Planning Appeal. Statement of Case

PLANNING APPEAL. STATEMENT OF CASE.

Demolition of existing stables, tack room and viewing room to facilitate the erection of a detached dwelling, Church Lane, Wychnor, Staffordshire. DE13 8BU.

Application No. P/2016/01175. East Staffs Borough Council.

Applicant: Mr. Ivor Smith, The Smithy, Church Lane, Wychnor, Staffordshire. DE13 9BY.

Agent: John Carter Architect, 14 Mill End Lane, Alrewas, Staffordshire. DE13 7BX.

INTRODUCTION

LA = East Staffordshire Borough Council. PO = Planning Officer, Emily Summers. NPPF = National Planning Policy Framework. SP = Strategic Policy. DP = Design Policy. DAS = Design and Access Statement. HS = Heritage Statement. (Green) = Source of information. Correction to address of application. Application form gave address as Church Lane, Wychnor, DE13 9BU. LA were informed. Site location

The LA purports to have taken a positive approach to decision making in respect of this application concluding that it is an unsustainable form of development which conflicts with relevant development plan, policies and material planning considerations including NPPF. The LA also profess that possible solutions were proactively considered in an attempt to secure a development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions.

Assuming that there would have been some potential the LA have made no attempt to invite dialogue in order to expand this potential nor have they responded to an invitation from the applicant to discuss matters since their decision. It would seem that these declarations, taken from paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF, are quoted to moderate their resistance to development within Wychnor. The resistance emanates from two quoted LA designated constraints.

Sustainability.

Putting aside the significance that the methods for construction and the building in use will be of the highest level in terms of sustainability, the application has not sought to claim that the site is situated within an existing sustainable neighbourhood as defined by a ‘Made’ Neighbourhood Plan (LA quote). Never the less, the development of this single dwelling will embrace some of the criteria cited in SP8 and deliver a high environmental performance. This dwelling will offer choice within the area of Burton upon Trent and will have valuable amenities that cannot be provided within a high-density volume built developments within Burton.

There is no prepared Neighbourhood Plan for Wychnor.

A Settlement Area.

The LA state that the proposal is outside a settlement boundary but are not able to produce evidence of adopted lines within Wychnor. The LA removed settlement boundary lines “two Local Plans ago” (Corinne O’Hare Neighbourhood Policy Officer). Neighbouring Barton (Barton under Needwood) does have established settlement boundaries which have recently been manipulated in order to allow expansion of residential areas. This is not to say that such action is not justified but the LA is subjective where appropriate in argument and seemingly objective where convenient. Appendix 1 and Appendix 6.

This appeal for development will respond to demonstrate:

 Validity in association with neighbouring areas of LA recognized sustainability. In Barton (ESBC) and Alrewas (Lichfield District Council)  That it will not harm the countryside or local heritage.  That the site can be reasonably considered as brownfield.

2  That the site can rationally be considered as being within an existing and well established settlement boundary.  That there is a building line established by development from 12th Century St. Leonard’s Church, later with St. Leonard’s House and quite recently garages and stabling for St. Leonard’s House.  That there is engagement with and through close proximity, has benefit of shopping, education, social activities, employment, trunk roads, motorways and railway links.  That the proposal is well designed, in keeping and in scale with its location and sensitive to the character of the countryside and local distinctiveness.  That the proposal is innovative, of high quality design and respectful to its surroundings.  That the site is not remote and the proposed dwelling will not be isolated.  That is questionable whether ESBC and the PO, using delegated powers, have taken a positive and dispassionate approach, considered the application in proactive deliberation and assessed the proposal in context. Appendix 7 examines a substantial housing development in Barton. The purpose is not necessarily to question the decision of the LA but to highlight anomalies and inconsistencies in approach to decision making and whether Design Guides were respected.

BACKGROUND.

The planning application P/2016/01175 was determined by delegated powers within the statutory period. There were no responses from consultees i.e. Staffordshire Highways, Crime reduction, Staffordshire Wildlife, Archaeology, Local Ward Members or Parish Council.

There was one letter of objection from a local neighbour but the PO determined that no harm to residential amenity would result.

The PO assessment cites DP’s and sections of the NPPF but cherry-picks portions without regard for the whole of the Design and Access Statement, Heritage Statement and visual aids in other documents. There is great regard, by the applicant, for the adjacent Scheduled Monument.

