COMMITTEE REPORT
Application Ref. 14/03579/OUT
Applicant CALA Management Limited
Reason for Referral Scale of Development to Committee Objections from Parish Councils
Case Officer Neil Hempstead
Presenting Officer Neil Hempstead
Long Marston Airfield, (predominantly The South Eastern Corner), Site Address Campden Road, Lower Quinton, Stratford-upon-Avon, Outline application (with all matters reserved (access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for future determination) for the erection of up to: 400 dwellings (Class C2/C3) of which a maximum of 100 would be self-contained Class C2 units the occupancy of which would be controlled by a S106 agreement. These C2 units would count towards the housing land supply., Up to 4,000m2 employment hub (Class B1(a)-(c)) Community hub (Class A1-A5/B1(a)/C3/D1/D2). Overall site area of 43.87 hectares Description of Provision of new open space (approx. 21.09 hectares) Development Upgrading existing access junction and provision of new emergency access off Campden Road (final design at reserved matters stage) Associated infrastructure, engineering and landscaping works including a new pedestrian/cycle link from Campden Road to the Stratford Greenway and off-site road improvements and pedestrian/cycle link along the Campden Road. Sustainable urban drainage systems and all ancillary enabling works including demolition of existing buildings and structures. Net gain locally of approximately 271 FTE jobs locally (creation of 325 FTE jobs and loss of existing 24.5 FTE jobs). Gas Consultation Zone Flood Zone 1. Small part of the site to the extreme west is located within flood zones 2 & 3. Heart of England Way to the South of the application site. Vale of Evesham Control Zone Protected species Site area and land to the north of the site are covered by two non-statutory designations for nature conservation – Long Description of Site Marston Camp (pSINC) and Long Marston Airfield (DISUSED Constraints (pSINC). Approximately 2 miles from the Cotswold AONB Nearby heritage assets (listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeology Landscape features (trees and hedgerows) Residential properties in surrounding area Local highways infrastructure. Existing businesses located on the airfield. . GRANT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND COMPLETION OF S.106 Summary of PLANNING OBLIGATION, RELEVANT PLANNING CONDITIONS Recommendation AND INFORMATIVE NOTES. Development Plan Paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advises that “due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with this framework”.
The development plan is the Stratford-on-Avon Local Plan Review 2006-2011 as saved by a Direction made by the Secretary of State pursuant to Paragraph 1 (3) of Schedule 8 to the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Relevant Policies in the Development Plan for this application, including for the supply of housing, are:
Relevant Policies in the Development Plan for this application are:- . PR1 – Landscape and Settlement Character,, DEV1 – Layout and Design, DEV.4 - Access, DEV.8 – Energy Conservation, DEV.10 – Crime Prevention, COM.15 – Accessible Housing, IMP.1 – Supporting Information, – consistent with Framework – Full weight should be given to these policies in decision making . STR.1 Settlement Hierarchy, PR.6 – Renewable Energy, DEV.2 - Landscaping, DEV.3 – Amenity Open Space, DEV.7 - Drainage, EF.1 – Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, EF.6 – Nature Conservation and Geology, EF.7 – Nature Conservation and Geology, EF.9 – Trees, woodland and hedgerows, EF.10 – Trees, woodland and hedgerows, EF.11 – Archaeological sites, EF.11A – Archaeological sites, EF13 – Conservation Areas, EF.14 – Listed Buildings, COM.3 – Local Shops and Services, COM.4 Open Space, COM.5 – Open Space, COM.9 – Walking and Cycling, COM.13 – Affordable Housing COM.14 – Mix of dwelling types, COM.17 – Rural Employment, COM.19 – Retail development, CTY.1 – Control over Development, IMP.4 – Infrastructure Provision , IMP.5 – Infrastructure Provision, IMP.6 – Transport Assessments , IMP.7 – Green Transport Plans, PR.7 – Flood defence , PR.8 – Pollution Control – some consistency but Framework is less restrictive –limited weight should be given to these policies in decision making . STR2 – New Housing Provision, STR2A – New Housing Provision, STR2B – New Housing Provision, STR.4 – Previously developed land, DEV.5 – Car Parking, DEV.6 - Services, DEV.9 – Access for people with disabilities COM.1 – Local Choice, COM.11A – Traffic Management, IMP.2 – Supplementary Planning guidance – inconsistent with Framework/out-of-date – no weight should be given to these in decision making.
Other Material Considerations
Central Government Guidance
. NPPF National Planning Policy Framework 2012 . Planning Policy Guidance 2014 . Circular 06/05: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation English Heritage . Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (The Setting of Heritage Assets).
Supplementary Planning Documents & Guidance . Provision of Open Space 2005 . Stratford upon Avon District Design Guide 2001 . Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines (1993) . Cotswold AONB Management Plan 2013-2018 (2013) . Planning and Community Safety - Design and Crime Reduction 2006: Planning Advice Note. . Long Marston Parish Plan (2007) Other Documents . Coventry and Warwickshire Joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment (November 2013) . Sustainability Appraisal of the Stratford on Avon Alternative Strategic Options 2014 . Focused Consultation 2011-2031- Housing Requirement and Strategic Site Options . Stratford on Avon Employment Land Assessment 2011 . Stratford on Avon PPG17 Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment (2011 and 2014) . Green Infrastructure Study for Stratford on Avon District Council (2011) . Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA3) . National Character Areas 17.07.2012 . Guidance on Transport Assessment published jointly by Department for Transport and Department for Communities and Local Government in 2007 . Stratford upon Avon Corporate Strategy 2011-2015 . Stratford on Avon Housing Strategy 2009-2014: Review 2012 . Stratford –on-Avon Business and Enterprise Strategy 2012-2015
Draft Core Strategy
This document was submitted to the Secretary of State on 29 September 2014, with the examination in public (EIP) in January 2015. The Inspector’s interim report was published on 19 March 2015.
Paragraph 216 of the NPPF allows for weight to be given to relevant policies in emerging plans, unless other material considerations indicate otherwise, and only subject to the stage of preparation of the plan, the extent of unresolved objections and the degree of consistency of the relevant emerging policies to the NPPF policies.
Following a full Council meeting on 22.06.2015, the Council has resolved to endorse the Cabinet recommendation of 01.06.2015 to adopt some of the development management planning policies as set out in emerging Core Strategy (As submitted September 2014 showing subsequent proposed modifications) June 2015 on an interim basis and due to their consistency with the NPPF/absence of objections in principle.
I therefore consider that the requirements of policies:- CS.1 – Sustainable Development CS.2 – Climate Change and Sustainable Construction CS.4 – Water Environment and Flood Risk CS.5 – Landscape CS.6 - Natural Environment CS.7 - Green Infrastructure CS.8 - Historic Environment CS.9 - Design and Distinctiveness CS.25 – Transport & Communication CS.26 – Developer Contributions are recognised as material planning considerations and given some weight in the determination of the planning application.
The other key relevant policies which remain as having little weight are:- CS.15 – Distribution of Development CS.16 – Housing Development CS.17 – Affordable Housing CS.18 – Housing Mix and Type AS.10 – Countryside and villages
The 2012 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) Review
The application site was considered as one of four rural brownfield sites put forward by the District Council. Long Marston Airfield was considered to be a large rural brownfield site which is not adjacent to a study settlement and is poorly related to facilities. It was also considered too small to create a new sustainable settlement, and is therefore not suitable for housing development. The site is also within a Local Wildlife Site. .
The SHLAA has only looked at suitability for housing, using obvious site constraints (“potential show-stoppers”). It does not follow that what it shows as a ‘suitable’ site is necessarily an ‘appropriate’ site and vice versa. The SHLAA 2012 does not assess appropriateness against the emerging Core Strategy. In officers’ opinion the conclusions reached by the SHLAA should be given limited weight and the appropriateness of the site should be assessed against relevant development plan policies and all relevant material considerations.
Landscape Sensitivity Study (July 2011 and 2012)
This document forms part of the evidence basis underpinning the preparation of the Core Strategy. The application site is not included within the study area.
Water Cycle Studies 2010 & 2012
Existing waste Water Treatment works are identified as already being at their limit of consent with current housing levels. Solutions are required to accommodate growth. Detailed assessments have shown that improvements for all treatment works are possible within the limits of conventional applied technology but that annual completions may have to be limited until solutions are in place.
Historic Environment Assessment (2012)
This document forms part of the evidence basis underpinning the preparation of the Core Strategy. The application site is not included within the study area.
Ecological & Geological Study (2012)
This document forms part of the evidence basis underpinning the preparation of the Core Strategy. The application site is not included within the study area.
Other Legislation
. Human Rights Act 1998 . Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 (any site in a rural location) . The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 . Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 . The EC Birds Directive (Directive 79/409/EEC), as translated into UK Law by The Habitat and Species Regulations 2010 . The EC Habitats Directive (Directive 92/43/EEC) as translated into UK Law by The Habitat and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) . Protection of Badgers Act 1992 . Hedgerow Regulations 1997 . Community and Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010Localism Act 2011 . Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) . Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 . Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2015Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 . Environmental Protection Act 1990. . Equality Act 2010
Summary of Relevant History
A range of uses are permitted on the overall site at Long Marston Airfield. These include acceptance, depollution and breakdown/dismantling of end of life Vehicles (12/01358/COUNTY)- granted June 2013, use of land for motorsports (93/00740/FUL), open air retail market and car boot sale (97/00550/FUL) and various other commercial and business activities. It has been used for temporary activities, including Global Gathering Festivals.
There has also been a number of planning enforcement cases relating to the use of the site including those relating to the use of the drag racing strip.
There are relevant planning applications in the vicinity of the application site:
There have been a number of planning applications granted on Meon Vale to the south of the application site which have resulted in residential development (approx. 1050 dwellings), employment and leisure development and other associated works being granted on the site over a number of phases.
In addition, 380 dwellings were granted on appeal at Codex Land Promotions Ltd in Wychavon District Council along with 5000sqm of Class B1(c) floorspace and associated works.
Applicant’s Supporting Documents
Summary provided by the applicant
Outline planning consent (with all matters reserved) is sought for a residential-led mixed use development on land at Long Marston Airfield (predominantly the south eastern corner). Proposals include the erection of up to 400 dwellings, 4,000 sqm employment hub, a community hub, the provision of new open space including parks and amenity space and associated infrastructure, engineering and landscaping works including the provision of a new access junction off Campden Road.
The part of the site proposed for development is previously developed land (also called ‘brownfield land’) falling within the curtilage of the airfield and with numerous fixed structures present on the site. Community consultation, through a series of local meetings and public exhibitions held in October 2014, established that 71% of comments received from the community were supportive of the proposals.
The proposal has to be considered in the context of a national housing shortage, the objectively assessed housing needs in the District and the emerging housing requirement of 14,480 dwellings 2011-2031. In July 2015 the Council resolved to endorse modifications to the emerging SoADC Core Strategy to incorporate ‘Proposal LMA’; a 3,500 dwelling mixed use community with supporting employment, local centre, schools, community facilities and open space, thus establishing the principle of development on the site.
The Core Strategy housing trajectory assumes that 400 homes will be built on the site by 2020/21, 320 of which would be delivered in the next five years. A five year housing land supply must be demonstrated in order for the Core Strategy to be found sound at examination and this site forms a critical part of the assumed five year land supply.
Although the scheme could form part of a wider allocation, it has been designed with the ability to operate as a standalone development and is considered a sustainable development in its own right. The site is in a sustainable location to the south of Stratford-upon-Avon and is the optimum ‘brownfield’ site in the District.
The indicative masterplan has been informed by a thorough analysis of local urban areas and villages, provides an extensive amount of green infrastructure delivering a variety of functions and character. The vision is to create a new community worth caring about, invoking Garden City principles, set within a framework of parkland and wooded glades, tree lined avenues, squares, streets and greens.
CALA recognise the importance of pre-application discussions and consultation with local interest groups, local residents and the Council. Feedback received has been an important influence on the emerging design of the development and changes have been made as a result.
The development seeks to provide 400 homes; with 35% as affordable housing to meet the needs of local people. CALA is an award winning house builder with a track record of delivery and knowledge of what makes a successful development. CALA is synonymous with high quality design, focusing on striking, individual new build homes, which combine traditional design features with contemporary home comforts.
Flexible employment opportunities will be also provided on site will support economic growth and enable new and existing residents south of Stratford- upon-Avon to work close to where they live, thereby helping the creation of a sustainable settlement and community, reducing the need for out- commuting, as well as increasing the proportion of expenditure that is retained locally.
An essential part of a sustainable community is to provide goods and services close to where people live. A centrally located community hub will be provided based around a public square to act as a focal point for the community and create a healthy, natural and economic combination of town and country life. The community hub will be a flexible space offering diverse functions for all ages. Possible uses include leisure space, education classes, healthcare provision and community support. The public square will be adjacent to an open space and will be a shared surface space allowing for flexible uses including event space (e.g. farmers markets, pop-up events, community fêtes etc.). The traffic impacts of the development have been of particular interest to local residents. An essential part of the vision for the masterplan was the inclusion of sustainable transport options. An important aim from the outset was the incorporation of routes for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport. A network of footpaths and cycle paths will afford the most efficient and direct routes to Long Marston, Stratford-upon-Avon (via the Stratford Greenway), Lower Quinton, Meon Vale and to facilities within the site. A new T-junction will be delivered at the access to the site on Campden Road. As part of the proposal local highway improvements works will be implemented, including a solution at the Waitrose roundabouts which avoids signalisation and improvements at the Freshfields Nursery and Stratford Garden Centre junctions on Campden Road. A detailed assessment of the potential transportation issues associated with the proposed development has been carried out. This shows that delivery of 400 dwellings on the site does not trigger the requirement for the South Western Relief Road which is proposed as part of the emerging allocation for 3,500 dwellings. The combination of pre and post mitigation measures is considered to reduce any negative effects that may occur as a result of the development at the site.
The proposals retain and enhance the best of the site’s landscape and environment. Biodiversity and open space benefits will emerge through converting the brownfield site into more diverse green-space with appropriate management.
