future management. The Wildlife Trust is of the view
that, with reference to the ecologists’ recommendations made throughout Section 4
of their report within the E.S. document; all of the proposed mitigation measures
therein must indeed be fully implemented. However, also of critical importance will
be the requirement for an ecological management plan ( EMP ), incorporating a
comprehensive Monitoring Programme, to be produced in order to inform and guide
the future delivery of all of the biodiversity enhancements across the whole site area
and its environs. These objectives might be best delivered by the appending of
strong, suitably-worded Planning Conditions and / or the insertion of relevant
clauses into a S106 Agreement, as appropriate.
4.25 Additional Comments. Welcomes the proposals for the overall incorporation of open
/ green space within this housing development. Paragraph 3.48 of the ecologists’
report makes a reference to the Small Blue Butterfly. This is now a very rare
butterfly species in Northamptonshire – it is listed within the Red Data Book for our
county – and the last known site for its presence is the Local Wildlife Site known as
‘Brackley Railway Embankment’ which lies not far to the south of this Application
Site along the route of the Great Central Railway disused line GI corridor. The
Wildlife Trust has a vision that aims to support this particular butterfly species and to
try aid its re-establishment and spread within this local area of the county. In order
to explain some of the background to this situation, we have included here with this
letter a schematic leaflet all about the Small Blue Butterfly Project. Therefore, the
Small Blue’s situation simply adds greater importance and significance to the
strategic need here to join pieces of habitat together and to create high-quality GI
network linkages. For instance, why not positively set out to make provision for the
food plant of the Small Blue Butterfly – Kidney Vetch – to be planted / sown into an
area of suitably-created habitat running through this proposed development site.
4.26 SNC GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY OFFICER: No objection. Given the size
of the site and the lack of an overarching strategy for the district / area I think this
document covers the main issues. I would suggest the document is a GI Plan for
the site rather than a strategy but that just semantics. I can’t really comment on the
appropriateness of their proposals not being an ecologist and will defer to the
specialists. I note the S106 covers the land transfer of the open space and
recreation, does this include all the GI area and how will the land be management in
perpetuity, we need a Management Plan as well either through condition or S106.
4.27 NCC GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE POLICY OFFICER: No objection. GI Linkages
and Impact on Brackley to Helmdon Disused Railway SSSI. At present there is a
89
_______________________________________________________________________________
contradiction within the document in that it rightly indicates that access from the site
to the SSSI to the north is obstructed by dense vegetation making it hard to access.
However there also seems to be an ambition to use the site to provide improved
green infrastructure links for north Brackley and open up access to the SSSI. The
application needs to decide which of these options it wants to achieve as at present
it come across as confused thinking. Using this development to open up new
access and thus improve the GI network of the town is fine in terms of the overall
strategy, however such an approach needs to be carefully managed to ensure that
new access towards the SSSI is well controlled to ensure it does not result in a
deterioration of the habitat for which it has been designated. At present the SSSI is
in poor condition in places and increased use should not contribute towards further
deterioration. A financial contribution from the development in the form of a S106
agreement could potentially be provided to facilitate good management of the link
between the site and the SSSI and provide interpretation for walkers using the new
linkage explaining about the biodiversity and history of the old railway line.
4.28 Bat Barn. The provision of a bat barn will be a useful addition the site; however
appropriate advice should be sought on the form and construction of this building to
ensure that it is appropriate for use by bat species that are known to be using the
site. Bat barns have been used on sites in other counties and advice could be
sought from Northants Bat Group and the Bat Conservation Trust. It should be well
constructed and built in such a way that it is difficult to vandalise and gain access to.
This should include being constructed from materials that are less susceptible to
arson attacks (e.g. limited use of combustible materials within the fabric of the
building). The condition of the building should be managed over time as part of the
Ecological Management Plan (see below) to ensure that vegetation is not allowed to
engulf the building over time and disrupt entry points to the building. The barn
should be located such that it is not overlooked by any existing lighting which may
affect any bats using it. A night time check of the location should be carried out to
ensure it is not encroached on by lights from nearby houses in Wordsworth Close
e.g. from security lighting.
4.29 Grassland Creation. The intention to create new areas of grassland along the route
of the old railway is a good use of this area, which could provide potentially high
quality habitats. Notwithstanding this, consideration should be given to the character
of the grassland. At present it is suggested that a neutral mix would be used but
given the nearby habitats and the potential underlying soils in this area it would
perhaps be better to aim for a calcareous grassland mix that mirrors the species
found on the nearby SSSI. Not only does this extend the potential habitat linkages
in the area but also has the potential to contribute in the longer term towards the
calcareous grassland creation targets in the Northamptonshire Biodiversity Action
Plan.
4.30 Ecological Management Plan (EMP) The suggestions and recommendations in the
GI strategy for the site such as the planting of kidney vetch for the small blue
butterfly all seem sensible subject to a few minor amendments. The strategy
suggests an EMP should be produced to guide the management of the site and my
suggestion would be that all of the various suggestions from the strategy should be
included more formally within the EMP and that a fully enforceable condition should
be included with the permission to ensure its production and that the works and
ongoing management are carried out. I would suggest that the EMP needs to be
produced within 6 months of permission being granted and should be available to
various stakeholders such as the Wildlife Trust for comment.
90
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.31 NCC RIGHTS OF WAY: No objection or comments.
4.32 RAMBLERS ASSOCIATION: No comment
4.33 NCC ARCHAEOLOGY: The applicant has submitted a Cultural Heritage
Assessment produced by Cotswold Archaeology (2010) with the application which
aims to provide information regarding the nature and extent of the cultural heritage
resource within the development area. The assessment concludes that the area has
potential for Iron Age and Roman activity. The site is currently predominately
hardstanding and as such it is reasonable to assume that it is likely to have had an
impact on any archaeological deposits present. However although this may have
resulted in truncation of some shallower deposits there is still the potential for
significant remains to survive below the hardstanding.
4.34 I note that Cotswold Archaeology recognise the need for a mitigation strategy and
also that this should be undertaken in consultation with the County Archaeological
Advisor. In most occasions a site of this size in a landscape of identified
archaeological potential would require pre determination evaluation. However in this
particular occasion due to the extent of the hardstanding within the greater area of
the site I would agree that the archaeological evaluation would be best undertaken
post determination. In order to allow the best opportunity to identify archaeological
deposits the removal of the hardstanding will need to be undertaken in conjunction
with the archaeological contractors. The proposed application will have a
detrimental impact upon any archaeological deposits present. This does not
however represent an over-riding constraint on the development provided that
adequate provision is made for the investigation and recording of any remains that
are affected as per the guidance within PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment
to any permission granted in respect of this application.
4.35 I suggest the following condition: ‘No development shall take place within the area
indicated until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the
implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written
scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in
writing by the local planning authority.’
4.36 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY:
Environmental Infrastructure - Thank you for
forwarding the ‘Suggested Informative Statements and Conditions Report’ sent by
Anglian Water, reference 1106/SP10(003), dated 18 May 2010 in relation to the
above development. We did consider that the forthcoming Brackley master plan
could provide a strategic solution to Brackley’s environmental infrastructure issues,
as opposed to looking at individual applications in isolation. However, subject to
Anglian Water confirming both sufficient water resource capacity and that the water
supply network system has adequate capacity to serve this development we would
be prepared to withdraw our previous objection on environmental infrastructure
grounds, subject to the imposition of conditions.
4.37 Flood Risk I can confirm that we have now reviewed a Flood Risk Assessment
produced by Cannon Consulting Engineers, reference CCE/B311/FRA, dated
March 2010. We consider that the details in the FRA have been undertaken in line
with Annex E of Planning Policy Statement 25 'Development and Flood Risk'
(PPS25), and these are considered appropriate for the scale and nature of the
proposed development. Accordingly, we are prepared to withdraw our previous
objection on flood risk grounds, subject to the imposition of conditions on any
91
_______________________________________________________________________________
subsequent planning permission granted:
4.38 Contamination - The recommendations made for further groundwater investigations
to identify and delineate the extent of the groundwater contamination present at the
site, followed by remediation if necessary, are generally acceptable. However,
further investigation of the identified soil contamination to delineate its vertical and
lateral extent, followed by a quantitative assessment of the risk to controlled waters
posed by this soil contamination will also be necessary. It will be necessary to
determine acceptable remedial targets, (protective of controlled waters) for soils
remaining at this site. Under no circumstance should contaminated material be left
in the ground without satisfactorily demonstrating that it does not pose an
unacceptable risk to controlled waters. Proposals to replace 500mm of soils with
clean soils in gardens only may therefore be insufficient for the protection of
controlled waters.
4.39 A remediation strategy for the whole site will be required following the further
investigations and controlled waters QRA. In accordance with the Environment
Agency Groundwater Protection Policy, direct discharges into groundwater of
surface water run-off are not normally acceptable except where the prior written
consent of the Environment Agency has been given under the terms of the Water
Resources
Act
1991.
Such
consent
may
be
withheld.
As part of our Groundwater Protection Policy all infiltration structures (permeable
pavements, infiltration trenches, soakaways, etc.) should be constructed to as
shallow a depth as possible to simulate natural infiltration. The base of infiltration
structures is to be at least 1.2 metres above the highest seasonal water-table as
direct discharges to groundwater are unacceptable. No infiltration structures should
be constructed in contaminated land.
4.40 ANGLIAN WATER: No objection the site has adequate water supply capacity, foul
flows and Brackley Sewage works has adequate capacity. Defers comment on
Surface Water Drainage to the Environment Agency.
4.41 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: Air Quality, Noise and Contamination 4.42 Air Quality – No objections or observations.
4.43 Noise - I am satisfied that the noise assessments detailed in the WBM Reports
submitted in support of the proposed development has been undertaken in
accordance with the relevant standards and procedures. No adverse comment
regarding noise aspect of the proposed development subject to imposition of
appropriate safeguarding conditions
4.44 Contamination - The report from the Nott Group confirms that there is contamination
across the site and that further investigations are taking place. As mentioned in the
report, on completion of all necessary site investigations a detailed scheme of
remediation will need to be submitted, and approved in writing, to ensure the site is
suitable for its proposed use.
4.45 PRIMARY CARE TRUST: Not received at the time of writing, please await update
4.46 NCC KEY SERVICES: The following contributions will be sought:
4.47
Libraries contribution: £ 29,770.00
92
_______________________________________________________________________________
1 Bed = £116
2 Bed = £155
3 Bed = £229
4 Bed = £290
5 Bed = £ 326
4.48 Fire and Rescue contribution: £11,180.00 (£86 per dwelling)
4.49 Education contribution: Depends on the final dwelling mix at reserved matters
stage, but using the usual multipliers would be based on the following amounts.
1 Bed = £0
2 Bed = £588
3 Bed = £2,756
4 Bed = £5,010
5 Bed = £ 9,828
4.50 ARBORICULTURAL OFFICER: There are a number of TPO trees and a great
number of unprotected trees on what appear to be the highway verge to
Northampton Road which seems to disappear under an enormous roundabout on
the indicative layout. This includes a row of ash trees that have not been replanted
after they were felled several years ago, shortly after the TPO was made (a tree
replacement notice was served on 5th March 2007 and was never complied with)
4.51 Other than the TPO trees and other trees on the Northampton Road mentioned
above there are no trees of any particular significance that could be lost. The
proposed indicative layout shows plenty of landscaping provision and public open
space that will more than make up for any loss of other trees on the inner part of the
site. A comprehensive landscaping scheme will need to be agreed and this should
include replacement trees to compensate for the amenity value of the trees to be
lost.
4.52 NORTHANTS POLICE CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR: No objection in
principle. I note and welcome the intention to adopt the ‘perimeter block’
arrangement for most of the development. However, this appears to be undermined
by the inclusion of what appear to be 3 parking courts. These should be avoided if
possible, as parking courts offer easy access to the rear gardens of dwellings, the
preferred route for most burglars, and can be the site of vehicle crime and antisocial behaviour of many types. If the courts are retained, the effects can be
mitigated by changing the orientation of some of the dwellings to directly overlook
the courts, giving more of a ‘mews’ feel. This has been achieved at the new
Bridleways development in Northampton.
4.53
Lighting should be specified to BS5489-1: 2003, and certification produced to verify
this. Bollard lighting should be avoided, as it is ineffectual, casting light too low to be
of value, and the bollards themselves are easily damaged, whether accidentally or
deliberately. The proposed ‘landscaped open space’ at the western edge of the
93
_______________________________________________________________________________
development needs careful treatment. In urban settings, any footpaths/cycleways
which are separate from general movement corridors can be nuisance and antisocial behaviour generators. Brackley in particular, suffers from problems of this
nature, and any new development should take this into account. The path must be
in open space, and well overlooked. Soft landscaping in the vicinity of the path
should be restricted to low-growing varieties.
4.54 There are particular concerns regarding the siting of the proposed play area in the
north-western corner of the site. It appears to be stuck in a corner of the site, out of
the way. Any such facility should be an integral part of the development and well
overlooked by neighbouring dwellings. If parents of young children do not feel it is a
safe environment, they will not allow them to use it, and it is likely to be ‘taken over’
by older children and youths. A number of such facilities have been destroyed
and/or removed in Brackley, following misuse and serious vandalism.
4.55 THIRD PARTIES: One e-mail received from Gill Balloch (no address provided –
comment submitted via e-mail) raising objection to the proposal.
4.56 ISSUES RAISED: Objects to the introduction of the play park, will attract unwanted
visitors and is located behind gardens, anti-social behaviour will result. 130 houses
are excessive given the area of the site. Queries the amount of parking with each
house likely to generate the need for two cars to be parked.
5.
POLICY
5.1
The application should be assessed in light of the following development plan
policies and Government Guidance:
5.2
NATIONAL PLANNING GUIDANCE: PSS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development),
PPS3 (Housing), PPS4 (Commercial/Employment), PPS5 (in respect of
Archaeology), PPS9 (Biodiversity), PPG13 (Transportation), PPS23 (Pollution),
PPS24 (Noise) and PPS25 (Flooding)
5.3
SOUTH NORTHAMPTONSHIRE LOCAL PLAN: G2 (General), G3 (General
Development Control), H3 (Housing in Brackley), EV1 (Design) IMP1 (Developer
Contributions), EV21 (Landscape)
5.4
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE: Planning Out
Northamptonshire, Developer Contributions, Energy and Development
5.5
OTHER: Draft Brackley Master Plan (June 2010)
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues in consideration of this application are:
Crime
in
The principle including the justification for the loss of employment land to residential
Sustainability of the location
Indicative Layout and Design
The impact on the character and appearance of the area
The impact on the streetscene and northern approach to Brackley
94
_______________________________________________________________________________
Highways considerations (including local, strategic and linkages to adjoining sites)
Pedestrian and cycle linkages to the Town centre and Radstone Fields
Flooding and Drainage considerations
Environmental considerations including: Air Quality, Noise and Contamination
Wildlife, Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity considerations
Developer contributions
Landscape and Arboricultural considerations
Boundary treatments for the site
Leisure provision (On site and off site)
Historic Environment and Archaeological considerations
The impact on neighbouring properties
Other matters including - High Speed Rail 2 (HS2) implications and Brackley
Hospital
6.2
PRINCIPLE: The application site was last in employment use and as can be seen
from the planning history contained in section 2 of this report has recent planning
permissions on the site for further employment uses. National Guidance promotes
the principles of sustainable development. This policy approach is embodied in
Paragraph 3 of Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development
(PPS1) (February 2005) which states that ‘Sustainable development is the core
principle underpinning planning’. Paragraph 5 advises that the planning process
should ‘facilitate and promote sustainable/inclusive patterns of urban and rural
development by:
making suitable land available for development in line with economic, social and
environmental objectives to improve people’s quality of life;
contributing to sustainable economic development;
protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and
character of the countryside, and existing communities;
ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive design, and the
efficient use of resources; and
ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes to the
creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and mixed communities with good access to
jobs and key services for all members of the community.’
6.3
This policy approach is an important consideration in respect of this application.
Since 2001 there have been 428 houses built in Brackley and 7.42ha. of new
employment development. According to the Councils 2004 Household Survey out
commuting to work from Brackley was estimated at approximately 75% and there is
no reason to suggest that this has changed. There is a need for this imbalance to
95
_______________________________________________________________________________
be addressed with both the development of additional employment sites in the town
and by the protection of existing opportunities.
6.4
Paragraph 10 of Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic
Growth sets out the Government’s objectives regarding the achievement of
sustainable economic growth. These include:
building prosperous communities by improving the economic performance of cities,
towns, regions, sub-regions and local areas, both urban and rural
reducing the gap in economic growth rates between regions, promoting
regeneration and tackling deprivation
delivering more sustainable patterns of development, reducing the eed to travel,
especially by car, and responding to climate change, and
promoting the vitality and viability of town and other centres as important places for
communities.
6.5
The PPS (Policy EC1.3) states that, at the local level, the evidence base should
assess the detailed need for land or floorspace for economic development,
including for all main town centre uses over the plan period. The evidence base
should also assess ‘the existing and future supply of land available for economic
development, ensuring that existing site allocations for economic development are
reassessed against the policies in this PPS, particularly if they are for single or
restricted uses. Where possible, any reviews of land available for economic
development should be undertaken at the same time as, or combined with, strategic
housing land availability assessments’
6.6
As part of the work underpinning the emerging Local Development Framework a
number of studies have been prepared that consider the need for economic
development related activities. The main ‘saved’ local plan policies that need to be
considered are policies H3 and E4. Policy H3 allows for the principle of housing
development within Brackley and therefore this proposal accords with that Policy. It
is also accepted that the principle of allowing residential development within
Brackley is consistent with the urban orientated focus of the Local Plan and most
notably Policy G2. However it is important to note that Policy G2 applies to all forms
of development including industrial and commercial that are needed to create
sustainable communities. Furthermore it is accepted that the principle of residential
development in this part of Brackley is consistent with the Local Plan as long as it is
on suitable sites.
6.7
Paragraph 3.14 of the Local Plan considers that the Council will seek to maintain as
far as possible all existing employment uses except where an established or
proposed industrial or commercial use is not particularly well suited to a site. In such
cases, there may be a significant gain to the local environment in allowing an
alternative use.
6.8
Policy E4 states that ‘planning permission will not be granted for the change of use
or redevelopment of a site or building currently or last used, and which remains
suitable for, industrial or commercial purposes to a non-employment use.
Exceptions may be made where the proposal is in accordance with Policy R1 or
where the existing use can be shown to be in significant conflict with the criteria set
out under Policy G3.’
96
_______________________________________________________________________________
6.9
The planning policy context of the Environmental Reports Compendium
accompanying the application actually highlights the potential supply situation in
Brackley itself which states Table 10.8 of the SELA (Strategic Employment Land
Availability) indicates that the sites at Brackley considered to have the potential to
deliver enhanced employment opportunities have the capacity to accommodate
approximately 95,600sqm of new floorspace. The utilisation of the SELA
employment land typologies for Northamptonshire suggests that this potential
capacity could accommodate some 3,290 extra jobs at Brackley. The portfolio of
sites evaluated by the SELA has the capacity to provide new employment
opportunities far in excess of the new housing the light of this assessed future
supply, the applicant does not consider it necessary, in planning policy terms, to
maintain the planning application site for economic development.
6.10 In terms of specific sites, the SELA portfolio of sites with potential for ‘next stage’
evaluation at Brackley includes 2 hectares of land within the wider definition of the
Brackley Sawmills site and new jobs will be created on the southern part of the
Sawmills site through the development of the proposed community health care
facility. Paragraph 6.7.4.1 of the Emergent Joint Core Strategy describes the
preferred spatial strategy for Brackley, incorporating Brackley North (providing
approximately 1,600 dwellings) and Brackley East (assumed to deliver
approximately 650 jobs). Paragraph 6.7.4.5 of the EJCS states that Brackley East
will deliver 25 hectares of mixed B Class employment. Table 10.8 of the SELA
contains sites for ‘next stage evaluation’, including two locations off Turweston
Road at Brackley. Those two sites (S9 and S13) contain 24.2 hectares of land for
new economic development. These two sites fall within the definition of Brackley
East contained in the Emergent Joint Core Strategy. The Northamptonshire SELA
considers that this location has the capacity to accommodate some 82,800sqm of
new floorspace. By utilising the employment densities for Northamptonshire
described at Appendix G of the SELA, it can be calculated that Brackley East could
deliver approximately 2,820 jobs, an outcome significantly greater than that
described in the EJCS.
6.11 There is no need to maintain the existing employment use conferred by the present
planning permission as the SELA identifies a significant supply of potential
employment land at Brackley. Furthermore, the Council has resolved to grant
planning permission for an industrial/business park on 10.2 hectares of land
between Turweston Road and Northampton Road, Brackley (application no.
S/2008/1648/PO). This is site S13 assessed in the Northamptonshire SELA. The
amount of floorspace accepted by the Council on this site could accommodate
between 1,145 and 1,205 jobs. SNC’s report regarding application no.
S/2008/1648/PO states that the total amount of gross floorspace on the site shall
not exceed 38,000sqm. B1(a) shall not exceed 8,000sqm (400 jobs), B1(c) could
cover 15,000-20,000sqm (470-625 jobs) and B8 could occupy 15,000-10,000sqm
(275-180 jobs).
6.12 The Brackley Employment Land Demand Study (BELDS) suggested that there was
a need to provide 12 hectares of employment-generating land at Brackley in the
period up to 2021. The Brackley Sawmills site was deemed to contribute 5 hectares
of that overall requirement. The four sites proposed in the Northamptonshire SELA
for ‘next stage evaluation’ collectively encompass an area of 28.2 hectares, a
potential supply substantially in excess of the requirement described in the Brackley
Employment Land Demand Study. That suggested potential supply anticipates only
2 hectares of land being used at Brackley Sawmills for new employment-generating
97
_______________________________________________________________________________
development. Crucially, paragraph 5.3 of the BELDS contends that it is not just the
quantity of employment land that should be considered. The Study concluded that,
in order to attract value-added employment opportunities to Brackley, it is ‘essential’
to have a range of quality employment sites available. The Study categorically
observes that the Sawmills site does not fulfil this qualitative need and that the
Council should seek to provide a range of sites.
6.13 The Savills/White Commercial report that accompanies the planning application
quantifies the potential increase in job opportunities at Brackley itself (1,993 jobs).
The report refers to the contribution that Silverstone will make to local employment
provision but does not suggest that those proposed job opportunities constitute any
justification for the present planning application regarding the Sawmills site. The
calculations contained in the report need to be viewed in the context of the
comments at paragraphs 4.1 and 4.29 of the BELDS.
6.14 In conclusion, the applicant has demonstrated that there is no viable way of
redeveloping this site for employment uses and that Brackley and the surrounding
area has sufficient employment land to meet immediate and future needs
adequately without the need to retain the part of the Sawmills site relevant to this
application. In this instance the Council’s policy and economic development officers
have thoroughly considered the applicant’s case that the site is not viable for
economic use and that Brackley and the surrounding area has an overprovision of
employment land rendering this site unnecessary as outlined in the preceding
paragraphs. In addition the cost of decontamination due to the extent of
contamination and resultant expense for clearing the site and making good and the
desirability of delivering the master plan objectives such as the hospital and access
to Radstone outweigh the conflict with policy E4.
6.15 Mitigation - Given the Council’s remit to consider longer term implications, if
employment use is now to be lost in favour of housing, then there needs to be some
form of financial contribution to other employment projects to enable the Council to
invest in projects that will bolster existing employment in the town which has an
under provision of employment within it.
6.16 Officers note that while Silverstone is within the Travel – to – Work area of Brackley
(a large area given the rural character of the District) and the applicant has made
the argument that its projected employment generation needs to be taken into
account when considering the proposed loss of potential employment on the
Sawmills site we note Government and Council planning policy remains to try to
reduce travel between home and work and the loss of this potential employment site
will exacerbate existing travel problems.
6.17 But, given the additional land value of housing over employment, officers feel the
case for a contribution to Council projects that will bolster employment within
Brackley is reasonable without affecting the viability of a residential development.
There are 2 main existing employment opportunities in Brackley that the Masterplan
process has identified as priorities which the Council will pursue. These are the
renewal of the town centre (non-B use) and Buckingham Road Industrial Estate (B
use). Both have their own issues, Buckingham Road Industrial Estate has issues
around environmental health, crime and appearance and the Town Centre has
issues around appearance, high vacancy rates and low footfall.
6.18 Strategic Policy have suggested a contribution towards projects which help improve
these issues and protect and generate new employment which will support the
98
_______________________________________________________________________________
viability of the town. There are a number of related options to which a contribution is
sought;
Contribution to the new Brackley Town Fund which SNC agreed to establish in
January 2010 (see draft SPD on Developer Contributions recently consulted upon
which sets out full details). It is proposed that a Town Manager post is created and
filled to improve co-ordination between business, local agencies and landlords
within the centre of the town, to drive down the current high vacancy rate. This post
would also undertake a proposed shop front improvement scheme that will improve
the appearance of the high street. It is also proposed the Town Manager would coordinate work within the town centre and takes over support to the recently
established Buckingham Road Industrial Estate Group which lies to the east of the
town centre please see paragraphs 6.19 to 6.23 below. Post cost - £35,000 per
annum including on-costs x 3 years = £105,000 total
Contribution towards marketing of the town centre retail (building on the recent Try
Brackley First retailers initiative to improve footfall and town centre vitality = £10,000
x 3 years = £30,000 total
Signage, road marking and security initiatives on Buckingham Road Industrial
Estate = £100,000 total
Total - £235,000 over 3 years
The above contributions will be discussed shortly with the applicant and the results
of these discussions will be updated to Committee.
