TO:- Planning Committee Councillor Terry Mason , Councillor Michael Lawrence , Councillor Penny Allen , Councillor Len Bates B.E.M. , Councillor Chris Benton , Councillor Barry Bond M.B.E. , Councillor Mike Boyle , Councillor Jo Chapman , Councillor Bob Cope , Councillor Brian Cox , Councillor Matt Ewart , Councillor Isabel Ford , Councillor Rita Heseltine , Councillor Lin Hingley , Councillor Diane Holmes , Councillor Janet Johnson , Councillor Roger Lees J.P. , Councillor Dave Lockley , Councillor Robert Reade , Councillor Robert Spencer , Councillor Christopher Steel
Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Planning Committee will be held as detailed below for the purpose of transacting the business set out below.
Date: Tuesday, 20 July 2021 Time: 18:30 Venue: Virtual Meeting
D. Heywood Chief Executive
A G E N D A
Part I – Public Session
1 Minutes 1 - 2 To confirm the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 25 May 2021
2 Apologies To receive any apologies for non-attendance.
3 Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations of interest.
4 Determination of Planning Applications 3 - 136 Report of Development Management Team Manager
5 Monthly Update Report 137 - 150 Report of Lead Planning Manager
RECORDING Please note that this meeting will be recorded.
PUBLIC SPEAKING Please note: Any members of the public wishing to speak must confirm their intention to speak in writing or e-mail to Development Management no later than 1 working day before the Committee i.e. before 12.00 p.m. on the preceding Monday.
E-mails to [email protected]
Please see Speaking at Planning Committee leaflet on the website for full details. Failure to notify the Council of your intention to speak may mean you will not be allowed to speak at Committee.
PUBLIC ACCESS TO AGENDA AND REPORTS
Spare paper copies of committee agenda and reports are no longer available. Therefore should any member of the public wish to view the agenda or report(s) for this meeting, please go to www.sstaffs.gov.uk/council-democracy. 3 June 2021
Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee South Staffordshire Council held in the Council Chamber Council Offices, Wolverhampton Road, Codsall, South Staffordshire, WV8 1PX on Tuesday, 25 May 2021 at 18:30
Present:- Councillor Penny Allen, Councillor Len Bates, Councillor Barry Bond, Councillor Mike Boyle, Councillor Jo Chapman, Councillor Bob Cope, Councillor Brian Cox, Councillor Matt Ewart, Councillor Isabel Ford, Councillor Rita Heseltine, Councillor Lin Hingley, Councillor Diane Holmes, Councillor Janet Johnson, Councillor Michael Lawrence, Councillor Roger Lees, Councillor Dave Lockley, Councillor Terry Mason, Councillor Robert Reade, Councillor Robert Spencer, Councillor Christopher Steel
118 OFFICERS PRESENT Manjit Dhillon, Kelly Harris, Lucy Duffy, Amanda Willis
119 MINUTES RESOLVED: - that the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 20 April 2021 be approved and signed by the Chairman
120 APOLOGIES Apologies were received from Councillor C Benton
121 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest.
122 DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS The Committee received the report of the Development Management Team Manager, together with information and details received after the agenda was prepared.
20/00281/FUL - BROOKFIELD FARM, CANNOCK ROAD, SHARESHILL, WOLVERHAMPTON WV10 7LZ – APPLICANT – MR LES COMMINS – PARISH – SHARESHILL
Councillor B Cope, local member, was in support of the Planning Officer’s recommendation.
RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions contained in the Planning Officers Report.
21/00085/FUL – 25 LONG LANE, NEWTOWN, WALSALL WS6 6AT - APPLICANT – MR CRAIG MURPHY - PARISH – ESSINGTON
Mr Craig Murphy (applicant) spoke in support of the application.
Councillor C Steele as local member said that there were many different types and sizes of properties already on Long Lane. He believed the applicant’s personal circumstances should be taken into account and noted that there had been no objection from neighbours. He believed the proposed extension would not impact negatively on the street scene and was not therefore in contravention of policy EQ11 and he moved a motion
Page 1 of 150 3 June 2021
to approve the application.
The motion was seconded by Councillor Allen.
The Lead Planning Manager explained that the proposed extension did not meet acceptable design specifications.
The motion was defeated.
Councillor Cope abstained from voting.
RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED subject to the reasons contained in the Planning Officers Report.
Councillors Cope and Ford abstained from voting.
21/00329/FULL – 22 FARLEIGH ROAD, PERTON, WOLVERHAMPTON WV6 7RH – APPLICANT – MRS STEPHANIE HOLLANDS – PARISH – PERTON.
Councillor Allen said that queries raised by the Parish Council had been addressed and she supported the Planning Officer’s recommendation.
RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions contained in the Planning Officers Report.
123 MONTHLY UPDATE REPORT The Committee received the report of the Lead Planning Manager informing the committee on key matters including training; changes that impact on National Policy; any recent appeal decisions; relevant planning enforcement cases (quarterly); and latest data produced by the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government.
RESOLVED That the Committee note the update report.
The Meeting ended at: 19:30
CHAIRMAN
Page 2 of 150 SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMITTEE – 20 JULY 2021
DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS
REPORT OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT TEAM MANAGER
PART A – SUMMARY REPORT
1. SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
To determine the planning applications as set out in the attached Appendix.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 That the planning applications be determined.
3. SUMMARY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Do these proposals contribute to specific Council Plan objectives? The reasons for the recommendation for each POLICY/COMMUNITY Yes application addresses issued pertaining to the Council’s IMPACT Plan. Has an Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) been completed? Determination of individual planning applications so No not applicable- see below for equalities comment. SCRUTINY POWERS No APPLICABLE KEY DECISION No TARGET COMPLETION/ N/A DELIVERY DATE Unless otherwise stated in the Appendix, there are no FINANCIAL IMPACT No direct financial implications arising from this report.
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Planning (Consequential Provisions) Act 1990 LEGAL ISSUES Yes Planning (Hazardous Substances) Act 1990 Planning and Compensation Act 1991 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004
Page 3 of 150 Equality and HRA impacts set out below. OTHER IMPACTS, RISKS & Yes OPPORTUNITIES
IMPACT ON SPECIFIC As set out in Appendix Yes WARDS
PART B – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
4. INFORMATION
All relevant information is contained within the Appendix.
Advice to Applicants and the Public
The recommendations and reports of the Development Management Team Manager contained in this schedule may, on occasions, be changed or updated as a result of any additional information received by the Local Planning Authority between the time of its preparation and the appropriate meeting of the Authority.
Where updates have been received before the Planning Committee’s meeting, a written summary of these is published generally by 5pm on the day before the Committee Meeting. Please note that verbal updates may still be made at the meeting itself.
With regard to the individual application reports set out in the Appendix then unless otherwise specifically stated in the individual report the following general statements will apply.
Unless otherwise stated any dimensions quoted in the reports on applications are scaled from the submitted plans or Ordnance Survey maps.
Equality Act Duty
Unless otherwise stated all matters reported are not considered to have any adverse impact on equalities and the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 has been considered. Any impact for an individual application will be addressed as part of the individual officer report on that application.
Human Rights Implications
If an objection has been received to the application then the proposals set out in this report are considered to be compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998. The recommendation to approve the application aims to secure the proper planning of the area in the public interest. The potential interference with rights under Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol has been considered and the recommendation is considered to strike an appropriate balance between the interests of the applicant and those of the occupants of neighbouring property and is therefore proportionate. The issues arising have been considered in detail
Page 4 of 150 in the report and it is considered that, on balance, the proposals comply with Core Strategy and are appropriate.
If the application is recommended for refusal then the proposals set out in the report are considered to be compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998. The recommendation to refuse accords with the policies of the Core Strategy and the applicant has the right of appeal against this decision.
Consultations Undertaken
The results of consultations with interested parties, organisations, neighbours and Councillors are reported in each report in the Appendix.
CONSULTEES
CH – County Highways CLBO – Conservation Officer CPO – County Planning Officer CPRE – Campaign to Protect Rural England CPSO – County Property Services Officer CA – County Archaeologist CS – Civic Society EA – Environment Agency EHGS – Environmental Health Officer ENGS – Engineer FC – The Forestry Commission HA – Highways Agency LPM – Landscape Planning Manager HENGS – Engineer NE – Natural England PC – Parish Council OSS – Open Space Society STW – Severn Trent Water SWT – Staffordshire Wildlife Trust
5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
N/A
6. PREVIOUS MINUTES
Details if issue has been previously considered
7. BACKGROUND PAPERS
Background papers used in compiling the schedule of applications consist of:-
Page 5 of 150 (i) The individual planning application (which may include supplementary information supplied by or on behalf of the applicant) and representations received from persons or bodies consulted upon the application by the Local Planning Authority, and from members of the public and interested bodies, by the time of preparation of the schedule.
(ii) The Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended and related Acts, Orders and Regulations, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Planning Practice Guidance Notes, any Circulars, Ministerial Statements and Policy Guidance published by or on behalf of the Secretary of State for the Department for Communities and Local Government.
(iii) The Core Strategy for South Staffordshire adopted in December 2012 and Supplementary Planning Documents
(iv) Relevant decisions of the Secretary of State in relation to planning appeals and relevant decisions of the courts.
These documents are available for inspection by Members or any member of the public and will remain available for a period of up to 4 years from the date of the meeting, during the normal office hours. Requests to see them should be made to our Customer Services Officers on 01902 696000 and arrangements will be made to comply with the request as soon as practicable. The Core Strategy and the individual planning applications can be viewed on our web site www.sstaffs.gov.uk
Report prepared by: Sue Frith, Development Management Team Manager
Page 6 of 150
App no Applicant/Address Parish and Recommendation Page Ward Councillors 20/01045/FUL C/O Rob Phipps HIMLEY APPROVE Non Major Himley Country 9-34 Hotel Councillor 22 School Road Roger Lees Himley DUDLEY DY3 4LG 21/00038/FUL Mr And Mrs D WOMBOURNE APPROVE 35-42 Non Major Wilson 75 Sytch Lane Councillor Ken Wombourne Upton WOLVERHAMPTON WV5 0LB Councillor Reginald Williams
21/00268/FUL Mr John Giffard BREWOOD & APPROVE 43-54 Non Major Chillington Hall COVEN Chillington Park Chillington Councillor WOLVERHAMPTON Wendy Sutton WV8 1RE Councillor Joyce Bolton
Councillor Diane Holmes
21/00432/FUL Mr Philip Mobberley KINVER APPROVE 55-64 Non Major Bailiffs House Lawnswood Road Councillor Lawnswood Brian Edwards Staffordshire DY7 5QL Councillor Lin Hingley
Councillor Henry Williams
21/00437/COU Mr Nicholas CHESLYN HAY APPROVE 65-76 Non Major Piponides Lodge Farm Councillor Lodge Lane Mike Boyle Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire Councillor WS11 0LT Steve Hollis
21/00522/COU Mr Julian Wilson LAPLEY, APPROVE 77-86 Non Major Cross Styles STRETTON & Ivetsey Road WHEATON Wheaton Aston ASTON Staffordshire ST19 9QW Councillor Brian Cox
Councillor Venetia Jackson
Page 7 of 150 21/00604/VAR Mr Adrian PENKRIDGE APPROVE 87-96 Major Maclaughlin Dunston Business Councillor Village Josephine Stafford Road Chapman Penkridge Staffordshire 20/01131/OUT SFG/Peveril FEATHERSTONE APPROVE 97-136 Major Former Royal & BRINSFORD Ordnance Factory Cat And Kittens Councillor Lane And Frank Brookhouse Lane Beardsmore Featherstone Councillor Bob Cope
BREWOOD & COVEN
Councillor Wendy Sutton
Councillor Joyce Bolton
Councillor Diane Holmes
Page 8 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
20/01045/FUL CO/Rob Phipps HIMLEY Councillor R Lees
Himley Country Hotel, 22 School Road, Himley, Dudley DY3 4LG
The demolition of the former Hotel, and erection of 8 dwellings with garages and car parking, including the provision of 2no affordable dwellings, the refurbishment of the retained former School Building / Private Residence to a 2 Bed Bungalow with garage, together with private amenity and new gated private road from the existing access from School Road.
1. SITE DESCRIPTION, BACKGROUND AND PLANNING HISTORY
1.1 Site description and background
1.1.1 Himley Country Hotel lies on the northern side of School Lane and comprises of a hotel complex with associated parking facilities. The hotel has recently been used to accommodate the homeless and early release prisoners during the Covid-19 pandemic. Whilst the existing bar and restaurant is currently closed, it still, in effect, provides a community facility within the village of Himley.
1.1.2 The site occupies an elevated position fronting onto School Lane, with the former school building dominating the site frontage. This building is an attractive red brick structure with prominent chimney detailing and a central gable feature fronting onto School Lane. Although the former school building is not listed, it is clearly of historic interest, with the modern single storey additions to the hotel positioned to the side and rear of this building. The Himley Village and Parkland Conservation Area (CA) extends along the southern and eastern boundaries of the site, with the red sandstone wall which defines the boundary with School Lane situated within the CA itself. The Himley Country Hotel also lies within the West Midlands Green Belt.
1.2 Site History
1.2.1 09/00529/COU Change of use of hotel (C1) to welfare and rehabilitation centre (C2) (resubmission of 09/00208/COU) – Withdrawn.
09/00208/COU Change of use of hotel (C1) to welfare and rehabilitation centre (C2) – Withdrawn.
08/01051/COU Change of use from C1 (hotel) to C2 (residential training centre) – Approved.
06/00931/FUL – Single storey extension to existing restaurant area of hotel and internal alterations – Approved.
1.3 Pre-application discussions
Page 9 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
1.3.1 Whilst the proposal would conflict with Policy CP1 of the CS, having regard to national planning policy in the Framework, the scheme has the potential to provide a sustainable site for new housing development and not represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Further evidence is required regarding the potential loss of a community facility and revision to the housing mix.
2. APPLICATION DETAILS
2.1 The Proposal
2.1.1 Following the receipt of amended plans the proposal seeks to demolish the modern hotel buildings, leaving only that part referred to as the former school building as seen on plan number HCH/20.4; and erect 8 new dwellings, including 2no affordable properties to the side and rear of the former school building. The latter would be retained, and converted into a new dwelling, with an extension added, providing a stand-alone bungalow with integral garage. Including the refurbishment and extension of the former School House, a total of 9 properties would be provided on the site comprising of the following:
• Plot 1 – Refurbishment and extension of former School House to provide 2 bedroom bungalow (Bung); • Plots 2 & 9; 2 x 4 bed detached houses (A35); • Plots 3, 7 & 8; 4; 3x3 bed detached houses (A44); • Plot 4: 1 x 2 bedroom bungalows (B2); and • Plots 5-6 (affordable); 1x2bed semi-detached bungalow and 1 x 3 bed semi detached bungalow (AH2 and AH3).
2.1.2 In summary, the housing mix would comprise of:
• 2x 4 bed house; • 3 x 3 bed houses; • 1 x 3 bed bungalow (affordable); and • 3 x 2 bed bungalows (1 affordable).
2.1.3 The existing access off School Lane would be utilised to serve the development, with new entrance gates restricting access to the housing development.
2.1.4 During the application process, the following additional information/plans have been provided:
• Viability report relating to the sites existing use as a hotel with bar/restaurant; • Report referring to loss of hotel bed space; • Bat emergence surveys;
Page 10 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
• Drainage strategy; • On site affordable housing secured. 2.1.5 It is understood that the ownership and maintenance of the private driveway, private drainage, private entrance gates and landscaping to frontage of site, including the retention of the sandstone wall, will be managed by a residents Management Company, with each property on the development making a service charge contribution.
2.2 Agents Submissions:
Design and Access and Heritage Statement Planning Statement Drainage Strategy Loss of hotel bed space report Bat emergence report Arboricultural Impact Assessment Heritage Impact Statement
3. POLICY CONTEXT
3.1 The site lies adjacent to the Himley Village & Parkland Conservation Area and within the West Midlands Green Belt.
Adopted Core Strategy (CS) Strategic Objective 1: To protect and maintain the Green Belt and Open Countryside in order to sustain the distinctive character of South Staffordshire. Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design Policy EQ1 Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets Policy EQ3: Conservation, Preservation and Protection of Heritage Assets Policy EQ4 Protecting and enhancing the character and appearance of the Landscape Policy EQ5: Sustainable Resources and Energy Efficiency Policy EQ9 Protecting Residential Amenity Policy EQ11 Wider Design Considerations Core Policy 6: Housing delivery Policy H1: Achieving a Balanced Housing Market Policy H2: Provision of Affordable Housing Core Policy 7: Employment and Economic Development Policy EV2: Sustainable Tourism Policy EV9: Provision and Retention of Local Community Facilities and Services Policy EV12 Parking Provision
Page 11 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport Appendix 5 Car parking standards
South Staffordshire Design Guide (SPD)
Green Belt and Open Countryside Supplementary Planning Guidance (GBOC SPD) Affordable Housing SPD
National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) Chapters 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16
3.2 National Planning Policy Guidance
3.2.1 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise.
3.2.2 The law makes a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it is to be given. Whether a particular consideration is material will depend on the circumstances of the case and is ultimately a decision for the courts. Provided regard is had to all material considerations, it is for the decision maker to decide what weight is to be given to the material considerations in each case, and (subject to the test of reasonableness) the courts will not get involved in the question of weight.
4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
No Councillor comments
Himley Parish Council (25.01.2021) – Support the application which will support the village of Himley. However, concern is raised regarding the amount of parking available for these properties. Overflow parking in School Lane could become a future problem on an already very busy road.
Planning Policy and Housing Strategy (15.06.2021) – Following the receipt of the viability report and loss of hotel bed space statement, it is accepted that the existing hotel use is neither viable, nor provides essential bed space provision within the District. Taken together, the outstanding matters concerning policies EV2 and EV9 are now satisfied. The revised housing mix and provision of two on- site affordable units is also in accordance with Policies H1 and H2.
Conservation Officer (07.04.2021) - The site itself is located outside of, but immediately adjacent to the Himley Village and Parkland Conservation Area. There are no conservation objections to the demolition of the former hotel, which is not in keeping with the character of the area. The proposed dwellings are traditional in character and will not look out of place within the area. The retention of the wall to the front of the site is an important element of the character of the area. Whilst it appears from the information that this is to be retained, confirmation of this will be needed prior to the
Page 12 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021 determination of the application. Subject to the satisfactory agreement of the materials, it is felt that the proposed scheme would be an improvement to the setting of the conservation area. There are therefore no conservation objections to the proposals. The materials can either be submitted and agreed prior to the determination of the application or covered by conditions at the time of determination.
Arboricultural Officer (17.05.2021) – No objections, subject to conditions regarding the submission of a landscaping scheme, no tree removal and protective fencing.
National England (01.04.2021) – No objections.
County Ecologist (30.06.2021) – No objections, subject to conditions.
Staffs CC Highways (10.06.2021) – The proposed development is situated off School Road, an unclassified road subject to a speed limit of 30 mph. There have been no recorded vehicular accidents in this location in the last 5 years. The proposed dwellings will replace an existing use of a Hotel. Therefore, vehicular movements for the proposed development are likely to be less than the previous use.
No objections, subject to conditions regarding the reconstruction and completion of the existing access, provision of access drive and turning areas in accordance with the submitted plans and any gates being a minimum of 6m rear of the carriageway boundary and shall open away from the highway.
County Planning (19.03.2021) – No objections.
Environment Agency (19.03.2021) – No comments.
Coal Authority (19.03.2021) – No comments.
Staffordshire County Council Flood Risk Management Team (10.06.2021) – No objections subject to the implementation of the submitted drainage scheme.
Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service (08.01.2021) - Appropriate supplies of water for fire fighting and vehicle access should be provided at the site, as indicated in Approved Document B Volume 1 requirement B5, section 11. It is recommended that the roads and drives upon which appliances would have to travel in order to proceed to within 45 metres of any point within the property, should be capable of withstanding the weight of a Staffordshire firefighting appliance (G.V.W. of 17800 Kg).
In the interest of preventing deaths and injuries from fires within domestic dwellings Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service strongly recommend the provision of a sprinkler system to a relevant standard. Early consultation with the Fire Service when designing buildings which incorporate sprinklers may have a significant impact on reducing fire deaths and injuries in domestic premises and financial implications for all stakeholders.
Page 13 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
Severn Trent Water (13.01.2021) – No objections, subject to a condition requiring details of disposal of foul and surface water flows.
Crime Prevention Design Advisor (18.01.2021) – No objections.
46 letters of support and 1 letter (neutral), making the following observations: • Recently been issues with anti-social behaviour associated with the use of the site; • The hotel does not offer any benefit to the local community with alternative restaurants and public houses nearby; • The development would improve the appearance of the site; • Clarification needed regarding the retention of existing trees to ensure that the proposed houses do not overlook neighbouring properties; • The proposal would bring new families to the village; • Concerns that the scheme would represent overdevelopment of the site; • Plot 2 occupies an elevated position and would therefore be quite visible; • 30% affordable housing should be provided.
Site notice expired 13.04.2021
5. APPRAISAL
5.1 This application has been called into committee for consideration as it conflicts with Core Policy 1 of the CS regarding the location of new housing development.
6. Main Issues
6.1 The main issues in this case are: • Whether the proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt;
• Whether or not the site provides a sustainable location for new housing development;
• Whether the development would result in the loss of a local community facility/impact on hotel bedspace;
• Housing mix and affordable housing provision;
• Whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Himley Conservation Area, its setting and significance of other heritage assets;
• The effect of the proposal on ecology;
Page 14 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
• Whether the proposal would provide an acceptable living environment for existing and future residents;
• The effect of the proposed development on highway safety/parking;
• Whether or not the development would be adequately drained, or increase flood risk on the site and surrounding land; and
• Planning balance/conclusions
6.2 Whether inappropriate development in the Green Belt
6.2.1 Paragraph 145 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) confirms that local planning authorities should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate development in the Green Belt unless they fall under certain exceptions. Included in this list, and not therefore to be regarded as inappropriate development is ‘limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed land, whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would: ‒ not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development; or ‒ not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt, where the development would re-use previously developed land and contribute to meeting an identified affordable housing need within the area of the local planning authority.’
6.2.2 Although Policy GB1 of the South Staffordshire Core Strategy (CS) does not specifically refer to the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed land, its overall aim is to preserve the openness of the Green Belt which the Framework regards as open of the essential characteristics of the Green Belt. Thus, Policy GB1 of the CS is broadly consistent with the Framework in this respect.
6.2.3 The site comprises of an existing hotel complex with associated car park. It therefore represents previously developed land which is not inappropriate development under paragraph 145 of the Framework, providing it does not have a greater impact on openness than the existing development.
6.2.4 One of the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness. As set out in R. (on the application of Samuel Smith Old Brewery) v North Yorkshire CC [2020] UKSC 3 when accessing impact on openness it is possible to take into account both the spatial and visual impact of a development. 6.2.5 The proposal would involve the demolition of the existing part single storey, part two storey hotel building. Based on the submitted calculations, I understand that the buildings to be demolished total around 1876sqm, with the new properties and their associated garages together with the extension to the former School House totalling about 1803sqm. This represents a 73sqm or around 6% reduction in floor area when compared to the buildings to be demolished.
6.2.6 Whilst the new dwellings would extend across the site, the existing hotel complex comprises of a single building of considerable bulk and massing. By spreading smaller and less bulky residential
Page 15 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021 properties across the site which would all sit in relatively spacious garden plots, together with the removal of the extensive existing car parking area, the proposed scheme would have a reduced spatial impact than the building(s) it would replace. Furthermore, due to the position of the proposed dwellings set back from School Lane, subject to additional landscaping, the proposal would also not have a harmful visual impact.
6.2.7 For the above reasons, the proposal as presented would not have a greater impact on openness than the existing development. It would not therefore represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
6.3 Sustainable location
6.3.1 The site lies within an existing ribbon of development on the northern side of School Lane, around 100m metres east of the Himley Development Boundary, as defined in the Council’s Site Allocations Document (SAD). Himley is classified as an ‘other village or hamlet’ in the South Staffordshire Core Strategy (CS), the lowest tier of settlements identified within the Council’s Settlement Hierarchy. Such settlements are not identified for growth under Policy CP1 of the CS except for the provision of rural affordable housing to meet identified local needs. The proposal is not purely for rural affordable housing and would therefore conflict with Policy CP1.
6.3.2 Notwithstanding the above, paragraph 78 of the Framework seeks to promote sustainable development in rural areas, with housing being located where it will enhance or maintain the viability of rural communities. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby. Paragraph 79 of the Framework states that planning decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless certain circumstances apply (those cited are not relevant to this case).
6.3.3 The site lies within an existing ribbon of development on School Lane, just outside the village of Himley. It is flanked by a care home which extends back significantly from the road and existing residential development. Given that the premises forms part of an established cluster of development, I do not consider that it is physically isolated. However, to establish whether or not the development would be ‘functionally isolated’, it will be necessary to assess how accessible the proposed residential use would be.
6.3.4 There are several local services in Himley including a church, public house and recreation ground. Nevertheless, for their daily needs (i.e. shops selling essential items, schools, employment opportunities and medical facilities), potential future occupiers would need to travel to larger nearby villages and towns such as Wombourne, Wall Heath and Stourbridge. Wombourne is located around 1 kilometre from the site, with a footway linking School Lane to this Main Service village and the variety of services it offers. Therefore, potential future occupiers of the development may be inclined to walk or cycle to access these facilities in Wombourne.
Page 16 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
6.3.5 I note from the supporting documentation that there is an existing bus stop on the A449, around 800m from the site. The submitted information indicates that this bus stop is served by the National Express service 15, providing a regular bus service between Wolverhampton and Merry Hill, including stops in Wombourne. As such, alternative public transport options to the private motor car would be available for future residents. Given the relatively modest scale of the proposal, it is also possible that the development would result in a reduction in vehicular movements when compared with the existing use, enhancing its sustainability.
6.3.6 Overall, despite the conflict with Policy CP1 of the CS, I find that the proposal would not introduce isolated homes in the countryside. It would also, through the construction and occupation of the new units make a small, albeit important contribution to the viability and vitality of services in Himley and other nearby villages.
6.4 Loss of community facility/hotel bedspace
6.4.1 Policy EV9 of the CS seeks to support and enhance essential community facilities and services where they make an important contribution to the vitality of the place and quality of life/wellbeing of local communities and the maintenance of sustainable communities. Proposals for redevelopment or change of use of any premises currently used or last used to provide essential facilities or services which support the local community, will only be permitted where the Council is satisfied that: a) it has been demonstrated through a viability test that the use concerned is no longer economically viable, that all reasonable efforts have been made to sell or let the property at a realistic price for a period of at least 12 months, the use could not be provided by some other means, or is genuinely redundant; and b) the premises or site or an unused part of the building cannot readily be used for, or converted to any other community facility; or c) the facility or service which will be lost will be adequately supplied or met by an easily accessible existing or new facility in the local area or the village concerned, unless it has been accepted as redundant under criterion (a) above; and d) the facility concerned was not required to be provided and or retained as part of a planning permission for a new development.
6.4.2 The Himley Country Hotel and its associated restaurant/bar is an existing community facility. In order for the proposal to satisfy the requirements of Policy EV9, it will be necessary to demonstrate through a viability test that the use is no longer economically viable and that all reasonable attempts have been made to sell or let the property at a realistic property for a period of at least 12 months. In addition, it will be necessary to confirm that either the premises cannot readily be used for or converted to any other community facility; or the facility or service which will be lost will be adequately supplied or met by an easily accessible existing or new facility in the local area or the
Page 17 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
village concerned, unless it has been accepted as redundant under criterion (a). Finally, it must also be confirmed that the facility concerned was not required to be provided and or retained as part of a planning permission for a new development.
6.4.3 In addition to the above, it is also important to establish if the loss of existing hotel bed space is acceptable within the context of the overall provision of tourist bed spaces within the District. The tourist accommodation sector in South Staffordshire continues to perform strongly when compared against the equivalent regional and national data. Indeed, local and regional policy also continues to outline the importance of tourism as a key economic sector (notwithstanding the Covid-19 implications) and commits to supporting and developing the sector as opposed to identifying a saturation. As such, it is clear that uses underpinning the tourism sector should be protected as the evidence and policy suggest they are viable.
6.4.4 It is the case of the applicant in their ‘analysis of loss of hotel bed space statement’ that the existing bed spaces are now redundant (or already lost) due to nearby competition and other loss of trade. Moreover, the applicant also considers current quality of provision is of such low a standard that custom cannot be sustained. Whilst these arguments are noted, they do not constitute acceptable grounds for the loss of tourist bed spaces – and indeed alternative management may have made a success of the business.
6.4.5 However, by introducing some important considerations which enable the application to be looked at in the balance, there are legitimate justifications as to the loss of bed spaces – despite being of relatively significant loss at x70 bed spaces. As it stands, the viability report concludes that the capital expenditure required to refurbish the property to the required standard far exceeds the potential value of a profit-making entity, failing to provide a sufficient return on investment. This, coupled with the strong local competition (Dudley Arms and Himley House Hotel), geographical location, and site characteristics mean it is highly unattractive to any required experienced operator. This is compounded by the likely cautiousness in the hospitality sector over the forthcoming years as a result of Covid-19.
6.4.6 It is therefore concluded that the existing hotel use is neither viable, nor provides essential bed space provision within the District. Similarly, the cost of refurbishing and bringing the public bar back into use, its location and alternative provision within the immediate area (Dudley Arms and Himley House Hotel) would also mean that the bar is no longer viable and the community need is already met by other facilities in the locality. Taken together, I am satisfied that the exceptions tests set out in Policy EV9 have been met and as such, there is no objection to the loss of this community bar facility or loss of existing hotel bedspace.
6.5 Housing mix and affordable housing
6.5.1 Policy H1 of the CS requires new housing development to provide a mixture of housing sizes, types and tenures in order to meet the needs of different groups of the community. The provision of
Page 18 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021 more 2 and 3 bedroom homes is particularly encouraged across all market areas of the district in order to better balance the local housing market. Mix should also be informed by local need as identified in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA). The 2017 SHMA indicates in this area:
• Market housing – there is a significant need for 3 bedroom homes, followed by 2 bedroom homes. There is also a small need for 1 and 4 bedroom properties. • Affordable housing – the main need is for 2 bedroom homes, followed by a need for all other property sizes
6.5.2 Following the receipt of amended plans, the proposal would provide the following mix:
• 2x 4 bed houses • 3 x 3 bed houses • 1 x 3 bed bungalow (affordable) • 3 x 2 bed bungalows (1 affordable). 6.5.3 The above revised housing mix meets the needs in the District. 6.5.4 In terms of assessing the affordable housing requirement, where residential development is proposed in a settlement classed as an ‘other village or hamlet’ in the settlement hierarchy, as is the case with Himley, the scheme will be treated on the same basis as those in small service village for their affordable housing provision (as per Paragraph 2.4 of the Affordable Housing SPD). An affordable housing contribution is required in this instance, as Policy H2 confirms that proposals of 2 or more dwellings qualify for affordable housing contribution.
6.5.5 The same policy provides that proposals for between 5 and 9 dwellings will be expected to contribute 20% affordable units on-site. The SPD indicates that the affordable housing tenure provision should be split equitably between social rent and shared ownership (with the balance in favour of social rent where an odd number of affordable units are to be provided) as set out in paragraph 2.5 of the SPD. On this occasion, the mathematical calculation equates to a requirement to deliver 2 affordable units. As such, this application is expected to provide onsite; 1 unit for social rent, and 1 unit for shared ownership in order to be complaint with planning policy.