List of documents:
Application form Planning summary Environmental Statement Volumes: Technical Studies, Technical Appendices and Non-Technical Summary – Chapters also contained Flood Risk Assessment, Transport Assessment and Tree Survey Planning application drawings Design and Access Statement Statement of Community Involvement Energy and Sustainability Statement
During the course of the application the following additional information was submitted:
Covering letter Addendum to the Design and Access Statement Supplementary Environmental Statement and associated appendices Updated Non –Technical Summary Ecology letter responding to issues relating to Biodiversity Offsetting; Great Crested Newts and Bats Ecology Biodiversity Offsetting results. Further Supplementary Environmental Statement and Associated Appendices Updated Non-Technical Summary 2 x memorandum in respect of highway information. Ward Member
Councillor Barnes
No comment as present on committee (16.02.2015)
Comment: I wish to support the comments of Clifford Chambers Parish Council for a new island incorporating the Milcote Road and feeder lane to the Freshfields Nursery School. The total highways works are estimated to cost around £790,000. In addition, on the heavily trafficked Milcote Road, would like some flashing warning signs at the Milcote Greenway crossing estimated to cost £27,500. Am assured services are available to implement these works (24.08.2015)
Comment: I am joint ward member and as so I will make comments. After two meeting with CALA they know that road improvements at Clifford Chambers are needed. At both meetings they agreed but it was up to the County Council and Cllr Brain to agree these works. These works are needed because of 1500 plus homes in the area and a massive associated increase in cars and lorries on the Milcote road. We have asked before and we believe Cala support Weston and Clifford in the provision of these road improvements. Campden Road is stated by Cllr Brain at public inquiry's as the most dangerous road in South Warwickshire therefore this application is against NPPF section 4. With no 5 year land supply on a brown field site it is the only reason for refusing this application (04.11.2015)
(The full responses are available in the application file)
Parish Councils (The application lies across the boundary of two Parish Councils – Marston Sicca and Quinton)
Marston Sicca Parish Council Strongly object to the proposal. Site is not identified as a Strategic Site or an allocated site under the Draft Core Strategy. Not included in the SHLAA. Traffic: B4632 not suitable for the increased number of vehicles especially when taken together with committed schemes at Meon Vale and Codex site. Will be significant impact on traffic in Stratford and Clopton Bridge. Rat runs will be created in local villages. 60,000 vehicles a month already pass through Long Marston. Any traffic travelling through Welford on Avon will already have to cross a centuries old bridge. Will impact on over 30 rural settlements in all directions. Employment: Employment will not cater for all residents either in number or type of occupation. This will mean residents leaving the site and other workers coming to the site on a daily basis. Jobs will be lost from the many small firms on the site. Education: No provision made for futher places of education. Most local primary and secondary schools are at capacity. Further matters of concern: Large gas main passes under the airfield close to the site; flooding in the southern part fo the site; loss of biodiversity. It is a proposed Local Wildlife Site; Loss of agricultural land; loss of amenity and leisure activities undertaken on the site at present; Cumulative impact of this and surrounding large development on underlying infrastructure; Part of a larger potential site that wasrejected as a strategic site in the respect of the Dradft Core Strategy (10.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information: Make no representations in respect of the amendments but reiterate previous objections and have updated these in light of Long Marston being allocated in the Draft Core Strategy as a possible strategic site. Site not allocatd in the SHLAA. Matters of extreme concern in respect of the sustainability of the site are: Traffic: All traffic would exit onto the B4632 which is not suitable for the increase in traffic. Impact of the traffic on Stratford and Clopton Bridge is well documented with no solution in the foreseeable future. Local villages will be impacted upon with rat runs created to avoid congestion. Traffic numbers show 60,000 vehicles pass through Long Marston every month. Impact on the weak bridge at Welford on Avon. Estimate the proposal will impact on 30 rural settlements in all directions. Employment: Jobs created will not suit all residents resulting in in and out commuting to the site. Existing jobs will be lost from the site. Education: No provision made for any further places of education. Welford Primary School and Stratford Secondary School already full. Other areas of concern: Gas main goes under the site; risk of flooding to the south of the site; loss of biodiversity; loss of agricultural land; loss of amenity and leisure activities currently undertaken on the site; cumulative impact on underlying infrastructure
Reference was also made to possible S106 contributions in respect of education, Contribution towards a community centre within Long Marston Village, new access to the Long Marston Sewage Works, mitigation of traffic and future scheme for parking at St. James Church (28.08.2015)
Quinton Parish Council Object to the proposal. 1. Does not accord with the provisions of the development plan. Not included within the Draft Core Strategy and was rejected as a Strategic site and not included in the SHLAA. 2. Unsustainable in that a. there is no identified local need and will put a strain omn local amenities b. Increase traffic movements on the local road network, primarily the B4632 c. Will displace existing businesses on the site. Sclae of the proposed housing means that the employment needs cannot be met on site d. Loss of agricultural land and biodiversity. Environmental impact from displacement of wildlife, noise and pollution adjacent to AONB not been satisfactorily addressed. 3. Cannot be assessed in isolation and cumulative effect with Meon Vale and Codex site needs to be assessed (12.03.2015)
(The full responses are available in the application file)
Adjoining Parish Councils
Clifford Chambers and Milcote Parish Council Object. Has seen nothing to provide convincing evidence that the existing highway infrastructure around the B4632 will be upgraded sufficiently to enable life to continue in an acceptable way for the residents of Clifford Chambers. That the development will take place over 5 years gives rise to additional concerns in respect of heavy construction traffic. Unconvinced that it will create significant new employment opportunities and will be a dormitory suburb for the surrounding area. Does not accord with the development and appears and insensitive and opportunistic attempt to capitalise on current planning uncertainty (22.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information: Object to the application for the following planning reasons: Our strong objection to this application still stands but we are responding to the amendments advised on 14th October. We welcome any improvements proposed for the B4632 but these should be made in advance of any further house building on this dangerous road. We would object strongly to any changes proposed at the Waitrose Island to install traffic lights. We feel that this is a retrograde step as the current give-way system works perfectly well (03.11.2015).
No representation. Council notes the reality of this application and makes no representation but notes that a tacit understanding has been given to create a traffic island at the entrance to Clifford Chambers village under a S106 agreement and urges most strongly that this be enacted (02.11.2015) Welford on Avon Parish Council Object. Strongly support the objections raised by Marston Sicca Parish Council. 1. Traffic. B4632 has a bad accident record and is unsuitable for any additional volume of traffic. Existing problems means that local villages will be used as rat runs. 2. Employment: Does not create any significant new employment opportunities. Most new job opportunities north of the river avon meaning will need new bridge and associated infrastructure. 3. Education: Welford Primary School is full. Primary school places should be identified locally in advance of development. 4. Cumulative effect of development: Cumulative impact of all local development needs to be independently assessed. (12.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information: Additional comments. The Parish Council attended a meeting with CALA Homes and other local parish councils on 14th September 2015 when the latest information on proposed road improvements was outlined. The Parish Council support the principle of bringing forward road improvements as part of this application but would request that road improvements also mitigate the impact on local villages such as Welford and are not just limited to the B4632. The village is already used as a “rat run” for vehicles travelling from the direction of Long Marston towards the M40 and on towards Birmingham. Vehicle numbers are fast increasing along roads which are entirely unsuitable for this volume of traffic. The situation is exacerbated by the single track sections of road at The Bell Inn and Binton Bridges where traffic is at a standstill at peak times. Realistically any significant development at Long Marston airfield will make this situation worse as traffic tries to avoid the centre of Stratford. The Parish Council has commissioned a strategic plan for a scheme of road calming in the centre of Welford-on-Avon to make this road a less desirable route for these vehicles. Formally request that these proposals are funded as part of this application (27.10.2015).
Weston on Avon Parish Council Make the following comments: Weston on Avon Parish meeting fully support both 400 and 3100 homes if the infrastructure is in place. In respect of 400 houses the green way needs safety measures by way of flashing lights. Pleased to see some improvement by Freshfields Nursery but not happy that no safety improvement is proposed for the Milcote Road junction with the B4632. A third of traffic on that road comes from Welford on the Milcote Road. The Parish Council have spoken at a meeting at Long Marston with Cllr Brain and he knows the Parish Council’s concern and Cala had agreed to spend the money. This week there is a great poster up at this junction making it more dangerous to see coming out. Concerned that there could be 1500 new dwellings on the Campden Road with no works to this junction (28.10.2015)
Bidford Parish Council Make the following comments: Councillors concerned about the traffic implications the development will have on Barton and more especially on Bidford Bridge. Recent accident on Bidford Bridge has highlighted the lack of appropriate road infrastructure to the south of the village.
Council request that consideration be given to a bridge being built from the A46 at Salford Priors to the Honeybourne Crossroads that can take all traffic. This will reduce the risk of further damage to Bidford Bridge, which is a national monument, as well as ease the increased traffic coming from and going to south of the River Avon. (11.08.2015) Further consultation following the submission of additional information Make the following comments: The Parish Council wishes to reiterate its concern regarding the potential increase of traffic on Welford Road, through Barton, and over Bidford Bridge: S106/CIL funds should be made available to relieve this, including the possible construction of an addition bridge over the River Avon as currently all traffic has to travel over Bidford or Welford bridges, both of which are unsuitable for this level of volume of traffic (29.10.2015).
Stratford on Avon Town Council. Object to the application. Latest iteration of the Core Strategy seeks an allocation on this site but this has yet to be ratified by the Planning inspector. Development has significant implications for the town because of its location south of the river.
Noted that the Core Strategy says the requirement for a relief road would be triggered upon 400 houses, yet this level of development would not fund the relief road entirely. There are questions over the relief road and what would happen in the interim if one is not provided.
There is insufficient information to show how this site fits into the wider potential allocation of the airfield. Where is the wider masterplan for the allocation? (18.08.2015)
(The full responses are available in the application file)
Adjoining District, County and Parish Councils outside the District Council
Adjoining Parish Councils
Honeybourne Parish Council Object. Contrary to the development plan. No overriding need given that the Parish Council is to allocate land at Gaydon for housing development. Site is not well served by facilities and as such would generate significant traffic movement and not minimise the need to travel or maximise use of sustainable modes of transport. Would not manage pattern of growth to maximise the use of public transport. Concerned about impact on highway safety and capacity. Will have unacceptable impacts on local amenities such as Honeybourne station. (14.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information: Objects to the application as the serious lack of road and local infrastructure to service the proposed 400 new homes will impact on all local communities. Furthermore, the already unsustainable communter use of Honeybourne Station will be further exacerbated by the development as more cars try to use the totally inadequate parking facilities (13.08.2015)
Pebworth Parish Council Object to the application. Large scale development does not meet local need. And outside the current parish development boundary; remote and unsustainable location and a great distance from the strategic road network, shops and services; Will place and unacceptable burden on local infrastructure; Would be detrimental to the character of the nearby Cotswold AONB by reason of visual intrusion and intensified traffic. (07.03.2015) Further consultation following the submission of additional information Objects to the application. Serious lack of road and local infrastructure to service the proposed 400 new homes will impact on all local communities. (12.08.2015)
Adjoining District Councils
Wychavon District Council Object. 1. Development is contrary to the development plan and should only be granted if material considerations to justify a departure.2. In considering whether a justification exists the harm as well as benefits needs to be taken into consideration. 3 No overriding need given the new settlement allocation at Gaydon/Lighthorne Heath 4. Not well served by facilities being located away from any major settlement and as such will not minimise the need to travel or maximise use of sustainable modes of transport. Will not support transition to a low carbon future nor manage patterns of growth to make fullest use of public transport. 5. Concern over highway safety and capacity. 6. Unacceptable impact on local services (09.03.2015).
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Would reiterate the previous concerns sent to the District Council (21.08.2015)
Would reiterate the previous comments made on this application (02.11.2015)
Cotswold District Council No objection subject to Gloucestershire County Council raising no highway objection to the proposed scheme (13.04.2015)
Adjoining County Council
Gloucestershire County Council No highway objection raised. Impact is likely to be negligible in Gloucestershire and recent applications within Gloucesterhsire close to the Warwickshire boundary indicate that there is still capacity on the local highway network. (21.04.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Comments of 21 April 2015 still stands (28.08.2015)
Additional response received: Further landscaping and green infrastructure provision is welcomed especially if it leads to increased biodiversity and linking of wildlife areas. Impact on education and libraries in Gloucestershire needs to be assessed (11.09.2015)
This is being assessed by Education School Place Planning Colleagues. It is likely that Warwickshire will secure the relevant contributions but we need to ensure arrangements are in place for provision of school places where required, if in GCC. (24.09.2015)
Do not believe that the amendments alter the previous recommendation (21.10.2015)
(The full responses are available in the application file) Third Party Responses
46 responses have been received (including 2 from St. Modwen Developments Ltd).
39 responses raise objections (including 2 from the Meon Vale Medical Centre Patient Group). The objections can be summarised as follows:
Traffic - Will add to existing traffic problems on Campden Road - Will add to congestion problems on Clopton Bridge - Campden Road and Clopton Bridge will need to be expanded to accommodate all the additional traffic - Existing traffic congestion is causing much traffic to use Milcote Road (From Clifford Chambers to Welford on Avon) as a rat run. - Residents of the proposed dwellings will use the Waitrose food store adding to existing congestion. - Full shopping centre facilities, schools and health facilities should be incorporated into the development to reduce the amount of traffic generated by the development - The employment element of the proposal will not prevent commuting to and from the site which will increase traffic. - Not enough jobs in Stratford which will mean commuting outside the area towards Birmingham. - Detrimental impact of increased traffic going through the surrounding villages. - Already congestion being experienced from construction at the Meon Vale application. - Increased traffic will be dangerous to equine users of the road. - Increased danger to cyclists who use the Campden Road from increased traffic. - Increased congestion will have a detrimental impact on air quality with associated health implications - Proposed relief road needs to be implemented prior to the housing being built - Use of ghost islands can be used for overtaking slow moving vehicles and as such can result in more accidents - Increase use of the roads by cyclists will cause tailbacks
Ecology - Loss of habitat for wildlife - Ecology in the general area will be decimated by the cumulative effect of the developments.
Infrastructure - Additional primary healthcare facilities should be provided on site before the proposed houses are occupied. - Additional educational facilities need to be provided.
Landscape - Overdevelopment in a rural area. - Changes to the infrastructure required (primarily roads and bridges to accommodate the additional traffic but also additional facilities such as shops) will have a detrimental impact on the existing rural landscape. - Will have an urbanising effect on the neighbouring villages - Will create ribbon development to Stratford that will have a detrimental impact on the rural environment - Linked to the suburbs of Stratford - Detrimental impact on character of the area - Will be urban sprawl Heritage Issues - Unacceptable impact on the setting of a Grade II listed building (Long Marston Grounds)
Residential Amenity - Increased noise and pollution to the nearest affected properties (Long Marston specifically identified) due to the construction of a large number of properties in the general vicinity.
Gas pipeline - National Grid will prevent any building nearer than 112m to the high pressure main which crosses the site which will increase the build density to an unacceptable level.
Other - Not in accordance with the development plan - Application should be put on hold for 15 years - Development not sustainable - Houses are not required whilst Meon Vale is being developed - Existing large gatherings provide a useful source of income for Stratford businesses and local charities. - Increased congestion will stop tourists from coming to Stratford which will have an impact on local employment. - Houses should be distributed throughout the District rather than concentrated in one area (which includes Meon Vale development). - Question the need for the quantity of housing proposed - Just a way of getting the full complement of 3500 on the site not allocated in the Draft Core Strategy. - Not identified in the SHLAA - Existing employment and leisure activities would be lost from the site - Concern expressed in relation to the facts/assumptions in relation to the health elements detailed in the application - Development should be spread around the villages - Speculative development - Land not identified for housing - Over 2000 dwellings built in the area. - All airfields wrongly classified as Brownfield Land. Permission must not be given until sufficient time has been given for this issue to be heard. - Concern over accuracy of health elements of the application. Medical centre will need to expand and as such a S106 contribution should be a condition of such consent. - Failure to comply with the requirements of the Care Act regarding the health and wellbeing of the community
(The full responses are available in the application file)
5 letters express support for the proposal. Reasons in support of the application:
- Developing brownfield rather than greenfield land accords with the government’s policy - More sustainable option than the proposed new settlement at Gaydon/Lighthorne Heath - Will not have noise and pollution issues Gaydon/Lighthorne Heath will have - Site has potential to improve public transport accessibility to Stratford upon Avon - Council cannot demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply and the Core Strategy has yet to be adopted. - Will reduce pressure on Stratford Town for more houses - The retention and expansion of the southern park and ride would reduce the traffic congestion - More sustainable transport link in the form of a re-opened Stratford- Honeybourne railway line. - Will stop development swamping local villages - Present an opportunity to provide employment, a new school and a GP practice on the site - Save Greenbelt land being developed - Ideally suited near Meon Vale - Close to an existing area of employment - Land offers no agricultural production. - - (The full responses are available in the application file)
In addition to the above letters of objection and support A letter has also been received from St Modwen Developments Ltd raising the following comments: What proportion of the Clopton Bridge Scheme will be will be funded by the proposed development and the implications for the funds toi be poaid by Meon Vale and Arden Heath Farm; Development at long Marston Airfield should not come forward until such time as the Clopton Bridge works are completed or a level of development should be identified which can be accommodated prior to works taking place; No clarity is given in respect of funding for further STP (Stratford Transport Projects) works and whether the proposed development is reliant on these works being undertaken; Different scheme has already been agreed for Trinity Way/Shipston Road roundabout roundabout. Mitigation from CALA is sufficient to accommodate traffic from both schemes and a cost sharing arrangement should be entered into to avoid potentially abortive works; Clarify sought as to whether works will be undertaken to the existing Shipston Road/Clifford Lane/Waitrose junction.
Further to their original letter further concerns were expressed by St Modwen following receipt of WCC Highways comments as follows: Modelling does not reflect the final roundabout design by Waitrose; Works proposed to the Waitrose Junction will not accommodate traffic from either the Long Marston or the Meon Vale application; there is no reference to the or acknowledgement withinh the suggested conditions or financial contributions towards to the traffic signals already consented at the at the Waitrose junction as part of the Meon Vale scheme; conditions require the works to the Trinity way roundabout to be delivered but no reference to the to the improvement scheme already consented as part of the Meon Vale Scheme; financial contributions incorresctly assume that Meon Vale has contributed 50% towards the Trinity Way roundabout scheme. Meon Vale consent requires the works to be delivered by condition (i.e S278 rather then S106) and furthermore the consented works are different to those now proposed by Long Marston.
