Appellant Statement of Case Proposed Dementia Care Home Land at Manchester Road, Rixton, Warrington
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Appellant Statement of Case Full Planning (Major) - Proposed construction of part three storey, part two storey 74 bedspace dementia care home (Use Class C2), together with ancillary facilities (laundry, cinema, salon lounge and dining) and associated access, parking, landscaping and external works (resubmission of application ref: 2015/26873) Appellant: Trustees of Horizon Cleaning Services Pension Fund Appeal Site: Land bound by A57 Manchester Road & Chapel Lane, Rixton, Warrington The Planning Studio Ltd 111, Piccadilly Ducie Street Manchester M1 2HY T: 0161 238 4979 E: [email protected] Appellant Statement of Case Proposed Dementia Care Home Land at Manchester Road, Rixton, Warrington 1.0 Introduction 1.1 This Appellant Statement of Case provides the grounds for appeal and sets out the appellant’s submissions to support the grant of planning permission for the proposed development, being a 74 bed dementia care development within a part 3 storey, part 2 storey building in the Green Belt. 1.2 In the interests of brevity and to assist the appeal, the intention in this Statement of Case is to address the stated reasons for refusal of Warrington BC planning application ref: 2018/32179, and to elaborate on matters that were raised with the Council post submission of the planning application and comments provided in the Warrington BC’s ‘Delegated Officer Report’. 1.3 There is no intention to rehearse the full planning case, as this can be found in the original ‘TPS Planning Statement’ submitted with the planning application, and the additional information provided in ‘Addendum Statement (Sequential Assessment), ‘Additional Information Letter (25 September 2018), ‘Additional Information Note’ – 15 February 2019, and various supporting information issued to the case officer in email exchanges (see Appendix TPS01). 1.4 By way of contextual information, the appeal arises from the refusal of planning application ref: 2018/32179, which was submitted for full planning permission for redevelopment of the appeal site by way of demolition of the existing building on the site followed by redevelopment through the construction of a part 2 storey, part 3 storey building to create 74 bedspaces within a dementia care home. 1.5 The proposed development would have associated car parking and amenity space as noted in the plans and D&A Statement. 1.6 Important to highlight that the proposed development is a specialist dementia care unit, catering for residents/patients with acute dementia, requiring specialist support services with intensive supervision, including nursing care and related therapy services. 1.7 The development is not an ‘Extra Care development’ and is not a ‘Residential Care Home’, as the residents in the proposed development are all requiring specialist dementia care support with appropriate provision for accommodation and support services. This will be highlighted through reference to the proposed operator of the development, Harbour Healthcare, who provided a letter of support and confirmed their involvement in the project. The Planning Studio Page 2 of 38 Appellant Statement of Case Proposed Dementia Care Home Land at Manchester Road, Rixton, Warrington 1.8 The planning application (ref: 2018/32179) was refused permission by notice dated 15th January 2020, stating 3 reasons for refusal, which are set out below: 1) The site is within the Green Belt, where there is a strong presumption against inappropriate development unless it can be demonstrated that very special circumstances exist. It is considered that the proposed development is inappropriate by definition and the exemptions listed within paragraph 145 of the National Planning Policy Framework are not applicable. Whilst acknowledging the submissions made on behalf of the applicant, in relation to the provision for dementia residential care in Warrington, these are not considered to amount to special circumstances sufficient to justify overriding the strong presumption against inappropriate development within the Green Belt policy. As such, the proposal is considered to conflict with the provisions of the NPPF and Policy CS5 of Warrington Borough Councils Local Plan Core Strategy. 2) Given the limitations of travel by public transport and on foot, future occupants, visitors and staff are likely to require access to a private car to access the services and facilities available at Hollins Green and larger settlements. Consequently, the location of the site would not provide non-vehicular accessibility to key day to day services and facilities required by future occupants. The resulting additional car journeys would give rise to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. The proposal would be contrary to the provisions of the NPPF which seeks to achieve a sustainable pattern of development having regard to the location of development and the accessibility of services and facilities and to support a transition to a low carbon economy. 