Due to the nature of the Delegated Report this Statement of Case has to be a fairly exhaustive response to quoted SP’s, DP’s and sections of the NPPF.

SP1 Approach to Sustainable Development.

Staffordshire Highways have not objected to the proposal.

 The site has good links to the strategic highway network.  Via A38 to the north the A50 links M6 north to the M1 and M42.  Via the A38 to the south the M6 Toll links M6 south/north.  A38 south links with A38M to Birmingham.  It is both convenient and safe to walk or cycle to larger neighbouring communities of Barton under Needwood and Alrewas.  Geographically Alrewas is the nearest community and can be reached by picturesque towpath. Once on the towpath there is a casual walk of about 15 minutes and cycle 5 to 7 minutes. St.Leonard’s Church, Wychnor is clearly visible from Church Road, Alrewas. Appendix 2  Although Alrewas is within Lichfield District Council residents of Wychnor have an affinity with Alrewas which supports a medical centre, primary school, 3 pubs, general store, post office, pharmacy, café, dentist, butcher, fish & chips, Chinese takeaway, Indian Restaurant and an undertaker!

3 Whilst it is recognized that having ownership of a car is an advantage if living in Wychnor, many residents living in substantial local communities like Fradley, Barton and particularly Burton are also car owners. Those not within comfortable walking distance of amenities and especially those living in fringe areas, and there are many, use their car. Have ESBC conducted a survey of how many people in Burton walk or cycle to Tesco, Sainsbury or Morrison to shop for groceries or B&Q, PC World and so on, the cinema, hospitals, medical centres, schools, restaurants, pubs etc?

There are alternatives like on line shopping and taxis. As an example, a taxi trip for two persons travelling from Alrewas (add £2 for Wychnor) to Lichfield City is £8. Bus fare for two is £8. Buses are not frequent and services were further reduced last year.

The applicant who lives in Wychnor can walk their dog visit Alrewas and include other activities.

Bridge + towpath from Alrewas Cottages next to site St. Leonard’s Wychnor.

Beautiful walk from Wychnor to Alrewas.

 The design does integrate with the character of the landscape and the building materials will reflect and respect the historic locality.  The design and setting protects the occupiers of residential properties nearby (acknowledged by the PO), through design and landscaping.  The proximity of the archaeological asset is entirely acknowledged within the DAS + HS. Reference is made to former buildings on the site and whilst investigation can be covered by a condition of planning, ESBC are aware that with the exception of the excavation for strip footings, a soak-away and rain water harvesting the site levels and ground generally will remain undisturbed. The plan prepared by Historic England for the Scheduled Monument excludes the proposed site.

4  The design proposals incorporate energy efficient considerations and renewable energy technologies. It will be developed by flood risk and drainage problems and will include Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems. Incorporation is described in the DAS.  The development does not harm biodiversity but rather enhances it (Forest Research) Appendix 3 Existing trees will be retained. The whole of the frontage onto Church Lane will be devoted to wild flowers in open space. There is no intension to intrude with any type of urban or sub-urban landscape gardening.  The proposals also continue the open nature of the site which is visible from public accessible space.  Does not harm viability of existing facilities or businesses.  Offers contribution of housing mix and types.  Would use locally sourced construction materials and labour wherever practicable. Bricks and roof tiles would be recycled materials.  Does not affect agricultural land. SP2 Settlement Hierarchy + SP8 Development Outside Settlement Boundaries.

The issue of settlement boundaries would seem to be the bedrock of the objection from ESBC.

ESBC have designated Wychnor as Tier 3 ‘a settlement within open countryside’.

In Wychnor, various settlement areas are now without drawn boundary lines. Two location plans ago marked boundaries were removed (Corinne O’Hare ESBC Neighbourhood Planning Policy Officer) meaning that case planning officers are able to determine settlement boundaries on an application by application basis. The case officer, for this application, has imposed a line that excludes the application site. The appellant wishes to challenge this judgement and the conclusion reached because it is opinion formed by delegated powers rather than established evidence. The proposal would not adversely affect the amenities enjoyed by existing landowners or residents, nor would it introduce urban form.

 Detailed siting is compatible with the character of the surroundings.  Landscape associated with the proposal takes into account both the immediate impact and the distant views of the development.  Development will not have an adverse impact on transport and highway network.  Provides adequate access for all users.  Access to the site is existing and would remain in its current form.  SP8 is not applicable if the proposal is within an existing settlement.  SP8 is not relevant to one off dwelling where it does not introduce considerable form.