6.5.6 The application has been amended to include 1 x 3 bedroom semi-detached bungalow (Shared Ownership – Plot 5, house type AH3) and 1 x 2 bedroom semi-detached bungalow (Social rent – Plot 6, house type AH2). As such, the proposal provides an appropriate level of on-site affordable housing and therefore accords with Policy H2 of the CS and the SPD. The provision of the aforementioned affordable housing will be secured through a S106 agreement.
6.6 Character and appearance
6.6.1 The existing sandstone wall which extends along the School Lane road frontage of the site lies within the Himley Conservation Area (CA), with the remaining part of the hotel complex site adjoining
Page 19 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021 the CA. Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act) states that in CA’s: ‘special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area’. Policy EQ3 of the CS and paragraph 192 of the Framework seek to encourage measures which secure the improved maintenance, management and sustainable reuse of heritage assets and sustain and enhance the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation.
6.6.2 The School House is an attractive red brick structure with prominent chimney detailing and a central gable feature fronting onto School Lane. Although the former school building lies outside the CA and is not a listed building, it has retained its original features and is clearly of historic interest. Therefore, I consider that the School House represents a non-designated heritage asset which, when weighing applications which directly or indirectly affect such assets, paragraph 197 of the Framework states that a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.
6.6.3 The proposal seeks to retain the former School House and demolish the attached modern buildings which currently make up the hotel complex. A new extension would be added to the former School House to provide a two-bedroom bungalow with integral garage. Eight detached and semi- detached houses and bungalows would spread across the site, with the detached property on plot 2 situated alongside the School House, addressing the School Road frontage and following the existing building line of properties on this side of the street.
6.6.4 The proposed layout, through the removal of the large modern hotel buildings and its replacement with a number of smaller residential properties set within relatively spacious landscaped plots, enhances the overall appearance of the site, the setting of the CA and the significance of the non-designated asset. Whilst the site occupies an elevated position above School Lane, the proposed dwellings would be set back on the plot, with the existing sandstone wall and landscaping along the road frontage to be retained. There is also scope to further strengthen the existing trees/hedgerows in this area through additional planting. This would help preserve the verdant character and setting of the CA and important physical features within it (i.e. the sandstone wall). As confirmed by the Conservation and Arboricultural Officer’s in their consultation responses, such matters (retention of the wall and additional landscaping) can be secured by condition. Similarly, details of all facing materials, boundary treatments and details of the proposed entrance gates can be secured by condition.
6.6.5 Turning to the design of the proposed dwellings, plot 2 which fronts onto School Lane is particularly important as it will be clearly visible from views out of the CA. This house type consists of a large-detached dwelling with a simple pitched roof, front porch and chimney detailing which would reflect the local vernacular and enhance the appearance of the front of the site when viewed from School Lane. Similarly, the house types on plots 3-9 would also incorporate similar design features and follow the form, scale and proportions of other existing residential development in School Lane. As
Page 20 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021 such, the proposed layout would respect the established pattern of the built form in this part of Himley and therefore enhance the appearance of land which directly adjoins the CA.
6.6.6 The alterations to the former School House would be subordinate to the original building, with the prominent principal elevation which incorporates important original design detailing and fronts onto School Lane being retained in its current form. As such, the proposal would preserve the significance of the former School House, a non-designated heritage asset.
6.6.7 The proposed development would be a gated community, with access restricted through the introduction of controlled gates on the main driveway. Paragraph 127 of the Framework seeks to provide safe, inclusive, and accessible places which, amongst other things do not undermine community cohesion. Whilst it may be argued that controlling public access could help provide a safe and secure environment for future occupiers, it would not contribute positively to community cohesion through providing an inclusive and accessible place. This element of the layout is regrettable. That said, I understand that there have been significant issues with anti-social behaviour associated with the use of the hotel in recent years. Clearly the redevelopment of the site for housing would remove these issues and therefore overall provide a significant benefit in terms of community cohesion.
6.6.8 Notwithstanding my conclusions regarding the gated access to the development, the scheme overall would improve the appearance of the site and thereby preserve and potentially enhance the setting of the CA and the significance of the former School House, a non-designated asset. In this respect and providing permitted development rights are removed for the dwellings on plots 1 and 2 which impact on an existing non-designated heritage asset and adjoin the CA, it would accord with Policy EQ3 of the CS, the expectations of the Act and Framework.
6.7 Ecology
6.7.1 The Framework seeks to minimise impacts and provide net gains in biodiversity. This is echoed within Policy EQ1 (Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets) which states that permission will be granted for development that does not cause significant harm to sites or habitats of nature conservation.
6.7.2 The existing buildings and landscape features (i.e. trees/hedgerows) could provide an appropriate habitat for a range of species. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal has been submitted with this application and indicates that there is a reasonable likelihood that bat roosts may be present and negatively affected by the proposals. Due to the location, the nature of the development and the features of the building there is a high likelihood that bat roosts may be present and negatively affected by the proposals. As such, the County Ecologist recommended that Bat Emergence Surveys (BES) are submitted to establish the potential impact on bats.
Page 21 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
6.7.3 BES have now been undertaken and confirm that bats were seen emerging from and re-entering certain buildings on the site, which suggests the presence of a summer roost for a relatively low number of male and/or non-breeding female bats rather than a maternity roost. As the proposal would result in the demolition of the existing buildings, the roosts present will be destroyed, with the potential for direct harm to any bats present during works.
6.7.4 As the BES results indicate that a European Protected Species (2 species of bats) is likely to be present, the proposed development is likely to result in an offence under the Conservation of Species & Habitats Regulations 2017 (CSHR). The Council therefore has a duty to consider whether the proposal would be likely to secure a licence. To do so the proposals must meet with the three derogation tests which are: 1. There are imperative reasons of overriding public interest (e.g. health and safety, economic or social); 2. There is no satisfactory alternative; 3. The action will have no detrimental impact upon population of the species concerned e.g. because adequate compensation is being provided.
6.7.5 Having reviewed the submitted evidence, officers are satisfied that in this case there are imperative reasons for overriding public interest (i.e. social benefits from the removal of the existing use which is causing issues with anti-social behaviour/community cohesion, need for new housing etc) and there are no satisfactory alternative sites for the development. Moreover, and importantly, the County Ecologist has confirmed that the submitted BES demonstrates that adequate mitigation can be provided to ensure that the development would not adversely impact on bats. These measures include conditions ensuring that a licence is issued by the relevant licensing body prior to demolition works, provision of bat tubes and boxes, together with details of any external lighting to ensure the development does not adversely impact on bat routes/flight paths. As such, the three derogation tests have been met. Conditions relating to soft landscaping works and the provision of bird boxes can also deliver biodiversity enhancements within the scheme.
6.7.6 For the reasons set out above, whilst it is acknowledged that European Protected Species (bats) are likely to be present, subject to the aforementioned mitigation measures, the proposal would satisfy the requirements of the CSHR and local and national planning policy relating to protected species and measures to ensure biodiversity enhancement.
6.8 Residential amenity
6.8.1 Policies EQ9 and EQ11 of the CS seek to ensure that development takes into account the amenity of nearby residents. These policies are broadly consistent with the Framework objectives to ensure that development provides a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.
Existing occupiers
Page 22 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
6.8.2 Plot 1 lies immediately adjacent to No 20 School Lane. Although the extensions to the former School House to form the proposed 2-bedroom bungalow on plot 1 would extend out towards the boundary, these additions would be set back from No 20. They would also be modest single storey extensions, further limiting their visual impact on the neighbouring property. Therefore, the alterations to the former School House would not have a detrimental impact on the outlook from or level of daylight/sunlight received into the rear facing rooms and garden of No 20. Similarly, there would be no new window openings in the flank elevation of this property which would impact on the privacy of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling. Although plots 4, 5 and 6 would back onto the long rear garden serving No 20, these units would be single storey bungalows, meaning they would not adversely impact on the privacy of No 20’s rear garden.
6.8.3 To the west of the site is the Himley Mill Nursing Home, with plots 8 and 9 extending out adjacent to along the boundary with the care home. As the latter is set in off the common boundary, the new two storey dwellings would not appear visually intrusive when viewed from the nursing home, especially taking into account the existing boundary planting which is to be retained. No window openings would be positioned in the dwelling on plot 9 which directly overlook Himley Mill, thereby preserving the residential amenities of the occupiers.
6.8.4 Plot 8 would be set in from the boundary with the nursing home, and its narrow gable end would face Himley Mill. No main habitable room windows would be positioned in this elevation. Therefore, plot 8 would not have an adverse visual impact on or adversely impact on the privacy of the occupiers of the nursing home.
6.8.5 Due to their position on the site and relationship to adjacent properties, plots 2, 3 and 7 would not adversely impact on the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers.
Proposed occupiers
6.8.6 Turning to the living environment that would be provided for future occupiers, the proposed dwellings would all accord with the internal space standards set out in the NDSS and guidelines for outdoor amenity space in Appendix 6 of the CS. The separation distances between the units would also comply with the Council’s Space About Dwellings Standards which seek to provide sufficient space between dwellings to ensure that the amenities of potential future occupiers are not compromised.
6.8.7 Taking account of the above considerations, I find that the development would provide an acceptable living environment for both existing and prospective occupiers. Consequently, the scheme would accord with Policy EQ9 and EQ11 of the CS and the Framework objective, to provide a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.
6.9 Highway safety/parking
Page 23 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
6.9.1 The existing access off School Lane would be utilised to serve the proposed development, with new entrance gates controlling access into the site. A new internal private driveway and turning areas to be provided within the development site serving the proposed plots.
6.9.2 The proposed dwellings would replace the existing hotel. Given the relatively modest number of dwellings to be provided on site, as confirmed by the highway authority, it is likely that the proposed vehicular movements associated with the development would be less than the existing use. Moreover, the highway authority is satisfied that the access and turning areas to be provided within the site allow appropriate provision for vehicles to pass and re-pass and manoeuvre, enabling users to exit the site in a forward gear. Thus, subject to conditions securing the reconstruction and completion of the existing access, parking and turning areas, and requirement for any gates being positioned a minimum of 6m rear of the carriageway boundary, the proposal would provide safe and suitable access to the site for all users. As such, it would accord with paragraphs 108 and 109 of the Framework.
6.9.3 Turning to the proposed parking arrangements, all of the proposed dwellings would satisfy the Council parking guidelines set out in Appendix 5 of the CS.
6.10 Flooding/drainage
6.10.1 Paragraph 163 of the Framework requires new development to consider the risk of flooding to the site and elsewhere. The site lies within Flood Zone 1, land with a low risk of flooding. That said, in order to demonstrate that the site can be adequately drained, a drainage strategy incorporating sustainable drainage systems (SUDs) has been submitted which demonstrates how both foul and surface water would be disposed of. This includes re-routing of existing surface water which currently runs off the site into the public highway and use of soakaways to drain the new private road and houses. The private estate and its associated drainage infrastructure is to be maintained by a residents Management Company. The LLFA is satisfied that the details contained in the drainage strategy are sufficient to ensure that the site is adequately drained and does not increase flood risk on the site or surrounding land. As such, the proposal would accord with Policy EQ7 of the CS and the Framework in this respect.
7. PLANNING BALANCE/CONCLUSIONS
7.1.1 The proposal does not represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Whilst it would provide new residential development outside a settlement identified for housing growth in the Council settlement hierarchy, contrary to Policy CP1 of the CS, I have found that overall, that the site would represent a sustainable location for new housing having regard to the Framework’s policies. Moreover, it has been demonstrated through an appropriate viability assessment and associated supporting information that the existing hotel use, and public bar is neither viable, nor provides an essential community facility or bed space provision within the District, with existing alternative facilities in the locality meeting these needs. Taken together, I am satisfied that the exceptions tests set out in Policy EV9 have been met and as such, there is no objection to the loss of this community facility (public bar) nor loss of existing hotel bedspace.
Page 24 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
7.1.2 The scheme would also achieve an appropriate housing mix, including the delivery of on-site affordable housing, in accordance with Policies H1 and H2 of the CS and guidance in the SPD. It would also preserve the character and appearance of the area, including the CA and remove the existing use which has caused significant issues with anti-social behavior, benefitting community cohesion. In addition, the proposal would provide an acceptable living environment for both existing and future occupiers, not have a detrimental impact on highway safety, ecology or increased flood risk on the site or surrounding land.
7.1.3 For the reasons set out above, I find that despite the conflict with Policy CP1 of the CS, the proposal overall provides a sustainable location for new housing development and accords with all other policies contained in the development plan and national planning policy in the Framework. Permission is therefore recommended.
8. RECOMMENDATION
8.1 Based on the conclusions above, the recommendation to the Planning Committee on this application is that DELEGATED AUTHORITY be granted to the Lead Planning Manager to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to:
a) The Applicants entering into a S106 agreement with the Council to secure the necessary on- site affordable housing b) The following conditions (with authority to finalise conditions to be delegated to Lead Planning Manager)
Conditions
1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: • HCH-01 Location Plan received 23/11/2020 • HCH/20.4 – Planning Layout received 25/05/2021 • HCH/21.4 – Coloured planning Layout received 25/05/2021 • HCH/22.4 – Planning Layout- impermeable areas received 25/05/2021 • HCH/24.4 – Planning Layout – garden sizes received 25/05/2021 • HCH/20.4 – Planning Layout received 25/05/2021 • HCH/26.4 – Planning Layout – affordable housing received 25/05/2021 • KH/01/21/100 – 2 bedroom bungalow received 23/11/2020 • HCH-15 – A44 3 bed ‘The Thornbury’ received 22/04/2021 • HCH-10 - A35 4 bed ‘The Brookthorpe received 22/04/2021 • HCH -16 2 bed detached bungalow received 16/06/2021 • HCH-17 - 2 bed bungalow received 25/05/2021
Page 25 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
• HCH-18 – 3 bed bungalow received 25/05/2021 • KH/01/21/101 Rev B Double detached garage received 24/06/2021 • KH/01/21/103 Rev A Double detached garage received 24/06/2021 • Drainage Strategy V6 received 25/05/2021 • Landscape Strategy V3 received 15/03/2021 • Arboricultural Impact Assessment received 23/11/2020 3. No works hereby approved shall be commenced, until full details of the following have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority: • the bricks to be used in the construction of the external walls; • the render to be used on the external walls; • the exterior roof materials; • full details consisting of sections at a minimum scale of 1:5 and elevations at 1:20, of all external joinery including fenestration and doors and proposed exterior finish; • full details including a sample panel of the mortar mix, colour, gauge of jointing and pointing; • full details of the eaves detailing; • full details of the brick bond to be used; • full details of rainwater goods, their materials and designs; and • full details of the design, materials to be used and external finish of the entrance gates to the site.
4. This permission does not grant or imply consent for the demolition or alterations to the wall along the School Road frontage of the site.
5. No development shall commence until details of hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. These details shall include: • a statement setting out the design objectives and how these will be delivered; • earthworks showing existing and proposed finished levels or contours; • means of enclosure and retaining structures; • boundary treatments and means of enclosure between plots; • hard surfacing materials; • permeable surfacing materials; • proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (e.g. drainage, power, communication cables, pipelines etc) indicating alignments, levels, access points, supports as relevant); • retained historic features (i.e. boundary wall along School Lane) and proposals for restoration, where relevant; • details of soft landscaping works shall include planting plans; including details suitable for pollinating insects, non-hybrid and single flowering types, together with climbing plants; written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass
Page 26 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
establishment); schedules of plants noting species, plant supply sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; and • an implementation programme. The landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before any part of the development is first occupied in accordance with the agreed implementation programme. The completed scheme shall be managed and maintained in accordance with an approved scheme of management and maintenance.
6. Before the development is first occupied or brought into use a landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved.
7. No existing trees, shrubs or hedges on the site or its boundaries shall be pruned in any way or cut down for a period of 10 years following completion of the development without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. If any the existing planting is removed or dies within 5 years of completion of the development it shall be replaced with the same species (or alternative agreed with the Council) within 12 months of its removal and as close to the original position as possible (or elsewhere in a position agreed with the Council). The existing and any replacement planting shall be maintained for a period of 10 years respectively from completion of the development or time of planting to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
8. Before the development commences the existing trees, shrubs and hedges on the site shall be protected by fencing constructed in accordance with BS 5837:2012 (trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - recommendations) in positions to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority which shall be retained throughout the development of the site in the approved positions.
9. Before development commences all construction work, drainage runs and other excavations within the protective fencing/root protection areas of the trees shown to be retained on the approved plan shall be agreed by the Local Planning Authority. All work shall be carried out in accordance with BS 5837:2012 (trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - recommendations).
10. The destruction by burning of any materials during the construction period shall not take place within 6 metres of the canopy spread of any trees or hedges shown to be retained on the approved plans.
11. There shall be no storage of construction materials or equipment or oil tanks within the protective fencing/root protection areas of the trees or hedges shown to be retained on the approved plans.
12. Before development commences full details of the finished levels, above ordinance datum, of the ground floor(s) of the proposed building(s), in relation to existing ground levels have been submitted
Page 27 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021 to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved levels.
13. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the approved drainage scheme shown in the following documents has been implemented:
Drainage Strategy - V5-635396-635397 (28/04/2021)
Thereafter, the drainage scheme shall be retained and maintained in accordance with the submitted management and maintenance plan in section 4 of the drainage strategy by Knarsboro Homes.
14. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the existing access to the site within the limits of the public highway has been reconstructed and completed.
15. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive, parking, servicing and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans.
16. Any gates shall be located a minimum of 6.0m rear of the carriageway boundary and shall open away from the highway.
17. The details pursuant to this planning permission shall comprise the following housing mix:
Market housing 2 x 4 bed houses 3 x 3 bed houses 2 x 2 bed bungalows
Affordable housing
1 x 2 bed bungalow 1 x 3 bed bungalow The above affordable housing mix is split 50:50 between social rent and shared ownership.
18. No demolition works to existing buildings on the site shall commence unless the local planning authority has been provided with either: a. a licence issued by [the relevant licensing body] pursuant to Regulation 55 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 authorizing the specified activity/development to go ahead; or b. a statement in writing from the relevant licensing body to the effect that it does not consider that the specified activity/development will require a licence.
Page 28 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
19. No development shall commence until details of biodiversity enhancement measures including 2 groups of 3 number swift boxes on or integrated into north facing brickwork of the new buildings as appropriate shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved measures shall be incorporated into the scheme and be fully constructed prior to occupation of the buildings and retained as such thereafter.
20. No development shall commence until details of the type and location of biodiversity enhancement measures including 2 number house sparrow terraces on or integrated into north- or east- facing brickwork of the new buildings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved measures shall be incorporated into the scheme and be fully constructed prior to occupation of the buildings and retained as such thereafter.
21. No development shall commence until details of biodiversity enhancement measures including 2 number integrated bat tubes or bat boxes within the new buildings, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved measures shall be incorporated into the scheme and be fully constructed prior to occupation of the buildings and retained as such thereafter.
22. Any external lighting scheme must be installed, designed in accordance with Bat Conservation Trust / Institution of Lighting Professionals Guidance Note 08/18 Bats and artificial lighting in the UK with the details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of development. This should including a lighting contour plan that demonstrates there will be minimal impact on receptor habitats such as trees and bat boxes. Any approved external lighting shall be incorporated into the scheme and be fully constructed prior to occupation of the buildings and retained as such thereafter.
23. Removal of vegetation and demolition of buildings shall be undertaken outside of bird nesting season (1st March to end August.) If this is not possible then a suitably qualified ecologist shall check the areas concerned immediately prior to the clearance works to ensure that no nesting or nest-building birds are present. If any nesting birds are present, then the vegetation or buildings shall not be removed until the fledglings have left the nest.
24. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended), or any other subsequent equivalent order, no development within the following classes of development shall be carried out to the dwellings on Plots 1 and 2 hereby approved without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority:
a. Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A – enlargement, improvement or other alteration b. Schedule 2, Part 1, Class B – addition or alteration to the roof
Page 29 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
c. Schedule 2, Part 1, Class C – any other alteration to the roof d. Schedule 2, Part 1, Class D – porches e. Schedule 2 Class AA – enlargement of a dwellinghouse by construction of additional storeys f. Schedule 2 Class AD – new dwellinghouses or detached buildings in use as dwellinghouses.
Reasons.
1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
3. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area in accordance with Policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
4. To preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, in accordance with Policy EQ3 of the Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.
5. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area and enhance biodiversity, in accordance with Policies EQ1 and EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
6. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area, in accordance with Policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
7- 11. To preserve existing landscape features, in accordance with Policy EQ4 of the adopted Core Strategy.
12. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area, in accordance with Policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
13. To reduce the risk of surface water flooding to the development and properties downstream for the lifetime of the development, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.
14. In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Staffordshire County Council requirements for a vehicular access crossing and the National Planning Policy Framework.
15. In the interest of highway safety and to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework.
16. In the interest of highway safety and to accord with the National Planning Policy Framework.
17. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
Page 30 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
18, 19 and 20. To ensure that protected species are protected, in accordance with The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.
21, 22 and 23. To ensure that the scheme protects and enhances biodiversity, in accordance with Policy EQ1 and the National Planning Policy Framework.
24. To preserve the character and appearance of the adjacent Conservation Area and non-designated Heritage Asset, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.
Informatives for Decision Notice.
European Protected Species (to include in Committee/Delegated reports as an Annex, not on Decision Notices) The Local Planning Authority in exercising any of their functions, have a legal duty to have regard to the requirements of the Conservation of Species & Habitats Regulations 2017, as amended by The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, which identifies 4 main offences for development affecting European Protected Species (EPS). 1. Deliberate capture or killing or injuring of an EPS 2. Deliberate taking or destroying of EPS eggs 3. Deliberate disturbance of a EPS including in particular any disturbance which is likely a. to impair their ability – i. to survive, to breed or reproduce, or to rear or nurture their young, or ii. in the case of animals of a hibernating or migratory species, to hibernate or migrate; or b. to affect significantly the local distribution or abundance of the species to which they belong. 4. Damage or destruction of an EPS breeding site or resting place.
Ecological survey results indicate that a European Protected Species (2 species of bats) is likely to be present. The proposed development is likely to result in an offence under the Conservation of Species & Habitats Regulations 2017. Officers therefore have a duty to consider whether the proposal would be likely to secure a licence. To do so the proposals must meet with the three derogation tests which are:
1. There are imperative reasons of overriding public interest (e.g. health and safety, economic or social) 2. There is no satisfactory alternative 3. The action will have no detrimental impact upon population of the species concerned e.g. because adequate compensation is being provided.
Your officers are of the opinion that the submitted evidence satisfies the three derogation tests because
Page 31 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
1. Reason for overriding public interest – need for housing and the social and environmental benefits to the local community from the redevelopment of this site. 2. No satisfactory alternative. 3. Bat surveys have demonstrated that adequate mitigation can be provided for the species present
Recommendation
The evidence submitted clearly demonstrates that the three derogation tests are likely to be met and given this, your officers are of the opinion that Natural England are likely to grant a licence. As such the LPA do not need to consider this matter further. It is however recommended that conditions are used to secure the bat loft design and require submission of the licence. Please note for the use or reuse of sewer connections either direct or indirect to the public sewerage system the applicant will be required to make a formal application to the Company under Section 106 of the Water Industry Act 1991. They may obtain copies of our current guidance notes and application form from either our website (www.stwater.co.uk) or by contact our Development Services Team (Tel: 0800 707 6600). i). The reconstruction of the existing vehicular access shall require a Highway Works Agreement with Staffordshire County Council. The applicant is requested to contact Staffordshire County Council in order to secure the Agreement. The link below is to the Highway Works Information Pack including an application Form. Please complete and send to the address indicated on the application Form or email to ([email protected]). The applicant is advised to begin this process well in advance of any works taking place in order to meet any potential timescales.https://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/Highways/highwayscontrol/HighwaysWorkAgreements.a spx ii). This consent will require approval under Section 7 of the Staffordshire Act 1983 and will require exemption under Section 219 of the Highways Act 1980. The road will remain private in perpetuity and must be maintained by a maintenance management company. Please contact Staffordshire County Council to ensure that approvals and agreements are secured before commencement of works.
Proactive Statement
In dealing with the application, the Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems in relation to dealing with the planning application, in accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2018.
Page 32 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20/07/2021
Himley Country Hotel, 22 School Road, Himley, Dudley DY3 4LG
Page 33 of 150
Page 34 of 150 Gemma Smith - Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 20 July 2021
21/00038/FUL Mr And Mrs D Wilson WOMBOURNE Councillor K Upton Councillor R Williams
75 Sytch Lane Wombourne WOLVERHAMPTON WV5 0LB
Proposed extensions
1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY
1.1 Application Site
1.1.1 The application site relates to a detached two-storey dwelling set within a large plot on Sytch Lane. The dwelling is characterised by fronting dormer windows. The dwellinghouse is located within the defined development boundary for Wombourne.
1.2 Planning History
03/00297/FUL -Alterations and extensions to provide porch, store at first floor and pitched roofs on dormers. Granted, subject to Conditions - 28.04.2003.
2.APPLICATIONS DETAILS
2.1 Planning permission is sought for a two-storey side extension along with amendments to the principal elevation, altering an exiting pitched roof dormer window to replace with a forward facing gable with full length doors at first floor serving a Juliet balcony.
3. POLICY CONTEXT
3.1The site is located within the Wombourne Development Boundary.
3.2 Adopted South Staffordshire Core Strategy, 2012. o Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy for South Staffordshire o Core Policy 3: Sustainable Development and Climate Change o Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity o Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design o Policy EQ11: Wider Design Considerations o Policy EQ12: Landscaping o Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport o Policy EV12: Parking Provision o Appendix 5: Parking Standards o Appendix 6: SAD Standards
3.3 Adopted Local Guidance o South Staffordshire Design Guide, 2018 o Sustainable Development SPD, 2018
Page 35 of 150 Gemma Smith - Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 20 July 2021
3.4 National Planning Policy Framework Section 12 Achieving well-designed Places
3.4.1 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise. 3.4.2 The law makes a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it is to be given. Whether a particular consideration is material will depend on the circumstances of the case and is ultimately a decision for the courts. Provided regard is had to all material considerations, it is for the decision maker to decide what weight is to be given to the material considerations in each case, and (subject to the test of reasonableness) the courts will not get involved in the question of weight.
4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
4.1 Consultations Received:
Councillors (Expiration 10.02.2021): No comments received.
Wombourne Parish Council (Received 01.02.2021): No Objection
South Staffordshire Council (Tree Officer) Amended Response (24.03.2021): No Objection, subject to conditions.
Initial Response (Received 02.02.2021): Further information is required, the site has protected trees which may be affected by the proposed, a tree survey and impact assessment that accords to BS5837:2012 should be submitted to determine any impacts on retained trees.
Neighbours expiration 10.02.2021
Site Notice n/a
No comments have been received from interested parties.
5. APPRAISAL
5.1 The planning proposal is brought before Members of the Planning Committee as the applicant is a Member.
5.2 The key issues in the determination of this proposal would be: o Principle of the development o Design, Scale and Impact on the Character of the Area o Impact on neighbouring amenity o Impact on protected trees o SAD Standards
Page 36 of 150 Gemma Smith - Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 20 July 2021 o Highways and Parking Implications
5.3 Principle of development
5.3.1 The site is located within the defined development boundary of Wombourne, identified as a 'Main Service Village' in the settlement hierarchy for the District, where for the purposes of Policy CP1 of the Core Strategy (CS), domestic extensions and alterations are accepted, providing there are no adverse impacts on neighbouring properties or the amenity of the area and subject to compliance of other development management policies.
5.4 Design, Scale and Impact on the Character of the Area
5.4.1 Policy EQ11 (Wider Design Considerations) of the CS states that development proposals must seek to achieve creative and sustainable designs that take into account local character and distinctiveness, and reflect the principles around use, movement, form and space.
5.4.2 The design and style of the dwellings along Sytch Lane all vary. The extensions would be appropriate by way of siting, scale and would be constructed out of materials to match the existing property. The extensions would also be subservient to and complement the form of the main property.
5.4.3 Overall, it is considered that the proposal would respect the character and appearance of the host dwelling and its surroundings and therefore accord with Policy EQ11 of the CS.
5.5 Impact on neighbouring amenity
5.5.1 Policy EQ9 (Protecting Residential Amenity) of the CS states that all development proposals should take into account the amenity of any nearby residents, particularly with regard to privacy, security, noise and disturbance, pollution, odours and daylight.
5.5.2 To the north and east of the site are the neighbouring properties, Lymore House and Stonegarth. Due to the position of the proposed extensions and separation distance to these properties, the proposed additions would not have a detrimental impact on the amenities of Lymore House and Stonegarth.
5.5.3 The existing single-storey conservatory and linked garage would be replaced by a two-storey side addition adjacent to the neighbouring property to the south-west, No 73 Sytch Lane. I recognise that the proposed two storey addition would extend out towards the boundary with No 73, closing the gap between the two dwellings. However, a combination of the staggered alignment of the properties and design of the roof, with the front projecting elements pitching away from the boundary, would ensure that the side extensions do not appear unduly overbearing to or adversely impact on the level of daylight and sunlight received to the front and side facing windows in the neighbouring dwelling.
Page 37 of 150 Gemma Smith - Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.5.4 Overall, it is considered that there would be no significant impact on neighbouring amenity. As such, the proposal accords with Policy EQ9 and Appendix 6 of the CS.
5.6 Impact on protected trees
5.6.1 Policy EQ4 (Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape) of the CS sets out that, amongst other things: 'The intrinsic rural character and local distinctiveness of the South Staffordshire landscape should be maintained and where possible enhanced. Trees, veteran trees, woodland, ancient woodland and hedgerows should be protected from damage and retained unless it can be demonstrated that removal is necessary and appropriate mitigation can be achieved'.
5.6.2 Policy EQ12 (Landscaping) also seeks to protect and enhance key landscape features. The proposed extensions have the potential to impact on the protected trees within the neighbouring back garden at Stonegarth (T5 & T6 of TPO Ref: 5/1975). In addition, the development has also been considered in relation to its impact on protected trees in the rear garden of the host property.
5.6.3 A tree protection plan has been submitted which shows protective fencing arranged in an arc in the corner of the the rear garden serving the host property. It is not considered that this enclosed area would provide sufficient root protection for the afore mentioned protected trees. As such, following consultation with the Tree Officer, a condition is recommended requiring the approval of a more extensive area of protective fencing before development commences. This will ensure that the trees on both the application site and adjoining land are adequately protected during construction works.
5.7 SAD Standards
5.7.1 Appendix 6 'Space about dwellings standards' of the CS seeks to provide an appropriate level of amenity space for existing and future occupiers. Although the proposed rear extension would reduce the length of the rear garden, overall, the remaining garden area would satisfy the standards set out in Appendix 6.
5. 8 Highways and Parking Implications
5.8.1 Policy EV12 (Parking Provision) of the CS requires that adequate parking be included in new development, with Appendix 5 providing guidance on the recommended number of vehicle parking spaces to be provided. The proposal would not result in an increase in the number of bedrooms at the property. Therefore the dwelling will remain compliant with local policy and Standards.
6. CONCLUSIONS
6.1 In light of the above observations, the proposal is considered to accord with Policies CP1, EQ4, EQ9, EQ11, EQ12 and EV12 of the CS. The proposal is therefore
Page 38 of 150 Gemma Smith - Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 20 July 2021 considered acceptable, and approval is recommended, subject to appropriate conditions.
7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions
Subject to the following condition(s):
1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawing Nos: Location Plan and Block Plan dated 7th January 2021 and amended plan referenced 18/590 Edition 2 Sheet 2 of 2 entitled 'Proposed Extensions' received on 29th June 2021.