3) The proposal by reason of the poor outlook from a number of bedrooms and inadequate and poor quality external amenity space the development would not provide a satisfactory standard of residential accommodation for future occupiers of the site and therefore the proposal is considered to be contrary to policies CS1 and QE6 of the Local Plan and the provisions of the NPPF. 4) The proposed development would not reinforce local distinctiveness or enhance the character/appearance of the local area by virtue of the height/bulk/plot coverage proposed. The proposed development would not harmonise with the scale or proportions of existing buildings adjoining or the wider semi-rural location within which it would be located and would visually damage the existing character of the area to the detriment of local residents and surrounding countryside. The development therefore conflicts with Policy QE7 of Warrington Borough Councils' Local Plan Core Strategy and the relevant sections of the NPPF. The Planning Studio Page 3 of 38 Appellant Statement of Case Proposed Dementia Care Home Land at Manchester Road, Rixton, Warrington 1.9 Before dealing with the grounds for appeal and appellant’s case for the proposed development, to assist the Inspector to consider the site’s contextual information, these as stated below. Site & Surroundings 1.10 The Inspector is directed to Sections 2.1 to 2.13 of the TPS Planning Statement. 1.11 Please note the comment set out in section 2.4 in relation to the relationship between the built-up part of the site and the ‘paddock’, which whilst it is acknowledged as being a paddock area, it was formerly used for storage in association with past commercial uses at the site and as the site is one contiguous unit, it is the appellant’s submission that one could make the case that this site as a whole is previously developed land – this will be considered in greater detail in Section 4 of this Statement of Case. 1.12 We also draw attention to the factual information regarding the site’s proximity to local village services in Rixton, which is accessible directly from the appeal site via a pedestrian footway with lighting, and the bus stop located some 50m from the site entrance. 1.13 The site details and locational aspects of the site in relation to accessibility to local shops and services and public transport provision will be set out in the Statement of Common Ground (SoCG.) Planning History Appeal Site History: 1.14 It is relevant to note that the appeal application follows on from a refusal of planning for a similar development (planning application ref: 2015/26873). 1.15 The appeal development was amended in terms of scale, design and layout to address matters raised in the refusal of planning application ref: 2015/26873, including in relation to highway matters, sustainability and parking. 1.16 The appeal scheme was carefully prepared and designed to provide the relevant supporting justification for the proposed development, which includes addressing the question of appropriateness, with reference to national and local policies. 1.17 The planning history details for the site will be confirmed in the SoCG. The Planning Studio Page 4 of 38 Appellant Statement of Case Proposed Dementia Care Home Land at Manchester Road, Rixton, Warrington Materially Relevant Planning History – Warrington BC 1.18 We will be making reference by way of materially similar issues and the manner in which a similar nursing care home development was granted elsewhere in Warrington just 2 months after the appeal scheme was originally refused planning permission in 2015. 1.19 In the ‘precedent’ scheme (Rose Villa, Penkford Lane, Collins Green – see Warrington BC application ref: 2015/25250) the Council accepted the development as limited infill, and on that basis they concluded that it complied with policy CC1 of the WCS and the NPPF relating to limited infilling. 1.20 In the relevant Sections of the ‘TPS Planning Statement’ (Section 4.28 in particular) and further discussed in Section 4 in this Statement of Case, we do ask the Inspector to come to a view as to whether there is a reasonable argument to support the proposition that the propose development could be considered as limited infilling, using the same logic and approach taken in the Rose Villa case (noting of course that each application is considered on its merits). Details of the Proposed Development 1.21 Full details of the proposed development are set out in the Shack Architects plans and Design & Access Statement and summarised in Sections 2.18 to 2.27 of the ‘TPS Planning Statement’. These will be listed and confirmed in the SoCG. 1.22 The land use classification of the proposed development will be Class C2 Institutional Care. 1.23 The scheme is designed specifically to support dementia care provision. 1.24 To complement the proposed 74 dementia care bedspaces, the plans show the building will provide supporting facilities for the residents including communal lounges, dining, laundry, salon and on-site cinema.