The appellants view is that a settlement boundary is a line drawn on a plan around a village or development which reflects its built form. This is also known as a settlement envelope. Appendix 4.

Even though LA’s determine the position of settlement boundaries, there are no hard and fast rules and opinions vary a little County to County.

The study of three authorities (Herefordshire, Lincolnshire and Purbeck District) with considerable areas of open countryside reveals usual and common criteria for ‘Guide to Settlement Boundaries’.

 Lines of communication- The boundaries trace the edge of a built-up area. They exclude roads, railways etc.  Physical features- The boundary should be continuous and related to permanent features that are unlikely to change such as, edge of adopted roads, canals, woodland, hedgerows, walls and fences.  Existing commitments i.e. unimplemented planning permissions and implemented permissions should be included within the settlement area.

5 As the DAS highlighted there is an existing planning consent granted in 2004 which was commenced but not completed i.e. still live. Whilst the current proposal is set slightly forward of the incomplete development, it is not in a physically isolated location.  NPPF paragraph 85 “define boundaries clearly, using physical features that are easily recognizable and likely to be permanent”. SP4 Distribution of Housing Growth 2012 – 2031.

ESBC have referred to this policy to demonstrate that this additional single dwelling is not essential because land allocated to housing growth in Burton upon Trent 2012 – 2031 will be met by providing 6473 units elsewhere during this period. 4790 units will be accommodated on Greeenbelt, a massive 74%. This is in addition to manipulation of settlement boundaries like that in Barton under Needwood. This provides the luxury of considering minor applications as trivial and frivolous.

The proposed single dwelling provides an opportunity to house those who do not wish to settle within LA conceived sites for developers of high volume housing. Modern settlement should be about choice of environment, opportunity of enjoying low density living, having immediate access to countryside footpaths and designated cycle routes within countryside conditions.

Wychnor area supports a pitch and putt golf course, a restaurant, health spa and gym facilities at Wychnor Hall, fishing in canal, river and lake conditions. These are within comfortable walking and/or cycling distance of the proposed site. Appendix 5.

Barton under Needwood is the nearest village (within the ESBC district) to Wychnor. The LA rate Barton as sustainable but there is no evidence available to establish the percentage of population travelling by bus to Burton for:

 Shopping at Morrisons, Tesco and Sainsbury’s.  Retail outlets.  Cinema.  Railway station.  Hospital.  Restaurants.  Place of work.  Fitness centres.

Given that buses are available on hourly time table and there are only 3 buses after 1800 it’s not like to be a high percentage of the adult population.

There are pleasant facilities, closely grouped, in the centre of Barton, pubs with restaurant, library, village hall, Co-op store, church etc. However, considering such a poor bus service, the percentage of those using a bus, will be low even for those living close to the bus route! There are many pockets that are a fair walk from the bus route. The perpetual overflowing public car park at the back of the Co-op store and the irate customers trying to park in the car park of the Middle Bell opposite the Co-op is evidence that all locals in Barton do not walk within this sustainable community. Appendix 5.

Secondary education catchment area for Barton, Wychnor and Alrewas is John Taylor High School. For those not within walking distance means of transport is car or private hire bus. This is also applicable to the sustainable community of Alrewas.

ESBC reference to SP4 is easy to quote but where is the relevance to this application. Wychnor is not remote and the general living style in relation to travel to place of work, secondary school, cinemas, shopping and recreation etc, is similar to that of residents in Barton and Alrewas.

6 SP16 Meeting Housing Needs.

Refers to main towns and strategic villages and affordable housing etc and consequently not applicable. The application was not claiming to satisfy a local need for housing or affordable housing. Applications of this nature do not necessarily have to satisfy a political appetite to become justifiable or sound.

ESBC have not produced a survey of need nor is there likely to be a Neighbourhood Plan. Tier 3 ensures that in preservation, Wychnor will never experience a housing shortage. An approval of this application, as stated in the DAS, will not set a precedent or open a floodgate for future reference due to limitations imposed by the Scheduled Monument and other physical restraints such as canal, river, floodplains and greenbelt etc.

SP18 Residential Developments on Exception Sites.