(The full responses are available in the application file)
Consultations
Highways
WCC Highways: No objection to the proposed development. Highways Authority have reived the following elements of the proposal: Sustainable Transport :Walking, Cycling, Public transport; Existing Network Operation, Accident Data, Trip Generation, Trip Distribution, Network Modelling Methodology; Study area, Scenario Testing, Committed Developments, Network modelling Outputs, Overall Network Statistics, Route Analysis, Junction Analysis, Mitigation Schemes. No objection on the basis of the following: Imposition of conditions relating to Constriction Management Plan (including timing of HGV movements); Provision of Site Access; Provision of Emergency Access; Provision of off-site highway works to the Bridgeway gyratory and the junction of Tiddington Road/Banbury Road/Swans Nest Lane/Clopton Bridge; Provision of off-site highway works to the Shipston Road / Trinity Way / A3400 / Seven Meadows Way roundabout junction and the Shipston Road / Clifford Lane / Waitrose Roundabout Junction; Provision of off-site highway works to the B4632 Campden Road / Stratford Garden Centre access junction; Provision of off-site highway works to the B4632 Campden Road / Freshfield Nurseries access junction; Provsiion of off-site highway works to the B4632 Campden Road Footway Provision; Provision of highway infrastructure; Provision of a travel plan for the employment hub. In addition there would be a requirement for S106 contributions in respect of the Clopton Bridge and Shipston Road mitigation scheme; Public transport (bus route); upgrading the surface of the Greenway and provision of sustainable Travel Packs (05.11.2015)
Highways Agency: Object on the grounds that additional information required regarding anticipated trip distribution and the assignment of development trips to the A46 Stratford Bypass. Decision should not be issued for a period of 3 months (04.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Objection on the basis that the residual impact on the A46 falls well below the ‘severe’ threshold set in the NPPF and consequently development should not be prevented or refused on transport grounds (16.04.2015). Additional information does not alter the previous recommendation dated 16.04.2015. No objection (21.08.2015)
Additional information does not alter the materiality of the development impact on Highways England’s asset. No objection (26.10.2015)
WCC Bus Stop Infrastructure: No objection. New development will be required to provide proper access for buses with suitable bus stop infrastructure and the cost of diverting services if necessary. (08.05.2015)
Warwickshire Police: Traffic Management Office: No objection. However, other speed reduction/engineering measures should be considered in respect of the application and perhaps secured by condition if required (10.03.2015).
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Reiterate previous comment relating to the comment regarding Speed Camera Warning Signs (07.08.2015)
Ecology
WCC Ecology: Insufficient ecological information submitted with the proposal and therefore advise that the application is not determined until this is information is received in relation to Habitats; Species (particularly bats, birds, reptiles, badgers, Great crested newts, water voles and otters and Section 41 Species – invertebrate interest, hedgehogs and brown hare) (31.03.2105)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No objection. Satisfied with the additional information submitted subject to the imposition of conditions (04.09.2015)
Warwickshire Wildlife Trust: Object on the grounds that additional information needs to be submitted in respect of wintering birds, bats and water voles (18.03.2015) Further consultation following the submission of additional information Trust is of the opinion that it is possible for the development to avoid, mitigate and compensate any adverse effects on biodiversity. Recommends that amendments need to be made in respect of: Corrections and the resubmission of the Biodiversity Impact Assessment; Precautionary measure taken regarding pond 3 as identified in Great Crested Newt survey; Amendment to plans or confirmation /assurances that the dark vegetated corridor to accommodate bats along the north east boundary will be included in the development. Maintain objection but if grant permission conditions are recommended (21.08.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Satisfied with the revised Biodiversity Impact Assessment, and as long as Local Planning Authority feel that the discussed conditions are appropriate (regarding the Great Crested Newts and Bats) then satisfied that our concerns have been adequately addressed (07.09.2015).
Natural England: No landscape objection. Does not consider that proposed development would impact significantly on the purposes of the designation of the Cotswolds AONB. Expect the Local Authority to look at other impacts relating to local sites (biodiversity and geodiversity); local landscape character and local or national biodiversity priority habitats and species. Standing advice should be taken into account in respect of protected species. Green Infrastructure and Priority Habitat, Soil and Biodiversity enhancements should be assessed as part of the development (12.03.2015).
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Advice in respect of the previous response remains and should be applied in respect for the amendments (26.08.2015)
Amendments unlikely to have significantly different impacts on the natural environment than the original proposal (15.10.2015)
Banbury Ornithological Society: Location is in an area outside that covered by the society (17.02.2015)
Pipeline Infrastructure
National Grid (Plant Protection): No objection on the basis that a Deed of Consent is put in place and protection is arranged for any crossing points on site where access routes would need to cross over the pipeline (received 30.04.2015 but dated 16.02.2015)
National Grid (Network Maintenance): Draw attention to the approximate location of National Grid Distribution High Pressure Pipeline. No habitable buildings be placed within 112m distance of the proven pipeline position. Advise undertake PADHI assessment (19.02.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information National Grid (Plant Protection): As the proposal is in close proximity to National Grids Transmission assets the application has been referred to the Asset Protection Scheme for a response (07.08.2015)
National Grid (Plant Protection): No objection. National Grid has a 12.2 easement strip that lays either side of the pipeline from the centre. Still want to kept involved when the works begin for the landscape and cycle pathway design so will know what will be going over the pipeline (04.09.2015) Health and Safety Executive: No objection. PADHI assessment undertaken. Does not advise, on safety grounds, against the granting of planning permission (22.04.2015)
Drainage
Environment Agency: No objection in respect of flood risk subject to imposition of conditions requiring the submission of hydraulic modelling at reserved matters stage and details of the proposed de-culverting works. In respect of possible contamination issues a condition is proposed requiring the submission of a remediation strategy (21.04.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No comments to make regarding the amended information (27.10.2015)
WCC Lead Local Flood Authority: No objection subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of surface water drainage and foul drainage arrangements (11.06.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Amended information does not appear to impact the drainage proposals and as such previous comments remain (20.08.2015)
Severn Trent: No objection subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of surface water and foul sewage drainage (09.04.2015).
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No objection subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of surface water and foul sewage drainage (23.04.2015).
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No objection subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of surface water and foul sewage drainage (03.08.2015).
Heritage
Historic England: Do not wish to comment in detail but advise the District Council to look at the methodology used in the assessment undertaken. Application should be determined in accordance with national and local planning guidance. (04.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Remain of the opinion that the documentation did not and does not follow the latest policy, guidance and advice from a heritage perspective. Broad conclusions are acceptable. Application should be determined in accordance with national and local planning guidance. (07.08.2015)
SDC Heritage Consultant: No objection. English Heritage’s criticisms of the methodology used is noted. However, consider that the approach undertaken is a reasonable and pragmatic one. No designated heritage assets are directly affected by the proposals. Do not believe that there is anything other than negligible harm to designated heritage assets and only minor to non-designated heritage assets (27.03.2015) Further consultation following the submission of additional information Reviewed additional submitted information and have found no substantive reason to change the original assessment. Minor impacts but they do amount to a level to engage paragraph 134 of the NPPF. The airfield itself has some level of non- designated historic interest. Any loss of historic interest would be very limited. Not sufficient harm to engage the NPPF paragraphs (24.08.2015)
Have looked at the minor traffic/road alterations, and cannot identify any meaningful level of harm to any heritage assets (20.10.2015)
WCC Archaeology: No objection subject to the imposition of conditions (29.06.2015)
Landscape
SDC Landscape Consultant: Concern raised in respect of the following issues: 1. Proposed development in the southern field 2. The absence of a rational and robust development boundary 3. The absence of a robust soft landscape interface on the development boundary 4. The dispersal of green spaces throughout the development and connectivity 5. A GI strategy largely driven by residential front and back garden tree planting within the development area and road layout. The Design and Access Statement describes a “Garden City” approach to the scheme layout but this does not appear to have been translated through the application and it struggles as a stand-alone development at this location in the countryside . (13.05.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No objection is raised with regard to landscape and visual matters. Approval of any reserved matters should include full landscape proposals in conjunction with a landscape management scheme and lighting proposals that ensure light pollution and night glow are minimised (03.09.2015)
Cotswold Conservation Board: No objection given scale of development, distance from the AONB boundary and context with nearby upper and lower Quinton. Suggest imposition of conditions to control landscaping and appearance of site. (10.03.2015)
Health
South Warwickshire NHS: No objection subject to financial contribution of £415,986.09 (12.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Contribution required the same as previous request (28.08.2015)
NHS England: No objection subject to a financial contribution of £86,810 for the extension of the Meon Medical centre by 24.38 sqm (11.03.2015)
Public Health Warwickshire, Communities Group: Ask that the draft report in Public Health Evidence for Planning is taken into account when determining the planning application. (12.02.2015)
South Warwickshire Clinical Commissioning Group: Request financial contribution of either £281,608 towards a new primary medical care facility or £87,895 towards improvement/extension of an existing primary medical care facility (Meon Medical Centre) Rail
Network Rail: No comments to make (12.02.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No comments to make (03.09.2015)
Aviation
Coventry Airport: No comment due to nature of the development and distance from airport and air traffic zones (16.02.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No objection (04.08.2015)
London Oxford Airport: No objection. Does not conflict with safeguarding criteria. Suggest that developer liaises with the airport if cranes are to be used during construction (11.09.2015.
Civil Aviation Authority: No objection as the buildings would be less in height than 25m and would not constitute an aviation en-route obstruction (16.02.2015)
NATS Safeguarding: No objection. Development does not conflict with the NATS safeguarding criteria (12.02.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No objection. Does not conflict with the NATS Safeguarding criteria (04.08.2015)
Crime Prevention
Warwickshire Police Crime Prevention Design Officer: No objection but suggestions made in respect of the residential and commercial elements of the scheme to ensure that they do not become a target for criminals (02.03.2015)
Further consultations following the submission of additional information No further observations to make (06.08.2015)
No objection but suggestions made in respect of the residential and commercial elements of the scheme to ensure that they do not become a target for criminals (02.11.2015)
Warwickshire Police Estate Services: No objection subject to the financial contribution of £21,124 towards recruitment and equipping of officers and staff (£14,268) and police vehicles (£6,856) (18.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No objection subject to the financial contribution of £91,468 towards recruitment and equipping of officers and staff (£15,082), Police Vehicles (£6,856) and premises (£69,530) (03.09.2015)
Leisure/Open Space
Sport England: No objections subject to the suitable contribution towards sports facilities and playing fields being secured. (05.03.15)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information Additional information submitted does not affect previous consultation response (13.08.2015) SDC Leisure Manager (CHRIS FENNELL): No representations. Equipped play area should be in line with SDC Open Space SPD and National Guidance - Use of Fields in Trust Design Guide (Planning and Design for Outdoor. Duplication of play equipment in the area should be avoided. Long Term ownership/maintenance of the play equipment needs to be established (16.02.15)
Public Right of Way
Ramblers Association: Object. 1. Proposed development does not accord with the requirements of the development plan. 2. Do not want the Heart of England Way (public footpath SD41) to become part of a cycle track. Walkers do not use the Heart of England Way to view a housing estate. 3. Stratford greenway is a recreational equestrian/cycle/walking route. Proposed cycle link with the Greenway risks turning it into a busy commuting cycleway to the detriment of the recreational users. 4. Would lead to a considerable amount of traffic attempting to enter Stratford from the South which would lead for further calls for a southern by-pass which would have a detrimental impact on the landscape. (03.04.2015)
WCC Footpaths: No objection. The public footpath (SD41) would be retained along its current alignment and that the adjoining area would be allocated as open space which is welcomed. Request contribution of £32,170 towards maintenance of the public footpath from the increased us by the new residents. (09.03.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No objection and no further observations to add to previous response (24.08.2015)
Infrastructure Contributions
WCC Libraries: No objection subject to contribution of £8,755 to enhancing existing library facilities (30.03.2015)
WCC Education: No objection subject to a contribution of £1,873,002 broken down as follows: Early years education (£116, 870), Primary Education (£818,090), Secondary Education (£730,450), Sixth form Education (£157,940), Primary SEN education (£18,311) and Secondary SEN education (£31,341). These figures are based on current and forecast surplus/deficit capacity of pupil numbers in priority area schools. (24.02.2105)
SDC CCTV: No objection subject to contribution of £335,283.92towards supply and implementation (£150,594) and maintenance (184,329.92) of 4 CCTV cameras for a period of 10 years (01.06.2015).
No objection subject to contribution of £188 647.02 towards supply and implementation (£83,038.00) and maintenance (105,609.02) of 2 CCTV cameras for a period of 10 years (02.11.2015).
Environmental Health
SDC Environmental Health: No objection subject to imposition of a condition to address any land contamination. The applicant needs to submit a detailed air quality assessment and proposed mitigation to address the impact of increased vehicle movements on the Stratford on Avon air Quality mitigation Area (19.05.2015) Further consultations following the submission of additional information Have reviewed the Air Quality Assessment and conclude that with its conclusions. Traffic Improvements at Clopton Bridge are essential for improving air quality at many of the surrounding roads. (24.08.2015)
I have read the AQ memorandum from HilsonMoran dated 5th November. It addresses my concerns and the overall impact remains low although has increased to “slight” at two locations. I am happy that the development will not have a significant impact on air quality subject to the proposed traffic scheme at the Clopton Bridge/Shipston/Tiddington Road interchange being built (05.11.2015).
Other
National Planning Casework Unit: No comments to make (24.02.2105)
OFCOM: Response based on a wind farm application (23.02.2015)
Ministry of Defence: No objection. Site is outside the Ministry of Defence safeguarding area (16.02.2015)
Stratforward: No objection. The provision of 400 additional homes is much more likely to have a positive effect on the town centre than the events currently staged at Long Marston, provided of course that the associated infrastructure supports the increased traffic demands (14.05.2015)
Meteorological Service: No objection (11.08.2015)
WCC Fire and Rescue: No objection subject to imposition of condition requiring adequate provision of water supplies and fire hydrants for fire-fighting purposes. (17.02.2015 and 12.03.2015)
Coal Authority: No comment (16.02.2015)
Further consultation following the submission of additional information No comments (04.08.2015)
SDC Building Control: No representation. Appears that PV panels are to be utilised for the dwellings to provide the 10% on site renewable requirements. Need to be justified at a later date by the provision of SAP calculations. Dwellings to be constructed to Code Level 3. Non-domestic buildings to be constructed to BREEAM good standards. Details to be provided at reserved matters stage (16.02.2015).
SDC Enabling Officer (verbal response): No objection subject to the C2 element of the application being secured by an appropriately worded S106 agreement (06.10.2015).
(The full responses are available in the application file) ASSESSMENT OF THE KEY ISSUES
Principle of Development
The Council is required to make a decision in line with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. (Section 38(6) PCPA 2004 and Section 70(2) TCPA 1990). The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is a key material planning consideration. The emerging Core Strategy is also a material consideration.
The application must be first determined against the Development Plan and a conclusion made as to whether the application accords or does not accord with the Development Plan. The decision-maker should then consider all other relevant material planning considerations, of which the NPPF is the key consideration. The emerging Core Strategy is also a consideration. Irrespective of whether the Council has a 5 year housing land supply or not, para.14 of the NPPF makes clear that there is “a presumption in favour of sustainable development”, the definition of which can be found elsewhere in the NPPF.
Housing Land Supply
The Council does not currently have a 5 year housing land supply and therefore, in accordance with para.49 of the NPPF, saved policies in the District Local Plan Review that are relevant to the supply of housing cannot be considered up to date. In accordance with para.47 of the NPPF, the Council needs to boost significantly the supply of housing to not only achieve a 5 year housing land supply, but to also maintain this supply thereafter.
The EIP Inspector’s Interim Conclusions were published on 19 March 2015. The executive summary identifies 4 areas of further work to be carried out by the Council:
- To revisit the objective assessment of housing need (OAN) and to increase the housing requirement to provide an improved balance with the projected growth in jobs; - To do further sustainability appraisal (SA) work; - To consider an employment land allocation at Atherstone Airfield to support the delivery of housing via proposal SUA.1 (Canal Quarter), proposal SUA3 having been found to be not justified; - To increase the OAN to provide more headroom in the housing supply trajectory.
That work is now complete and on 20 July 2015 the Council resolved that further modifications to the submitted Core Strategy be endorsed for formal consideration by the Examination Inspector, subject to them first being published for a period of further representations. These modifications include basing the Core Strategy on an Objectively Assessed Need of 14,480 homes and identifying Long Marston Airfield as ‘Proposal LMA’ for a new settlement for a total of 3,500 homes, 2,100 of which will be delivered by 2031. Proposal LMA also includes a main village centre, two primary schools, a secondary school, 13 hectares of employment land (no more than 8 hectares by 2031), highways infrastructure and public open space. On 19 October 2015 the Council approved the submission of the Core Strategy Proposed Modifications, together with the representations on them, to the Examination Inspector. These were submitted to the Inspector on 23 October and the Council awaits to be advised of the Inspector’s intentions as to when the examination hearings will reconvene. In order for the Core Strategy to be found sound at examination, the Council must, at time of submission, be able to demonstrate a trajectory providing a five year supply of housing land. The Council considers it can demonstrate in excess of 5 years supply when the proposed allocated sites are included in the supply calculation. This calculation and the housing trajectory are included in the proposed modifications to the explanation to Policy CS.16.