3. The materials to be used on the walls and roof of the extension shall match those of the existing building unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
4. Prior to the commencement of any works relative to this application Tree protective fencing shall be erected at a minimum distance of 12 times the trunk diameter (measured at 1.5m above ground level) of any tree in the rear garden of the applicant's garden and at the same calculated distance (measured from the centre of the tree) of any other tree in adjacent gardens that abut the applicant's garden and where that 'protected' distance extends into the applicant's garden.
5. No existing trees, shrubs or hedges on the site or its boundaries shall be cut down for a period of 10 years following completion of the development without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. If any the existing planting is removed or dies within 5 years of completion of the development it shall be replaced with the same species (or alternative agreed with the Council) within 12 months of its removal and as close to the original position as possible (or elsewhere in a position agreed with the Council). The existing and any replacement planting shall be maintained for a period of 10 years respectively from completion of the development or time of planting to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
6. The destruction by burning of any materials during the construction period shall not take place within 6 metres of the canopy spread of any protected trees or hedges.
7. There shall be no storage of construction materials or equipment or oil tanks within the protective fencing/root protection areas of the protected trees or hedges. 8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order, 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting
Page 39 of 150 Gemma Smith - Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 20 July 2021
that Order with or without modification) no additional windows nor velux roof lights shall be constructed within the south west elevation.
Reasons
1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
3. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
4. To safeguard the amenity of the area and, in particular, to recognise the Tree Preservation Order in accordance with policy EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy
5. To safeguard the amenity of the area and, in particular, to recognise the Tree Preservation Order in accordance with policy EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy
6. To safeguard the amenity of the area and, in particular, to recognise the Tree Preservation Order in accordance with policy EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy
7. To safeguard the amenity of the area and, in particular, to recognise the Tree Preservation Order in accordance with policy EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy
8. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area and the privacy of residents in nearby dwellings in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
Proactive Statement - In dealing with the application, the Local Planning Authority has approached decision making in a positive and creative way, seeking to approve sustainable development where possible, in accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2019.
Page 40 of 150 Gemma Smith - Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 20 July 2021
75 Sytch Lane Wombourne WOLVERHAMPTON WV5 0LB
Page 41 of 150
Page 42 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
21/00268/FUL Mr John Giffard BREWOOD & COVEN Councillor W Sutton Councillor J Bolton Councillor D Holmes
Chillington Hall Chillington Park Chillington WOLVERHAMPTON WV8 1RE
Installation of 3No Shepherd's Huts for holiday accommodation at the edge of a commercially managed (not ancient) woodland. The application includes the installation of a septic tank and associated drainage as well as upgrading the existing woodland (tractor) track and parking to take up to 3 cars (one per shepherd's hut). Part of the nearby ha that has collapsed will be rebuilt re-using the existing bricks supplemented with new matching bricks. The park is listed Grade II*
1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY
1.1 Site description
1.1.1 Chillington Hall is a Grade I Listed country house set within Grade II star Listed gardens and parkland. The property is located within the Chillington Conservation Area. Chillington Hall has its own lake which lies approximately one kilometre southwest of the main house. The property is three-storey in scale, and is characterised by red facing bricks, plain roof tiles and sash windows. Near Chillington Hall is a former pump house which was granted planning permission in 2019 for residential use and is currently rented out for tourism purposes (19/00396/FUL & 19/00397/LBC].
1.1.2 This application relates to an area of the existing parkland, next to the managed wood, referred to as 'The Grove'. The Grove is a rectangular area of woodland that is located to the southwest of the Hall. It is divided in two by a strip of mown grass that runs on an approximate North south axis. The mown vista is tapered and is at its widest at the south end where it is terminated by a ha-ha. A ha-ha is a recessed landscape design element that creates a vertical barrier for farming whilst preserving uninterrupted views of the landscape beyond. It is at its narrowest at the north end nearest to the Hall. The Grove comprises of managed woodland either side of the mown vista although there are some more mature trees to the perimeter of the Grove which conceal and protect the young saplings. There are also other mature trees in or around the Grove including some copper beeches and a fine cedar tree.
1.2.3 The site is situated in the West Midlands Green Belt.
1.2 Planning History
2021: Installation of 3No Shepherd's Huts for holiday accommodation at the edge of a commercially managed (not ancient) woodland. The application includes the installation of a septic tank and associated drainage as well as upgrading the existing woodland (tractor) track and parking to take up to 3 cars (one per shepherd's hut). Part of the nearby ha ha that has collapsed will be rebuilt re-using the existing bricks supplemented with new matching bricks. The park is listed Grade II*, application withdrawn 21/00269/LBC. The listed building application was withdrawn as the proposal didn’t require listed building consent, as confirmed by the Conservation Officer. 2019: Detailed planning application for the conversion of an existing two storey brick build former pump house into a one bedroom residential dwelling with landscaping, car parking and associated external works, approved (19/00396/FUL & 19/00397/LBC)
Page 43 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
2017: Alterations to south wing of Chillington Hall including replacement copper roof, installation of photovoltaic cells, repair works to chimneys and parapets and replacement ceiling in second floor nursery (resubmission of application 16/00586/FUL), approved (17/00070/FUL & 17/00071/LBC) 2016: Alterations to south wing of Chillington Hall including replacement copper roof, installation of photovoltaic cells, repair works to chimneys and parapets and replacement ceiling in second floor nursery. Approved [16/00586/FUL & 16/00587/LBC]. 2014: Change of Use to a mixed use of Class D2 (Assembly and Leisure) and Class C3 (Dwellinghouse). Approved [14/00089/COU]. 2013: Use of five rooms as venue for marriages, civil partnerships and assembly / leisure activities requiring a licence, plus use of external land as car parking as required by persons undertaking those activities. Refused [13/00972/LUP]. 2011: Variation of condition to allow the marquee to remain in situ until 30.11.2014. Approved subject to S106 agreement [11/00499/VAR]. 2010: Alterations to provide teaching area, mess facilities and toilets, including installation of doors, windows and stairs. Approved [10/00635/LBC]. 2010: Variation of condition two of 09/00054/TEM to allow the marquee to remain in situ throughout the year. Approved [10/00388/VAR]. 2009: Variation of condition two of 09/00054/TEM and 09/00055/LBC to allow marquee to be erected during December. Approved [09/00221/VAR]. 2009: Temporary marquee. Listed Building Consent granted subject to S106 agreement [09/00055/LBC]. 2009: Temporary marquee. Listed Building Consent granted subject to S106 agreement [09/00054/TEM]. 2008: Erection of marquee for nine months per year over a five-year period. Withdrawn [08/01170/LBC]. 2008: Erection of marquee for nine months per year over a five-year period. Withdrawn [08/01169/TEM]. 2008: Disabled WC. Listed Building Consent granted [08/00623/LBC]. 2008: Redecoration of saloon and front hall, removal of dado and new bracket support for chandelier. Listed Building Consent granted [08/00153/LBC]. 2002: Installation of satellite dish. Planning Permission and Listed Building Consent granted [02/00954/FUL & 02/00940/LBC]. 2001: Installation of fittings to form bathroom. Listed Building Consent granted [01/01304/LBC]. 1977: Construction of new lavatories. Planning Permission and Listed Building Consent granted [77/00046/LBC & 77/00656/LBC]. 1975: Extension To Existing Garages And Demolition Of Some Outbuildings. Planning Permission and Listed Building Consent granted [75/00477/FUL & 75/00012/LBC]. 1971: Alterations. Listed Building Consent granted [71/00017/LBC]. 1971: Removal of twelve dormer windows and roofing over. Listed Building Consent granted [71/00013/LBC]. 1971: Demolition of small stable block. Listed Building Consent granted [71/00014/LBC].
2. APPLICATION DETAILS
2.1 The Proposal
2.1.1. Planning permission is sought for the erection of three shepherd’s huts for tourism purposes. The shepherd’s huts would be located in the parkland on the edge of an existing managed wood. Each hut would be suitable for a couple and have its own facilities [shower, toilet].
Page 44 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
2.1.2 The three huts each measure 5.48 x 2.4 x 3.5m high to the top of the roof. The floor area of each is 11.6 sqm. The units will be mounted on traditional cast iron wheels. The walls will be of corrugated steel painted in juniper green (dark green). The roof will have a curved profile and will be of corrugated steel (painted black).
2.1.3 There is an existing track into the wood which is currently suitable for off-road vehicles and tractors only. This track is to be improved by the laying of 200mm thickness of coarse graded aggregate to BS13242:2002. The coarse aggregate will allow rainwater to pass through it. There will not be kerb stones or fixed drainage. The parking area for three cars will be located in an existing clearing towards the end of the track.
2.1.4 The footpaths from the parking area to each of the huts will be of mulched wood chippings. The paths will be approximately 750mm wide with a timber board edging.
2.1.5 The services and drainage will be brought through in the area of the collapsed ha-ha. The septic tank would be positioned in the adjacent field which is used for the grazing of sheep.
2.1.6 As part of the application, and after the drainage works have been completed, it is proposed to re-build the collapsed section of the ha ha [along the south edge of the Grove].
2.2 Agent's submission
The application is accompanied by:
- Design and Access Statement - Heritage Assessment - Arboricultural Impact and Method Statement - Ecology Report - Photo Montage - Photo of Route - Statement of Need - Business Plan
3. POLICY CONTEXT
3.1 Green Belt, Listed Building and Historic Park and Garden, Conservation Area.
3.2 Adopted Core Strategy 2013
Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy for South Staffordshire Core Policy 2: Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment GB1: Development in the Green Belt EQ1: Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets EQ3: Conservation, Preservation and Protection of Heritage Assets EQ4: Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity EQ11: Wider Design Considerations EQ12: Landscaping EV2: Sustainable Tourism
Page 45 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport EV12: Parking Provision Appendix 5: Parking Standards
3.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance
Design Guide 2018 Green Belt and Open Countryside 2014
3.4 National Planning Policy Framework 2019
3.4.1 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise.
3.4.2 The law makes a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it is to be given. Whether a particular consideration is material will depend on the circumstances of the case and is ultimately a decision for the courts. Provided regard is had to all material considerations, it is for the decision maker to decide what weight is to be given to the material considerations in each case, and (subject to the test of reasonableness) the courts will not get involved in the question of weight.
4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
4.1 Comments received
Councillors [expired 03/06/2021]: No comments received
Parish Council [received 25/05/2021]: No objection
Conservation Officer [received 15/06/2021]: I'm happy with the attached document and raise no further objections to the proposals. The materials of the wall will be important, these details can either be covered by a condition or submitted prior to the determination.
Arboricultural Officer [received 16/06/2021]: No objections to the proposed subject to a condition and works adhering to the revised AIA and AMS.
County Ecology [received 06/06/2021]: I agree with the ecology survey and its recommendations. Condition recommended.
Severn Trent [received 01/06/2021]: As the proposal has minimal impact on the public sewerage system, I can advise we have no objections to the proposals and do not require a drainage condition to be applied.
The Garden Trust [received 25/05/2021]: The application site lies within the grade II* registered historic park at Chillington. The proposed shepherds' huts will be located within The Grove, a block of managed woodland of 19th century origin bisected by an open mown strip to the SW of the hall. The huts and associated parking and access drive will be discretely sited within the woodland and are not considered to have any impact on the significance of the historic landscape. The Trusts have no objection to the application.
Historic England [received 17/06/2021]: No comments.
Page 46 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
County Highways [received 28/05/2021]: No objections subject to a condition.
Neighbours [expired 03/06/2021]: No comments received.
A site notice and advert were posted on the 13/05/2021 and 25/05/2021.
5. APPRAISAL
5.1 The application has been referred to planning committee as the proposal is contrary to Policy GB1 of the Core Strategy (CS).
5.2 Key Issues - Principle of development - Very Special Circumstances - Impact on the Heritage Assets - Impact on the openness and visual amenity of the Green Belt - Ecology and Trees - Impact on neighbouring amenity - Access/parking
5.3 Principle of development
5.3.1 The site is located within the Green Belt. Policy GB1 of the CS advises that development acceptable within the terms of national planning policy set out in the National Planning Policy Framework [NPPF] will normally be permitted.
5.3.2 The proposal for three shepherd’s huts for tourism purposes does not fall under any of the exceptions listed under paragraph 145 of the NPPF and Policy GB1 of the CS and therefore represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Inappropriate development in the Green Belt is harmful by definition and contrary to policy and should not be approved except in very special circumstances, as noted in paragraph 143 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
5.3.3 Policy EV2 of the Core Strategy provides that the Council will support the growth of tourism in South Staffordshire consistent with the heritage and cultural associations of the District including attractive villages and hamlets, historic houses, parklands and gardens with particular focus given to the promotion of sustainable tourism. In accordance with the Council's Tourism Strategy, the aim will be to raise the profile of South Staffordshire as a visitor destination.
5.3.4 Outside of development boundaries, Policy EV2 of the CS advises that it will be necessary for a business case to be made, which identifies how the development will support and make a sustainable contribution to the local economy. Priority will be given to re-use and conversion of redundant buildings rather than new build. The provision of tourist accommodation, including the location of static and touring caravans, will only be permitted if it does not adversely affect the character and appearance of the area, taking account of the capacity of the local area and the highway network to absorb the development.
5.3.5 The application is accompanied by a business plan, which provides that the income from the venture would be used to contribute to the future management and repairs of the estate, to reduce the financial burden not only for the present incumbent but for future generations. At present there is a gardener's cottage that is let out for approximately 40
Page 47 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021 weeks per annum. The shepherd's hut would be let out for around 30 weeks per year at approximately £400 per week less expenses and utilities such as water and electricity. The total cost of one shepherd's hut including services, access etc will be approximately £30,000 and it is envisaged that it should start making a profit during the third year.
5.4 Very Special Circumstances
5.4.1 As noted above there is a policy conflict with Policy GB1.
5.4.2 Paragraph 144 of the NPPF states that when considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure substantial weight is given to any harm in the Green Belt. 'Very Special Circumstances' will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.
5.4.3. Chillington Hall is a Grade I Listed country house set within Grade II star Listed gardens and parkland. The application is accompanied by a business plan, which provides that the income from the venture would be used to contribute to the future management and repairs of the estate, to reduce the financial burden not only for the present incumbent but for future generations. The statement of need submitted with the application provides the following:
'The Chillington Estate comprises not only the Grade I listed Hall but also many other buildings and parkland listed Grades I, II* and II. All of these buildings can be classed as high maintenance, but any expenditure is not necessarily rewarded with income. Just one example of this is the nearby 19th century cast iron water tower. This has been redundant for many years however the owner is obliged to maintain it as a heritage asset and part of the ongoing maintenance of the estate. The recent repairs cost approximately £45,000. Farm income alone is not sufficient to support maintenance work on this scale therefore it is essential that the estate diversifies and finds alternative additional ways in which to increase its income'.
5.4.4 Policy EQ3 of the Core Strategy provides that the Council will support and encourage measures which secure the improved maintenance, management, and sustainable re-use of heritage assets, particularly those which are identified nationally or locally as being at risk. Where necessary an assessment will be made of whether the benefits of a proposal for enabling development, which would otherwise conflict with planning policies but would secure the future conservation of a heritage asset, outweigh the disbenefits of departing from those policies.
5.4.5 The proposal is small scale, and the shepherd huts can be easily moved and are temporary in nature. Each hut will stand on 4 precast concrete slabs that can be easily taken away and reused. They are discreetly positioned on the edge of a managed woodland, and each occupy a small floor area 11.6sqm. The huts are self-sufficient [toilet, shower] and no further buildings would be required. The existing farm-track is also to be re-used and improved. The income from the venture [profitable from year three onwards] would be used to contribute to the future management and repairs of the estate, to reduce the financial burden not only for the present incumbent but for future generations and help to secure the future conservation of the heritage assets. If successful, each hut could bring in around £36,000 per annum [minus service charges such as electricity and water].
Page 48 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.4.6 I therefore consider that the benefits of the proposal, that is to help secure the future conservation of the heritage assets, clearly outweighs the harm caused and constitutes the very special circumstances required in this instance.
5.5 Impact on the Heritage Assets
5.5.1 Chapter 16 of the NPPF and Policy EQ3 of the CS state that care and consideration must be taken to ensure no harm is caused to the character or appearance of a heritage asset. Heritage assets are buildings, sites, monuments, places, areas, or landscapes identified as significant features in the historic environment. Conservation areas are designated under Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and defined as "an area of special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance." The NPPF stipulates that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset's conservation.
5.5.2 Policy EQ3 of the Core Strategy seeks to conserve, preserve, and protects heritage assets.
5.5.3 The application site lies within the grade II* registered historic park at Chillington and is the work of Lancelot "Capability" Brown and James Paine. The proposed shepherds' huts and associated works will be located within The Grove a block of managed woodland of 19th century origin bisected by an open mown strip to the south-west of the hall. The huts and associated parking and access drive will be discretely sited within the woodland and are not considered to have any impact upon the registered park and the conservation area.
5.3.4 The works will also involve the repair of the ha-ha, a section of which has collapsed. This will allow services and facilities to be put through without having to disturb any of the in situ ha-ha. This is welcomed and the materials of the repair will need to match the existing. The conservation officer has recommended a condition to secure this.
5.5.5 For the above reasons, the proposal is compliant with Policy EQ3 of the CS and Chapter 16 of the NPPF.
5.6 Impact on the openness and visual amenity of the Green Belt.
5.6.1 Openness is an essential characteristic of the Green Belt. Openness has both a visual and spatial aspect. The latter can be taken to mean the absence of built form. The proposal would have an impact on the openness of the Green Belt, however this is some-what mitigated by the temporary nature of the huts which can be easily moved, along with the slabs.
5.6.2 Concerning visual amenity, as noted above the proposal is small scale and would be discreetly positioned at the edge of a managed woodland. It is therefore not considered that the proposal would cause any visual harm on the visual amenity of the Green Belt. The materials used and the appearance of the shepherd huts are also acceptable.
5.7 Ecology and Trees
5.7.1 Policy EQ1 of the CS provides that developments should not cause significant harm to habitats of nature conservation, including woodlands and hedgerows, together with species that are protected or under threat. Support will be given to proposals which enhance and
Page 49 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021 increase the number of sites and habitats of nature conservation value, and to meeting the objectives of the Staffordshire Biodiversity Action Plan.
5.7.2 An ecological report has been submitted with the application and its contents are to the satisfaction of the County Ecologist. A condition has been recommended for the inclusion of bird and bat boxes to enhance biodiversity opportunities.
5.7.3 In relation to the impact on existing trees, the application is accompanied by an Arboricultural impact and Method Statement (AIMS). This demonstrates that the shepherd huts and associated infrastructure are to be positioned in a managed woodland where there is a number of young and early mature ornamental trees, in addition to a belt of self-sown sycamores on the north boundary. The tree survey includes records of 45 individual trees. The proposed development would require the removal of 6 no. category U trees within the application site. These trees are of low quality and will be indirect conflict with the proposed Shepard huts, path, track and service routes, with their loss being considered unavoidable.
5.7.4 The Council Arboricultural Officer is satisfied with the reports and the plan has been updated to his satisfaction. A condition is recommended ensuring the proposal adheres to the measures contained within the AIMS.
5.8 Impact on neighbouring amenity
5.8.1 In accordance with Policy EQ9 of the CS, all development proposals should take into account the amenity of any nearby residents, particularly with regard to privacy, security, noise and disturbance, pollution, odours and daylight.
5.8.2 The proposal will cause no adverse harm on neighbouring amenity as there are no neighbouring properties in proximity of the proposal. Therefore, the application is compliant with Policy EQ9.
5.9 Access/Parking
5.9.1 The existing access is to be ultised and one parking space is to be provided for each hut. This is acceptable as each hut is designed for two people to share. The County Highways Team have raised no concerns over the proposal, subject to a condition regarding the access drive and parking areas being provided in accordance with the submitted plans.
6. CONCLUSIONS
6.1 The proposed development is inappropriate development in the Green Belt and therefore very special circumstances must be demonstrated for the development to be approved.
6.2 The application has demonstrated very special circumstances as the proposal is required to help to secure the future conservation of the heritage assets. The huts and associated parking and access drive will be discretely sited within the woodland and are not considered to have any impact upon the registered park and the conservation area. There will be no impact caused on the visual amenity of the Green Belt or on neighbouring amenity and there are no highway, tree, or ecology implications. 6.3 The proposal complies with all the relevant polices and therefore I recommend the application for approval.
Page 50 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions
Subject to the following condition(s):
1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: 01 A, 02 B and 06, received 16/03/2021 and 12/05/2021
3. Notwithstanding any description/details of materials in the application documents, the materials to be used for the repairs to the ha-ha shall match in colour and texture, those of the existing ha-ha wall or as otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority
4. The only tree removals and pruning works permitted under this planning permission are those identified in the Savills Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement Revision A received 17th of June 2021. Furthermore, the sequencing of tree works and tree protection and the methodology for all construction and excavation works shall be in accordance with that detailed in the method statement and subject to the Arboricultural inspections detailed thereto.
5. Prior to first occupation of the shepherd’s huts hereby permitted, details of the type and location of 3 no woodcrete type bat boxes and 2 number woodcrete type bird boxes to be installed on existing trees shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
6. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive and parking areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans.
7. The accommodation hereby permitted shall only be occupied for holiday purposes for periods of not more than 28 days at a time.
Reasons
1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
3. To ensure that the character of the existing structure is preserved in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
4. To protect the existing trees on the site during construction work in accordance with policy EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy
5. To increase the biodiversity of the site, in compliance with Policy EQ1.
6. In the interest of highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.
Page 51 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
7. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
Proactive Statement - In dealing with the application, the Local Planning Authority has approached decision making in a positive and creative way, seeking to approve sustainable development where possible, in accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2019.
Page 52 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Chillington Hall Chillington Park Chillington Staffordshire WV8 1RE
Page 53 of 150
Page 54 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
21/00432/FUL Mr Philip Mobberley KINVER Councillor B Edwards Councillor L Hingley Councillor H Williams
Bailiffs House Lawnswood Road Lawnswood Staffordshire DY7 5QL
Demolition of existing and erection of replacement dwelling
1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY
1.1 Site description
1.1.1 This application relates to a two-storey detached property located on the fringes of Lawnswood village within the West Midlands Green Belt. The property is rendered on all four sides, with no apparent previous additions.
1.1.2 Bailiffs House is set-back around 23 metre from Lawnswood Road. A series of former agricultural buildings directly south and east of the site form part of the Lawnswood Farm estate.
1.2 Relevant planning history
16/00718/LUP Proposed permitted development to include: single storey extensions to sides and rear of existing dwelling house; single storey porch extension to front of existing dwelling house and detached single storey outbuilding, Refused.
17/00081/LUP Proposed permitted development of a detached single storey outbuilding. Please refer to accompanying layout plan for further details, Refused.
17/00082/LUP Proposed permitted development to include: - Single storey extensions to sides and rear of existing dwelling house. - Single storey porch extension to front of existing dwelling house, Approved
17/00263/LHSHLD Permitted development consisting of proposed rear extension to existing dwelling house (length beyond original rear wall 8m, maximum height 3m), Approved
18/00483/LUP Proposed permitted development of a detached single storey outbuilding, Approved
2. APPLICATION DETAILS
2.1 The Proposal
2.1.1 The application proposes to demolish the existing four bedroom house and erect a new four bedroom dwelling with detached garage. Amended plans have been submitted reducing the size of the proposal to reflect the permitted development fall-back position and the removal of the new access with 1.8m high boundary wall. The revised plans utilise the existing access and no change is proposed to the front boundary treatment.
2.1.2 The existing dwelling has an overall floor area of 200sqm and is positioned approximately 23m from Lawnswood Road close to the western boundary. It has a ridge
Page 55 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021 height of 7.4m. The new dwelling would occupy a central position within the plot and be set back around 18m from Lawnswood Road. It would have ridge heights of between 7.1m and 7.7m and an overall floor area of 361sqm. The detached double garage would be positioned near the eastern boundary, with a ridge of 4m [eaves 2.2m] and floor area of 48sqm. The garden would have depths of between 19m and 28m.
2.1.3 The proposed materials are:
Facing Brickwork: Wienerberger Ashington Red Multi or similar Roof Tiles: Dreadnaught Stafforshire Blue Plain Clay Tiles Tile Hanging: Dreadnaught Blue Brindle/Dark Heather Plain Clay Tiles Windows & Doors: Aluninium Double Glazed Units and Composite Entrance Doors Fascia's Soffits and Rainwater Goods: UPVC Black.
2.2 Agents Submission
2.2.1 The following documents have been submitted:
- Design and access statement - Bat Survey - Bat Roost and Activity Survey - Ecology Letter
3. POLICY CONTEXT
3.1 The site lies within the West Midlands Green Belt
3.2 South Staffordshire Core Strategy, adopted 2012
-- NP1: The Presumption in favour of sustainable development - Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy for South Staffordshire - Policy GB1: Development within the Green Belt - Core Policy 2: Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment - Policy EQ1: Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets - Policy EQ4: Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape - Core Policy 3: Sustainable Development and Climate Change - Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity - Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design - Policy EQ11: Wider Design Considerations - Policy EQ12: Landscaping - Policy EV12: Parking Provision - Appendix 5: Car Parking Standards - Appendix 6: Space About Dwellings Standards
3.3 Adopted Local Guidance - Green Belt and Open Countryside SPD (2014) - South Staffordshire Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2018) - Sustainable Development Supplementary Planning Document (2018)
3.3 National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (the - 'NPPF'). - Section 12 - Achieving well-designed places - Section 13 - Protecting Green Belt land
Page 56 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
3.3.1 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise.
3.3.2 The law makes a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it is to be given. Whether a particular consideration is material will depend on the circumstances of the case and is ultimately a decision for the courts. Provided regard is had to all material considerations, it is for the decision maker to decide what weight is to be given to the material considerations in each case, and (subject to the test of reasonableness) the courts will not get involved in the question of weight.
4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
4.1 Comments received:
Councillor: No comments received, expired 19/05/2021
Parish Council [received 27/05/2021]: Recommend Approval subject to the property being constructed using carbon neutral materials and have an EV Charging point.
County Ecologist [received 22/05/2021]: I am satisfied with the bat survey report submitted. The development should provide biodiversity enhancements and I have therefore suggested conditions for bird and bat boxes. Conditions recommended.
Severn Trent [received 11/05/2021]: As the proposal has minimal impact on the public sewerage system I can advise we have no objections to the proposals and do not require a drainage condition to be applied.
County Highways [received 10/06/2021]: No objections, conditions recommended.
Neighbours: No comments received, expired 19/05/2021
A site notice was posted on the 30/04/2021.
5. APPRAISAL
5.1 This application is being referred to Planning Committee as the proposal represents inappropriate development within the Green Belt, contrary to Policy GB1 of the Core Strategy (CS).
5.2 Key Issues
- Principle of development - Case for Very Special Circumstances - Impact on the openness of the Green Belt - Impact on visual amenity of the Green Belt and character of area - Impact on neighbouring properties - Space about dwelling standards - Impact on ecology and trees - Impact on highways
5.3 Principle of development
Page 57 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.3.1 The site is located within the Green Belt where Policy GB1 of the CS and paragraph 145 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) apply, both of which seek to restrict inappropriate forms of development within the Green Belt. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. Local Planning Authorities are expected to regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt unless they fall under certain exceptions. Included in this list, and not therefore to be regarded as inappropriate development is: ‘the replacement of a building, provided that the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces.’ 5.3.2 In order to judge whether a building is materially larger, the Councils adopted Green Belt and Open Countryside SPD (SPD) provides that a range of floor area increases between 10-20% should be used.
5.3.3 The existing dwelling has an overall height of 7.4m and a floor area of 200sq.m. across two floors. The proposed dwelling is between 7.1 and 7.7m in height and would also be spread across two floors, having an overall floor area of 361 sq.m. which would constitute an increase in floor area of over 80%. The application also proposes a double garage occupying a floor area of 48sqm.
5.3.4 The replacement dwelling is clearly materially larger and above the 10-20% guidance contained within the SPD. The proposal would therefore constitute inappropriate development which, as set out in paragraph 143 of the NPPF is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and cannot be approved except in very special circumstances.
5.4 Case for very special circumstances
5.4.1 Paragraph 144 of the NPPF provides that when considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. 'Very special circumstances' will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm resulting from the proposal, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.
5.4.2 The case for very special circumstances submitted by the agent relate to the extensions which could lawfully be carried out through a combination of the permitted development fall-back (which has been confirmed with Lawful Development Certificates) for side and rear extensions (17/00082/LUP and 17/00263/LHSHLD). Under the permitted development fall- back position, there is scope for extensions to the existing house amounting some 162sqm spread over a considerable footprint. When added to the existing floor space this would create a dwellinghouse of 362sqm. A certificate of proposed use/development has also been granted for a large outbuilding comprising some 167sqm (18/00483/LUP).
5.4.3 This application proposes a more compact proposal than the permitted development fall-back position with the floor area split similarly over the two floors. The overall floor area of the house would be 361sqm and the ridge height similar to the existing dwelling. The outbuilding proposed [double garage] would represent a significant reduction in floor area [48sqm] when compared to the outbuilding approved under the above certificate. I therefore attach significant weight to this material consideration.
5.4.4 Whilst the application site is within the Green Belt, it is also just outside of Lawnswood development boundary and is situated within its ribbon of development [lawnswood], where large-detached dwellings is generally the norm.
Page 58 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.4.5 On balance I consider that there are very special circumstances in this application to justify the inappropriate development within the Green Belt.
5.5 Impact on openness of the Green Belt
5.5.1 Taking into account the permitted development fall-back position, it is not considered that the proposal would cause any further harm on the openness of the Green Belt. There would be an overall reduction in the amount of built form, compared to the PD fall-back position and the removal of permitted development rights for extensions for the new building would be reasonable and necessary as these constitute the case for very special circumstances.
5.6 Impact on visual amenity of the Green Belt and character of area
5.6.1 Policy EQ11 of the CS requires that new development respects local character and distinctiveness, including that of the surrounding development and landscape by enhancing the positive attributes whilst mitigating the negative aspects. In terms of scale, design and materials, development should contribute positively to the street scene and surrounding buildings, whilst respecting the scale of spaces and buildings in the local area.
5.6.2 The existing dwelling house does not hold any architectural merit, and the proposed design and materials are suitable for the surrounding area, which comprises of a mixture of house types/designs. Concerns have been expressed over the proposed 1.8m high wall to be erected along the front of the site, given the relatively open nature of plot frontages in the immediate area where low walls, hedges and post and rail fencing predominate. As a consequence, the 1.8m high wall has now been removed from the scheme and the existing access utilised, with no change to the front boundary treatment.
5.6.3 On this basis, it is considered that the new development would respect the scale and materials of surrounding development and would contribute positively to the street-scene, thereby complying with Policy EQ11.
5.7 Impact on neighbouring amenity
5.7.1 Policy EQ9 of the CS states that new development 'should take into account the amenity of any nearby residents, particularly with regard to privacy and daylight.'
5.7.2 The Councils space about dwelling standards recommends 21m between any facing habitable windows per private space and 13m from any habitable windows to flank walls.
5.7.3 There are adequate separation distances between the proposal and the nearby dwellings, in compliance with the Councils standards and as such there is no prospect of this proposal reducing the daylight or privacy to an unacceptable level. As such, there is no conflict with Policy EQ9.
5.8 Space about dwelling standards
5.8.1 The proposed dwelling complies with the national space standards and the Councils local standards with regards to garden area and depth.
5.9 Impact on Ecology and Trees
Page 59 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.9.1 Policy EQ1 of the CS provides that developments should not cause significant harm to habitats of nature conservation, including woodlands and hedgerows, together with species that are protected or under threat. Support will be given to proposals which enhance and increase the number of sites and habitats of nature conservation value. Policy EQ12 of the CS seeks to ensure appropriate landscaping for all developments.
5.9.2 There are no mature trees within 15m of the proposal and the County Ecologist has raised no objections to the proposal, subject to the inclusion of conditions relating to protected species [bird and bat boxes]. A landscape scheme which would deliver some ecological benefits can also be secured by condition. Consequently, there is no conflict with Policies EQ1 and EQ12.
5.10 Impact on highways/Parking
5.10.1 The revised scheme proposes no change to the existing access and there is plenty room within the site for the parking of vehicles in accordance with the Council's standards. County Highways have raised no concerns over the proposal and conditions have been recommended securing the necessary visibility splays and position of any entrance gates.
6. CONCLUSIONS
6.1 To conclude, the proposal is for a replacement dwelling that is materially larger than the dwelling being replaced. It therefore represents inappropriate development which, as directed by paragraph 144 of the NPPF, I attached substantial weight. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.
6.2 I have given due consideration to the trade-off of the permitted development fall-back position and have considered the impact of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt when compared with the permitted development fall-back. I consider these considerations clearly outweigh the harm caused to the Green Belt. In addition, the proposal would not have an undue impact on the character of the area and there are no concerns arising in respect of ecology, highways or residential amenity. Approval is therefore recommended.
7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions
Subject to the following condition(s):
1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: P- 003 Rev B and P-005 Rev B, received 25/05/2021
3. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive, parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. 4. All site works, including demolition must comply with the measures outlined in section 5 of the Bat Survey Report (Camlad Ecology, February 2021.) Failure to do so may result in an offence being committed.
Page 60 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5. Within 3 months of any development commencing on the site, details of biodiversity enhancement measures including 2 number integrated bat tubes or bat boxes within the new building, located on a south elevation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved measures shall be incorporated into the scheme and be fully constructed prior to occupation of the buildings and retained as such thereafter.
6. Within 3 months of any development commencing on the site, details of the type and location of biodiversity enhancement measures including 2 number house sparrow terraces on or integrated into north- or east- facing brickwork of the new buildings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved measures shall be incorporated into the scheme and be fully constructed prior to occupation of the buildings and retained as such thereafter.
7. Within 3 months of any development commencing on the site a landscape scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The approved scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and completed within 12 months of the completion of the development. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the scheme has been completed. Any failures shall be replaced within the next available planting season and the scheme shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. The planting shall be retained and maintained for a minimum period of 10 years by the property owner from the notified completion date of the scheme. Any plant failures that occur during the first 5 years of the notified completion date of the scheme shall be replaced with the same species within the next available planting season (after failure).
8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended), or any other subsequent equivalent order, no development within the following classes of development shall be carried out to the dwelling(s) hereby approved without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority:
a. Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A - enlargement, improvement or other alteration
b. Schedule 2, Part 1, Class B - addition or alteration to the roof
c. Schedule 2, Part 1, Class C - any other alteration to the roof
d. Schedule 2, Part 1, Class D - porches
e. Schedule 2 Class AA - enlargement of a dwellinghouse by construction of additional storeys
f. Schedule 2 Class AD - new dwellinghouses or detached buildings in use as dwellinghouses. 9. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access to the site within the limits of the public highway has been completed.
Page 61 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
10. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details of the visibility splays have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The visibility splay shall thereafter be kept free of all obstructions to visibility over a height of 600 mm above the adjacent carriageway level and be provided in accordance with the approved plan prior to the development commencing.
11. Any gates shall be located a minimum of 6.0m rear of the carriageway boundary and shall open away from the highway.
Reasons
1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
3. In the interest of highway safety
4. In order to protect any protected species on the site in accordance with EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.
5. To increase the biodiversity of the site, in accordance with Policy EQ1.
6. To increase the biodiversity of the site, in accordance with Policy EQ1.
7. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
8. The site is within the Green Belt within which, in accordance with the planning policies in the adopted Core Strategy, there is a presumption against inappropriate development
9. In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Staffordshire County Council requirements for a vehicular access crossing.
10. In the interest of highway safety.
11. In the interest of highway safety.
Informatives
1. Severn Trent
Severn Trent Water advise that there may be a public sewer located within the application site. Although our statutory sewer records do not show any public sewers within the area you have specified, there may be sewers that have been recently adopted under the Transfer Of Sewer Regulations 2011. Public sewers have statutory protection and may not be built close to, directly over or be diverted without consent and contact must be made with Severn Trent Water to discuss the proposals. Severn Trent will seek to assist in obtaining a solution which protects both the public sewer and the building.
Page 62 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Please note that there is no guarantee that you will be able to build over or close to any Severn Trent sewers, and where diversion is required there is no guarantee that you will be able to undertake those works on a self-lay basis. Every approach to build near to or divert our assets has to be assessed on its own merit and the decision of what is or isn't permissible is taken based on the risk to the asset and the wider catchment it serves. It is vital therefore that you contact us at the earliest opportunity to discuss the implications of our assets crossing your site. Failure to do so could significantly affect the costs and timescales of your project if it transpires diversionary works need to be carried out by Severn Trent.
2. County Highways
Informatives for Decision Notice.
i). The construction of a new vehicular access shall require a Highway Works Agreement with Staffordshire County Council. The applicant is requested to contact Staffordshire County Council in order to secure the Agreement. The link below is to the Highway Works Information Pack including an application Form. Please complete and send to the address indicated on the application Form or email to ([email protected]). The applicant is advised to begin this process well in advance of any works taking place in order to meet any potential timescales. https://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/Highways/highwayscontrol/HighwaysWorkAgree ments.aspx
`ii). No part of the boundary wall/fence or its foundations, fixtures and fittings shall project forward of the highway boundary.
Proactive Statement - In dealing with the application, the Local Planning Authority has approached decision making in a positive and creative way, seeking to approve sustainable development where possible, in accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2019.
Page 63 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Bailiffs House Lawnswood Road Lawnswood Staffordshire DY7 5QL
Page 64 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
21/00437/COU Mr Nicholas Piponides CHESLYN HAY Councillor M Boyle Councillor S Hollis
Lodge Farm Lodge Lane Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS11 0LT
Change of Use of Barns from Agricultural/Sui Generis Use to B8 General Storage Use (retrospective)
1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY
1.1 Site description
1.1.1 The application site lies in the Green Belt on the north side of the A460 Lodge Lane between its junctions with the A5/Walsall Road to the east and Wolverhampton Road to the west; the M6 Toll Road runs parallel immediately to the south.
1.1.2 Immediately to the east the site adjoins a residential barn conversion development comprising 6 dwellings. Beyond, which, to the north, east and west are open fields. On the other side of the highway(s) to the south and southeast is a commercial/industrial estate.
1.1.3 The application site consists of two relatively modern barn structures, an associated access and yard/parking area. The remaining area comprises of trees/vegetation and is not included within the application site. The buildings have a combined floor area of approximately 630 sq.m. The site is served by a vehicular access, which connects, at a 90- degree angle to the main access from Lodge Lane, which also serves the adjacent residential development.
1.2 Planning History
1986, Caravan for farm worker, approved (86/00296) 2006, Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings and cottage to form six residential units with garaging, external store, courtyard and gardens, approved (06/00411/COU) 2007, Erection of agricultural storage buildings, approved (07/00465/AGR) 2008, Conversion of existing barns to 2 residential units including detached garaged, withdrawn (08/00285/COU) 2008, Demolition of existing building and construction of replacement dwelling with detached garages, withdrawn (08/00286/FUL) 2008, Conversion of existing redundant agricultural buildings to form 3 dwellings, withdrawn (08/00725/COU) 2008, Conversion of existing barn and erection of detached garage, approved (08/00929/COU) 2009, Demolition of existing buildings and construction of replacement dwelling [resubmission of 08/00286/COU], approved (09/00261/FUL) 2012, Alteration to car park layout [amendment to 09/00969/COU], approved (08/00969/AMEND) 2014, Retention of modified agricultural storage building, approved (14/00370/FUL) 2014, Conversion of garages to residential use - 1 x 4 bedroom dwelling, approved (14/00383/FUL) 2015, Conversion of redundant farm buildings into 1 x 4 bed property, approved (14/00872/FUL)
Page 65 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
2016, Discharge of condition Nos. 5, 9, 11, 12 and 13, approved (14/00383/COND) 2016, Formation of new access including erection of wall, piers and gates and laying of stone track, refused (15/00931/FUL) - APPEAL dismissed (16/00026/REF) 2016, Conversion of agricultural building to 1 dwelling, refused (16/00025/AGRRES) 2016, Conversion of garages to residential use - 1 x 4 bed dwelling, approved (14/00383/COND2) 2016, Conditions 10 and 16, approved (14/00872/COND2) 2016, Changes to window design and placement, approved (14/00383/AMEND) 2016, Formation of new access including erection of wall, piers and gates, timber panel fencing and laying of stone track, approved (16/00582/FUL) 2017, Enforcement Notice - Without planning permission, the material change of use of the land for the siting of a portable building and shipping containers. Unauthorised stationing of a portacabin and shipping containers (17/00024/ENF) - APPEAL dismissed 2018, Retention of fencing to site entrance, approved (18/00345/FUL) 2019, Proposed change of use of barns from agricultural sui generis class to general storage use (B8 use class)(Retrospective), refused (19/00627/COU), APPEAL Dismissed
As demonstrated above the site has a long and complicated planning history.
In summary, the smaller barn was approved for agricultural purposes in 2007, whilst the larger (north-western) barn is the result of a retrospective planning application which was granted in 2014 and described as 'retention of modified agricultural storage building'. A planning condition imposed on the consent restricted the use of 'any adjacent farm buildings' to crop storage and the storage of farm equipment (excluding any maintenance of any farm vehicles or equipment and excluded the housing of livestock); the stated reason for the condition was on amenity grounds.
The site has been the subject of enforcement investigations over subsequent years, in respect of alleged unauthorised uses.
2. APPLICATION DETAILS
2.1 The proposal
2.1.1 This is a retrospective application which proposes to change the use of the barns from agricultural/sui generis use to B8 (general storage) use. The application site is confined to the buildings themselves, the yard/parking area and vehicular access.
2.1.2 The application is accompanied by a Site Access Design plan which proposes highway safety improvements to the vehicular access into the site. This is a resubmission of application reference 19/00627/COU which was refused at committee and a subsequent appeal was dismissed.
2.2 Background/Appeal decision
2.2.1 As previously mentioned, the lawful use of the barns was for agricultural purposes, limited to crop storage and the storage of farm equipment. During 2019, in response to investigations by the Council's enforcement team, planning application reference 19/00627/COU was submitted to seek to continue the unauthorised general storage use of the barns and surrounding land for storage or distribution (Class B8) purposes.
Page 66 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
2.2.2 Whilst the application was recommended for approval by the case officer, it was refused by the Planning Committee on 17th December 2019. The reason for refusal was:
The proposed use of the buildings for general storage would cause annoyance to nearby residents as a result of noise and disturbance, contrary to Policy EQ9 of the Local Plan.
2.2.3 During the Planning Committee several Members raised concerns that the use would represent overdevelopment of the site and the impact from large vehicles regularly visiting the site within close proximity of nearby dwellings. The application was subject to a subsequent appeal which was dismissed in October 2020 on the following grounds:
• Areas of open storage would constitute inappropriate development within the Green Belt and a condition to restrict these elements would be unenforceable/imprecise due to conflict with the application plan. • Safe and suitable access could not be achieved.
2.2.4 This application seeks to address the concerns raised by the appeal inspector and Members as part of the previous planning application and appeal. The appeal decision is discussed in greater detail later in this report.
3. POLICY CONTEXT
3.1 Within the Development Boundary
3.2 Adopted Core Strategy Core Policy 7: Employment and Economic Development Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Policy EV5: Rural Development Policy EV6: Re-use of redundant rural buildings Policy EV12: Parking Provision
3.3 National Planning Policy Framework Chapter 6: Building a Strong Competitive Economy Chapter 13: Protecting Green Belt land
3.3.1 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise.
3.3.2 The law makes a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it is to be given. Whether a particular consideration is material will depend on the circumstances of the case and is ultimately a decision for the courts. Provided regard is had to all material considerations, it is for the decision maker to decide what weight is to be given to the material considerations in each case, and (subject to the test of reasonableness) the courts will not get involved in the question of weight.
4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Councillor Hollis (comments received 25/05/21) Wishes to call in the application on the basis of highway safety concerns, impact on Green Belt and potential for expansion of the proposed use.
Page 67 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Parish Council (comments received 25/05/21) Objects on the following grounds:
- It is the Parish Council's policy to object to all retrospective planning applications; - No specific details supplied type/size of vehicles and objects to be stored on site; - Risk that general storage areas could be converted into dwellings; - Residential Amenity - potential for noise and disturbance to affect the nearby dwellings; - Inappropriate Development - unacceptable impact on the openness of the green belt; - Highway Safety - potential to impact on highway safety accessing the very busy Lodge Lane route.
Planning Enforcement (comments received 06/05/21) Wishes to be kept informed of the outcome as there is an open enforcement case relating to the use of the building.
Environmental Health (expired 26/05/21) No comments received.
County Highways Officer (comments received 24/05/21) No objections on highway grounds subject to conditions to secure the access, parking, turning areas and highway improvements as proposed. Notes to officer: The proposed development is situated off a classified road subject to a speed limit of 50 mph. There has been no recorded vehicular accidents at this location in the last 5 years. Although the proposed use is already on going. This appears to be a similar application to a previous one 2 years ago and with the reconstruction of the existing access to enable vehicles to enter the site more easily, there would be no more vehicular movements than at the moment.
Neighbours (expired 24/05/21) One objection has been received via Councillor Hollis which is submitted on behalf of Lodge Farm Residents. Key points as follows:
• Highways The design of the access is flawed and incapable of safely accommodating an inward LGV (light goods vehicle) movement without impairing the safety of vehicles upon the principal road. The conflict between entering and exiting vehicles cannot be resolved. The reasoning of the decision maker in the appeal against the previous refusal (APP/C3430/W/20/3250012), is still pertinent and should be adhered to in the determination of the current application.
• Green Belt The appeal decision relating to the previous application is still pertinent to the current application which has not changed in substance from the previous submission. The decision maker determined that the proposal was contrary to green belt policy.
• Potential expansion of the current use If the commercial use of the site were to be permitted, it would be down to the local planning authority (LPA) to monitor usage and the number of vehicles using the access. It is not feasible for the LPA to monitor this on a day to day basis. Any limiting condition would fail the tests set out in planning guidance for the use of conditions, as pointed out in the appeal decision.
The objection from Lodge Farm Residents is accompanied by a Transport Statement which will be considered further within this report.
Page 68 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Site Notice (expired 16/06/21) No comments received.
5. APPRAISAL
5.1 This application has been called into Planning Committee by Councillor Hollis who raises concerns regarding highway safety, impact on Green Belt and expansion of the proposed use.
5.2 Key Issues
- Principle of the development - Impact on the character of the area - Residential Amenity - Highways
5.3 Principle of the development
5.3.1 Paragraph 83 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that planning decisions should enable the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of businesses in rural areas, both through the conversion of existing buildings and well-designed new buildings.
5.3.2 Core Policy 7 of the Core Strategy (CS) advocates that outside the main/local/small service villages proposals for small scale employment development and the sustainable diversification of the rural economy (including the conversion and re-use of suitable redundant buildings for employment use) will be supported where they are consistent with Policy EV5 of the CS, which provides general support for rural diversification.
5.3.3 In Green Belt terms, as identified within paragraph 145 of the NPPF, there is a presumption against the construction of new buildings within the Green Belt, subject to a number of exceptions. Paragraphs 145 and 146 identify the types of developments which are not considered inappropriate within the Green Belt, one of which is the re-use of buildings providing they are of permanent and substantial construction and that the openness and function of the Green Belt is preserved. Policy GB1 of the Core Strategy allows for the re-use of a building in the Green Belt, again, providing that the proposed use would not harm its openness or the fulfilment of its purpose.
5.3.4 Local residents and a Ward Member have raised concerns regarding the impact on the proposal on the Green Belt. Reference is made to the 2020 appeal (reference APP/C3430/W/20/3250012) wherein the inspector concluded that the proposal taken as a whole amounted to inappropriate development within the Green Belt.
5.3.5 As noted by the Inspector, in that instance the application involved a relatively extensive curtilage which included land outside of the buildings to the north-east and north- west (total application site measuring around 5600 sq.m).
5.3.6 The Inspector noted that "the site is relatively extensive with substantial area of open land around the barns. The use of the open land for general storage uses of goods, materials, machinery etc would be harmful to the openness of the Green Belt and would encroach on the countryside".
Page 69 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.3.7 However, in terms of storage within the buildings, they considered that "the use of the barns for general storage would not affect the openness of the Green Belt. Nor would it add to the sprawl of large built-up areas or encroach on the countryside. The use of the barns would therefore not conflict with these, or any of the other, purposes of including land within the Green Belt".
5.3.8 In this case, it is proposed to change the use of the buildings only (as opposed to internal and external storage proposed as part of the previous application). The red edge plan which accompanies the application is drawn tightly around the application buildings, excluding the remaining land to the north, east and west, equating to an application site measuring approximately 2300 sq.m (as opposed to the previous 5600 sq.m.)
5.3.9 As highlighted by local residents, the appeal Inspector also raised concerns regarding the use of conditions to restrict external storage, as they considered that such a condition would not have met the precision or enforceability tests for conditions (as set out within the NPPF and Government Planning Practice Guidance). In that case such a condition would not have met those tests specifically because it conflicted with what was shown on the application plan, which (as mentioned) included a far more extensive red edge incorporating land around the sides of the buildings.
5.3.10 Given that the current application relates to internal storage only, I consider that there is no conflict with the Inspectors decision. The buildings are of substantial and permanent construction and the openness or function of the Green Belt would not be harmed by the proposed change of use which is internal only. If members are minded to approve the application, the permission would relate only to the buildings/land within the red edge. If any unauthorised external storage were to take place outside of the red edge line, it would be subject to enforcement action in the usual way. The case officer has discussed the current proposal with the Council's Enforcement Manager who is content that external storage could be enforced against, should any take place.
5.3.11 On that basis it is considered that the proposal would constitute an appropriate form of development within the Green Belt and is in compliance with paragraphs 83 and 146 of the NPPF and Policies EV5 and GB1 of the Core Strategy.
5.4 Impact on the character of the area
5.4.1 Policy EQ11 states that 'in terms of volume, scale, massing and materials, development should contribute positively to the street scene and surrounding buildings, whilst respecting the scale of spaces and buildings in the local area'. The proposed change of use relates to the internal use of the buildings only, as such there would be no material impact upon the character or appearance of the area. Consequently, the proposal is in accordance with the aims of policy EQ11.
5.5 Residential Amenity
5.5.1 In accordance with Local Plan Policy EQ9, all development proposals should take into account the amenity of any nearby residents, particularly with regard to privacy, security, noise and disturbance, pollution, odours and daylight.
5.5.2 As previously noted, planning application 19/00627/COU was refused at Planning Committee due to concerns regarding potential noise and disturbance to residents from the general storage use. This matter was considered as part of the subsequent appeal where the
Page 70 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Inspector concluded that "there would be negligible harm by virtue of noise and disturbance arising from the use of the access as a result of the proposal" and…"the noise and disturbance arising from activities associated with general, as opposed to agricultural, storage would not be so harmful to the living conditions of occupiers of the nearby dwellings as to justify withholding permission particularly as hours of use could be restricted by condition".
5.5.3 The Inspectors report also acknowledges that the use of the site at present is relatively low key and this could intensify as a result of the proposal. However, it was also noted by the Inspector that intensification could also occur in association with the permitted uses.
5.5.4 On the basis of the above comments and given that the current application is for internal storage only, I conclude that there is no conflict with Policy EQ9. In line with comments from the Environmental Health Officer as part of the previous application, it is considered appropriate to include a working hours condition as a further safeguard against any noise and disturbance.
5.6 Highways
5.6.1 Paragraph 108 of the NPPF notes that safe and suitable access to sites should be achievable for all users and in line with paragraph 109, development should only be refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety or the residual impacts on the road network would be severe.
5.6.2 The residents of Lodge Lane Farm and a Ward Member have objected to the proposal on the basis of highway safety. They consider that the design of the access is flawed and incapable of safely accommodating an inward LGV (light goods vehicle) movement without impairing the safety of vehicles upon the principal road. They also raise concerns that a condition to limit the number of vehicles using the access would not meet the enforceability test for planning conditions.
5.6.3 Representations from local residents have been accompanied by a Transport Statement (TS) prepared by ADC Infrastructure Ltd. The key points identified in the TS are as follows:
- There are existing accidents along the A460 and within the vicinity of another existing access, demonstrating that turning vehicles increase the risk of accidents.
- The trip rates provided in the Applicant's Transport Statement are unrealistically low and more robust trip rates show that HGVs would use the site in the AM and PM peaks and there would be more throughout the day. There is a likelihood that two HGVs could enter and exit the site access at the same time.
- A revised swept path assessment shows a more realistic positioning of an HGV exiting the site as another enters at the same time. The swept paths show that the internal give-way line is too far away from the access junction and an exiting vehicle cannot anticipate the arrival of an entering HGV. This would therefore result in the entering HGV over hanging the A460 carriageway, a busy road with increasing traffic volumes and high speeds.
5.6.4 The site is accessed via an existing vehicular access which turns off Lodge Lane and runs roughly parallel to it. As part of the previous planning application (reference
Page 71 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
19/00627/COU) the Highway Authority initially objected on the grounds of increased danger to highway users due to increased use of a sub-standard access. Further information was submitted to demonstrate that the existing junction geometry could accommodate cars and typical light commercial vehicles (LCV or LGV). Taking this into account the Highway Authority withdrew their objection subject to no deliveries being made by vehicles over 7.5 tonnes (to be secured via condition).
5.6.5 The appeal Inspector, however, was concerned that the geometry of the access after the mouth of the junction would not necessarily be apparent to drivers of larger vehicles until after the commitment to turn off the carriageway had been made, potentially resulting in longer vehicles overhanging the carriageway whilst attempting to manoeuvre into the site thereby harming, rather than improving, road safety. As such, the proposed condition was not considered sufficient to prohibit access by larger vehicles. On that basis the Inspector concluded that safe and suitable access could not be achieved.
5.6.6 In light of the Inspectors concerns, the applicant has entered into pre-application discussions with the Highway Authority. The current proposal has been formulated on that basis and seeks to address the Inspectors comments, incorporating improvements to the site access to ensure that large vehicles can access the site safely. The works proposed include access and radii widening, white lines, give way signage and markings, the relocation of an access gate to allow two-way access and the relocation of the existing gates further along the driveway so that vehicles entering the site will not overhang the highway.
5.6.7 The TS submitted by local residents raises a number of concerns, one of which is that the trip rates used within Transport Statement submitted by the applicant are too low and that HGV's could end up overhanging the highway.
5.6.8 The applicant's TS notes that given the retrospective nature of the application; it is possible to quantify the number of trips to the site. The use would, at most, be expected to generate 7 vehicle movements per day which represents only a very small proportion of vehicle movements along Lodge Lane. The infrequent nature of trips to the site, in particular in relation to large vehicles, in combination with the proposed improvement works are considered to fully address any perceived highway safety issues associated with the proposed use of the barns for general storage purposes.
5.6.9 The Highway Authority has been consulted and has commented as follows: 'the proposed development is situated off a classified road subject to a speed limit of 50 mph. There have been no recorded vehicular accidents at this location in the last 5 years. Although the proposed use is already on going. This appears to be a similar application to a previous one 2 years ago and with the reconstruction of the existing access to enable vehicles to enter the site more easily, there would be no more vehicular movements than at the moment'. They also consider that the physical restrictions of the site access will inevitably limit its use to smaller commercial vehicles. Therefore, no highways objections are raised, subject to conditions requiring the re-construction of the access, provision of the access drive, parking/turning areas and the completion of road markings/signage.
5.6.10 Overall, subject to the imposition of the afore mentioned conditions, safe and suitable access to the site would be provided and the development would not have a harmful impact on highway safety. It would therefore accord with paragraphs 108 and 109 of the NPPF.
6. CONCLUSIONS
Page 72 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
6.1 The proposal to change the use of the existing buildings from agricultural to general storage is considered to be appropriate in principle and would cause no material harm to the openness or function of the Green Belt or the character of the surrounding area. There would be no material harm to the amenity of neighbouring properties and the access improvements proposed would ensure that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on highway safety. The proposal is in accordance with the relevant policies of the NPPF and the Core Strategy, as such approval is recommended.
7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions
7.1 Subject to the following condition(s):
1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: Location Plan 1:1250, 210442-02 Access Design 1336/801 Dutch Barn Existing Plan _ Elevation 1336/702 Green Shed Existing Plan _ Elevation received 26/04/21.
3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification), the premises hereby approved shall only be used for ‘General Storage’ purposes within Class B8 of the schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 or any other subsequent equivalent order, and no other use as defined within Schedule 2, Part 3, Classes B8 or ancillary vehicle maintenance or the storage/keeping of livestock shall be carried out on the site.
4. There shall be no outside/external storage of any materials, goods, plant, equipment.
5. No work shall be carried out, and no deliveries shall be dispatched to or from the premises/site other than between the hours of 8.00am to 6.30pm on Mondays to Fridays and between the hours of 10am to 2pm on Saturdays and no such operations shall take place at any time on Sundays and Bank Holidays.
6. The permission hereby granted does not grant or imply consent for the installation of any means of lighting on the site or the building. Any lighting of the building, road/access way or parking areas shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval before installation.
7. The existing access to the site within the limits of the public highway shall be reconstructed and completed within 12 months of the date of this decision.
8. The access drive, parking, servicing and turning areas shall be provided in accordance with the approved plans within 12 months of the date of this decision
9. The road markings and signage indicated on submitted drawing No. 210442-02 shall be completed within 12 months of the date of this decision.
Reasons
Page 73 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
3. To limit the nature and extent of the use of the site to ensure that the use of the premises does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
4. To limit the nature and extent of the use of the site to ensure that the use of the premises does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
5. To ensure that the use of the premises does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
6. To ensure that the use of the premises does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
7. In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Staffordshire County Council requirements for a vehicular access crossing, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework
8. In the interest of highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework
9. In the interest of highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework
INFORMATIVE
The reconstruction of the existing vehicular access shall require a Highway Works Agreement with Staffordshire County Council. The applicant is requested to contact Staffordshire County Council in order to secure the Agreement. The link below is to the Highway Works Information Pack including an application Form. Please complete and send to the address 4 indicated on the application Form or email to ([email protected]). The applicant is advised to begin this process well in advance of any works taking place in order to meet any potential timescales. https://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/Highways/highwayscontrol/HighwaysWorkAgreements.as px
Proactive Statement - In dealing with the application, the Local Planning Authority has approached decision making in a positive and creative way, seeking to approve sustainable development where possible, in accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2019.
Page 74 of 150 Jennifer Mincher - Senior Planning Officer: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Lodge Farm Lodge Lane Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS11 0LT
Page 75 of 150
Page 76 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021
21/00522/COU Mr Julian Wilson LAPLEY, STRETTON & WHEATON ASTON Councillor B Cox Councillor V Jackson
Cross Styles, Ivetsey Road, Wheaton Aston, Staffordshire ST19 9QW
Change of use application only. Permission requested to change current use classification C3 Dwellinghouse to C2 Residential Institutions. Existing 5 bedroomed dwelling house and contained garden. Change use to provide 24hr residential care and support services to non- related occupants as a managed service
1. SITE DESCRIPTION, BACKGROUND AND PLANNING HISTORY
1.1 Site description and background
1.1.1 The host dwelling is a large two-storey detached property situated on Ivetsey Road, around 500m south of the Wheaton Aston settlement boundary. Immediately to the south- west is Wardies Livery/Greyhouse Farm and the associated residential property, Birchenese, with open agricultural land to the north and east. Residential properties in Bellhurst Lane lie further to the south.
1.1.2 Planning permission has been granted for the erection of a new detached dwelling on the south-west side of Cross Styles (Refs: 19/00116/OUT and 21/00028/REM). This permission has yet to commence.
1.2 Site History
19/00116/OUT - Erection of 1no. dwelling including layout and access with all other matters reserved – Approved. 21/00028/REM - Access, layout, scale, external materials, height – Approved.
1.3 Pre-application discussions
1.3.1 None.
2. APPLICATION DETAILS
2.1 The Proposal
Page 77 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021
2.1.1 This application seeks permission for the change of use of the existing C3 dwelling to a C2 Residential Institution, providing 24hr residential care and support services to non-related occupants as a managed service. This would involve the establishment of a small residential service for 4/5 under 18-year-old Children and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHs) patients, who need to be discharged from hospital, but are not able to return to their home environment, due to circumstances beyond their control.
2.1.2 It is understood that the service will be support led, with an on-site care registered manager. The applicant anticipates that the average length of stays would be 1 to 2 years, with beds funded and filled by a mixture of Local Authority referrals or from the local Clinical Commissioning Group. The proximity of the host building to the existing Huntercombe Hospital around 1 mile away, will enable the facility to access the pool of specialist support staff and additional supporting services based at the hospital site.
2.1.3 No external alterations are proposed to either the host dwelling or its grounds as a consequence of the proposed change of use. Thus, the proposed change of use would not have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the countryside.
2.2 Agents Submissions:
Planning Statement
3. POLICY CONTEXT
3.1 The site lies in the Open Countryside.
3.2 Adopted Core Strategy (CS) Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy for South Staffordshire Core Policy 2: Protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport Core Policy 15: Children and Young People Policy EQ2: Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation Policy EQ4: Protecting and enhancing the character and appearance of the Landscape Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Policy EQ11: Wider Design Considerations Policy H5: Specialist Housing Accommodation Appendix 5 Car parking standards Appendix 7 Space about Dwellings
3.3 South Staffordshire Design Guide (SPD) 3.4 National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) 6. Building a strong competitive economy
Page 78 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021
8. Promoting health and safe communities 12. Achieving well-designed places
3.4.1 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise.
3.4.2 The law makes a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it is to be given. Whether a particular consideration is material will depend on the circumstances of the case and is ultimately a decision for the courts. Provided regard is had to all material considerations, it is for the decision maker to decide what weight is to be given to the material considerations in each case, and (subject to the test of reasonableness) the courts will not get involved in the question of weight.
4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
No Councillor comments
Lapley, Stretton and Wheaton Aston Parish Council (17.06.2021) – Object, on the following grounds:
o Questions whether the property is correctly configured for the management of the business/provide adequate staffing facilities; o Inadequate parking; o No footpath link to either the village or Huntercombe Hospital; o The facility would be better located within the grounds of Huntercombe Hospital; o Noise pollution; o Local businesses reportedly had issues with similar homes in the locality, particularly in relation to noise and disturbance; o Adjacent land has allegedly been granted permission. How can this land be restricted to residential use only and ensure that the home does not expand into this area.
Environmental Health (07.06.2021) – No comments.
Staffs CC Highways (14.06.2021) – No objections. The proposed development is located in a rural area and accessed off a classified road subject to the National Speed limit of 60 mph. There has been no recorded vehicular accidents at this location in the last 5 years. The proposed use will have similar vehicular movements to the existing use and therefore there will be no difference on the impact to the public highway.
3 representations received from nearby residents raising the following issues:
o Similar change of use nearby at Bellhurst Cottage has resulted in anti-social behavior, adversely impacting on neighbouring residents/uses;
Page 79 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021
o Proximity of the site to existing commercial and residential uses would increase the potential for anti- social behavior; o The facility would be better located at Huntercombe Hospital which has extensive grounds; o Existing property not appropriately laid out, with no office space or staff facilities; o Insufficient parking and increase vehicular movements; o Adverse impact on highway safety; o Occupants would not be able to access Huntercombe Hospital on foot due to lack of footpaths, lighting and nature of route; o Conflict with policies in the CS; o Adverse impact on neighbouring uses/properties in terms of noise and disturbance, privacy and security; o Issues with foul and surface water drainage.
Site notice expired 5 July 2021
5. APPRAISAL
5.1 This application has been called into committee by Councillor Brian Cox who has also requested a site visit.
6. Main Issues
6.1 Taking account of the background and details of the proposal set out in sections 1 and 2 of the report, the main issues in this case are:
o Whether or not the site provides a sustainable location for the proposed use;
o Whether the proposal would provide an acceptable living environment for existing and future residents; and
o The effect of the proposed development on highway safety/parking.
6.2 Whether or not the site provides a sustainable location for the proposed use
6.2.1 The host property lies in the Open Countryside. Policy OC1 of the CS states that development in the Open Countryside will normally be permitted where the proposed development is for, amongst other things, ‘the re-use of a building provided that; the proposed use of any building (taking into account the size of any extensions, rebuilding or required alterations), would not harm, the appearance or character and local distinctiveness of the Open Countryside.’
Page 80 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021
6.2.2 The proposed change of use does not seek to make any alterations to the property itself or its grounds. As such, it would accord with Policy OC1 of the CS in this respect. If any new boundary treatments are required to protect the amenities of neighbouring residents/uses, given the presence of existing boundary fencing on the adjacent commercial site, I do not consider that such features would adversely impact on the character and appearance of the countryside.
6.2.3 It is understood that the proposed residential institution would accommodate between 4 and 5 under 18-year-old residents who are CAMHs patients and need to be discharged from hospital but are not able to return to their home environment. The service would be support led, with an on-site care registered manager and a total of 7 full-time equivalent members of staff employed at the institution on a rota basis. This would include specialist support staff from the nearby Huntercombe Hospital which lies around 1 mile away on Ivetsy Bank.
6.2.4 The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) seeks to support a prosperous rural economy, with planning policies and decisions to enable, amongst other things ‘the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of businesses in rural areas, both through the conversion of existing buildings and well-designed new buildings.’ Another objective of the Framework is to promote healthy, safe and inclusive communities for all.
6.2.5 Core Policy 15 of the CS seeks to support proposals and initiatives which improve access to services for children and young people, with Policy H5 of the CS relating to the provision of specialist housing accommodation. The latter states that: ‘the Council will enable and support the provision of specialist housing accommodation in South Staffordshire. Sites for sheltered accommodation, nursing/residential care homes, dementia care units, and retirement villages to meet the needs of the District will also be supported. Sites may be allocated in the Site Allocations DPD or approved through planning permission.
In identifying sites and/or determining planning applications development must: a) be in a sustainable location and considered suitable by virtue of its size and scale in relation to an existing village and its services, and its proximity to public transport links and key infrastructure and services; b) consider the re-use of previously developed land (brownfield land) in sustainable locations, provided it is not of high environmental value, as a priority including the extension of existing nursing/residential care homes and/or redevelopment of existing sites or co-location of facilities where there is an acknowledged need.’
6.2.6 The host property is situated around 500m south of Wheaton Aston and approximately 1 mile from Huntercombe Hospital which would offer specialist support staff and supporting services for the proposed home. I acknowledge that there is no direct footpath link from the site to Wheaton Aston village or Huntercombe Hospital. However, given its proximity to the village, the support services provided by the hospital, and the fact that it would involve the re- use of an existing building, I consider that overall the site would provide a sustainable location
Page 81 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021 for the proposed residential home which would help contribute to the provision of specialist housing accommodation in the District. As such, it would accord with Policies OC1, H5 and Core Policy 15 of the CS and the Framework in this respect.
6.2.7 Although a nearby resident and the PC have suggested the facility would be better located within the grounds of the Hospital, I have found that this application would accord with the aforementioned local and national planning policies. Therefore, it is not necessary to consider alternative sites for the proposed use.
6.3 Residential amenity
6.3.1 In accordance with Core Strategy Policy EQ9, all development proposals should take into account the amenity of any nearby residents, particularly with regard to privacy, security, noise and disturbance, pollution, odours and daylight. This policy closely aligns with the Framework objective, to create places that provide a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.
6.3.2 Wardies Livery/Greyhouse Farm lie immediately to the south-west of Cross Styles. These are existing commercial premises, with the nearest residential property, Birchenese situated further to the south-west. Given the relatively limited size of the facility, the presence of the intervening commercial use at Greyhouse Farm and separation distance involved (i.e. around 80m between Cross Styles and Birchenese), I do not consider that the proposed use would adversely impact on the amenities of the occupiers of this property either in terms of noise and disturbance or loss of privacy.
6.3.3 Concerns have been raised from nearby occupiers regarding security/anti-social behavior associated with the proposed facility. However, I consider that through the appropriate management of the facility by the on-site care manager and the provision of appropriate boundary fencing, these matters can be adequately controlled.
6.3.4 It has also been suggested that the facility could generate issues with anti-social behavior affecting Wardies Livery which lies directly to the south-west of the site. However, if appropriate fencing was installed along the boundaries of the site, I see no reason why the facility of this size (i.e. 4/5 residents) would adversely impact on the livery from noise and disturbance associated with the use.
6.3.5 Planning permission has been granted for the erection of a new dwelling immediately adjacent to Cross Styles, on land boarding Grayhouse Farm. This permission which has yet to be implemented relates to a residential dwelling (C3 use) and not a residential Institution (C2 use). It has been suggested by interested parties that this site has been purchased for use as a C2 residential institution. However, no evidence has been provided to substantiate this claim. Moreover, planning permission would be required if the adjacent site were to be used for this purpose. No application has been submitted to the Council for the use of the adjoining land for a residential institution.
Page 82 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021
6.3.6 Clearly, given the approved dwellings proximity to the proposed residential home, once constructed, there is the potential for the proposed use to adversely impact on the living conditions of the future occupiers of this unit, particularly with regard to noise and distance generated by the use. Nevertheless, the proposal does not seek to make any external alterations to the existing building, with the proposed institution only accommodating between 4 and 5 residents. A condition can be imposed restricting the number of proposed residents, to limit any potential impact. Furthermore, it is understood that only 3 members of staff would ordinarily be on-site at any one time, with a fourth member of staff present when additional services are required. Given, the limited number of proposed residents and staff members, I do not consider that the level of noise and disturbance associated with the use and occupation of the home would be significantly greater than that associated with a large residential property.
6.3.7 There is currently no existing boundary treatment between Cross Styles and the site of the proposed new dwelling. One of the planning conditions attached to this consent requires details of boundary treatments to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. To ensure that an adequate boundary treatment is provided between the host dwelling and the new dwelling/adjacent livery, a condition is recommended, requiring boundary treatments to be agreed before the occupation of the adjacent property.
6.3.8 Although there are other residential properties in the general vicinity, these dwellings are sufficiently distant to not be unduly affected by the proposed use.
6.3.9 Turning to the suitability of the host dwelling for the intended use, it has 4 bedrooms and bathroom facilities on the first floor, with an office/guest bedroom on the ground floor. Therefore, I consider that appropriate facilities would be available for residents/staff without making significant alterations to the internal layout of the property. Cross Styles also sits in a large plot, providing suitable outdoor space for residents.
6.3.10 For the above reasons, I find that the proposal would provide an acceptable living environment for both neighbouring and proposed residents. It would therefore accord with Policies EQ9 and EQ11 of the CS and the Framework in this respect.
6.4 Highway safety and parking;
6.4.1 The existing driveway and parking bays are large enough to accommodate 6 vehicles. Consequently, notwithstanding the concerns of the PC and nearby residents, there is more than sufficient on-site parking to accommodate vehicles associated with staff members/visitors. The scheme would also satisfy the Council parking guidelines in this respect.
6.4.2 Given the limited number of residents and staff members, I do not consider that the proposed facility would result in a significant uplift in the number of vehicle movements, compared with the use and occupation of a large detached house (i.e. the existing use of Cross Styles). As such, it would not have an adverse impact on highway safety in the area. 6.5 Other matters
Page 83 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021
6.5.1 As the proposal would not alter the layout of the existing property, there would be no impact on foul/surface water drainage.
7. CONCLUSIONS
7.1 For the reasons set out, the proposal would provide a sustainable location for the proposed residential home which would help contribute to the provision of specialist housing accommodation in the District. It would also preserve the residential amenities of nearby occupiers and not have a detrimental impact on highway safety. It would therefore accord with Policies OC1, EQ4, EQ9, EQ11, H5 and Core Policy 15 of the CS and the Framework.
8. RECOMMENDATION – Approve, subject to the following conditions:
1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawing Nos: 1451/2021/01 Location Plan and 1451/2021/02 Site Plan Proposed floor plan 3A and Proposed elevations 4A received on 02.04.2021.
3. The number of residents accommodated at the residential institution shall not exceed 5 unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.
4. No development shall commence until details of the boundary treatment to be erected along the boundaries of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved boundary treatments shall be installed in accordance with the approved details before the approved residential institution is brought into use.
Reasons
1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
3. To safeguard the residential amenities of nearby occupiers/uses, in accordance with policies EQ9 and EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
4. To safeguard the residential amenities of nearby occupiers/uses, in accordance with policies EQ9 and EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
Proactive Statement - In dealing with the application, the Local Planning Authority has approached decision making in a positive and creative way, seeking to approve sustainable
Page 84 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021 development where possible, in accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2019.
Page 85 of 150 Tom Cannon: Planning Consultant – Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Cross Styles Ivetsey Road Wheaton Aston Staffordshire ST19 9QW
Page 86 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
21/00604/VAR Mr Adrian Maclaughlin PENKRIDGE Councillor J Chapman
Dunston Business Village Stafford Road Penkridge Staffordshire
Application Reference Number: 20/01028/FUL Date of Decision: 24/05/2021
Variation of Condition 7: To allow Units 33, 34 and 35 to be used to provide education - use class F1(a) Provision of education
Condition 7 to read as: The development hereby approved shall be used as follows; units 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 & 32 shall be used for offices and units 33, 34 and 35 shall be used for education (use class F1(a) Provision of education) and for offices, and for no other purposes (including any other purpose in Class E of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended.
1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY
1.1 Site Description
1.1.1 Dunston Business Village is located north of Penkridge near to the village of Dunston and is accessed off the A449 which is a major road. The business village is well connected for this reason.
1.1.2 The application relates to the existing business park, Dunston Business Village. It originally involved the redevelopment of a cluster of redundant agricultural buildings which were converted to offices for small and medium sized businesses with associated car parking following the grant of planning permission began in 2006. The site has an unauthorised construction yard to the north and a car park to the west which was approved as part of a later consent. There have been a number of planning applications relating to the site in recent years, some allowing for the expansion of the Business Village outside the original approved area for car parking and log cabins. The most recent being two storey office buildings were approved under planning permission 17/00250/FUL.
1.1.3 The site relative to this application relates to land adjoining the western edges of the site. The land measures on average 70m wide by 136m deep. Planning permission was recently granted for the 12 log cabins on the land with a condition restricting the use for offices under Use Class E (20/01028/FUL).
1.2 Planning History
2006, Change of use of agricultural buildings to business use B1, Refused, (06/00624/COU) allowed on appeal. 2007, Change of use of agricultural buildings to business use B1, Approved, (07/00222/COU) 2007, Change of use of agricultural building to business use B1, approved (07/00572/COU) 2008, Demolition of 3 grain silos and replacement building for B1 office use, Approved, (08/00569/COU) 2008, Change of use of agricultural barn to office use B1, Approved, (08/00570/COU) 2009, Change of use to allow B1 office usage on mezzanine floor plus provision of up to 27 external parking spaces, Approved, (09/00107/COU) 2010, Change of use of farmland to car park, Approved, (10/00013/COU)
Page 87 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
2010, Change of use of barn 6 from garaging to office [B1(a)] and amendment to car park approved under 10/00013/COU to provide five additional spaces, Approved (10/00430/COU) 2010, Architectural improvements and raising the roof of barn 7 for office use, Approved, (10/00981/FUL) 2011, Provision of temporary office accommodation of approx. 2460sqm plus temporary additional car parking during conversion of barns 6 and 7. Freestanding log cabins on slabs, Approved subject to Section 106 agreement, (11/00892/FUL) 2011, Variation of condition 14 of planning approval 10/00430/COU - Before the approved parking area is brought into use the hardcore parking area immediately to the north of barns 6 and 7 and outlined in green on the approved plan shall be returned to its former condition (apart from the area to provide the new service road) and the materials arising therefrom permanently removed from site, Approved, (11/01026/VAR) 2013, Provision of temporary office accommodation (B1) comprising 2460 square metres, plus temporary additional car parking during the conversion of barns 6&7. Freestanding log cabins on slabs, Approved, (13/00756/VAR) 2013, Provision of office accommodation (B1) comprising approximately 2,500 square metres of floor space plus additional car parking, comprising free standing log cabins on slabs, Approved subject to S106 agreement, 13/00757/FUL 2014, Change of use from office (B1) to a bistro (A3) incorporating a single storey rear extension, approved (14/00380/COU) 2015, Demolition of barn 7m which is existing (and has planning approval for 10, 191 sq. ft. of office space over three floors - Planning Ref : 08/00570/COU). Demolition of barn 6 which is existing (and has planning approval for 17,156 sq. ft. of office space over two floors - Planning Ref : 09/00107/COU).Replacing the demolished barns with 16No. log cabins 12 of which (cabins numbered 24-35 on the proposed site layout) will be elevated on timber decking to allow ground level car parking beneath. Cabins numbered 20-23 will all be at ground level, with additional parking, approved (15/00469FUL) Demolition of barn 7 which is existing (and has planning approval for 10, 191 sq. ft. of office space over three floors - Planning Ref : 08/00570/COU). 2015, Demolition of barn 7 which is existing (and has planning approval for 10, 191 sq. ft. of office space over three floors - Planning Ref : 08/00570/COU), withdrawn 2016, Provision of a temporary car park for approx. 100 vehicles to enable the construction of 12 log cabins (Numbers 24 to 35) approved under planning approval 15/00469/FUL. For a temporary period of 18 months and the provision of a top soil earth bund for the storage of the top soil stripped from the parking area for re-instatement on completion, withdrawn (16/00497/FUL) 2017, Erection of 2no. office buildings with car parking layout amended to suit. Plus three log cabins 21,22 and 23, approved (17/00250/FUL) 2019, Installation of bore holes for ground source heat pumps, approved (19/00593/LUE) 2020, Proposed extension to the Dunston Business Village comprising 12 new office cabins, extension to internal access road and car parking and tree and hedge planting, approved (20/01028/FUL)
2. APPLICATION DETAILS
2.1 Proposal
2.1.1 Planning permission was recently granted for an additional 12 log cabins and associated infrastructure under application 20/01028/FUL. Condition 7 of the decision notice restricted the usage of the log cabins for an office use under Use Class E of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended'. It reads:
Page 88 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
'The premises shall be used for offices and for no other purposes (including any other purpose in Class E of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended'.
2.1.2 This application seeks to vary the wording of this condition to allow for three of the log cabins (33, 34 and 35) to be used to provide education (class F1a) by a Staffordshire School. No alterations are required to the approved log cabins. The applicant is therefore requesting that Condition 7 be amended to the following:
'The development hereby approved shall be used as follows; units 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 & 32 shall be used for offices and units 33, 34 and 35 shall be used for education (use class F1(a) Provision of education) and for offices, and for no other purposes (including any other purpose in Class E of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended'.
2.2 Agent Submission
2.2.1 The application is accompanied by a planning statement which discusses the need and the suitability of the site. Some of the key points are:
- The Haven School is a 25-place special educational needs Ofsted registered school which caters for young people between the ages of 11 - 19 who have additional needs in the area of social, emotional and mental health. It is on the list of Department for Education approved independent schools, one of only 3 in Staffordshire. It is rated good in all areas by Ofsted. - The Haven's existing base is at Stafford Manor High School and the school now needs additional accommodation to cater for the demand for places by the local authority. The LA currently commissions all 25 places and continues to ask for more. Crucially the school also needs a more rural setting to respond to the emotional and mental health needs of the students. Students will benefit from access to outdoor activities on-site and where there is cleaner air, a lack of traffic noise and a countryside outlook. The school works therapeutically and the relatively tranquil environment at Dunston will support the emotional needs of the students. - The Haven School has a proven track record from OFSTED and has been asked by the Local Authority to provide additional places. This change of use will allow The Haven School to enhance the provision of community services in line with Core Policy 10 and policy EV9 - Students will be dropped off by parents and picked up again at the end of the day. This arrangement will not increase vehicle movements beyond those that were anticipated by Staffordshire Highways Team when the application of more offices was determined.
3. POLICY CONTEXT
3.1 Within the Open Countryside
3.2 Core Strategy
Strategic Objective 1 - To protect and maintain the Green Belt and Open Countryside in order to sustain the distinctive character of South Staffordshire. Strategic Objective 2 - To retain and reinforce the current pattern of villages across South Staffordshire, and in particular protect and retain the important strategic gaps between existing settlements in order to prevent the coalescence of settlements. Core Policy 1 - The Spatial Strategy
Page 89 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Policy OC1 - Development in the Open Countryside Beyond the West Midlands Green Belt Strategic Objective 4 - To protect, conserve and enhance the countryside, character and quality of the landscape and the diversity of wildlife and habitats. Policy EQ1 - Protecting, Expanding and Enhancing Natural Assets Policy EQ6 - Renewable Energy Policy EQ8 - Waste Policy EQ9 - Protecting Residential Amenity Policy EQ11 - Wider Design Considerations Policy EQ12 - Landscaping Strategic Objective 10 - To support the urban regeneration of the Black Country Major Urban Area by distributing new housing and employment growth within South Staffordshire in a way that supports existing local communities and in particular discourages out-migration from the Black Country Major Urban Area. Strategic Objective 11 - To support the growth of a vibrant, prosperous and sustainable local economy; sustain, improve and enhance the vitality and viability of village centres and promote South Staffordshire as a tourist destination. Strategic Objective 12 - To support thriving and sustainable communities by ensuring that local people enjoy access to jobs and key services such as social, health care, education, open space and recreation and other facilities. Strategic Objective 13 - To reduce the need to travel, to secure improvements to public transport infrastructure and services and make it safer and easier for the community to travel to jobs and key services by sustainable forms of transport, such as public transport, walking and cycling. Core Policy 7 - Employment and Economic Development Policy EV5 - Rural Employment Core Policy 10 - Sustainable Community Facilities and Services Policy EV9 - Provision and Retention of Local Community Facilities and Services Core Policy 11 - Sustainable Transport Policy EV11 - Sustainable Travel Policy EV12 - Parking Provision
3.3 Supplementary Planning Documents Design Guide
3.4 National Planning Policy Framework 3.4.1 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise.
3.4.2 The law makes a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it is to be given. Whether a particular consideration is material will depend on the circumstances of the case and is ultimately a decision for the courts. Provided regard is had to all material considerations, it is for the decision maker to decide what weight is to be given to the material considerations in each case, and (subject to the test of reasonableness) the courts will not get involved in the question of weight.
4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Councillor: No comments received, expired 25/06/2021
Parish Council: No comments received, expired 25/06/2021
Page 90 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
County Highways [11/06/2021]: No objections, subject to conditions
Neighbours: No comments received, expired 25/06/2021
A site notice and advert were posted on the 04/06/20 and 08/06/2020.
5. APPRAISAL
5.1 Planning permission 20/01028/FUL was approved by planning committee on the 16th of March 2021. This application to vary a condition attached to the afore mentioned permission variation has therefore been referred to a planning committee meeting for consideration.
5.2 Key Issue - Whether a change to the use restriction of three of the log cabins from a general office use under Use Class E to an education use under Use Class F3a is acceptable.
5.2.1 The report to committee for application 20/01028/FUL concluded that:
'Dunston Business Village represents sustainable development in accordance with the aims of the presumption in favour of sustainable development in the NPPF and policy NP1 of the adopted Core Strategy. The extension would be adjacent to a successful business village with 100% occupancy rates and contribute to the demand for office spaces in south Staffordshire. The scheme will add value to the local economy through the provision of permanent well- paid jobs and temporary jobs throughout the construction period.
The design of the scheme is acceptable, and the log cabins will match the appearance of those already on site. The low ridge height and the landscape buffer will ensure that no significant harm is caused on the character or appearance of the open countryside; and a B1 office use is compatible with residential uses. The amount of parking is satisfactory, and no concerns have been expressed by the Highways Department over safety. The revised site layout plan has resulted in a minor gain of habitat units and a major gain in hedgerow units.'
5.2.2 One of the material considerations for approval was that there was strong need for more office spaces within South Staffordshire and that the scheme at Dunston Business Village would help meet some of this demand in a sustainable location. This variation application would therefore see the loss of three offices under Use Class E. The amended use would be for education purposes for The Haven School which is around 3.6 miles from Dunston Business Village.
5.2.3 The planning statement provides that the Haven School is a 25-place special educational needs Ofsted registered school which caters for young people between the ages of 11 - 19 who have additional needs in the area of social, emotional and mental health. The Local Authority [Staffordshire County Council] currently commissions all 25 places and continues to ask for more to meet the need within the district. The use of the Dunston Business site is considered suitable by the school, as the students would benefit from access to outdoor activities on-site where there is cleaner air, a lack of traffic noise and a countryside outlook. The school works therapeutically and the relatively tranquil environment at Dunston will support the emotional needs of the students. 5.2.4 Paragraph 94 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that it is important that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and new communities. Local planning authorities should take a proactive, positive and
Page 91 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021 collaborative approach to meeting this requirement, and to development that will widen choice in education.
5.2.5 Core Policy 10 and Policy EV9 of the Core Strategy (CS) provide that The Council will support proposals and activities that protect, retain or enhance existing community facilities and services or lead to the provision of additional facilities that improve the wellbeing and cohesion of local communities and ensure communities are sustainable. This application would allow The Haven School to enhance the provision of community services in line with Core Policy 10 and Policy EV9.
5.2.6 It is not considered that the additional use for education provision would cause any neighbouring issues. There is a generous distance from the site to residential properties and an education use is compatible with office/residential uses. With regards to parking and impact on the highway network, there is to be a drop off and collection area for parents/students and I note that no concerns have been expressed by the highways department regarding the scheme. As such, I recommend that Condition 7 be varied to read as follows:
'The development hereby approved shall be used as follows; units 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 & 32 shall be used for offices and units 33, 34 and 35 shall be used for education (use class F1(a) Provision of education) and for offices, and for no other purposes (including any other purpose in Class E of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended'.
7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions
Subject to the following condition(s):
1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: DBV_RF_003 received 17/11/2020, DBV_RF_001 REV E received, 28/05/2021 and RSE_3020_D4_PG1 Rev V3 received 24/02/2021.
3. Prior to the erection of the log cabins, the existing and finished floor levels for the development shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval.
4. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the parking bays and drop off zone have been provided in accordance with submitted Drg. No.DBV-RF-001 Rev. E the subject of this consent and shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated purpose.
5. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until details of the proposed weatherproof cycle store have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The proposed cycle store shall thereafter be installed in accordance with the approved details prior to the development being first brought into use and shall be retained for the life of the development. 6. The materials to be used on the walls and roof of the log cabins shall match those of the existing buildings unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Page 92 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
7. The development hereby approved shall be used as follows; units 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 & 32 shall be used for offices and units 33, 34 and 35 shall be used for education (use class F1(a) Provision of education) and for offices, and for no other purposes (including any other purpose in Class E of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended.
8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 [as amended), or any other subsequent equivalent order, no development within the following classes of development shall be carried out to the building(s), the subject of this approval, without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority:
a. Schedule 2, Part 7, Class A - extensions etc of shops or financial or professional premises
b. Schedule 2, Part 7, Class E - hardsurfacing
c. Schedule 2, Part 20, Class AA - new dwellinghouses on detached buildings in commercial or mixed use
9. The landscape scheme shown on the approved plan(s) RSE_3020_D4_PG1 Rev V3 shall be implemented concurrently with the development and completed within 12 months of the completion of the development. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the scheme has been completed. The planting, hard landscaping (and any other introduced features shown on the approved plan(s) shall be retained and maintained for a minimum period of 10 years by the property owner from the notified completion date of the scheme. Any plant failures that occur during the first 5 years of the notified completion date of the scheme shall be replaced with the same species within the next available planting season (after failure).
10. Prior to the occupation of the units. details shall be provided of the location and type of permanent fencing to be installed and maintained to south of proposal to protect tree and hedge lines. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained as such for the lifetime of the development.
11. All site works including removal of rubble piles, must comply with recommendations in 5.4.1 iv, 5.4.2.v, vi, 5.4.4 viii and 5.4.6 xi of the Ecological Impact Appraisal (EcIA)(RammSanderson, December 2020)
12. Before the site is brought into use, the rail fence as shown on the Landscape plan RSE_3020_D4_PG1 Rev V3 shall be installed and retained as such for the lifetime of the development
Reasons
1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
3. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
Page 93 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
4. In the interest of highway safety
5. In the interest of sustainability
6. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
7. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
8. To protect the character and appearance of the open countryside in accordance with Policy OC1.
9. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
10. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
11. To comply with Policy EQ1.
12. To comply with Policy EQ1.
Informative
1. Staffordshire Fire Team
FIRE MAINS, HYDRANTS AND VEHICLE ACCESS Appropriate supplies of water for fire fighting and vehicle access should be provided at the site, as indicated in Approved Document B Volume 2 requirement B5, section 15 and 16.
I would remind you that the roads and drives upon which appliances would have to travel in order to proceed to within 45 metres of any point within the property, should be capable of withstanding the weight of a Staffordshire firefighting appliance (G.V.W. of 17800 Kg.
AUTOMATIC WATER SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS (SPRINKLERS) I wish to draw to your attention Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service's stance regarding sprinklers.
Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) would strongly recommend that consideration be given to include the installation of Automatic Water Suppression Systems (AWSS) as part of a total fire protection package to: - Protect life, in the home, in business or in your care. - Protect property, heritage, environment and our climate; - Help promote and sustain business continuity; and - Permit design freedoms and encourage innovative, inclusive and sustainable architecture. - Increase fire fighter safety - The use of AWSS can add significant protection to the structural protection of buildings from damage by fire.
Page 94 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Without this provision, the Fire and Rescue Service may have some difficulty in preventing a complete loss of the building and its contents, should a fire develop beyond the stage where it cannot be dealt with by employees using first aid fire fighting equipment such as a portable fire extinguisher.
SFRS are fully committed to promoting Fire Protection Systems for both business and domestic premises. Support is offered to assist all in achieving a reduction of loss of life and the impact of fire on the wider community.
Early consultation with the Fire Service when designing buildings which incorporate sprinklers may have a significant impact on reducing financial implications for all stakeholders.
Further information can be found at www.bafsa.org.uk/ the website of the British Automatic Fire Sprinklers Association Ltd.
Proactive Statement - In dealing with the planning application the Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner in accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.
Page 95 of 150 Laura Moon – Senior Planning Officer Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Dunston Business Village Stafford Road Penkridge Staffordshire
Page 96 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
20/01131/OUT SFG/Peveril FEATHERSTONE & BRINSFORD PC AND BREWOOD & COVEN Councillor W Sutton Councillor J Bolton Councillor D Holmes Councillor F Beardsmore Councillor R Cope
Former Royal Ordnance Factory Cat And Kittens Lane And Brookhouse Lane Featherstone i. Full proposals for a new access road from the A449 to a proposed roundabout on Cat and Kittens Lane and site accesses to land either side of this road, internal site roads, along with drainage infrastructure and landscaping; and ii. Outline proposals for the employment uses (E, B2 and B8) with floorspace up to 158,121 sq.m. G.I.A., support hub uses (E and sui generis) with floorspace up to 511 sq.m. GIA, proposed buildings with ridge heights ranging between 6m and 24.5m, parking, drainage infrastructure and strategic landscaping. All other matters are reserved
1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY
1.1 Site Description
1.1.1 The application site comprises the former Royal Ordnance Factory (ROF) and extends to approximately 52 hectares in area and is located alongside the M54 between Junctions 1 and 2. Access to the site is gained from either Cat and Kittens Lane to the west or Brookhouse Lane/East Road to the east. The site is located close to the M54, M6 and M6 Toll motorways as well as the administrative boundary with Wolverhampton. The West Coast Mainline runs north-south parallel to the western boundary of the site.
1.1.2 The village of Featherstone is situated approximately 1km away to the west and Cross Green, Slade Heath and Coven Heath lie to the north-west and west. Coven and Shareshill are just over 2km to the north-west and north-east respectively. To the north and north- east of the site is the settlement of Brinsford and the prison complex which is close to the site boundary having once formed part of the ROF site. Bushbury and Fordhouses areas of the northern part of Wolverhampton are approximately 1km to the south of the site.
1.1.3 The vast majority of the site lies within the development boundary of the allocated Strategic Employment Site of the former Royal Ordnance Factory (ROF). The land proposed to accommodate the access together with a small part of the site’s north-western corner (adjacent to Cat and Kittens Lane) lies within the West Midlands Green Belt. Large parts of the site comprise previously developed land with central areas of the site having been occupied by buildings and infrastructure associated with the former munitions’ factory, the majority of which was developed during World War II. The site is continually evolving following previous permissions for the demolition of redundant buildings and remediation of the site.
Page 97 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
1.1.4 The land has a fall from east to west of 12m whilst the fall from north to south is not significant and at most 2m. The site is shown as being predominantly within Flood Zone 1, with only the northwestern portion of the site shown to be within Flood Zones 2 and 3. The existing DVSA Test Centre, located to the south-west is not within the application boundary but is served from Cat and Kittens Lane to the west.
1.1.5 The surrounding road network that gives access to the site is a mix of trunk roads, local roads and small lanes. The A460 runs through Featherstone and using New Road and Paradise Lane links with Cat and Kittens Lane. Brookhouse Lane and East Road link with Cat and Kittens Lane from the settlement of Brinsford. The A449 Stafford Road links with the site via Brinsford Lane or Old Stafford Road at Coven Heath, also using New Road and Paradise Lane to reach Cat and Kittens Lane. There is a height and width restriction under the railway bridge on Brinsford Lane. Cat and Kittens Lane links with north Wolverhampton.
1.2 Relevant Planning History
1.2.1 2011, Application for mixed B1, B2 and B8 use and new access, Withdrawn [11/00631/OUT]
1.2.2 2011, Application for site remediation and ground works, Approved [11/00632/FUL]
1.2.3 2012, Application for mixed B1 and B2 use and new access, Withdrawn [12/00586/OUT]
1.2.4 2015, Application to demolish redundant buildings and other structures, Approved [15/00545/DEM]
1.2.5 2018, Application for demolition and remediation of former ROF site, buildings and ancillary works, Approved [18/00995/FUL].
1.3 Pre-application Advice
1.3.1 This application follows Pre-application meetings between the applicant and the Local Authority. A public exhibition was held at Featherstone Community Centre in December 2020.