Reference to SP18 is evidently included in order to harden the resolve of the LA to resist change wherever achievable in Wychnor. In removing lines for settlement boundaries, rating the area as “open countryside” any future development will be confined to Traveller Pitches “restricted to Gypsies” (SP18) or affordable housing. Given that ESBC consider the area inactive due to lack of sustainability. The former could be regarded as discrimination and the latter beyond practicability.

NPPF paragraphs 186 & 187.

The LA has not demonstrated decision making in a positive manner. Their interpretation of sustainable development is not applicable to Wychnor. The proposal ecologically is highly sustainable and will not harm the setting or environment.

The LA has sought to manifest problems rather than recognize merits associated with the proposal.

The development will not harm or encroach upon the greenbelt or countryside and will not contribute to the continuing sprawl of Burton upon Trent.

Visual Amenity.

The PO makes some disapproving architectural assessments mostly by implication rather than through a considered critique. What does ESBC mean by Visual Amenity for this particular application? Appendix 1 and 5 The subject is addressed very differently for other applications within the Borough. Amenity should include factors relevant to the general characteristics of the locality. It is however a matter of interpretation by the local planning authority. Planning Practice Guidance. There is no loss of daylight, view, no impact on neighbours, no high-density issues. Whether or not the PO has a personal view on whether the proposal is pleasant or attractive is immaterial. SP 24 is addressed within the DAS. No dialogue offered by the PO.

DP1:

 Layout: circulation routes, arrangement of building and how it relates to the surrounding area.  Response: to historic character, enhancing heritage assets.  Open spaces: both hard and soft. How they relate to each other and characteristics of the site.  Massing in terms of shape, volume and arrangement in context.  How height and massing relates to surrounding development, vistas, views and skyline.  Materials to be used and how they relate to traditional and the vernacular.  Detailing and construction techniques.

7 The above are extremely important issues and are comprehensively addressed in the DAS particularly pages 13 to 17 inclusive. It would have been of assistance if the PO had given some thought to comment on specific objections or grievances.

 Size and location. The PO should, as suggested within the DAS, have considered the street scene as a whole i.e. in context, because the proposal does have buildings on both sides. To the north are the existing cottages. To the south there is a recently constructed building which is close to the edge of Church Lane (refer to the DAS page 14). All buildings to the south establish a building line. These buildings are all prominent in comparison to the proposal. St. Leonard’s Church and St. Leonard’s House will continue to dominate the street scene and will, of course, continue to be the strongest factors within the settlement.  The proposal has an eaves height, building width, and roof pitch equal to the existing cottages.  An unworthy comment form the PO is “the design attempts to mimic a traditional agricultural building …. but fails to do so ….”. Scale and massing are relevant and there is intention to reference countryside language. It is usual for the solid to void ratio related to agricultural buildings to be dominated by solid proportions. Traditionally brick in Staffordshire.  The PO is uneasy about the effect of perspective and the ratios. Perspective does not judge things and their relative importance. Standing at the north end of Church Lane does not render St. Leonard’s as insignificant nor, in the distant view, Lichfield Cathedral less impressive. It is a mental view or outlook. In a drawn presentation perspective can be used to exaggerate but in reality it does not deceive.  By definition architectural vernacular is concerned with domestic or functional buildings rather than public or monumental ones. Although of great importance it is not necessarily about materials.

It’s good practice to seek historical references for the vernacular. Here are some examples of agricultural buildings illustrating solid to void ratios. Vernacular “buildings in which Gothic merged into farmhouse vernacular”. Oxford dictionary. Agricultural buildings do not have to be pretty although these happen to be very beautiful and beam emotional content.

No reason to “mimic” it’s about ratios and proportions.

Not Staffordshire materials of course but in massing it is a delightful example of robustness, durability and sense of permanence and of course functional proportion.

ESBC response to new development within former greenbelt Barton under Needwood! Where are the architectural references here or the vernacular?

10 References for the proposal

Proportionally well balanced solid to void ratio and relates to countryside building. “Cart gates” symbolized by brise soleil doors reducing heat gain when closed but not preventing light penetration, not restricting views but absorbing solar power. When open solar power from daylight source continues.

Reference for facing brick taken from tower to St. Leonard’s Wychnor. Re-claimed or hand-made set in lime mortar. Source for supply determined and are available..