6.19 Buckingham Road Industrial Estate Group - The Buckingham Road Industrial Estate
was set up in June 2010. It is currently co-ordinated by Northamptonshire
Enterprise Ltd with the active support and involvement of South Northamptonshire
Council and attended by businesses on the Estate and Northamptonshire Police.
There are 16 such groups around the County covering a number of industrial
estates.
6.20 The main concerns that have been identified by the group are;
Crime levels and security
Concerns over parking on / blind spots on some of the T Junctions – in particular
Buckingham Road near Faccenda – possible introduction of yellow lines on this
section of road
Lorries parking overnight and longer
Scrap metal thefts
Issues with people gaining access to the estate from the bottom of the railway track
(this would be solved by having CCTV)
The estate has been used as a race track at the weekends
6.21 These issues are common to many industrial estates. The Buckingham Road group
is in its infancy and is undertaking further work to identify more specific issues and
translate these into achievable actions. A separate contribution from an off-site
99
_______________________________________________________________________________
developer would help tackle some of the more immediate issues identified by the
Buckingham Road Businesses to ensure the estate is improved in terms of security
and appearance.
6.22 The estate is identified in the draft Brackley Masterplan as in need of improvement,
to drive down rising vacancy rates and the preparation of a Development brief for
redevelopment. This priority will be retained into the final version of the Brackley
Master plan.
6.23 The Buckingham Road group has discussed the long term option to form a
Business Improvement District (BID) as has been the case at the Brackmills
Industrial Estate in Northampton. Although much larger the Brackmills BID currently
raise £400,000 per annum to tackle issues such as security, transport access,
appearance of the estate and group buying. Due to the nature of BID’s being a legal
partnership which all must pay into if the majority votes in favour, so it is not a quick
option.
6.24 SUSTAINABILITY OF THE LOCATION: The application site is located within the
settlement boundary of Brackley and is adjacent to a major route into the town. In
this sense it can be considered a sustainable location. In terms of specific key local
facilities, the following is within reasonable distance of the application site:
Lake Field Nursery School at a distance of 1.8 km from the site;
Brackley Church of England Junior School at a distance of 1.7 km from the site;
Magdalen College School (providing secondary and sixth form education) a
distance of 1.3 km from the site;
A health centre is located within the Town Centre 800 m from the site on Halse
Road;
In terms of employment, there is a large industrial estate (Buckingham Road)
situated on the south-eastern edge of Brackley a distance of 1.3 km from the site;
Major employment development is planned on the opposite side of Northampton
Road on the Smyth-Osbourne site.
The Town Centre which has a range of shops and services is situated at a distance
of approximately 1 to 1.6 km south of the site.
6.25 IMPACT ON THE STREETSCENE AND NORTHERN APPROACH TO
BRACKLEY: At present the application site is a prominent site which forms part of
the northern approach to the town as it links onto the A43 dual carriageway. The
current state of the site does not make for a particularly attractive approach to the
town (reflected in the draft master plan which identified the site as an important
gateway to the town) and therefore a priority of the draft master plan to improve the
situation.
6.26 On site at present are a series of dated and largely dilapidated commercial
buildings. Many of the former buildings have now been demolished, but those which
remain have fallen into disrepair and will be demolished. The applicant has for a
considerable period of time struggled to secure the site and to this extent parts of
the site have been subject to anti-social behaviour, unauthorised stripping of
materials, informal recreational uses such as skateboarding and tipping of
100
_______________________________________________________________________________
materials.
6.27 The Council’s Arboricultural officer recognises that the existing trees which form the
boundary to Northampton Road offer some amenity value. Concern was expressed
by him about the loss of a number of trees at the point of the proposed roundabout
as it would potentially open up the site visually. However, he was unable to sustain
an objection due to the fall back position of existing permissions and due to the
potential for the reserved matter of landscaping to provide a replacement scheme of
planting. The details of this would need to be agreed and the intention would be to
soften the visual impact of the development and enhance the existing streetscene
which is characterised by a largely green approach to the town.
6.28 The area of public open space occupying the former dismantled railway along the
western edge of the site will be planted so as to enhance the opportunities for
wildlife habitation in this area; especially for bats and bird life. A special landscape
treatment will be afforded to the nodes or key spaces in the form of paving surface
treatments and street trees. This will assist in providing a sense of place within
these key spaces. The main boulevard running through the centre of the scheme
will benefit from having new planting, whilst the landscape strip along the southern
boundary of the site with the potential healthcare development south will also
receive tree planting. In terms of children’s play areas, it is currently intended that
play space or facilities (Local Landscaped Area of Play) will be provided at the
northern end of the western area of public open space. This will allow pedestrians to
access the play space for most parts of the site by walking through the public open
space along the western edge of the site. An appropriate separation distance will
need to be provided between the play area itself and any intended buildings.
6.29 In summary, the proposal seeks to clear the site and compensate the loss of
vegetation with a comprehensive scheme of landscaping as a reserved matter and
in this sense the proposal would accord with the aims and objectives of the draft
master plan along with adopted local plan policies G3 and EV1.
6.30 IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The application has for a number
of years been an intensively used commercial use which generated significant
traffic, noise and other disturbance to the immediate locality. To the west are
residential properties in relatively close proximity to the site (separated only by the
former railway cutting) and in this sense the development of a residential use should
prove more in keeping with the character of the area. There is a commercial use
proposed for the Smyth-Osbourne site to the east, but this will be separated from
the Sawmills site by the Northampton Road which at this point is wide with two sets
of hedgerow which should be a sufficient barrier to prevent either use impacting on
the other. To the north is the potential Robson land which is very likely to come
forward as a residential use in the future and the current proposal would
complement it. The hospital to the south would not detract from the character of the
area and the precise linkages and separations between the two sites would be
subject to agreement at a later date.
6.31 The Sawmills site has been in industrial use for many years and has a functional
character which includes large areas of hard-standing and large buildings. The site
vegetation is sparse and confined largely to the boundaries of the site by necessity,
to allow the site to operate efficiently. In both visual and character terms, the
Sawmills site does not relate well to the surrounding area. The site is industrial in
character, in contrast with the surrounding areas to the north and east. The
proposals to change the character of the site from industrial development to
101
_______________________________________________________________________________
residential would have a beneficial effect upon both the character of the site and the
surrounding area, particularly given the high standard of design which would be
implemented at this new gateway to Brackley.
6.32 INDICATIVE LAYOUT AND DESIGN: The application, based on the site area and
assuming a density approach of 45 dwellings per hectare, will deliver 130 dwellings.
The Design and access statement states ‘It is likely that the majority of the housing
provided will be in the form of family housing i.e. semi-detached or detached
dwellings with their own amenity space’. The development includes 1 hectare of
public (Landscaped) open space. This incorporates a play area to meet the needs
of the younger children likely to be accommodated in the development. The built
development and associated pattern of streets need to achieve a good residential
layout whist avoiding the in-filled former railway cutting which is contaminated.
Within these constraints the developer has proposed a series of perimeter blocks
whose size and arrangement allow suitable separation distances for dwellings as
well as allowing permeability between the new area of public open space and
Northampton Road. The developers have created two nodes or key spaces within
the built development itself, to provide variety and a focus for the new development.
6.33 In order to ensure that the proposed development responds appropriately to its
context, the Design and Access Statement suggests an arrangement of three
character areas as follows:
The ‘Green Edge’ character area along the western and northern edge of the site;
The ‘Suburban Core’ character area located within the scheme itself; and
The ‘Northampton Road Gateway’ character area located primarily along the
Northampton Road frontage.
6.34 Although appearance is a reserved matter the Design and Access Statement
suggests the following approach may be appropriate ‘Architectural Style- Given the
site’s position at a gateway location into Brackley, Brackley’s association with high
technology, Formula 1 motor racing, and the site’s position in relation to forthcoming
employment development across Northampton Road; a contemporary architectural
approach may be most appropriate within the Northampton Road Gateway
character area. Within the Suburban Core character areas and especially the Green
Edge character areas, a more traditional approach would be more appropriate albeit
we suggest with contemporary features. This would help to ensure a sense of
cohesion within the development as a whole. The site’s relationship with the open
countryside lying to the north suggests a more traditional architectural response for
the Green Edge character area intended for these locations’.
6.35 In terms of scale it is anticipated that the majority of the residential buildings on the
site would be two storeys, occasionally rising to 2.5 storeys around the key spaces
or nodes. The maximum height will be 3 storeys fronting Northampton Road where
the character of the scheme is intended to reflect the gateway setting. Although
there are some concerns in respect of the layout, design and scale, these matters
can be dealt with adequately at the reserved matters stage.
6.36 HIGHWAYS CONSIDERATIONS: There are three important issues. Firstly
consideration needs to assess the impact on the strategic highways network.
Secondly the impact on local route. Thirdly the issue of the link road to Robson and
Radstone Fields as well as the related issues of Travel Plan, Public Transport and
102
_______________________________________________________________________________
sustainability.
6.37 Strategic Highways considerations: The Highways Agency (HA) have raised no
objection to the proposal having originally raised some concerns with the scheme.
Subject to increased contributions towards highways improvements and some
alterations and contributions to the submitted Travel Plan the application is
acceptable in terms of its impact on the strategic highways network. The travel plan
will need to form part of the finalised S106. The Highways Agency also requires that
the Strategic Highways Contribution (SHC) be held for a 10 year period and the
developer is agreeable to this. The wording within the S106 will be redrafted
accordingly and also incorporate a start date for that 10 year period.
6.38 Local road network considerations: The engineer from the County Council (LHA)
raises no objection to the application as submitted subject to a number of
conditions, informatives and contributions which need to be included in the legal
agreement. For clarity these can be summarised below:
6.39 Highway mitigation
Southern access junction (Trade Counter) – Ghost Island Right turn priority junction
on Northampton Road, to include pedestrian refuges on Northampton Road. Shown
indicatively on Cannon Consulting Engineers drawing B311- SK014 (Rev.B).
Northern access junction (Residential) – 50m ICD, 4 arm roundabout access on
Northampton Road. Shown indicatively on Cannon Consulting Engineers drawing
B311-SK014 (Rev.B).
Link Road from Northern Access Junction to northwest boundary of the site to be
7.3m wide, with 2 simple priority junctions for residential access. Shown indicatively
on Cannon Consulting Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B). Revised priority
junction (as per extant 2007 permission) at Northampton Road/Turweston Road,
required if a roundabout in this location has not already been provided by others.
Footways adjacent to Northampton Road and new link road, Shown indicatively on
Cannon Consulting Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B), including a connection
to the existing petrol filling station to the north of the site.
A signal controlled pedestrian crossing on Northampton Road, and any footways
required to tie in to existing footways, south of junction with Turweston Road,
Shown indicatively on Cannon Consulting Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B).
Two Bus stops located between the two site access junctions on Northampton
Road, one either side of Northampton Road, shown indicatively on Cannon
Consulting Engineers drawing B311-SK014 (Rev.B), to include the provision of
shelters, bus boarders, truform poles, timetable information, real time information,
and appropriate road markings.
6.40 Construction Management
Prior to the commencement of any part of the development hereby permitted, a
Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
local planning authority. The Construction Management Plan shall include and
specify the provision to be made for the following:
Dust mitigation measures during the construction period;
103
_______________________________________________________________________________
Control of noise emanating from the site during the construction period;
Hours of construction work for the development
Contractors’ compounds and other storage arrangements;
Enclosure of phase or sub-phase development sites;
Provision for all site operatives, visitors and construction vehicles loading, off
loading, parking and turning within the site during the construction period;
Arrangements during the construction period to minimise the deposit of mud and
other similar debris on the adjacent public highways;
Routing agreement for construction traffic.
6.41 Public Transport
Prior to occupation of the first dwelling a financial contribution of £200,000 (two
hundred thousand pounds) is to be provided to the Local Highway Authority to
enhance the existing Brackley Buzzer bus service to provide an hourly service to
the site utilising the proposed bus stops on Northampton Road, Monday to
Saturday, for a 5 year tender period (£40,000 x 5).
Parking: There will be parking provision in the form of the following:
Courtyard parking bays and coach houses;
On street parking;
On plot parking bays and garage parking.
The detail of the parking arrangements will be resolved at the Reserved Matters
Application stage.
6.42 Scale, Size and Capacity of the Link Road. Northants County Council (the LHA for
Northampton Road) are satisfied with the access provision made in the Sawmills
planning application. This is concluded in their response to the application. This
also differs little in terms of design and capacity from the extant employment
permission in 2007 which updated the 2006 permission. In both cases, and since,
the developers have been asked to make provision for connection to potential
development in North Brackley. The provision made in the 2007 application was
designed on the basis of there being employment on the Sawmills site and the
adjacent Robson land. The scale of the roundabout is related to the capacity
assessments carried out in the absence of detailed proposals for Radstone Fields
but making robust assumptions in respect of likely traffic generation and assignment
to the network. This was accepted and consented in 2007. Other than updating the
development assumptions for Radstone Fields and the Robson Land now as
residential, little has changed. The capacity of the roundabout and dimension of the
access road at 7.3m is consistent with the requirements of NCC and agreed with
them. If this were to reduce in width, the applicant could accommodate this within
the wider access corridor that has been allowed for. It has been suggested by the
applicant’s transport consultant that the dimension of the road will vary little given
that it will almost certainly become a bus route from the Northampton Road to
Radstone Fields and NCC’s own design guidance would seek a carriageway of at
104
_______________________________________________________________________________
least 6.0m. If the road reduced further in width within the Radstone Fields master
plan, then the transition could be redesigned within the detailed proposals in due
course.
6.43 In terms of layout of the road and connection with Radstone Fields, NCC has
confirmed that this is preferable to that which was previously consented in 2007.
The Radstone Fields applicants have also made provision for this connection in
their masterplan and are concerned that a change now will affect their recently
submitted application. The road layout also makes provision for connection to the
Robson’s land through a side hung priority junction. This is supportable and
accepted by NCC. The road connection is only illustrative in the BMP and not
definitive.
6.44 The applicant was made aware that discussions were ongoing with the Radstone
developers and the two highway authorities and that the scale of the road and its
final position may be subject to change. As the application does not list this as a
reserved matter should the needs on the adjoining sites change the applicant will
need to formally reconsider this aspect as by this application being approved the
road layout and scale are being granted planning permission and therefore ay
variation will necessitate a new application. The alternative would have been for the
applicant to keep the road link a reserved matter, but this was not considered
suitable particularly since the highway authority had requested the applied for
specification since early discussions commenced in 2005.
6.45 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE LINKAGES: The application proposes to provide
linkages from the site onto Northampton road, into the proposed hospital site, to the
Brackley SUE, to the future Robson Land and to the BP filling station. The only
direction it is not intended to link the site to is the existing residential development to
the west. This is because there is no available space between the properties to
formulate such a link and the Northants Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor
has suggested such a link may be inappropriate. .The precise details of pedestrian
and cycle linkages within the site are unknown at present as these are details
reserved for later consideration. The applicant has however identified a number of
possible methodologies for improving permeability and direct linkages in their Travel
Plan which has been out to consultation and agreed and will form a key part of the
S106.
6.46 The Council initially requested financial contributions towards improving cycle
linkages to the new employment opportunities being developed at Silverstone. It is
difficult, to consider and determine a level of contribution to a scheme without any
form of scheme definition. The developer’s transport consultant has confirmed with
the Highways Engineer at the County Council that NCC is not aware of such a
proposal and it forms no part of their comprehensive response to the application
consultation dated 7 June 2010. The engineer has confirmed that this is considered
to be their final and full response and clearly includes for all the various
requirements of highways, access and transport infrastructure required by the
development. There is also no mention of such cycle linkage in the Brackley
masterplan or the Silverstone Draft Development Brief. The developer (through
their transport consultant) would respectfully suggest that Silverstone is beyond any
acceptable or attractive cycle distance. Indeed, the Draft Brackley Masterplan has
clearly considered this and places the burden for such sustainable linkage on public
transport, to which the Sawmills is contributing as an outcome of the consultation
with Northants County Council.
105
_______________________________________________________________________________
6.47 The Highway Authorities (both HA and LHA) intention is to support improvements to
a variety of bus services from this collective pool of contributions. NCC Highways
has indicated some of these monies will be used on inter-urban services including
those that connect Brackley with Towcester and conceivably via Silverstone. The
contribution is in part justified on making the Sawmills more sustainable and for
‘loss’ of employment. The developers transport consultant would suggest that such
a concept is more attuned to making Silverstone more sustainable and as such the
burden of such provision should lie with Silverstone. On this basis they would not
agree that there is a requirement for such a cycle link contribution from the
Sawmills, or any development in Brackley. Given this robust argument the Local
Planning Authority upon further reflection as there was no formal scheme being
pursued by the Local Highway Authority or NCC Rights of Way this was discounted
in favour of an increased contribution towards public transport linkages. To this
effect a £200,000 contribution has been sought.
6.48 IMPACT ON EXISTING RIGHTS OF WAYS: There are only a limited number of
public rights of way in the form of footpaths and bridleways in the vicinity of the site.
Immediately to the west of the site and south of the existing residential area of
Brackley, there are no public rights of way within a kilometre from the Town. The
closest bridleway to the site is on land near to Ilett’s Farm approximately 600m to
the north. Within the countryside to the north of the site, there is a bridleway which
links Radstone Road with the A43. From most of this bridleway, the proposed
development would be obscured from view due to topography and vegetation in the
intervening distance, both during construction and in the operational phase.
6.48 In conclusion from a strategic highways, local road network impact, master plan
compliance, rights of way impact and sustainability perspective the application
accords with the aims and objectives of PPG13 relating to transportation.
6.49 FLOODING AND DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: Both the Environment Agency
and Anglian Water raise no objection to this proposal on water capacity, drainage or
flood risk grounds. The EA reviewed a Flood Risk Assessment produced by Cannon
Consulting Engineers, reference CCE/B311/FRA, and confirmed that they consider
that the details in the FRA to have been undertaken in line with Annex E of Planning
Policy Statement 25 'Development and Flood Risk' (PPS25), and these are
considered appropriate for the scale and nature of the proposed development.
Accordingly, the EA withdrew their previous objection on flood risk grounds, subject
to the imposition of conditions and informatives.
6.50 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: The main areas of environmental concern
relate to Air Quality, Noise and contamination. Air Quality – The application was
submitted with a full assessment of air quality which concluded that the operational
impacts of increased traffic emissions arising from the additional traffic on local
roads would result in concentrations of nitrogen dioxide would remain below
Government requirements and therefore in accordance with PPS23. The data
provided in this report has been considered by the Council’s Environmental
Protection Officer who raised no objection or comment.
6.51 Noise - The assessment details indicate that the proposed development site falls
and can be zoned within a number of ‘Noise Exposure Category’s’ as defined for
road traffic in PPG24. It goes onto conclude that any subsequent noise sensitive
development should be provided with an adequate and commensurate level of
protection against noise in order to achieve any necessary internal or external
ambient design standards as recommended in BS8233 Sound Insulation & Noise
106
_______________________________________________________________________________
Reduction for Buildings – Code of Practice. The report advises that a range of noise
mitigation packages could be applied to the development and which will depend on
the degree of exposure and nature and extent of measures applied. The report also
advises that noise from the construction phase of the proposed development would
need to be controlled and that a range of measures could be used to do this. It goes
on to recommend that a more comprehensive assessment should be undertaken to
determine the necessary measures once the necessary detailed construction
schedule, methodology equipment has been determined. Some consideration will
need to be given to subsequent development of the adjacent employment sites in
order to ensure that the respective layout of the separate developments are
sympathetic to each other. Overall, Environmental Protection Officers make no
adverse comment regarding noise aspect of the proposed development subject to
imposition of appropriate safeguarding conditions.
6.52 Contamination- Both the Environment Agency and the Council’s Environmental
Protection Officer have assessed the contamination report produced by the Nott
Group and agree with its findings and recommendations. In short the report
concluded that the site will need to avoid building on the former railway cutting and
that due to high levels of arsenic and chromium clean topsoil to 500 mm depth will
be needed across the site. Gas protection measures are needed on the railway
cutting and gas protective membrane is recommended for sensitive buildings. A
further groundwater assessment is needed to assess the effects of the tannelising.
The report has been considered and the Environment Agency raises no objection
subject to a series of related conditions and informatives. Subject to the
requirements of the conditions being met the proposal is considered to accord with
the aims and objectives of PPS23.
6.53 WILDLIFE, GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND BIODIVERSITY: The application
was submitted initially with a wildlife survey which concluded that overall the
proposals would result in the direct loss of habitats low in intrinsic value and
consequently low ecological value. The report did identify that bats and common
lizards were present on the site and that mitigation measures were to form part of
the development strategy.
6.54 The report did identify that the site had potential to be developed in a manner which
would create suitable habitats and in effect increase the biodiversity benefits of the
site and linkages to the wider area. The wildlife trust local records also identified a
rare species of Blue Butterfly being present on the railway SSSI to the north and at
certain points within the site. To this effect a revised assessment and mitigation
strategy linked to an assessment of the Green Infrastructure with a view to
developing a clear GI Strategy for the site were requested by officers.
6.55 The revised strategy (which includes updated ecological assessments) has been
out for consultation with the relevant bodies and ecological experts who have
provided feedback whilst not objecting in principle. The recommendations of Natural
England, The Wildlife Trust, The Northants Bat Group, NCC’s GI officer as well as
SNC’s GI Officer can be included in the GI management plan which will form part of
the S106 and then the reserved matters. In this sense the proposal accords with the
aims and objectives of PPS9.
6.56 LANDSCAPE AND ARBORICULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS: The loss of the
existing trees on the boundary is a shame and was a concern to the Council’s
arboricultural officer as they provide a green approach to the northern end of
Brackley and help to screen the site. However, the fall back position is that the
107
_______________________________________________________________________________
position of the roundabout has been agreed under past planning permissions and
there is an opportunity to secure a strong scheme of landscaping through the site
which will more than compensate for the loss of any existing vegetation on the site.
6.57 Landscaping is a reserved matter, but the indicative layout plans show adequate
new planting and this principle of soft landscaping throughout the site can be
secured at the outline stage so that it forms a central component of the reserved
matters application. To this effect conditions to secure a suitable landscaping
scheme including species and a maintenance plan are recommended. In summary,
subject to conditions the proposal is considered to accord with policies EV1, EV21
and G3 of the Local Plan.
6.58 BOUNDARY TREATMENTS: At present the application fails to identify boundary
treatments due to its outline status with the precise details to be reserved for later
consideration. In terms of the edge of the site it will be important to provide a strong
boundary to the west where there are currently fences to the existing residential
properties. Some of these have unauthorised access points onto the site as
members may recall from their site visit which needs addressing. To the north the
boundary of the site needs careful consideration to ensure the future Robson Land
can link adequately to this site, the future hospital and the wider town. To assist
members in considering this issue the applicant has provided an indicative plan
showing how the two sites could interact (this does not however form part of the
application). To the east and the boundary of the site onto Northampton Road the
boundary treatment will need to soften the visual impact and provide an attractive
approach to the town. This will form a key aspect of the future reserved matters and
overall landscaping scheme. However at this point in time the Local Planning
Authority must secure suitable conditions for the outline and therefore it is
recommended to impose a condition to agree the boundary treatments throughout
the site in addition to the more general landscaping scheme.
6.59 DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS: The applicant has submitted a draft S106 which
at the time of writing is in the process of being edited and redrafted. The agreement
will need to cover the following developer contributions:
Affordable Housing at 40%
Education, Libraries and Fire and Rescue
Leisure including Public open space, off site leisure facilities and maintenance
The provision of an access road through the site to the Robson Land and Radstone
Fields SUE
Strategic Highways contributions
Public Transport and Travel Plan contributions/strategies
Green Infrastructure implementation/management plan
Town centre contribution
Bucking Road Industrial Estate Management/enhancement contribution
Unrestricted access at zero cost to the adjoining landowners for the road scheme to
secure access to neighbouring sites
108
_______________________________________________________________________________
Recycling contribution
6.60 Subject to the above being finalised in accordance with the best practice required
under the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations and Circular 05/2005 the
application accords with policy IMP1 and draft SPD ‘Developer Contributions’. As it
has not been possible to finalise a full S106 agreement prior to committee it is
recommended to delegate authority to approve the application to the Head of
Environment and Development Services subject to the applicant completing the
S106 and paying the relevant legal costs of the County Council and SNC.
6.61 LEISURE PROVISION (ON SITE AND OFF SITE): The Council’s Lead Leisure
Services Officer has been involved in the consideration of this application and has
formally requested the contributions outlined, justified and broken down in
paragraph 4.9 of the report. As stated above these will need to form part of the
S106 agreement. Discussions have been ongoing concerning the possibility of the
applicant donating a section of land of 0.18 ha which is disused to the community as
a possible skate park facility. However at the time of writing nothing has been
formalised in this regard and it remains an option only.
6.62 HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT AND ARCHAEOLOGY: The application site does not
contain any Listed Buildings or any heritage designations such as Conservation
Areas nor is the site adjacent or within the setting of any heritage asset. The County
Council archaeologist has assessed the application and concluded that the site is
currently predominately hardstanding and as such it is reasonable to assume that it
is likely to have had an impact on any archaeological deposits present. However
although this may have resulted in truncation of some shallower deposits there is
still the potential for significant remains to survive below the hardstanding. Due to
the extent of the hardstanding within the greater area of the site the archaeologist
considers that the archaeological evaluation would be best undertaken post
determination and therefore a condition is recommended. This approach is
considered compliant with the advice contained in PPS5 relating to archaeology.
6.63 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES: The application site has a modern
housing development to the west. There will however be no impact on the
residential amenity of the existing properties on account of the separation distance
achieved by the railway cutting which is to be left as Public Open Space. The Crime
Prevention Design Advisor has expressed concern about anti-social behaviour from
the POS and has requested that at the reserved matters stage the issues of
boundary treatments and natural surveillance be considered to ensure that there is
overlooking of the POS.
6.64 In terms of other impacts on existing residential properties surrounding the site
given the separation distances involved and the fact that design and scale are
reserved matters and therefore issues such as loss of daylight and overlooking are
impossible to consider fully at this juncture. Indeed the applicant’s landscape
assessment summarises the positioned well ‘The residential properties located to
west of the site are in the main visually unaffected by the proposals as views
towards the proposed development would be interrupted by adjacent residential
properties in the neighbourhood. Only those which directly back onto the disused
railway line and the site will have the opportunity to observe the construction phase
and the completed proposed development. However, these currently have first floor
level filtered and glimpsed views of the existing industrial sawmill premises and
associated compounds and timber yards which detract from the visual amenity of
the area. With the removal of this built form during the construction phase, and the
109
_______________________________________________________________________________
creation of a residential development as envisaged, the visual amenity for these
properties would be improved’. These would be some of the major design
considerations that would come out of the discussions over the reserved matters. In
summary the proposed scheme will not harm the amenity of any neighbouring land
use and will be a significant improvement over a commercial use of the type
previously utilising the application site. In this sense the proposal accords with
Policy G3 of the Local Plan.
6.65 OTHER MATTERS - HS2 AND BRACKLEY HOSPITAL: On 11th March 2010 the
Government published the HS2 report. This report summarises the findings of the
work carried out last year to consider a high speed railway line from London to the
West Midlands and identifies the options that were considered. The report also
examines the case for extending the line further north. The 'preferred route option' if
adopted, would pass through South Northamptonshire. The ‘preferred route option’
if adopted would run very close to Brackley and could have a major impact on the
future development of the town. The draft Brackley Masterplan illustrates these
potential impacts in detail. The consultation on the proposed route and on the
Government’s overall strategy for high speed rail was to have begun in October and
to run through to April 2011.
6.66 The application at its northern end is impacted by the aforementioned route and it
does form a material consideration. However at the time of writing it is simply a
consultation and does not carry status as a safeguarded route. In this sense at the
end of the consultation period the route may change. It is not therefore considered
that there is sufficient justification to warrant refusal on this basis.
6.67 In terms of the possible hospital development all calculations and designs have
been derived on the assumption that the site will deliver a hospital and care home
facility at the southern end. The site is identified in the draft master plan but again
until such time as a planning application is approved there is no absolute guarantee
that this will be the ultimate land use for the adjoining parcel of land.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
It has been demonstrated robustly that there is sound justification for the Local
Planning Authority permitting a change to its adopted policy of safeguarding
employment sites and allowing a change of use to residential development.
7.2
In summary the applicant has shown that there is an over supply of employment
land in and surrounding Brackley to render the 5.62 ha on this site as unnecessary.
The extent of contamination and the need to secure a holistic approach to the
northern gateway site are also contributory factors.
7.3
The development of this site in the manner applied for will secure the future hospital
and care home site becomes accessible, will secure access to Radstone Fields and
the Robson Land to the north.
7.4
Developer contributions will enhance travel links, leisure provision; as well
contribute towards compensating existing services. Biodiversity and the visual
approach to Brackley will be significantly enhanced as result of the development.
7.5
Subject to the applicant completing the outstanding issues contained in the S106
legal agreement and the conditions outlined at the beginning of the report the
application is recommend for approval to be delegated to the Head of Environment
and Development Services.
110
_______________________________________________________________________________
8.
REASON FOR APPROVAL
8.1
In this instance the Local Planning Authority considers that there are substantive
and technically sound reasons to depart from the adopted policy of the development
plan as outlined at length in this report.
8.2
The application is therefore recommended for approval to be delegated to Head of
Environment and Development Services subject to the applicant completing the
outstanding issues contained in the S106 legal agreement and the conditions
outlined at the beginning of the report
111
112
Item No 005
Application Number : S/2010/0401/MAF Parish : Paulerspury
Applicant : Whitlock Together with David Wilson Homes
Location : Land Off Grays Lane Paulerspury
Description : Residential development of 14 dwellings,
associated parking, roads and
sewers, public open space and storm
water balancing facility
Reasons :1.
in particular G2, H6 and EV2 of the adopted South Northamptonshire Local Plan
which seek to concentrate future developments primarily in the rural service
centres of Brackley and Towcester, whilst strictly controlling development in the
remainder of the rural areas in order to provide sustainable growth and to protect
the intrinsic character of the countryside and rural area. It is not considered that
there are material planning considerations that would outweigh this conflict as the
Council has a 5 year land supply of housing in accordance with PPS3 ‘Housing’.
2.
The proposed development would not accord with ‘saved’ policies EV1 and G3 of
the adopted South Northamptonshire Local Plan, the Council’s adopted Interim
Rural Housing Policy (IRHP), Supplementary Guidance on Residential Design in
the Countryside and the adopted Paulerspury and Pury End Design Statement, as
well as Government Guidance contained in PPS1, PPS3 and PPS7. In this
instance the development due to the low density does not make efficient use of the
land, does not provide an appropriate mix of dwelling types and represents a
significant extension of the village into open countryside, which together with the
proposed design and layout of the development and the arbitrary boundary of the
development site across the field, is out of keeping with, and would be harmful to,
the surrounding pattern of development, the rural character of the area and this
sensitive edge of village location.
3.
The application is contrary to ‘saved’ policy G3 of the South Northamptonshire
Local Plan and the advice contained in PPS5, because it fails to provide sufficient
information to demonstrate that the development would not cause undue harm to
any archaeological assets that may be present on the site.
4.
In the absence of a satisfactory signed unilateral undertaking or any other form of
Section 106 legal agreement the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the
proposed development provides for appropriate libraries, fire and rescue,
healthcare and education facilities required as a result of the development, to the
113
_______________________________________________________________________________
detriment of both existing and proposed residents and contrary to Policy IMP1 of
the adopted South Northamptonshire Local Plan and the Council’s adopted
Supplementary Planning Guidance relating Policy Statement on Developer
Contributions (2001).
S/2010/0401/MAF
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Tove
This application was subject to a Pre-Committee Members Site Visit which took
place on Tuesday 27th July 2010.
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The application site lies on the eastern edge of Paulerspury village and comprises
two-thirds of a field used for grazing. A line of pylons run along the last third of the
field. The site has a total area of 0.86 hectares. The site lies outside the built up
area of the village as defined in the Local Plan. On the opposite side of the road is
a row of Local Authority built housing. To the south west is a detached dwelling,
and a field. To the east is a Telephone Exchange and Petrol Filling Station. To the
south are fields. A public footpath cuts across the site from Grays Lane to the petrol
station.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
Planning permission for two detached dwellings alongside Saratoga was dismissed
at appeal in 1987 on the grounds that it was outside the built up area and the loss of
the agricultural field, the eroding of a gap between the last house and the A5 and
the harm caused to the entrance of the village (S/1987/0543/PO refers).
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
The application seeks full permission for 14 two storey dwellings, comprising 12
detached and a pair of semi-detached houses. Access is proposed from Grays
Lane at the western side of the site frontage, alongside Saratoga. A landscape
buffer is proposed along the rear (south east) boundary of the site. A balancing
lagoon is proposed in the north-eastern corner of the site, adjacent to the petrol
station. The public footpath is proposed to be re-routed along the internal access
roads.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
PAULERSPURY PARISH COUNCIL: Object for the following reasons:
The site lies outside the village confines. The Paulerspury and Pury End Village
Design Statement (VDS) adopted by SNC clearly states at Principle 1 that ‘Any
development that seeks to increase the size of the village by breaking through the
existing village confines….will not be acceptable’. The Parish Council continue to
support this Principle.
The proposal does not conform with the VDS as it is not sympathetic to the
114
_______________________________________________________________________________
appearance and character of buildings in the immediate locality
On street parking is a problem in this area affecting traffic on road in both directions.
The bus stop is an additional hazard at the present time and the situation will not be
helped by repositioning the bus stop nearer to the A5.
As less the 60% of garages are ever used, the proposed scheme has insufficient
parking provision. If cars from this development park on Grays Lane it will make it
impassable and could affect traffic on the A5.
Concern over balancing pond so close to residential development. such ponds are
often neglected and become a hazard to children and health. No details as to how
pond will be drained, it will not be practical to discharge to ditch on south side of
Grays Lane as it is inadequate and contours of the land make this impossible.
The water table in this part of the village has risen in recent months
The public footpath provides a short cut and is also an amenity, both aspects will be
lost by the development.
Concerns over impact on wild-life and Great Crested Newts
Concerns over health hazards to some of the dwellings due to the proximity of the
electricity pylons that run to the rear of the site.
4.2
SNC POLICY: (Original response): The proposed development is considered not to
be in accordance with the Council’s adopted IRHP Policy and the advice contained in
PPS3. Officers do not consider that this development accords with the IRHP as the
new site boundary is not adequately justified and that the density does not
represent the most effective use of a Greenfield site and the land proposed for
development is unnecessarily large and therefore unnecessarily intrusive in the
open countryside.
4.3
SNC HOUSING: A village housing need survey in March 2008, combined with
housing register data identified a housing need of 12 affordable homes (mix of
sizes) in Paulerspury: A further check of the housing register has revealed that
there are currently 10 households expressing a preference to live in Paulerspury.
This demonstrates that there is housing need in the village to be met. The current
proposal for 14 homes means that in line with the Affordable Housing SPG (2003),
an element of affordable housing for this site does not currently apply. However, the
proposal falls one home short of the threshold of 15 homes which would allow us to
request 40% affordable housing on this site. We note that an artificial boundary has
been created for this site to maintain the required distance between homes and
overhead power lines. However, given the affordable housing needs of Paulerspury
identified above, we would like to see further consideration given as to whether the
total number of dwellings on this site can be increased. We also understand that the
Interim Rural Housing Policy, under which this application is submitted, sets the
requirement for development in Paulerspury at 15 dwellings.
4.4
NCC COUNTY HIGHWAYS: No objections subject to conditions relating to visibility
splays, access widths, parking provision and turning.
4.5
NCC POLICY: No response received
115
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.6
CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR: The proposal is for a modified cul de
sac design, with reasonable mutual surveillance over the properties, and on-plot
and garage car parking provision. Plots 1-8 are arranged in a small ‘perimeter block’
with gardens backing onto each other, which is considered to be the best
arrangement for intruder prevention. However, there are two relatively minor
concerns as follows:
The ‘amenity area’ (or bit of spare land) in the north-eastern corner has the potential
to be an anti-social behaviour point. This could be a piece of land that no-one owns
or takes responsibility for. I would suggest that Plots 9-12 are extended slightly and
the land taken up by gardens. If it is retained, any landscaping should be kept to a
minimum in order to maintain good views into the area.
Likewise, the informal public open space intended as a buffer for ‘Saratoga’ could
prove to be more of a nuisance than a buffer. It would be advisable to break up the
area with a number of low-growing shrubs to prevent its use as a football arena.
Recommend the attachment of conditions/informatives relating to security measures
in the interests of crime prevention
4.7
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: No response received to date
4.8
ANGLIAN WATER: There is sufficient water resource to supply the development
and the water supply network has adequate capacity. The foul flows from the
development can be accommodated within the foul sewerage network which has
adequate capacity and the Towcester Sewage treatment works has capacity to treat
the foul drainage. The surface water drainage is not to a public sewer and the Local
Planning Authority will therefore need to seek the views of the Environment Agency.
4.9
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY: No objection subject to conditions.
4.10 NATURAL ENGLAND: No objection subject to conditions/informatives
4.11 PRIMARY CARE TRUST: Not received
4.12 ARCHAEOLOGY: The application has been submitted with an archaeological desk
based assessment (DBA) which provides a summary of the currently known
archaeological information held within the Historic Environment Record (HER). The
DBA concludes that the area has potential for archaeological activity ranging from
the Iron Age through to the Roman period. There is also special emphasis put on
the potential for activity related to the medieval/post medieval periods. The DBA
recognises both in the summary and the conclusions, paragraph 6.6, that this
potential can only be assessed through further archaeological investigation.
However in spite of this lack of information paragraph 6.5 assesses that the site
contains no remains of ‘sufficient importance to prevent development or to require
preservation in situ.’ The DBA paragraph 6.6 suggests that this outstanding
information can be provided by further archaeological survey work as part of a
mitigation process. It is however premature to make the statements regarding the
lack of potential for significant remains to be present within the area without
undertaking any archaeological fieldwork.
It is clear within the Guidance provided within paragraph HE 6.1 of PPS5 that
‘Where an application site includes, or is considered to have the potential to include,
116
_______________________________________________________________________________
heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should
require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where
desk-based research is insufficient to properly assess the interest, a field
evaluation.’
The evaluation encompassing geophysical survey and trial trenching would allow
the significance of any surviving remains to be assessed. The evaluation needs to
be undertaken in advance of the determination of the application. The results of the
evaluation would provide sufficient information to allow an informed assessment of
the impact of the development on the heritage resource.
The information from the evaluation would have the potential to identify if any areas
of significance were present within the development area that would form a
constraint on development. Current policy and guidelines indicate that this
information should be provided as part of the proposed application in order to allow
the LPA to make a balanced and informed decision as to the archaeological
potential of the area. This will enable us to ascertain the existence and the state of
preservation of any buried remains, in order to assess the importance of the site
and the impact of the development as per PPS5: Planning for the Historic
Environment.
I therefore recommend that further information in the form of an archaeological field
evaluation is provided by the applicant before the determination of this application.
4.13 RAMBLERS ASSOCIATION: No objections subject to the early installation of the
proposed bridge and waymarking and maintaining a right of way during the works.
4.14 THIRD PARTIES: A petition signed by 49 people and 23 copies of the same letter
sent in by different residents have been received quoting the following objections:
increased traffic congestion and danger near A5 junction
primary school entry for village children
doctor’s surgery capacity
aesthetics of the village
safety of moving the bus stop nearer the A5
flooding potential due to water table level
high number of village development applications, where will this stop?
4.15
Twenty individual letters of objection have also been received raising the following
objections:
Highway safety
Flooding
Capacity of the village school
117
_______________________________________________________________________________
Capacity at the Doctor’s Surgery
Development outside village boundaries
Impact on character and appearance of village
Site is away from the village amenities
Maintenance of the balancing pond
The nature of the footpath would be ruined by its re-routing
Loss of wildlife habitat
New houses would be too close to electricity pylons and the noise from the A5
5.
POLICY
5.1
The relevant Development Plan consists of the ‘saved’ policies of the South
Northamptonshire Local Plan (SNLP). Note - the RSS8 document was deleted by
Central Government in June 2010 and therefore forms no part of the development
plan for the consideration of this application.
5.2
The relevant Policies of the Local Plan comprise; Policies G2, G3, H5, H6, H7, EV1,
EV2, EV21 EV24, EV29 and IMP1.
5.3
constitutes a material planning consideration, particularly; Developer Contributions,
Affordable Housing, Residential Design in the Countryside and the adopted
Paulerspury and Pury End Design Statement.
5.4
relevance is guidance in PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS9, PPS25 and PPG13. PPS3
relates to the amended version June 2010 particularly in relation to density
requirements
5.5
In addition, the Council has the adopted the Interim Rural Housing Policy (IRHP)
adopted 29th July 2010.
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues in consideration of this application are
the principle of development on this site
design and layout and impact on character of area
impact on neighbouring properties
the residential amenity of future occupiers of the proposed development
highways considerations
118
_______________________________________________________________________________
effect on biodiversity and ecology
drainage and flooding considerations
archaeology
developer contributions
6.2
THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE: Applications for planning
permission should be determined with regard to the Development Plan which, in
light of the recent revocation of Regional Strategies, comprises only; Adopted
Development Plan Documents, Saved Policies and any old style plans that have not
lapsed. For this Council therefore the development plan comprises the saved
policies of the South Northamptonshire Local Plan.
6.3
In this case the proposal is clearly contrary to the adopted Local Plan in that it
comprises development outside the adopted village confines as defined in that Plan
and development therefore within the open countryside. The development is
therefore in conflict with Policies G2, EV2, H5 and H6.
6.4
Local Planning Authorities are however also advised to have regard to other
material considerations, including national policy. Of particular relevance is PPS3
which still requires Councils to provide a five year housing land supply.
6.5
The report of the Director of Service Delivery at Item 6 on this Agenda sets out the
for planning applications.
6.6
In accordance with the above report it is considered that this development does not
6.7
6.8
have a 5 year land supply that officers are given the delegated authority to issue the
refusal but to remove this reason for refusal from the decision notice (reason 1).
6.9
DESIGN AND LAYOUT: The IRHP sets out an indicative target of 15 dwellings for
Paulerspury. This application is for 14 dwellings which is a single dwelling under
the threshold where affordable housing would be required. The layout includes the
formation of an artificial staggered boundary across the site and is at a density of
just 16.3 dwellings per hectare. It is important to note that the Government has
recently amended PPS3 to remove the previous requirement that new housing be
built at a minimum density of 30 units per hectare. However, the PPS still requires
developments to make efficient use of land whilst having regard to the character
and appearance of the area. Densities therefore need to be considered on a site by
119
_______________________________________________________________________________
site basis in the context of the setting of the site and neighbouring development.
The proposed layout comprises 3 and 4 bed houses, with 12 out of the 14 detached
and only two semi-detached.
6.10 There is a range of house types and mix in this part of Paulerspury at varying
density ranging from terraces and semi detached housing opposite the site on
Greys Lane to larger detached dwellings further into the village. Para. 10 of PPS 3
considers that the Planning system should deliver ‘A mix of housing, both market
and affordable, particularly in terms of tenure and price, to support a wide variety of
households in all areas, both urban and rural’. Para. 16 of the PPS states that a
new development ‘Is well integrated with, and complements, the neighbouring
buildings and the local area more generally in terms of scale, density, layout and
access’. This proposal does not achieve this and the layout, density and house
types proposed result in a development that falls under the threshold for affordable
housing without justification. As such the proposal fails to make efficient use of the
land and does not provide an appropriate mix of dwelling types. In addition, whilst
the rear boundary of the site has been formed to provide a buffer to the electricity
pylons that cut across the rear of the field, the boundary created is still arbitrary and
deviates across the field around garages, dwellings and the proposed balancing
pond, rather than providing a strong, clear and direct boundary to the development.
6.11 Also of concern is that the proposal would result in a significant extension of the
village into open countryside, well beyond the village confines. There is piecemeal
development at present on the south side of Grays Lane at this eastern end of the
village.
Paulerspury is generally a linear village with development largely
comprising of properties either side of the main road through the village. This is
punctuated with development along the lanes that extend from the main road. It is
considered that a low density housing estate extending beyond and behind the
development on the south side of Grays Lane will be out of keeping with and be
harmful to the rural character of the village, particularly at this eastern end.
6.12 PPS1 promotes high quality design which takes account of local character. PPS1
at para. 38 states that design policies ‘should concentrate on guiding the overall
scale, density, massing, height…of new development’ and promotes ‘local
distinctiveness…where this is supported by clear plan policies or supplementary
planning documents on design’. The Councils SPG on Residential Design in the
Countryside and the adopted Paulerspury and Pury End Design statement set out
such policies and guidance. In this case, due to the large adopted estate road
proposed, the development consisting primarily of detached houses, all with
detached garages, the low density and the proposed house types (including the
proposed materials), the layout of the development itself is reminiscent of a modern
housing estate in an urban location and is therefore inappropriate in a rural location
on the edge of a village. Some of the house types have appropriate form and scale,
such as narrow plan depths, pitched roofs, chimneys etc, however, as a whole the
development is not reflective of the South Northants vernacular – central gable front
projections, bay windows, quoins, deep plan depths, lean to roofs across frontages.
There is also a poor flow to the street scenes as the dwellings are not linked to one
another or by walls to provide means of enclosure. Whilst the site is not in the
historic core of the village, the development should still reflect the local
distinctiveness of the area, rather than more standard house types that could be
found anywhere.
120
_______________________________________________________________________________
6.13 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURING AMENITY: It is not considered that neighbouring
properties will be adversely affected by overlooking or loss of light due to the
distances away of the proposed dwellings, including Saratoga (which has windows
in its side elevation that face the application site) and the properties on the opposite
of Grays Lane. The proposed access road is also positioned away from the side of
Saratoga to minimise disruption. An informal open space is proposed to the side of
Saratoga and the Police have raised this as a potential point for anti-social
behaviour. However, whilst this concern is noted, it is not proposed as a formal play
area, rather an area of landscaping, as such it is not considered that it would justify
a reason to refuse the application.
6.14 IMPACT ON FUTURE OCCUPIERS: Occupiers of this development would not be
directly affected by existing dwellings surrounding the site, however, the site does
lie in close proximity to the A5 and therefore may be affected by noise. In addition,
the dwellings at the eastern end of the development may be adversely affected by
the electricity pylons that cut across the rear part of the field. Environmental Health
have been consulted on this and their comments will be provided as an update.
6.15 HIGHWAYS CONSIDERATIONS: The proposed access to the development is at
the southern end of the Grays Land Frontage. The application has been submitted
with a Highways Report which the Local Highway Authority (NCC County Highways)
have considered when making their representations on the application. They have
recommended a series of conditions and informatives that should be imposed
should permission be granted. Whilst the concerns of residents and the Parish are
noted, the layout of the development provides at least 2 parking spaces per
property, some with 3 and some with the capability to park 4 spaces within their
property. In addition, there is also the possibility that any additional cars could be
parked along the proposed adopted estate road. As such it is unlikely that the
development would lead to increased parking on Grays Lane. In light of this and
the comments of NCC Highways, it is not considered that the proposed
development would be unacceptable in highway terms.
6.16 EFFECT ON BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY: The application has been
accompanied by a full ecological assessment. The report concludes that the site is
of little botanical interest containing a limited diversity of habitats and no protected
species were found, but recommends the retention of hedgerows and an
enhancement of biodiversity on the site through good landscaping design. Natural
England has reviewed the submitted report and raises no objections. The proposal
is therefore considered acceptable in this regard.
6.17 DRAINAGE AND FLOODING CONSIDERATIONS: Both water capacity and
drainage capacities have been considered by Anglian Water and the Environment
Agency. Both organisations raise no objection subject to the Local Planning
Authority imposing a series of conditions and informatives should consent be
granted. In this sense the proposal is satisfactory in principle in terms of drainage
and water supply.
6.18 ARCHAEOLOGY: PPS5 states that ‘Where an application site includes, or is
considered to have the potential to include, heritage assets with archaeological
interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an
appropriate desk-based assessment and, where desk-based research is insufficient
to properly assess the interest, a field evaluation.’ In this case NCC Archaeology
121
_______________________________________________________________________________
consider that the submitted desk based assessment is insufficient and have
requested a field evaluation as highlighted in their comments detailed at para 4.12
above. In light of this and given that the site has the potential for archaeological
activity ranging from the Iron Age through to the Roman period, as well the
medieval/post medieval periods, and further investigation is needed as to the
nature, extent and significance of these remains, then without such investigation
being carried out this forms a reason to refuse the application.
6.19 DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS: The scheme as submitted should provide
contributions to Education, Libraries, Fire & Rescue and Healthcare. A draft S106
has been submitted, but given the above objections to the scheme this has not
been progressed.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
In conclusion it is considered that the principle of development is considered
unacceptable, the layout and design of the development is out of keeping with the
rural character of the area and the sensitive edge of village location, and is
unacceptable in archaeological terms.
7.2
As such, it is recommended that permission be refused for the reason(s) above but
to delay issuing the decision notice until the outcome of the recent appeal is known
(see item 6 on the agenda). In the event that the appeal decision confirms that the
Council does have a 5 year land supply, then the application decision notice can be
issued as it stands.
7.3
but to remove reason for refusal No. 1 from the decision notice.
122
Item No 006
Application Number : S/2010/0575/OUT Parish : Paulerspury
Case Officer : Amanda Haisman
Applicant : Orchard Developments (Paulerspury)
Location : Land North of High Street
Paulerspury
Description : Residential development of 5 houses, public
open space, new vehicular access
and associated works (outline)
Reasons :1.
in particular ‘saved’ policies G2, H6 and EV2 of the adopted South
rural area. It is not considered that there are material planning considerations that
would outweigh this conflict as the Council has a 5 year land supply of housing in
accordance with PPS3 ‘Housing’.
S/2010/0575/OUT
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Tove
This application was subject to a Pre-Committee site visit on 27th July.