2. APPLICATION DETAILS
2.1 The Proposal
2.1.1 The application as submitted seeks to redevelop the former Royal Ordnance Factory (ROF) site at Featherstone for mixed employment purposes (Use Classes E, B2 and B8) together with an ancillary ‘hub’ to provide food and drink related uses. The site is allocated as a Strategic Employment Site in the Council’s adopted Site Allocations Document (SAD) 2018. The application also proposes the construction of a new link road between the ROF site running west between Cat and Kittens Lane crossing the West Coast Mainline by a bridge and joining the A449 just north of Junction 2 of the M54. The principle of this link road is established and agreed in the adopted SAD. There is an extant planning permission
Page 98 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021 for the demolition of redundant buildings and remediation of the site and this process is currently well underway.
2.1.2 The application submitted is a hybrid application. The outline element seeks approval for the principle of the redevelopment of the ROF site for E, B2 and B8 Class development of up to 158,121 sqm including an on-site hub of a scale of up to 511 sq.m. floorspace (Class E and sui generis). This is a major development proposal for mixed, flexible employment uses within the established Strategic Employment Site of the former ROF. Whilst the accompanying site layout is only indicative at this stage, it has been informed by the masterplan process which represents a realistic solution to achieving the required quantum of development. It is proposed to provide 8no. units, each with their own parking areas with the larger commercial units having their own dedicated service yards, vehicular circulation, and parking arrangements to include those for HGV’s.
2.1.3 Approval is also sought for the height ‘parameters’ of the new buildings which would be secured when a subsequent application is made for the approval of the reserved matters. Eight industrial/employment buildings are proposed offering between approximately 4,830 sq.m. and 46,450 sq.m. of accommodation, with overall ridge heights ranging between 13.5m and 24.5m. The highest building is anticipated to be in the central part of the site and has a ridge height of up to 24.5m. The proposed height of the buildings in the eastern part of the site would be up to 18.5m; in the northern part between 16m and 18.m and in the western part up to 13.5m. The application discusses design principles to be adopted however such matters will be dealt with at a later stage through the submission of a Reserved Matters planning application.
2.1.4 Approval is sought for the accompanying landscape strategy and the incorporation of measures to improved biodiversity which themselves are linked to the surface water drainage strategy. Amongst other things, the accompanying illustrative Landscape Strategy proposes to retain the grassland, woodland, ponds, and stream to the northwest part of the site whilst introducing a new landscape buffer to the east together with strategic landscaping adjacent to the road network which will produce a ‘boulevard’ effect along the access roads. There is also proposed to be a footpath cycle route from the southern edge of Featherstone from Brookhouse Lane directly into the development.
2.1.5 The detailed element of the hybrid application seeks full permission for the access arrangements into the site – notably the new link road which is proposed from the western edge of the site, crossing the West Coast Mainline via a bridge, and then forming a new junction onto the A449 which then joins onto the M54 Junction 2. Approval is also sought for the proposed new roundabout junction allowing access into the site from Cat and Kittens Lane and the internal road layout, together with drainage infrastructure and landscaping associated with the access proposals.
2.1.6 The new link road will comprise a 7.3m carriageway with footpaths either side that will run due west from the new roundabout junction at the site entrance on Cat and Kittens Lane due west. It will go over the existing West Coast Railway line via a bridge. The route will then continue west beyond the railway line before joining the A449 at an existing lay-by where a new roundabout junction will be formed north of the M54 Junction 2.
Page 99 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
2.1.7 At this stage it is envisaged that the proposed development will be delivered in phases moving across the site from west to east. It is intended to construct the link road and to provide some 77,000 sq.m. of floorspace (circa 50% of the proposed scheme) as Phase 1, to include the building of the proposed ‘Hub’, and for this to be ready for occupation in late 2022. Following the completion of Phase 1, the second (final) phase will then be progressed with the end date for the occupation of this final phase being late 2024.
2.2 Agent Submission
2.2.1 The application has been accompanied by a full suite of plans and documents, including:
• Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) – this contains assessments of the impact of the proposed development in relation to matters such as biodiversity, flood risk, visual and landscape impacts, heritage etc. • Landscape Masterplan • Non-technical summary to the EIA • Transport Assessment • Design and Access Statement • Planning Statement • Statement of Community Involvement • Biodiversity Impacts Assessment and Enhancement Strategy • Arboricultural Impact Assessment • Energy Strategy Report, including draft BREAAM Assessment • Archaeological Evaluation • Drainage Strategy
2.2.2 Additional supplementary information has been submitted during the course of the application’s consideration to address matters raised through the consultation process.
3. POLICY CONTEXT
3.1 Located within the former Royal Ordnance Factory (ROF) Strategic Employment Site.
3.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) taken as a whole, in particular Sections 6, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15 and 16.
3.3 Adopted Core Strategy
Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy for South Staffordshire GB1: Development in the Green Belt GB2: Land Safeguarded for Longer Term Need Core Policy 2: Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment EQ1: Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets EQ3: Conservation, Preservation and Protection of Heritage Assets EQ4: Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape Core Policy 3: Sustainable Development and Climate Change
Page 100 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
EQ5: Sustainable Resources and Energy Efficiency EQ6: Renewable Energy EQ7: Water Quality EQ8: Waste EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design EQ11: Wider Design Considerations EQ12: Landscaping Core Policy 7 Employment and Economic Development EV1: Retention of Existing Employment Sites Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport EV11: Sustainable Travel EV12: Parking Provision Core Policy 13: Community Safety CS1: Designing Out Crime
SAD5: Employment Land Allocations SAD9: Key Development Requirements
3.4 Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs)
South Staffordshire Design Guide SPD 2018 Sustainable Development SPD 2018
3.5 National Planning Policy Guidance
3.5.1 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise.
3.5.2 The law makes a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it is to be given. Whether a particular consideration is material will depend on the circumstances of the case and is ultimately a decision for the courts. Provided regard is had to all material considerations, it is for the decision maker to decide what weight is to be given to the material considerations in each case, and (subject to the test of reasonableness) the courts will not get involved in the question of weight.
4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES
4.1 Statutory / Non-statutory Consultation responses:
Councillor Wendy Sutton [10/02/2021] – Objects - Increase of traffic congestion on A449 – noted holding objection from Highways England whilst further assessments are completed. A pedestrian crossing is required across the A449 near to the junction of Ball Lane, Coven Heath. - Lack of consultation with residents of Coven Heath both in terms of public engagement and within the proposals of the planning application.
Page 101 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
- Noted concerns of County Flooding – no Drainage Strategy or Flood Risk Assessment appears to have been submitted. Absence of adequate supporting information is a sufficient reason it itself for a refusal of planning permission. - Noted comments from Severn Trent Water regarding a failure to submit drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows. - Noted comments from Archaeology which indicated a need for further archaeological evaluation and recording. - There is a suggestion that there would be a substantial increase in traffic noise levels – this would need evaluating in ‘normal times’ (Post Covid) to obtain a true reflection of the issues - the same observation has to be said for air pollution and light pollution impacts. - Does not appear that an impact assessment upon local wildlife habitats close to Coven Heath has been undertaken – there is a suggestion that bats, newts, owls, buzzards, field mice, kestrels, badgers, foxes and otters have made their homes in enclaves nearby.
Councillor Mark Sutton – Objects • Consultation responses from SCC Flood Risk Team, Highways England, Historic Environment Officer recommend that permission is not granted until further information is available. • Little or no compensation for the community in this application, the residents that are impacted on live on the whole in Coven Heath and along the A449 in particular, this development will add to the traffic volume and noise, light and air pollution. • Mitigation around light, noise and air pollution need considering in particular for the residents on the A449 adjacent to the new junction. • Parking of HGV’s in this area is a continual problem and laybys in the evening frequently cause nuisance to residents – further assessments required to ensure adequate provision on site for HGV parking overnight. • Central reservations along A449 are rarely maintained. Speed limit should be reduced to 30mph and the developer should meet these costs. • Inadequate bus service currently to serve the development and the applicant should work with SSC and SCC to promote and fund improvements.
Featherstone Parish Council [Expired 28/01/2021] – No comments received.
Brewood Parish Council [12/02/2021] – Objects - Substantial increase in air, noise and light pollution affecting the long-term health and quality of life to all residents of Coven Heath. - Permanent loss and destruction of approximately 1-mile-long swathe of green-belt with no indication of mitigating the visual impact to Coven Heath residents of the road over the railway line. Consideration appears to have been only given from the Featherstone view. - The A449 is the gateway from the West Midlands into Staffordshire, and we wish for it to have a pleasing landscape for visitors. - Increase of commercial/commuter traffic impacting the already congested traffic approaching M54 J2. Also projected increase of traffic for the West Midlands Interchange.
Page 102 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
- Apparent lack of evaluation of impact of the proposed access road on local wildlife, ancient hedgerows and trees, archaeological and historical features, public footpaths and bridleways and drainage in a predominantly rural area already decimated by industrial development such as i54 and future development of the WMI. - Lack of consultation with residents of Coven Heath. - Coven Heath has been split by the A449 dual carriageway with little consideration of how residents can connect either side – this proposal will make it even more difficult.
Wolverhampton City Council [01/03/2021] – Comment - The site is allocated for employment development in the 2018 South Staffordshire Site Allocations Document (SAD) with the principle established in the 2012 Core Strategy and the much earlier 1996 Local Plan. The 2018 SAD extended the development site from that identified in the Core Strategy by some 12ha on the basis of it meeting evidenced employment land needs arising in the Black Country. - Policy EMP1 of the Black Country Core Strategy identifies the site as contributing towards Black Country Employment land needs – the quantum based on the (pre- SAD extension) allocation contained in the South Staffs Core Strategy. Since the adoption of both the SAD and Core Strategy, the Black Country Councils have commenced the review of the Black Country Core Strategy. The 2017 Black Country Core Strategy Issues and Options Report identifies a significant shortfall of employment land supply against forecast demand, and the associated Economic Development Needs Assessment (EDNA) specifically identifies the application site as potentially contributing towards meeting demand generated in the Black Country (para 8.5). It therefore remains the case that the site has a potentially crucial role to play in meeting both local and cross-boundary strategic employment land needs. - We note that the application is for unfettered Class E, B2 and B8 development. The new E use Class incorporates office uses formerly within Class B1(a) and while we note that the masterplan indicates that such uses would be ancillary to large scale B2 and B8 uses, we request that the quantum of E(g)(i) office uses is subject to control to ensure it remains ancillary and that the remaining Class E element of the scheme is restricted to E(g)(ii) and E(g)(iii) which reflect the employment uses formerly within Class B1(b) and B1(c) respectively. This would ensure that the site fulfils its strategic role of providing for large format, high quality manufacturing and logistics needs, and does not compromise the deliverability of critically important office-led and other commercial, business and service regeneration projects in Wolverhampton and the wider Black Country by diverting investment away from these locations. - The development has the potential to provide significant levels of job creation and we wish to ensure that opportunities for Wolverhampton residents to access the job opportunities that are created are maximised. Policy EQ13 of the South Staffs Core Strategy states that contributions will be sought from developers where necessary to ensure the achievement of sustainable development. - Wolverhampton Council has been involved in the options appraisal for the access infrastructure for ROF Featherstone and have no objection to the proposed link road connecting to the A449. The route should include appropriate provision of infrastructure for cycling and walking access to connect to the surrounding existing
Page 103 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
routes, and on to the A449 and into the Featherstone area for links to public transport. - With regards to the impact on Wolverhampton, specifically Cat and Kittens Lane there needs to be suitable cycling and walking access in the form of appropriate routes and crossing points. Vehicle impacts to the south of the site need to be mitigated through road safety and operational improvements at the junction of Cat and Kittens Lane and Greenfield Lane. HGV restrictions should be included for Cat and Kittens Lane to restrict inappropriate vehicle routeing to the south of the site. The proposed development needs to include appropriate provision of a Travel Plan, the site itself should provide facilities for cycle storage, Electric Vehicle Charging as well as suitable shower and changing facilities for staff.
County Highways [11/06/2021] – No objections, subject to conditions, financial contributions relating to improved bus services and Travel Plan monitoring and coordination.
- The site is allocated in the Local Plan and there has been a history of discussions on accessing the site. To help inform the proposal the developer has submitted a detailed Transport Assessment (TA), which has also been supplemented by additional submissions to accompany the planning application. - The application site is situated between the A449, M54 and the A460 just to the east of Featherstone. There have been various discussions over the last few years on how best to provide a highway solution to connect the site in a satisfactory way to the surrounding road network. The highway proposal submitted shows a new link road to be constructed to allow the site access from Cat and Kittens Lane to the A449 and the strategic road network. - The TA has sought to provide detailed assessment of this proposal. The access is the preferrable solution giving vehicles the most direct access to the Trunk Road network thus alleviating any issues with vehicles associated with the development travelling on less suitable roads. As the trunk road network, A449, A5 east of but also including Gailey Island, M54 and the M6, is under the control of Highways England then these comments are relating to the impact of the development on Staffordshire County highway. - The applicant’s highway consultant has sought to model the impact from the development based on industry standard techniques. The applicant has modelled a worst-case scenario in terms of the impact, which is logically heading towards the trunk road network. There is also some minor impact of vehicles affecting the County’s highway. This work is found to be acceptable and the potential impact on the County network will be negligible however it is important to note that once the M6/M54 link road is built traffic on this part of the network should fall. - The new link road will provide a suitable access for HGV’s accessing the site. Whilst it is logical that the HGV routes are likely direct to the trunk road, I will require that there is some control over this. The TA also touches on this in para 2.4.6 with the mention of an HGV management plan. This will need to be secured via a planning condition or in any legal agreement. The management plan needs to clearly identify the permitted routes to and from the site.
Page 104 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
- The TA has also assessed the accessibility of the site for sustainable modes of transport to ensure the site can be reached by bus, walking and cycling and keep the impact from future impacts as low as can be. - For walking and cycling to site this has been assessed using the distances recommended with professional guidance and logically the best opportunity for these modes is from the closest residential areas. The scheme will provide a dedicated pedestrian cycle link on the eastern side of the development onto Brookhouse Lane which is to be welcomed as it will improve the journey times for any pedestrian/cyclist from the Featherstone direction. However, drawing ITM15267-GA-011 Rev B will need to be amended with a smaller road width, although I am happy for this to be done via a planning condition. - Discussions have taken place with the applicant regarding the road layout and potential amendments to increase the convenience for pedestrians accessing plots 1-3 on foot/cycle, as there is no footway on the western side of the reconstructed part of Cat and Kittens Lane. The applicant has submitted a drawing that shows a footway can be provided along this side. This will also need to be secured via a planning condition. - Where the site was deficient was in the bus offer, the current bus provision would not offer a service to allow potential employees access to the site at likely starting and finishing times and a realistic choice of travel. To rectify this the County has identified the necessary uplift to the bus frequency and the funds required to provide this; £446,000 to be paid in instalments. However, as the end users are not yet known we shall require suitable flexibility in how these services are provided and that detail will be decided once the end users are known and they are engaged in the Travel Planning for this site. - There is another important element in ensuring the site maximises the sustainable transport opportunities which has been submitted by the applicant. The TP is an essential tool to ensure sustainable transport modes are marketed to all visitors to the site. It will also provide the mechanism to deliver an effective bus service based on times the service is required to have the most benefit. - The TP will also promote sustainable travel and commit future users to reducing single car journeys to the site. A TP Framework has been submitted as the end users are not known but one element that can have a big impact on the car journeys to the site is car sharing, which is recognised in the NPPF as a form of sustainable travel and can be very effective at achieving a lower impact. To this end I shall require an additional contribution of £13,000 to allow future travel discussions to take place with the eventual occupiers of the units. - Having assessed the planning application there is no objection in principle to this proposal. It is an allocated site and the access road would ensure that there is no ‘severe’ impact upon the County’s road network. However, I will require the following to be secured via a planning condition and a suitably worded legal agreement to secure the funding towards bus services and the operation of the Travel Plan.
- To be secured by planning condition:
1. Prior to the commencement of any construction, including demolition, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to,
Page 105 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved management plan shall include details relating to construction access, hours of construction, routing of HGV’s, delivery times and the location of the contractors compounds, cabins, material storage areas and contractors parking and a scheme for the management and suppression of dust and mud from construction activities including the provision of a vehicle wheel wash. It shall also include a method of demolition and restoration of the site. All site operations shall then be undertaken strictly in accordance with the approved CEMP for the duration of the construction programme.
2. Secure, covered and safe cycle parking facilities shall be provided within the site prior to the first occupation of the development in accordance with a scheme that has first been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved facilities shall be retained in perpetuity.
3. Prior to first occupation of any building on the site the access road as shown on drawing CWA-18-214- 518 P4 from the site to the A449 shall be substantially complete and open for use unless otherwise agreed in writing
4. Upon commencement an HGV management plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved HGV management plan shall include details relating to routing of HGVs to and from the site without traveling through Featherstone.
5. Notwithstanding the submitted drawing ITM15267 -GA-011B, upon commencement of the development a detailed scheme for off-site highway improvements to Brookhouse Lane at its junction with the pedestrian / emergency access on eastern part of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to first occupation.
6. Upon commencement details the footway on the western part of Cat and Kittens Lane as shown on drawing 15-062-SK-03-02-21/01 REV A shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to first occupation.
- To be secured in a legal agreement:
Public transport services contribution of £446,000 for bus services to the site that will provide a link between the development, Wolverhampton and Cannock. Additional destinations may also be served following consultations through the travel plan. Contribution to be paid, index linked, in five instalments as per table:
• 1st instalment £89,380 + indexation from commencement of development of the FIRST Unit to be paid 3 months prior to occupation of 1st building. • 2nd instalment £89,380 + indexation on or before anniversary of 1st instalment unless otherwise agreed under the service review.
Page 106 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
• 3rd instalment £89,380 + indexation on or before 24th month anniversary of 1st instalment unless otherwise agreed under the service review. • 4th instalment £89,380 + indexation on or before 36th month anniversary of 1st instalment unless otherwise agreed under the service review. • 5th instalment £89,380 + indexation on or before 48th month anniversary of 1st instalment unless otherwise agreed under the service review.
- The County Council may substitute a demand responsive service for a fixed route, fixed timetable service subject to it providing equivalent journey opportunities, covering the hours of operation, with maximum fares specified by the Council.
- The County Council will review the service annually and may at its sole discretion adjust service frequencies and hours of operation taking into account passenger demand and ongoing subsidy requirements.
- The sum of £13,000 will also be required for the Travel Plan sum.
Highways England [06/07/21] – Following a previous holding recommendation Highways England has been engaged with the applicant’s consultant and has received a number of technical submissions aimed at addressing some of the matters raised in our previous response. This included (but not limited to) an updated Options Assessment Report and further information regarding the development impact A449/A5 Gailey and A449/Brewood road junctions. These submissions have been reviewed and we are satisfied that although there will be some impact on the local road, the predicted impact at these junctions is acceptable from an SRN perspective. We are also satisfied that the strategic modelling sufficiently demonstrates the impact on the SRN to not be severe. The application is now recommended for approval subject to the following conditions:
1. No works to the proposed A449 Trunk Road roundabout or connecting Access Link Road shall commence until the detail design and full construction specification of the proposed A449 Trunk Road roundabout and associate works has been submitted to, and approved in writing, the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Highways England. 2. No works to the proposed A449 Trunk Road roundabout or connecting Access Link Road shall commence until a detailed Works Phasing Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Highways England. 3. Construction Environmental Management Plan
County Council Flood Risk Management Team [15/06/2021] – No objection following receipt of additional information as requested 05/02/21.
County Ecologist [02/06/2021] – Recommend following conditions:
1. Submission of a five-year management and monitoring plan for retained and created habitats prior to occupation of the buildings. 2. Annual submission of habitat monitoring information for approval.
Page 107 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
3. Detailed design showing means of preventing lorry incursion into verges and other soft landscaping. 4. Details of external lighting for the construction stages to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement. 5. Details of external lighting for the operational stage of the development to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement.
Natural England [04/02/2021] – Responded by stating that they have no comments to make and rely upon their Standing Advice.
Arboricultural Officer [14/06/2021] – Following receipt of an Arboricultural Method Statement the previous concerns have now been satisfied. Recommend inclusion of following condition:
- ‘All pre-commencement, tree removals, pruning, protection, site meetings and monitoring shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Arboricultural Method Statement by Aspect Arboriculture (ref: 10143_AMS.001) dated February 2021’.
Local Plans [24/06/2021] – Recommend that a condition is applied to the proposed ‘Hub’ to remain as Use Class E development and ancillary to the main employment site.
Original Comments [09/02/2021]: - ROF Featherstone has a history of support for employment development through previous Local Plans. B8 use has not historically been supported because of the implications of HGV movement along rural roads, whilst there was also a requirement to restore and improve landscape quality around the site. - The former ROF site is allocated through both the Core Strategy 2012 and Site Allocations Document 2018. In general terms, the principle of development for this site established in the Core Strategy has been supported by the detailed requirements set out in the Site Allocations Document with Policy SAD5 amending the original scope of acceptable development. As such, Policy SAD5 indicates that ROF Featherstone, as a strategic employment site, is expected to deliver 12ha of additional employment land above existing provision which can include B8 uses (subject to the provision of evidence to demonstrate an acceptable access road solution). - From a planning policy perspective, the key considerations are as follows: 1. 10ha of landscaping delivered east of the site (outside development boundary in GB). 2. Application masterplan must be in accordance with allocation masterplan (SAD Appx 3). 3. Provision of landscape buffer between Featherstone and ROF site. 4. Design and layout of scheme to minimize impact on Featherstone. - It is evident from the supporting documentation that the proposed site layout is in accordance with the SAD masterplan in terms of development occupying the existing ROF site and allocated site extensions. However, due to the outline nature of the application, it is difficult to provide any comments in relation to points 1, 3 and 4.
Page 108 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Core Policy 4 and associated policies are key in this regard and detailed consideration will be had at any full application stage. - It is pleasing that the applicant has submitted a detailed Socio-Economic Report to support the application which demonstrates the positive economic implications of the proposal. From a strategic perspective, it is clear that this application will bring with it inward investment and further the economic position of the District. Supporting and sustaining such development is encouraged and supported as per Core Policy 7. - It is important to note that at the detailed design stage it will be expected that all buildings are built to sustainable construction techniques, deliver maximum energy efficiency / suppresses energy consumption, is flexible to future needs and uses, and minimises and manages waste responsibly. Due to the indicative size of the buildings proposed, the applicant must be mindful of Policy EQ5 to deliver BREEAM 'Excellent' standards and incorporate low or zero-carbon energy generation systems to reduce carbon emissions by a minimum of 20% or a scoring of 2 BREEAM credits. Furthermore, a scoring of at least 2 credits within the water section of BREEAM is necessary. Robust evidence will be required to demonstrate deviation from these policy requisites. - Due to the employment units and the majority of the green infrastructure elements of this application only seeking outline approval at this stage, the principle of the employment proposal is acceptable as more detailed design and landscape considerations will be considered at the reserved matters stage. To ensure appropriate measures can be secured as part of any subsequent reserved matters permission, any outline permission on the relevant part of the site will require conditions for the submission of a full landscape scheme and management plan at the reserved matters stage, including full hard and soft landscaping specification, implementation measures and ongoing maintenance measures.
County Archaeologist [23/06/2021] – Comment - I have now had opportunity to review the accompanying reports and am satisfied that it, and the archaeological work it summarises, is in line with the approved WSI and the relevant standard and guidance. As such, I happy to approve and confirm it as final. - The site has now been suitably archaeologically evaluated (as per para 189 of the NPPF) and the results do not merit any further archaeological evaluation or mitigation works. The pillbox to be retained (Ref MST11528) is at the junction of Cat and Kittens Lane / Brookhouse Lane and the area around it will be cleared for better interpretation/visibility from the highway and it has been confirmed that two interpretations boards will be provided – one within the vicinity of the retained pillbox and one at the new entrance to the site. Accordingly, no archaeological conditions will be required in this instance.
Severn Trent Water [19/03/2021] – Following receipt of drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows there is No objection, and no drainage related conditions are required.
The Coal Authority [11/01/2021] – Comment
Page 109 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
- The application site does not fall within the defined Development High Risk Area and is located instead within the defined Development Low Risk Area. This means that there is no requirement under the risk-based approach that has been agreed with the LPA for a Coal Mining Risk Assessment to be submitted or for The Coal Authority to be consulted.
Crime Prevention Design Advisor [21/01/2021] – No objections. - Formal response includes detailed recommendations regarding Secured by Design, which have been shared with the Agent. No further informative is therefore considered necessary.
Ramblers Association [01/02/2021] – No Objection - The development will have no adverse effect on Public Right of Way: The Monarch’s Way Long Distance Path which goes along Cat and Kittens Lane.
County Countryside and Rights of Way Officer [12/01/2021] – Comment - The Design and Access Statement does not appear to recognise the existence of Public Footpath No 39 Brewood and Coven which runs within/immediately adjacent to eastern boundary of the proposed development site. The attention of the developer should be drawn to the existence of the path and to the requirement that any planning permission given does not construe the right to divert, extinguish or obstruct any part of the public path. If the path does need diverting as part of these proposals the developer would need to apply to your council under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to divert the footpath to allow the development to commence.
Staffordshire Fire and Rescue [11/01/2021] – Comment - Formal response includes detailed recommendations regarding Fire Mains, Hydrants and Vehicle Access together with automatic Water Suppression Systems (Sprinklers), which have been shared with the Agent. No further informative is therefore considered necessary.
Environment Agency [expired 07/01/2021] – No comments received.
Staffordshire Wildlife Trust [expired 07/01/2021] – No comments received.
Badger Conservation Group [expired 07/01/2021] – No comments received.
Cadent Gas Limited (formerly National Grid) [expired 07/01/2021] – No comments received.
Western Power [expired 07/01/2021] – No comments received.
4.2 Third Party Representations – 19 letters of objection have been received following consultation. The responses received have been summarised below:
• Concerns related to highways and additional traffic which will be generated by the development, particularly during peak times.
Page 110 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
• Development will exacerbate existing traffic levels in particular on the A449 Stafford Road. • Need for the development is flawed – located in an area of low unemployment and since conception the area has seen further developments nearby such as the i54 and WMI. • Those employed in the new premises will have to travel from outside the area – there is already very little public transport. • Loss of Green Belt land. • Loss of green spaces left for future generations. • Harm on local trees and/or wildlife/habitats/damage to ecosystem. • Pollution from exhaust fumes/air quality/dust and concerns for public health. • Noise pollution. • Lack of public consultation – particularly Brewood and Coven. • Impact on living conditions of nearby residents – overlooking, loss of privacy, traffic congestion and air/noise and light pollution. • Development will result in further flooding. • Visual Impact – development will be an eyesore. • Development will depreciate house values locally. • Local community will not benefit from this development. • Proposed new access inappropriate – consideration should be given to the widening of Brinsford Lane.
A site notice along Cat and Kittens Lane and a second on Brookhouse Lane were displayed on 12th January 2021 in accordance with the Council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). Prior to submission of the application ROF Featherstone and the principle of the access road has been subject to consultation over the course of the development of the Site Allocations Document (SAD). The Applicants also carried out their own pre-application consultation locally.
5. APPRAISAL
5.1 Councillor Wendy Sutton has requested that this application be considered by members of the Planning Committee.
The key issues with regard this application are:
• Principle of Development. • Green Belt Considerations. • Layout, Scale, Landscape & Appearance. • New Access and Highway Safety. • Visual Impact of the Development. • Flood Risk and Drainage. • Biodiversity and Trees. • Residential Amenity. • Other matters. • Legal Obligations and Contributions.
Page 111 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.2 Principle of Development
5.2.1 As identified above, the application site falls within the former Royal Ordnance Factory (ROF) Strategic Employment Site as referred to in both the adopted Core Strategy 2012 and Site Allocations Document (SAD) 2018. The former ROF site is one of four such existing freestanding employment sites within the District, as recognised under Core Policy 1 (The Spatial Strategy) of the Core Strategy (CS).
5.2.2 Core Policy 7 (Employment and Economic Development) provides overarching support for development within such a designated site, with Policy EV1 (Retention of Existing Employment Sites) of the Core Strategy, amongst other things, specifically referencing the ROF site as being allocated and suitable for employment purposes, which would include B1, B2 and B8 uses.
5.2.3 Furthermore, the Council’s adopted Site Allocations Document (SAD) reiterates ROF site’s status as a Strategic Employment Site and, at Paragraph 9.7 comments that it has was “identified for B1 and B2 employment use in both the 1996 Local Plan and reaffirmed in the adopted Core Strategy in 2012”. The former ROF site is allocated through both the Core Strategy 2012 and Site Allocations Document 2018. The site, however, has never come forward for development because of problems over viability of its development because of concerns over the need for a suitable access to be provide into the site linking it to the national highway network.
5.2.4 In general terms, the principle of development for this site established in the Core Strategy has been supported by the detailed requirements set out in the Site Allocations Document with Policy SAD5 amending the original scope of acceptable development. As such, Policy SAD5 indicates that ROF Featherstone, as a strategic employment site, is expected to deliver 36ha of employment land, which can include B8 uses, subject to the provision of evidence to demonstrate an acceptable access road solution. The SAD includes a Strategic Masterplan with two indicative suitable access proposals, one of which was to access the A449 north of Coven Heath. The SAD was subject to significant consultation with communities and statutory stakeholders throughout the course of its preparation, and rigorously Examined by the Planning Inspectorate in 2017/18 and found to be sound.
5.2.5 Paragraph 80 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) makes it clear that: “Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity, taking into account both local business needs and wider opportunities for development.” Whilst Paragraph 81 indicates that planning policies should: “set out a clear economic vision and strategy which positively and proactively encourages sustainable economic growth”.
5.2.6 Against this Policy backdrop, there is clear and demonstrable in principle support for the development as is proposed, with any devil that might exist lying in the detail and any associated technical matters.
5.2.7 The principle of the development is found to be acceptable in line with Section 6 of the NPPF; and Core Policy 7 and Policy EV1 of the adopted Core Strategy and Policy SAD5 of the Site Allocations Document (SAD).
Page 112 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.3 Green Belt Considerations
5.3.1 The proposed means of access crosses the Green Belt to provide access to the M54 motorway. Paragraph 166 of the NPPF identifies certain other forms of development that are not inappropriate in the Green Belt provided they preserve openness and do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it. Engineering operations are identified as one of the listed ‘other forms of development’ in paragraph 146 of the NPPF. Policy GB1 (Development in the Green Belt) of the Core Strategy is consistent with the NPPF and therefore it is appropriate to consider the application in line with the provisions of the Framework.
5.3.2 The Town and Country Planning Act states that the formation or laying out of means of access to highways constitutes engineering operations. Despite the scale of the access that would be necessary to serve the proposed development, this aspect of the proposal would comprise engineering operations and therefore is not inappropriate development if preserves openness and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it. That said, the scale is such that inevitably there will be some loss of openness through the provision of an extensive area of hard surfacing, street lighting etc. Moreover, the access would also encroach into the countryside and therefore also conflict with one of the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. Any harm to the Green Belt is given great importance. As a matter of principle, therefore, there would be some harm to openness and the purposes of including land in the Green Belt arising from the proposed access at this location.
5.3.3 I have concluded that in Green Belt terms, the proposed access and likely associated paraphernalia would result in modest loss of openness and conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. Openness and permeance are the essential characteristics of the Green Belt i.e. openness is the absence of development and it has both spatial and visual aspects. I have found elsewhere that the visual impacts of this proposal are acceptable. These matters attract substantial weight. However, for the reasons given elsewhere in this report, including the significant economic and social benefits that would emerge from this important strategic development opportunity, I am satisfied that these considerations clearly and demonstrably outweigh the harm to the Green Belt by reasons of apparent conflict with one of the purposes of including land within it and the moderate loss of openness. Therefore, the very special circumstances that would be necessary to justify the proposal, in my view, unequivocally exist in this instance.
5.4 Layout, Scale, Landscape and Appearance
5.4.1 This current application proposes a significant level and form of development, and as previously indicated will deliver a total of nearly 159,000 sq.m of new flexible E, B2 and B8 development, within an allocated strategic employment site with excellent accessibility to the national Motorway Network. Policy SAD5 allows B8 use on the basis that 10ha of planting to provide a landscape buffer is delivered and located outside the development boundary in the Green Belt to the east of Featherstone.
Page 113 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.4.2 As previously confirmed, the application submitted is a hybrid application. The outline element seeks approval for the principle of the redevelopment of the ROF site for E, B2 and B8 Class development. Approval is sought for the height ‘parameters’ that will be adopted for when a subsequent reserved matters application is submitted. Approval is also sought for the drainage and landscape strategy in relation to the site. This application, however, does not seek approval for the design of the employment buildings on the site.
5.4.3 The outline element of the application seeks to establish the appropriateness of the scale of development proposed on the site including height parameters together with the general layout of the proposed building. The layout of the site has been heavily influenced by existing constraints which have designated developable areas. The existing DVSA Test Centre which, although not within the application boundary, is served from Cat and Kittens Lane to the west. A mature woodland area to the east plays an important part in softening the previous development from its environment and adjacent to this area there are existing ponds. An existing stream running through the norther part of the site is to be retained. To the north-west, in the ownership of the applicant but outside the application site is another area of grassland and woodland scrub. Within and around the application site there are also several utilities present including underground and overhead utility infrastructure. Whilst the on-site constraints restrict the developable area of the site, the location of the new access from the west provides the opportunity to incorporate a gateway into the site and introduce structural landscaping thus increasing the opportunity for biodiversity.
Layout 5.4.4 Given the nature of this planning application the layout that has been produced is indicative however it has been informed by the masterplan process and represents a realistic solution to achieving the required quantum of development across a range of uses that remain in conformity with the adopted SAD’s Strategic Masterplan for ROF. The indicative layout has been prepared with the aim of demonstrating that a wide range of commercial uses can be accommodated on site. The individual plots will be designed to bring service yards into the site so that they are shielded by the buildings to keep both noise and light pollution to a minimum, thus softening the visual impact on the existing landscape. The units themselves will be orientated around the fully designed centrally positioned access road which will connect to the new entrance into the site and will provide distribution around the development to enable various unit sizes. Buildings will be set back into the site to allow for the incorporation of large landscape features which in turn will further soften the impact of the development.
5.4.5 The retention of the woodland area to the North West adjacent to the existing ponds (outside of the application boundary) and the reconstruction of a woodland area to the east of the application site adjacent to Unit 7 together with the proposed structural landscape to the perimeter of the development provides visual protection, softening the impact on the surrounding environment. Whilst the proposed scheme is illustrative, Units 1, 2 & 3 will be designed sympathetically to compliment the DVSA Test Centre which will benefit from the new access arrangements. The remainder of the development is likely to be made up of larger commercial units with their own dedicated service yards, vehicular circulation, and parking arrangements.
Page 114 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.4.6 Other features include a new pedestrian/cycle and emergency access link extending from the main estate road to Brookhouse Lane giving permeability through the development towards Featherstone Village. It is considered that the site is primarily located to take advantage of its excellent road network connectivity, essential for modern commercial operations whilst also ensuring that traffic movements by large goods vehicles are focussed on the main road links, in this case the A449 Stafford Road and the M54 Motorway.
5.4.7 The illustrative layout of the proposed development appears to be logical and allows the Applicant to make the most effective use of the land available, which would correspond with the aspirations of Section 11 of the NPPF.
Scale 5.4.8 Policy EQ11, Part C. f) indicates, amongst other things, that in terms of scale and massing: “development should contribute positively to the streetscene and surrounding buildings, whilst respecting the scale of spaces and buildings in the local area.”
5.4.9 The proposed masterplan seeks to establish a scale and massing that addresses the topography and locality of the site whilst successfully connecting the site to adjacent land uses and buildings. Whilst the application does not seek consent for the detail or siting of buildings at this stage it does contain a series of parameters which will set out the limitations for any subsequent reserved matters application on the site.
5.4.10 The following table sets out the key dimensions associated with the proposed development:
Gross Internal Area Haunch Ridge Height (GIA) Height UNIT 1 10.0m 13.5m B2/B8 4,589sq.m Office 241.5sq.m Total 4,830.5sq.m
UNIT 2 10.0m 13.5m B2/B8 5,736.8sq.m Office 301.9sq.m Total 6,038.7sq.m
UNIT 3 10.0m 13.5m B2/B8 5,295.5sq.m Office 278.7sq.m Total 5,574.2sq.m
UNIT 4 12.5m 16.0m B2/B8 13,238.7sq.m Office 696.8sq.m Total 13,935.5sq.m
Page 115 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
UNIT 5 12.5m 16.0m B2/B8 15,445.1sq.m Office 812.9sq.m Total 16,258sq.m
Unit 6 15.0m 18.5m B2/B8 22,064.5sq.m Office 1,161.3sq.m Total 23,225.8sq.m
Unit 7 15.0m 18.5m B2/B8 39,716sq.m Office 2,090.3sq.m Total 41,806.3sq.m
Unit 8 21.0m 24.5m B2/B8 44,128.9sq.m Office 2,322.6sq.m Total 46,451.5sq.m
Hub N/a 6.0m E(b) 511sq.m Total 511sq.m
5.4.11 As the masterplan is indicative it is not possible to give overall dimensions for the proposed buildings as these will vary depending on specific needs of future occupiers and will form part of the considerations of any future reserved matters application. Nowhere in the supporting Core Policies 1 and 7 or Policy EV1 are there any caveats or conditions which require any part of the ROF site, or any of the other allocated Strategic Employment Sites for that matter, to be in anyway constrained or restricted in terms of footprint, form or scale of development, such as maximum build heights for instance. Rather, it therefore falls to the relevant adopted design-based policies and guidance to consider the acceptability of the development, which would include matters of scale. Taking this into consideration and given the nature of the site and its surroundings, I find the above parameters to be acceptable and will assimilate well within its context.
Landscape 5.4.12 In accordance with the SAD’s Strategic Masterplan, the existing landscape features and topography means that mature trees and hedgerows will be protected where possible with additional structural landscape planting provided to help visually integrate the new development into the surroundings whilst encouraging and enhancing biodiversity.
5.4.13 The new site infrastructure will include structural planting adjacent to the new access road to serve the employment area. It is intended that any future detailed design will include substantial landscaping adjacent to the road network which, when matured, will
Page 116 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021 be of suitable massing to provide active frontages and screening to the units whilst producing a ‘boulevard’ effect along the road network.
5.4.14 The landscape proposals have been established by the following principles: - Retention of the semi-improved grassland, woodland scrub, ponds and stream to the north-west of the site. - Introduction of new woodland and grassland to the eastern boundary to replace the loss of existing landscaping in the vicinity of where unit 7 is proposed. - New wildflower grass mix and native shrub planting to enhance new attenuation basin on the north-eastern part of the site. - Conservation of as much of the existing tree groups and mature landscaping as possible. - New swales and planting will run along the estate roads. Carefully selected species will be considered to provide a variety of trees and planting which will enhance ecology. - Integration of sustainable urban drainage attenuation features which assist the biodiversity offsetting targets by incorporating a variety of species mixes. - Provision of a commercial park landscape setting which combines functional requirements and attractive landscape for the benefit of park users and visitors.
5.4.15 I consider the above principles will help to define areas, separate uses and generally articulate exterior space. It will assist in establishing comprehensive and easy to use pedestrian and vehicular circulation. Moreover, the landscape proposals are in conformity with the requirements as defined under policy SAD5.
Appearance 5.4.16 Section 12 of the NPPF sets out the Government’s aspirations in terms of achieving well-designed places, with Paragraph 124 stating that: “Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development ….”.
5.4.17 Appearance does not form part of the consideration of this planning application however the developers have set out some design principles that are to be adopted with any future reserved matters application. It is envisaged that the buildings will be designed to a high standard to ensure the finished scheme is of an appropriate quality and will make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area. The overall design objective is to provide buildings that will sit comfortably in their environment with the use of high quality and energy efficient materials. Taking this into account there is no reason why a subsequent reserved matters application cannot achieve the aspirations of the NPPF in relation to good design.
5.5 New Access and Highway Safety
5.5.1 The detailed element of this hybrid application seeks full permission for the access arrangements into the site, which comprises the proposed new link road from the western edge of the site, crossing the West Coast Mainline via a bridge, then forming a new traffic light controlled junction onto the A449, which then joins onto the M54 north of Junction 2. Approval is also sought for the proposed new roundabout junction allowing access into the site from Cat and Kittens Lane and the internal road layout together with drainage
Page 117 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021 infrastructure and landscaping associated with the access proposals. A significant amount of supporting highway information has been submitted by the Applicant including a Transport Assessment.
5.5.2 The corridor required for the proposed new link road is some 4.1ha of mainly flat pastureland interspersed with trees and hedgerow located to the west of Cat and Kittens Lane. It includes the West Coast Mainline that runs north-south parallel to the western boundary of the site. To the west of the railway there is further agricultural land before the A449 road is reached. There is a lay-by on the A449 where the proposed new link road is intended to join and form a new traffic island junction.
5.5.3 The new link road will comprise a 7.3m wide carriageway with footpaths either side that will run due west from the new roundabout junction at the site entrance on Cat and Kittens Lane and will go over the existing railway line via a bridge. Discussions with Network Rail on this matter have established the acceptability of the proposal. The route will then continue west before joining the A449 at an existing lay-by (which will be closed through the Highways Act Section 247 procedure) where a new roundabout junction will be formed north of the M54 Junction 2. It is noted that the lay-by has also been the subject of previous antisocial behaviour and nuisance complaints by local residents.
5.5.4 This new road will provide a direct route for traffic accessing the ROF site using the M54 Motorway and will also allow traffic to access the ROF site from the M6 toll to the north via the A449. The details of the traffic impact, the link road and how it affects both traffic volumes and routeing throughout the area are covered within the Transport Assessment. As confirmed by County Highways this proposed access is the preferrable solution giving vehicles the most direct access to the Trunk Road network thus alleviating any issues with vehicles associated with the development travelling on less suitable roads.
5.5.5 Paragraph 109 of the NPPF advises that: “Development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.”
5.5.6 A considerable amount of dialogue has taken place between the Applicant, the Local Planning Authority, County Highways and Highways England over a considerable amount of time. Fundamental issues have had to be addressed by the Applicant during the course of this planning application to overcome the concerns raised by Highways England and County Highways. All parties have acted pro-actively in a bid to resolve the outstanding matters raised by Highways England, including (but not limited to) the junction Option Appraisal, Departures associated with the new roundabout, completion of a Road Safety Audit and the impact on the Strategic Road Network. Highways England have now confirmed that they are willing to offer support for the proposed development subject to conditions as detailed below.
5.5.7 The detailed response from County Highways is provided above. This provides background information and an outline of previous and on-going discussions relating to the provision of a new access. County Highways are satisfied that the chosen new access is the most preferred and having reviewed the Transport Assessment are satisfied that the overall impact on the county’s highway will be ‘negligible’. Several conditions have been requested
Page 118 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021 and these are also detailed above but in summary relate to the provision of sustainable modes of transport, off-site highway works, submission of Construction and HGV Management Plans as well as the construction of the new access prior to first occupation of the site.
5.5.8 Where the site was deficient was in the existing bus service offer. The current bus provision would not offer a service to allow potential employees access to the site at likely starting and finishing times and a realistic choice of travel. To rectify this the County has identified the necessary uplift to the bus frequency and the funds required to provide this; £446,000 to be paid in instalments. However, as the end users are not yet known we shall require suitable flexibility in how these services are provided and that detail will be decided once the end users are known, and they are engaged in the Travel Planning for this site. These payments will be secured by a suitable legal agreement and will be conditional of the planning permission. This is also discussed in further detail below.
5.6 Visual Impact of the Development
5.6.1 Notwithstanding my previous comments regarding the scale, design and layout of the development, I do find it necessary to consider the potential wider visual impact of the development.
5.6.2 In terms of any wider visual impact, Policy EQ4 of the Core Strategy states, amongst other things, that: “Throughout the District, the design and location of new development should take account of the characteristics and sensitivity of the landscape and its surroundings, and not have a detrimental effect on the immediate environment and on any important medium and long distance views. The siting, scale, and design of new development will need to take full account of the nature and distinctive qualities of the local landscape. The use of techniques, such as landscape character analysis, to establish the local importance and the key features that should be protected and enhanced, will be supported.”
5.6.3 In this regard, the application has been accompanied by a detailed and suitably illustrated Landscape and Visual Impact Appraisal (LVIA) which considers the potential impact of the development on the wider landscape when viewed from a range of public and private vantage points.
5.6.4 The accompanying LVIA concludes that the proposed development “is likely to result in change at a localised level and, notwithstanding that there are adverse effects identified, these are localised and on balance, the potential landscape and visual effects identified are not likely to be significant … and the proposals for green infrastructure will deliver a number of enhancements in terms of the physical appearance”. The report continues that the development “will result in a development that is not an uncharacteristic addition to the local landscape, and together with proposed new landscape infrastructure planting will respect its context”. Finally, “the proposed strengthening of the structure of the landscape to create a new robust, defensible Green Belt boundary to the east and west of the main ROF part of the site and adjoining land will help maintain residential amenity and create a new landscape framework for future development”.
Page 119 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
5.6.5 I am satisfied that, in terms of the visual impact of the development and the impact upon the character and appearance of the surrounding landscape, which includes the Green Belt to the east and west in particular, the requirements of Policies EQ4 and EQ11 of the Core Strategy are satisfied.
5.7 Flood Risk and Drainage
5.7.1 The application has been supported by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and a detailed foul and surface water drainage strategy. The FRA determines that the Proposed Development is classified as “Less Vulnerable” and confirms that the site is located in Flood Zone 1, an area with a low probability of flooding. The FRA indicates that the risk of flooding from fluvial, pluvial, groundwater is low.
5.7.2 It is considered that the Proposed Development, with the inclusion of the SuDS drainage systems described within the submission documents, will not increase the risk of surface water flooding in the wider catchment.
5.7.3 Whilst both the relevant consultees (the County Council’s Flood Risk Management Team and Severn Trent Water) raised some initial concerns, following the receipt of additional information and further clarification, both consultees have since confirmed that they have no objections and are supportive of the proposals.
5.7.4 I am therefore content that the Applicants have satisfactorily addressed matters relating to surface water and foul drainage, and that the development is in accordance with Core Policy 3 and Policy EQ7 of the adopted Core Strategy.
5.8 Biodiversity and Trees
5.8.1 The application has been supported by the submission of an Arboricultural Survey and Report; Landscape Strategy and a Biodiversity Impact Assessment and Enhancement Strategy.
5.8.2 Paragraph 170 of the NPPF indicates that, amongst other things, planning decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: “minimising impacts on and providing net gains for biodiversity …. “. Whilst Paragraph 175 (NPPF) states that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should refuse development proposals: “if significant harm to biodiversity resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated; or, as a last resort, compensated for ….”.
5.8.3 Policy EQ1 of the Core Strategy (Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets) states that permission will be granted for development that would not cause significant harm to species that are protected or under threat and that wherever possible, development proposals should build in biodiversity by incorporating ecologically sensitive design and features for biodiversity within the development scheme.
5.8.4 The accompanying Biodiversity Impact Assessment and Enhancement Strategy confirms that the development will result in the removal of approximately 46ha of habitat
Page 120 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021 from the site with approximately 8.0ha of existing vegetation being retained and enhanced within the development and approximately 12.83ha of new ecologically valuable habitat being created within the development. The development will therefore include approximately 20.8ha of habitats. Through appropriate management the report shows that the development can result in a minor net gain equating to +0.10 Habitat Biodiversity Units and +0.41 Hedgerow Units.
5.8.5 Following the submission of additional ecology surveys (relating to Badgers, Amphibians and management plans) the County Ecologist raises no objections to the scheme subject to the inclusion of conditions which are detailed above. These relate predominantly to habitat management and monitoring, additional landscaping details and external lighting details.
5.8.6 In terms of existing trees, the accompanying Arboricultural Survey confirms that tree losses are inevitable as part of the proposed development although it is noted that the proposals allow for the retention of the site’s veteran tree (T30 Veteran Alder) which will be unaffected during construction. The report concludes that “in the absence of harm to veteran trees or those scheduled within a TPO, the arboricultural impact of the development is acceptable”.
5.8.7 There are no objections to the proposed development from the Arboricultural Officer subject to a condition being imposed to any permission requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Arboricultural Method Statement. In light of the above I am of the opinion that the requirements of the NPPF in this regard have been satisfied and that the application accords with Core Policy 2 and Policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.
5.9 Residential Amenity
5.9.1 Whilst this application seeks permission for the principle of the development together with access, consideration must be afforded to the impact the development may have on the living conditions of occupants of any nearby residential dwellings. Policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Policy stresses the requirement for all development proposals to take account of the amenity of any nearby residents, particularly with regard to privacy, security, noise and disturbance, pollution (including light pollution), odours and daylight.
5.9.2 The village of Featherstone is situated approximately 1km away to the west and Cross Green, Slade Heath and Coven Heath lie to the north-west and west. Coven and Shareshill are just over 2km to the north-west and north-east respectively. To the north and north- east of the site is the settlement of Brinsford and the prison complex which is close to the site boundary having once formed part of the ROF site. Bushbury and Fordhouses areas of the northern part of Wolverhampton are approximately 1km to the south of the site.
5.9.3 The visibility into the site from a northerly direction is screened by the existing prison buildings which are up to 20m in height. From the east, as discussed previously, the landscape buffer will result in restricted visibility from residential dwellings as existing and proposed in Featherstone. Any wider visibility of the scheme from the south is screened by the motorway. There will be visibility into the site from the west and this will – on the basis
Page 121 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021 of the proposed masterplan – result in visibility of the buildings on the western side of the site and the new site access. The visual impact of the road will be more widely experienced, particularly due to the bridge that will be required to cross the West Coast railway line. However, the overall conclusion in relation to the provision of the link road is its impact in visual terms will not be significantly adverse.
5.9.4 It is appreciated that Policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy advises that all development proposals should take account of the amenity of any nearby residents. Whilst this policy provides advice and guidance regarding the introduction of new housing development in the vicinity of noise generating uses, it is largely silent on the opposite scenario, as in this case, albeit that it calls for noise suppression measures to be secured where necessary. In this regard, the findings of the submitted Noise Impact Assessment state that:
“Due to the significant distances between the on-site construction and operational activities and local dwellings, the scheme would have a low impact upon neighbouring receptors, including the HMP’s Oakwood and Featherstone which are the closest receptors to the Site. There would be no harm caused to the residential amenity of dwellings closest to the application site due to noise from outside or inside the new buildings, and there would be no change to the ambient noise climate at the dwellings. There are no other outstanding noise issues, therefore, the overall conclusion of the noise assessment is that the decision maker may grant planning permission with conditions where appropriate. Taking the above into account, it is concluded that the scheme accords with planning policies in the development plan, or parts thereof, that deal with noise, along with the relevant guidance in the NPPF”.
5.9.5 Given the nature and scale of the development proposed it is also necessary to consider what impact the scheme may have on noise and air quality. In this regard, the findings of the submitted Air Quality Impact Assessment state that:
“Due to the significant distances between the on-site construction and operational activities and local dwellings, the scheme would have a low impact upon neighbouring receptors, including the HMP’s Oakwood and Featherstone which are the closest receptors to the site. There would be no harm caused to the residential amenity of dwellings closest to the application site due to dust during the construction phase or emissions from traffic generated by the proposed development. There are no other outstanding air quality issues, therefore, the overall conclusion of the assessment is that the decision make may grant planning permission with conditions where appropriate. Taking the above matters into account, it is concluded that the scheme accords with planning policies in the development plan, or parts thereof, that deal with air quality, along with the relevant guidance in the NPPF”.
5.9.6 Further consideration of the potential impact on neighbouring amenity shall be given as part of any future detailed planning permission however for the purposes of this application I am of the view, that insofar as possible, the Applicant has sought to respect the relationship with the closest neighbouring properties against the backdrop of the site’s overall allocation as a Strategic Employment Site.
5.10 Other Matters
Page 122 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Sustainable Construction 5.10.1 Policy EQ5 of the adopted Core Strategy sets out the Council’s aims and aspirations in terms of Sustainable Development and Energy Efficiency and states that for non- residential development of this scale that it should be built to BREEAM “Excellent” standard.
5.10.2 Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) is a nationally (and internationally) recognised method of assessing the sustainability of buildings. BREEAM assessments evaluate the procurement, design, construction, and operation of a development against a range of targets based on performance benchmarks. Buildings are rated on a scale of ‘Pass’, ‘Good’, ‘Very Good’. ‘Excellent’ and ‘Outstanding’.
5.10.3 A BREAAM Statement accompanies the application and confirms that the objective across the site is to deliver BREEAM excellent rating in accordance with Core Strategy Policies EQ5 and 6. The report also confirms there will be a pre-assessment carried out at each reserved matters submission and gives an outline of the types of measures that will be brought in across the site to enable the BREEAM excellent rating to be achieved over time.
Historic Environment 5.10.4 The application site is located, at its nearest point, approximately 200m to the north of the Grade II* Listed Moseley Old Hall, which is owned and maintained by the National Trust. Moseley Old Hall has an east/west orientation, the rear elevation of this historic Elizabethan Farmhouse facing in an eastward’s direction. The Hall is located within a lightly wooded location, but the first-floor windows do allow for views in the direction of the ROF site.
5.10.5 The application has been accompanied by an Historic Environment Assessment which, amongst other things, assesses the impact of the proposed development upon Moseley Old Hall.
5.10.6 Paragraph 189 of the NPPF requires an applicant to identify and describe the significance of any heritage assets that might be affected by their proposed development. Whilst Paragraph 196 (NPPF) advises that where less than substantial harm would occur, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposed development. Policy EQ3 of the adopted Core Strategy states that, amongst other things: “The Council will ensure that development which affects a heritage asset, or its setting will be informed by a proportional assessment of the significance of the asset, including its setting, which is likely to be affected by the proposals”.
5.10.7 The submitted Assessment observes that “the proposed development will not result in any adverse effects on the heritage value of any designated heritage asset as a result of alteration to setting…it is concluded that the scheme accords with planning policies in the development plan, or parts thereof, that deal with archaeology and cultural heritage, along with the relevant guidance of the NPPF”.
5.10.8 On this latter point, the County Archaeologist whilst having originally raised some initial concerns regarding the need for further archaeological evaluation and recording in relation to known and potential archaeological features on-site. This additional work has
Page 123 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021 been carried out and documented accordingly and the Archaeologist has since confirmed that he is content with the nature and level of the written submissions and accepts the findings. No conditions or further need for archaeological survey or monitoring has been requested.
Job Creation and Economic Benefits 5.10.9 As previously mentioned, Paragraph 80 of the NPPF makes it clear that: “Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity, taking into account both local business needs and wider opportunities for development.”
5.10.10 A Socio Economic Effects Assessment has been submitted with the application which amongst other things provides an indication of the likely number of jobs to be created as a result of the development.
5.10.11 The report states that, based upon the proposed E, B2 and B8 uses, the development can be reasonably expected to generate over 3,000 FTE jobs once fully operational. The total net effects of the proposed development (taking into account leakage, displacement and multipliers) would be the creation of 3,752 jobs within the region and of these 2,474 would be at the local level (employed directly on site and within the broader local economy).
5.10.12 The report continues that “the expenditure generated by people working at the site (when complete) will be £111.962m per annum, of which £58.79m will be net additional expenditure which would directly benefit South Staffordshire and Wolverhampton. Salaries will also be generated in the local economy through employment created as a result of the indirect and induced effects of the proposed development. This would equate to around £55.52m per annum at the regional level of which £30.54m would benefit the local area”. The total construction of the proposed development (including demolition, remediation and infrastructure works) would be in excess of £100m.
5.10.13 The Localism Act 2011 introduced changes to primary planning legislation such that local financial considerations are capable of being material considerations when arriving at a planning decision. The weight to be attributed to such matters lies with the decision taker.
5.10.14 In this case, I consider that the local financial considerations would include increased Business Rates payments; local employment opportunities during construction; and new job creation once development is completed.
5.10.15 It is clear to me that the approval of the proposed development will result in a significant positive economic benefit with regards to job creation and the local economy in line with Section 6 of the NPPF and Core Policy 7 of the adopted Core Strategy.
5.11 Legal Obligations and Contributions
5.11.1 Through the consultation process, it has been identified that Legal Obligations and Contributions are justified and necessary which are summarised as follows:
Page 124 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
1. Public transport services contribution of £446,000 for bus services to the site that will provide a link between the development, Wolverhampton and Cannock. Contribution to be paid, index linked, in five instalments as per table:
• 1st instalment £89,380 + indexation from commencement of development of the FIRST Unit to be paid 3 months prior to occupation of 1st building. • 2nd instalment £89,380 + indexation on or before anniversary of 1st instalment unless otherwise agreed under the service review. • 3rd instalment £89,380 + indexation on or before 24th month anniversary of 1st instalment unless otherwise agreed under the service review. • 4th instalment £89,380 + indexation on or before 36th month anniversary of 1st instalment unless otherwise agreed under the service review. • 5th instalment £89,380 + indexation on or before 48th month anniversary of 1st instalment unless otherwise agreed under the service review.
2. The sum of £13,000 for the Travel Plan monitoring sum.
5.11.2 The Applicants are in agreement to the contributions as set out above which are considered to be a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, b) directly related to the development; and c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
5.11.3 Committee Members will be familiar with the process of securing such financial contributions via a S106 (of the Town and Country Planning Act) Agreement. In this case, however, it has been agreed between the Applicant and County Highways that the contributions will be secured by way of a Unilateral Undertaking direct with the recipients, Staffordshire County Council.
6. CONCLUSIONS
6.1 The proposed new access serving the proposed development is situated within the West Midlands Green Belt. However, the identified significant economic and social benefits that would emerge from this important strategic development opportunity clearly and demonstrably outweigh the harm to the Green Belt by reasons of apparent conflict with one of the purposes of including land within it and the moderate loss of openness.
6.2 The starting point in favour of the application must be the fact that this is a longstanding allocated Strategic Employment Site, with Core Policies 1 and 7 and Policy EV1 of the Core Strategy and SAD5 of the Sits Allocations Document providing unequivocal support for the proposed development. This is a site where the very scale and nature of development proposed is supported, in principle, and is only to be expected. As stated above, Paragraph 80 of the NPPF makes it clear that “Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity, taking into account both local business needs and wider opportunities for development.”
6.3 The proposed development is expected to deliver over 3,000 FTE jobs, not counting construction job opportunities and thereby would make a significant contribution to the
Page 125 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021 local economy, and I attribute significant weight to the principle and nature of the development proposed, and the public benefits that would be delivered.
6.4 In considering the matters pertaining to the outline element of this application the illustrative layout and parameters proposed in regard to scale, layout, design and visual impact were acceptable with any concerns capable of being satisfactorily addressed either through conditions or later consideration as part of a future detailed planning application. The scheme will deliver significant landscaping to the east of Featherstone in direct compliance with Policy SAD5 (Employment Land Allocations) of the SAD. In considering the matters relating to the proposed new access and estate roads (i.e. the full element of the application) the proposed new access is considered to be the most preferred option and having reviewed the Transport Assessment are satisfied that the overall impact on the county’s highways will be ‘negligible’. Where deficiencies were noted i.e. in the existing bus service offer the developer, through a legal agreement, will provide the required financial contributions to upgrade these services. County Highways are offering support for the application as are Highways England (albeit updated comments are pending).
6.5 Subject to planning conditions there are no concerns in terms of drainage and flood risk or in terms of biodiversity and trees. In relation to heritage matters I have considered the findings of the accompanying Historic Environment Assessment against the requirements of Paragraphs 189-196 of the NPPF and concluded that any harm to the setting of the Listed Hall would be at the lower end of “less than substantial” and that such minimal harm that might be perceived is outweighed by the public benefits, which are clearly economic and job creation based.
6.6 In terms of impact upon residential amenity I am satisfied that the living conditions of existing and future residents in and around Featherstone, Coven Heath and Brinsford will not be compromised as a result of this development and this is evidenced in the accompanying supporting documentation.
6.7 I consider that significant weight must be attributed to Economic Growth which will be delivered as a result of this development and this growth shall outweigh any perceived shortcomings in the scheme. The development as proposed will finally see the delivery of a longstanding vacant but allocated employment site, brought into economic use, in accordance with the adopted Local Plan. Overall, I find that the application accords with Policies EQ1, EQ3, EQ4, EQ5, EQ7, EQ9, EQ11, EQ12, EV1, EV11, EV12 and CS1 of the adopted Core Strategy, and SAD policy SAD5, I therefore consider that the application can be supported for the reasons set out above.
7. RECOMMENDATION
7.1 Based on the conclusions above, the recommendation to the Planning Committee on this application is that DELEGATED AUTHORITY be granted to the Lead Planning Manager to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to:
a) The Applicants entering into a Unilateral Undertaking with the County Council relating to the following:
Page 126 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
- Public transport services contribution of £446,000 for bus services to the site that will provide a link between the development, Wolverhampton and Cannock. Contribution to be paid, index linked, in five instalments. - The sum of £13,000 for the Travel Plan monitoring sum.
b) The following conditions (with authority to finalise conditions to be delegated to Lead Planning Manager)
Conditions
01. The development which this permission relates must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:
a) The expiration of three years from the date on which this permission is granted; b) The expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.
02. Before the commencement of Reserved Matters development within a particular parcel or plot, and within 3 years of the date of this permission, full details of the following reserved matters relevant to that parcel or plot shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority:
a) The Layout - The way in which buildings, routes and open spaces are to be provided within the development and their relationship to buildings and spaces in the vicinity of the site; b) The Scale - The height, width, length and overall appearance of each of the proposed buildings, including the proposed facing materials, and how they relate to their surroundings; c) The Appearance - The aspects of a building or place which determine the visual impression it makes; d) The Landscaping - The treatment of private and public space and the impact upon the site's amenity through the introduction of hard and soft landscaping.
03. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings:
Pedestrian Link to Plots 1-3 SK-03-03-21_01 REV A Proposed A449 Link Road CWA-18-214-518 P9 Proposed Access Road A449 ITM 15267-GA-013G Proposed Junction of Access Road with ITM15267-GA-012F A449 Illustrative Master plan 15-062-PL-200D Site location Plan 15-062-PL-100C Landscape Masterplan 6948.LM.ASP3E Parameters Plan 15-062-PL-400C Proposed Spine Road (on site) CWA-18-214-517-P3 Typical Sections Road CWA-18-214-525 P1
Page 127 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Bridge Proposed Plan and Elevation BMH2140-BWB-HGN-XX-DR-C-0003 S8- P04 Detail/Outline Consent Plan 15-062-PL-402B Landscape Phasing plan 15-062-SK-08-03-21-01 Landscape detail plans 6948.PP.4.0B to 4.10B (inclusive) 11 in total Overall Drainage strategy (main site) 10702-HYD-XX-XX-DR-D-2200 rev P010 Proposed Drainage Strategy ( A449 link 10702-HYD-XX-XX-DR-D_2207 rev P09 Road) Proposed Drainage Strategy (A449 link 10702-HYD-XX-XX-DR-D-2208 rev P08 road) 10702-HYD-XX-XX-DR-D-2209 rev P09 Proposed Drainage Strategy ( A449 link Road)
04. A Landscape Management Plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities, implementation and maintenance schedules for all landscaping within the application site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to first occupation of the development within a parcel or plot. The Landscape Management Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timescales.
