F
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATORY BOARD
24TH JANUARY 2013
JOINT REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT & TRANSPORT
APPLICATION UPON WHICH THE COUNTY PLANNING AUTHORITY IS CONSULTED BY THE DISTRICT COUNCIL PART A – SUMMARY REPORT
APP.NO. & DATE: Application number 2012/0295/04 Date received: 19th April 2012.
PROPOSAL: Outline planning permission including means of access is sought for: Demolition as necessary of any on site buildings or structures; Up to 2,500 new residential dwellings (Use Class C3); An employment zone for B2 and B8 development providing up to 24,800m²; Sports pitches, pavilion building and changing rooms (Use Class D2) and associated car parking area; Areas of formal and informal open space, children’s play areas, landscaping, allotments and new areas of public realm; Provision of hydrological attenuation features and sustainable drainage systems; Pedestrian and cyclist connections; New infrastructure and services as necessary to serve the development; and
A new community hub area which shall provide: A primary school (Use Class D1) and associated sports pitch; A local health care facility (if required) (Use Class D1) or, in the alternative, a family public house/restaurant (Use Classes A3/A4); and Local retail and commercial units (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5) up to a maximum floorspace of 1,000m².
LOCATION: Barwell Sustainable Urban Extension (SUE) Land West Of Barwell, Ashby Road, Barwell, Leicestershire.
2 2012/0295/04 – continued
APPLICANTS: Ainscough Strategic Land Ltd, Barwood Development Securities Ltd., Barwood Strategic Land II LLP and Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd.
MAIN ISSUES: Compliance with the Development Plan in terms of housing and employment land provision and the Earl Shilton Area Action Plan in terms of masterplanning and more detailed design; Transportation and Highways; Mineral Safeguarding; Ecological impact; Archaeology and Cultural Heritage; and developer contribution towards highways, recycling and household waste, school and library provision.
RECOMMENDATION: It be noted that technical responses, and developer contribution requirements in respect of the planning application have been submitted to Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council as set out in paragraphs 182 to 200 of this report.
That with regards to the final comments of the Mineral Planning Authority on the Mineral Safeguarding issue, and the Highway Authority, in respect of the Highway and Transport impact of the development and consequent requirements for mitigation, that work is still on going and Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council be advised that it would be inappropriate for a decision to be issued on the application until final comments can be provided. Notwithstanding that ideally the application should not be determined in advance of an adopted Area Action Plan in order to secure the proper planning of the area and avoid the risk of the SUE being developed in isolation.
Circulation Under the Local Issues Alert Procedure
Mrs. R. Camamile CC
Officer to Contact
John Wright, Tel. 0116 305 7041 Email: [email protected]
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 3 2012/0295/04 – continued
PART B – MAIN REPORT
Background
1. A question was asked by Mrs Camamile CC, at the County Council meeting in September about the approach being taken by Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council to have the necessary transport modelling undertaken for the proposed SUEs (Sustainable Urban Extensions) at Barwell and Earl Shilton, and what transport mitigation matters are proposed. She asked a supplementary question as follows ‘In light of the importance of the Area Action Plan to guide development in both Barwell and Earl Shilton, particularly in relation to infrastructure provision to ensure that existing and new communities are sustainable and well serviced, can the Lead Member confirm that the County Council has made sufficient representations about what is needed from its other services and other responsibilities?” Answers were provided to both questions but in response to the supplementary question Mrs Pendleton CC added that she considered that members may very well welcome a full report and discussion on these proposals via the County Council’s Cabinet with advice from its Development Control and Regulatory Board.
2. It is in the light of Mrs Pendleton’s response that this report has been prepared.
Location of Proposed Development
3. The site comprises approximately 132.4 hectares of land located on the western edge of Barwell approximately 600m from the settlement centre at the nearest point. The site is currently occupied by agricultural land with associated farm buildings. The site is broadly defined by Ashby Road (A447) to the west, Hinckley Road to the south, Barwell to the east and farmland to the north. Stapleton Lane runs through the site, splitting it into two main parts. The Little Fields Farm Meadow Local Wildlife Site (LWS) is located within the central part of the site.
4. The settlement of Stapleton is located approximately 400m to the north-west of the site. A travelling showpeoples site, Carousel Park, is located just outside the site to the north of Stapleton Lane. A former landfill, now used as a recreation ground, is located to the immediate east of the site and Barwell Farmhouse, which is Grade II Listed, is located to the south-west corner of the site.
Site Description
5. The site comprises land which is predominantly in agricultural use, with fields bounded by hedgerows and hedgerow trees. Just outside of the planning application boundary are two existing farm buildings, The Gabes, which is accessed from Stapleton Lane, and Bosworth House Farm, which is located to the south of the site accessed from the A447. Both comprise a collection of small farm buildings and a farm house. The farmland associated with these farms is included within the planning application boundary.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 4 2012/0295/04 – continued
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 5 2012/0295/04 – continued
Landscape and Topography 6. The northern portion of the site rises from approximately 100 metres above Ordnance Datum (AOD) to a height of approximately 118 metres at the top of the northernmost ‘spur’. From here, much of the site slopes partially eastwards towards Barwell where it falls away towards a height of between 100 – 105 metres AOD, giving the impression of looking inwards on the town. The western boundary of the site remains at around 105 metres AOD, whilst the central portion rises to approximately 115 metres AOD where it meets in the south with the Hinckley Road.
7. The visual character within the site is strongly defined by the vegetative framework formed by the mature trees and well maintained hedgerows. This framework contains much of the views to within the site. The Barwell skyline is punctuated by a number of landmarks including St Mary’s Parish Church to the south east and the water tower east of the site. The landscape character is agricultural but the site is influenced by the urban character of Barwell and occupies a landscape which features a number of larger settlements.
8. There are no trees designated with Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs).
Ecology 9. The Little Fields Farm Meadow Local Wildlife Site (LWS) is located in the centre of the site and comprises unimproved swampy grassland. There are no other designated ecological sites within the planning application boundary.
10. Off-site ecological sites include Burbage Common and Wood Local Nature Reserve, which is located 1.2km to the south-east of the site, and the 'Mature Oak off Barwell Lane' Local Wildlife Site, which is located 0.7km south-east of the site. There are also two Candidate Local Wildlife Sites near to the site, including a 'Mature Ash off Barwell Lane' 0.9km to the south east, and 'Little Pit Fishery' 1.2km to the south.
11. The field boundaries within and around the site are primarily defined by hedgerows. The hedgerows within the site vary in height between 1.8 to 2.5m, many of which contain mature broadleaf trees including Oak and Ash species. These hedgerows establish the vegetative framework on the site. Several hedgerows include a higher number of hedgerow trees and so appear more substantial.
12. One small copse is present in the north eastern portion of the site but the rest of the site is largely free of trees. Historically, there is no woodland associated with the site, as indicated by mapping from 1837 and 1903.
13. In terms of the habitats present, the site contains buildings and hard standing, arable fields, improved grassland, semi-improved grassland, unimproved grassland, broad-leaved woodland, scrub, amenity grassland, hedgerows, running water and ponds and ditches.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 6 2012/0295/04 – continued
Archaeology and Heritage 14. The site does not include any designated heritage assets, although, in the surrounding area of the site, there are a number of listed buildings, the majority of which are in the historic centre of Barwell. The closest listed building to the site boundary is Barwell Farmhouse, which, along with the attached stable buildings, is Grade II listed. There are also listed buildings to the north west of the site, in the village of Stapleton.
15. The majority of the site has not been subject to previous archaeological investigation. However, two fields on the western edge of the site, adjacent to Ashby Road, were subject to fieldwalking undertaken in 1995, 1996 and 2002. This investigative work identified a potential Roman settlement site, although its exact nature and extent remain unknown.
16. The Battle of Bosworth Field is a Registered Battlefield located approximately 3km to the north-west of the site.
17. The site does not lie within a Conservation Area. There are two Barwell Conservation Areas, which are located close to the settlement centre approximately 100 metres to the east of the site.
Geology 18. The site is underlain by bedrock strata of the Triassic aged Mercia Mudstone Group, Gunthorpe Formation. This typically comprises a series of red-brown mudstone, with subordinate strata of dolomitic siltstone and fine-grained greenish grey sandstone and commonly contains veins and nodules of gypsum. The mudstones are characteristically very weak and brittle or friable and weather near-surface to silty clay (and clayey silts). The bedrock strata dip at a very shallow angle (approximately 1 degree) to the south-east. No faults are mapped within 500m north of the site boundary.
19. The bedrock is overlain and masked by a complex sequence of Quaternary and Recent drift deposits across the site. These deposits comprise glacial deposits (derived from two periods of glaciations) including glacial tills (gravelly glacial clays or ‘boulder clay’), glaciofluvial deposits (sands and gravels), and glaciolacustrine or glacial lake deposits (from local lakes that formed when the glaciers melted) comprising stoneless silts and clays. In addition, post-glacial deposits in the form of Head and Alluvium are also locally present.
20. The northern, western and southern parts of the site are shown to be underlain by glacial till deposits, with local outliers of glacial sand and gravel. The glacial till is assigned to the Oadby Member which comprises brown to grey silty clay with chalk and flint fragments. The sands and gravels are variably assigned to the Wolston Sand and Gravel and the Wigston Member. The central eastern part of the site is mapped as underlain by glacial lake clays designated the Wolston Clay. This is finely-layered clay which varies in composition with the sand content declining rapidly up the sequence. The sequence is typically relatively thin, often only in the order of 2m thick. Along the course of the River Tweed, a tract of alluvium is mapped overlying and masking the glacial deposits.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 7 2012/0295/04 – continued
21. Reference to the published British Geological Survey (BGS) geological map record for the district shows local outliers of Glacial Sands and Gravel both within the main body of the site and extending onto the north-western, north- eastern and south-western corners of the site. The extent, depth and quality of these potential mineral reserves is not known as no records from any exploratory mineral boreholes have been identified in the British Geological Survey archives.
Hydrogeology 22. The current Environment Agency (EA) Groundwater Vulnerability map classifies the Triassic aged bedrock Gunthorpe Formation as a Secondary B aquifer. The overlying deposits comprise a combination of Secondary A and Secondary B aquifers and Unproductive Strata. The site does not currently lie within 500m of a current groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ)
Hydrology 23. The Tweed River crosses the site and is fed by two tributaries. The main tributary (Sibson Brook) enters the site in the south eastern corner from a culvert under the Hinckley Road and flows northwards along the eastern boundary. The Sibson Brook extends along the eastern site boundary for a distance of approximately 600m before it is culverted beneath the public open space (historic landfill) area. The brook then flows northwards for a distance of approximately 50m where it has confluence with a second tributary.
24. The second tributary enters the site on the eastern boundary close to Stapleton Lane. After the confluence of the tributaries, the Tweed River flows westwards across the site for a distance of approximately 450m and leaves the site (beneath the A447 Ashby Road) at Abraham’s Bridge.
25. A further short section of a separate watercourse is present on the northern part of the site; the source is a spring close to the northern boundary, with the watercourse then flowing along the northern boundary a distance of approximately 150m before turning and flowing to the north-east. This watercourse is one of many tributaries of the Thurlaston Brook which is situated several kilometres to the east of the site.
26. The majority of the site lies outside the Environment Agency’s indicative flood plain, in Flood Zone 1 with a flood probability of less than 0.1%. The exception is the corridor of the Tweed River/Sibson Brook, which flows along the eastern boundary of the site before turning to the north-west in the vicinity of the former landfill and is subject to the usual variances in flow and water levels.
Movement and Access 27. There are points of access to the site for farm vehicles located around the site including one off Stapleton Lane and via tracks around the farm buildings. However, these are private access routes and are not publicly accessible.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 8 2012/0295/04 – continued
28. The Leicestershire County Council Definitive Map identifies six public rights of way (PROW) crossing the site. Two locally important long distance footpaths lie in proximity or run through the site; the ‘Ambion Way’ and the ‘Leicestershire Round’. These PROW are footpaths only; there are no bridleways providing access for cyclists or horse riders.
Utilities 29. The site is bisected in the northern section by a watermain, running from the north east corner of the site and leaving the site at Ashby Road on the western boundary.
30. High voltage (HV), 33KV and 11kV overhead electricity lines cross the site in several locations. The 33kV overhead line exits the site boundary on Ashby Road and to the northern boundary. The existing 11kV overhead line exits the site boundary in Ashby Road, at four points on the northern site boundary and at 2 points on the eastern boundary.
31. Overhead telecommunications lines run across the site and a number of sewers are present on the site:
Landfill 32. The former landfill site is not located within the application site but is situated to the immediate east. Due to its proximity, the potential effects on residential development have been considered in the EIA. Landfill gas monitoring in the past by HBBC has not identified any migration of gas towards surrounding residential properties.
Description of Proposed Development
33. The application seeks outline approval with all matters reserved except means of access for a residential-led mixed-use development. The applicant states that the overall aim of the proposed development is to provide a development which responds to and complies with the aspirations of Hinckley and Bosworth BC as set out in the Hinckley and Bosworth Core Strategy and the Draft Action Area Plan for Earl Shilton and Barwell.
34. In summary the proposed development will consist of the following key elements; Up to 2,500 dwellings of a mix of size, type and tenure; A Community Hub with local needs retail, a local healthcare facility or, in the alternative, a family public house/restaurant; A two-form entry primary school; Up to 24,800m2 of employment space; and Extensive landscaping and public open space, including sports pitches and play areas.
35. The proposed development is illustrated on an indicative masterplan. Because the application is submitted in outline, planning permission is not sought for the masterplan; rather, this provides an illustration of the potential layout of the site, for which the detail would be agreed in subsequent reserved matters applications.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 9 2012/0295/04 – continued
36. The planning application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement and for the purposes of assessing the environmental effects a series of assessment parameters have been set, for which plans have been produced and for which planning permission is sought. Forthcoming reserved matters applications will be submitted in accordance with these development parameters, which are as follows: Land Use Building Heights Density Open Space Access and Movement
37. The means of access has been applied for in full detail.
38. Below is the maximum quantum of development applied for in the outline planning application.
Land Use Maximum Quantum of Development Residential (C3) Up to 2,500 dwellings Employment – General Industrial (B2) Up to 12,400m2 Employment – Storage & Distribn (B8) Up to 12,400m2 Primary School 2-form entry Commercial / Retail (A1 – A5) Up to 1,000m2
39. The main land uses proposed in the development are as follows.
Residential
40. The majority of the proposed development comprises residential dwellings and its associated infrastructure. The areas classified as residential on the land use zones plan will be occupied by up to 2,500 dwellings (Use Class C3) of a mix of size, type and tenure. The residential areas occupy some 73.76ha of the overall site in the indicative masterplan.
41. The dwellings will comprise a mix of 2 to 5-bedroom houses and a limited number of 1 and 2-bedroom apartments. The indicative breakdown of numbers of house types is set out below: 7% apartments (include flats over garages) 35% terraced (comprising 15% 2-beds and 20% 3-beds) 40% 3 bed detached 18% 4 bed detached
42. Within the residential zones there will be four Local Equipped Areas of Play (LEAP) to ensure that an equipped area of play is available within 400m walking distance across the site. Although the siting of these facilities is not fixed by the EIA parameters, two LEAPs will be provided on land north of Stapleton Lane and two will be provided on land south of Stapleton Lane.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 10 2012/0295/04 – continued
43. In addition to the LEAP and Neighbourhood Equipped Area of Play (NEAP) provision, residential areas will also incorporate informal areas of open space and play. These areas will be provided off major routes to provide good natural surveillance from houses, roads and pathways.
44. The proposed heights of buildings across the site are illustrated in the application. With reference to the proposed residential dwellings, the majority of the development will be up to 11.5m (2.5 storeys) in height above floor level. Along the Ashby Road frontage on land south of Stapleton Lane and along the north-western boundary on Land north of Stapleton Lane, dwellings will have a maximum building height of 10m (2 storeys) to reduce the scale of development in the closest proximity to the open countryside. In the central area of the site, on either side of Stapleton Lane, permission is sought for dwellings of up to 15m (4 storeys) in height. Dwellings around the central residential area, on the eastern frontage on land north of Stapleton Lane and in a small portion in the south of the site are proposed to be up to 13m (3 storeys) in height. These values represent a maximum development parameter and HBBC are invited to secure this commitment by way of an appropriately worded planning condition.
45. Any dwellings provided within the area defined as the community hub would be provided in the form of apartments above retail units or community facilities, meaning that the 15m (4 storeys) defined for this area would not constitute solely residential development.
46. The lowest density development will be in the areas fronting Ashby Road south of Stapleton Lane and to the north-western boundary of the site, where the density will be 20-30 dwellings per hectare (dph). The highest density of development is within the central area on either side of Stapleton Lane, where residential density will be 40-40dph. All other areas will have a density of 30- 40dph.
47. The residential areas will include a network of streets incorporating primary, secondary and tertiary routes.
Mixed Use Community Hub
48. The community hub will provide a range of local needs facilities for the future residents of the proposed development, the detail of which will be determined through future reserved matters applications.
49. The planning application seeks approval for up to 1,000m2 of retail/commercial floorspace (Use Class A1-A5) within the community hub. This will allow for the provision of local needs facilities in small units such as a café, newsagents, local convenience retail, public house/restaurant or a post office to be determined at reserved matters.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 11 2012/0295/04 – continued
50. One Neighbourhood Equipped Area of Play (NEAP) will be provided as part of the community hub, in the most central location of the proposed development and in close proximity to the primary school. This provision complements the LEAP provision described above and ensures that the provision of equipped play spaces within 400m across the site can be achieved.
51. Building heights within the community hub are limited to 15m (4 storeys) in height above floor level. As stated in the residential section above, any dwellings provided within the community hub would be in the form of apartments above retail units or community facilities, meaning that the 15m (4 storeys) defined for this area would not constitute solely residential development.
52. Within the community hub, an area of approximately 700m2 will be reserved for a new local needs healthcare facility. The delivery of this facility is dependent upon the needs and preferences of the local Primary Care Trust (PCT) (or other decision makers, as relevant). In the event that the decision is taken that a medical facility should not be provided on the Barwell West site then an alternative location off site will be used, whereupon the site reserved for medical use will be used, instead, for a family public house/restaurant.
Employment
53. An area for employment uses is to be provided in the south of the site. The planning application seeks approval for up to 12,400m2 of General Industrial (Use Class B2) floorspace and 12,400m2 of Storage and Distribution (Use Class B8) floorspace. This has been provided in accordance with the requirements of the Area Action Plan (AAP).
54. The employment units will be of a maximum height of 15m (3 storeys) above floor level.
Primary School Including Playing Fields
56. A 2-form entry primary school will be positioned on the western edge of the site adjacent to the community hub. The school building will be up to 13m (2 storeys) in height, although this height has been agreed to allow for the provision of a sports hall if required. The majority of the built form is anticipated to be single storey.
57. As part of this component of the development, outdoor play areas will be provided for school use. The detail of the school and playing fields provision will be set out in future reserved matters applications.
58. It is anticipated that the school will be designed in such as a way that it can be safely used for other community events such as public meetings
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 12 2012/0295/04 – continued
Strategic Open Space and Landscape
59. The proposed development contains significant areas of open space and landscaped areas. Broadly speaking, these are concentrated in the areas adjacent to existing residential areas to the east and south of the site and through the central area, including the Local Wildlife Site (LWS). In addition, green infrastructure corridors are to be maintained throughout the site, focusing on the existing network of hedgerows and trees.
60 The open space provision includes 7ha of formal outdoor sports provision in the northeastern corner of the site, which is anticipated to include three football pitches and smaller sports facilities such as a hockey pitch or tennis courts, which is to be determined during the detailed design stage.
61. Within the areas of open space are several areas that serve the dual function of flood water attenuation areas. These are located in the area to the south of the existing recreation ground on the east of the site, in the south-eastern and northeastern corners of the site and in the green corridor around the LWS and two other areas to the north of Stapleton Lane.
62. The Applicants invite HBBC to secure the provision of the open spaces in through a planning condition.
Affordable Housing
63. The development will include the provision of affordable housing in line with HBBC’s requirement for 20% for new developments. This would represent a requirement for 500 affordable units on the site. However, affordable housing will be delivered through a combination of direct provision on the site and commuted sums for provision off-site within the existing settlement. This may include improvements to existing vacant housing within Barwell. The details of the affordable housing provision are to be determined through further discussions with HBBC.
Access and Highways
64. The access and movement strategy is illustrated in the application and the location of all proposed vehicular and pedestrian access points shown. Vehicular access to the site has been applied for in full detail. Each proposed junction is discussed in turn below together with the detail of proposed highway works to Stapleton Lane.
65. Ashby Road Northern Access The proposed junction off Ashby Road will comprise a two-way T-junction, with a 1m verge and 2m footway on either side. The footpath in this area will not connect into Ashby Road as there is no footpath present. The existing drainage ditch is to be culverted beneath the new access.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 13 2012/0295/04 – continued
66. Ashby Road Southern Access The southern Ashby Road junction will comprise a new 50m radius (to edge of road) three-arm roundabout with two- lane entry from each arm, single lane exit and 7m wide roadway around the roundabout. All existing signage, utilities located within the extent of the new roundabout will be removed and replaced as part of the works in this area.
67. A pedestrian/cyclist crossing with tactile paving will be installed along the easternmost arm of the roundabout. On the proposed development side of the junction a 1m wide grass verge and 2m wide footway will be provided, extending to a 2.5m wide footway on the eastern side of the pedestrian/cyclist crossing.
68. Stapleton Lane Eastern Access The easternmost Stapleton Lane access point will comprise a T-junction with a 1m verge and 2.5m footway/cycleway on either side, which will tie in to the existing footway on Stapleton Lane. An uncontrolled footway/cycleway crossing is to be provided as well as drop-kerb facilities to allow cyclists to rejoin the carriageway when exiting the site.
69. Stapleton Lane Western Access The spine road forms two junctions with Stapleton Lane at this point. The junction will form a crossroads, which will include controlled footway/cycleway crossings.
70. The access points will include a 2m verge on either side, a 3m footway/cycleway on the eastern side of the carriageway and a 2m footway on the western side of the carriageway. Footways will tie in to the existing footway on Stapleton Lane and drop-kerb facilities will be provided to allow cyclists to rejoin the carriageway when exiting the site.
71. Stapleton Lane Highway Works In addition to the provision of new means of access to the site from Stapleton Lane, the highway itself will be subject to some amends to improve safety in what would become a residential area. It is proposed that Stapleton Lane will have its speed limit reduced from 60mph to 30mph in areas adjacent to the site. This will involve new signage and speed cushions.
Landscape Strategy
72. The landscape strategy aims to incorporate Barwell West into its hinterland including both Barwell to the east and the surrounding wider rural landscape. This is achieved through the provision of a permeable green network and three new parks, which offer accessibility to green space throughout the scheme and total area of 26.5ha of green space and green infrastructure. The landscape strategy includes several objectives, described below.
73. The strategy has been informed by the presence of landscapes of ecological and visual value. This has resulted in the retention and enhancement of landscape assets including hedgerows, woodlands, individual trees, the Local Wildlife Site, waterways and the local undulating topography within the design.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 14 2012/0295/04 – continued
74. A sequence of Parks, squares, local pocket parks and linear green spaces, along with the tree lined network of streets, provide a diverse mix of public spaces that are connected to adjacent communities, the existing parts of Barwell and the wider landscape. The detail of the parks to be provided is reserved; however, further indicative information in relation to their design is presented in the Design and Access Statement accompanying the application.
75. Functional open spaces have been provided at a range of scales and for a range of uses and users to deliver a varied landscape network that can be used by new and existing Barwell residents.
76. A green corridor has been proposed along the River Tweed Valley creating a linear park through the proposed scheme and reinforcing links from the centre of Barwell to the wider countryside along the Tweed Valley.
77. Two new parks in the south and north-east of the site will provide sports pitches, play facilities, woodlands and wetlands as well as consolidating existing and proposed public green spaces into the wider green network.
78. Throughout the development, spaces for community food production will be established. This will include formal allotment spaces in the area behind the existing properties fronting on to Hinckley Road, the orchard alongside the River Tweed and in the parks in the south and north-east of the site.
79. A network of swales and meadows will be integrated into the landscape to provide flood attenuation and ecological enhancement. In particular, these will be located along the River Tweed corridor and alongside highways to provide natural drainage solutions where possible.
Permeability and Movement
80. The access and movement strategy includes enhanced public transport services, pedestrian and cycle infrastructure and new vehicular accesses. These measures will integrate the development within the existing community and the local highway network.
81. The main spine route through the development will take the form of a Central Avenue. This will connect the new development from Ashby Road, through Stapleton Lane and to the heart of Barwell West. It will form a clear legible primary route through the site.
Street Layouts
82. A hierarchy of primary and secondary streets and shared surface lanes and mews will be employed to help define the character of different areas throughout Barwell West ranging from main thoroughfares to quiet residential areas.
83. The primary route will be 6.1m wide, of a semi-formal character and within the high and medium density areas of the development. A cycleway will be provided along one side of the route.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 15 2012/0295/04 – continued
84. Secondary routes will carry a lower volume of traffic than the primary route and will be 5.5m wide. They will be located within the medium and low density areas of the development and will incorporate footpaths on both sides.
85. The highways layout will prioritise the movement and safety of pedestrians & cyclists. This will include a comprehensive network of safe and direct routes for pedestrians and cyclists through the site and into the wider area of Barwell.
86. Traffic speed control measures will be incorporated. Traffic calming measures and carefully devised road alignments will help reduce vehicle speeds.
87. Carriageway and pathway widths and other design principles will be in accordance with adopted highway standards including LCC’s Design Guide and Manual for Streets.
Parking
88. The parking strategy will seek to position parking spaces in appropriate locations to ensure that they can be accommodated without dominating the built environment. This will include parking courtyards to the rear of properties, driveways and some recessed parking bays within the streetscene. Parking will be delivered in line with HBBC’s requirements.
Public Transport
89. The development will accommodate new public transport facilities and services through the provision of a bus route and bus stops. Bus stops will be provided to ensure new occupiers will be no more than 400m from a bus stop, as far as reasonably practical.
90. The route of the new service will connect Barwell West with Barwell centre, Hinckley & Bosworth Community Hospital, Hinckley town centre, Hinckley bus station and Hinckley rail station.
91. The enhanced service will utilise the proposed infrastructure within the site and will provide access to the employment, Community Hub and residential elements of the proposals. A number of key design and structural features will be developed to encourage and facilitate bus usage among residents in the site.
Sustainability and Energy
92. An Energy Strategy has been produced to accompany the application which has been based on an assessment of the energy requirements of the proposed development.
93. The assessment has identified that some low or zero carbon technologies have low or no viability at the Barwell West site. Such technologies include large- scale wind turbines, for which there is low resource and insufficient space for buffer zones from residential dwellings, and Energy from Waste and Anaerobic Digestion plants, which are likely to be undesirable for a predominantly residential development. Hydropower also has low resource around the site.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 16 2012/0295/04 – continued
94. The spatial layout, plot design and detailed building design will account for the majority of carbon emission reduction. The addition of micro generation technology will allow further carbon emission reductions over these figures where required or specified by the end user.
95. Whereas the energy strategy does not identify a single effective solution to meet the energy demand at the Barwell West site, it confirms that a combination of Low and Zero Carbon (LZC) technologies may be able to provide a high proportion of the future development’s energy demand. These are discussed below.
96. The energy strategy recommends that further consideration should be given to the application of solar photovoltaics and small scale wind turbines for residential and commercial buildings. The utilisation of biomass in the school is also a potentially appropriate technology for the site. Similarly, micro CHP units in dwellings may offer a viable solution, although a district CHP network, either dedicated to the site or used in combination, could be an alternative to micro CHP.
97. The output from these technologies can be maximised in combination with established passive design principles, such as optimised building orientation and roof pitch. Overall demand for energy on the Barwell West site may be reduced through the installation of smart meters to encourage building users to change their energy use habits and flatten peaks of demand.
98. The energy strategy for the development has identified a number of approaches and technologies that can be used to achieve the desired outcome in terms of compliance with relevant policy. However, given the current rate of change in this area, the exact approach and technology mix will be selected at a more appropriate point in the development process and any requisite environmental assessment work will be undertaken at this time and in consultation with HBBC.
Waste Management
99. Detailed waste management strategies will be prepared at the detailed design stage and will set out procedures to deal with waste arisings in conjunction with local networks of waste management facilities to enable best practice reuse and recycling of different waste streams. The plans will also suggest site-wide initiatives and strategies to manage waste more effectively.
100. Local planning policy requires developments to incorporate facilities suitable for the collection of household and/or business generated recyclable materials for collection by the local authority where applicable. Accordingly, appropriate recyclable and non-recyclable waste storage areas will be provided for all residential and business premises
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 17 2012/0295/04 – continued
Utilities
101. A comprehensive survey of all existing services will be undertaken prior to any site works commencing in order to enable a detailed plan of action to be developed which will determine the services to be disconnected, diverted, replaced or retained. Services to all adjacent properties will be maintained at all times during any works to the services network in conjunction with the Statutory Authorities.
102. The gas supply for the development will feed into the site in the vicinity of the Ashby Road access roundabout and would route through the site via the Avenue alignment to serve other parts of the site.
103. Potable water supply to the development will be from existing mains in Ashby Road and Kirkby Road.
104. Utilities will be located in the footways of the primary and secondary routes and in a 2m strip within the shared surface on mews roads.
Environmental Impact Assessment
105. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been undertaken for the proposed development and Environmental Statement has been submitted with the planning application. Prior to the submission of the application a scoping exercise for the Environmental Assessment was undertaken which involved consultation with the County Council and other statutory bodies. The following topic areas requiring environmental assessment were identified: Socioeconomics Landscape and Visual Impacts Ecology and Nature Conservation Archaeology and Heritage Geology and Land Contamination Drainage and Flood Risk Transport and Access Air Quality Noise Waste Utilities Cumulative Impacts
106. A summary of the findings of the EIA are provided under the topic headings below.
Socioeconomics
107. A socioeconomic assessment evaluates the effect that the development may have on local public services, the local economy and other social issues such as crime and deprivation.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 18 2012/0295/04 – continued
108. The assessment identifies that during the construction phase there will be a significant benefit to the community through the creation of 260 construction related jobs.
109. On completion of the development the population of Barwell will increase by approximately 6000 generating additional spending in the local economy estimated as £26m per year which could translate into 357 jobs.
110. The new employment floorspace, community retail facilities and new school premises would also contribute to creating new jobs. In total taking into account additional jobs created by local spending and new employment opportunities it is estimated around 794 new job opportunities in the Borough.
111. It is estimated that the New Homes Bonus scheme would result in approximately £16m of additional funding for HBBC and £4m for Leicestershire County Council assuming all the proposed housing is built.
112. The proposed development is anticipated to generate demand for around 600 primary school places and 500 secondary school places. The proposed two- form entry primary school would provide places for 480 primary age pupils, with the remainder going to existing local schools, which currently have 153 spare primary places. There are currently 458 secondary school places available at Heathfield High School and William Bradford Community College, which will almost entirely meet the additional demand generated by the proposed development. HBBC has indicated that additional secondary school places that may be required as a result of the development should be accommodated through an increase the capacity of existing secondary schools rather than the provision of a new school. Therefore the potential impact on school places will be adequately addressed.
113. All GP surgeries within 5miles/8km of the site are currently registering new patients. However, in order to ensure that the development can be accommodated, the Applicants are in talks with the local Primary Care Trust with a view to establishing opportunities in relation to contributing to the delivery of a new medical centre in Barwell.
114. The provision of leisure and recreation facilities within the development will significantly improve access to sports and leisure for the local community. This is seen as a significant benefit to Barwell as the area suffers from poorer than average levels of physical activity in children and obesity in adults.
115. The conclusion of the EIA on socioeconomic factors is that overall the potential socioeconomic benefits to Barwell of the delivery of the development are resoundingly positive.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 19 2012/0295/04 – continued
Landscape and Visual
116. The assessment identified that the character of the site would be subject to significant change from its current rural condition. This is unavoidable with development on previously undeveloped sites and has been reduced as far as possible through the retention and enhancement of existing hedgerows and trees which maintain the historic field patterns and help to integrate the proposals into the landscape
117. The development has aimed to minimise the visual effects of development by paying attention to the scale and nature of development, particularly around the site edge. This aims to integrate the development into the existing urban and rural areas. The inclusion of trees and green spaces throughout the development and the retention of hedgerows also seeks to provide a visual connection to the surrounding rural areas and provide a more attractive development. Although the visual impact of a development of this scale on an undeveloped site cannot be avoided altogether, these measures combine to minimise the adverse visual impacts of the proposals as far as possible.
Ecology and Nature Conservation
118. To inform the assessment a range of studies and surveys have been undertaken to gather ecological information relating to the site. These included a desk study, an overall site appraisal and protected species surveys for breeding birds, Hobbys, badgers, bats, reptiles, great crested newts and watervoles
119. Where ecological receptors were considered to be of more than local importance based on the findings of these targeted surveys they were subject to an ecological impact assessment. The only receptor that was identified as being of more than local importance was the Little Fields Farm Meadow LWS. Receptors that were of only local importance were not subject to the ecological impact assessment but measures to avoid harm to protected species were still proposed. . 120. The mitigation measures proposed include the retention and protection of trees, hedgerows and protected species during construction works. This will involve the production of a detailed management plan that will be implemented and observed by site workers. Approved guidance in relation to protected species will also be provided to construction workers to avoid harm to reptiles and birds.
121. In the longer term the LWS will be considerately managed to enhance its value to local wildlife and improve the diversity of plant species present. This will ensure that there will be no adverse effect on the LWS in the long term. Recommendations for the enhancement of the site for bats, amphibians and watervoles have also been made in the form of bat boxes, the reinstatement of a medieval pond and appropriate river bank treatment.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 20 2012/0295/04 – continued
Archaeology and Heritage
122. The archaeology and heritage study included a desk based assessment, a geophysical survey (using large scale below ground metal detecting equipment), trial trenching and an assessment of the historic setting to characterise the site in terms of its historic past and to determine if proposed development has the potential to result in unacceptable harm to any historic features.
123. The desk based assessment identified that there were no Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs), Registered Battlefields or Listed Buildings located on the site itself. The nearest Listed Building is the Grade II Listed Barwell House to the south-west of the site and the Battle of Bosworth Field battlefield is located approximately 3km to the north-west.
124. The geophysical survey identified a number of potentially historic features that would be the main targets for trial trenching. The trenching focused on areas that exhibited signs of former Roman use and post-medieval agricultural uses. The trenching found only limited evidence of Roman activity, a medieval fishpond and a ridge and furrow agricultural evidence. These finds were considered to be of low-medium importance.
125. The assessment of the historic setting evaluated the potential impact of the development on all heritage assets within 5km of the site that had potential visual link to the site. This identified that the majority of listed buildings around the site had no direct line of sight with the proposed development and therefore that there would be no effect on the historic setting of these features. The main exception to this is the Barwell House Listed Building due to its proximity to the site, for which mitigation has been designed into the proposals in the form of maximum 2-storey development in the areas nearest to the building, which offsets the potential effect.
126. The development of the site could result in the destruction of any surviving below ground remains through ground works such as the laying of foundations and pipework. As any potential remains are of relatively low importance, all potential impacts upon then would be suitably mitigated through a programme of further recording work to be agreed with the County archaeologist.
Geology and Land Contamination
127. It was identified that the site has been in agricultural use for as long as maps have been produced for the area. However, the recreation ground to the east of the site is a former landfill which was identified as the main contamination risk for the site in addition to a series of former ponds which have been filled with unknown material. However, records provided by HBBC confirmed that a system to release ground gas and collect polluted liquid from the landfill is in place and that no gas was migrating towards the proposed development site. An assessment of surface water quality confirmed that pollutants from the landfill were not entering the adjacent river.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 21 2012/0295/04 – continued
Drainage and Flood Risk
128. The assessment of drainage and flood risk identified that the site is located partially within an area that is at risk from flooding. In particular this relates to the Tweed River corridor to the south and west of the adjacent former landfill and its tributaries. The river includes a section which is culverted beneath the former landfill. The Tweed is the main means of surface water drainage from the site and also for some areas of Barwell to the east. The majority of the site is not at risk from flooding.
129. Due to the important drainage function of the Tweed and the associated risk of flooding, detailed modelling of the drainage requirement for the site was undertaken. This allowed the amount of floodwater storage required to be determined and designed into the proposals. As a result, the development will not increase the risk of flooding on the site or in any other areas.
130. An assessment of surface water quality was also undertaken to evaluate whether the presence of the former landfill to the east of the site was adversely affecting water quality. It was identified that water quality is not being affected by the landfill. In relation to the effect of the proposed development on surface water quality, it was stated that mitigation would be required to avoid contamination of the watercourse from spillages, leaks or loosened soils associated with the construction and operational phases. As such, appropriate measures such as bunding of tanks and the installation of silt and oil traps was proposed. This would result in adverse impacts on surface water quality being avoided.
Transport and Access
131. The traffic and transportation implications of the proposed development have been assessed and are based on the detailed Transport Assessment which has been submitted as part of the planning application.
132. During the construction phase it is anticipated that although there will be an increase in the amount of vehicles, this will be significantly below the capacity of the road network. However, an appropriate traffic management plan will be developed and approved by HBBC to help minimise any disruption caused by these works.
133. Once the development is completed and occupied, there would be an increase in vehicles on the local highway network as a result of the increase in the number of residents. Accordingly, a number of highways improvement measures are proposed to HBBC and LCC for their approval. It is considered by the applicant that once these improvement works are implemented that the improved network would safely and adequately accommodate the increase in traffic associated with the development.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 22 2012/0295/04 – continued
Air Quality and Dust
134. A qualitative assessment of the potential impacts during construction works identified there was the potential for dust to arise. Accordingly, a number of methods to reduce the potential for dust generation were proposed, which will be included in a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). These include actions such as damping down the site and erecting dust screens. Potential impacts after construction were considered to be insignificant.
Noise and Vibration
135. The noise and vibration impacts that could arise as a result of the proposed development have been assessed. The study evaluated the potential noise impacts during the construction phase, the suitability of the noise environment for the proposed development and the potential impacts of traffic noise and the proposed employment uses.
136. During the construction phase, the assessment notes that for nearby residential some noise and vibration disturbance is likely to occur in relation to activities such as piling. In order to address this, a range of mitigation measures have been proposed that will form part of the CEMP which will be approved by HBBC. This will include locating noisy plant further from local residents, the erection of site hoarding, setting of acceptable working hours and other quiet working methods. In terms of vibration, it is recommended that methods which cause less vibration are used and that the works are monitored and stopped should vibration levels become unacceptable.
137. The noise study assessed the suitability of the site and the noise environment for residential properties and the proposed school. It notes that with the incorporation of double glazing and appropriate ventilation systems to properties along Stapleton Lane and Ashby Road, levels of noise that comply with best practice guidance can be achieved in houses across the site. No additional noise mitigation is required in relation to noise from the Carousel Park.
138. The noise assessment also evaluated the effect of the potential increase in traffic on the noise environment. This identified that there would be a slight increase in the amount of traffic noise as a result of the proposed development but that this would not affect the Listed Barwell House or the LWS. As stated above, sustainable modes of transport, for example walking, cycling and public transport, are encouraged as part of the development to reduce the number of car journeys associated with the proposed development.
139. The potential effect of the proposed employment uses on the noise environment was also considered. It was proposed that maximum operating noise levels should be set for these buildings to avoid adverse effects. Furthermore, a bund is proposed to the south of the employment zone which would act as an acoustic barrier for residents of Hinckley Road.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 23 2012/0295/04 – continued
Waste
140. The assessment of waste generation identified that the proposed development will inevitably result in the generation of waste material during the construction phase. However, a series of best practice measures to minimise waste arisings during construction have been proposed and will be submitted to HBBC for approval. Furthermore, a Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) has been prepared in outline and this will be developed in detail and maintained throughout the construction phase. This will set out the means by which waste reduction and recycling targets will be met and will ensure that waste related impacts are minimised.
141. When completed the development has the potential to generate household and commercial waste. This has been calculated to be 5,260 tonnes per year once the development is completed, which represents an additional 0.6% to the total volume of waste generated in Leicestershire, which would require 0.05% of the landfill capacity. However, once Leicestershire’s future recycling target for household waste of 60% is taken into account, the total amount of waste predicted to go to landfill reduces significantly. Furthermore, it is recommended that exemplary recyclable waste storage and sorting space is provided within the dwellings during the detailed design stage to encourage higher rates of recycling. The generation of waste is therefore considered to be of only negligible or minor significance
Utilities
142. An assessment was undertaken to identify the capacity in the existing utilities infrastructure at the site. This included water supply, electricity, gas, sewerage and telecommunications. This process included consultation with the full range of utilities providers including Severn Trent Water (STW), National Grid Gas and Western Power Distribution
143. Taking all the findings into account, the assessment identified that the development will have no significant effect on utilities and that the provision of new high quality telecommunications infrastructure could be beneficial to Barwell in general.
Cumulative Impacts
144. The first stage of a cumulative impact assessment involves the consideration of how the impacts of the proposed development may interact with impacts associated with other development proposals in the surrounding area. For this assessment the potential environmental effects of the Earl Shilton SUE, which is detailed in the same AAP that relates to the Barwell SUE, were considered alongside those for the Barwell proposals. The Earl Shilton SUE development proposes 1,400 houses, employment, a primary school and a community hub.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 24 2012/0295/04 – continued
145. The areas where cumulative impacts were considered possible were primarily in relation to traffic generation and the subsequent impact of traffic related noise and effects on air quality. The transport assessment included the Earl Shilton development in its calculations of future traffic levels and these figures were used to calculate the effect on noise and air quality. The effects of both developments were therefore fully accounted for in the assessments and the impacts were found to be acceptable when appropriate mitigation was considered.
146. The two developments combined will create an increased volume of household and commercial waste. However, this has been evaluated in terms of the capacity of waste sites and the cumulative impact is negligible.
147. Cumulative impacts are not anticipated in relation to visual impacts, ecology, archaeology and heritage, drainage and flood risk, geology or utilities.
148. Beneficial impacts were identified in relation to socioeconomic effects, where the combined effect of the two developments on the local economy was found to be beneficial in terms of the temporary construction jobs, additional spending of new residents on local goods and services, the combined new homes bonus funding for HBBC and LCC, the provision of direct employment opportunities in the employment zones and the potential improvement in overall deprivation. As the development includes a primary school it is assumed that there will be no cumulative effect on primary education. In relation to secondary provision, the two developments could increase demand for places significantly beyond capacity but HBBC policy states that developers will be required to contribute to the provision of additional places; therefore, the means to address this potential issue are already established. Overall, it is considered that the cumulative socioeconomic effects of both developments are very positive.
149. The combined/synergistic assessment of impacts has focused on whether potential construction and development use effects would combine to generate a significant adverse impact on sensitive receptors. The cumulation of aspects such as traffic, dust, noise and visual intrusion caused by construction activities has been considered together. The assessment has identified that impacts may be significant in areas immediately surrounding the site.
Conclusions
150. The developer has undertaken assessments of the potential impacts of the construction and operational phases of the proposed development and the adverse environmental impacts have been minimised wherever possible through scheme design and by using appropriate mitigation measures.
151. Potentially adverse impacts have been identified in relation to the construction works. These include temporary increases in noise, dust and traffic and will be mitigated through the production and implementation of a CEMP that will be subject to approval by HBBC and a programme of monitoring.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 25 2012/0295/04 – continued
152. The significant change to the scale of development on the site means that there will be an unavoidable adverse impact related to the visual impact of the proposed development although this is to be expected of any development of a greenfield site and should not be seen as a reason to refuse planning permission.
153. Despite these adverse impacts, the majority of the assessments in the EIA identified that impacts would be of negligible or beneficial significance. In particular, it has been determined that there will be significant social and economic benefits associated with the development. It is therefore concluded that when the proposals are considered as a whole that they constitute a sustainable development opportunity with significant potential benefits to the people of Barwell.
Planning Policy
National Planning Policy
154. The Localism Act 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, published on 27 March 2012) bring into operation a system which places greater emphasis on local decision-making and reduces the extent of national planning guidance. The NPPF has been drafted to reflect the law following the implementation of the Localism Act. The NPPF replaces the majority of planning policy statements, although PPS10 (Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (2005)) remains in place until the National Waste Management Plan is published.
155. The NPPF seeks to provide a framework within which, local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans, which reflect the needs and priorities of their communities. The NPPF should be read in conjunction with the Government’s planning policy for travellers’ sites (published 23 March 2012).
156. The NPPF sets out that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. Paragraphs 18 to 219 of the NPPF, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development in England means in practice for the planning system. This presumption in favour of sustainable development should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision taking.
157. Key aspects of the NPPF include: Planning system should operate to encourage and not act as an impediment to sustainable growth; Ensuring the vitality of town centres, application of sequential test for town centre uses; Supporting a prosperous rural economy; Promoting sustainable transport; Supporting high quality communications infrastructure; Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes;
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 26 2012/0295/04 – continued
Identify and update annually five year housing land supply against housing requirements, with additional 5% to ensure choice and competition and 20% where there has been persistent under delivery of housing; Acknowledgement that supply of new homes can sometimes be best achieved through planning for larger scale development such as new settlements or extensions to existing villages and towns that follow the principles of garden cities; Requiring good design, great weight given to outstanding or innovative design; Promoting healthy communities, facilitating neighbourhood planning; Sufficient choice of school places, should take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to meeting this requirement, and to development that will widen choice in education; Local Green Space designation; Protecting Green Belt land; Meeting the challenge of climate change and flooding; Conserving and enhancing the natural environment; Conserving and enhancing the historic environment; and Facilitating the sustainable use of minerals.
The Development Plan
158. The relevant Development Plan documents comprise:
East Midlands Regional Plan (adopted March 2009); Hinckley and Bosworth Core Strategy (December 2009); The Leicestershire Minerals and Leicestershire and Leicester Waste Core Strategies & Development Control Policies (2009); and Saved policies and proposals from the Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Local Plan.
East Midlands Regional Plan
159. Regional spatial strategies remain part of the Development Plan until they are abolished by Order using powers taken in the Localism Act 2011. It is the government’s intention to revoke regional strategies outside of London, subject to the outcome of environmental assessments that are currently being undertaken.
160. At the current time the East Midlands Regional Plan, published by the Secretary of State in March 2009, remains part of the development plan.
161. In anticipation of the abolition of regional planning, the Localism Act has introduced a Duty to Co-operate which applies to all local authorities and a number of other agencies. The Duty to Co-operate (Section 33A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, inserted by the Localism Act 2011) will be the mechanism for co-operating in respect of the preparation of Development Plans and in agreeing strategic issues that go beyond individual local authority boundaries.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 27 2012/0295/04 – continued
162. It will also be important that local planning authorities and the County Council work closely with the Leicester and Leicestershire Local Enterprise Partnership to ensure planning policies and proposals are aligned with sub-regional economic priorities.
163. The Regional Plan (March 2009), and the Three Cities Sub-Regional Strategy within it, sets out an underlying strategy for the delivery of housing and jobs growth over the period to 2026. The Regional Core Objectives of the Regional Plan are:
To ensure that the existing housing stock and new affordable and market housing address need and extend choice in all communities in the region; To reduce social exclusion; To protect and enhance the environmental quality of urban and rural settlements; To improve the health and mental, physical and spiritual well being of the Region’s residents; To improve economic prosperity, employment opportunities and regional competitiveness; To improve accessibility to jobs, homes and services; To protect and enhance the environment; To achieve a ‘step change’ increase in the level of the Region’s biodiversity; To reduce the causes of climate change; and To minimise adverse environmental impacts of new development and promote optimum social and economic benefits.
164. The Three Cities Sub-Regional Strategy within the Regional Plan explains that within Leicester and Leicestershire the location of this growth is to be focused on the existing Leicester urban area, initially by capitalising on its substantial urban capacity. Later in the plan period it will be met by planned sustainable urban extensions (SUEs) to the Principal Urban Area (PUA). The PUA includes Leicester City, Oadby and Wigston Borough and parts of Charnwood Borough, Blaby District and Harborough District. Elsewhere in Leicestershire the focus for growth is within and adjacent to the sub-regional centres, including SUEs as necessary.
165. The scale of housing growth set out in the Regional Plan for Hinckley and Bosworth Borough is 450 dwellings per annum to provide a total of 9000 dwellings overall between 2006 and 2026. It refers to new housing being focused around Hinckley including Sustainable Urban Extensions as necessary.
166. A range of employment sites at sustainable locations are sought. The Three Cities Sub-Regional Strategy Policy 4 requires that several factors are taken into account, which include the housing distribution, in particular the SUEs; supporting the regeneration of the city centres, including large scale office developments, leisure and retail; the need to provide for the regeneration of deprived communities; and the need to promote local employment opportunities that will reduce out commuting. Three Cities Policy, Sub-Regional Strategy Policy 5 refers to local authorities and implementing agencies co-ordinating the
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 28 2012/0295/04 – continued
provision of enhanced and new green infrastructure, and identifies strategic priorities which include Green Wedges, community forest proposals and ‘greenways’ around Leicester.
167. Regional Plan Policy 44 includes sub-area transport objectives, which for the Three Cities Sub-area include reducing the use of the car in and around Leicester and promoting a step change increase in the quality and quantity of local public transport provision, and facilities to encourage walking and cycling.
Hinckley and Bosworth Core Strategy
168. To accommodate new housing requirements and to ensure conformity with the Regional Plan the Core Strategy proposes that the majority of new development will be accommodated in and around Hinckley reflecting its role as a sub- regional centre, through sustainable amendments to the settlement boundary and Sustainable Urban Extensions at Barwell and Earl Shilton. The requirement to provide new employment land within the SUEs is also identified primarily to ensure that employment opportunities are provided as part of these developments. The following Spatial Strategy Policy is particularly relevant to the application proposals.
169. Policy 3: Development in Barwell. The preceding text to this policy identifies that Barwell plays a supporting role to Hinckley as the sub-regional centre providing an important critical mass of population to support Hinckley town centre. The Core Strategy also notes that Barwell contains pockets of significant deprivation and that the area is in need of regeneration. In order to support this regeneration and to reinvigorate the area the Core Strategy proposes 2 mixed use Sustainable Urban Extensions comprising 2,500 homes to the west of Barwell and 2,000 homes to the south of Earl Shilton. Paragraph 4.19 of the Core Strategy goes on to say that:- “These Sustainable Urban Extensions will be exemplars of sustainable design, well linked to the existing communities through efficient vehicular access, excellent walking and cycling routes and by regular public transport. They will include the necessary community infrastructure to support the new residents, including neighbourhood shops, primary schools, GP’s and green space provision as well as high quality employment provision to allow residents to work close to home should they choose to. A particular focus will be ensuring green infrastructure is provided as part of the development that links with existing networks in urban areas and connects residents to their rural hinterland. These Sustainable Urban Extensions will act as a catalyst for the regeneration of Barwell and Earl Shilton, and as such, developers of the Sustainable Urban Extensions will be expected to contribute to the existing facilities and local centres and Barwell and Earl Shilton where appropriate.”
170. Core Strategy Policy 3 sets out a number of development criteria for the Barwell SUE. The policy allocates land: “… for the development of a mixed use Sustainable Urban Extension to the west of Barwell including 2,500 environmentally sustainable homes, 15ha of employment, neighbourhood shops, a new primary school and children’s centre, GP’s, neighbourhood policing and green space provision.”
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 29 2012/0295/04 – continued
171. The policy dictates that the employment development should provide for B2 industrial and B8 warehousing development opportunities and should primarily support local employment objectives. The requirement for a “community hub” to provide community services including a new primary school and children’s centre is identified. The policy states that detailed requirements for the SUE including its boundaries and other details will be set out in an Area Action Plan to which all development must be in conformity and that no piecemeal developments will be permitted.
172. The policy also notes that the Council will support the regeneration of the Barwell local centre including public realm improvements, traffic calming measures and transport improvements.
173. Other policies in the Core Strategy give further guidance on how a SUE at Barwell should be brought forward including requirements relating to transportation, affordable housing, housing density, mix and design, green space and green infrastructure.
Minerals and Waste Core Strategies
174. The Leicestershire Minerals Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD contains policies to safeguard mineral resources and in certain circumstances require the extraction of the mineral in advance of surface development (Policies MDC 8 and MDC 9).
175. The Leicestershire and Leicester Waste Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD identifies SUEs as potentially suitable locations for non- strategic waste sites.
Hinckley and Bosworth Local Plan (2001) (Saved Policies)
176. There are a number of saved Local Plan policies of relevance to the proposals but particularly Policy NE5 - Development in the Countryside and Policy NE10 - Local Landscape Improvement Area.
Other Relevant Policy Documents
Earl Shilton and Barwell Area Action Plan
177. As proposed in Policy 3 of the Core Strategy the Council are producing an Area Action Plan(AAP) for the Earl Shilton and Barwell Sustainable Urban Extensions. At present the plan is at a draft stage having undergone a formal consultation exercise in early 2011. The purpose of the AAP (in addition to defining the precise boundaries of the Urban Extensions) is to provide guidance primarily in relation to masterplanning and design issues in order to guide planning applications.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 30 2012/0295/04 – continued
178. Section 1 of the AAP sets out the Area Action Plan boundaries for Earl Shilton and Barwell and confirms that the document is a Statutory Development Plan forming part of the Local Development Framework. The AAP boundary encompasses both the existing urban areas of Barwell and Earl Shilton in addition to the proposed Urban Extensions. This includes land to the west of Barwell to which this planning application relates. At present the Plan remains in draft having been subject to a formal consultation exercise in January/February 2011.
179. In addition to a range of development management policies the AAP contains a masterplan development framework plan and associated policy which requires future planning applications to be in accordance with it. The draft AAP recognises that the development framework is not a finalised masterplan however it asks that future planning applications should closely follow the principles which it sets out.
Leicestershire Together Performance Framework
180. Leicestershire's strategic outcomes for 2012/13 were agreed by the Leicestershire Together Board in March 2012. The outcome framework contains 28 outcomes, 5 individual Commissioning Hubs and cross cutting partnerships will be overseeing the achievement of the strategic priorities. The priorities relevant to this proposal include: New housing meets the needs of people in Leicestershire a. Levels of new housing meet household growth levels b. An increase in affordable housing within mixed and sustainable communities. c. Housing developments are supported by excellent / good infrastructure and services d. Suitable locations are identified for new Gypsy and Traveller sites e. Increased availability of affordable, well designed, suitable and fuel efficient rural housing for local residents to help ensure the future sustainability of rural community (including social and entry level market housing).
Existing homes are improved to better meet the needs of the people of Leicestershire a. More people live in affordable, well designed, suitable and fuel efficient homes b. There is improved access to housing advice services c. A reduced number of people and families present themselves as homeless d. Vulnerable people are supported to live independently at home e. Vulnerable people access appropriate housing and housing related support
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 31 2012/0295/04 – continued
Local Transport Plan
181. Leicestershire’s third Local Transport Plan (LTP3) was launched on 1 April 2011. The long term strategy for LTP3 sets out a vision for transport to 2026 and provides a framework for how the county’s transport system will be managed and developed in the future. The strategic outcomes that LTP3 seeks to deliver include a transport system which provides more consistent, predictable and reliable journey times for the movement of people and goods; all residents having efficient, easy and affordable access to key services, particularly by public transport, bike and on foot; more people walking, cycling and using public transport as part of their daily journeys and accessing the natural environment easily and efficiently, particularly by bike or foot. The key theme is making the best use of the transport system we have, only seeking to increase capacity where it is affordable and is the best choice in the context of the strategic goals and outcomes which LTP3 is trying to achieve.
County Council Consultation Response
182. Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council has consulted the County Council on the outline planning application for the Barwell SUE. The County Council no longer has a strategic planning role following the abolition of Structure Planning, nor does it have a requirement to support the Regional Planning function following the intended revocation of regional plans and the disbanding of the Regional Planning Body, however it has a number of functions which will play an important role in ensuring the successful delivery of the proposed development. Under the heading of each of the Council’s service functions the County Council’s current position on the planning application is provided below. As background the previous key comments relevant to the Barwell SUE made by the County Council on the Submission Hinckley and Bosworth Core Strategy are also provided. These emphasised the need to plan the Barwell and Earl Shilton SUEs together albeit the Council accepted the SUEs being split.
Previous Comments on Hinckley & Bosworth Core Strategy (2008)
183. ‘The split of the SUE between Barwell and Earl Shilton is accepted. However, they are dealt with by two separate policies, Policy 2 and Policy 3, with no clear linkages between them. There is a danger, especially as these are likely to be separate developers, that one or other SUE will be developed in isolation. They must be planned together so that opportunities to secure appropriate infrastructure provision will be maximised. The proposed Area Action Plan is critical in this respect.’
184. ‘Proper consideration needs to be given to how services and infrastructure provision for the proposed SUEs, (….), will be resourced if it is not to have implications for the County Council and the overall sustainability of new development.
185. ‘The Leicester and Leicestershire Infrastructure Plan, currently in preparation, will form an important part of the evidence base for such policies.’
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 32 2012/0295/04 – continued
Highway Authority
186. The Highway Authority has advised HBBC that the County Council’s integrated transport model (LLITM) is being used to assess the transportation implications of expanded development at Earl Shilton and Barwell and this work has been commissioned but is still not completed.
187. The modelling is complicated in that it is not a single SUE but split between the two settlements of Barwell and Earl Shilton. There is a need to understand the interaction between these significantly enlarged settlements in the future and to masterplan carefully the developments, so that they minimise the impact on the transport network and local services and infrastructure. There is also a draw towards the A5 and North Warwickshire, which requires the involvement of the Highways Agency and Warwickshire County Council in the assessment
188. The Highway Authority sent a report to HBBC on 23 November 2012 which gave an updated position statement on previous comments and provides the following:
1. principle and criteria for SUE development
2. current work and methodology being carried out to support the Area Action Plan (AAP)
3. comments on the methodology submitted within the applicant’s Transport Assessment
4. findings from the LLITM / Paramics modelling for the AAP
5. detailed comments on the applicant’s submitted Transport Assessment, including:
Masterplanning Trip Generation, Distribution and impact Proposed access junctions Proposed off-site mitigation Public Transport Walking / Cycling linkages Submitted Travel Plan
The report in itself is a substantial document and is reproduced in full as Appendix A to this report.
Minerals Safeguarding
189. There is a responsibility on planning authorities to ensure valuable mineral resources are not unnecessarily sterilised by built development. The Barwell SUE lies within an area identified by the County Council, in its role as the Mineral Planning Authority, as being a potential sand and gravel resource. The
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 33 2012/0295/04 – continued
applicant initially concluded in the application that the mineral resource is not viable but did not provide sufficient information to support that contention. The County Council has consequently requested that the applicant provide further information on the quality and extent of the mineral resource and or a more reasoned explanation as to why it believes the extraction of that resource is not viable. In response the applicant has commissioned further investigation work involving borehole drilling to help establish the extent and quality of the sand and gravel deposits within the application area. This work will inform a separate technical submission which will be made to Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council (HBBC) as a formal addendum to the April 2012 Environmental Statement prepared by HOW Planning. Amongst other issues, this will provide an updated assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on the potential mineral resource in view of the further work which has been undertaken. The County Council will be consulted on the ES Addendum.
Archaeology and Cultural Heritage
190. Archaeology and heritage represents a significant consideration in the construction of the proposals and the County Council’s archaeologist has reviewed the Environmental Statement accompanying the application which includes a desk-based assessment of the available information, a comprehensive programme of geophysical survey, followed by a targeted programme of evaluation trenching. The Environmental Statement also includes a consideration of the impact of development on the setting of relevant heritage assets. Officers have been in discussion with the developer's agents throughout the completion of the above programme, contributing to the staged assessment of the proposals. The County Council Archaeologist is satisfied that sufficient consideration has been given to the implications of the scheme upon the historic environment to inform determination of the proposals and are satisfied that the development could go ahead subject to conditions to secure a staged programme of archaeological mitigation, including, as appropriate, further exploratory trial trenching, targeted archaeological excavation and historic building survey and the developer incorporating interpretation and presentation of the results of the archaeological investigation into the green infrastructure proposals, including appropriate management and interpretation of earthworks remains. A copy of the County Council Principal Planning Archaeologist’s formal comments to HBBC is provided at Appendix B.
Ecology
191. Initially a number of ecology issues were raised by the County Ecologist but these have been satisfactorily addressed as part of the application process. The main issue was that the Local Wildlife Site (Littlefields Farm Meadow, along the Tweed River) within the site should be protected and its proper management in the future is secured through agreements tied to the grant of any planning permission.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 34 2012/0295/04 – continued
192. A revision has been made to the application which takes account of this concern by provision of an adequate buffer around the Local Wildlife site and clear designation within the Green Infrastructure plans and master plans. The initial objection by the County Ecologist has now been withdrawn subject to planning conditions being imposed to cover the following. Update surveys every 3 years for protected species until the development is fully implemented No removal of potential bird nesting habitats during bird-nesting season (beginning of March to end of July) No development to commence before an ecological management plan (EMP: ref ES10.118 and onwards) and Ecological Construction Method Statement (ECMS: ES ref 10.116 and onwards) has been submitted and approved by LPA, to cover management of Little Fields farm meadow LWS and other wildlife habitats in perpetuity. The EMP should cover hedges, ponds, wetlands, trees, wildflower grassland, scrub, badgers, River Tweed corridor and LWS. Retention of the LWS as an area of species-rich grassland surrounded by hedgerows, managed in perpetuity to enhance and protect it biodiversity, with limited and informal public access.
Developer Contributions
193. In respect of developer contributions towards County Council infrastructure and service provision a number of requirements have been identified and requested to HBBC. All requests have been justified and evidenced and are considered by the County Council to be CIL compliant in that they are necessary to make the development acceptable, directly related to the development and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
Recycling and Household Waste Contribution
194. A contribution of £117,000 has been requested to be spent on the Barwell Recycling and Household Waste Site (RHWS) which adjoins the Barwell SUE.
195. It is anticipated that the existing capacity of the Barwell RHWS would need to be increased by approximately 15% to meet the demands generated by the Barwell SUE.
196. The contribution is required to provide additional storage and compaction equipment within the existing Barwell RHWS and on traffic management into and out of the site to facilitate the increased traffic usage of the RHWS generated by the SUE.
Library Service Contribution
197. A contribution of £135,880 towards the Barwell Library on Malt Mill Bank has been requested on the basis that the SUE would generate 3,600 new library users.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 35 2012/0295/04 – continued
198. The contribution would be used to extend the public space at the library and provide additional library material books etc and upgrade ICT equipment to account for the impact of the proposed development.
Education Contribution
199. Primary School Provision. The provision of a site and building for a new 420 place Primary School has been requested (approximate build cost £5.35m). In addition a contribution of £1.32m for extension of existing local primary schools is required.
200. Secondary School Provision. In isolation the pupils generated from this development could be accommodated in the existing Secondary Schools with the need for 7 additional pupil places. When combined with the Earl Shilton proposed development of 1600 dwellings the number of additional pupil places required increases to 327 places. A contribution of £4.45m for High school provision and £1.42m for Upper school provision is required to accommodate the additional 327 secondary pupils How this contribution should be split between the two developments is still to be finalised.
Conclusion
201. In terms of the proposed amount of housing provision, the location, and the broad principles adopted in the master planning of the development it is consistent with the Regional Plan, the adopted Hinckley and Bosworth Core Strategy and the emerging Area Action Plan for the Earl Shilton and Barwell SUE. Therefore there is no objection to the principle or location of the proposed development.
202. However, there is an inter-relationship between the Barwell SUE and the Earl Shilton SUE and the comments of the County Council on the Highway and Transportation requirements of the Barwell development in particular need to address this inter-relationship through the finalisation of the Area Action Plan.
203. The transport assessment work required to finalise the AAP has not yet been completed although this is expected to have been done by the end of this month. Once this work is completed the highway and transportation impacts and appropriate mitigation of the development can be identified. In the absence of this necessary information it would be inappropriate for Hinckley and Bosworth to determine the application. Furthermore, given the importance of the Earl Shilton and Barwell SUEs to the delivery of the Hinckley and Bosworth Core Strategy, any decision on planning applications seeking to bring forward development in this area should strictly only do so in accordance with an adopted Area Action Plan. It is critical that the two areas are planned together so that opportunities to secure appropriate infrastructure and regeneration for the settlements is maximised and the risk to them being developed in isolation is avoided.
204. The County Council’s service requirements resulting from the proposed development will need to be included in a section 106 agreement if the Borough Council were to grant planning permission.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 36 2012/0295/04 – continued
Recommendation
It be noted that technical responses, and developer contribution requirements in respect of the planning application have been submitted to Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council as set out in paragraphs 182 to 200 of this report.
That with regards to the final comments of the Mineral Planning Authority on the Mineral Safeguarding issue, and the Highway Authority, in respect of the Highway and Transport impact of the development and consequent requirements for mitigation, that work is still on going and Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council be advised that it would be inappropriate for a decision to be issued on the application until final comments can be provided. Notwithstanding that ideally the application should not be determined in advance of an adopted Area Action Plan in order to secure the proper planning of the area and avoid the risk of the SUEs being developed in isolation.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 37 APPENDIX A
HIGHWAY AUTHORITY COMMENTS 23 NOVEMBER 2012
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013 38
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATORY BOARD
The considerations set out below apply to all the following applications.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPLICATIONS
Unless otherwise stated in the report there are no discernible equal opportunities implications.
IMPLICATIONS FOR DISABLED PERSONS
On all educational proposals the Director of Children and Young People's Service and the Director of Corporate Resources will be informed as follows:
Note to Applicant Department
Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Person’s Act 1970 and the Design Note 18 “Access for the Disabled People to Educational Buildings” 1984 and to the Equality Act 2010. You are advised to contact the County Council’s Human Resources Department if you require further advice on this aspect of the proposal.
COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS
Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 places a very broad duty on all local authorities 'to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area'. Unless otherwise stated in the report, there are no discernible implications for crime reduction or community safety.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
Unless otherwise stated in the report the background papers used in the preparation of this report are available on the relevant planning application files.
SECTION 38(6) OF PLANNING AND COMPULSORY PURCHASE ACT 2004
Members are reminded that Section 38(6) of the 2004 Act requires that:
“If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”
Any relevant provisions of the development plan (i.e. any approved Local Plans) are identified in the individual reports.
The circumstances in which the Board is required to “have regard” to the development plan are given in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990:
Section 70(2) : determination of applications; Section 77(4) : called-in applications (applying s. 70); Section 79(4) : planning appeals (applying s. 70); Section 81(3) : provisions relating to compensation directions by Secretary of State (this section is repealed by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991); Section 91(2) : power to vary period in statutory condition requiring development to be begun; Section 92(6) : power to vary applicable period for outline planning permission; Section 97(2) : revocation or modification of planning permission; Section 102(1) : discontinuance orders; Section 172(1) : enforcement notices; Section 177(2) : Secretary of State’s power to grant planning permission on enforcement appeal; Section 226(2) : compulsory acquisition of land for planning purposes; Section 294(3) : special enforcement notices in relation to Crown land; Sched. 9 para (1) : minerals discontinuance orders.
DC®. BOARD 24/01/2013