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
This site comprises around 0.31 hectares of land historically used as a paddock and
for horticulture outside the village confines.
1.2
The land is currently accessed via a gate between The Vine hotel and number 104
High Street. The village primary school lies nearby to the other side of Tews End
Lane, and the Barley Mow Public House is located on the opposite side of the High
Street. The Barley Mow and number 49 High Street are both listed buildings.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
Permission was granted for the erection of a polytunnel on the site in 1988
reference S/1988/0366/P.
3.
PROPOSAL
123
_______________________________________________________________________________
3.1
This is an outline application for five dwellings, comprising 3 x three bedroom
houses and 2 x four bedroom houses, with the only matters for approval at this
stage being access. Access is shown direct from the High Street adjacent to
number 104 which necessitates the removal of the existing front stone boundary
wall to the side garden of this property. The existing mature boundary hedge and
trees delineate the boundary of the application site and the indicative layout shows
five detached dwellings with garages in a cul de sac arrangement. The density
equates to 16 dwellings per hectare.
3.2
Surface water drainage is provided by means of a sustainable urban drainage
system with balancing lake. This part of the site provides public open space,
accessed from the new cul de sac and is also intended to provide an enhanced
area for potential great crested newt habitat. As well as the removal of the existing
stone boundary wall to the front, the development would also require the removal of
two storage sheds and a short section of 2m high stone wall attached to the
adjacent property at 102a High Street.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
PAULERSPURY PARISH COUNCIL – Object on the following grounds:
The land is outside the village confines
It will add to the already difficult situation with regard to parking, it being in the heart
of the parking area for the Primary School.
Safety concerns regarding access and egress
Request a site visit during the early morning when the school is receiving pupils.
4.2
SNC POLICY – (Initial response made in June) The Council’s Interim Rural Housing
Policy seeks to establish objective criteria in determining those villages that are
‘most sustainable’ and therefore where a more positive and flexible approach could
be taken towards development. Paulerspury is considered to be a ‘Reasonably
Sustainable’ village capable of accommodating an indicative total of 15 dwellings.
4.3
The IRHP sets out an indicative target of 15 dwellings for Paulerspury. It is noted
that this application is for 5 dwellings at a density of 16 dwellings per hectare. It is
important to note that the Government has recently amended PPS 3 to remove the
previous requirement that new housing was supposed to be built at a minimum
density of 30 units per hectare. Densities will now need to be considered on a site
by site basis in the context of the setting of the site and neighbouring development.
The proposed layout comprises 3 and 4 bed detached houses. Development in
this part of Paulerspury is predominantly larger detached dwellings and it is
considered that the proposed development is of a type and density that reflects this
and is consistent with paragraph 16 of PPS 3 that states that a new development ‘Is
well integrated with, and complements, the neighbouring buildings and the local
area more generally in terms of scale, density, layout and access’.
4.4
The proposal to reinforce the existing northern boundary with additional native
species hedgerow and tree planting is also supported as the proposal to set aside
land to the west as a great crested newt mitigation and enhancement area. As
proposed it is considered that this new boundary forms a ‘strong alternative
124
_______________________________________________________________________________
boundary’ as set out in the IRHP.
4.5
Whilst PPS 3 remains there is a significant change to Policy emerging from the new
Government. A key area of confusion is the effect of the letter and abolition of
Regional Spatial Strategies will have on the 5 year housing land supply. Planning
Policy Statement 3 (Housing) will still remain in place and it is this that requires local
planning authorities to have a 5 year supply of housing land. It is understood that
the Minster intends to make a further announcement soon, to provide details on the
implications of this decision. In the meantime, his letter outlines that he expects
Local Planning Authorities to have regard to these changes in any decisions that
they are taking. The letter means that there is considerable uncertainty about the
basis on which councils should decide planning applications, until the further
guidance is announced. It is therefore sensible to delay decisions on some types of
planning applications, such as large scale developments in villages.
4.6
ARBORICULTURAL OFFICER – The proposed indicative layout makes adequate
provision for the trees surrounding the site. Tree protection and arboricultural
method statement to be submitted and agreed will reduce any potentially damaging
activities to an acceptable minimum.
4.7
DRAINAGE ENGINEER – No response at the time of writing this report.
4.8
NCC HIGHWAYS – No objections in principle, subject to provision of visibility splays
and hard bound surface material for the first 5m from the highway boundary. Advise
a Section 184 licence will be required with the highway authority.
4.9
NCC ARCHAEOLOGY – Request a standard archaeological condition regarding the
implementation of a programme of archaeological works prior to development.
4.10 NATURAL ENGLAND – Initially requested further information. Subsequently
confirmed no objections to the proposal.
4.11 CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR – No objections in principle. Although
the layout is indicative at present the cul de sac has good mutual surveillance over
the properties and residents can exercise control over the indicated open space.
Provides advice on fences, gates, ‘Secured by Design’ awards, alarms siting of bin
storage, fire service access etc.
4.12 THIRD PARTIES – Two letters received from neighbouring properties as follows:
One letter from number 2 Tews End Lane states no objections in principle provided
the boundary hedge is retained at its present height to prevent any loss of privacy.
One letter received on behalf of the Vine House Hotel raised concerns regarding the
proximity of the new access to their property as shown on the original plans.
However, following some amendments to the access made by the applicant in
response to their concerns, confirmation that this objection is now withdrawn has
been received.
5.
POLICY
125
_______________________________________________________________________________
5.1
The relevant ‘saved’ policies of the Local Plan comprise Policies G2, G3, H5, H6,
EV1 and EV2, relating to the location of new development, development in the open
countryside, housing in villages and the open countryside, design and context,
access and amenity.
5.2
The Council has also adopted an Interim Rural Housing Policy (IRHP) which seeks
to guide development to the more sustainable locations in the district where a five
year land supply as required in Planning Policy Statement 3 is not available in the
district.
5.3
relevance are Planning Policy Statements 1 (Delivering Sustainable Development),
3 (Housing), 7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas), 9 (Biodiversity and
Geological Conservation) and Planning Policy Guidance 13 (Transport).
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues for consideration in this instance are:
Principle of development
Design and context
Highways issues
Residential amenity
Biodiversity
6.2
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT. Applications for planning permission should be
determined with regard to the Development Plan which, in light of the recent
revocation of Regional Strategies, comprises only; Adopted Development Plan
Documents, Saved Policies and any old style plans that have not lapsed. For this
Council therefore the development plan comprises the saved policies of the South
Northamptonshire Local Plan. In this case the proposal is clearly contrary to the
adopted Local Plan in that it comprises development outside the adopted village
confines as defined in that Plan and development therefore within the open
countryside. The development is therefore in conflict with Policies G2, EV2, H5 and
H6.
6.3
Local Planning Authorities are however also advised to have regard to other
which still requires Councils to provide a five year housing land supply. The report
of the Director of Service Delivery item 6 on this agenda sets out the Council’s latest
5 year housing land supply position and the consequent implications for Planning
Applications.
6.4
land supply of housing as explained in Appendix A.
6.5
126
_______________________________________________________________________________
6.6
authority to change the decision and grant permission (with appropriate conditions)
on their behalf.
6.7
In the event of there still being a need to provide additional housing to secure a five
year land supply following the outcome of the appeal at Middleton Cheney, this site
is considered suitable. The IRHP identifies Paulerspury as a reasonably sustainable
village, capable of accommodating 15 dwellings. The proposal satisfies the criteria
identified in the IRHP and the considerations in paragraph 69 of PPS 3 as it is
considered to be in line with the spatial vision for the area and respects established
long term boundaries.
6.8
DESIGN AND CONTEXT. Notwithstanding the potential objections to the
development of the site ‘in principle’ the proposal is considered acceptable in terms
of its relationship to the existing built form of the village and its visual impact on the
area. The application is for outline permission for five detached dwellings and as
such the layout is currently indicative and no details of the appearance of the
buildings are available. However, as development in this part of Paulerspury is
predominantly larger detached dwellings and it is considered that the proposed
development is of a type and density that reflects this, it is consistent with
paragraph 16 of PPS 3 that requires that a new development ‘Is well integrated
with, and complements, the neighbouring buildings and the local area more
generally in terms of scale, density, layout and access’.
6.9
The proposal to reinforce the existing northern boundary with additional native
species hedgerow and tree planting is also supported as is the proposal to set aside
land to the west as a great crested newt mitigation and enhancement area. It is
considered that this new boundary forms a ‘strong alternative boundary’ as required
and set out in the IRHP. Furthermore, the provision of the balancing lake and open
space would provide a spacious and semi rural feel to this edge of village site which
would be in keeping with the character of the village.
6.10 The existing stone walls to the front boundary of number 104 High Street and
attached to the neighbouring building at the Vine Hotel currently contribute
positively to the appearance of the area and their removal to facilitate access to the
site would undoubtedly alter the appearance of the street scene. However, this
could be mitigated by the reinstatement of a stone wall along the new boundary of
number 104 to the back of the visibility splay. The site is not within a conservation
area and it is considered that, subject to appropriate provision of a replacement
stone wall and suitable soft landscaping there would not be a significant adverse
visual impact on the street scene sufficient to justify refusal of this application.
6.11 HIGHWAYS ISSUES. The application demonstrates that access to the development
can provide adequate visibility, width and gradient and there are no objections to
127
_______________________________________________________________________________
the proposal from County Highways. Although the site is close to the village primary
school which inevitably becomes busy at certain times of day, bearing in mind the
low levels of vehicle movements associated with a development of this size and the
ample opportunity for both on and off street parking within the site it is considered
that there would be insufficient grounds for refusing the proposal based on highway
safety.
6.12 RESIDENTIAL AMENITY. Given the size of the site and proposed density there is
sufficient scope to ensure that five dwellings could be accommodated with sufficient
levels of amenity space and distances between each other and the existing
dwellings on the High Street and Tews End Lane. The application therefore raises
no issues of loss of light or privacy etc. to warrant refusal of the application.
6.13 BIODIVERSITY. An ecological report has been provided as part of the application
and although the site does not appear to contain any protected species, the
proximity of a pond in a neighbouring garden which provides great crested newt
habitat means there is potential to provide a biodiversity enhancement as part of
this development. The measures proposed accord with the requirements of PPS 9
and Natural England have confirmed no objections to the application.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
That permission be refused as the proposal does not accord with the relevant
Development Plan policies and there are no material planning considerations that
would outweigh this conflict as the Council has a 5 year land supply for housing in
accordance with PPS 3, but to delay issuing the decision notice until the outcome of
the recent appeal is known (see item 6 on this agenda). In the event that the appeal
application decision notice can be issued as it stands.
7.2
year land supply that officers are given the delegated authority grant permission
(with appropriate conditions) on their behalf.
128
_______________________________________________________________________________
Item No 007
Application Number : S/2010/0600/FUL
Parish : Greens Norton
Case Officer : Amanda Haisman
Applicant : Mr H Patel
Location : 17 High Street Greens Norton
Description : Installation of security shutters
Reasons :The application would be contrary to Policies G3 and EV1 of the South
Northamptonshire Local Plan which seek to protect the character and appearance of
the Local Environment. In this instance the proposed perforated shutters, by reason
of their low level of transparency would have a detrimental visual impact on the
historic core of the village.
Additional Note :
The Development Plan policies relevant to this decision are :
INF33 :PPS1, PPS4.
South Northamptonshire Local Plan G3 & EV!
Supplementary Planning Guide Shop fronts, Planning out Crime in
Northamptonshire
S/2010/0600/FUL
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Kingthorn
Cllr Tony Wilkinson
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Number 17 High Street is the village post office and shop in Greens Norton village,
located on the corner of the High Street and School Lane. The building is cream
painted brick with a slate roof and arched upvc windows at first floor level. There
are also two large bay windows and customer door fronting the shop on the ground
floor.
1.2
This application was deferred by members from the last committee meeting in order
129
_______________________________________________________________________________
for the case officer to ascertain if the applicant was willing to remove the
requirement for external shutters on the front windows of the shop. Following the
meeting the applicant indicated to the case officer that he would be unwilling to do
this and confirmed he wishes to apply for the perforated type of external shutter on
both the side entrance and front shop windows and doors as described in the
update to the committee meeting on 5th August. Although the applicant did state he
would consider the matter further and inform the case officer if he changed his
mind, no further contact has been made at the time of writing this report and
therefore the report has been written on the basis of a proposal for perforated
external shutters to the front and side of the building.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
Planning permission was granted in 2004 for a two storey rear extension to the
building reference S/2004/0628/P.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
This application seeks permission for retractable security shutters to be installed on
the premises following a recent night time burglary. Although the application
originally proposed open ‘punched’ lattice type shutters, the shutters now proposed
by the applicant are of the ‘perforated’ type, circulated at the last meeting. The
reason for this is that the manufacturers have advised the applicant that the
punched shutters are prone to being taken out by a chain attached to a vehicle. The
shutters would be fixed to the exterior of the two ground floor shop windows and
door to the front facing the High Street and also installed on the side delivery
entrance facing School Lane. The material is a powder coated aluminium and this
perforated specification delivers up to 17% vision though the shutter.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
GREENS NORTON PARISH COUNCIL – Object to the proposal on the following
grounds:
It would be out of keeping with the village environment
It would result in the loss of visual amenity to neighbouring houses
4.2
CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR (Original comments on lattice type
shutters) – No objections in principle. Indeed we are fully supportive of the proposal
which should help to prevent and deter attack by burglars. However, it should be
noted that such a product has no value in the event of a robbery (during the day
when the shop is open). I am surprised that there is no reference to crime in the
documentation. It would be helpful if much more detail were provided. A search of
the police crime recording system reveals that the shop has been the target of a
recent night-time burglary. It is pertinent to point out that the proposed shutters are
of the ‘open style’ which will present a less blank or hostile appearance to the street
scene, and is not a suitable surface for graffiti purposes.
4.3
In response to the amended proposal for perforated shutters the CPDA advised that
he is unaware of any history locally of an attack on a post office whereby lattice
type shutters were pulled out by a vehicle and concluded that the appropriateness
of the type of shutters comes down to a risk assessment.
4.4
THIRD PARTIES – One letter received from a neighbour stating the proposal is
130
_______________________________________________________________________________
inappropriate for the following reasons:
Greens Norton is a rural village which has mercifully low levels of crime and
vandalism
The shop has suffered two break-ins in 25 years and the proposal is therefore an
over reaction
The proposed shutters would be highly detrimental to the appearance and amenity
of the attractive village centre.
Such installations have been shown to increase vandalism
Burglars would be attracted to the rear of the building instead
Previous approved development for residential accommodation is not being used
Lattice shutters fitted to the inside of the windows are available without being an
eyesore or vandal magnet.
5.
POLICY
5.1
The application should be considered with regard to policies G3 and EV1 of the
South Northamptonshire Local Plan relating to design, context, visual impact, crime
prevention and residential amenity. The Council has adopted Supplementary
Planning Guidance on Shop Fronts.
5.2
Northamptonshire County Council also produced a Supplementary Planning
Guidance document entitled Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire which has
been adopted by South Northants Council.
5.3
Planning Policy Statement 1 ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ and PPS4
Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth are also relevant.
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues to consider with regard to this application are:
Visual impact of the proposal and effects on amenity
Crime prevention issues
6.2
VISUAL IMPACT AND AMENITY. The shop sits on a prominent corner location
along the main route through the village. It is therefore not only important to
safeguard the character and appearance of the area in the interests of the
occupants of nearby dwellings, but also the appearance of the village generally.
Although not in a conservation area (Greens Norton does not have one), this area
of Greens Norton is part of the historic core and the focal point of the village, near
the intersection of two main through routes. It is characterised by mainly traditional
style properties and a wide ‘green’ fronting the buildings on the opposite side of the
road. There are several listed buildings close by. Although the original report to the
previous committee recommended approval on the basis of the ‘punched’ lattice
type security shutters, the amended proposal for the perforated shutters, which
have a more opaque appearance raises some concerns.
6.3
Both South Northamptonshire Local Plan Policies and Planning Policy Statement 4
promote the retention of local facilities serving rural communities. The village shop
131
_______________________________________________________________________________
is an important resource for Greens Norton and its viability as a business should
therefore be supported as much as possible, although this must be balanced
against the impact of the proposed development. On balance, officers are of the
view that the more ‘solid’ nature of the perforated shutters would be harmful to the
character and appearance of the host building and the wider area and that this is
not outweighed by the applicant’s desire to improve security.
6.4
CRIME PREVENTION. The Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor confirms the
shop has recently suffered a break in and he supports this provision of open type
shutters on the building. He further advises that ‘open’ style shutters are preferable
from a crime prevention point of view as, unlike solid shutters, they present a less
blank or hostile appearance to the street scene and are not a suitable surface for
graffiti purposes.
6.5
The Planning Out Crime In Northamptonshire SPG states ‘Local authorities in
Northamptonshire do not support the application of solid external shutters as it
leads to monotonous, unattractive frontages, which reinforces fear of crime and
attracts criminal activity’. It further advises full window views offer the potential to
enhance trade and enables surveillance by passers-by to report any disturbances.
All shutters should therefore be as transparent as possible e.g. with holes or slots in
metal slats, or open mesh grills. From a crime prevention point of view therefore
this proposal complies with policy G3(P) of the Local Plan and the adopted SPG as
the addition of any shutters on the building would have a positive impact overall on
crime prevention.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
The application is recommended for refusal as, although it would reduce the
potential for crime associated with an important local service premises the
proposed development would have a significant detrimental impact on the
appearance of the area.
132
133
___________________________________________________________________________
____
Item No 008
S/2010/0639/MAO
Parish : Old Stratford
Case Officer : Daniel Callis
Applicant : Burleigh Bucks Ltd
Location : Land East of The Meadows Old
Stratford
Description : Residential development of 15 dwellings
(outline).
Reasons :1.
The proposed development would not accord with the relevant Development
Plan in particular ‘saved’ policies G2, H6 and EV2 of the adopted South
rural area. It is not considered that there are material planning considerations
that would outweigh this conflict as the Council has a 5 year land supply of
housing in accordance with PPS3 ‘Housing’.
2.
The application is contrary to Local Plan policies EV1 and G3, the Council’s
adopted Interim Rural Housing Policy (IRHP) and Supplementary Guidance
on Residential Design in the Countryside, as well as Government Guidance
contained in PPS1, PPS3 and PPS7. In this instance the development due to
the low density does not make efficient use of the land and represents a
significant extension of the village into open countryside which, together with
the arbitrary eastern boundary of the development site across the field, is out
of keeping with, and would be harmful to, the surrounding pattern of
development, the rural character of the area and this sensitive edge of village
location.
3.
In the absence of a satisfactory unilateral undertaking or any other form of
Section 106 legal agreement the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that
the proposed development provides for appropriate affordable housing, public
open space, leisure facilities, education and other facilities required as a result
of the development, to the detriment of both existing and proposed residents
and contrary to Policies H7 and IMP1 of the adopted South Northamptonshire
Local Plan and the Council’s adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance
relating to Affordable Housing (2003) and Policy Statement on Developer
Contributions (2001).
134
___________________________________________________________________________
____
S/2010/0639/MAO
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Old Stratford
Cllr Mrs Lucinda Mobaraki
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The application site is an open field located on the eastern side of Old Stratford.
The field lies outside but directly abuts the village confines on its northern and
western sides, and lies between The Meadows and the river Great Ouse. The site
covers roughly 80% of the existing field and extends to some 0.88Ha. The lower
part of the field nearest the river (and in flood zones 2 and 3) is excluded from the
site. A public footpath runs through this excluded part of the field.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
S/1988/0724/PO, S/1988/0725/PO, S/1989/0533/PO and S/1989/0534/PO – four
applications were submitted in the late 1980s seeking outline planning permission
for the demolition of the former transport depot on the adjacent land (Holtons Yard)
and the erection of 44 dwellings on the application site and adjacent land. All of the
applications were withdrawn.
2.2
S/2002/1473/P – planning permission was granted in August 2003 for the
redevelopment of Holtons Yard and the erection of 34 dwellings (now known at The
Meadows).
2.3
S/2008/0707/PO – planning permission was granted at appeal for the erection of 35
dwellings on the existing small paddock to the west of the application site.
2.4
S/2010/0146/MAO – planning permission was refused in April 2010 for outline
consent for 31 dwellings on the same application site as the current application.
permission was refused on the grounds that the cumulative quantum of
development, when added to the extant consent for 35 on the adjoining paddock
(66), would significantly exceed the indicative target set in the IRHP (43) and the
local need for housing and would conflict with sustainable development objectives
and the spatial priorities for the region, which seek urban focused development and
the protection of villages from inappropriate growth.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
The proposal seeks outline planning permission (all matters reserved) for the
erection of 15 dwellings on that part of the existing field that is included within the
site.
3.2
Of these, 40% (6 dwellings) would be affordable housing, the remaining 60% (9
dwellings) would be market housing.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
135
___________________________________________________________________________
____
4.1
OLD STRATFORD PARISH COUNCIL – Object to the application on the following
grounds:
The proposal is contrary to saved Local Plan policies H5 and H7 and the IRHP
(insofar as the cumulative quantum of development, 15 + 35 = 50, exceeds the
indicative allocation of 43).
The village primary school is already over capacity. Extending the school is not
easy, given the constraints of the site and that fact that it is already short of the
statutory area required for playing fields.
The low density proposed would make an inefficient use of land and so would be
contrary to PPS3.
There is currently no signed S106 agreement covering suitable contributions such
as affordable housing, public open space, education, etc.
They also suggest that the applicant does not own the entire site, as a strip along
the boundary with The Meadows is retained by the previous developer. No evidence
has been submitted to support this claim and it is not considered to materially affect
whether or not permission is granted.
4.2
POLICY OFFICER – Objects to the application. The 5-year housing land supply is
now considered to be met. Hence it is considered that this development does not
considerations that would outweigh this conflict.
4.3
STRATEGIC HOUSING – There is no up-to-date housing needs survey for Old
Stratford. However, the Council’s housing register currently indicates that there are
39 households expressing a preference to live in Old Stratford (as of 23rd June
2010), and of those a minimum of 15 have a local connection to the village.
Consequently, a 40% affordable housing provision would be required, equalling 6
units. These should be 75% for rental and 25% for ‘intermediate’. The current
scheme indicates six 1 and 2 bedroom flats, which do not meet the Council’s
minimum floorspace requirements. In addition, this type of housing is clearly
distinguishable and, therefore, not tenure blind from the market housing, which is
predominantly large detached 4 and 5 bedroom houses. The affordable housing
should contain a mix of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom properties, ‘pepper-potted’ throughout
the site and that should be indistinguishable from the market housing.
4.4
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH – No objection, subject to conditions relating to land
contamination
4.5
ARBORICULTURAL OFFICER – No objection, there are no outstanding trees on
the site or anything worthy of a TPO. The indicative plan also gives the existing
trees a reasonable amount of space. Suggests that any approval should include
comprehensive landscaping to the southern boundary (edge of the housing line).
Also requires that any approval applies tree protection conditions to protect the two
existing trees on the southern boundary, particularly during the construction phase
4.6
HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY – No objection in principle. However, highlight certain
136
___________________________________________________________________________
____
points, including the following:
The new estate road will be subject to a Section 38 agreement to be adopted by the
Highway Authority
Pedestrian visibility splays of 2.4m x 2.4m should be provided at each access (2.0m
x 2.0m where turning provided)
The new estate road should have a minimum width of 4.8m along with a footpath
width of 2 x 1.8m (or 1 x 1.8m plus 1 x service strip)
The design of the estate should comply with the design speed of no more than
10mph
Turning facilities for refuse and commercial vehicles should be provided within the
site. The design should also meet the needs of all emergency services
4.7
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL – request financial contributions for
additional primary school places, libraries, fire and rescue service (see relevant
paragraphs below)
4.8
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY – No objection, subject to a condition requiring the
applicant to submit a phasing and future management and maintenance plan for the
provision of foul water drainage and have it approved in writing before the first
occupation of any building on the site.
4.9
ANGLIAN WATER – No response received to date.
4.10 NATURAL ENGLAND – No response received to date. However, the information
submitted with the application is the same as the previous proposal, to which they
raised no objection.
4.11 CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR – No response received to date.
4.12 THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS – 10 letters of objection have been received
from local residents. Objections include: The development would be outside the
village confines and would be contrary to PPS3 and to saved Local Plan policies
G2, H6 and EV2; the development would be detrimental to the character of the
area; the additional traffic would be detrimental to the local highway network
(congestion) and highway safety and would result in additional on-street parking;
existing on-street parking congestion makes access for emergency vehicles difficult;
additional traffic will cause noise and environmental pollution; the village school is
already at capacity, as are local medical and dental surgeries; the existing open
field is an important asset to the area; the village has already undergone significant
expansion without a matching investment in infrastructure; the existing sewerage
network in the area does not have sufficient capacity to accommodate the extra
dwellings; the existing public transport service is inadequate to accommodate
additional development in a sustainable way; the village does not contain many
facilities and is not a sustainable location for such a significant cumulative amount
of development.
4.13 A petition of village residents opposing the application was also submitted with 88
137
___________________________________________________________________________
____
signatories. This is the same petition that was submitted with the previous
application (S/2010/0146/MAO).
5.
POLICY
5.1
The relevant Development Plan comprises the ‘saved’ policies of the South
Northamptonshire Local Plan (SNLP).
5.2
The relevant Policies of the SNLP include Policies G2, G3, H5, H6, H7, EV1, EV2,
EV21 and IMP1.
5.3
constitutes a material planning consideration, particularly; Developer Contributions
(2001) and Affordable Housing (2003)
5.4
relevance is guidance in PPS1, PPS3, PPS7, PPS9, PPG13, PPG24 and PPS25.
5.5
In addition, the Council has recently adopted an Interim Rural Housing Policy
(IRHP).
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main considerations in this case are:
the principle of the development (including the scale of development)
Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3: Housing) compliance
access and highways safety
drainage and flooding
the effect on biodiversity and ecology
the effect on the character and appearance of the area
effect on adjoining residents
contributions to local infrastructure
6.2
THE PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT – Applications for planning permission
should be determined with regard to the Development Plan which, in light of the
recent revocation of Regional Strategies, comprises only; Adopted Development
Plan Documents, Saved Policies and any old style plans that have not lapsed. For
this Council, therefore, the development plan comprises the saved policies of the
South Northamptonshire Local Plan.
6.3
In this case the proposal is clearly contrary to the adopted Local Plan in that it
comprises development outside the adopted village confines as defined in that Plan
and, therefore, constitutes development within the open countryside. Consequently,
the development is in conflict with Policies G2, EV2, H5 and H6.
138
___________________________________________________________________________
____
6.4
Local Planning Authorities are, however, also advised to have regard to other
which still requires Councils to provide a five year housing land supply.
6.5
for Planning Applications.
6.6
6.7
Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed development is unacceptable in
6.8
year land supply it is recommended that officers are given the delegated authority to
issue the refusal but to remove this reason for refusal from the decision notice
(reason 1).
6.9
PPS3 COMPLIANCE – Notwithstanding the issues above, paragraph 69 of PPS3
requires new development to reach high standards of design, relationship to
context, efficiency and quality when measured against sustainability criteria. In this
instance the total site measures 0.88ha, meaning that the 15 dwellings proposed
equates to around only 17 dwellings per hectare. Although the indicative minimum
density has now been removed from PPS3, there is still a requirement and
expectation to make an efficient use of land.
6.10 The proposed density, however, is significantly low and much lower than the
existing adjoining development at The Meadows (45 dwellings per hectare) and in
Manorfields Road and Rivercrest Road (23 dwellings per hectare). As a result the
development would not only appear out of keeping with the character of the
adjacent development but it would also be contrary to PPS3 by making an inefficient
use of land.
6.11 ACCESS AND HIGHWAY SAFETY – Although not for determination as part of this
application for outline consent, it should be noted that access to would almost
inevitably come via The Meadows, which then leads onto Deanshanger Road. In
fact, the Highways Authority has previously stated that access would need to be
provided via the adjacent, but as yet undeveloped, site that has outline consent for
35 dwellings. This, in turn, would then connect with The Meadows opposite No’s 1
and 3. The reason for this is due to the road through The Meadows itself not being
of sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the
application site.
6.12 However, the Highways Authority are satisfied that a suitable access could be
139
___________________________________________________________________________
____
provided via the adjacent undeveloped site and that the development would cause
no significant detriment to highway safety in terms of the additional volumes of
traffic and parking congestion.
6.13 DRAINAGE AND FLOODING – The site deliberately lies fully in flood zone 1. The
unusually wavy line of the eastern boundary actually skirts the edge of flood zones
2 and 3 in relation to the adjacent river Great Ouse, therefore making best use of
the field without making the development susceptible to flooding.
6.14 The Environment Agency has confirmed that they have no objection to the proposal
in principle. If permission were to be granted they require that a condition be
included requiring the applicant to submit a phasing and future management and
maintenance plan for the provision of foul water drainage and have it approved in
writing before the first occupation of any building on the site.
6.15 BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY – The applicant’s Evaluation and Impact
Assessment identifies that, from an ecological perspective, the site can be divided
into two contrasting zones. The improved grassland on the high ground
(approximately two thirds of the field and the vast majority of the area covered by
the application site) is of ‘negligible’ value in that it is composed of ‘low grade and
widespread habitat’. The lower lying land on the floodplain (the remaining land,
almost entirely outside the application site) is of ‘national’ value because it contains
a viable area of a key habitat identified in the ‘UK Biodiversity Action Plan’. The
hedges and trees also have the potential to support bats, grass snakes and nesting
birds. In terms of mitigation, the report suggests that development (including activity
during any construction phase) should not extend into the floodplain and that all
existing trees and hedges should remain. If any removal or pruning/pollarding of the
latter is required then further survey work will be required.
6.16 Although Natural England are yet to respond, the information submitted with the
application is the same as the previous proposal. On that occasion they were
satisfied with the report and its findings and raised no objection. They were also
satisfied that the development need not necessarily cause any harm to any
protected species or their habitats.
6.17 CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF THE AREA –The site is open agricultural
land, currently laid to pasture. The land to the south is also agricultural and the flood
meadows to the river Great Ouse lie to the east. The land rises gradually from the
river and the site is clearly visible from the large public park to the east (as well as
the public footpath that runs through the field itself). The development of the land for
residential use would clearly be detrimental to its existing open rural character.
6.18 In terms of the wider settlement form, the site provides an additional gradual step of
development between the rear of the properties in Deanshanger Road, the adjacent
as yet undeveloped site with outline consent (the adjoining paddock), and the
eastern extremity of the properties in Manorfield Road (which back directly onto the
river Great Ouse). The utilisation of these boundaries means that the development
abuts existing residential development on two sides and, to a certain extent, would
appear as a reasonably integral part of the built form of the village.
6.19 The retention of the existing hedges and vegetation on the southern and eastern
140
___________________________________________________________________________
____
boundaries would also help soften the appearance of the development from outside
the settlement to a certain extent, but would need to be supplemented to provide a
substantial and effective edge to the site, particularly when viewed from the public
open space on the opposite side of the river.
6.20 However, notwithstanding this, the site does project quite prominently into the
adjacent open countryside and the visual harm is significant. Consequently, in light
of the fact that the housing land supply shortfall is now addressed, there is no
longer any material consideration that would over-ride this harm caused.
6.21 NEIGHBOURING AMENITY – The indicative plan demonstrates that the proposed
dwellings could all be accommodated within the site without causing any material
harm to the amenities of any existing neighbouring property.
6.22 The indicative plan also appears to demonstrate that the new dwellings themselves
would all be afforded a satisfactory level of amenity and area of external amenity
space.
6.23 CONTRIBUTIONS – If permission were to be granted
agreement/undertaking would be needed to secure the following:
a
legal
Affordable housing 40%, or 6 units (of that, 75% would be for rent and %25 for
shared ownership, etc)
Library contribution at £116 per 1 bed unit, £155 per 2 bed unit, £229 per 3 bed unit,
£290 per 4 bed unit, £326 per 5 bed unit
Fire and Rescue contribution at £86 per unit (31 x £86 = £2,666)
Education contribution to fund additional primary places at a rate of £0 per 1 bed
unit, £497 per 2 bed unit, £3,403 per 3 bed unit, £7,602 per 4 bed unit
Landscaping – the creation of a landscaping belt along the southern boundary of
the site in order to accord with the requirements and expectations of the IRHP that
proposals should either consolidate the existing confines boundary or form a sound
alternative boundary that respects and reflects natural or other long term features.
The belt, along with any other public open space, would then need to be transferred
to the Parish Council to ensure permanency to the new limit of the village.
6.24 In the absence of an agreed and signed S106 at the time of determination it would
be necessary to add this as an additional reason for refusal.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
In accordance with the above and the contents of item 6 on the agenda, it is
considered that this development does not comply with the relevant development
plan and that there are no material planning considerations that would outweigh this
conflict because the Council has a 5 year land supply of housing.
7.2
In addition, the proposal constitutes a particularly low density of development which
is not in-keeping with the character of the area and does not make an efficient use
141
___________________________________________________________________________
____
of land, as required by PPS3.
7.3
Consequently, and notwithstanding the fact that the proposal causes no significant
detriment in terms of highway safety, neighbouring amenity, flooding and drainage,
ecology the application is recommended for refusal on the grounds outlined above.
8.
RECOMMENDATION
8.1
That planning permission be refused, but to delay issuing the decision notice until
the outcome of the recent appeal is known (see item 6 on the agenda).
8.2
In the event that the appeal decision confirms that the Council does have a 5 year
land supply, then the application decision notice can be issued as it stands.
8.3
but to remove this reason for refusal from the decision notice (Reason 1).
142
143
_______________________________________________________________________________
Item No 009
Parish : Newbottle
Case Officer : Maria Philpott
Applicant : Mrs P Johnson
Location : Newbottle & Charlton Primary School
Green Lane Charlton
Description : Provision of stand alone kitchen pod unit
Conditions :1.
B1 Statutory time limit
2.
The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete accordance
with the approved plans: site plan S0152A, K9314-2-EL Rev 02 and
NTQS1267/S0152A/01 received on 4th June 2010 and S0152A/03 received on 30th
June 2010, unless a non-material amendment is approved by the Local Planning
Authority under the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure)
(Amendment No3) (England) Order 2009.
3.
Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, further detailed
drawings of the proposed ramp to be erected shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out
in accordance with the approved details.
4.
The kitchen pod hereby permitted shall only be used in connection with activities
related to Newbottle and Charlton Primary School and shall not be used in
connection with any non-school related purposes, unless agreed in writing by the
Local Planning Authority.
5.
The kitchen pod hereby permitted shall only be used for preparing and warming
already cooked dinners to be served in the school hall and no cooking shall be
undertaken in the unit at any time unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
Reasons :1.
RB1A
2.
To clarify the permission and for the avoidance of doubt
3.
To ensure the details are appropriate to the development
4.
To clarify the permission and for the avoidance of doubt
144
_______________________________________________________________________________
5.
In the interests of residential amenity
S/2010/0656/FUL
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Steane
Cllr Mrs Rebecca Breese
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The application site comprises Newbottle and Charlton village primary school which
is located in a central location in the village, with a frontage to Green Lane and
vehicular access from Myers Close.
1.2
The school buildings themselves comprise some traditional stone and red brick
buildings with more modern additions to the rear of the site.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
Planning permission (S/2010/0358/FUL) has recently been granted for an extension
to the existing entrance to create a new entrance, heads office and library.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
The application seeks the erection of a stand alone kitchen ‘pod’ unit to allow school
dinners to be served on site. Associated ramped access from the rear of the pod
will also be provided. The finish of the pod is a sustainable wooden batten finish
coloured green
3.2
It is not intended to cook food on site, only to warm food ready to serve in the
school hall. Once warmed, food will be covered and wheeled to the school on a
trolley.
3.3
The applicant, Northamptonshire County Council, advise that they have made a
commitment to provide hot school meals throughout the County. The Pod offers a
way of achieving this without having to take up valuable school classroom space.
The cost of building a permanent space is not possible and this is a viable
alternative. It has a design life of 20 years with the current provision of a 5 year
lease.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
Newbottle Parish Council: Object. The unit looks unpleasing to the eye due to this
being the front of the new school refurbishment. It doesn’t appear to be in keeping
with the new look. [Second letter re clarification of colour] Object. The colour of the
pod is not the issue, it is the way the pod is constructed and will not fit the new
image of the school.
4.2
Conservation Officer: The application site is located beyond the confines of the
settlement’s conservation area and the ‘pod’ will be positioned to the north of that
site adjacent to the existing modern school building. In that location it will have no
impact on the setting of the conservation area or any views into or out of it. I
therefore have no objections to this proposal or further comments to make.
145
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.3
Access Officer: No comments
4.4
Environmental Health: No objections
4.5
Third Parties: No comments received
5.
POLICY
5.1
Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 1: Delivering Sustainable Development
5.2
Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 5: Planning for the Historic Environment
5.3
South Northants Local Plan: EV1, EV11 and G3
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues which relate to the proposal are as follows:
the principle
design
impact on the setting of the conservation area
Residential amenity (including noise and odour)
Principle
6.2
The proposal is located within the village confines and within the existing primary
school site and therefore the principle of providing additional development is
acceptable.
Design
6.3
The design of the kitchen pod, whilst of no particular architectural merit, is
considered to be of a functional design appropriate to its use and setting within the
existing school site. It is acknowledged that the school has had permission granted
for some new extensions to the eastern side of the site, however these will create a
modern addition to the school entrance and therefore the kitchen pod will not look
out of keeping within the immediate setting of the buildings. The kitchen pod will
also be tucked adjacent to the hedge on the northern side and well screened by
dense hedging to the northern and eastern boundaries. On this basis, and when
balanced against the need for the Pod as explained in para 3.3 and the cost of
building a permanent space, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable.
6.4
Impact on the setting of the conservation area
6.5
The proposal is not considered to have an adverse impact to the setting of the
conservation area as the kitchen pod is to be located to the opposite side of the
school from the western edge of the conservation area, therefore views into and out
of the conservation area will not be affected.
Residential Amenity
6.6
The kitchen pod is not anticipated to create any adverse impacts in terms of noise
and odour to the adjacent residential occupier at No. 1 Myers Close. Whilst the use
involves food preparation, this only includes the warming of food and no cooking will
146
_______________________________________________________________________________
take place within the facility. A condition will be imposed to ensure that this remains
the case.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
The application is considered to be acceptable and in keeping with the modern
school buildings to which it relates. It will not harm the setting of the conservation
area or create any adverse impacts to the occupiers of adjacent residential
properties.
8.
REASON FOR APPROVAL
8.1
Pursuant to Section 38 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the
proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and
adopted supplementary planning guidance. The design of the kitchen pod is
functional and in keeping with the modern school buildings and it will not affect the
setting of the conservation area or residential amenities. There are no other
material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal.
147
148
___________________________________________________________________________
____
Item No 010
S/2010/0692/MAR
Parish : Silverstone
Applicant : Mr K Pearson
Location : Whittlebury Road Silverstone
Description : Residential development for 49 dwellings
and associated works. (Reserved
matters pursuant to outline planning
permission S/2009/0290/PO).
Conditions :1.
The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete
accordance with the approved plans, [****insert approved drawing numbers
here*****] unless a non-material amendment is approved by the Local
Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (General
Development Procedure) (Amendment No3) (England) Order 2009.
2.
No development shall take place on the construction of the dwellings hereby
approved until a reference panel or panels of the proposed stonework and
brickwork, including the mortar type, has been constructed and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The panels shall be erected on site in
a position that is protected and readily accessible for viewing in good natural
daylight from a distance of 3 metres. The panels shall be retained on site for
the duration of the construction contract and the development shall be carried
out in accordance with the approved details.
3.
J11 Inset of window/door to form reveal
4.
No development shall take place until further details of the architectural
detailing of the exterior of the dwellings, including the windows and doors (and
their surrounds), together with the eaves and verge treatment, at a scale of
not less than 1:20, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in
accordance with the approved details.
5.
No development shall take place until a scheme for external lighting of the
development, in particular the roads, parking courts and footpath link, has
been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the
approved details.
149
___________________________________________________________________________
____
6.
The existing access onto Whittlebury Road shall be permanently closed and
the verge / kerb / footway to be re-instated before the development is first
occupied, and shall thereafter remain as such.
7.
The first-floor windows in the side gable of plots 1, 13, 28 and 33 and the firstfloor windows in the rear elevation of plots 40 and 46 shall be fitted with
obscure glass and be top third opening only and thereafter permanently
maintained as such.
8.
Before commencement of any part of the development hereby permitted
(including any clearing and demolition) the existing trees/hedges to be
retained on the site shall be protected and maintained in accordance with the
details provided in the Tree Report (ref 1024/DP/TR001) dated 17th March
2010 and on drawing number 10-24-02
Reasons :-
1.
For the avoidance of doubt and to clarify the permission.
2.
RK2
3.
RK1
4.
RK1
5.
In the interests of visual and neighbour amenity and crime prevention.
6.
In the interests of highway safety
7.
To protect residential amenities from overlooking
8.
In the interests of visual amenity and good Arboricultural practice.
S/2010/0692/MAR
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Silverstone
Cllr Dermot Bambridge
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The application site is located on the east side of Towcester Road at its junction
with Whittlebury Road and extends to 1.239 hectares. It is currently used for
grazing sheep and is bounded by trees and hedgerows. None of the trees are the
subject of a Tree Preservation Order, but the hedgerow along the frontage to
Towcester Road and Whittlebury Road is defined as an important feature within the
Village Design Statement.
150
___________________________________________________________________________
____
1.2
The site lies outside the village confines of Silverstone, and is therefore classed as
open countryside. However, the site is surrounded by residential development.
Unlike other similar open fields within /adjacent to the village, the site is not defined
as an important open space in the Village Design Statement.
1.3
To the east of the site is a former local authority housing estate on Kingsley Road
and the BT Telephone Exchange, whilst to the north is a detached dwelling ‘The
Paddocks’, which occupies a generous plot. Further north beyond The Paddocks is
a large field which also fronts the Towcester Road and is bounded by the Kingsley
Road houses. To the west, on the opposite side of Towcester Road, are two-storey
dwellings, largely screened by a mature hedgerow, backing onto the road and
served from Hillside Avenue, and Nos. 9 and 9a Towcester Road, two detached
houses served off the main road. To the south of the site on the other side of
Whittlebury Road is the residential care home of Clare House and a detached
dwelling set back from the road.
1.4
There is an existing field access located towards the southern end of the Towcester
Road frontage and a further one midway along the Whittlebury Road frontage.
1.5
The land slopes from east to west, the maximum fall being about 4 metres.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
Outline planning permission was granted in 2009 for 49 dwellings (S/2009/0290/PO
refers). All matters were reserved for approval as such only the principle of
development was approved at that time. A legal agreement was entered into when
permission was granted requiring 40% of the development to be affordable housing
and financial contributions towards education, leisure and healthcare.
2.2
Full planning permission was also granted in 2009 for 46 houses on the adjacent
site to the north and this is currently under construction.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
This application seeks consent for all the reserved matters, namely access, layout,
scale, appearance and landscaping.
3.2
A single point of access to serve the development is proposed centrally along the
Towcester Road frontage. The access road enters the site perpendicular to the
road for approximately 50m and then forks in a north and south direction to access
all the houses. The southern fork of the adopted road terminates at the Whittlebury
Road frontage and has two private drives leading off of it to access the houses that
front onto the Whittlebury Road. A pedestrian access is proposed at the end of this
section of the adopted road to link with the existing zebra crossing on Whittlebury
Road.
3.3
All the dwellings are two-storeys in height. There is frontage development to both
the Towcester and Whittlebury Road frontages. The affordable housing provision is
split into two areas – a grouping of 15 at the northern end of the site and a grouping
of 5 at the southern end. There is a mixture of 2, 3, 4 and 5 bed houses and 2 bed
apartments across the site. The mature hedges and trees along the boundaries of
the site are proposed to be retained. The dwellings would be finished primarily in
151
___________________________________________________________________________
____
red brick with some stone dwellings.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
SILVERSTONE PARISH COUNCIL: Object to the application for the following
reasons:
There appears to be no designated policy and requirement to reinstate removed
hedges, retain hedges around the site and provide a scheme for ongoing
maintenance
No provision has been made for a safe pedestrian crossing on the Towcester Road
resulting in residents leaving the site onto Towcester Road having to walk around
the corner to the pedestrian crossing on Whittlebury Road and then accessing the
pedestrian crossing higher up the Towcester Road and well away from the
development site to safely cross the A413
Clarification is needed as to which access road it is anticipated will be adopted
o
NCC HIGHWAYS: Make the following comments:
the access should be at least 80m from the end of the flare of the first mini
roundabout
the junction radii of the access and the internal adopted access roads need to
conform to highways standards
dwellings must be a at least 1m from highway boundary, service strips need to be
1m wide not 0.6m
an adoptable footpath link is required to link with the Whittlebury Road.
The applicant has amended the plans in line with County Highways requests and
confirmation is awaited that the amended plan is now acceptable. An update will be
given on this.
4.3
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY: No objection
4.4
WILDLIFE TRUST: Due to limited resources we are unable to comment on this
application.
4.5
NATURAL ENGLAND: No response received to date.
4.6
HIGHWAYS AGENCY: No objections
4.7
POLICE CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR: No objections in principle, but
have the following comments:
Some of the lower density housing is arranged in a perimeter block style, which is to
152
___________________________________________________________________________
____
be welcomed, as it is the safest for resisting intruders.
Most of the remainder, however, is laid out in an open style, with ‘defensible space’
undermined by either small parking courts or rear alleys, most of which are
associated with the higher density housing.
Parking courts facilitate access by intruders to rear gardens and often become the
scene of nuisance behaviour, damage etc. Similarly, rear alleys can be used in the
same fashion, and become dumping grounds for rubbish, and the cause of friction
between neighbours. In this instance, they will rapidly fill with leaf fall from the many
surrounding trees, and are quickly likely to become disused.
In view of the above, I would request the attachment of conditions/informatives, for
reasons of crime prevention, relating to secure windows and doors, secure
boundary treatments, especially those exposed to parking courts.
4.8
SNC STRATEGIC HOUSING:
Original Comments: The most important
consideration for the Strategic Housing Team is that this development delivers 40%
affordable housing comprising a mix of property types and tenures which meets the
identified housing need, which this proposal does. However, the pepper-potting of
the affordable housing on this site does not meet the SPG requirements, of no more
than 10 units grouped together. However, the applicant has advised that this is a
compact site which potentially restricts re-location of the affordable housing and
further pepper-potting without compromising site viability. Therefore, on the basis
that the applicant is prepared to deliver this scheme without grant funding, it was
agreed that we should request sight of Three Dragons economic viability appraisals
which the applicant has undertaken for this site, which could confirm that our
preferred location for the affordable units is not viable.
Additional Comments: The viability appraisal has now been received and assessed.
It is apparent that site viability is an issue for the applicant, particularly as they are
intending to bring the scheme forward without recourse to public subsidy. Having
had sight of the financial appraisal the Strategic Housing Team is satisfied that
further pepper-potting of the affordable units is therefore very likely to further
compromise viability.
4.9
SNC ARBORICULTURAL OFFICER: No objections to the (revised) scheme on the
understanding that planning conditions will be attached to any consent that ensure
the tree protection measures are undertaken in accordance with their
arboriculturalists’ recommendations.
4.10 THIRD PARTIES: One letter of objection received, summary of comments:
the signed S106 on the outline was flawed as neither the County or District
Council’s considered it important to secure a financial ‘highway safety’ contribution
towards the cost of the extension of a safe footway along the south side of Church
Street which is needed to provide a safe day and night time footway from the village
to the playing fields and recreation centres and to West End
there are too many dwellings on the site and the layout conflicts with Policy G3 (A)
of the Local Plan. it is not compatible in terms of scale, type, setting, design and
153
___________________________________________________________________________
____
materials with the existing character of the locality. The density of Kingsley Road is
low enough to justify a lower density on this site
the proposed vehicular access is too close to the double roundabouts at the
Whittlebury Road junction. 49 dwellings would generate too many vehicular turning
movements onto the Towcester Road. The access should be from the Whittlebury
Road.
A vital footpath link is required between the development and the Whittlebury Road.
5.
POLICY
5.1
The relevant policies of the development plan pertinent to this proposal are
considered to be Policies G2, G3, H5, H6, H7, H8, EV1, EV2, EV21, EV24, EV29
and IMP1 of the South Northamptonshire Local Plan.
5.2
Material considerations to this proposal are government guidance in the form of
PPS1 Sustainable Development, PPS3 Housing, PPS7 Sustainable Development in
Rural Areas and PPG13 Transport; Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Residential
Design in the Countryside’.
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
As the principle of development has already been established on this site for 49
dwellings by the granting of the outline consent, the main considerations in respect
of this application are considered to be:
the layout and design of the development and the impact upon the character and
appearance of the area
dispersion, type, mix and tenure of affordable housing
the proposed access and highways layout and the impact on highway safety
the impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents
the impact on existing landscaping
the impact on flooding and drainage
6.2
IMPACT ON CHARACTER AND APPERAANCE OF AREA: National publications
and government advice in the form of PPS1 and PPS3, as well as ‘By Design’ and
‘Building for Life’, sets out the need to secure high quality housing development. At
the local level the Council’s SPG on Residential Design in the Countryside sets out
guidelines for new housing to respect the local vernacular, particularly in village
locations such as this. In general terms, the SPG advises that developments
should be simple plain fronted dwellings, narrow plan depths, linear in form with
pitched roofs parallel to the street and contain chimneys.
6.3
LAYOUT: The proposed layout of the development has sought to respect its
frontage to the Towcester and Whittlebury Roads by fronting houses along the
western and southern boundary, whilst at the same time retaining the important
hedgerow along the frontage. Whilst the majority of the houses on the opposite
154
___________________________________________________________________________
____
side of Towcester Road back onto it, this is a remnant of when the road was the
A43 trunk road and was therefore inappropriate to front it at that time. The road has
now been de-trunked and is considerably lighter trafficked. In addition, recent
housing developments along the road (including the development currently under
construction on the adjacent site to the north) have fronted it, creating a more
appropriate street scene to the road in those places. As such, it is considered that
fronting houses onto the Towcester and Whittlebury Roads, whilst at the same time
retaining the hedgerow, is acceptable in street scene terms and the general
character of the settlement.
6.4
The access to the site is positioned centrally along the frontage to Towcester Road
with a private drive leading immediately off it to the left (north) to access the
properties which front the Towcester Road. The access road then extends towards
the centre of the site where it splits in two and extends to the north and south. Off
these roads are private drives to serve individual and groups of dwellings. All of the
proposed dwellings front the access road and the subservient lanes, and walls are
provided between buildings to provide a sense of enclosure. The development
provides a mixture of housing sizes and types (detached, semi-detached and
terraced houses), which are arranged in a layout which reflects as best as possible,
given the density and location, its rural context. This echoes the principles of good
design and is reflective of the guidance of the SPG. However, amendments to the
layout have been sought relating primarily to the provision of a better focal point at
the centre of the site, and queries over the close proximity of plots 11-16 to the
trees along the northern boundary, and the close relationship between some plots
regarding overlooking and loss of light.
6.5
The properties at the rear of the site back onto properties in Kingsley Road, and the
properties on the northern boundary back onto the garden of The Paddocks, and
the majority of other properties have gardens backing onto other gardens. Where
parking courts or small parking areas are proposed they will be closely surveilled by
the dwellings they serve or neighbouring properties. Where a parking court backs
onto garden areas a condition will be placed to ensure these areas are adequately
secured. As such, the development is considered appropriate to deter the
opportunities for crime.
6.6
DESIGN: The development has been designed to reflect the principles of the SPG,
by proposing in the main simple fronted two-storey dwellings with generally narrow
plan depths, rooflines parallel to the road and chimneys. A small proportion of the
properties have a deeper span (8m), and a resulting taller roof (which has been
utilised to provide rooms in the roofspace – but no dormer windows), but this taller
property provides variety to the street scenes and roofscape of the development.
6.7
The site is not located in or near to the historic core of the village. However, the
Local Authority built housing in Kingsley Road, particularly at its southern end, also
echoes the principles of the SPG, and is finished primarily in red brick.
6.8
The development is proposed to be predominantly finished in red brick, with two
slightly different varieties to provide some variety across the site, but with some of
the properties finished in stone. This ties in with the Kingsley Road development,
as well as the development currently under construction on the adjacent site, and
also relates to the principal building material in this area of the district of local
155
___________________________________________________________________________
____
limestone. Where possible, the majority of gas and electricity meters are either
ground mounted or on side elevations.
6.9
There were elements of the design that officers had concerns over, but the
submission of amended plans has largely addressed these (the addition of timber
lintels to some of the dwellings; greater number of chimneys added; bay windows
omitted; stone cills omitted and replaced to brick or tile; ground-floor windows made
less deep; front doors amended to a cottage style; omission of small side lights to
some dwellings; more frontage to Whittlebury Road; provision of pedestrian access
point to Whittlebury Road). However, further amendments have been requested to
some of the house types (namely the addition of further chimneys; simplified
window treatments as the majority have too many glazing bars; a reduction in size
of some of the windows; the improvement of the window arrangement to some of
the gables; the reduction in the number of rooflights; omission of small square
ground-floor windows either side of front doors).
6.10 Amendments have also been requested to the materials (to increase the number of
stone properties; the stone properties to be natural stone rather than reconstituted;
improvement to roofing materials to be natural or at least good imitation slate and
plain clay tiles, rather than the concrete tiles currently proposed; and improvements
to the surfacing materials for the private drives). The recommendation of approval
is based on receipt of these amended plans.
6.11 AFFORDABLE HOUSING: As detailed at para 4.8 above, whilst the development
delivers 40% affordable housing comprising a mix of property types and tenures
which meets the identified housing need, the pepper potting of the affordable units
across the development does not meet the SPG requirements of no more than 10
units grouped together (there are 15 in the northern corner of the site and 5 in
southern corner). The applicant stated that this was due to the financial viability of
delivering the site, particularly as they are intending to bring the scheme forward
without recourse to public subsidy. Following assessment of the financial viability
through the Three Dragons model, the Strategic Housing Team is satisfied that
further pepper-potting of the affordable units would be very likely to further
compromise viability of the site.
6.12 In light of the above, and following discussions with the Strategic Housing Team
and Planning Policy, it is considered that whilst lack of proper pepper-potting might
be a cause for more concern on larger sites with lower densities, there are restricted
options on this higher density and more compact scheme (even if in two groups of
ten, they would still be close to one another). However, despite this it has still been
possible, notwithstanding the viability issues, to achieve two groups of affordable
units, rather than having them all in one location, and also to provide 40%
affordable housing comprising a mix of property types and tenures which meets the
identified housing need, all without grant funding. As such, overall the affordable
housing element of the scheme is considered acceptable for this development.
6.13 HIGHWAY SAFETY: A formal response to the latest layout is awaited from County
Highways at the time of writing this report, however, the layout has been based
upon the comments NCC Highways have made. As such, it is likely that NCC will
raise no objections to this proposal in highway safety terms. NCC have been
insisting on a set distance away from the mini-roundabout, suitable road alignment
156
___________________________________________________________________________
____
within the site, dimensions of roads, pavements, radii, service strips and the
provision of a pedestrian access to the Whittlebury Road.
6.14 Nearly all of the houses have two dedicated parking spaces, but all of the
apartments have just one parking space. This equates to the provision of, on
average, 1.75 spaces per dwelling which is considered appropriate in this instance,
given the mix of properties.
6.15 NEIGHBOUR AND RESIDENTIAL AMENITY: The neighbours that would be most
affected by this development are those of The Paddocks to the north, and Nos. 8290 Kingsley Road to the east. In this instance given the distance away from the
these boundaries of the proposed houses and the location of windows, coupled with
the mature vegetation along these boundaries and the distance away of the
neighbouring properties themselves, it is considered that the proposed development
would not adversely impact upon the neighbouring properties by reason of loss of
light, privacy or be overbearing upon them.
6.16 With regards the amenities of future occupiers of the development itself, the
distance between properties is largely acceptable across the development. There is
a close relationship between a couple of plots of overlooking to garden areas and
amendments have been requested to overcome these issues. The units that are
proposed to back onto the northern boundary have gardens that could be
dominated by the mature trees that oversail the application site, resulting in
potentially dark gardens and dark properties, this has also been raised with the
agent.
6.17 LANDSCAPING: All the mature trees and hedging which bound the site are to be
retained as part of the development and protected during construction. Additional
landscaping proposed within the site is appropriate to context.
6.18 FLOODING AND DRAINAGE: The issues at the outline stage relating to the
capacity of the drainage system to accommodate additional foul flows has been
resolved prior to the submission of this application. Following improvements
elsewhere in the system, capacity has been created to deal with the foul flows
arising from this development. Conditions attached to the outline require the
submission of drainage details prior to commencement of development. The
Environment Agency have raised no objection to this development. Both the EA
and Anglian Water would be consulted on the drainage details submitted pursuant
to the conditions on the outline.
6.19 OTHER MATTERS: The third party has requested that a financial contribution is
required to provide a footpath from the village to the recreation ground. However,
this was considered on both the granting of the outline on this site as well as the full
planning permission granted for adjacent site where it was considered that it was
unreasonable for these developments to fund this highway improvement as the
developments in themselves would not make an existing situation worse.
7.
CONCLUSION
157
___________________________________________________________________________
____
7.1
In light of the above assessment the application is recommended for approval
subject to the receipt of amended plans in line with the suggested improvements
detailed at paras 6.4, 6.9 – 6.10 and 6.16.
8.
REASON FOR APPROVAL
8.1
proposed development complies with policies G3, EV1, EV19, EV21 and IMP1 of
the South Northamptonshire Local Plan, the government guidance within PPS1
Sustainable Development, PPS3 Housing, PPS7 Sustainable Development in Rural
Areas and PPG13 Transport; and to the Council’s Supplementary Planning
Guidance ‘Residential Design in the Countryside’. The impact on the character of
the area, neighbour amenity, traffic movements, and landscaping have been
considered and there are no sound reasons for the refusal of planning permission.
158
159
___________________________________________________________________________
____
Item No 011
Parish : Silverstone
Case Officer : Maria Philpott
Applicant : Mr D Hale
Location : Plot 4 Murrell Court West End
Silverstone
Description : Dwelling with detached garage
Conditions :1.
2.
The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete
accordance with the approved plans 3121/W1 A received on 28th July 2010,
unless a non-material amendment is approved by the Local Planning Authority
under the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure)
(Amendment No3) (England) Order 2009.
3.
Details confirming the external facing and roofing materials for the dwelling
and garage hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any development
on site.
4.
K11 Reference panel of stonework/brickwork required
5.
Full details of the siting and appearance of any electricity or gas supply meter
housings to be located on the external elevations of the buildings, shall be
submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, prior to
construction of the buildings above slab level. The development shall
thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
6.
C9 Maintenance of planting (full and outline applications)
7.
H3 Exclusion of extensions and windows - single dwelling
8.
I14 Floodlighting/security lighting prohibited without consent
9.
Before the dwelling hereby permitted is occupied the shared access shall be
laid out so as to achieve visibility splays of 40 metres x 2 metres back along
the centre line of the access measured along and from the near edge of the
carriageway.
160
___________________________________________________________________________
____
10.
Before the dwelling hereby permitted is occupied the areas of land bounded
by the visibility splays and the kerb or channel line of the public highway shall
be cleared of all obstructions and levelled and maintained at a height not
exceeding 0.9 metres above the adjacent highway level.
11.
The width of the shared drive shall be a minimum of 4.5 metres for a distance
of 10 metres (minimum) measured from the near edge of the highway
carriageway.
12.
All windows and doors shall be of timber construction and painted white or off
white, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
13.
The garage and first floor accommodation above the garage hereby permitted
shall be used as ancillary accommodation in connection with Plot 4 Murrell
Court only and shall not be converted to an independent residential unit.
14.
Details of the design and materials for the external staircase to the garage
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority
prior to the commencement of any development on the garage. The
development shall thereafter be completed in accordance with the approved
details.
15.
The bathroom window on the northern elevation and the secondary bedroom
window on the south elevation shall be provided with obscure glazing before
the house is occupied and shall be retained in that manner at all times.
16.
J17 Cast iron or aluminium rainwater goods required
17.
J17 Cast iron or aluminium rainwater goods required
Reasons :-
1.
RB1A
2.
RB1A
3.
RK2
4.
K11 Reference panel of stonework/brickwork required
5.
6.
RC5
7.
To protect neighbouring residential amenities and having regard to the
constrained nature of the site.
8.
To protect neighbouring residents from overspill light pollution.
9.
To accord with South Northamptonshire Local Plan policy G3 (B) which
161
___________________________________________________________________________
____
requires that new development shall have a satisfactory means off access and
in the interests of highways safety and the convenience of users of the
adjoining highway.
10.
To accord with South Northamptonshire Local Plan policy G3 (B) which
requires that new development shall have a satisfactory means off access and
in the interests of highways safety and the convenience of users of the
adjoining highway.
11.
To accord South Northamptonshire Local Plan policy G3 (B) which requires
that new development shall have a satisfactory means off access and in the
interests of highways safety and the convenience of users of the adjoining
highway.
12.
13.
To clarify the terms of this permission as an additional unit of residential
accommodation is not acceptable in this location.
14.
15.
In the interests of residential amenity
S/2010/0703/FUL
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Silverstone
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The application site comprises Plot 4 of a development plot of four houses within
Silverstone, located on the outer edge of the village in West End. Planning
permission has previously been granted on appeal for the development of the site
for four houses in 2002, 2003 and 2006 (see below). The development plots have
since been sold off individually and 2 of the properties are now constructed and
occupied (plots 1 and 2). Plot 4 occupies the position at the front of the site and
therefore has a direct frontage to West End.
1.2
The site is located within a Special Landscape Area and within a designated
archaeological asset site.
The village confines line is drawn through the
development site, though Plot 4 is largely positioned within the village confines.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
S/2001/0677/PO – Outline consent for 4 dwellings - Allowed on appeal in June 2002
2.2
S/2002/1605/PR – Reserved matters application to S/2001/0677/PO – allowed on
appeal in November 2003
2.3
S/2006/0372/PR – Amended scheme to S/2002/1605/PR for changes to the house
types of Plots 1 and 3, alteration to the boundaries within the site and repositioning
162
___________________________________________________________________________
____
of the garage to Plot 4 but submitted as a full revised application to effectively
superseded the above two applications – approved in April 2006
2.4
Subsequently to the principle being established above a number of further
applications have been submitted for each house type as the plots have been sold
off independently as follows:
2.5
S/2007/0982/P – Revision to Plot 2 – approved in August 2007
2.6
S/2008/0857/P – Revision to Plot 3 – refused in July 2008
2.7
S/2008/1204/P – Revision to Plot 1 – approved in October 2008
2.8
S/2009/0643/P – Revision to Plot 3 – approved in September 2009
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
The proposal seeks an amendment to planning permission S/2006/0372/PR in
respect of Plot 4 relating to the following:
3.2.
repositioning of the rear projection of the dwelling by bringing it approximately 2.5m
nearer to No. 62 West End resulting in a change to the form from a ‘T-plan’ to an ‘Lplan’
3.3.
the repositioning of the remainder of the house closer to No. 62 West End by
800mm
3.4
conversion of the first floor above the garage to provide a studio with roof lights and
an external staircase
3.5.
insertion of additional dormer to front elevation of main dwelling
3.6.
erection of a single storey utility room in the corner of the ‘L’ part of the dwelling
3.7.
alterations to the fenestration including the insertion of additional windows to the
rear and side elevations and change to the design to make the window design
consistent throughout
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
Silverstone Parish Council: No objections but provided comments as follows: The
Council has serious concerns that the permission is likely to be given for a
bungalow to be replaced by a three storey property as it has previously expressed
the view that these are out of keeping with other village properties.
4.2
Third Parties: 1 letter of objection received from 62 West End on the following
grounds: 1) the house is now centred on the site putting the whole building closer to
the boundary; 2) direct overlooking from the proposed studio above the garage by
way of dormer windows.
5.
POLICY
163
___________________________________________________________________________
____
5.1
Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development
5.2
Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing
5.3
South Northamptonshire Local Plan: G3 (general criteria), H5 (housing in restricted
infill villages), H6 (housing in the open countryside), E1 (design) and EV7 (special
landscape areas)
5.4
SPG: Residential design in the countryside
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues in the determination of this application are as follows:
Principle
Design
Residential amenity
Impact on the Special Landscape Area
Highway Safety and parking
Principle
6.2
Whilst the application site is part located in open countryside, the large part of Plot 4
is still contained within the village confines. In any case, planning permission
already exists for the complete development of the site, part of which has already
been completed (plots 1 and 2). Therefore whilst work on the application site (plot
4) has not yet commenced, implementation of the development has begun. The
fallback position is therefore that the plans approved under S/2006/0372/PR can still
be implemented. A consideration of whether the proposed amendments are
considered to be acceptable is therefore appropriate in this case.
Design
6.3
The repositioning of the rear projection (point 1) is to allow for more useable space
in the rear garden, rather than having the rear projection centred. In design terms
this is considered to be acceptable and does not detract from the overall design of
the proposed dwelling. Likewise the repositioning of the remainder of the house
(point 2) does not result in any design changes and the inclusion of a small utility
room (point 5) is also considered acceptable and will be in keeping.
6.4
The conversion of the garage into habitable space (point 3) does not result in any
significant design changes. The inclusion of the roof lights and the erection of an
external staircase are considered to continue to be in keeping. A condition will be
imposed in respect of the design and materials of the external staircase as timber
would be the preferred design option as there are other examples of this in the
vicinity.
6.5
The insertion of an additional dormer window in the front elevation (point 4) will still
164
___________________________________________________________________________
____
be in keeping with the overall design. The alterations to the fenestration (point 6)
relate to a couple of glazed doors at ground floor level (south and west elevations)
including fixed glazed panels to the sides which is considered to be a minor
alteration. The insertion of additional windows (point 6) to the north and south (side
elevations) and are minor alteration which will not impact upon the overall design.
6.6
The applicant also wishes to reduce the number of glazing bars to the windows
(point 6) at the front and increase them on all the remaining elevations so that 4
pane sash windows will be provided to the whole dwelling (rather than 6 to the front)
to make the design consistent on all elevations. Officers consider this to be
acceptable on the basis that there are a variety of examples in close proximity to the
site.
6.7
The dwelling is to be erected in limestone with a slate roof although precise
materials are still under discussion with the agent at the time of writing the report.
Residential Amenity
6.8
In respect of Point 1 above, whilst this does result in the rear projection moving
closer to No. 62 West End reducing the gap from 6m to 3.5m at its shortest, the rear
projection is adjacent to the side elevation of No. 62 where there are no first floor
windows and no principal windows to the ground floor. Whilst the dwelling extends
slightly beyond the rear of No. 62, this is only by 2m and coupled with the distance
from No. 62 does not result in the breach of any 45o sight lines from No. 62. On this
basis it is therefore considered that the repositioning of the rear projection is
acceptable.
6.9
In respect of Point 2 above, the remainder of the house is to move 0.8m closer to
the neighbour at No. 62 West End. This does now result in a slight breach of the
45o line from the neighbour’s front windows, but the impact of this in terms of loss of
amenity to No. 62 is considered to be minimal.
6.10 The plans have been amended in respect of Point 3 above to address the
neighbour’s concerns regarding overlooking. The original plans proposed dormer
windows on the east elevation of the garage facing into the garden of the proposed
dwelling. However, officers shared the concerns of the neighbour that this would
create direct overlooking into the garden of No. 62. The amended plans now only
propose roof lights on the opposite elevation facing towards the public realm areas
of Plots 2 and 3. The roof lights will also be set at a high level and so overlooking
will no longer be possible in any direction.
6.11 The insertion of the dormer to the front (point 4) and the new utility (point 5) together
will the minor alterations to the fenestration (point 6) will not create any loss of
residential amenity. The new windows proposed (point 6) include one at first floor
level on the north elevation and one at first floor level on the south elevation,
however these serve a bathroom and a secondary window to a bedroom
respectively and therefore both will be conditioned to be obscure glazed.
Special Landscape Area
6.12 None of the design alterations proposed will have any impact of the character and
165
___________________________________________________________________________
____
appearance of the Special Landscape Area.
Highway Safety and Parking
6.13 Plot 4 will be accessed via a private drive serving the other plots on the
development. A gated entrance to the dwelling is located to the rear of the site and
together with the garage there are ample parking facilities.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
The minor alterations to the design of the house type for Plot 4 are considered to be
consistent with the original approved design and the other dwellings on the site and
the alterations do not create any significant loss of amenity to nearby residential
occupiers.
8.
REASON FOR APPROVAL
8.1
proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and
adopted supplementary planning guidance. The design is in keeping with the
character of the area and does not detract from the appearance of the Special
Landscape Area. None of the alterations proposed will create a significant loss to
residential amenities. There are no other material considerations that would
constitute sustainable grounds for refusal.
166
167
_______________________________________________________________________________
Item No 012
Application Number : S/2010/0741/MAF Parish : Silverstone
Case Officer : Andrew Longbottom
Applicant : Mr D Mee
Location : Silverstone Circuits Ltd Silverstone
Description : Two storey B1/B2 commercial building with
car parking, office, workshop and
research areas
Conditions :1.
2.
The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete accordance
with the approved plans, drawing numbers 1163/P001 A, 1163/P002 A, 1163/P003
A, 1163/P004 A, 1163/P005 B, 1163/P007 A, 1163/POO8 AND 1163/P009 which
were received by the Local Planning Authority on the 18 June 2010, unless a nonmaterial amendment is approved by the Local Planning Authority under the Town
and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment No3)
(England) Order 2009.
3.
No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape
works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
4.
5.
Prior to the commencement of works on site a travel plan shall be submitted to and
be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the
Highways Agency. The travel plan shall thereafter be implemented prior to the first
occupation of the building hereby permitted and the provisions of the travel plan
shall thereafter remain in force.
6.
Notwithstanding the submitted plans further details of the proposed extent of the
works to be carried out in the first and second phases of development shall be
submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved
scheme.
7.
The premises shall be used for B1 and B2 uses as defined in the schedule to the
Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order, as amended, 1987 (or any order
revoking and re-enacting that order) and in connection with motorsport only and for
no other purpose whatsoever.
8.
Prior to the commencement of works on site further details of the proposed
168
_______________________________________________________________________________
boundary treatments for the site shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by
the local planning authority.
9.
F18 Surface water from vehicle parking areas
10.
Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to the commencement of works on site
representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved
details.
Reasons :-
1.
RB1A
2.
To define the permission.
3.
RC1
4.
RC5
5.
To ensure that sustainable form of transport are used to access the development.
6.
To ensure a satisfactory phasing of the development.
7.
To ensure that the development complies with the adopted Council planning
policies.
8.
To ensure a satisfactory standard of development.
9.
RF14
10.
RK2
S/2010/0741/MAF
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Silverstone
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The site is a 1.5 hectare area of level land located within the Silverstone race circuit
complex. The site is currently divided by a tall leylandii hedge running north south
through the site, to the west of the hedge is a compound and a parking area and on
the east side of the hedge is a grassed area and two mature oak trees.
1.2
To the east of the site is the race circuit and to the north, west and east of the site
are single storey and two storey grey/silver clad commercial building associated
with the automotive industry. Access to the site is via a wide two lane access road
to the north of the site.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
169
_______________________________________________________________________________
2.1
All the planning history relating to the site is prior to 2000 and is not directly relevant
to the determination of this application
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
The application is for full planning permission for the erection of a two storey light
industrial and general industrial building to be constructed in two phases. The
building would create a total of approximately 3100 square metres of commercial
floor space. Approximately one quarter of the building is proposed to be used for the
Ducati race team for workshop, research and office use employing 25 people. The
unit will also include a small amount of retail/meeting and promotional use. The
remainder of the building could be split into smaller units or have a single occupier
but would have a similar use.
3.2
The building is proposed to be located on the eastern boundary of the site with
parking and turning located to the north, west and south of the site, a total of 67
parking spaces are to be provided. The compound also includes turning areas for
HGV’s and motor cycle and bicycle parking. Small areas of landscaping are
proposed within the development and on the boundary. The development would
result in the loss of the mature oak trees on the site.
3.3
The building would be of standard steel frame construction with clad walls and a
very shallow pitched metal roof. The building is proposed to be 83 metres in length,
23 metres in width and 7.3 metres in height to the ridge.
3.4
The first phase of the development would be to construct the most northerly quarter
of the building as the developers already have a prospective tenant for the building.
Then construct the remainder of the building when the requirements of the future
tenants are known.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
SILVERSTONE PARISH COUNCIL: No objections
4.2
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY: No response received to date.
4.3
ANGLIAN WATER: No response received to date
4.4
NCC ARCHAEOLOGY: No objections
4.5
HIGHWAYS AGENCY: No objection, however requires that a condition be added to
any planning permission requiring the submission and implementation of a travel
plan.
4.6
LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY: No observations
4.7
SNC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Supports the application as it would create
additional jobs in the district.
4.8
ARBORICULTURAL OFFICER: The trees have little amenity value as they are not
clearly visible from outside the circuit and therefore do not meet the tests for tree
preservation orders. Therefore considers while the loss of the trees is regrettable
but there are no planning reasons for their retention.
4.9
POLICE CRIME PREVENTION DESIGN ADVISOR: No objections however makes
the following comments: (i) the perimeter of the circuit offers limited security, (ii)
170
_______________________________________________________________________________
bollards should be specified and installed to British standards, (iii) high quality
rollers shutters need to be used, (iv) consideration should be given to reinforcing the
metal cladding walls.
4.10 AYLESBURY VALE DISTRICT COUNCIL: No objections
5.
POLICY
5.1
Policies G2, G3, E3, EV1, EV2, EV21 and RE1 of the Saved
South
Northamptonshire Local Plan are considered to be relevant and relate to
development in the open countryside, design and scale, access, expansion of
existing commercial uses, loss of landscape features, and development within
Silverstone.
5.2
South Northamptonshire Council and Aylesbury Vale District Council have also
jointly adopted a Silverstone Circuit Master Plan in February 2009 which is a
material planning consideration.
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues in the determination of the application are
The phasing of the development
The design of the building
The vehicular access to the site
The removal of the mature trees
The outstanding responses
6.2
Policy RE1 of the Local Plan states that proposals for industrial and commercial
development directly connected with motor racing located at the circuit would be
generally supported. In addition one of the objectives of the master plan is to
enhance and strengthen Silverstone circuit as the centre of automotive and high
technology excellence for the UK and the proposed development assists in
achieving this objective.
6.3
The Master plan does allocate the site for development for a mixed use and
manufacturer display zone and is allocated for the second phase of development
between 2012 and 2018.
6.4
As such the principle of the building does accord with the provisions of policy RE 1
and broadly the use allocated for the site in the master plan. Although the site is not
identified for development until phase 2 I do not see any planning reason why the
earlier development of the site would be problematic. The policy of the local plan
and the master plan do state that development on the site is only acceptable if it is
related to motorsport and therefore any planning permission granted would need a
condition restricting the use of the unit to motorsport, as have previous permissions
for commercial units on the site.
171
_______________________________________________________________________________
The phasing of the development.