The Development Plan
Housing
The principle of this proposal does not accord with policies in the Development Plan concerning the principle of development. In particular, under saved policy STR.1 in the District Local Plan Review, new open market housing development is restricted to the main town of Stratford upon Avon and the Main Rural Centres only. In addition, saved policy CTY.1 seeks to control development in the open countryside and states that all forms of development in the countryside, other than those in accordance with provisions elsewhere in the Local Plan, will generally be resisted in order to preserve its character and to ensure that resources are protected. Proposals for forms of development and activity in the countryside that are not covered elsewhere in the Plan will have to be fully justified and show that they would not be contrary to the overall strategy of the Plan and that their impact on the character of the area would not be harmful.
As the authority cannot currently demonstrate a five year supply, saved policies STR.1 and CTY.1, which are relevant policies for the supply of housing, cannot be considered up to date.
Employment Local Plan Policy COM.17 encourages the provision of new employment opportunities in rural areas which is broadly consistent with the aims of the NPPF. Whilst the proposals do not generally fall within the categories listed in policy COM.17, they would generate new employment opportunities. Furthermore, the nature of the proposed development is such that the range of employment opportunities available in the area would be widened. These are aims that are carried through in polices within the emerging Core Strategy.
The proposed employment hub has been included in order to create a mixed-use settlement and would provide opportunities for new and existing residents south of Stratford to work close to where they live, encouraging the creation of a sustainable settlement and community and reducing the need for out commuting as well as increasing the proportion of expenditure that is retained locally. The proposed employment space (4000sqm) is proposed to serve a rural business need and is therefore unlikely to have an appreciable impact upon surrounding town centre office space. The total quantum of B1(a)-(c) development proposed necessitates a condition restricting the B1(a) element across the scheme (to a maximum of 2,500 sqm) to ensure the development takes the form established within the application and satisfies the policy within the NPPF (paragraph 26) to ensure that the office accommodation is at a scale that it will not have a detrimental impact on the vitality and viability of Stratford upon Avon or any other nearby centres. The proposed uses on the site would replace existing employment on the site which amounts to 24.5 full time equivalents (FTE). Jobs associated with regular but temporary events would also be displaced, but these are difficult to quantify. Approximately 324 FTE jobs would be created. I consider that although the employment provision would not be in accordance with saved policies of the adopted plan there are other material considerations which have led to the conclusion that employment development at this scale in this location is acceptable in principle. Retail/Community Hub
Paragraph 26 of the NPPF states that when assessing applications for retail, leisure and office development outside of town centres, which are not in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan, local planning authorities should require an impact assessment if the development is over a proportionate, locally set floorspace threshold (if there is no locally set threshold, the default threshold is 2,500 sqm). Saved policy COM.19 of the District Local Plan Review encourages small scale retail schemes which meet the immediate needs of local communities. It sets a Retail Impact Assessment threshold of 1,000 sqm for A1 uses as does draft Core Strategy Policy CS.22 which defines large scale retail development as exceeding 1000 sqm. The District Council has taken the view that the modest size of even the larger settlements in the District justifies a lower threshold of 1000 sqm for requesting a retail impact assessment rather than the default threshold of 2,500 sqm specified in the NPPF. Adopted policy COM.3 states that the provision of new shops and services which meet the needs of local communities will be encouraged. These aims are carried through in polices in the emerging Core Strategy.
The outline planning application includes a 1.15 ha community hub (Class A1- A5/B1(a)/C3/D1/D2). The community hub is expected to meet the day to day needs of the new residents. The applicant has suggested that retail (A1- A5)floorspace is expected to comprise up to 400 sqm gross floorspace including a small convenience store (A1 convenience) and this can be controlled by the imposition of a condition. The extent of B1(a)/D1/D2 uses are as yet undefined but are expected to be provided via a flexible space accommodating a range of functions. Given the undefined nature of the remaining community hub town centre uses, a condition is considered necessary to ensure the development takes the form established within the application and does not result in the provision of one large retail unit for example. In this regard I consider that 1,500 sqm of floorspace is a reasonable limit for the community hub, of which no more than 400 sqm will be retail (Class A1-A5) as agreed with the applicant. I also consider that it is appropriate to restrict the floorspace for Class B1(a) within the community hub to a maximum of 400 sqm with a further 400 sqm in respect of the individual Class D1 and Class D2 unit sizes.
The scale of the proposed retail floorspace is likely to result in a small convenience store which would be directly related to the function of the new residential area. It would not be competing with other centres (Stratford upon Avon, other village centres for example) in the surrounding area as the need would be entirely generated by the new residential population. In my opinion, the proposals would not cause any significant loss of vitality and viability in nearby centres, nor would they adversely impact upon public or private investment in the surrounding network of centres. Given this, and considering the proposals are under the Council defined thresholds, there is no requirement for a full impact assessment to be undertaken.
I consider that the provision of retail and accompanying facilities within the community hub of the development would benefit the new residents by reducing the need to travel, limiting carbon emissions and improving the character and facilities in the area.
Overall, I consider that the retail/community hub would be in accordance with the saved policies of the adopted plan and acceptable in principle. I consider that the proposed amount and nature of the employment floorspace and retail and other commercial uses within the community hub would be appropriate for the scale of the residential development proposed.
The applicant has confirmed that the proposed development will come forward in phases and as such I consider it is appropriate to impose a condition requiring the submission of a phasing strategy for the site to ensure that all the facilities are delivered on site.
Conclusion
Taking into account all the above I consider that the housing and employment elements of the proposal do not accord with policies in the Development Plan concerning the principle of development whilst the retail/community hub elements of the proposal do comply with the requirements of the development plan.
Material considerations
The National Planning Policy Framework
At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. For the decision-taker this means Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay and
Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, planning permission should be granted unless: -Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies of this Framework taken as a whole; or -Specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted.
The NPPF gives three dimensions to sustainable development: social, economic and environmental. These should not be assessed in isolation, because they are mutually dependant.
Assessing the planning balance against these three strands, I consider that the benefits from the scheme would be:
Economic:
Creation of up to short term construction jobs (635 direct jobs and 190 indirect jobs over the 5 year length of the build) 325 FTE direct permanent job opportunities based on the site , a net gain of 271 FTE jobs locally Provision of modest retail and community facilities and a large amount of public open space within the site to serve residents Potential for jobs associated with the creation and operation of use class C2 accommodation The proposed development would bolster the viability of public transport within the local area, which would also include diversion of bus services into the site. This in turn will assist in connecting communities and local economies. Proposal would provide up to £4.0 million of New Homes bonus contributions for the District (over a 6 year period). Up to 400 dwellings would generate significant an annual convenience goods expenditure, comparison goods expenditure and expenditure of leisure goods and services; the majority of which could be spent in the local economy.
Social:
The provision of up to 400 new homes, community hub and employment land to support the creation of strong, vibrant and healthy community. Provision of new homes in a sustainable location to meet the Councils deficiency in its 5 year housing supply, and where such a level of housing land supply is achieved, the benefit of helping to maintain the Councils 5 year housing land supply going forward. Provision of possible C2 accommodation for those with care needs (as part of the 400 total). Provision of 35% Affordable Homes (in respect of the Class C3 element of the proposal) to meeting the Districts shortfall in affordable housing. Creation of a balanced and inclusive community covering age, income, housing composition and tenure through an appropriate mix and type of accommodation coming forward. Provision of financial contributions towards education and enhanced bus service to serve the application site The proposed development incorporates a wide variety of formal and informal open spaces, which are within easy walking distances of the new homes, community hub and employment land encouraging the development of healthy communities. As a result of the critical mass within the site, (of new dwellings, community hub and employment land), this in turn would foster the growth of a strong and sustainable community within the proposed development. Significant green infrastructure that is designed and managed to improve access to - and encourage an appreciation of - the natural environment, thereby improving the interpretative value of the site and local area.
Environmental:
Redevelopment of a significantly brownfield site. Provision of significant areas of green infrastructure including significant open space that would retain, and through better management, enhance habitats of existing value, to ensure an overall net biodiversity gain within the site. Site wide Sustainable Urban Drainage System to ensure the long term management of flood risk within the site. Providing surface water retention and wetland features that offer an opportunity to manage surface water on site and benefits to water quality. Promotion of sustainable modes of travel (in respect of the employment hub) through the implementation of a Framework Travel Plan promotes sustainable travel measures for the employment hub, and the proposal includes financial contributions towards public transport to help reduce car based travel. Other sustainability gains:
Public transport – improved bus services to the site. Improvement to cycle ways through the site including from the Greenway and new pedestrian/cycleway along Campden Road. Off-site highway improvements to provide improvements to the operation of the local highways infrastructure including at Clopton Bridge, Shipston Road/Waitrose roundabouts and Fairfields Nursery.
With regards to the potential harm arising from the development these are considered to be:
Minor harm to the setting of nearby Conservation Area, listed Buildings and Cotswold area of Outstanding natural Beauty Minor harm to the setting of the Grade II Listed Long Marston Grounds and Heritage Assets around the Clopton Bridge (It is acknowledged that these works have already been granted consent in respect of the Meon Vale application ref 14/01186/OUT but are required for this proposal to be acceptable) and Grade II listed building at Fairfields Nursery as a result of off-site highway works; Minor harm to the landscape and localised visual impact in the short term that is inevitable with this scale of development; Limited environmental effects in short term (during construction); Loss of low value agricultural land; Increased traffic generation within the local highways infrastructure; Loss of existing commercial businesses on the site
Other comments:
The proposal would not result in significant harm to the landscape character or wider visual amenity in the long term and would not result in significant environmental impacts on air quality, noise and vibration, risk of contamination, residential amenity, water resources and flood risk that could not be mitigated by the imposition of conditions and legal agreement.
It is also recognised that the final form of the proposals would be agreed in consultation with the local community at the reserved matters stage to ensure the delivery of a high quality form of development that harmonises with the local environment.
The above mentioned harm is limited, for a development of this scale, and can be mitigated. Technical issues from statutory consultees can be dealt with by way of planning conditions as detailed later in the committee report. Where potential deficiencies in services/facilities have been identified, financial contributions have been sought to remedy these as detailed later in the committee report. The development would not place unacceptable pressure on the local infrastructure subject to appropriate mitigation measures being implemented.
In my opinion, the benefits of the scheme would outweigh the identified harm, and therefore, I have concluded that the proposal is sustainable development and should be approved in accordance with paragraph 14 of the NPPF. In coming to this conclusion, I give significant weight to the presumption in favour of sustainable development and the fact that the NPPF indicates that, in the absence of a 5 year housing land supply in an up-to-date, adopted development plan, planning permission should be granted for the proposal. Emerging Core Strategy
Emerging policies in the draft Core Strategy follow the approach in paragraph 55 of the NPPF. The methodology used for identifying Long Marston Airfield (as defined in the Core Strategy) as a mixed use development is the most up to date evidence base for identifying sustainable locations for development in the District and is afforded some weight in decision making.
The wider Long Marston Airfield allocation has been included in the Core Strategy Proposed Modifications in Response to the Inspectors Interim Conclusions. This seeks to provide approximately 3,500 dwellings (2,100 by 2031); A main service village; Two Primary Schools; Secondary School; Green Infrastructure; Employment; Transport Infrastructure; Walking and Cycling networs; Enhanced Public Transport and possible provision of a Railway Station. The proposed 400 dwellings would form part of the overall total of 3,500 and would not be in addition to this overall total.
A number of representations have been received in respect of the proposed allocation and as such this proposed modification can only carry limited weight at present in the decision making process.
The proposal is consistent with the approach to the creation of a new settlement at Long Marston Airfield as set out in Proposal LMA in the proposed modifications to the Core Strategy although I acknowledge that this is a self-contained application to be determined on its own merits.
Prematurity
Advice on the issue of prematurity is provided in the national Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) states that in the context of the Framework and in particular the presumption in favour of sustainable development that:
“arguments that an application is premature are unlikely to justify a refusal of planning permission other than where it is clear that the adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, taking the policies in the Framework and any other material considerations into account. Such circumstances are likely, but not exclusively, to be limited to situations where both: a) the development proposed is so substantial, or its cumulative effect would be so significant, that to grant permission would undermine the plan-making process by predetermining decisions about the scale, location or phasing of new development that are central to an emerging Local Plan (http://planningguidance. planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/local- plans/) or Neighbourhood Planning (http:// planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/ guidance/neighbourhood- planning/); and b) the emerging plan is at an advanced stage but is not yet formally part of the development plan for the area.
Refusal of planning permission on grounds of prematurity will seldom be justified where a draft Local Plan has yet to be submitted for examination, or in the case of a Neighbourhood Plan, before the end of the local planning authority publicity period. Where planning permission is refused on grounds of prematurity, the local planning authority will need to indicate clearly how the grant of permission for the development concerned would prejudice the outcome of the plan-making process.”
In the case of the current application whilst the scheme could form part of larger allocation it is presented as a stand-alone proposal. Given the scale of the housing and employment land being promoted through the Plan process, I am of the view that the granting of this consent will not undermine the plan-making process when taken as a whole. The proposed development is a small part of the plan’s overall provision and the granting of this proposal will not predetermine issues still to be debated at the Examination in Public concerning the distribution strategy for the development requirement of the Plan as a whole.
Conclusion on Principle of Development
Whilst the principle of residential development does not accord with the Development Plan, there are material considerations that must be considered when reaching a decision on the principle of development:
In the absence of a 5 year housing land supply, the Local Plan policies relating to the supply of housing are out-of-date the application site is allocated for a mixed use development in the Draft Core Strategy the proposed development utilises brownfield land The proposal would constitute sustainable development when assessed against the three strands of sustainability as identified in the NPPF: - Economic, Social and Environmental having regard to paragraph 55 of the NPPF, I consider this to be a sustainable location for new residential development the proposed dwellings would form a mixed use development that would provide a range of accessible services, facilities and employment opportunities that are convenient and accessible to the community itself and to the local area whilst the scheme could form part of a wider allocation, it has been designed with the ability to operate as a standalone development and is considered a sustainable development in its own right.
Taking all these factors into account, I consider that the principle of development at Long Marston Airfield is acceptable. Landscape and visual impact including Impact on the AONB
Paragraph of the NPPF 115 indicates great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. Saved Policy EF.1 indicates proposals that harm the AONB should not be permitted and cumulative impact particularly in respect of the rurality and tranquillity of the area should be taken into account. The NPPF requires as part of its core principles (paragraph 17 (5)), that, amongst other things, planning should take account of the different roles and character of different areas and recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. Policy C.5 of the emerging Core Strategy requires development to minimise and mitigate impacts on the landscape character and quality, including cumulative impacts. Saved policy PR.1 of the Local Plan Review is consistent with this as it states that proposals should respect, and where possible, enhance the quality and character of the area. Paragraph 109 of the NPPF also states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes.
The application site is not included within the Landscape Sensitivity Study for Stratford-upon-Avon (2011-2012). The site landscape character is within National Character Area 106 ‘Severn and Avon Vales’. At County level the Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines places the application site within the ‘Avon Valley’ Character Area which is further sub-divided into four landscape types within which the application site falls within the ‘Vale Farmlands’ landscape type. The Stratford on Avon District Design Guide Character Areas identifies the site as part of the Avon and Stour Valleys and within the sub- area of ‘Upper Avon’.
The District Council has employed an external landscape consultant in order to help assess the impact of the proposal on the landscape character and visual amenity of the area. The applicant has submitted a Landscape and Visual Impact Appraisal as part of the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment which considers the visibility of the proposed development within the landscape. Following an initial overview of the submitted LVIA the District Council’s landscape consultant come back with a number of concerns mainly relating to the provision of a landscape buffer to the northern boundary, improvements to Green Infrastructure site-wide and removal of development from the southern field and achieving a more organic less structured feel to the overall layout. The applicant has sought to address by amending the illustrative masterplan and associated parameter plans submitted during the course of the planning application.
I acknowledge that representations have been received on the grounds that proposal will have a detrimental impact on the character and visual amenity of the area together with the setting of the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and these have been given careful consideration in the assessment of this planning application.
Given the size of the proposed development it is inevitable that the proposed development will have an impact on the landscape character and visual amenity of the area. However, I have carefully considered the proposal and I do not consider that these impacts will be significant and that they will be able to ultimately be mitigated. The removal from the site of the existing structures and areas of hard standing and their replacement with a mixed use development with associated green infrastructure is judged to be beneficial overall. Existing landscape features such as hedgerows, trees and an existing tree copse will be retained and their setting reinforced and enhanced through the implementation of an extensive framework of Green Infrastructure which will include new structural landscaping. This will provide the proposed development with a defined green border that wraps around the edges of the new of the new built development and connects to a strong central green corridor through a series of interconnected open spaces and smaller green links. Although landscaping would be covered at reserved matters stage I do consider it necessary to impose some landscaping conditions to ensure that an appropriate landscaping scheme is achieved.
The character and setting of Lower Quinton will be protected by new structure planting and open space along the southern and eastern boundary that will provide an effective boundary between the village, development at Meon Vale and the development site. Layout also retains and creates views towards St. Swithins Church and Meon Hill further south.