11 Conclusion.

There is confidence held by the applicant that the proposal is situated in a location that can be considered on par with other locations within neighbouring Barton under Needwood, particularly in periphery locations and certainly within Alrewas.

The absence of an infrequent bus route is only one factor in a score sheet to determine what might be considered sustainable. The many other delights, advantages and recreational facilities offered by living in Wychnor provides a highly desirable lifestyle.

This statement has:

 Questioned the validity of reasons given to deny consent, highlighted the failure by the LA to substantiate some of the reasons for quoting SP’s.  Given well founded reasons DAS p14, for considering the site to be “Brownfield” when considering its former commercial use.  Demonstrated a valid and rational reasons for the application site to be within an established settlement boundary. Appendix 4.  Given reasonable criteria for considering inclusion of the site location within a reasonably sustainable environment. Demonstrated that the site is not isolated or the location remote. Appendix 2.  Given architectural justification to establish that the proposal can be regarded as both innovative/ well designed and contributes to the environmental character of the setting.

Appendix 1.

Plan included in PO report for committee on 25th Feb 2016

13 House type taken from developer’s sales details for site in Barton

 Case officer is Emily Summers who is also PO for the Wychnor application.  Site is within walking distance of Wychnor but obviously not in Tier 3.  2.3 confirms that the site is outside of the development boundary. The site is also mostly outside of the settlement boundary. The whole of the blue hatched area was outside of the settlement in previous Local Plans.

Street scene to the south. Site. Urban insertion.

High density not village setting! Street scene to the north. Site. Appendix 2.

Walking and cycling comparisons within Alrewas and from Wychnor.

Appendix 3.

Biodiversity. Wild Flower Garden

Appendix 4

Settlement boundaries and established building line.

Appendix 5.

Photos to the south. Photos to the north. Co-op store. Secondary school

Bellway housing site. Barton under Needwood.

Appendix 6.

1.5 The Barton site makes no attempt to respect the recommendations in ESBC Design Guide i.e. new should reflect the characteristics of Barton etc. paragraphs 2.12, 3.51, 4.73 to 4.78 inclusive.

5.1 The justified concerns expressed by the Parish Council are overlooked.

11.3.1 to 11.3.4 inclusive: The Barton site has no regard for the context nor is it acceptable in design terms when considered in its village setting. The site is developed with an inward-looking focus.

11.3.5 PO refers to the Design Guide in which Barton is described as “having a well defined character”.

11.3.6 PO says that proposal would impact and visually not of high quality! Also the development would encroach into the countryside. Where is the rationale?

11.3.7 The development integrates satisfactorily with the adjoining built form. Is this because the proposal is phase two by the same developer? Has this form of sub urban design become the vernacular for Barton?

11.3.8 Reflects the adjacent phase! Minimum house types with varying materials and false chimneys to reflect the traditional character of Barton! Remarkable statement from the PO for an unremarkable development. Unremarkable because it is not appropriate for a village setting.

11.3.9, 11.3.10 ESBC confirm yes this is now the vernacular.

11.3.11. Yes. Despite request from the Parish Council ESBC consider that the development is in context.

Statement dated 10 December 2016

23 Hill Farm site St. Leonard’s Church Wychnor

View from Church Road Alrewas.

All Saints Church, Church Road, Alrewas

View from start of tow path Wychnor END

24 Drawings and Documents to accompany the Statement of Case

Drawings all at A3 landscape and prefix Wych(03) 001 A: Site Location Plan – scale 1:1250 002 A: Site Plan – scale 1:500 003: Proposed Plans – scale 1:100 004: Proposed Elevations - scale 1:100 005: Proposed Elevations 2 – scale 1-100 006: Proposed Sections – scale 1:50 007: Plans Visualizations. 008: Sections Isometrics 009: Development History 1968, 1995, 2004, present and proposed. 010: Development Circa 1968. 011: Development Circa 1995. 012: Development 2004 and present. 013: Aerial Isometrics of Proposals. 014: Street Scene – scale 1:200 015: Street Scene photograph montage. 016: Isometric views of proposals. Documents: Design and Access Statement + Historical Report. A4 landscape. Application Form. Dated 24th August 2016. Additional information requested by ESBC for validation. A4 portrait. Planning Decision Notice. Application No. P/2016/01175. Dated 28th October 2016. Planning Officer Delegated Report. Application No. P/2016/01175. Dated 20th October 2016 and signed by Emily Summers.