05. Any reserved matters application for the erection of a building shall include an accompanying landscaping scheme for the associated development plot. The landscaping scheme shall include full details of planting plans and written specifications, including cultivation proposals for maintenance and management associated with plant and grass establishment, details of the mix, size, distribution, density and levels of all trees/hedges/shrubs to be planted and the proposed time of planting. No development within the development plot for which reserved matters approval is sought shall commence until the landscaping scheme has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
06. Reserved matters applications for each individual development plot or building shall include full details of hard landscape works associated with that respective plot or building. These works shall be carried out as approved prior to the occupation of any part of the building hereby approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials; minor artefacts and structures; furniture; refuse and on-site storage facilities for trade waste or other storage units and any signs; proposed.
07. The buildings approved within plots knows as units 1 to 8 on the Illustrative Master Plan are to be used for B1, B2 and B8 employment use only. The heights of the buildings which will be the subject of reserved matters shall not exceed the maximum height parameters for each part of the site in accordance with the approved Parameters Plan 15-062-PL-400 Rev C.
Page 128 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
08. The 'hub' as described on the Illustrative Development Master Plan (drawing no. 15- 062-PL-200) shall be permitted for use as an ancillary food and beverage offer (for consumption on or off premises) to the employment uses on-site as use class E(b). This includes limited convenience goods provision.
09. The total amount of development floorspace authorised by this permission shall not exceed 158,631.9 sq.m. (GIA) and any reserved matters application(s) pursuant to Condition 2 shall be limited to this maximum in total.
10. Prior to the commencement of any construction, including demolition, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority in respect of each part of the works. The approved management plan shall include details relating to:
• construction access arrangements, • hours of construction, • Construction vehicle routing plan • permitted construction traffic arrival and departure times • estimated construction traffic movements per day • the location of the contractors compounds, cabins, material storage areas and contractors parking. a scheme for the management and suppression of dust and mud from construction activities including the provision of a vehicle wheel wash. • measures to control and monitor construction noise; • an undertaking that there must be no burning of materials on site at any time during construction; • removal of materials from site including a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works; • details of external lighting equipment for construction purposes if applicable • details of ditches to be piped during the construction phases if applicable • site compound materials storage, staff parking, delivery vehicle parking and manoeuvring areas • contact details for the responsible person (site manager/office) who can be contacted in the event of any issue.
All site operations shall then be undertaken strictly in accordance with the approved CEMP for the duration of the construction programme.
11. No development shall commence above ground other than the road and bridge infrastructure until an Employment and Skills Framework Statement detailing arrangements to promote local employment and skills development opportunities related to the development has been submitted to the local planning authority. The plan must include proposals for working with South Staffordshire County Council, Staffordshire County Council and Wolverhampton City Council and explain how they have been consulted on the submitted plan. The Employment and Skills Framework Statement shall be supplemented by further detailed Statements for each subsequent Phase of development. The Employment and Skills Framework
Page 129 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Statement must be implemented and maintained for the duration of the construction and use of the development.
12. Prior to occupation of any Phase of the development hereby permitted, details of charging points for electric vehicles shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and thereafter shall be provided in accordance with the approved details and subsequently retained for that purpose.
13. Prior to the erection or installation of any outdoor lighting associated with the development of an individual building or development plot, a detailed outdoor lighting scheme applicable to that plot and associated building/s shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall specify the method of lighting (including details of the type of lights, orientation/angle of the luminaires, the spacing and height of lighting columns/fixings), the extent/levels of illumination over the relevant plot and measures to be taken to contain light within the curtilage of the site. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with approved details and shall thereafter be maintained as such.
14. In the event that unexpected contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development, it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
15. In the event that the foundations of any building require piling, prior to any piling taking place in association with that building, a method statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority detailing the type of piling to be used, potential noise and vibration levels at the nearest noise sensitive locations in accordance with British Standard 5228 - Part 4 and mitigation measures to be undertaken in order to safeguard the amenity of adjacent residents. The piling mitigation shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
16. Prior to occupation of each plot a noise assessment relating to the impact of any proposed fixed external plant shall be submitted to, and agreed by, the Local Planning Authority. The development and use shall then be carried out with the approved details.
17. Secure, covered and safe cycle parking facilities shall be provided within the site prior to the first occupation of the development in accordance with a scheme that has first been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved facilities shall be retained in perpetuity.
18. Prior to first occupation of any building on the site the access road as shown on drawing CWA-18-214- 518 P9 picking up the Highways England roundabout changes
Page 130 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
from the site to the A449 shall be substantially complete and open for use unless otherwise agreed in writing.
19. Prior to occupation and bringing a unit in to use an HGV management plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved HGV management plan shall include details relating to routing of HGVs to and from the site without traveling through Featherstone.
20. Notwithstanding the submitted drawing ITM15267 -GA-011B, upon commencement of the development a detailed scheme for off-site highway improvements to Brookhouse Lane at its junction with the pedestrian / emergency access on eastern part of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to first occupation unless otherwise agreed om writing.
21. As part of the reserved matters application on plots 1, 2 and 3 details the footway on the western part of Cat and Kittens Lane as shown on drawing 15-062-SK-03-02- 21/01 REV A shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to first occupation.
22. The development must be carried out and operated in accordance with the approved Framework Travel Plan dated 14/12/2021 . Those parts of the Approved Framework Travel Plan that are identified therein as being capable of implementation after occupation must be implemented in accordance with the timetable contained therein and must continue to be implemented as long as any part of the development is occupied.
23. The submission of reserved matters shall include a scheme for parking for each building and/or plot of the permitted development. The parking provision shall be in compliance with the parking standards of the local highway authority for B2 and B8 buildings. The parking spaces approved shall be made available for use prior to the operational use of each building the spaces relate to and shall be maintained clear of any obstruction and retained for the intended purposes at all times.
24. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved a five-year management and monitoring plan for retained and created habitats shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Habitat monitoring information shall thereafter be submitted to the Local Planning each year for approval and implementation.
25. All pre-commencement, tree removals, pruning, protection, site meetings and monitoring shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Arboricultural Method Statement by Aspect Arboriculture (ref: 10143_AMS.001) dated February 2021.
26. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the drainage scheme has been implemented in accord with the principles of the Approved Overall
Page 131 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Drainage Strategy 10702-HYD-XX-XX-DR-D-2200 Rev P010 and the A449 Link Road Drawings 10702-HYD-XX-XX-DR-D_2207 Rev P09 A449 Link Road 10702-HYD-XX-XX-DR-D-2208 Rev P08 A449 Link Road 10702-HYD-XX-XX-DR-D-2209 Rev P09 A449 Link Road Thereafter, the drainage scheme shall be retained and maintained in accordance with the submitted management and maintenance plan dated 12/2/21 Ref 10702- HYD-XX-XX-RP-D-5600-P01
27. Before any above ground development commences details of the finished floor levels of the buildings shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. Such details shall include adjoining proposed land levels and thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved levels.
28. Prior to the first occupation of the first building details of historical interpretation boards and their locations shall be submitted to and approve in writing by the Local Planning Authority together with a timetable for completion.
29. No materials stored outside the premises shall be stacked or deposited to a height exceeding 2.5 metres unless within the Service Yards unless otherwise agreed in writing.
30. No works to the proposed A449 Trunk Road roundabout or connecting Access Link Road shall commence until the detailed design and full construction specification of the proposed A449 Trunk Road roundabout and associated works (based upon the preliminary design drawings including “A449 Junction General Arrangement – Drawing No. FEA-BWB-HGN-HW01-DR-CH-0100_S4_P2” & “A449 Junction Horizontal Geometry Layout - Drawing No. FEA-BWB-HML-HW01-DR-CH-Highways England Planning Response (HEPR 16-01) January 2016 0150_S1_P5”) has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Highways England.
The detailed design shall include (but not exclusively) the following: - • Any necessary changes to the position of the controlled pedestrian crossing on the A449 southbound roundabout exit • Full approval to the Departures from Standard which were accepted in-principle as part of the preliminary design • Full details of how the Access Link Road will align and interface with the A449 Trunk Road roundabout. The design of a sufficient length of the Access Link Road will be required to enable consideration of the tie-in (horizontal/vertical alignment, visibility, drainage, etc) to enable the connection of the works • Walking, Cycling and Horse-Riding Assessment and Review (WCHAR) “Review Reports” in accordance with Paragraph/Table 5.3 of GG 142 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. • Any necessary geotechnical or structural assessments and works • Surface water drainage and outfall (including calculations and legal easements/permissions) which will also need to demonstrate that the arrangements proposed for the existing and proposed extent of the Strategic Road Network (SRN) are independent of any existing or proposed Local Road Network drainage systems • Road lighting, road markings, advance and local direction signing • Temporary traffic management arrangements • Demonstrating
Page 132 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
compliance with the current Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), Interim Advice Notes (IANs), Traffic Sign Manual (TSM), Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works (MCHW) and associated British Standards and Eurocodes and Department for Transport Policies, Local Transport Notes (LTNs), Traffic Advisory Leaflets (TALs) and Advice Notes along with the completion of all necessary Highway or Traffic Regulation Orders. • Matters arising from the Stage 1 Road Safety Audit (BWB - dated 25th June 2021) and Response Report (BWB - dated 1st July 2021) along with Stage 2, 3 (and Stage 4 if necessary) Road Safety Audits carried out in accordance with GG 119 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. The A449 Trunk Road roundabout works shall be implemented fully in accordance with the details approved under this condition or any amendments subsequently approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Highways England before the connecting Access Link Road is opened to use by pedestrian or vehicular traffic.
31. No works to the proposed A449 Trunk Road roundabout or connecting Access Link Road shall commence until a detailed Works Phasing Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Highways England. The Works Phasing Plan shall specifically include the phasing of the connecting Access Link Road, West Coast Main Railway line overbridge and Local Highway Improvements in conjunction with the A449 Trunk Road roundabout works. The works shall thereafter be undertaken in full accordance with the approved Works Phasing Plan or any amendments subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Highways England.
Reasons
01. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
02. To ensure compliance with Section 92 (5) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.
03. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
04. In the interest of biodiversity in accordance with Policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.
05. In the interest of biodiversity in accordance with Policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.
06. In the interest of biodiversity in accordance with Policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.
07. To protect the amenities of nearby residents and to ensure the impact of the development is minimised having regard to Policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
08. To protect the amenities of nearby residents and to ensure the impact of the development is minimised having regard to Policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
Page 133 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
09. The impacts of the development on existing infrastructure and the surrounding environment have been assessed on the basis on this maximum in total, having regard to Part 6,8,12 and 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
10. In the interest of highway safety and to ensure that suitable facilities are provided to enable the development to proceed without detriment to nearby premises in accordance with Policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
11. This condition is necessary in order that the local need to retain jobs within the Staffordshire/Wolverhampton area and support economic development is supported in accordance with the adopted Core Strategy.
12. To encourage the use of low emission vehicles, in turn reducing CO2 emissions and energy consumption levels in accordance with Policy EV11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
13. In the interest of biodiversity in accordance with Policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.
14. To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner.
15. To protect the amenities of nearby residents having regard to Policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
16. To protect the amenities of nearby residents having regard to Policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.
17. To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner.
18. In the interests of highway safety.
19. In the interests of highway safety.
20. In the interests of highway safety.
21. In the interests of highway safety.
22. In the interests of highway safety.
23. To provide for adequate and satisfactory provision of off-street accommodation for vehicles in the interest of safety and the general amenity of the development.
24. In the interest of biodiversity in accordance with Policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy
25. To protect the existing trees on the site during construction work in accordance with policy EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy
Page 134 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
26. To reduce the risk of surface water flooding to the development and properties downstream for the lifetime of the development in accordance with Policy EQ7 of the adopted Core Strategy.
27. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.
28. To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner
29. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.
30. To enable the A449 Trunk Road to continue to be an effective part of the national system of routes for through traffic, in accordance with Section 10 (2) of the Highways Act 1980 and to protect the interests of road safety.
31. To enable the A449 Trunk Road to continue to be an effective part of the national system of routes for through traffic, in accordance with Section 10 (2) of the Highways Act 1980 and to protect the interests of road safety.
Informative
Diversion of any Public Right of Way
Proactive Statement
Page 135 of 150 Matthew Thomas - Assistant Team Manager: Planning Committee 20 July 2021
Former Royal Ordnance Factory Cat And Kittens Lane And Brookhouse Lane
Page 136 of 150 SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMITTEE – 20 JULY 2021
MONTHLY UPDATE REPORT
REPORT OF THE LEAD PLANNING MANAGER
PART A – SUMMARY REPORT
1. SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
1.1 A monthly update report to ensure that the Committee is kept informed on key matters including:
Proposed training Any changes that impact on National Policy Any recent Planning Appeal Decisions Relevant Planning Enforcement cases on a quarterly basis The latest data produced by the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government
2. RECOMMENDATION
2.1 That Committee note the content of the update report.
3. SUMMARY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Do these proposals contribute to specific Council Plan objectives? POLICY/COMMUNITY Yes IMPACT Has an Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) been completed? No SCRUTINY POWERS Report to Planning Committee APPLICABLE KEY DECISION No TARGET COMPLETION/ 20 July 2021 DELIVERY DATE There are no direct financial implications arising from FINANCIAL IMPACT No this report.
Any legal issues are covered in the report. LEGAL ISSUES No
OTHER IMPACTS, RISKS & No other significant impacts, risks or opportunities No OPPORTUNITIES have been identified.
Page 137 of 150 IMPACT ON SPECIFIC District-wide application. No WARDS
PART B – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
4. INFORMATION
4.1 Future Training – Changes to Planning Committee were approved at the 26 March 2019 meeting of the Council to reduce committee size from 49 potential members to 21 members. As part of these changes an update report will now be brought to each meeting of the Committee. The intention has been that with a reduced size of Committee additional training will be provided throughout the year, namely before Planning Committee. We have recently had training from the County Council highways team on planning and highways, and at the time of presenting this report to planning committee, we will have had a session on s106 training with all members. Please let me know if you have any other areas you wish to be considered for training.
4.2 Changes in National Policy – There have been no changes since the last report, although changes to National Planning Policy are anticipated shortly. Members will be updated when these changes are brought about.
4.4 Planning Appeal Decisions – every Planning Appeal decision will now be brought to the Committee for the Committee to consider. There have been 2 appeal decisions since the last Committee, a copy of the decisions are attached as Appendix 1 and 2 . These relate to:
1 An appeal against the refusal to build one detached bungalow at Hollyhurst, Holly Lane, Cheslyn Hay WS6 7AR. The appeal was dismissed because the Inspector concluded the proposed works would significantly harm the character and appearance of the area.
2 An appeal against a refusal for the change of use from car park to beer garden to left hand side of main entrance area at Minerva Inn, Wolverhampton Road, Essington, Wolverhampton, WV11 2BX. The appeal was dismissed because the Inspector concluded that the proposal would lead to increased pressure for parking on the surrounding streets with a consequential harmful effect on highway safety and would cause significant harm to the living conditions of nearby residents in terms of noise and general disturbance. The case has been handed back to Planning Enforcement and the applicants have been given until mid-July to remove the beer garden.
4.5 In May 2020 the Secretary of State for Transport made an order granting development consent West Midlands Interchange (WMI). Documents can be seen here : https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/projects/west- midlands/west-midlands-interchange/ Officers are now working with the site promoters to understand next steps. It is understood that detailed plans will be submitted to the Council shortly. As soon as the details and phasing of the plans are known Officers will engage with Members.
Page 138 of 150
4.6 Relevant Planning Enforcement cases on a quarterly basis – No update on performance statistics since last meeting – 78% of Planning Enforcement cases were investigated within 12 weeks of the case being logged. This slight drop below the 80% target and reflects several issues including an upturn in caseload but also complex cases. This year already we have served 6 Enforcement Notices, compared to none in 2020. Similarly, comparing caseload volume in January to June 2020 against January to June 2021, we have seen a 14% increase in cases. Since the last stats update, we have a further vacancy in the team which is currently being recruited to. The team continues to manage day to day workload through the triaging of cases to ensure that the necessary information is obtained from the complainant regarding the alleged planning breach before a case is logged.
4.7 The latest data produced by the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government – As members will recall, MHCLG sets designation targets that must be met regarding both quality and speed of planning decisions. The targets are broken into Major and Non major development. If the targets are not met, then unless exceptional circumstances apply, MHCLG will “designate” the relevant authority and developers have the option to avoid applying to the relevant designated Local Planning Authority and apply direct, and pay the fees, to the Planning Inspectorate. Details can be seen at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attac hment_data/file/760040/Improving_planning_performance.pdf
4.8 We will ensure that the Committee is kept informed of performance against the relevant targets including through the MHCLG’s own data.
4.9 For Speed – the 2020 target for major developments is that 60% of decisions must be made within the relevant time frame (or with an agreed extension of time) and for non-major it is 70%. For Quality – for 2020 the threshold is 10% for both major and non-major decisions. Current performance is well within these targets and the position as set out on MHCLG’s website will be shown to the Committee at the meeting – the information can be seen on the following link tables:
151a – speed – major 152a – quality – major 153 – speed – non major 154 – quality – non major
The link is here – https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables- on-planning-application-statistics
The latest position is on the MHCLG website and the key figures are below:
Speed 151a – majors – target 60% (or above) – result = 92.7% (data up to March 2021) 153 – others – target 70% (or above) – result = 86.1% (data up to March 2021)
Page 139 of 150 Quality 152a – majors – target 10% (or below) – result = 4.3% (date up to September 2019) 154 – others – target 10% (or below) – result = 0.6% (date up to September 2019)
4.10 The national statistics above represent an improvement across the board in speed and quality of decision making. However, these nationally reported stats do not show the detail behind the scenes on the types of applications and volume the Team are dealing with. We are currently reviewing options for sharing more statistics with Members to demonstrate trends.
4.11 It is clear that up to June 2021, compared with the previous period in 2020, the volume of application and decisions issued is significantly up, but the vast majority of these are householder and minor application which are being determined under delegated powers. The table below shows that 39% more decisions have been issued this year than in the same period last year, demonstrating the increased number of applications which are being dealt with and determined by the Planning team. By June 2021 we had already received more householder applications than in the whole of 2020. It must be noted that performance statistics are being maintained with the increased level of workload.
Date Decisions Delegated Committee % Delegated Issued 01.01.2020 - 02.06.2020 444 420 24 94.5% 01.01.2021 - 02.06.2021 617 594 23 96.2%
4.12 The latest national planning application figures and an accompanying statistical release have been published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) last week, which show this upturn in application volume and specifically householder applications is a national trend, although South Staffordshire is seeing a higher upturn than the national average. It shows that the number of decisions made by English councils on householder developments was 57,300 in the January-March quarter 2021. This was up 31 per cent from the 43,900 decisions made in the quarter ending March 2020. And of the 57,300 decisions, 58 per cent of all decisions related to householder developments, up from 50 per cent in the quarter ending March 2020.
5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
N/A
6. PREVIOUS MINUTES
N/A
7. BACKGROUND PAPERS
Appendix 1 – Appeal Decision – Hollyhurst, Holly Lane, Cheslyn Hay WS6 7AR Appendix 2 – Appeal Decision – Minerva Inn, Wolverhampton Road, Essington, Wolverhampton, WV11 2BX
Page 140 of 150
Report prepared by: Kelly Harris Lead Planning Manager
Page 141 of 150
Page 142 of 150
Appeal Decision Site Visit made on 25 May 2021
by J Williamson BSc (Hons) MPlan MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 23June 2021
Appeal Ref: APP/C3430/W/21/3268918 Hollyhurst, Holly Lane, Cheslyn Hay WS6 7AR • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr & Mrs James against the decision of South Staffordshire District Council. • The application Ref 20/00249/FUL, dated 19 March 2020, was refused by notice dated 6 November 2020. • The development proposed is erection of one detached bungalow.
Decision
1. The appeal is dismissed.
Main Issue
2. The key issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.
Reasons
3. I broadly accept the appellant’s characterisation of the area as not having a strongly defined settlement pattern or prevailing vernacular; and that there are a wide range of house types and architectural styles, properties of different ages and a mix of scales, including single-storey, two-storey, two-and-a-half storey and three-storey buildings. Additionally, I acknowledge that plot sizes vary and that most of the properties front a highway and are set behind front gardens or hard-standing car parking areas.
4. However, even though there is a mix of properties in the area in terms of types and sizes, the variation in sizes between neighbouring properties is not as extensive as the difference between the proposed bungalow and the three storey buildings north-east of the site; ie there are single-storey dwellings next to two-storey dwellings, two-storey next to three-storey, and, in the case of The Hollies, two-storey next to three-storey.
5. The proposal would provide a detached bungalow, fronting a road, set behind a hard-standing car parking area with a rear garden of a comparable size to others in the area. It would therefore have features in keeping with the character of the area. However, I consider the form of the proposal, in terms of its size, would be out of keeping with neighbouring buildings. Thus, as noted above, the detached single-storey building would be sited within proximity of 2 No. three-storey buildings located at the head of the cul-de-sac, and opposite a short terrace of two-storey dwellings. There are no bungalows located along The Hollies. Due to the extensive difference in height, footprint, and mass
https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate
Page 143 of 150 Appeal Decision APP/C3430/W/21/3268918
between the proposal and what would be the neighbouring three-storey buildings, I consider the proposal would be an incongruous feature in the street scene.
6. I accept that there are single-storey outbuildings in the rear gardens of properties on Holly Lane and that there is a single-storey extension to the rear of the Public House, ‘The Malt’. However, the nature of these buildings is significantly different to the proposal, ie domestic outbuildings and an extension to the rear of a public house; these buildings are also sited behind fences around 2 m high, and some plots have boundary trees, features which clearly demarcate the rear boundaries of the properties on Holly Lane. I therefore conclude that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the street scene, which would significantly harm the character and appearance of the area.
Other considerations
7. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires me to determine the proposal in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
8. I acknowledge that the provision of a dwelling would provide social and economic benefits, helping to achieve the Government’s objective to significantly boost the supply of housing (paragraph 59 of the National Planning Policy Framework). However, given that only one dwelling would be provided, both the social and economic benefits derived from the proposal would be minor. As such, I attach limited weight to these factors.
9. The appellant has drawn my attention to a planning application granted approval by the Council on the site immediately east of the appeal site (Ref 15/00418/OUT), a site that also consists of the rear garden of a neighbouring property. I acknowledge that the Council has accepted the principle of dwellings on garden land, fronting The Hollies, with rear gardens smaller than some of the existing rear gardens of properties on Holly Lane.
10. However, there are significant differences between the approved application referred to and the proposal before me. Thus, the approved scheme was an outline application, with matters of scale and appearance to be subsequently determined. From the evidence before me, the Council was satisfied that a pair of two-storey, semi-detached dwellings could be accommodated within the site and accord with development plan policies. I note that although scale was a reserved matter, the Council Officer’s Report considers the distance standards between dwellings in the scenario of the proposed dwellings being two-storey. Due to such significant differences, I consider the 2 schemes to not be directly comparable, and therefore cannot attach substantial weight to this matter. However, given the comparative aspects that do exist, I attach moderate weight to this factor.
11. On balance, considering the above, I conclude that there are no other considerations that outweigh the significant harm I have found to the character and appearance of the area. The proposal would therefore not accord with Policy EQ11 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document, 2012, which requires, among other things, the design of developments to be of the highest quality, and their form, in terms of scale, to contribute positively to the street scene and surrounding buildings, and to respect local character and
https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2
Page 144 of 150 Appeal Decision APP/C3430/W/21/3268918
distinctiveness, including surrounding development. The proposal would also not accord with guidance in the South Staffordshire Design Guide, (2018), which, among other things, broadly seeks to protect the character and appearance of local areas, advising that development should contribute positively to the street scene, respecting the scale of buildings in the area to ensure buildings fit harmoniously into the surrounding environment.
12. As Policy EQ4 deals specifically with the effect of development on the landscape, I do not consider it to be directly relevant to the proposal, given that the site is located at the head of a cul-de-sac, surrounded by built form, and not read in connection with the landscape beyond the built form.
Other Matters
13. The appeal site lies within the zone of influence of the Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC), an area which has been designated for protection under the Habitats Regulations. The Council Officer’s Report identified the need for a contribution towards mitigation measures to avoid an adverse effect on the integrity of the protected site, should the proposal be allowed.
14. A Unilateral Undertaking was submitted with the appeal to secure a contribution to mitigate against any adverse impact on the SAC stemming from the development. However, it is not necessary for me to consider whether this obligation meets the tests set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations, as I am dismissing the appeal for other substantive reasons.
Conclusion
15. For the reasons outlined above, I conclude that the appeal is dismissed.
J Williamson
INSPECTOR
https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3
Page 145 of 150
Page 146 of 150
Appeal Decision Site visit made on 22 June 2021 by Nigel Harrison BA (Hons) MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 24 June 2021
Appeal Ref: APP/C3430/W/20/3262248 Minerva Inn, Wolverhampton Road, Essington, Wolverhampton, WV11 2BX • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Star Pubs and Bars against the decision of South Staffordshire Council. • The application Ref 20/00085/FUL dated 4 February 2020, was refused by notice dated 30 March 2020. • The development proposed is: Change of use from car park to beer garden to left hand side of main entrance area. New post and rope to boundary. New polycarbonate roof to existing smoking shelter. New timber external fixed seating. New loose furniture fixed down. New coloured tarmac. Re-white-line car parking spaces.
Decision
1. The appeal is dismissed.
Procedural Matters
2. The application is retrospective, as the development has already been carried out largely as indicated in the application details and plans, except that the parking spaces have not been marked out as shown on drawing No 2242-100. However, the number of spaces remains the same, and this minor variation does not affect my consideration of the merits of the appeal.
3. The Council says there was an error in drafting the decision notice, as the reasons for refusal should have stated that the proposal conflicted with Core Strategy policies EV12 & EQ9. However, as no reference was made to them in the decision, the appellant says they should be disregarded. However, these policies (and others) were clearly set out in the Officer Report, a public document, and are not ‘new’ evidence. I shall therefore take them into account in my considerations of this appeal.
4. The appellant also says he was not aware of the objections to the proposal submitted by local residents at the application stage. However, these are summarised in some detail in section 4.1 of the Officer Report, and could have been viewed by the appellant prior to the determination of the application.
Main Issues
5. There are two main issues. Firstly, the adequacy of the parking arrangements and the effect on highway safety, and secondly; the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of nearby residents with particular regard to noise and other disturbance.
https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate
Page 147 of 150 Appeal Decision APP/C3430/W/20/3262248
Reasons
6. The Minerva public house is located at the junction of Wolverhampton Road and New Street, with the main frontage facing south onto New Street. Apart from a nearby take-away and a florists’ shop, the area is predominantly residential. The new outdoor drinking area (beer garden) is located on the left-hand side of the front forecourt and is a dedicated space marked by a low post and rope boundary. The proposal also includes a new polycarbonate roof to the smoking shelter and timber tables and seating. The right-hand side has been laid out for car parking (4/5 useable spaces in total in an ‘L’ shaped arrangement).
Parking
7. The Council’s first reason for refusal relates to highway safety, and its main concern in this regard (and that of many neighbours) relates to the intensification of use of the site in the context of added pressures for on-street parking in the area.
8. Policy EV12 of the South Staffordshire Core Strategy Development Plan Document (CS), adopted 2012 requires adequate parking to be provided as part of any new development and says the Council will have regard to the impact on highway safety from potential on-street parking. CS Appendix 9 (Parking Standards) sets out the parking provision requirement for public houses. Based on these standards the outdoor drinking area would generate the need for a significant amount of additional parking.
9. However, the beer garden facility has reduced the parking capacity from about 10/11 spaces to just 4/5 whilst at the same time increasing the potential capacity for customers. Objections have been received from local residents raising concerns about the increased demand for on-street parking which has been generated, saying that pub customers are parking on both sides on New Street and on Wolverhampton Road close to the road junction (notwithstanding the recently introduced double yellow lines). Some residents also say vehicles sometimes block residents’ driveways, and pedestrians have to step into the carriageway to get around vehicles. Further concerns have been raised regarding parked vehicles hindering visibility for road users coming into and out of the New Street junction.
10. The location is an accessible one, and I accept that some customers would walk to the public house or even use public transport or taxis. However, I consider the amount of off-street parking retained would be insufficient to serve the needs of the operation, and would lead to significant additional pressure for parking on adjacent residential streets in the locality, particularly New Street where there are no parking restrictions other than adjacent to the Wolverhampton Road junction. This would be harmful to highway safety in terms of the free and safe flow of traffic close to a junction, and the safety of pedestrians using the footways on either side on New Street.
11. I share the concerns of the Highway Authority that the development fails to make adequate provision for parking within the site curtilage, resulting in an increase in the likelihood of highway danger due to the potential for more customers vehicles being parked on the public highway. I therefore conclude on this issue that the proposal would lead to increased pressure for parking on the surrounding streets with a consequential harmful effect on highway safety. It conflicts with CS Policy EV12 and section 9 of the National Planning Policy
https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2
Page 148 of 150 Appeal Decision APP/C3430/W/20/3262248
Framework, which says development proposals should minimise the scope for conflict between pedestrians and vehicles.
Living Conditions
12. The capacity for outside drinking has increased significantly to 11 tables (compared with 2/3 previously), and many local residents have raised concerns about problems noise, disturbance, anti-social behaviour, and debris/litter arising from the use of the outdoor area. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer (EHO)has referred to a long history of noise complaints from the Minerva Inn including complaints of loud music from bands, recorded music, and other issues including anti-social behaviour, and says the proposal could worsen these problems as the new seating capacity encourages people outside, increasing the noise levels which has a detrimental effect on the amenity of nearby residential properties.
13. The post and rope enclosure clearly offers no acoustic protection against the transmission of noise, and any control mechanisms offered through even the most careful of management regimes (such as controlling the hours of use of the outdoor drinking area) would be difficult to enforce and in any event would not mitigate the harm caused when open, particularly given the relatively large numbers that can be accommodated. From my observations of the site and surroundings it is evident that the most affected properties are in very close proximity to the public house, which would heighten sensibilities and annoyance. I therefore conclude on this issue that the proposal would cause significant harm to the living conditions of nearby residents in terms of noise and general disturbance. As such, it would conflict with CS Policy EQ9, which requires all development proposals to consider the amenities of nearby residents, particularly with regard to matters including noise and disturbance.
Other Matters
14. CS Policy 7 says supporting the local economy, existing businesses and jobs are key elements of the Council’s Spatial Strategy, and facilities such as public houses can make an important contribution to the vitality of a community. However, it has not been suggested that the long-term viability or future of the public house is in any way dependant on the provision of the outdoor seating area, although it must add to the appeal of the facility. I also accept that the area has been well laid out, and arguably has provided a more attractive frontage to the street than the previous larger parking area.
15. Nonetheless, these factors do not weigh sufficiently against my conclusions on the main issues, which must be decisive. The proposal conflicts with the development plan as a whole and there are no material considerations which might justify a departure from the development plan.
Conclusion
16. Therefore, for the reasons given above and taking into account all other matters raised (including one representation in support of the proposal), I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed. Nigel Harrison
INSPECTOR
https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3
Page 149 of 150
Page 150 of 150