In terms of visual impact I consider that the proposed development has a relatively limited Zone of Visual Impact owing the interaction of the generally flat topography, existing vegetation and built development resulting in limited visual effects overall.
The applicant has concluded in the LVIA that during the construction phase the landscape effects will be restricted to the site area only and visual effects will essentially be limited to the localised areas adjacent to the development site which I agree with. Once completed the applicant considers that the proposal will result overall in a major to moderate beneficial landscape effect upon the character of the site together with its immediate context in the long term which I agree with. In light of this I do not consider that the proposed development will have a detrimental impact on the landscape character of the area subject to the imposition of a condition that any reserved matters application shall be submitted with masterplan to ensure that the development is properly assimilated into the landscape.
In respect of the development when complete the applicant has concluded that the visual effects upon residential settlements and individual properties are considered to range from minor adverse to minor beneficial whilst effects upon users of local roads are assessed as negligible to minor beneficial and long term effects upon public rights of way are judged to range from minor adverse to minor beneficial. I agree with these conclusions and as such do not consider that the proposal will have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area or the character of the surrounding landscape.
I have also given careful consideration to the proposed off site highway works, including the proposed pedestrian/cycleway along the Campden Road, and do not consider that this will have a detrimental impact on either the character or visual amenity of the area.
I have given careful consideration to the setting of the Cotswolds AONB which is located approximately 2km south of the application site and conclude that there will be no impact on the character of the AONB with a negligible effect overall upon the visual amenity of the AONB. The Cotswold Conservation Board have concluded that given the scale of the development, the distance from the AONB boundary and the context when seen together with nearby Upper and Lower Quniton in the foreground that the impacts on the character and qualities of the AONB are not so negative that a refusal is recommended.
The identified harm to the character and appearance of the landscape (including the setting of the AONB) and to the setting of the locality needs to be weighed in the balance when considering all of the beneficial and negative aspects of the development proposals. It is however for the Committee, as decision-taker, to weigh all of the material considerations and draw its own conclusions regarding the degree of harm to the character of the landscape and the visual amenity of the area in this case.
Highways Matters
Paragraph 32 of the NPPF states, amongst others, that decisions should take account of whether opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up; safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people and whether improvements can be undertaken effectively limiting the impacts of the development. Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.
Paragraph 34 of the NPPF also states that developments that generate significant movements are located where the need to travel will be minimised, albeit, this needs to take into account policies throughout the framework relating to rural areas. Saved policies DEV.4, COM.7 and COM.9 of the Local Plan Review remain generally consistent with this approach. Policy CS.25 of the emerging Core Strategy requires development to mitigate any unacceptable transport impacts which arise directly from that development by, amongst other things, ensuring that the scale of traffic generated by the proposal is appropriate for the function and standard of the roads serving the area; implementing necessary works to the highway; providing new and improved pedestrian and cycle routes.
I acknowledge that representations have been received on the grounds that the proposal will have a detrimental impact on highways and these have been assessed carefully in the consideration of the application.
Access
Details of the proposed access have been reserved for future development as part of the reserved matters application. However, the applicant has confirmed that the proposal will involve minimal modifications to the local highway network in order to provide access to the residential site with a new secondary access to provide an emergency access to the site. Illustrative drawings of how these accesses could work have been provided as part of the application and this arrangement is considered acceptable.
In order to ensure that an adequate access to the site is provided conditions are proposed to ensure that acceptable access arrangements are provided prior to any dwellings being occupied (with an emergency access being provided before 100 dwellings are occupied). The Highways Authority has stated that the current access can be used during the construction period. I therefore consider the proposed access arrangements to the site would not result in any unacceptable highways issues. There are however wider traffic related issues arising from the impacts of traffic generated by the development which are discussed further below.
Traffic generation and distribution
The Transport Assessment submitted in respect of the application shows that the residential and employment hub elements of the application could generate the following number of vehicular trips:
214 two way (arrive/depart) trips AM Pre-Peak (0700-0800) 326 two-way (arrive/depart) trips AM Peak (0800-0900) 234 two-way (arrive/depart) trips PM Pre-Peak (1600-1700) 297 two –way (arrive/depart) trips PM Peak (1700 -1800) In order to assess the impact of the proposed development the applicant has undertaken extensive modelling of the highway network. The application was submitted with an Environmental Statement that incorporated a Transport Assessment (TA) and Travel Plan (TP). These were prepared using the WCC strategic traffic model (S-PARAMICS) that covers Stratford-on-Avon and the immediate area. Post-submission, at the request of WCC, further modelling of the Clopton Bridge and was undertaken using their recently developed Cordon Model. Subsequent to this an additional run of the strategic traffic model was undertaken to consider an adjusted baseline factoring in a recent planning consent awarded at Meon Vale (14/01186/OUT).
The modelling included a number of committed developments such as the Meon Vale application (550 dwellings) together with the Arden Heath application currently at appeal and essentially looked at three different scenarios 1. Committed development 2. Committed development and the current application 3. Committed development, current planning application and the Arden Heath development currently at appeal. These are considered to provide a robust analysis.
In terms of assessing the impact of the development on the operational efficiency of the highway network the applicant has assessed both the routing of traffic and a number of key junctions.
The S-PARAMICS model includes a number of journey paths that are used to measure the timing of vehicle journeys throughout sections of the highway network. Based on the development proposals there will be an increase of vehicle movements on the highway network. In terms of the operation the impact is minimal as mean delay across the highway network will increase by 2.4% (4 seconds) during the AM Peak (08.00 – 09.00) and by 4.4% (20 seconds) during the PM Peak (17.00 – 18.00).This will lead to minimal decrease in vehicle speeds across the network. Based on the outputs of the model this has been identified as a reduction by 1Kph during the AM Peak and 2Kph in the PM Peak.
As well as assessing the overall network analysis the Highway Authority has also assessed a number of routes based on journey times. The key routes that are considered will be impacted by traffic associated with the proposed development are: Banbury Road, Banbury Road, Shipston Road, Severn Meadow Road /Trinity Way and Campden Road/Clifford Lane. These have been analysed and the Highway Authority have concluded that the development proposals will lead to an increase in average delay on these routes. However, the majority of these delays are not considered to be severe except for the delays recorded on the Shipston Road and Severn Meadows Way/Trinity Way routes.
In order to understand the origins of these delays the Highway Authority has considered the key junctions that link these routes. In respect of junction analysis the following local offsite junctions have been analysed as part of the planning application in order to provide a consistent basis for analysis between other similar recent planning applications : Shipston Road/Clifford Lane/Waitrose Roundabout, Shipston Road/Trinity Way/A3400/Severn Meadows roundabout and Banbury Road/Clopton Bridge.
In respect of Banbury Road/Clopton Bridge/Shipston Road/Tiddington Road the assessment has been based on the mitigation scheme that was approved as part of the Meon Vale planning application which would see the signalisation of the crossroads between Clopton Bridge/Tiddington Road/Banbury Road and Swans Nest. The Highway Authority have concluded that the impact of the development at this junction will not be severe nor have a detrimental impact on this junction. Subject to the imposition of a condition requiring these junction works to be undertaken prior to the occupation of 100 consider that this is acceptable.
Funding is secured towards these works as part of the Meon Vale application and is included in the Arden Heath S106 submitted in respect of the recent appeal for 270 dwellings on the site (decision yet to be issued). However, the applicant has confirmed that if they come forward first that they are committed to the full costs for delivery of the mitigated scheme. The applicant has stated that it would welcome any proposal to share the costs of undertaking this work with other developers.
In respect of the Shipston Road/Trinity Way/A3400/Seven Meadows Way the Highway Authority has concluded that this junction requires mitigation to resolve additional queuing and associated delays. In respect of the Shipston Road/Clifford Lane/Waitrose Roundabout this has been assessed utilising the approved mitigation scheme identified within the Meon Vale Planning application which proposes the replacement of the roundabout junction with a four armed signalised junction.
In order to resolve the issues at the Shipston Road/Trinity Way/A3400/Seven Meadows Way roundabout it became apparent that this junction closely interacts with the Shipston Road/Clifford Lane/Waitrose roundabout Junction due to their close proximity to one another. A mitigation scheme has been identified that keeps both junctions as roundabouts (i.e. the previously approved signalisation would not take place) which increases the operational capacity and the A4300 between the two junctions will be dualled with increased lane approaches to the junctions. This is different to the scheme approved as part of the Meon Vale application. Subject to the imposition of a condition requiring these junction works to be undertaken prior to the occupation of 100 dwellings which is based on the findings of the highways modelling that has been undertaken in respect of the proposed development. I consider that this is acceptable.
WCC highways Authority has raised no objection in respect of the modelling undertaken or the plans submitted in respect of these proposed highway works to accommodate the traffic generated from this development and that approved at Meon Vale. As already stated these works will supersede those approved in respect of the Meon Vale application and will negate the need for these works to be undertaken. The applicant’s highway analysis has demonstrated why the traffic signals are not deemed necessary which relates to their negative interaction with the Trinity Way/Shipston Road. The signalisation of the junction is controlled by condition 27 of the the Meon Vale application (14/01186/OUT) which requires that prior to the occupation of the 650th dwelling that the signalisation works are undertaken with works to the Trinity Road roundabout with the same trigger points controlled by condition 28. However, wording is also contained within both conditions that allows works to be undertaken in accordance with an alternative scheme which has been submitted and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority. This would enable the scheme put forward by the applicant to come forward and effectively supersede the signalisation and existing approved works to the Trinity Road roundabout.
The applicant has confirmed that if they come forward first that they are committed to the full costs for delivery of the mitigated scheme. The applicant has stated that it would welcome any proposal to share the costs of undertaking this work with other developers.
The Stratford Transport Package (STP) comprises a series of mitigation measures identified by WCC at a number of key junctions within Stratford on Avon that are to be improved via pooled funding. The three junctions identified for capacity improvements as part of the application (Clopton Bridge, Trinity Way roundabout and Waitrose roundabout) are STP locations and the works that are proposed to these junctions can be upgraded to the full STP works when required. The applicant has confirmed that they are committed to paying their fair and proportionate share towards mitigating their own development impacts. However, should WCC Highways be minded to pool contributions between developers in order to deliver larger schemes in line with the emerging STP that is considered acceptable subject to trigger points and the proposals not having an adverse impact on the delivery trajectory of Long Marston Airfield (or others).
Accident data and Highway Safety
In addition to the above analysis and as a result of safety concerns regarding the B4632 Campden Road corridor the Highway Authority has undertaken further analysis of the accident data submitted which has resulted in a request for the following junctions to be reviewed due to concerns about highway safety:
-Access to Freshfields Nursery -Access to Stratford Nursery
In respect of Freshfields Nursery and Stratford Garden Centre the applicant has submitted plans to resolve safety concerns that would involve the installation of ghost island right hand turns. The Highway Authority Road Safety Team have stated that the principal of the schemes are acceptable subject to the imposition of conditions requiring the submission of further drawings to be accompanied by a Road Safety Audit and that the approved works are undertaken before the occupation of the first dwelling in respect of the Freshfields Nursery access and prior to the occupation of 100 dwellings in respect of the Stratford Garden Centre.
The comments that have been received by third parties/consultees (including Parish Councils) in respect of possible additional junction works along the Campden Road/Clifford Lane have been assessed by the Highways Authority in reaching the above conclusion in respect of junction works that need to be undertaken.
I therefore consider that subject to the imposition of the above conditions that the proposal will be acceptable in terms of highway safety.
Operation of the A46 Junctions
Highway England have carefully assessed the impact of the proposed development on the A46 and have confirmed that they have no objection in respect of the development.
I acknowledge that a number of highway improvements have been raised by third parties, Parish Council’s and neighbouring authorities. These have been carefully assessed by the Highway Authority and applicant through the highways modelling. I conclude that subject to appropriate off-site highway works being secured and implemented that the proposed development would not have a severe impact on the flow of traffic or congestion in the vicinity of the site or within the wider highway network. Furthermore, the proposal would not have a materially adverse impact on highway safety within the locality. I acknowledge that reference has been made to the provision of the southern relief road. However, the analysis of the highways data in respect of this application indicates that the southern relief road does not have to be provided as part of this application. Accessibility
The application site lies approximately 5 miles to the south of the Stratford on Avon. The site is bounded to the east by the B4632 and is in close proximity to the villages of Long Marston, Lower and Upper Quinton, Mickleton, Pebworth, Clifford Chambers, Welford on Avon, Luddington and Weston on Avon, amongst others.
Local Facilities
As part of the Meon Vale application (approximately 1 mile to the south of the application site – approximate distance between accesses) facilities have been provided within the site including new leisure centre, new community centre, new retail store, sports pavilion, sports pitches and play facilities which would help reduce the need to travel to access such facilities.
Quinton Primary School is located approximately 2miles to the south west of the site and two further primary schools are located at Mickleton and Welford. In addition the Meon Vale proposal includes a new one-form primary school.
Secondary schools are located within Stratford on Avon, food shopping is available at the Waitrose Store at the Rosebird Centre on the southern edge of Stratford on Avon, having a full range of facilities that are directly accessible by the greenway and public transport to encourage more sustainable modes of transport. However, it is recognised a large proportion of such trips are likely to be car borne where destinations are not served by the bus service connected to the site.
Within the site, there will be a community hub together with a 4000m² employment hub which further help reduce the need to travel.
In order to reduce the amount of vehicle movements a condition is proposed to be imposed the aim of which is to reduce single occupancy private car trips to/from the site in favour of more sustainable modes of transport in relation to the employment element of the proposal.
Public Transport
Campden Road is currently well served by buses, the majority of which route along between Meon Vale and Stratford on Avon. The site currently does not benefit from dedicated bus stops even though the B4632 Campden Road Corridor benefits from a frequent bus service. The corridor is served by the 21, 22, 23 and 24 bus services which are operated by Johnsons Coaches. However the nearest bus stops are located on Main Street, Lower Quinton.
The Highway Authority has undertaken proactive discussions with the Public Transport Operations Team at Warwickshire County Council, Johnsons and the applicant to ensure a suitable bus service can be provided.
These discussions have concluded that subject to suitable financial obligations and conditions being implemented, that existing bus services would be diverted into the development site. The proposal seeks to secure a contribution of £295,848.80 via a legal agreement towards bus service improvement for Friday evening and a Sunday service operating on an hourly basis for a period of 5 years. This figure appears to be based on a half hourly service for a Friday. This figure may reduce should a hourly service be required. This will be confirmed in the update sheet for committee. A condition is also proposed to ensure that the bus infrastructure (such a bus stops) are appropriate and will be installed on site.
The improvements to the bus service would encourage more sustainable modes of transport and improve access to facilities, not only for future occupiers of the site but also for existing communities nearby. Furthermore, it would improve the long term deliverability of the service.
Pedestrian and Cycling Infrastructure
There are a number of cycle routes in the vicinity of the site including, amongst others, National Cycle Network (NCN) Route 5 which runs on Station Road, providing access to local villages, Stratford on Avon, and Banbury to the south- west. In addition to this the section between Stratford on Avon and Long Marston, known as the Greenway, is suitable for both cyclists and pedestrians and the proposed development links through to this. Therefore, there is significant potential for cycling to offer an attractive alternative to car travel from the site for journeys to work and other every day destinations. However, the Greenway was developed primarily as a recreational cycling route and the surfacing is currently unbound limestone dust.
This surfacing is unsuitable for road bikes / commuter bikes and as such it will be necessary to provide a bound, all-weather surface on The Greenway in order for the Long Marston site to offer the choice of sustainable transport options required by the NPPF. The County Council cycling officer has requested a financial obligation of £244,000 in order to provide a sealed surface along the 6km length of The Greenway between the site and Stratford-upon-Avon which will be secured by legal agreement.
In terms of walking the The Heart of England way is also located nearby and provides pedestrian access to local villages. The developer would contribute approximately £32,000 towards the improvement of nearby public rights of way (see public rights of way section of the committee report) to be secured by a legal agreement.
However there at present there is no footway provision on the B4632 Campden Road within the vicinity of the development. In order to promote access for all and enable modal choice the Highway Authority have requested footway improvements along the Campden Road.
A scheme has been put forward that seeks to provide a footway/cycleway along Campden Road that joins into the existing NCN route. The Highway Authority Road Safety Team have reviewed the plans and concluded the principal of the scheme is acceptable subject to the imposition of conditions requiring the submission of further drawings to be accompanied by a Road Safety Audit and that the approved works are undertaken before the occupation of the first dwelling. In light of this I consider that the proposal would encourage sustainable modes of transport and improve the local pedestrian and cycle network.