6.5
The applicant is intending to construct the northern quarter if the proposed building
under a phased implementation of the construction and the remainder of the
building will be constructed at an unspecified future date once other tenants have
been secured. Whilst this is not an orthodox approach to such a development I do
not see any particular harm associated with this approach, furthermore there is a
good argument for a more flexible approach to application that result in high quality
jobs being brought into the district in times when the economy is need of
assistance.
The design of the building
6.6
The building is of standard construction and is the type of building that can be found
on almost any industrial estate. The master plan for Silverstone gives the design of
buildings on the site a high priority and states that they should be high quality and in
terms of image and architectural style. In this case I do not consider that the design
of the building achieves those objectives. However, there are adjacent industrial
units to the south west of the site and the north east of the site built to a similar
design and using similar materials, on site I consider that this development feels like
a continuation of these small estates. Furthermore there will be no direct views of
the building from the public domain, the views either being screened by existing
buildings or hedgerows and trees. I consider that the design of the building is
therefore not objectionable in this case, however each case has to be judged on its
own merits and I do not consider that any approval on this site will set a precedent
for other developments on the wider Silverstone site.
The vehicular access to the site
6.7
Both the Local Highway Authority and the Highways Agency have not objected to
the application. The Highways Agency have directed a condition requiring a green
travel plan to be submitted and agreed and I consider this is reasonable.
The removal of the mature trees
6.8
There is a mature oak tree located adjacent to the entrance to the site and other
located on the eastern boundary of the site both of which would be felled as part of
the scheme. The larger of the two is located adjacent to the access and given the
access point it would not be possible to save the tree. The tree, if retained would
also impede access to the proposed unit. Both trees could be saved however, if a
new access would be provided and less development is proposed for the site, whilst
this could be possible, the Council has to determine the application that has been
submitted. Given that the Arboricultural Officer has commented that the trees are
not worthy of a tree preservation order, I do not consider that the Council can object
to the application on grounds that the development would result in the loss of
mature trees.
6.9
The outstanding responses
6.10 I am still currently waiting for responses from Anglian Water and the Environment
Agency and I will update members on the responses and any implications prior to
the meeting.
7.
CONCLUSION
172
_______________________________________________________________________________
7.1
The application accords with the policies of the South Northamptonshire Local Plan
and the broadly the proposed land uses for the site as stated in the Silverstone
Masterplan. I do not consider that the site coming forwards for development sooner
than expected creates any problems. Whilst the design of the building is utilitarian I
think it is in keeping with the neighbouring buildings. The proposed loss of the trees
is unfortunate, however is not objectionable in planning terms.
8.
REASON FOR APPROVAL
8.1
The application accords with the policies of the development plan and will provide
additional high quality jobs within the district. The Local Planning Authority has
considered the principle, the design, the siting, the materials, the visual impact and
landscaping, the impact on the character of the area and the felling of the trees on
site and the application is considered satisfactory in planning terms.
173
174
___________________________________________________________________________
____
Item No 013
Application Number : S/2010/0841/OUT Parish : Deanshanger
Case Officer : Suzanne Groves
Applicant : Mr Duncan Wigley
Location : Land adjacent to 60 Northway
Deanshanger
Description : Pair of semi detached houses (Outline)
Conditions :1.
A1 Statutory time limit
2.
A3 Reserved matters
3.
D1 Parking required - residential
4.
E25 Single driveway-gradient and surfacing
5.
E31 Set-back of garage
6.
Reasons :-
1.
RA1
2.
RA3
3.
RD1
4.
RE10
5.
RE15
6.
RC5
S/2010/0841/OUT
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
Deanshanger
Cllr David Aaronson & Cllr Allen Walker
175
___________________________________________________________________________
____
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The application site is the site of the former water tower, an area of paved, vacant
land covering 0.04 hectare, accessed off North Way. The site has a wide street
frontage and narrows to the rear. To the north of the site is a pair of semi-detached
houses and to the south of the site a row of terraced houses, in brick and tile.
Opposite the site there are two detached dwellings.
1.2
Part of the site is currently used for the parking of vehicles as there is a high level of
on street parking in this area.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
Outline permission has previously been granted for residential development
(S/1998/0994/PO, S/2003/0561/PO & S/2006/0676/PO refer). The most recent
approval for residential development expired in June 2009.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1
This application seeks consent for the erection of a pair of semi detached properties
with all matters reserved.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
DEANSHANGER PARISH COUNCIL: Object to the application. Comment that the
area gets congested with on street parking, previous off road parking site was sold
for housing, and indicative plan shows the proposed dwellings closer to the highway
than No.60.
4.2
NCC HIGHWAYS: Comments still awaited. An update will be given at the meeting.
4.3
VILLAGE HERITAGE SOCIETY: No objection in principle. Comment that the
design of the dwellings would appear improved if chimneys were added to either
end. Also concerned that one driveway is located on a bend and could be
dangerous to road users.
4.4
THIRD PARTIES: 5 letters of objection received from local residents. Concerned
about the increase in on street parking following the loss of this land for informal
parking and problems and dangers associated with such a high level of on street
car parking. Also concerned the new dwellings will increase the parking problems
further. Several comments relating to the position of one of the drives on the bend
and potential dangers of this.
5.
POLICY
176
___________________________________________________________________________
____
5.1
This application falls to be considered in the light of saved policies G2 (location of
new development), G3 (general development strategy), and EV1 (design) of the
South Northamptonshire Local Plan (SNLP).
5.2
PPS1 is also relevant in this instance.
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues arising from this application are:
The principle of the development and the changes to the planning policy framework
since the last approval.
The impact of the development on the character and appearance of the locality and
residential amenity.
Highway safety and parking matters
6.2
THE PRINCIPLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE TO PLANNING
POLICY. Since the previous approval of outline planning permission in 2006, the
Regional Spatial Strategy has been revoked. There is no specific saved policy in
the local plan relating to Deanshanger, but the site is clearly located within the built
up limits of the village and is surrounded by residential development. In the context
of the Interim Rural Housing Policy the village is classed as one of the more
sustainable locations in the district, as Deanshanger is one of the district’s largest
villages with one of the best ranges of facilities and transport links. The principle of
this development is therefore considered acceptable.
6.3
Significant weight must also be given to the previous planning approvals,
particularly S/2006/0676/PO. The circumstances of the site have not significantly
altered since this permission was granted and it is therefore considered reasonable
to recommend approval of the application with similar conditions as previously
imposed.
6.4
THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE CHARACTER AND
APPEARANCE OF THE LOCALITY AND RESIDENTIAL AMENITY. Whilst the
application is in outline form with all matters reserved, this application has
specifically proposed a pair of semi detached dwellings, whereas previously no
number or type of dwellings has been specified. Also provided is an illustrative plan
showing a potential arrangement for these dwellings. It is considered that the site
could accommodate this level of development without undue harm to the character
of the area or to the amenities of the immediately adjacent dwellings. The type of
dwellings being semi detached in nature would be characteristic of this estate
location where many of the dwellings are semi detached in character, and could be
designed to be in keeping with the appearance of the locality generally. It is also
considered that the proposed dwellings could achieve sufficient amenity space and
parking provision. The relationship with adjacent dwellings is such that an
appropriate scheme could be put forward at reserved matters stage that would not
cause serious harm to residential amenity.
6.5
HIGHWAY SAFETY AND PARKING MATTERS.
177
It is considered that these
___________________________________________________________________________
____
additional dwellings would not result in any significant reduction in highway safety
as off street parking could be provided for the proposed development and further
negotiation over the location of the second driveway could be entered into as part of
any reserved matters submission. At the time of writing the report, comments were
still awaited from the County Highways Officer, although they have raised no
objections to previous applications subject to conditions.
Furthermore, although
this land is presently used for parking by local residents, this is an informal
arrangement that could be terminated and therefore it is considered that the loss of
the parking is not a material planning consideration in this case.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
The proposed development would be in keeping with the scale and type of
development in the surrounding area and would not be detrimental to residential
amenity or highway safety, or result in a significant increase in on-street parking in
this case.
8.
REASON FOR APPROVAL
8.1
The proposed development adheres to current local planning policy and general
government guidance, and benefits from previous planning approvals for residential
development. The proposed development would be in keeping with the scale and
type of development in the surrounding area and would not be detrimental to
residential amenity or highway safety or result in a significant increase in on-street
parking, and there are no other material considerations that would constitute
sustainable grounds for refusal in this case.
178
179
_______________________________________________________________________________
Item No 014
Application Number : S/2010/0902/CW
Parish : Towcester
Case Officer : Andrew Longbottom
Applicant : South Northamptonshire Council
Location : Moat Lane Towcester
Description : West Northamptonshire Development
Corporation consultation on the
regeneration of Moat
Lane/Northampton Road, including
new build and change of use for
shop, cafe, drinking, workshop uses;
offices, council building, hotel,
dwellings, new public realm works
and decked car park
Recommendation to WNDC that application be approved subject to the
following comments:
1.
Any planning permission granted should make it clear that it is not giving planning
permission for the upper limits of the floor spaces, specified in the application, to be
achieved and that the scale and massing of the buildings are reserved matters.
2.
The section S106 agreement needs to ensure that 40% affordable housing is
delivered across the site unless it can be demonstrated that this will affect the
viability of the scheme (when a lower provision could be negotiated).
3.
In relation to affordable housing the S106 also needs to include the following
provisions
A phasing plan, including timescales for the development and infrastructure
provision.
An Affordable Housing Scheme which shall include details of:
The numbers, type, tenure, external appearance and location on the land of the
Affordable Housing Units
The timing of their construction and phasing in relation to the Market Housing Units.
The arrangements for the transfer of the affordable housing to an Affordable
Housing Provider
The arrangements to ensure that the Affordable Housing Units are affordable for
both initial and subsequent occupiers of the Affordable Housing Units.
180
_______________________________________________________________________________
Occupancy criteria for determining the identity of occupiers of the Affordable
Housing Units and the means by which such occupancy criteria shall be enforced.
4.
The Council’s Strategic Housing division needs to be consulted on the wording of
any S106 agreement.
5.
Car parking for the development should be provided in accordance with the
maximum amount allowable under the adopted NCC standards and any deviation
away from the standard shall only be allowed for legitimate planning and highway
engineering reasons.
6.
The number of car parking spaces proposed needs to take into account the loss of
the existing parking spaces on the Northampton Road car park.
7.
There should be a pedestrian crossing to serve the decked car park across
Northampton Road as part of the development.
8.
The development need to include a developer contribution of £30,000 towards a
scheme of air quality mitigation.
9.
The application needs to clarify the impact of noise from the increase in traffic on
Northampton Road and from movements to and from the new car park.
10.
Conditions need to be placed on any planning permission issued which require the
following
An intrusive investigation into land contamination on the site and require remedial
action if any pollutants are discovered.
Details of measures to control noise dust and emissions during construction of the
development.
Restricting the hours for delivery to commercial premises to 07:30 to 18:00 on week
days and 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays and no times on Sundays or bank holidays.
The reserved matters application needs to provide details of the operating hours of
the proposed commercial premises.
Detail of the proposed soundproofing of the proposed dwellings to be submitted and
approved.
A scheme for the treatment of noise and vibration from plant and equipment to be
submitted and approved.
181
_______________________________________________________________________________
S/2010/0902/CW
WARD :
WARD MEMBER :
1.
Towcester Mill
Cllr Mrs Mary Clarke & Cllr A Grant
INTRODUCTION
Site description.
1.1
The site is 2.74 hectares of land located to the rear of the existing properties on
Watling Street, including frontage properties between 36a and the Wayside Garage
site fronting onto Watling Street. The site also includes the Wayside Garage
buildings fronting onto Northampton Road and the Northampton Road car park to
the rear of 146 to 158 Watling Street. The land up to the mill stream defines the
north eastern boundary of the site and Chantry Lane defines the south east
boundary of the site.
1.2
Within the site area are a considerable number of different planning uses including
retail, professional services, health care, offices public houses, warehousing,
dwellings, car parking, motor vehicles sales and repair and public leisure uses. Bury
Mount is also included within the red line area of the site.
1.3
The Moat Lane area is located within the core of the mediaeval/post mediaeval
market town of Towcester, and may be related to the walled centre of the Roman
town of Lactodurum, which was refortified in the late Saxon period. The site
includes Bury Mount, the remains of a Norman fortification designated as a
Scheduled Ancient Monument. It is thought to have been constructed in the late
11th or early 12th centuries and probably controlled the mediaeval road to
Northampton, which formerly continued the line of Chantry Lane across the River
Tove. Records indicate the first Norman layout of St. Lawrence church as the basis
of the present day building in 1170-1200, indications of a market in the town from
1220, and establishment of the water-mill by 1317.
1.4
Bury Mount was altered during the English Civil War, when the parliamentary army
was billeted in Towcester prior to its march to Naseby where the royalist forces
were defeated. Following the civil war, Towcester developed as an important
coaching town on routes from London to the north-west of England and Holyhead,
and from Oxford to Northampton. This period strongly influenced the appearance
and character of the town, with the development of numerous coaching inns such
as the Saracens Head.
1.5
Although the establishment of railways in the 19th century had a major impact on
the stagecoach system, Towcester remained and developed as an important
service centre for its agricultural hinterland. As a measure of this, in 1865 The Town
Hall & Corn Exchange was built at a cost of £3,600. There has been steady
expansion of the town through the 20th century, but this gradual trend could be
greatly accelerated by proposals to build 3,000 new dwellings in the south of the
town.
1.6
The present day town reflects the mediaeval form of the settlement. It is
characterised by the historic development pattern of long, narrow burgage plots
fronting onto Watling Street. Narrow fronted mediaeval buildings were sited right on
182
_______________________________________________________________________________
the street, while long plots extended behind them providing outbuildings,
workshops, animal housing and kitchen gardens to support the household. Because
frontage was highly valued, access into the plots was through narrow breaks in the
frontage, and in places development has subsequently bridged over these access
points to create a continuous building line with carriage arches off the street for the
coaching inns. Bakers Lane continues to connect right through to the area behind
the burgage plots, while Whittons Lane leads into a private yard, and this ‘alley and
yard’ combination is quite typical of the urban character, especially for the inns.
1.7
Moat Lane forms a ‘back lane’ running parallel to Watling Street and providing rear
access for plots fronting Watling Street. On Moat Lane there are a number of single
or two storey buildings in stone or red brick, some older outbuildings relating to the
town burgage plots and others of 19th or 20th century origin, housing a mix of
domestic and commercial uses. The pattern is not fully developed into a continuous
built frontage, but the rhythm of the burgage plots is still evident and important to
the character of the lane. The main uses or properties include Anchor House
(Volunteer Centre) and private dwellings, including a number of flats.
1.8
A discrete group of stone buildings occupies the area around Towcester Mill, and
forms a distinctive part of the regeneration area, separated by the narrowing of
Chantry Lane where it passes between a high boundary wall and the churchyard
wall. The space between these buildings is broad in comparison to the tight
character of Moat Lane. The height of both the mill buildings and trees behind them
in the adjacent landscape areas of Easton Neston Historic Park and Garden and St.
Lawrence churchyard helps contribute to a sense of containment.
1.9
The frontages of the market place and Watling Street include historic two and three
storey buildings in a variety of architectural styles, and they contain a street space
of great character. Most of these buildings are listed. By contrast, Northampton
Road lacks scale and distinctiveness. Its character derives from its former status as
a trunk road, dominated by highway engineering and the former garage and
showroom, which occupy a prominent position.
1.10 Bury Mount is an earthwork motte castle, situated in what would, in earlier times,
have been a key strategic position overlooking the Northampton Road. Bury Mount
is of national importance, being a well-preserved example of a small round motte
castle in an urban location. Prior to the purchase of the mount by SNC, the motte
was falling into decay. Concern was expressed that the periodic decay and falling of
the trees which were planted on the motte was leading to accelerated loss of
archaeological remains, and this was being exacerbated by casual access to the
site by members of the public, and the SAM was placed on English Heritage’s ‘at
risk’ register. A full archaeological investigation of the site was undertaken for the
first time in summer 2007, to enable proposals to be developed for the preservation,
management and interpretation of the motte. Then, in 2008 following a landscape
design competition, plans were prepared for the restoration of the mount to facilitate
public access and enjoyment of it. The proposals received the consent of the
DCMS, as required, and planning permission from SNC, and were completed in
April 2010.
1.11 The main part of the site is served by Moat Lane, which is accessible by vehicles
from Watling Street via Chantry Lane. The access is narrow and provides no
through route, so that vehicles have to turn and exit via Chantry Lane. Bakers Lane
provides an additional pedestrian access to Moat Lane from Watling Street. These
are areas of adopted highway. North-west of Bakers Lane, Whittons Lane provides
183
_______________________________________________________________________________
pedestrian and very constricted vehicle access to yards at the northern end of the
site; it is unadopted. There is vehicle access onto the site via the former Wayside
Garage from Northampton Road.
1.12 The following planning constraints apply to the site.
The site lies with the Towcester Conservation Area
Bury Mount is a scheduled ancient monument.
The following properties within the site are grade II listed 136a, 136b and 136
Waling Street and Towcester Mill. Outside, but adjacent to the site 88, The post
Office, 94, 96, 98, 98a, 104 -106, 112, 114, 116, 118, 122, 124 and 126 are grade II
listed. To the south of the site, St Lawrence Church is grade I listed.
The site lies within an area of known archaeological assets
The site lies within the Town Centre as defined in the Local Plan.
There are four trees which are the subject of a preservation order within the site.
-
The Northampton Road car park partially lies within an area known to flood.
2.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.1
There is extensive planning history relating to the site dating back many years and
is too extensive to list here. The most relevant recent decisions are listed below.
2.2
Planning permission was granted for the change of use of the first and second
floors from office to residential at 138 Watling Street East, (S/2005/0083/P)
2.3
Planning permission was granted for the change of use from a light industrial to a
general industrial use at 18 Moat Lane Towcester (S/2005/1109/P)
2.4
Planning permission was granted for the change of use of the first and second
floors from one dwellings into two flats at 94 Watling Street, (S/2006/0325/P)
2.5
Planning permission was granted for the change of use from B1/B8 (industrial) to
A2 (financial and professional services)at the Old Post Office Yard, (S/2008/0750/P)
2.6
Planning permission was granted for the change of Bury Mount to public open
space and works to restore the mount, (S/2008/1331/P)
2.7
Planning permission was granted for an extension to the masonic meeting hall,
(S/2009/0694/FUL)
2.8
Planning permission has been granted for use of the water meadow to the north of
the site to be used as public open space and the installation of a footpath
bridge.(S/2009/0694/FUL)
3.
PROPOSAL
184
_______________________________________________________________________________
3.1
The application is for outline planning permission, with all matters reserved for
future consideration, for the regeneration of the Moat Lane area of the town centre.
Specifically the application is for the following
3.2
Up to 1,300 m² of retail and restaurant and café uses including change of use of
public conveniences in Bakers Lane, rear of 108 Watling Street on Bakers Lane
from storage, 15 Moat Lane (ground floor) from storage/workshop, and the building
north west of Mill Cottage (a.k.a. Buckland’s Warehouse) from storage.
3.3
Up to 2,400 m² of office use provision of private or council offices in two new threestorey buildings; including approximately 550 m² underground car parking.
3.4
Up to 300 m² of light and general industrial use including the change of use from
motor vehicle workshop to small scale manufacturing use and ancillary sales.
3.5
Up to 2,400 m² of hotel space including new and existing buildings; including
change of use of Towcester Mill and Mill House from offices and change of use Mill
Cottage from a residential dwelling.
3.6
41 dwellings in the form of new town houses, cottages and flats; including division
of The Coach House to two dwellings, addition of two dwellings above 15 Moat
Lane (storage use), change of use of Anchor House from office use, change of use
of building (formerly Tove Engineering) north of 1 Moat Lane from business use and
change of use of building to the rear of 100 Watling Street from workshop/storage
use.
3.7
A new civic building of up to 2200 m² that will overlook the Bury Mount which can
provide a wide range of functions which may include the following
A new library, replacing the one in Richmond Road.
Studio space for dramatic performance
Gallery space for visual arts and displays
Café
Public information point and public toilets
SNC information office
Public sector ‘one stop shop’
Community offices
3.8
Up to 4,000 m² decked parking structure; including vehicular and pedestrian access
and circulation on land to the north west of Northampton Road on what is now the
Mason’s car park. The car park will hold about 130 car parking spaces, and
additional parking spaces will be created within the Moat Lane area and some
parking space retained to create a total of 309 new parking spaces for the
development.
3.9
The infrastructure to serve the above development including the provision of access
roads, service areas and car parking.
3.10 The application also proposes the removal of the following buildings:
185
_______________________________________________________________________________
140 Watling Street, Wayside Garage showroom;
Northampton Road, Wayside Garage filling station canopy;
6 – 8 Whittons Lane;
Outbuilding to Mill House (disused air-raid shelter).
The application also includes the removal and/or alterations to the following boundary
walls:
Rear of 138 Watling Street including remnants of a former outbuilding;
Rear of 126 - 132 Watling Street at the end of Moat Lane;
Between 106 and 108 Watling Street;
Between 100 and 102 Watling Street;
Rear of 96 Watling Street;
Rear of 92 Watling Street.
3.11 The application also proposes the redesign of the surfaces of the adopted highway
in Chantry Lane and Moat Lane to facilitate pedestrian priority use. The application
also proposes that Chantry Lane will link right through to Northampton Road,
however this will be a shared surface.
3.12 The proposed retail and café uses are located around the areas with the highest
potential for footfall and are located around Bakers Lane, Whittons Lane and
Watling Street. The majority of these units are proposed to have residential uses on
the first floor. The majority of the office uses are proposed to be located on either
side of the Northampton Road, with the largest building in the development being
located on the south western side of the road.
3.13 The residential uses are primarily located around Moat Lane and Northampton
Road, creating the mix of development already found in the town centre.
3.14 The proposed hotel use is provided by the existing building in The Mill complex, the
warehouse fronting onto the mount and the buildings on the north eastern side of
Moat Lane adjacent to the Church. The proposal makes use of the larger buildings
which are already found in this location and their views over the Water Meadows,
the Church and the mount.
3.15 In terms of scale, the details submitted are all indicative, however the tallest building
as part of the redevelopment would be the existing mill building which could have
another storey giving it a height 4.5 to 5 storeys. There are also three other
landmark four storey buildings, being the corner building on Watling Street and
Northampton Road, the town houses and office building on the south east side of
Northampton Road, the south western element of the civic building and the
remainder of the existing mill building.
3.16 The remainder of the scheme is proposed to be two and three storey development
with the three storey elements facing onto Watling Street, Moat Lane and
Northampton Road. It should also be taken into account that the scale of the
development proposed is indicative at this time.
3.17 The application proposes that all development will be constructed to a minimum of
level three of the code for sustainable homes and any development built after 2013
will be constructed to level four.
186
_______________________________________________________________________________
3.18 The application is supported by an Environmental Impact Assessment which
includes
An air quality study
An assessment of planning policy
An archaeological assessment
A ground conditions report
An ecological report
A visual impact assessment
A water quality assessment
A flood risk assessment
A noise and vibration assessment
A transport assessment
A waste assessment
3.19 In addition the application includes a comprehensive design and access statement.
3.20 The application has been prepared on behalf of South Northamptonshire Council by
a team of SNC, WNDC and NCC officers, SNC members and outside consultants
consisting of urban regeneration specialists, transport consultants, environmental
consultants, urban designers and solicitors. The project team have been working on
the redevelopment scheme for in excess of 2 years.
4.
CONSULTATIONS
4.1
No external consultations have been carried out as this Council is a consultee in the
application process. External consultations have been carried out by WNDC and
they will have to take the responses into account in determining the application.
Consultations within SNC have been carried out and the following responses
received
4.2
SNC POLICY: No response to date, I will update the committee when it is received.
4.3
SNC ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: No objections, however make the
following comments (i) the air quality modelling needs updating, (ii) the air quality
mitigation measures do not consider any improvements to traffic flows through the
town centre as identified in the air quality action plan, (iii) advances in engine
technology, as stated in the applications report, are not sufficient to overcome air
quality concerns, (iv) improvement to traffic flows in the town centre need to be
made to improve air quality and it is disappointing that the application does not
address these issues, (v) there needs to be better signage to existing car parks to
discourage parking in Watling Street, (vi) measures to address air quality could be
implemented as part of the development proposal, (vii) the site could be subject to
land contamination and further intrusive investigation is required, (viii) the noise
report has been undertaken in accordance with the appropriate methodologies, (ix)
the mixed use nature of the development could introduce conflicts that will need to
be addressed in subsequent applications, (x) the report contradicts itself on the
noise impact on properties adjacent to Northampton Road and the proposed car
park and this matter needs to be clarified, (xi) hours of deliveries to premises needs
to be restricted by condition, (xii) planning conditions need to be used to control the
187
_______________________________________________________________________________
hours of operation of the commercial uses, (xiii) conditions need to be used where
residential development abuts the commercial uses to ensure that there is adequate
noise insulation, (xiv) further information is needed on the noise impacts of the car
park on the adjacent residential properties, (xv) new residential properties need to
achieve a good standard of noise insulation as set out in BS8233:1999, (xvi) noise
from fixed plant and equipment should not exceed 35dB, cumulative impacts also
need to be taken into account, (xvii) noise, vibration, dust and emissions from
construction activities will need to be assessed during any subsequent development
phase and needs to be controlled by condition.