Whilst the proposal is in outline form, the final design and layout can ensure high levels of pedestrian and cycle permeability, and taking into existing infrastructure within the site would enable journeys to leisure, employment and retail facilities within the site on foot and further afield by cycling. The provision of secure cycle storage facilities as part of the development would further promote such sustainable modes of transport.
Train Stations
The nearest railway stations are Honeybourne; which provides links to London, Oxford, Reading, Hereford and Worcester; and Stratford upon Avon, which provides frequent connections to several key destinations including Birmingham and London. Honeybourne is approximately 10kms away and Stratford upon Avon is approximately 12km away, however, public transport is available within the locality to enable access to these transport nodes. Furthermore, the Greenway provides a cycle link into Stratford on Avon with secure cycle storage available at the train station.
Conclusion on Highway Matters
For the above reasons, I therefore conclude that the site is sustainable in terms of its location when considered holistically. In addition, the measures set out within the Framework Travel Plan and s.106 legal agreement relating to increased public transport services to the site, would help encourage more sustainable modes of transport.
In respect of traffic and transport matters, taking into account the potential environmental impacts effects that could arise from the change in traffic during the construction and occupation phase of the development as well as cumulative impacts, I consider that the proposed development would not result in any significant adverse environmental effects. Furthermore, based on the recent traffic modelling undertaken (which includes an analysis of the proposed mitigation schemes put forward as part of the Meon Vale application) and the proposed highways mitigation measures, I consider that the proposal would not have a severe impact on the capacity of the local highways infrastructure or on highway safety (taking account of other users of the road network such as equestrians users for example).
The proposal would therefore accord with the principles, and paragraphs 32 and 34, of the NPPF and saved policies COM.7, COM.9 and DEV.4 of the Local Plan Review, which remain generally consistent with the NPPF and Policy CS.25 of the emerging Core Strategy.
Impact on Heritage Assets
Listed Buildings and Archaeology
Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that in considering whether to grant planning permission for development that affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. In addition Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that special attention should be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area.
The Barnwell case considered by the Court of Appeal determined that when considering the impact on heritage assets with other material considerations in the overall planning balance, interpreting S66(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 the decision maker should accord ‘special weight’ or ‘considerable importance and weight’ to the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings, and to preserving the character and appearance of Conservation Areas.
Paragraphs 128 to 139 of the NPPF seek to protect heritage assets, including sites of archaeological importance. However, paragraphs 133 and 134 state that harm to heritage assets may be acceptable if outweighed by public benefits. Saved policies EF.11, EF.13 and EF.14 of the Local Plan Review are less flexible and more restrictive in their approach than the NPPF, as the key requirement is the protection of heritage assets. They are therefore not considered consistent with the NPPF, and consequently afforded limited weight. Policy CS.8 of the emerging Core Strategy does however allow for harm to a heritage asset to weighed against the public benefit.
I acknowledge that representations have been received on the grounds that the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on heritage assets and these have been given careful consideration in the assessment of this planning application.
Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas
The District Council’s Heritage consultant has carefully considered the application. No designated heritage assets are directly affected by the proposal.
The heritage asset with the most obvious potential for visual impact on its setting is the Hill Fort on Meon Hill. This has been given careful consideration and I agree with the conclusions of the Heritage Consultant who considers that appreciation of the asset when looking towards it from the proposed site will be little affected, and that when looking back towards the proposed site from the hill there will be a small degree of change but in the context of already existing scattered development across a wide tract of land visible from the hill the degree of change there would be negligible impact i.e. at the very lower end of less than substantial. I acknowledge the requirements of Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. However, I consider that the negligible impact of the proposal on these identified heritage assets are outweighed by the benefits of the proposal. .
In respect of the impact on other Heritage Assets I do not consider that there would be any meaningful degree of harm for any of the many assets (including Alscot Park Grade II Registered Park) within a few kilometres of the site either because of distance from the application site or because of screening or profiles of the landscape which negate any potential visual impact on setting. In reaching this conclusion I have considered all those heritage assets listed in the applicant’s heritage report as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment, as well as those heritage assets in Lower Quinton including St. Swithins church and those in Long Marston.
In addition to this I have also given careful consideration to the impact of the proposed road works that will be required at the Clopton Bridge as a result of the proposed development. The proposal does not require the implementation of any additional works above those secured in respect of the application for 550 houses at Meon Vale (application reference 14/01186/OUT) and in light of this I consider that the proposal is acceptable. In addition I have given careful consideration to the proposed junction improvements at Fairfields Nursery and consider there would be negligible impact i.e. at the very lower end of less than substantial on the setting of Grade II Clifford Forge House. I acknowledge the requirements of Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. However, I consider that the negligible impact of the proposal on this heritage asset is outweighed by the benefits of the proposal.
English Heritage have raised no objection to the proposal. However, I acknowledge that they have raised some concern about the methodology employed by the applicant to assess the proposal. The Council’s Heritage consultant has stated that whilst he is in agreement with the criticisms the rationale and selection of heritage assets for consideration is very much in line with the approach undertaken by the consultant and as such it is considered that the assessment undertaken by the applicant is sufficiently robust so that further work does not have to be undertaken in this respect.
In respect of non-designated assets to the extent that The Greenway has some non-designated heritage value as the line of a former railway line, there would be some limited harm in terms of the experience of those using this footpath/cycleway, but again even this is largely mitigated by existing screening. With regard to the airfield itself, it has a degree of historic interest and part of this would be lost as a result of the development, but the level of interest is limited and the loss is not greatly significant in my opinion.
Archaeology
The supporting assessments and archaeological records for the site indicate that there is a potential for the proposed groundworks to disturb archaeological deposits pre-dating the medieval and later agricultural use of this area.
Given the past disturbance across this site, and that this in an outline application with some flexibility in respect of the final layout WCC Archaeology have raised no objection subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of a programme of archaeological work. This should include an initial phase of archaeological evaluation by trial trenching, and the recording of the historic structures (including air raid shelters) which survive across the site.
Conclusion on Heritage matters
In light of the above I conclude that the proposed development would have a negligible impact i.e. at the very lower end of less than substantial on some heritage assets as detailed above. In assessing these impacts I acknowledge the requirements of Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. However, I consider that the negligible impact of the proposal on these heritage assets is outweighed by the benefits of the proposal. In light of this I consider that the proposed development is in accordance with saved adopted policies EF. 11, EF.13, EF.14, emerging Core Strategy policy CS.8 and paragraphs 128-137 of the NPPF. I therefore consider, in terms of heritage impact, the application site is suitable in principle for the proposed commercial and residential development.
Ecology and Nature Conservation
A core planning principle of the NPPF (para 17, bullet point 7) is that the planning system should contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment. The NPPF states, inter alia, that minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contribute to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity (para 109 bullet point 3). The NPPF also states that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity. Chapter 11 of the NPPF sets out a number planning principles including, amongst others, that planning policies should minimise any adverse effects on wildlife and opportunities for improving bio-diversity within developments should be maximised.
Local plan policies EF.6 and EF.7. These policies generally accord with the principles of the NPPF in so far as they relate to the retention, protection, management and, where appropriate, creation of wildlife habitats, albeit, the NPPF is less restrictive. Policy CS.6 of the Emerging Draft Core Strategy states that development will be expected to contribute towards a resilient ecological network throughout the District.
I acknowledge that representations have been received on the grounds that the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on ecological assets and these have been given careful consideration during the assessment of this application.
The majority of the site is covered by the Long Marston Airfield designation as a Potential Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (pSINC). This proposed designation is primarily for grassland habitats and as an historic British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) site for golden plover and lapwing. The applicant has stated that a detailed assessment of the site confirmed that the site is unlikely to meet the criteria to be selected as a Local Wildlife Site on the grounds of botanical interest or breeding/overwintering bird species but small areas of habitat to the south do support noticeable assemblages of invertebrate. These invertebrate habitats are retained, enhanced and managed in the long term as part of the development and will be included within the revised Potential Local Wildlife Site (pLWS) boundary. However, the remainder of the application site is now outside the revised pLWS boundary. The imposition of a condition will ensure that these important areas are not impacted on during the construction phase and ensure that a biodiversity gain is ultimately achieved.
WCC Ecology has confirmed that the development will impact on poor semi- improved grassland and low value ecological habitats. However, there are a significant number of bat species using or crossing the site; great crested newts have been identified in a number of ponds and where one pond was not surveyed a precautionary approach has been taken; there are breeding birds onsite that are locally and nationally important and badger setts have been found on the perimeter of the site. Therefore, there are protected species issues that need to be resolved and there must be clear commitment to deliver a net biodiversity gain should the site progress. In assessing the proposals the proposed off-site highway improvements have also been taken into consideration.
WCC Ecology has confirmed that the proposed methodology to resolve the protected species are satisfactory subject to the imposition of a condition regarding the submission of a Protected Species Contingency Plan. A condition requiring details of a Environment Protection Plan for Construction has also been suggested.
In respect of an increase in biodiversity on the site the applicant submitted an amended biodiversity calculation that shows that there is an increase in biodiversity on the site as a result of the proposed development. The NPPF differs to that of the local plan policies in that it allows for biodiversity offsetting. WCC Ecology acknowledge that, although there are errors in how the Biodiversity Impact Assessment has been used, there is security in the knowledge of wider ownership boundaries that a biodiversity gain can be achieved. However, WCC have requested the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of a scheme to show that there is no net biodiversity loss on the site which would be based on the scheme finalised at reserved matters stage. A condition is also proposed that requires details of any lighting to be submitted in order that the possible impact on bats can be properly assessed.
The Warwickshire Wildlife Trust has not raised any objection in respect of the imposition of these conditions. I have also taken into account the response of Natural England and their associated standing advice.
It is the duty of the Authority to have regard to conserving biodiversity, including in relation to living organisms or types of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006. I am satisfied that appropriate regard has been given to the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.
I therefore conclude that the proposal is acceptable in terms of its ecological impact, taking in account any cumulative effects, in accordance with the saved policies EF.6 and EF.7 of the Stratford on Avon District Local Plan Review 1996- 2011 and principles of the NPPF and emerging Draft Core Stretegy CS.6 subject to the imposition of conditions.
Water Resources and Flood Risk
Paragraphs 100 to 104 of the NPPF seek to ensure that development considers impact of flood risk. Saved policies PR.7 and DEV.7 remain generally consistent with the NPPF. Policy CS.4 of the emerging Core Strategy seeks to maintain the floodplain; manage the risk of flooding in a catchment area and achieve good status for water bodies by, amongst others, locating development in Flood Zone 1, securing SUDs solutions to surface water drainage, managing run off from sites and ensuring that foul drainage flows are kept separate to surface water drainage.
An assessment has been undertaken of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment with respect to water resources and flood risk including a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA).
I acknowledge that a number of representations have been received on the grounds that the proposal will exacerbate flooding and have a detrimental impact on foul drainage and these have been given careful consideration in the assessment of this planning application.
Surface water drainage
The development site is predominantly beyond the floodplain ie in Flood Zone 1. The proposed link to the Stratford Greenway passes into flood Zone 2 and 3 although it is not anticipated that any built development other than a non- vehicluar (pedestrian and cycleway) link is intended in this area.
Infiltration systems for the disposal of surface water is unlikely to be feasible given the ground conditions and as such the surface water is proposed to discharge into Gran Brook along the western boundary as is currently undertaken. However, the proposed water discharge rates will be limited to the Greenfield run off rate which will provide a betterment to the existing peak brownfield run off rates reducing flood risk downstream of the site.
Where possible SUD’s features such as ponds and swales will be used to convey and store surface water flows which will provide both amenity and water quality benefits prior to the discharge to the watercourse. The Environment Agency and the Lead Local Flood Authority have raised no objection to this subject to the imposition of conditions.
Foul Water Drainage
At present there is insufficient capacity within the existing Long Marston Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW) to accommodate permanent foul flows from the development site. This is located immediately beyond the airfield grounds to the southwest corner of the site. This treatment works serves the village of Long Marston to the west and the villages on Lower and Upper Quinton to the south and discharges to the adjacent Gran Brook.
The applicant has stated that Severn Trent have confirmed that that with current consented and pending developments in the catchment area no capacity is available to accept foul flows from the development site until the end of 2017 when either upgrades to Long Marston WWTW or a pump away solution to Stratford Milcote WWTW is in place and operational.
The applicant has confirmed that any foul flows in the interim from the initial built development would be temporarily treated onsite prior to discharge to the minor ordinary watercourse to the south of the site which will be de-culverted and reinstated back to an open channel, all subject to Environment Agency approval.
Severn Trent, The Environment Agency and Lead Local Flood Authority have raised no objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of conditions
The Environmental Statement submitted with the application concludes that provided the recommended mitigation measures are adopted during construction that and after completion that the development should have no significant adverse impact on the water environment.
I consider the site has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development whist ensuring adequate means of drainage and no significant adverse impacts occurring to the risk of flooding within or off-site as a result of the proposal in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 93-108 of the NPPF and saved policies PR.7 and DEV.7 of the Local Plan Review, which remain broadly consistent with the NPPF Policy CS.4 of the emerging Core Strategy.
Environmental Health impacts in particular Air quality, Noise, Vibration and Ground Conditions/Contamination
A number of representations have been received on the grounds of possible impact on residential amenity and these have been assessed carefully in the consideration of this application.
Air Quality
The NPPF at paragraph 109 states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by, amongst other things, preventing new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution. Paragraph 124 requires planning policies to sustain compliance with EU limits or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas, with decisions being consistent with local air quality action plans. Saved Local Plan Review Policy PR.8 is generally consistent with the Framework and seeks to prevent harm being caused to health or the natural environment from pollutative impacts. Emerging Core strategy Policy AS.1 seeks to apply measures relating to the Air Quality Management Area designated for Stratford Upon Avon.
The application is supported by an assessment that ascertains the significant effects of the proposed development on the environment in relation to local and surrounding air quality.
The assessment has considered the significance of effects resulting from the generation of dust during the construction phase and air quality effects in a range of strategic locations as a result of increases in vehicular traffic following completion of the proposed development.
The assessment recognises that the construction works would have the potential to create dust. However, subject to appropriate mitigation measures (secured by imposition of a Construction Environmental Management Plan [CEMP]condition), dust emissions can be minimised, to the extent any residual effects would be minimal.
Air quality impacts resulting from increases in vehicular traffic following completion of the proposed scheme has been demonstrated to have a negligible impact on air quality associated with sensitive air quality receptors at each of the strategic locations (such as the area around the Banbury Road, Tiddington Road and Clopton Bridge bottleneck). The annual mean concentration of Nitrogen Dioxide and Particulate Matter will remain well within the limits for these. The applicant has stated that as the assessment is based on a worst-case scenario and has a negligible magnitude of impact, the significance of effects can confidently be predicted to be negligible. The mitigating measures proposed by the transport assessment have been taken into account in reaching this conclusion.
The supporting Envrionmental assessment concludes that the overall operational air quality impacts of the Development would be minimal and as such I do not consider that the proposed development will have a detrimental impact on the health of residents.
The Councils Environmental Health Officer has carefully considered the submitted information and raises no objection to any of these conclusions subject to the imposition of appropriate highway conditions to mitigate impacts. I therefore consider the proposed development acceptable, taking into account any cumulative effects, in respect of its impact on air quality.
Noise and Vibration
I acknowledge that the nearest adjoining residential properties will be located to the north of the site where the proposed employment hub could be located. However, the proposed use of the employment hub is to be for Class B1(a) – (c) purposes. A Class B1 use is acknowledged as being a use that must be capable of being undertaken in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area by reason of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust or grit.
In light of this I am satisfied that the proposed use of the employment hub, combined with the removal of existing uses on the site such as the drag racing and metal recycling will not have a significantly detrimental impact on residential amenity.
The applicants have confirmed that in order to ensure that all the existing commercial uses on the site (including the drag racing that takes place in close proximity to the application site) would not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the residents the applicant has agreed to the inclusion of clause within the proposed S106 agreement that all existing uses on site (the rest of the Long Marston site included within the blue line) will cease upon the grant of planning permission.
In addition to this given the uses associated with the community hub and its location towards the centre of the application site I am satisfied that this will not have a detrimental impact in terms of noise and disturbance.
I do not consider that the proposed construction of the development will result in any significant noise and vibration impacts on any surrounding residential properties. I am satisfied that this can be controlled by the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP).
The District Council’s Environmental Health Team have raised no objection to the proposed development on the basis that the proposed use of the site would result in any unacceptable noise impact on surrounding properties. In addition to this I consider that the proposed clause within the S106 requiring the existing uses to cease outside the application site but within the general Long Marston site which is land under the applicants control (land within the blue line) within an agreed timescale will ensure that the potential residents of the application site will not suffer from unacceptable noise and disturbance.
Ground Conditions/Contamination
Principal contaminants associated with Airfield operations have been identified in line with guidance published by the Environment Agency. The contaminants identified across the whole of the Long Marston Site include: Fuel and lubricating oils; radioactive contamination; chemical warfare agents; explosives; unexploded ordnance; metals; solvents – degreasing agents; de-icers; and detergents.
The District Council’s Environmental Health Team have carefully considered the Phase 1 Geo- Environmental Assessment and whilst it is assumed that there may be hot spots, no extensive remediation will be needed on the site and as such no objection has been raised subject to the imposition of contamination conditions. In addition a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will ensure that possible sources of pollution are controlled during the construction phase.
Impact of Existing National High Pressure Gas Pipelines on the Proposal
I acknowledge that a number of objections have been received on the grounds of safety concerns that the proposed development will be close to some high pressure gas pipelines and that these have been given careful consideration during the assessment of the application.
To the south and west of the site are a number of high pressure gas pipelines. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE), which is a statutory consultee for certain forms of development within the consultation distance of major hazard sites/pipelines, provide a software tool ‘PADHI+’ which allows LPAs to generate the formal HSE consultation response by inputting the relevant data relating to development proposals.
The applicant has submitted a parameters plan that shows how the proposed masterplan layout responds to the location of the high pressure gas pipelines by locating development in areas that are considered appropriate according to the Health and Safety Executive Land Use Planning consultation Zone. I acknowledge that the proposed open space and cycle/pedestrian link cross a gas pipeline. However, National Grid have raised no objection in respect of this. Following the insertion of the data (approximate location of the pipes based on the councils GIS system, proposal details, etc), the HSE response from the PADHI+ assessment is ‘HSE does not advise, on safety grounds, against the granting of planning permission in this instance (22.04.15)’.
In addition to this the proposed footpath along Campden Road would also cross a gas pipeline. However, given the relatively minor excavation works that would be associated with this work I am satisfied that it will be able to be completed safely.
National Grid have been consulted who also raise no objection to location of the development on safety grounds but have recommended that the applicant liaise with them in respect of the construction of these elements
For these reasons, I consider the proposal acceptable in terms of its location in relation to existing gas infrastructure subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the adherence to the submitted parameters plan controlling development in the restricted zones.
Loss of Agricultural Land
Paragraph 112 of the NPPF identifies that Local Authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of higher quality. The NPPF seeks to protect the best and most versatile agricultural land. However, the majority of land in Stratford district is not best and most versatile agricultural land and it is considered that the loss of part of the application site (in this case a grassed area in between existing hard standing that has been used primarily for grazing animals periodically to control the growth of the grass rather than grow crops) would not cause such significant and demonstrable harm that would outweigh the benefits of the scheme, to the extent it would constitute a reason for refusal of the application.
Form and Housing Mix
Form
Notwithstanding this is an outline application, where matters relating to layout, scale, appearance and landscaping would be considered at the reserved matters stage, the proposals include an illustrative master plan for the development of the entire site (3,500 house proposal) to provide a context for this proposed development whilst acknowledging that it is a separate self-contained development.
The indicative masterplan (in respect of the current 400 dwelling development) demonstrates how the proposed built form and Green Infrastructure responds to the context of the site with the community hub in the centre of the site and an employment hub set closer to the main access with the residential development in the remainder of the site in different character areas interspersed with open spaces.
The application is also supported by building parameters relating to the extent of the developable area of the site; Access and pedestrian and cyle links; restricted zones for development; general location of site uses; extent of landscaping and buildings heights which create a framework to inform any future reserved matters application within the site. The indicative density is primarily 15dph-30dph which is broadly comparable in terms of density (27 dph) to existing modern development located within the wider Meon Vale estate development located to the south of the application site. To achieve an urban density around the community hub densities are increased to up to 40dph which is considered acceptable in terms of the overall layout.
Building heights range from up to 2.5 storeys at the periphery to up to 4 storeys (11m) in the centre of the site and the employment element. The majority of the buildings on the site are anticipated to be 2-2.5 storeys in height.
The proposed development would be set within a generous landscape setting for the site which further demonstrates the site has capacity to accommodate all elements of the development with a form of development that would integrate with the surrounding built form.
For these reasons, I consider that it has been demonstrated that the site has capacity to accommodate a form of development that would harmonise with the surroundings subject to an appropriate layout, scale, appearance and landscaping provision coming forward at the reserved matters stage in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 56, 57 of the NPPF and saved policies PR.1 and DEV.1. In officers’ opinion, these policies have a high degree of consistency with the guidance contained in the NPPF. In addition the proposal is considered to be in accordance with emerging draft core strategy poly CS.5.
Housing mix and affordable housing
Paragraph 50 of the NPPF refers to the need to deliver a wide choice of high quality homes to create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities to meet the needs of different groups within the community including the elderly, and to include appropriate provision of affordable housing. Saved policies COM.13 and COM.14, whilst now quite old, seek to secure affordable housing and a mix of housing types and therefore still have some consistency with the NPPF. Whilst the Council has an adopted SPD Meeting Housing Needs, the most recent evidence base is now the Coventry & Warwickshire SHMA of November 2013.
The scheme is in outline form with the final details to be determined at the reserved matters stage. However, the applicant has indicated that the proposal would comprise a mix of dwelling types and sizes, including affordable housing provision at 35% of the total number of houses (Class C3 only) as well as potential C2 accommodation for those in need of care (e.g. older people) up to a maximum of 100 self-contained units. Based on the capacity of the site, I consider an appropriate mix and type of housing can be achieved within the site at the reserved matters stage. The provision of 35% affordable housing is a significant benefit of the scheme within the District where affordability is so acute.
Provision of Public Open Space
The NPPF, at paragraphs 58 and 73, encourages access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation. Saved policies COM.4 and COM.5 also seek to secure appropriate standards of open space provision and therefore remain broadly consistent with the provisions of the NPPF. Emerging Core strategy Polcy CS.24 seeks to provide sufficient open space and recreational space and developers will be expected to contribute towards the provision of open space in order to help to achieve the standards set out in the Council’s Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment. The proposed development would make the following open space provision (together with requirement under emerging Core Strategy Policy):
Open Space Typology Open Space Requirement Open Space to be under Emerging DC policy provided on Site (sqm) CS24 (sqm) (based on an average size of 400 3 bedroom properties) Parks & Gardens and 11,960 29,400 (2.94ha) Amenity Space Unrestricted Natural 7,800 32,600 (3.26ha) Accessible Greenspace Children and Young 2,600 2700 (0.27ha) People's Equipped Play Facilities Outdoor Sport Note: The Council's 2011 16,200 (1.62ha) Needs Assessment only identifies a need for additional Outdoor Sport within the following settlements: Bidford-on- Avon, Wellesbourne and Gaydon/Lighthorne Heath new settlement. Allotments and 4,160 4000 (0.4ha) Community Gardens
In addition to the above figures the site would also provide the following
Structural Open Space N/A 126000 (12.60ha)
Overall amount of open space to be provided on site equates to 210,000 sqm (21.09 ha) or approximately 48 % of the overall site. Although the proposal shows a very slight under provision in terms of space for allotments (it should be recognised that this calculation is based on 400 3 - bedroom houses across the site and is therefore an estimate) given the amount of open space to be provided on site this can easily be accommodated at reserved matters stage.
I note that Sports England have raised no objection in respect of the application subject to a financial payment. However, based on the above I am satisfied that an appropriate amount of open space will be able to be accommodated on site and as such a financial contribution will not be required. However, details will have to be included in the S106 in relation to the maintenance of the open space.
In addition to this the development at Meon Vale is providing a range of leisure facilities on site that will be easily accessible and able to be utilised by the residents of this proposed development.
I consider the level of open space provision to cater for the future occupiers of the proposed development acceptable. Furthermore, with the intended over provision of Incidental open space is considered a benefit which weighs in favour of the planning application. The proposal would therefore accord with the provisions of paragraphs 58, 73 of the NPPF and saved policies COM.4 and COM.5 and emerging draft core strategy CS.24. Impact on Public Rights of Way
The NPPF requires as part of its core principles to actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of, inter alia, walking. Saved policy COM.9 seeks to ensure that the layout and design of development proposals will be expected to incorporate facilities for walking that are safe, convenient to use and well connected to other parts of the settlement. I consider policy COM.9 to be consistent with the guidance contained in the NPPF.
Public footpath SD41 (Heart of England Way) runs along the southern boundary of the application site and would be retained along its current alignment. I consider that the proposed cycleway/footway and open space to the north of the footpath would provide an enhanced environment to the footpath users.
Warwickshire County Council Rights of Way Team has confirmed that they have no objection in principle to the proposal subject to the payment of a contribution of approximately £32,170 towards improvements to public rights of way within 1.5 miles of the development. I consider that this is CIL compliant and can be secured via a Section 106 agreement.
I acknowledge that the Ramblers Association have raised an objection to the proposed development on the grounds that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on footpath SD41 on the grounds that it would become part of the proposed cycle track and that the proposal would turn the Greenway into a buy cycle commuter route.
However, the proposal does not intend to undertake any work to footpath SD41 and the cycleway/ footpath will be entirely separate to the existing footpath. I acknowledge that there will be an increase in cyclist using the Greenway who may be commuting to Stratford. However, I do not consider that this will be to the detriment of the recreational users of the Greenway. In addition the proposed new pedestrian/cycleway along the Campden Road will give cyclists different routes to choose from in order to access the surrounding area.
Subject to the the securing of a financial contribution I raise no objection on the grounds of impact on public rights of way having regards to the NPPF, saved and emerging local plan policies.
Energy Conservation
Paragraphs 95 and 98 of the NPPF require schemes to incorporate renewable saving measures. Saved policy DEV.8 and the Council’s Low Carbon Buildings SPD remain generally consistent with the NPPF, as they also seek to improve energy conservation and promote use of renewable technologies.
The Core Strategy, albeit of some weight, is moving away from a reliance on renewable technology to a fabric first approach. The applicant has confirmed that this is the approach to be adopted which will secured under the building regulation legislation rather than under the planning regime. However, the applicant has submitted an energy and sustainability statement with the application that also outlines what additional renewable energy works could also be implemented such as the use of photovoltaic panels and air/ground source heat pumps. Crime prevention
The District Council has adopted guidance on ‘Design and Crime Reduction’ which is considered to be generally consistent with the provisions of the NPPF (paragraph 69). Four key principles include integration, sense of ownership and responsibility, natural surveillance and movement through the site.
The proposal has been considered by the Warwickshire Police Crime Prevention Design Officer who raises no objection to the design of the scheme subject to advisory notes. I therefore consider the proposal would not conflict with these principles, notwithstanding such details would be agreed at the reserved matters stage.
A request has been made by the SDC CCTV service for a contribution (£188,647) towards two new CCTV cameras (which would include maintenance and fibre line rental):- one for the employment hub and one for the community hub. CCTV cameras were recently secured in respect of the development at Meon Vale (14/01186/OUT). Two new camera’s would assist in deterring crime in the first instance, and where crime occurs, help identify offending persons (and vehicles) who have committed crime and their subsequent prosecution by providing video evidence.
The proposal could result in up to a further 1000 residents (excluding employees in the community hub and employment land) within the site which would inevitably increase the risk of potential crime and disorder occurring. The requested CCTV infrastructure is therefore considered necessary to address concerns over future crime and safety for the community in order to mitigate the impact of the development. The District Council is continuing to liaise with directly with the applicant in order to finalise an agreed financial contribution subject to the Head of Environment and Planning being satisfied that contribution would be CIL compliant. If the contribution is not considered to be CIL compliant it will not be collected.
The Police have requested approximately £91,468 towards the recruitment and equipping of officers and staff, police vehicles and premises . Negotiations are on- going with the applicant in terms of whether this request is CIL compliant. The District Council is continuing to liaise with directly with the applicant in order to finalise an agreed financial contribution subject to the Head of Environment and Planning being satisfied that contribution would be CIL compliant. If the contribution is not considered to be CIL compliant it will not be collected.
For these reasons, subject to the provision of this mitigation if considered CIL compliant, I consider that the proposal would ensure the creation of a safe and accessible environment in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 58 and 69 of the NPPF, saved policy DEV.10 and adopted ‘Design and Crime Reduction’ guidance and Emerging Draft Core Strategy policy CS.9 .
Socio-economic Impact
The Environmental Statement makes an assessment of the likely significant effects of the Development on the environment with respect to socio-economic issues. The assessment considered effects of the Development on: changes in population numbers and structure; changes in housing requirements; changes in local spending; levels of employment, demand for healthcare provision and demand for education provision. The proposed development would provide up to 400 new residential dwellings (including up to 100 self-contained C2 units) which must be given significant weight in the context of the District not having a 5 year housing land supply and which would make a significant contribution toward meeting housing need within the District. Furthermore, the provision of 35% affordable housing (in respect of Class C3 dwellings) will make a significant contribution towards meeting the Districts acute affordable housing shortfall.
The additional 400 households generated by the development are estimated by the applicant to introduce a further £3.4 million of net additional expenditure by new residents to the area which would have a significant positive impact on the local economy and would support an additional 50 new operational jobs (FTE) supported by the increased spending in the area in retail, leisure, hospitality and other service-based sectors.
I acknowledge that there will be a loss of a number of existing jobs on the site (approximately 24.5 FTE) and the associated uses. However, the applicant indicates that the proposed development would also result in the creation of 325 FTE jobs (20 community hub, 20 in retail and 285 in the offices – a net gain of 271 FTE jobs locally with 120 FTE jobs supported in the supply chain across the West Midlands Region. The applicant considers that this will result in an additional economic output (GVA per annum) of £26.3 million.
In respect of construction jobs the applicant indicates that 635 direct employment jobs will be created over the 5 year length of the build with 190 indirect/induced employment jobs which could be supported in the supply chain per year of construction. The total construction value of the build is estimated at £54 million with an economic output (GVA per annum from direct and indirect jobs) given as £9.4 million.
The Development is not expected to have a significant effect on the levels of local healthcare and education provision subject to CIL compliant financial contributions being sought to mitigate any impact.
In respect of Local Authority revenue impacts the applicant estimates that the proposal would result in £4 million new home bonus (over a 6 year period), additional Council Tax revenue of £648,000 per annum and additional Business Rates revenue of £95,700 per annum.
Overall, the proposed development would have a positive socio-economic impact on the District which lends support to the proposal in officer’s opinion.
Cumulative Impacts
A requirement of the EIA Regulations is to assess cumulative effects. Cumulative effects are generally considered to arise from the combination of effects from the Development and from other committed developments in the vicinity, acting together to generate elevated levels of effects. The supporting ES has taken into the account a large number of nearby developments in assessing such effects including the applications at Meon Vale, Long Marston Storage Depot and Sims Metals UK at Pebworth in Wychavon.
In officers opinion satisfactory consideration of the cumulative environmental effects of key committed and emerging proposals has been made in accordance with the EIA Regulations. The cumulative effects subject to mitigation proposed are considered acceptable in officer’s opinion. Alternatives
The EIA regulations require an Environmental Statement (ES) to outline any alternatives that have been considered for the proposed development. The applicant has undertaken this exercise in accordance with the regulations as follows:
The ‘do nothing’ Alternative
The ‘do nothing’ alternative considers the future situation without the proposed development.
If the scheme does not come forward then the current temporary uses of the site are likely to continue. There is little investment in the facilities at present and and it may be that the buildings become derelict and less attractive for any temporary uses.
The significant housing, social and recreational benefits would not come forward at the site.
Consideration of Alternative Locations
No other locations were considered by the Applicant for the proposed development. However, it is also recognised there are no planning policy requirements for the applicant to consider alternative sites.
Consideration of Alternative Designs and Design Evolution
The applicant states that the development site was preferred over other locations on the airfield due to being the least constrained and best connected. The overarching design principles for the wider site evolved in response to the findings of site and context analysis and also the public consultation programme that was undertaken. The findings have informed the overarching vision and principles for the proposed scheme.
Furthermore, the proposed development is supported by parameter plans that take account of key constraints and which have evolved in response to baseline assessments undertaken for all disciplines e.g. identifying, amongst others, the net developable areas, building heights and open space/green infrastructure to limit potential significant environmental effects.
Phasing/Delivery Programme
As stated above, the indicative delivery programme for the proposed development is anticipated to span approximately 4 to 5 years (anticipated completion in 2021). To ensure the appropriate development of the site and provision of necessary infrastructure at the relevant stages of development, planning conditions could be imposed through a ‘phasing’ condition so the overall development of the site is subject to the Districts approval.
In addition, mitigation measures are set out within the ES to minimise adverse effects during the construction phase would be implemented through a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for the site. Referral to the Secretary of State
Having regard to the provisions of the National Planning Practice Guidance and the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009, taking into account the scale and nature of the proposed development, this is currently being assessed and will be reported in the update sheet to Members.