4.4
If planning permission is granted conditions need to be attached relating to
Land contamination (intrusive investigation needed)
Control of noise, dust and emissions from construction
Control of the hours of delivery
Control of hours of operation for the proposed commercial uses.
Details of the proposed sound proofing of the buildings
Further details of the treatment of the plant and machinery sound proofing needs to
be submitted
4.5
SNC CONSERVATION OFFICER: No objections and makes the following
comments (i) the proposals have evolved over a number of years, (ii) the proposal
is a result of extensive consultation, (iii) the development is supported by planning
policy, (iv) the proposal was always to regenerate the area rather than redevelop
the location and the current application appears to have followed that approach, (v)
the development proposes the removal of a number of buildings which do not make
a positive contribution to the character and form of the locality and the sensitive
redevelopment of the site will enhance the locality, (vi) conservation area consent
will be required for demolition of the buildings within the conservation area and I
have no objection to the demolitions, (vii) the demolition of walls for the opening up
of the rear service yards on Watling Street will require listed building consent, (viii)
the character of Moat Lane is very sensitive to change, any new development will
need to have a positive impact upon the character and form and local
distinctiveness of the historic environment of Moat Lane.
4.6
SNC ARBORICULTURAL OFFICER: No objection however makes the following
comments (i) the proposed office building appears to be within the root protection
area of the protected sycamore tree and this will need to be resolved at the
reserved matters stage, (ii) any reserved matters applications will need a method
statement and tree protection plan and engineering details of the tree protection and
surfaces, (iii) there is the opportunity to plant more trees in the central square area,
(iv) the proposed redevelopment will have a detrimental affect on the pear trees on
the south side of Northampton Road (not subject to tree preservation orders), (v)
the plans are incorrect as they show trees to be retained on the north side of
Northampton Road and there are no trees here to be retained.
4.7
SNC STRATEGIC HOUSING: Have the following comments to make (i) one of the
strategic aims of the Council is to increase the supply of affordable homes, (ii) the
policies of the local plan state that affordable housing should be negotiated as part
of large residential development schemes, (iii) the Council’s SPG on developer
188
_______________________________________________________________________________
contributions requires an element of affordable housing where there is a need, (iv)
PPS3 states that affordable housing should be provided as part of any residential
development greater than 15 units, (v) there is a need for 100 affordable units in the
district every year, (vi) there is a waiting list of 530 people in Towcester, a high
proportion of which are singles or couples (vii) there are currently only 600
affordable properties in Towcester, (viii) the application does provide an undertaking
that affordable housing will be provided, however the level will be determined at a
later date through a mechanism written into the S106 agreement, (ix) 40% of the
dwellings should be affordable housing and 75% of these should be for rent, (x) if
the applicants consider that 40% social housing is not viable then this needs to be
established through the Three Dragons tool kit to determine the appropriate level of
affordable housing to be provided, (xi) apartments should be 2 bed rather than one
bed, (xii) there is no need for larger affordable family houses, (xiii) one parking
space per dwelling is not appropriate for larger house types, (xiv) plans need to
show where the parking spaces are in relation to the units that they serve, (xv)
affordable housing needs to be dispersed throughout the development, (xvi) in
design terms the affordable houses should be indistinguishable from the free market
dwellings, (xvii) the affordable dwellings need to be constructed to at least code for
sustainable homes level 3, (xviii) the Council has a list of preferred landlord
partners, (xix) SNC Strategic Housing wish to be involved in the negotiations
relating to the wording of any S106 agreement, (xx) If planning permission is
granted then the following planning conditions need to be attached
1)
Prior to the approval of the reserved matters a phasing plan, including timescales
for the development and infrastructure provision, shall be submitted to the Local
Planning Authority’
2)
Prior to the approval of the reserved matters application, an affordable housing
scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval and shall
include details of:
The numbers, type, tenure, external appearance and location on the land of the
affordable housing units
The timing of their construction and phasing in relation to the market housing units.
The arrangements for the transfer of the affordable housing to an Affordable
Housing Provider
The arrangements to ensure that the Affordable Housing Units are affordable for
both initial and subsequent occupiers of the Affordable Housing Units.
Occupancy criteria for determining the identity of occupiers of the affordable
housing units and the means by which such occupancy criteria shall be enforced.
5.
POLICY
5.1
The Regional Spatial Strategy has now been revoked and therefore the
Development Plan is made up of the saved polices of the Northamptonshire County
Structure Plan and the South Northamptonshire Local Plan. Policies G3, H3, H7,
EV1, EV9, EV10, EV12, EV13, EV21, EV24, R1, IMP1, RC2, TE1, TE2, TEV1, TT1,
TT2, TR2, TRC2, TRC4, are considered to be relevant.
5.2
In terms of national policy, PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS3
189
_______________________________________________________________________________
(Housing) PPS4, (Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth), PPS9, (Biodiversity
and Geological Conservation), PPG 13 (Transport) PPS 5 (Planning for the Historic
Environment), PPS17 (Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation), PPS 23
(Planning and Pollution Control), PPG 24 (Planning and Noise) are considered to be
relevant.
5.3
The Council also adopted a planning brief for Moat Lane in October 2007 which is
supplementary planning guidance. This provides a framework of the redevelopment
of the site and also updates the vision of how the site could be developed from that
expressed in the Local Plan.
5.4
The Draft Towcester Master Plan identifies Moat Lane as one of the key
opportunities for the town.
6.
APPRAISAL
6.1
The main issues in the determination of the application are
The acceptability of the proposed uses
The scale of the development proposed.
The quantity of car parking proposed as part of the development.
The impact of the development on highway safety and the free flow of traffic.
The impact of the development on the character and setting of the Bury Mount.
The impact of the development on the street scene of Moat Lane.
The impact of the development on the street scene of Northampton Road.
The design of the major office block
The design of the civic building.
The visual impact of the decked car park.
The impact of the development on the conservation area and the setting of the
listed buildings.
The impact of the decked car park on residential amenity
The impact of the development of archaeological assets
The provision of affordable housing within the development
The impact of the development on air quality in the Town Centre
The noise associated with the proposed uses of the building.
The developers contributions associated with the proposal.
The impact of the development on protected species
190
_______________________________________________________________________________
The impact of the development on the protected trees.
The flood risk associated with the development.
6.2
I am still awaiting the comments of the policy unit on the application however Moat
Lane has been identified as an area in need of regeneration for a considerable time.
The principle of works to Moat Lane to provide additional shopping, employment
and recreational uses is contained within the policies of the Saved South
Northamptonshire Local Plan and proposals for the site have been updated in the
Council’s Planning Brief for the site.
6.3
The development brief suggests the following uses for the site
The provision of civic and community facilities;
The development of shops, offices and some limited housing
The preservation and enhancement of the Bury Mount Motte, including the provision
of an educational interpretation board for the Scheduled Ancient Monument.;
The development of public areas, including a riverside walk, public open space
around Bury Mount and a public square for community use
The development of tourist, leisure and cultural facilities in the area south of Bury
Mount;
Provide access to the open parkland to the east of the Moat Lane area, enhance
the area and provide a pedestrian link to Towcester Racecourse
The parkland is currently in private ownership but its use as public open space in
the future will be explored.
Seek environmental improvements to existing properties including those backing
onto Moat Lane.
6.4
The planning brief identified the following opportunities for the site
The site is in a key location lying to the south east of the Watling Street
/Northampton Road crossroads, the main entrance to the Primary Retail Area of
Towcester town centre, and is highly visible from Northampton Road.
The area represents an opportunity to integrate past and present components of the
town centre and to provide for the interpretation of the local historic environment for
the benefit of local residents and visitors.
The site provides a unique opportunity to develop a mixed-use development
focussed on community, civic and tourist use in the heart of an expanding town.
The site represents an opportunity to develop a prestigious development of a high
quality design reflecting the historical and architectural character of Towcester town
191
_______________________________________________________________________________
centre.
The proximity of the site to the existing town centre and attractive landscape edge
bounded by the River Tove provides an opportunity to develop enhanced pedestrian
links between the new development, the rest of the town centre and the open space
to the east.
There is an opportunity to take advantage of, and to enhance the open views across
the adjoining Easton Neston Park.
Regeneration could provide the opportunity to provide a landscaped pedestrian link
between the town and racecourse.
Potential exists to improve the setting, maintenance and public access to Bury
Mount Motte.
Now that Northampton Road is no longer a trunk road, there is an excellent
opportunity to redesign it as a pleasant town street, with wider pavements, possible
avenue trees and on-street car parking.
6.5
The site has been identified for development in the Local Plan and in more detail in
the Moat Lane planning brief. Therefore the issue here is not related to the principle
of development but whether the development proposed delivers the aims and
objective of the planning brief without being unacceptably detrimental to matters of
acknowledged importance.
The acceptability of the proposed uses
6.6
The existing retail uses in Towcester are primarily located on Watling Street and
there are no retail uses on Northampton Road. The proximity of Towcester to other
major retail centres such as Northampton and Milton Keynes means that Towcester
cannot hope to attract large retails stores. It is likely that Towcester will only
continue to attract smaller independent retailers, but it has a strong tradition of local,
high quality, specialist retailers and the scheme needs to build on that tradition. The
proposed location of the retail uses is shown on the plans but is only indicative,
however it proposes a number of smaller units located around Bakers Lane,
Whittons Lane and the central square. Slightly larger retail units are proposed on
Watling Street and the corner of Watling Street and Northampton Road.
6.7
In the plans submitted café uses and retail uses are not differentiated, this detail will
come at the later reserved matters stage. However in town centres the two uses
complement each other as high quality food and drink uses will create footfall away
from Watling Street into the development which the retail uses will benefit from and
vice versa. However care needs to be taken that we have the correct mix of retail
and food and drink uses and do not end up with too many food and drink outlets.
6.8
The additional range of goods and services that the additional units will bring will
enhance Towcester as a shopping and service destination, thereby creating
additional customers for existing shops and services as well as creating a more
sustainable town with less need to travel to other retail and service centres
6.9
Office uses are shown indicatively off Whittons Lane, on the north side of
Northampton Road and a large office block to the south of Northampton Road and
facing onto the central square. These buildings could all have a single occupier or
be used as office suites, for example as ‘incubator’ business space as suggested in
192
_______________________________________________________________________________
the planning brief. The additional workers located in the town centre created by the
office development will help to sustain the proposed additional retail services the
development will bring. It has been suggested that this Council could be one of the
potential occupiers of the larger office building but this is only one scenario, the
application does not state who the final occupier of the building will be.
6.10 The proposed civic building, which is proposed to provide a range of public
functions, is shown located adjacent to the Bury Mount and the central square. The
proposed use accords with the planning brief and has the benefit of providing
footfall along Moat Lane and Whittons Lane to access the services the building will
provide. This footfall will benefit the proposed commercial uses on Moat Lane and
Whittons Lane.
6.11 The use of the mill buildings for tourist accommodation is supported by the planning
brief and there is a need for high quality tourist accommodation in the locality which
could serve Silverstone and Towcester Racecourse. A high quality conversion of
the building could generate about 20-30 rooms with other facilities provided by the
adjacent buildings, such as a spa or separate restaurant. The location of the
buildings adjacent to the Church with views across the water meadows towards the
racecourse and Easton Neston as well as Bury Mount provide an appropriate
setting for the proposed use.
6.12 The existing Wayside workshop building is proposed to be retained for a light or
general industrial use. Ideally the building could be used for manufacturing
purposes with a retail element such a craft or micro brewery uses.
6.13 The development includes residential uses which build upon the initiatives to get
people living and working in town centres. Primarily the residential development will
consist of town houses and flats, some of which will be located above the proposed
commercial uses. Some dwellings will be conversions of existing buildings whilst
others will be new. The dwellings will be located throughout the development rather
than being located in one particular area and will also help with surveillance and
thereby help to create a disincentive for crime.
6.14 The outline application also includes a proposal for a decked car park to be located
in the location of the current Northampton Road car park. This approach to
providing car parking for the development, as well as providing it within the Moat
Lane area is in accordance with the approach laid out in the planning brief.
The scale of the development proposed.
6.15 The scale and scope of development proposed has clearly increased since the
Local Plan was adopted. The reconsideration of the site and its future, as set out in
the planning brief, followed from the publication of the Regional Plan which
proposed a large urban extension to Towcester. This in itself brought additional
opportunities for the redevelopment of Moat Lane, through the increased population
the town centre will need to serve.
6.16 In terms of the height and the size of the buildings the development brief does not
set out any parameters. However the visual impacts of the development are
discussed later in the report and it should also be remembered that the scale and
appearance are reserved matters. The application does include quantities of floor
space for each of the proposed uses, however these are expressed as a maximum
and if planning permission were to be granted no commitment would have been
193
_______________________________________________________________________________
given that these maximum floor spaces could be achieved on the site.
The layout of the development
6.17 Primarily, on the indicative plan, the development follows the historic street pattern
of Towcester with development fronting onto Moat Lane, Whittons Lane, Watling
Street and Northampton Road, which is the correct approach. The larger office
buildings and civic building make use of the larger space available between Bury
Mount and Northampton Road and this approach follows that illustrated in the
adopted Moat Lane planning brief. The illustrative plans submitted show a central
square which will provide a focal point for the development and will create an
attractive space for the shops, cafes, restaurants and offices to look out onto. The
plans also show an area of hardstanding between the civic buildings and could be
used for a number of uses including a performance space where small events could
take place which could attract more people into the development.
6.18 The decked car park is located to the rear of the existing buildings that front onto
Watling Street and Northampton Road which will assist in screening the building, to
an extent, from public view. The location of the car park accords with the planning
brief.
The quantity of car parking proposed as part of the development.
6.19 The parking requirements for the development have been initially calculated in the
transport assessment based upon the County Council’s adopted parking standards
using the indicated maximum floor spaces. The proposed flats have been allocated
one parking space while the proposed houses are allocated 1.5 parking spaces.
This also accords with the reduced parking space allocation for residential
developments in town centres which is advised within the standards. Using this
means of calculation the number of parking spaces required to serve the
development is 313.
6.20 The transport assessment goes on to make assumptions on linked trips, ie one
visitor to the development may visit the civic centre, shops and bars and therefore
the development does not need to provide parking spaces for all three individual
uses separately and so a reduction in the need for parking spaces for retail uses of
30 spaces, of 4 spaces for the hotel use and 12 spaces for the civic building are
proposed. The travel plan also then assumes that South Northamptonshire Council
is the end user for the office building. It then applies empirical data relating to
parking use at the Council’s current Springfield Offices to justify additional parking
provision at the site of 44 spaces. The resulting calculation shows that the
development requires a total of 311 parking spaces, two fewer than if the implication
of standard parking standards. However the transport assessment does not cover
what the parking requirements of the building would be if SNC were not the final
occupier of the building.
6.21 In addition the decked car park is being built onto an existing car park and it is not
clear how the loss of these parking spaces is being worked into the calculations.
6.22 Having spoken to both the Local Highway Authority, who are looking into the
parking issue, they are concerned that the trip generation from the proposed
development and the proposed parking required do not correlate and they feel that
they cannot comment fully on the parking proposal at present. So clearly more work
need to be carried out on the transport assessment and the number of parking
spaces proposed may alter, however the Council has to comment on the scheme as
194
_______________________________________________________________________________
submitted.
6.23 Nevertheless, Towcester is a market town that serves a rural hinterland for retail
and service delivery which is not well served by public transport, hence many users
of the town centre will rely on the car to access the places of work or retail uses or
food and drink uses on offer as well as the dwellings. Hence I consider that
comments need to be passed back to WNDC that state that parking should be
provided in accordance with the maximum amount allowable under the adjusted
parking standards.
6.24 In addition as the car park is located on the north west side of Northampton Road
and the buildings are located on the south east side of Northampton Road there
should be a pedestrian crossing as part of the development.
The impact of the development on highway safety and the free flow of traffic.
6.25 WNDC will need to consult the Highways Agency and the Local Highway Authority
and take their views into account in determining the application.
6.26 The Moat Lane planning brief advocates that Chantry Lane be stopped up and the
main access for Moat Lane is to come off the Northampton Road. However the
application submitted shows, indicatively, that traffic will be able to travel from
Watling Street down Chantry Lane and through to Northampton Road. The highway
authorities will need to take a view on whether this is acceptable and there may be
concerns that the route could be used as a rat run.
The impact of the development on the character and setting of the Bury Mount.
6.27 Clearly the mount is a very important historic feature in the town and is a scheduled
ancient monument, the setting of which needs to be preserved. There are already
buildings in close proximity to the structure and so in that respect the development
does not propose anything new. However the civic building, which will have the
largest impact on the character of the mount, needs to be sympathetic both in scale
and design and will clearly need to front onto the mount. However no detailed
design of the civic building has so far been produced and therefore the impact of the
development of the setting of the mount will need to considered in more detail as
part of any reserved matters application.
The impact of the development on the street scene of Moat Lane.
6.28 At present Moat Lane acts primarily as a service street to the commercial properties
fronting onto Watling Street and many of the views from it are of car parks and the
rear elevations of these buildings which do not provide a very attractive street
scene. Under the proposals Moat Lane will still act as a service entrance however
the new buildings will give it a street frontage of its own and will considerably
enhance the street scene of this part of the town.
The impact of the development on the street scene of Northampton Road.
6.29 The corner of Watling Street and Northampton Road is currently dominated by the
present car sales use and associated buildings and structures. The majority of the
buildings will be removed and replaced with new buildings that will provide a better
defined street scene with an active street frontage which will considerably enhance
this corner of the site. The overall design, scale and appearance of the buildings will
195
_______________________________________________________________________________
be considered as part of any future reserved matters application.
The design of the major office block and the civic building
6.30 I consider that these will be among the most challenging buildings to deliver. The
form of the buildings shown on the indicative plan, in terms of their footprint, do not
neatly fit into the established character of these area, which are typically narrow
fronted buildings facing directly onto the street, with long and narrow rear gardens
or service areas. The buildings will also act as a gateway to the town from the
approach along Northampton Road and will be visible from a distance along
Northampton Road, from Bury Mount and from the newly created public water
meadow, especially if the buildings are between 3 and 4 storeys as shown in the
design and access statement. Therefore if the development is to be acceptable then
these buildings will need to be of the highest quality in terms of design and
materials to ensure that they are buildings that the town can be proud of and act as
a focal point for the development of the remainder of the site. However the height,
mass, form and design of these building will need to be considered as part of any
future reserved matters application.
The visual impact of the decked car park.
6.31 It is clear that the new development will require additional car parking to be provided
in the town centre. The Local Plan originally allocated the area to the north east of
the mill stream as a parking area, however this would involve development of a
greenfield area and the land is also now allocated as being within the flood plain.
Clearly there are advantages in the increased utilisation of the existing area of
parking to the north west of Northampton Road to serve the development and this is
the approach advocated in the Moat Lane planning brief. This site has the
advantage of being backland and as such much of the development will be
screened by existing development and the proposed new office block on the north
western side of Northampton Road. The main area that will be visible to the public
realm will be the entrance to the car park which would need to be carefully
designed.
6.32 The indicative plans submitted show a structure that has a single deck where it is
closest to the listed buildings fronting onto Watling Street to minimise the impact on
the setting of the listed buildings and the residential amenity of the occupants.
There would be surface level parking between the single storey deck and the
boundaries of the properties fronting onto Watling Street. The building would rise to
two decks adjacent to the mill stream, and views form the north east will be
screened by existing tree planting.
6.33 Clearly this is a difficult part of the development to accommodate as there is no
historic precedent for this style of structure within Towcester and the footprint,
function and form of the structure does not sit easily with the other surrounding
buildings and land uses. However I consider that the site chosen is well related to
the development and given the backland location it gives the best opportunity to
minimise the impact.
The impact of the decked car park on residential amenity
6.34 Some of the properties fronting onto Watling Street, (which back onto the proposed
car park) and also properties to the north west are residential properties and the car
park will have an impact on their residential amenity. The exact impact will not be
known until detailed drawings of the location and form of the building have been
196
_______________________________________________________________________________
submitted. However I do consider that the indicative plans do demonstrate that the
decked car park can be accommodated on the site without unacceptable
detrimental impact on the amenity of nearby residential properties through
overlooking or being overbearing. If at the reserved matters stage the car park is
larger than that shown on the indicative plans then this will need to be reassessed. I
note that Environmental Protection consider that there is still some missing
information in terms of noise impact and this will need to be relayed to WNDC.
The impact of the development on the conservation area and the setting of the listed
buildings.
6.35 The application is in outline form only and therefore does not contain much detail,
however further involvement of the Conservation Officer will be required if and when
more details of the development come forward. The scheme has the potential to
considerably improve the character and appearance of the locality and the setting of
the conservation area and the listed buildings if the development is designed
sensitively.
The impact of the development of archaeological assets
6.36 Information relating to archaeology has been submitted as part of the application.
WNDC will need to consult the archaeologists at the County Council and take their
views into account in determining the planning application.
The provision of affordable housing within the development
6.37 The Council’s policy is that development of 15 dwellings or more have to provide
40% affordable housing. The Council can allow a reduction in the number of
affordable dwellings if it is that the affordable housing element compromises the
viability of the development. In the case of this application no evidence of viability
being affected has been presented. In the design and access statement an
undertaking to provide affordable housing is given however the applicants state that
the amount that will be delivered will be investigated after the procurement process
and will be dependant on the economic conditions at that time. I have no concerns
with this approach as long as the wording of the S106 is sufficiently robust to ensure
the issue is dealt with adequately and WNDC involve our Strategic Housing team in
the wording of the S106 (the method used to calculate viability is the Council
preferred method of the Three Dragons tool kit.) Finally the viability of the
development needs to be considered as a whole rather than looking at elements of
the scheme in isolation.
6.38 Strategic Housing have requested conditions to be imposed on any planning
permission however these can be addressed through the S106 agreement.
The impact of the development on air quality in the Town Centre
6.39 The air quality assessment submitted with the application accepts that in the
absence of any mitigation the development would degrade the air quality within an
area of Towcester that is already designated as an air quality action zone. In the
view of SNC Environmental Protection, improvements can be made by the proposal
to mitigate the impacts of the development.
6.40 The main cause of the air quality issues in the town centre is the stop and start
nature of the traffic through the town centre as stationary vehicles create
considerably more pollution than moving vehicles. In Towcester one of the main
197
_______________________________________________________________________________
causes of congestion is the inappropriate parking of vehicles in Watling Street and
Council officers have started a joint working programme with the Highways Agency
to produce better signage and enforcement of parking in the town centre and
develop a joint scheme of works that can be implemented.
6.41 As the scheme has not yet been developed it is not known what the final cost of the
works will be, however best estimates at this time are that the cost will be around
£50 000. It is therefore suggested that the development could make a financial
contribution towards the scheme and a sum of £30 000 has been suggested, which
I consider to be reasonable.
The noise associated with the proposed uses of the buildings.
6.42 The development proposes a wide range of uses and includes residential
development being located adjacent to and above commercial uses. This
relationship of uses is nothing new in town centres and ensures the best use of the
land, however it can cause conflict between the occupiers of the residential units
and the commercial units. Therefore I consider that the use of planning conditions
relating to hours of delivery for the new commercial uses, noise insulation of
buildings and noise insulation of plant and equipment are reasonable.
6.43 The Council’s Environmental Protection Team also require further information on
the noise impacts of the new decked car park as there are inconsistencies in the
information submitted and I also think that this is reasonable.
The developers contributions associated with the proposal.
6.44 It is likely that the scheme will attract contributions other than those already
mentioned, such as an education contribution. However, these will be made
apparent by the other consultations that WNDC need to carry out, for example with
the County Council and the Highways Agency.
The impact of the development on protected species
6.45 The application includes an ecology report and WNDC will need to consult Natural
England and take their views into account.
The impact of the development on the protected trees.
6.46 The plans submitted are only indicative and do not give a true indication of the
impact of the development on the protected trees. Further input from the
Arboricultural Officer will be required if and when detailed plans are prepared to
ensure the proposals are acceptable
The flood risk associated with the development.
6.47 A flood risk assessment has been submitted with the application and WNDC will
need to consult the Environment Agency and take their views into account.
7.
CONCLUSION
7.1
The site is allocated for development in the Local Plan and the Council has also
published a planning brief on the redevelopment of the Moat Lane area. The
development put forward in this application is outline only with all matters reserved
for future consideration, so in terms of the detail, there is little to be considered in
the application. However in terms of the principle of development, the site area and
198
_______________________________________________________________________________
proposed uses, the application closely resembles the Moat Lane planning brief and
delivers the aim and objectives of the brief. I therefore consider that the
development should be supported.
7.2
However the Council needs to bring to the attention of the West Northamptonshire
Development Corporation technical issues that still need to be resolved, developer
contributions that should be secured by the legal agreement and particular
conditions requested by the Council’s Environmental Protection Team.
199
200

Item 7 - Schedule of Planning Applications

Transcription

Similar documents

Ah-Nab-Awen Park - City of Grand Rapids

Directions to UCSD Extension K-12 Facility Located at: 6256

Devour - Roto Grip

Schottenstein Center

Parking Lot Striping - Parking Control Unit

first night northampton 2016 first

Pencader Corporate Center

Event Parking

A “Charitable Networking” Event

August 2015 ECRC-Parent Link Centre Stepping Stones Society