Developer Contributions /Infrastructure Provision
As members will be aware, the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 requires any financial contributions sought from developers to be assessed under Regulation 122 of the Regulations which state:
If a payment does not meet all of the following Regulation 122 tests then it is unlawful and cannot be requested. The three tests are:
1. be necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; 2. be directly related to the development; and 3. be fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
The NPPF and PPG re-affirm the statutory tests set out within Regulation 122.
Requests for the following contributions/obligations have come forward:
Affordable Housing
Affordable Housing would be provided on the basis of 35% of the total number of C3 residential units with tenures to be agreed as part of an Affordable Housing Scheme submitted and approved prior to the commencement of development. Stage.
Extra Care Housing
Potential for a maximum of 100 of the proposed dwellings to be C2 extra care which must provide a domiciliary care package including a minimum of 1.5 hours per week of personal care, or such other form of domiciliary personal care provision as agreed.
Cessation of Existing Uses on the site
The existing uses on the Long Marston Site (outside the application site but within the blue line) site shall cease to operate prior to the occupation of the first dwelling on the site. This will include any remediation work that is required to be undertaken within the blue line also.
Public Open Space maintenance
The provision of details of securing the maintenance of the public open space on the site.
Financial Contributions
Education
Early Years education : £116,870, Primary Education: £818,090, Secondary Education: £730,450, Sixth form Education: £157,940, Primary Special Educational Needs (SEN) Education £18,311, Secondary SEN Education £31,341 – Request up to £1,873,002 (final amount is formula based).
Warwickshire County Council have confirmed that the Early Years, Primary and Primary SEN contributions should be for the purpose of developing a new school on the Meon Vale development. The secondary contribution and the secondary SEN contributions will support the phased expansion of Shipston High School. The next stage in the expansion programme is for the demolition of the existing gym to enable the development of new sports facilities and a new classroom block. This contribution will go towards supporting this work. The post 16 contribution will support development at Stratford Girls Grammar School as detailed in the WCC Cabinet report of 16 July 2015.
In respect of how the accommodation of the pupils that will live on the development will be accommodated prior to the works funded by the above contributions coming on stream WCC Education have confirmed that there are sixth form places available across the area. However, WCC have agreed to fund the expansion at Stratford Girls Grammar School in advance of the S106 contribution being received to ensure a choice of places remains available.
Shipston High School is going through a phased expansion and additional classrooms are already being added to the school to cater for the growing numbers. WCC and the school are working together to ensure that there continue to be places available from the priority area. This will include this development. WCC have confirmed that Early Years places are available at Quinton Primary School.
SEN places are in short supply generally across the county but it is the County Council’s wish that wherever possible we adapt existing mainstream schools to cater for children with additional needs. WCC has confirmed that this is why the County Council will use the primary SEN and secondary SEN S106 funds at the new primary school and at Shipston High.
Highways
Possible contributions towards highways improvement works to allow possible pooling of money if junction works to Clopton Bridge, Trinity Way and Waitrose roundabouts need to be upgraded to the full STP (Stratford Transport Package) works at the request of the WCC Highways Authority rather than the implementation of the schemes proposed as part of the current development.
Bus Service
Contribution of £295,848.80 for bus improvement for Friday evening and Sunday service operating on an hourly basis (Sunday service £182,098.80 and Friday evening service £113,750) to cover a period of 5 years. The District Council is continuing to liaise with directly with the applicant in order to finalise an agreed financial contribution dependent on whether an hourly or half hourly service is to be provided on a Friday. Greenway Improvements
Contribution of £244,000 to enable surface improvements for the provision of a sealed all-weather surface on the Greenway between the site and Stratford on Avon, to make the route suitable for cycle commuting and other utility journeys from the site. The District Council is continuing to liaise with directly with the applicant in order to finalise an agreed financial contribution subject to the Head of Environment and Planning being satisfied that contribution would be CIL compliant. If the contribution is not considered to be CIL compliant it will not be collected.
Sustainable Travel Packs
£75 per household equating to a total sum of £30,000.
Libraries
For the improvement of local library services – request £8,755 (final amount to be formula based dependent on the number of dwellings at reserved matters stage)
Rights of Way
For the improvement of local public rights of way within 1.5 miles of the application site - request £32,170 (final amount to be formula based dependent on the number of dwellings at reserved matters stage) )
SDC CCTV Team
For the prevention of crime and disorder through 2 new CCTV cameras (to include maintenance of the cameras and fibre line rental) – to cover a period of 10 years (£188,000 towards equipment supply and installation and towards maintenance of the cameras). The District Council is continuing to liaise with directly with the applicant in order to finalise an agreed financial contribution subject to the Head of Environment and Planning being satisfied that contribution would be CIL compliant. If the contribution is not considered to be CIL compliant it will not be collected.
Healthcare
South Warwickshire Clinical Commissioning Group, NHS England, NHS Property Services and Public Health Warwickshire (coordinated health-economy wide response) –have suggested either a contribution of £281,608 towards a new medical centre or £87,895 towards improvement/extension to the Meon Medical Centre. In light of the proposal being for a self contained development of 400 houses separate from the possible redevelopment of the whole of the Long Marston Airfield site for 3,500 dwellings (which may provide for a new medical centre) I consider that the contribution towards the improvement/extension of the medical centre is more appropriate in this case (final amount is formula based dependent on the number of dwellings at reserved matters stage).
NHS South Warwickshire Hospital Trust (acute care) – Request £415,986.09 towards additional facilities to meet patient demand.
[N.B. The Council’s Cabinet on 16.3.15 agreed an interim policy that where South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust has sought a contribution towards healthcare that such a contribution should be secured via a S106 agreement, subject to the Head of Environment and Planning being satisfied that such a contribution would be CIL compliant. If the contribution is not considered to be CIL compliant then it will not be collected]
Police
Request £91,468 for the recruitment and equipping of officers and staff, police vehicles and premises. Negotiations are on-going with the applicant in terms of whether this request is CIL compliant. The District Council is continuing to liaise with directly with the applicant in order to finalise an agreed financial contribution subject to the Head of Environment and Planning being satisfied that contribution would be CIL compliant. If the contribution is not considered to be CIL compliant it will not be collected.
In addition to the above I acknowledge that Long Marston Parish Council have requested a number of S106 contributions. I have given these careful consideration and consider that that these are either covered by the provisions of the planning application or are not considered to have sufficient information to be CIL compliant. The applicant has stated that they are willing to liaise with the Parish Council in respect of any matters outside the scope of the application.
Conclusion
The application must be first determined against the Development Plan and a conclusion made as to whether the application accords or does not accord with the Development Plan.
The principle of residential accommodation in this location does not wholly accord with the development plan, there are other material considerations, including the fact that the site is part of the overall airfield that has been put forward as a Strategic Housing allocation in the Emerging Core Strategy, that lead officers to conclude that this development (including the community hub and employment hub) is acceptable in principle.
The Council currently cannot demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply and as such policies relevant to the supply of housing are out of date (para.49 NPPF). In such instances, para. 14 advises that permission should be granted unless:
- Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole; or - Specific policies in the framework indicate development should be restricted.
The Council has a present and substantial need for additional housing in the District to which the application site could appropriately contribute to in a sustainable way. The NPPF supports the presumption in favour of sustainable development, and this site can be concluded to be made a sustainable site subject to the imposition of conditions especially in light of the relatively close proximity to the sites at Meon Vale and SIMS Metal works which have been granted on appeal together with the settlements at Stratford upon Avon, Long Marston and Upper and Lower Quinton.
The ‘golden thread’ running through the NPPF is the presumption in favour of sustainable development. It gives three dimensions to sustainable development: social, economic and environmental. These should not be assessed in isolation, because they are mutually dependant.
Assessing the planning balance, I consider that the benefits from the scheme in terms of Economic, Social and Environmental criteria (as detailed in the principle section of the committee report) would outweigh the identified harm (also detailed in the principle section of the committee report), and therefore, I have concluded that the proposal is sustainable development and should be approved in accordance with paragraph 14 of the NPPF. Furthermore, the site is available now, would provide a significant proportion of much-needed affordable housing, and the scheme would be well-located in terms of proximity to the existing facilities provided as part of the approval on the Meon Vale site which is in relatively close proximity to the application site.
I have also had regard to the conclusions made by the Secretary of State in allowing the Appeal Decision at the nearby Codex site, and the reasoning of SoDC in granting planning permission for the developments at the Meon Vale site in 2010 and 2015 which are material considerations.
Whilst officers have made a recommendation on the basis of the Development Plan and other material considerations it is for the Planning Committee to weigh these in planning balance these in coming to a decision on the overall acceptability of the proposal.
It is therefore recommended that the application is APPROVED (subject to the application not being called-in by the Secretary of State if consultation is required), subject to: a) The completion of the section 106 agreement, with delegated authority to the Head of Environment and Planning in consultation with the Chairman of the Planning Committee in respect of any final negotiations/sums and whether they are CIL Compliant; and b) The following planning conditions, with any necessary amendments delegated to the Head of Environment and Planning: a) S.106 Agreement
1. Affordable housing – 35% of total number of Class C3 2. Extra Care Housing 3. Cessation of existing uses on the site (Long Marston site – within the blue line on location plan) 4. Public Open Space Maintenance 5. Education contribution - Approx £1,873,002 6. Possible contributions towards the highways improvement works to allow possible pooling of money if junction works to Clopton Bridge, Trinity Way and Waitrose roundabouts need to be upgraded to the full STP (Stratford Transport Package) works at the request of the WCC Highways Authority rather than the implementation of the schemes proposed as part of the current development. 7. Bus service – Approx £295,848.80 8. Greenway improvements – Approx £244,000 (if considered to be CIL compliant) 9. Sustainable travel packs - £75 per household 10. Libraries – Approx £8,755 11. Rights of Way – Approx £32,170 12. CCTV cameras – Approx £188,000 (if considered to be CIL compliant)
13.Extension of Meon Medical Centre approx £87,895
14. South Warwickshire Hospital Trust (acute care) approx-£415,968 (if considered to be CIL compliant) 15. Police – approx £91,468 (if considered to be CIL compliant) b) Planning Conditions
Permission definition conditions
1. Details of the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping.(reserved matters) for each phase (as referred to in condition 30) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved
2. Application for approval of reserved matters for the first phase (as referred to in condition 30) shall be made no later than 1 year from date of permission and the last application for reserved matters shall be made no later than 3 years beginning on the date of this permission.
3. Development of each phase (as referred to in Condition 30) shall commence no later than 1 year from the date of the respective approval.
4. Plans to which decision relates for the avoidance of doubt
5. The number of dwellings hereby permitted shall not exceed 400 on the site of which no more that 100 shall be self-contained Class C2 accommodation.
6. The total gross external floorspace of the community hub shall be no more than 1500m² within which the following use classes and maximum associated gross external floorspace may be accommodated: - All retail units (Use Classes A1-A5) shall not exceed 400m² (in total for Use Classes A1-A5) -Office floorspace (Class B1(a) shall not exceed 400m² -Individual D1 units shall not exceed 400m² -Individual units shall not exceed 400m²
No other uses apart from those listed within this condition and residential uses (Class C3) shall be permitted within the community hub.
7. The total gross external floorspace of B1(a) - (c) office space within the development shall not exceed 4000m² of which no more than 2500m² shall be for Class B1(a) purposes which includes the Class B1(a) floorspace within the community hub.
8. The employment hub hereby permitted shall be used for Class B1(a) to (c) and the office space within the community hub hereby permitted shall be used for Class B1(a) and for no other purposes.
9. The Class C2 self-contained independent living accommodation shall be used for this purpose only and for no other purpose.
10. The maximum height of any buildings (both commercial and residential) on the application site shall be in accordance with those heights shown on Parameter Plan 6: Heights
11. The location of the uses within the Inner, Middle and Outer Health and Safety Land Use Planning Consultation Zones shall be in accordance with those shown on Parameter Plan 3 : Restricted Zones
12. No development shall not take place within 8 metres of the top bank of any ordinary watercourse. 13. The development permitted by this planning permission shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment.
14. The landscape details submitted as part of any reserved matters application shall include the landscape features as shown on Parameter Plan 5: Landscape
15. Details in respect of landscaping to be submitted for any reserved matters application.
16. Soft landscaping comprised in the approved details of landscaping for each Phase (approved in respect of condition 30) shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the first occupation of any of the buildings in the respective phase of development
17. Replacement planting within a period of 5 years
18. Submission of a statement that outlines the strategy for how the equipped play space, necessary to meet the needs of that reserved matters application shall be provided, along with a programme for its implementation for each phase. The quantum of open space to be consistent with the overall amount detailed in the planning application.
Pre occupancy conditions
19. Provision of bins
20. Provision of Water buts
21. Details of the access arrangements to be submitted and approved by the District Planning authority and completed before any dwellings are occupied on site
22. Details of the emergency access arrangements to be submitted and approved by the District Planning Authority and completed before occupation of the 100 dwelling.
23. Details of the off site highway works to the detailed design of the off-site highway works to the Bridgeway gyratory and the junction of Tiddington Road/Banbury Road/Swans Nest Lane/Clopton Bridge to be submitted and approved by the District Planning Authority and completed before occupation of 100 dwellings.
24. Details of the off site highway works to the detailed design of the off-site highway works to the Shipston Road / Trinity Way / A3400 / Seven Meadows Way roundabout junction and the Shipston Road / Clifford Lane / Waitrose Roundabout Junction to be submitted and approved by the District Planning Authority and completed before occupation of 100 dwellings.
25. Details of the off-site highway works to the B4632 Campden Road / Stratford Garden Centre access junction to be submitted and approved by the District Planning authority and completed before occupation of 100 dwellings.
26. Details of the the off-site highway works to the B4632 Campden Road / Freshfield Nurseries access junction to be submitted and approved by the District Planning authority and completed before any dwellings are occupied on site.
27. Details of the off-site highway works to the B4632 Campden Road Footway Provision to be submitted and approved by the District Planning authority and completed before any dwellings are occupied on site.
28. Detailed plans for the location of bus infrastructure and implementation timetable shall be submitted and agreed by both the Planning and Highway Authorities prior to the first occupation of a dwelling within the development.
29. Travel plan in respect of the employment hub
Pre commencement conditions
30. The reserved matters application shall be accompanied by a Phasing Strategy.
31. Any reserved matter application shall be accompanied by a Masterplan incorporating a landscape masterplan.
32. Existing and Proposed site levels
33. No development shall take place until a detailed surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority
34. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to provide detailed plans of the proposed deculverting works to Gran Brook has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority.
35. The development hereby permitted shall not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul sewage via a temporary onsite foul treatment plant have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning
36. No development shall take place until an assessment of the nature and extent of contamination based on the Phase I desk study.
37. Submission of a detailed remediation scheme (based on the findings of condition 36) for each phase of development.
38. Remediation scheme referred to in condition 37 shall be implemented in accordance with the deposited timetable of works for each phase of development
39.Within 6 months of the completion of the measures identified in the deposited remediation scheme referred to in condition 38 for that phase of development and before the site can be brought into use or be occupied, a Validation Report must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
40. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the development hereby permitted that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing within 7 days to the Local Planning Authority and development must cease on that part of the site.
41. Monitoring and maintenance scheme for each phase of development to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of 5 years (or any other period agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), shall be deposited with the Local Planning Authority.
42. Submission of an Environment Protection Plan for Construction has been submitted to and approved in writing by the planning authority for each phase of development.
43. Submission of a Protected Species Contingency Plan for each phase of development.
44. Details of all external light fittings and external light columns for each phase of development.
45. Submission of a scheme to ensure that there is no net biodiversity loss as a result of the development.
46. A Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) for a programme of archaeological evaluative work, including trial trenching, across this site to be submitted for each phase of development
47. Any fieldwork detailed in the approved Archaeological Mitigation Strategy document to completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority for each phase of development.
48. Submission of a Construction Environmental Management Plan for each phase of development (includes timing of HGV movements)
49. Submission of a scheme for the provision of water supply and fire hydrants necessary for fire fighting purposes for each phase of development
50. Submission of tree protection details for each phase of development
Informative Notes
1. Ensure that there is not a duplication of play equipment 2. Liaise with National Grid re: crossing the high Pressure Gas Line 3. Public footpath SD41 must remain open at all times for public use 4. The proposed de-culverting works will require consent from the Lead Local Flood Authority. 5. General Pollution Prevention Measures 6. Discharge of Surface water drainage condition information 7. Use on indigenous planting 8. Control of Pollution Act. 9. Discharge of lighting condition information. 10. Discharge of biodiversity condition information 11. Section 278 highway works 12. Design of Estate Roads 13. Paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
ROBERT WEEKS HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING