Agenda Item 6
PLANNING COMMITTEE
Date: 20 September 2018
APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO CARRY OUT DEVELOPMENT OR TO DISPLAY ADVERTISEMENTS (PC 42/18)
Schedule by Head of Planning and Coastal Management
Number of items: 9
FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT, 1985 THE RELEVANT BACKGROUND DOCUMENT IN RESPECT OF EACH ITEM IS THE PLANNING APPLICATION FILE, INCLUDING SUBMITTED PLANS, CONSULTATIONS AND LETTERS OF COMMENT, BUT EXCLUDING INFORMATION EXEMPTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND IDENTIFIED AS SUCH. ANY REPRESENTATIONS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUBMITTED AFTER THE PREPARATION OF THIS SCHEDULE RECEIVED NO LATER THAN 24 HOURS PRIOR TO THE COMMITTEE MEETING WILL BE REPORTED VIA THE ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS REPORT CIRCULATED AT THE MEETING.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ORDER OF THE ITEMS LISTED MAY BE CHANGED AT THE MEETING TO ACCOMMODATE PUBLIC SPEAKING.
SHOULD ANY OF THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS BE SUBJECT TO A SITE VISIT, THIS WILL NORMALLY TAKE PLACE ON THE SECOND MONDAY FOLLOWING THE DATE OF THE MEETING.
I N D E X
Item Page Case Application Address No No Officer No 1 3 LB DC/18/3173/FUL Coastguard Walk, Felixstowe, IP11 2DA 2 16 DM DC/18/2663/FUL Vale Farm, Stebbings Lane, Hollesley, IP12 3QZ 3 25 SM DC/18/2814/VLA Gas Works, Carr Avenue, Leiston, IP16 4AT 4 29 MP DC/16/3514/FUL Land Adjacent Bridge Cottage, The Causeway, Peasenhall, IP17 2HU 5 49 IR DC/18/3026/FUL The Corner Cottage, Peasenhall Road, Walpole, IP19 9AP 6 53 NW DC/18/2409/FUL Jetty Lane Car Park, Station Road, The Avenue, Woodbridge, IP12 4BA
1
7 64 LB DC/18/2671/FUL Queens House, Woodbridge School, Burkitt Road, Woodbridge, IP12 4JH 8 82 LB DC/18/1658/FUL The Abbey School, 27 Church Street, Woodbridge, IP12 1DS 9 94 LB DC/18/2659/LBC The Abbey School, 27 Church Street, Woodbridge, IP12 1DS
2
1. FELIXSTOWE – DC/18/3173/FUL – To create a new beach cafe along with a meeting events space with associated landscaping, including stopping up of existing vehicular entrance and construction of new vehicular access off Orford Road at Coastguard Walk, Felixstowe IP11 2DA for Mr A Jarvis, Suffolk Coastal District Council
Case Officer: Liz Beighton
Expiry Date: 24 September 2019
DC/18/3173/FUL- Proposed Cafe/Restaurant, Coastguard Walk, Felixstowe
DO NOT SCALE SLA100019684
Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning Permission is sought for a café/restaurant as part of the community and leisure offer associated with the South Seafront (Martello Park) development.
This item has come before members because the applicant is Suffolk Coastal District Council and therefore its determination falls outside the scope of the scheme of delegation.
The application is recommended for approval in recognition of the economic and tourism benefits that would accrue together with the lack of technical objections to the proposal.
1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The 0.1365 hectare application site is located at the junction of Orford Road and Sea Road and is immediately adjacent to the Martello Park, which runs to the west of the
3
promenade and east of the 127 homes constructed as part of the South Seafront proposals by Bloor Homes. 1.2 The site is currently devoid of any buildings or structures and currently landscaped and partly laid to hardstanding as an informal parking area. It must however be noted that any parking which currently takes place on the area is not permanent or benefits from appropriate consents. Parking for residential is accommodated to the rear of the properties and two pay and display car parks are also provided within the wider scheme. Approved residents parking is unfettered by this proposal. 1.3 The site is bordered on two sides by three-storey townhouses off Orford Road and four-storey residential flats along Sea Road. Homes in the area are predominately in Suffolk red facing brick under slate or tiled roofs. Many of the homes benefit from sea views, either from their main windows or secondary windows. 1.4 Due south of the application site is the wider Martello Play offer which utilises the entire public realm offer, passes the Martello Town (Scheduled Ancient Monument) and terminates due south where there are two kiosks currently operational. The two kiosks offer limited outside seating, but currently no provision for indoor seating to shelter from the elements, provide use throughout the year and widen the offer of food and drink available to visitors. 2. PROPOSALS 2.1 Planning permission is sought for a single storey semi-circular building to accommodate a café/restaurant together with a meeting space and exhibition area together with an external terrace. On the western side of the site would be the vehicular entrance serving four parking spaces (one of which is proposed to be disabled) for staff and a bin store. 2.2 The intention is to create an iconic building accommodating in the region of 400sqm of floorspace to act as a focal point for the southern part of the resort and to complement the existing leisure offer at Martello Park.
2.3 The application form indicates that the facility would yield five full-time and eight part- time jobs. The proposed opening hours are 0800-2300h Monday to Saturday and 0800h to 2200h on Sundays and Bank Holidays.
3. CONSULTATIONS
The prescribed consultation period expires on the 7 September 2018 and therefore any additional representations received after the compilation of this report will be included in the Member Update Sheet.
3.1 Felixstowe Town Council: Committee recommended APPROVAL. Committee greatly welcomed this long-needed addition to the resort in Felixstowe, with its potentially iconic design and presentation. Committee is aware of the concerns of local residents who believe this was not envisaged in the original concept of the development, but equally are aware that this is not the case and the masterplan had reserved this site for a café/restaurant. Committee was glad to note the Flood Risk Assessment but
4
would like to see strong planning conditions to ensure that materials are resilient to flooding from the sea and also not insignificant but frequent sea-spray. 3.2 English Heritage: raise no objection to the application 3.3 Suffolk County Council - Flooding Authority: have not sought to object to the application given it is a minor application outside of their remit, however draw attention to informative advice provided. 3.4 SCDC - Head of Environmental Services and Port Health: raise comments seeking additional information via planning conditions – these have been included within the recommendation. 3.5 Felixstowe Society : supports this attractive proposal for the South Seafront. 3.6 Suffolk County Council Highways Authority: No objection subject to conditions 3.7 Third Party Representations: 15Letters of objection have been received raising the following matters: A ea ell se ed fo afé s Adverse mental health impact on local residents A garden would be preferable Size and scale is too great and out of proportion Will obscure the view from some residential properties Additional traffic will create problems Should focus development on other run-down areas Will blight some properties Cavendish site is in close proximity and recently have planning permission for similar uses Will seek legal action if approved in the region of £100k per property as compensation to reflect the devaluation of properties Café not raised during conveyancing No.2 Orford Road was allocated two parking spaces on land to the front of the house which would be lost. If these residents are forced to park at the rear then they will obstruct access to the parking spaces for No.4. This was written into the covenants by Bloor Homes. Will bring more litter, vandalism, anti-social behaviour and vermin At the very least the roof should be lowered.
4. RELEVANT POLICIES 4.1 NPPF 4.2 NPPG 4.3 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Core Strategy and Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2013) policies: SP1a – Sustainable Development SP1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SP8 – Tourism
5
SP11 – Accessibility SP15 – Landscape and Townscape SP19 – Settlement Hierarchy SP21 – Felixstowe with Walton and the Trimley Villages DM19 – Parking Standards DM21 – Design: Aesethics DM22 – Design: Function DM23 – Residential Amenity 4.4 Felixstowe Area Action Plan Policies SP220 – Spa Pavilion to Martello Park 5. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 The key issues associated with this application relate to the following matters:
The principle of development having due regard to the planning history of the site; Design and appearance of the proposed building; The impact on heritage assets; Impact on residential amenity. Highways considerations and parking provision; and Economic benefits
Principle of development 5.2 Members will note from Section 3.6 of this report that concern has been raised from some local residents that the inclusion of a café was not brought to their attention when purchasing a property and the impact of such will be detrimental to the value of their properties. Whilst noting that impact on a property value, either positive or negative, is not a material planning consideration, officers do not believe that it is an accurate statement that such a facility on the site could not have been envisaged when purchasing a property.
5.3 The development of a café/restaurant in this location has been accepted in principle since the first planning approval in the area in 2009 and then again in the implemented 2012 proposals (application reference C/12/0068 refers) which was approved on the 28 May 2012. Whilst it was not part of the planning permission at that time, it formed a part of the wider masterplan for the housing development and Martello Park and was clearly identified not only on the plans and in the decision notice as an informative advising that the development of a café would need to be via a detailed planning application.
5.4 When the scheme was evolved and considered, the development of the housing element was a catalyst for the delivery of public realm – indeed it was the enabling element to deliver significant tourism benefits in this location. The area reserved for a
6
café was clearly identified on the approved plans submitted by Bloor Homes and subsequently approved by the Local Planning Authority. These plans, decision notice and Committee report are available in the public domain.
5.5 The proposal seeks to work within the area planned for this use and as a tourism focussed development in a key priority area for tourism development and regeneration. Policy SPP20 of the Felixstowe Area Action Plan encompasses this area and supports and promotes high intensity tourist uses in the area between the Spa Pavilion and Martello Park, with a high proportion of these to be located along the Sea Road frontage. The policy welcomes proposals which actively encourage new resort experiences and resort related uses will be supported on the Sea Road frontage. This supports the overarching policies of SP9 and SP21 in the Local Plan which promote additional and improved tourism offer in Felixstowe. The proposal would in the opinion of officers support these policies and complement not just the wider Martello Park but also other leisure and tourism uses in the town including, but not limited to, the new pier, seafront gardens, Premier Inn and Martello path. The improvements to the town of Felixstowe over recent years (resort, residential and employment) have been significant and this is another welcome addition to the enhancement of the town. Design and Appearance 5.6 It is accepted that the approved plans on the 2012 application did not detail the design, appearance or scale of the proposed building, however it was always envisaged that any such facility would be of a scale to complement the existing two kiosks and act as a focal point for visitors to Felixstowe and provide a much needed facility at the southern end of the resort.
5.7 It is considered that the high quality design of this proposal will enhance the area and provide an iconic building to complement the range of buildings and features of interest which make this resort a high quality coastal destination. Great care has been taken to achieve a design which is both high quality and sensitive to its historic and coastal setting. The proposed building design and construction will seek to minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate effects to climate change whilst also providing a design which addresses the coastal flood risk of the area.
5.8 Members will note that some local residents believe that the size and scale of the building is to great for the site, and have in one instance suggested that the dynamic roof is replaced by a flat roof. It is understood that the main driver for these comments relate more to the impact on residential amenity rather than visual appearance and are matters therefore considered elsewhere in the report. Regarding the change of rood, officers are of the opinion that a flat-roof structure would not lead to the creation of an iconic building, a focal point in its own right, and therefore would not meet the aspiration of the Council in terms of the wider development of the area. The NPPF places great emphasis on securing high quality, innovative designs and applicants should not shy away from such where all other matters are acceptable.
7
Impact on Heritage Assets 5.9 As noted earlier in the report, due south of the application site is a Martello Tower, which has the benefit of being a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM) and accordingly should receive appropriate protection and consideration of its setting. In o de to eet the st i ge t tests fo su h laid out i the NPPF, the Cou il s P i ipal Design and Conservation Officer has been involved in consideration of the application and consultation has also been undertaken with Historic England, whose response is contained in paragraph 3.2 above.
5.10 It is important to recognise the significant change in setting which has occurred to the Martello Tower as a result of the residential development. In comparison with the previous derelict setting, despite the enclosure created by the buildings, this has benefitted the setting and long term management of the designated heritage asset. The formal space around the tower frames it and provides focus, it is now an attractive space and the tower has far greater access and public appeal than it did prior to that development.
5.11 When the residential development was consented, it was accompanied by detailed Heritage Statement and sat alongside the masterplan for the site which also proposed the future café opportunity. Previously there has been no concern raised about the potential in-combination effect of both the housing and this form of development and Historic England were heavily engaged in the design of the scheme as a whole. The baseline setting has therefore changed substantially since that time and the tower now sits within an urban environment to its south-west, west and north and significant sea views remain to its north-east, east and south-east. The latter views clearly being of greatest importance to it historic function and essential to retain as part of its setting and historic appreciation. Indeed it was always part of the design of the site that the area immediately surrounding the tower remained devoid of any permanent structures or play equipment to retain its immediate setting.
5.12 It is also important to recognise that the site of the proposed development previously housed the Herman de Stern building which was demolished in 2006. This large early 20th century building had a similar relationship with the tower and some non-designated heritage interest in itself. It provided a focal point of interest to the end of Sea Road in much the same way that this proposal sets out to achieve.
5.13 It is necessary however for the decision maker to consider the level of harm an undertake the necessary balancing exercise. This includes the statutory test of Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (in respect of the Listed Building status only):
In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State 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
8
5.14 The NPPF sets out the consideration process in respect of harm to the setting of He itage Assets, depe di g o hethe that is su sta tial o less tha su sta tial ha . I this i sta e, it is o side ed that the p oposal ill ot ha e a sig ifi a t effect on the setting of the Martello Tower, however that will introduce a low level of harm and therefore it is recognised that the test of Paragraph 196 of the NPPF will eed to e applied i assessi g the less tha su sta tial ha o this he itage asset, along with the statutory desirability of preserving the setting of the listed building. Alongside this, the proposal accords with the development plan and therefore has significant merit as a development in itself.
The NPPF states that: When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a desig ated heritage asset, great eight should e gi e to the asset s o ser atio (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be).
Paragraph 196. Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.
5.15 It is concluded that the less than substantial harm should be balanced against the following benefits arising as a result of the development: Substantial benefits to the visitor/tourism economy and regeneration of Felixstowe. Increased visitors to the immediate area who can experience the Martello To e s histo a d the e isti g i te p etatio . This ill i lude a e opportunity for views of the tower to be enjoyed from within an indoor café/restaurant area year-round. The entrance/exhibition area of the building may also provide an opportunity for further interpretation of the tower and the history of the area. Direct benefits through the proposed development facilitating the creation of long term management and investment proposals for the Martello Tower, including the introduction of an optimum viable use through increased visitor activity in the area. The creation of a significant number of direct and in-direct jobs. The construction of a high quality design which will enhance the area and improve various views on the seafront. A development which accords with the development plan and is supported by strategic policies for the area.
Therefore the public benefits outweigh the less than substantial harm and the proposal accords with the NPPF and the Development Plan. Impact on Residential Amenity 5.16 One of the key influences on the design was achieving a scale and layout which responded to the surrounding residential development in order to minimise its effects.
9
The proposed café is within an area which has peaks of public activity within the hild e s pla a ea a d o the sea f o t a d as a sea f o t tou is fo ussed a ea the integration of further commercial development is compatible with the surrounding uses, subject to design measures and safeguards. It is accepted that the proposed development will result in a change in relationship to those properties, but change is not necessary unacceptable and it is the significance of those impacts which need to be appropriately assessed.
5.17 Officers are of the opinion that the proposal has been carefully designed to avoid the introduction of windows and external seating areas which would face or overlook the adjacent residential dwellings. The outlook of the building is towards the play area and sea and therefore there is no direct views into any surrounding properties. Na o slit i do s a e i luded i the ea ele atio of the d u spa e ut these would be a minimum of 19m from the ground floor front windows of the nearest property. The western end of the external deck has also been designed to include a privacy screen to restrict any views from tables towards the dwellings.
5.18 The main building will be sufficiently distanced from the dwellings to avoid blocking the outlook of dwellings. This is not the same the effect on private views, which is not a material planning consideration. Therefore private residential sea views cannot be protected when determining the planning application, however the design has purposefully attempted to minimise its mass and position itself to reduce the number of private views affected. The responses from third parties highlights this as being a significant issue and in particular the resident at No.2 Orford Road is concerned that their views of the sea will be removed. The plans forming part of the submission in the Design and Access Statement clearly show that whilst there will be an impact, there will still be views available from their windows on the eastern elevation of their property, although it is also important to note that the orientation of this window is due north and therefore the main windows and views have been designed to face north towards Orford Road.
5.19 This application submission provides a detailed sun path study showing the shadow cast by the building in winter and summer. The overshadowing of adjacent buildings is limited to mid-winter mornings when the sun is on its lowest path and this would be limited to ground floors. Considering the elevated height of ground floor rooms/windows in properties to the west, designed so as to remove habitable rooms out of the flood zone, the effect on those rooms would not be as significant and when assessed on a year round basis the effect would not be considered an adverse impact on amenity.
5.20 As an A3 café/restaurant use the proposal will introduce public activity and modest groups of people socialising. Again, this is a matter which has been raised via the public consultation responses. The building will be developed and let by the Council and therefore as the Council also has a responsibility for protection of Environmental Health the maintenance of a low level of noise and disturbance will be a priority for the Council as a landlord.
10
5.21 The building has been designed to avoid noise and disturbance through various elements of the design. First of all, it should be accepted that this area was always planned for a café and therefore the residential properties adjacent to this site were positioned with this fact in mind and the interrelationship between both such uses has already been considered as part of the 2012 planning application.
5.22 This design also addresses the western and northern residential neighbours by turning its back to them and placing all seating area and openings on the southern and western elevations. This seeks to direct noise away from these properties. Internally the building will be well insulated against noise breakout and it is not intended to be a significant noise generating use. Externally, the noise generated in daytime hours by customers will be comparable with existing activity within the park. In the evenings the area does have lower noise levels but it is an urban area and its is not deemed to have a level of tranquillity which could not accommodate such a use.
5.23 The noise of any extraction and ventilation equipment will be addressed by appropriate housing around it and insulating it within the parapet area of the rear drum element. The detail of extraction and ventilation equipment and its noise levels should be agreed by condition as is standard practice once an operator of café has been identified and they can design a bespoke ventilation scheme to meet their e ui e e ts. These o ditio s ill eed to e ag eed the Cou il s Head of Environmental Health who have a responsibility to consider noise impacts on sensitive receptors.
5.24 It is considered that vehicular movements to and from the site will be minimal and limited to staff parking, deliveries and collections. Conditions are proposed to deal with delivery times to ensure that these are acceptable on the neighbouring residential properties and also to agree a strategy for noise management once an occupier is in place and prior to the use commencing.
5.25 Any lighting is proposed to be focussed away from dwellings and any lighting provided to the rear will be low level. Odour from cooking will be carefully controlled through filtration integrated into the extraction and ventilation equipment to be agreed with Environmental Health Officers. An enclosed and secured bin storage area will be provided to avoid odour and amenity impacts and to protect from litter being spread by wind or gulls. Careful design measures will be implemented in the landscaping and construction to avoid vermin populations on the site.
5.26 The design seeks to have a safe relationship with the public areas surrounding it. Measures will be incorporate to ensure that the building and external deck are secured from trespassing outside of opening hours and the building will be well observed from surrounding residential uses to minimise the risk of anti-social behaviour. Highways Considerations 5.27 Concern has been raised that insufficient parking has been provided and that the additional traffic will create problems. As shown on the plans, four parking spaces are provided within the site, three identified for staff and one for accessible parking. The
11
café is seen as a complementary use supporting the wider Martello Park and leisure offer in the area, and to that end it is important to note that two public pay and display car parks are provided within Martello Park which are well related to the café. It is therefore considered that sufficient parking is available to the café.
5.28 Existing residents parking remains unfettered by this proposal. It is noted that one resident advises that No.2 Orford Road was allocated two parking spaces on land to the front of the house which would be lost. If these residents are forced to park at the rear then they will obstruct access to the parking spaces for No.4. The approved plans associated with the 2012 application provided sufficient parking for each property to the rear of properties, and therefore shielded from public vantage points, but offered appropriate natural surveillance. Any parking on this land does not benefit from planning permission and cannot therefore be protected. The approved parking for all residents remains unfettered by these proposals and therefore in accordance with the 2012 approved plans sufficient parking access remains for both No.2 and No.4 Orford Road. Economic Benefits 5.29 The proposal will add substantially to the regeneration of this part of Felixstowe Seafront which requires public investment for economic growth. It will help to make Felixstowe a o e att a ti e desti atio a d sig ifi a tl add to the eso t s visitor economy. The proposal will also generate jobs (as listed earlier in the report) with a direct economic benefit and it will also provide indirect benefits to the area through greater footfall along the South Seafront by acting as a destination complementing the recent Pier and Historic Garden destination investment.
5.30 It is also considered that existing businesses in the area will be made more viable and competitive through this addition.
5.31 The proposal will provide a substantial social benefit through job creation and its ability to deliver a space which can be used for community events and groups. This will suppo t the o u it s health, so ial a d ultu al ell-being. In addition this facility adjacent to the substantial play area will enhance the use of that area by families, encouraging healthy activities and access to open space, including the promenade and beach. Conclusions 5.32 The introduction of a high quality designed café is a welcome addition to the resort and tourism offer of Martello Park and Felixstowe more widely. This is the final element of the 2012 approval of the development and will seek to complete the wider development as originally envisaged. Whilst it is noted that there will be a change of relationship to existing properties, this was always planned for and the impacts associated are not significant enough to warrant refusal of permission and are outweighed by the benefits that would ensue, including the economic, tourism and community benefits. The application is policy compliant and recommended for approval.
12
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE subject to the following conditions
1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun within a period of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.
2 The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until it has been completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the following plans received 31 July 2018, PL343-A01-01 - Location Plan PL343-A02-01B - Proposed Overall Block Plan PL343-A02-02C - Proposed Block Plan PL343-A02-10 - Proposed Elevations PL343-A02-11 - Alternative Floor Plan for which permission is hereby granted or which are subsequently submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and in compliance with any conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To secure a properly planned development.
3 The materials and finishes shall be as indicated within the submitted application and thereafter retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development in the interests of visual amenity
4 The working hours in connection with the use/building[s] hereby permitted, shall not be other than between 8am and 23pm Monday to Saturday; 8am and 10pm on Sundays and Bank Holidays. Reason: In the interests of amenity and the protection of the local environment.
5 Prior to any installation, the details of any ventilation and extraction equipment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only the equipment approved by means of this condition shall be installed and operated. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity
6 The delivery of goods and removal of waste shall restricted to undertaken only between 8am and 6pm Mondays to Saturdays and at no times outside of these hours. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity
7 There shall be no live or amplified music outside of the building hereby approved. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity
13
8 Prior to the commencement of development, a Construction Management and Deliveries Plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The construction of the dwelling hereby approved shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the approved Plan. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity and to reduce and / or remove as far as is reasonably possible the effects of HGV traffic in sensitive areas.
9 The access shall be completed in all respects in accordance with Drawing No. PL343 A02-02C and SCC Standard Drawing DM10; with an entrance width of 4.5m and be available for use before first occupation. Thereafter it shall be retained in its approved form. At this time all other means of access within the frontage of the application site shall be permanently and effectively closed to the satisfaction of the Highways Authority "stopped up" in a manner which previously shall have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety to ensure the approved layout is properly constructed and laid out and to avoid multiple accesses which would be detrimental to highway safety.
10 The areas to be provided for storage of Refuse/Recycling bins as shown on drawing number PL343 A02-02C shall be provided in its entirety before the development is brought into use and shall be retained thereafter for no other purpose. Reason: To ensure that refuse recycling bins are not stored on the highway causing obstruction and dangers for other users.
11 The use shall not commence until the area(s) within the site shown on drawing number PL343 A02-02C for the purposes of [LOADING, UNLOADING,] manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has been provided and thereafter that area(s) shall be retained and used for no other purposes. Reason: To ensure that sufficient space for the on site parking of vehicles is provided and maintained in order to ensure the provision of adequate on-site space for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles where on-street parking and manoeuvring would be detrimental to highway safety to users of the highway.
12 Before the development is commenced details of the areas to be provided for secure cycle storage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be carried out in its entirety before the development is brought into use and shall be retained thereafter and used for no other purpose. Reason: To ensure the provision of sustainable secure cycle storage.
13 Before the development is commenced details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing the means to prevent the discharge
14
of surface water from the development onto the highway. The approved scheme shall be carried out in its entirety before the access is first used and shall be retained thereafter in its approved form. Reason: To prevent hazards caused by flowing water or ice on the highway.
DETERMINATION:
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No DC/18/3173/FUL and C12/0068 Committee Date: 20 September 2018
15
2. HOLLESLEY – DC/18/2663/FUL – Use of 1st Floor in addition to office use, approved under C08/0599, use as a residential or holiday accommodation at Vale Farm, Stebbings Lane, Hollesley IP12 3QZ for Mr Peter Scopes
Case Officer: Danielle Miller
Expiry Date: 6 September 2018 (Extension of time until 27 October 2018)
DC/18/2663/FUL – Vale Farm, Stebbings Lane, Hollesley IP12 3QZ
DO NOT SCALE SLA100019684
Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning Permission is sought for the use of the 1st floor of an existing outbuilding, which was approved under C08/0599 for office use, to be used as residential or holiday accommodation in addition to office use as approved, at Vale Farm, Stebbings Lane, Hollesley
This item has come before members because the proposals are contrary to the Development Plan (Policy SP8) in that the site is not located within a sustainable location. Dispute this it is considered by officers that the development would contribute to the tourism offer within the district and provide a unique property in a rural location as such the application is recommended for the authority to approve subject to considerations of material planning considerations and conditions.
16
1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The site lies at the end of Stebbings Lane, coming west out of the village of Hollesley. Hollesle is lassified as a Ke “e i e Ce t e i the Lo al Pla , ho e e the application site lies outside the physical limits boundary by some 350 metres and therefore considered to be located within the countryside in planning terms. The site lies within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty outside of the physical limits boundary for Hollesley. 1.2 The site comprises of a large farm house know as Vale Farm with a detached outbuilding comprising of garaging storage and Vale View which is the subject of this planning application. 2. PROPOSALS 2.1 The application seeks permission for the use of the 1st floor of an existing outbuilding, known locally as Vale View, to be used as residential or holiday accommodation in addition to the office use which was approved under application C08/0599 at Vale Farm, Stebbings Lane. 2.2 The building was granted permission under application C08/0599 as the erection of one-and-a-half storey building to provide carports, garage, feed store, workshop, garden machinery store and office at first floor following the (demolition of existing outbuildings). Condition 9 of that permission stated that the development including the office shall not be used other than for purposes ancillary and incidental to the existing dwelling and shall be used only for the purposes outlined on the drawings permitted. 2.3 The first floor alone with office accommodation has been used as residential accommodation in association with the main property and occasional holiday lets which is advertised on Suffolk Secrets; Love Cottage; Self Catering Travel and AirBnB. An enforcement case, reference ENF/2017/0352/USE, was opened to investigate the use contrary to the approval granted it is as a result of this investigation the owners have submitted this planning application to regularise the use of the first floor. The accommodation at first floor level consists of an office/lounge area approximately 5 metres x 6.5 metres, a separate kitchen area and toilet with 2 small bedrooms, the change of use occurred in 2014. The other side at this level is used for storage as stated on the original application. As this is a retrospective application no building works are due to be undertaken. 3. CONSULTATIONS The application was re-published with a revised site notice stating that the site is in the vicinity of a public right of way and as a departure from the local plan. The site notice expires on the 28 August 2018 any additional comments received will be noted in the members update report. 3.1 Hollesley Parish Council: Object to the application stating: This lo atio is outside the PLB fo Hollesle a d the efo e o e esidential dwelling should be permitted. Access to this location is along a long single lane track with very few passing places. This location is not suited to further traffic which will be
17
caused by the location being use for either residential of holiday accommodation e o e d efusal 3.2 Suffolk County Council - Highway Authority: No objection 3.3 SCDC - Head of Environmental Services and Port Health: have raised a concern over contamination and requested a condition to mitigate against any contamination issues that may arise. 3.4 SCDC – Economic Development: No objection. The annual Economic Impact of Tourism report for 2016 states that self-catering accommodation was worth £6,391,000 to the local economy last year. It is recognised that the offer at Vale View is particularly charming in a peaceful rural location adding to the diverse accommodation offer within the district. 3.5 Third Party Representations: One Letter of Objection has been received raising the following points: No objection to the regulated holiday let, however objection raised to unrestricted residential permission as it would constitute a new dwelling in the countryside. The unmade access lane is unsuitable for consistent increase in vehicles accessing the dwelling 4. RELEVANT POLICIES 4.1 NPPF 4.2 NPPG 4.3 NPPG 4.4 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Core Strategy and Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2013) policies: SP1a – Sustainable Development SP1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SP8 – Tourism SP12 – Climate Change SP14 – Biodiversity and Geodiversity SP15 - Landscape and Townscape SP19 – Settlement Policy SP27 – Key and Local Service Centres DM3 – Housing in the Countryside DM6 – Residential Annexes DM21 – Design: Aesthetics DM23 – Residential Amenity DM27 – Biodiversity and Geodiversity
18
4.5 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Site Allocations and Area Specific Development Plan Document (adopted 2017) Policies: SSP2 Physical Limits Boundary 5. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Principle of development 5.1 The site lies in the countryside which is generally protected for its own sake in accordance with policy SP29, however there are some exceptions to this where certain development may be supported. In this case, Policy SP8 in relation to tourism is the most relevant. This policy, and the supporting text to it, highlights the important contribution that tourism has on the local economy and it generally supportive of development that promotes tourism offer in the district. The policy sets out the type of development that is appropriate in different areas of the district. Within the Area of Outsta di g Natu al Beaut AONB , it states that de elop e t i the fo of conversions, improvements/minor extension to existing facilities and small scale new development in unexposed areas will be acceptable within sustainable locations where a landscape assessment shows these could be accommodated with no adverse i pa t . 5.2 The building gained permission in 2008 under C08/0599 for the erection of one and a half storey building to provide carports, garage, feed store and workshop, garden machinery store and office at first floor (demolition of existing outbuilding). It is understood that the first floor was converted into a small self contained unit in 2014 where it was used as ancillary accommodation for Vale Farm and a holiday let. Whilst this is a retrospective application it is considered as a conversion of an existing building under policy SP8. The overall scale of accommodation is modest with two small bedrooms, a living/office space; kitchen and shower room. The site is well landscaped with trees and well established shrubs. There are minimal public view points of the site from Stebbings Lane and the nearby public right of way. Given the landscaping around the site and the position of the outbuilding it is not considered that the building is in a dominant position with any long distance public views as such it considered that the site should not be considered to be within an exposed part of the AONB. 5.3 Policy SP8 states that tourism development in the AONB will be acceptable within sustainable locations. The site is located on the edge of the village of Hollesley, outside the physical limits boundary, as such it is effectively within the countryside. The site is approximately 350 metres from the edge of the settlement where there is a range of services which occupants could walk to via a public footpath as such the site does go some way towards being located within a sustainable location. However given the sites position in the countryside it is effectively contrary to this element of the policy. 5.4 Although the site is not located within the settlement boundary it is close enough to walk to access services provided within Hollelsey furthermore the site given its rural environment is a draw to tourists who wish to experience the quiet, countryside location which is an attraction of the site. This is supported by SCDC Economic De elop e t ho s annual Economic Impact of Tourism report for 2016 states that
19
self-catering accommodation was worth £6,391,000 to the local economy last year and recognise that the offer at Vale View is particularly charming in a peaceful rural location which adds to the diverse accommodation offer within the district. Given the attraction of the countryside, practically within the AONB to visitors and the possibility that access to local services is achievable on foot it is considered in this case that the provision of a single unit of holiday accommodation should be supported in this location. 5.5 National policies also supports the above with paragraph 83 of the NPPF stating planning policies should enable sustainable rural tourism and leisure developments which respect the character of the countryside. Paragraph 84 of the NPPF continues to advise that decisions should recognise that sites to meet local business and community needs in rural areas may have to be found adjacent to or beyond existing settlements, and in locations that are not wel served by public transport. 5.6 In addition to holiday accommodation the application seeks to secure the unit as ancillary residential accommodation. Local policy DM6 relating to the creation of self contained annexes to existing dwellings supports such accommodation where the annexe is in the form of the conversion of an outbuilding which is well related to the existing dwelling, does not have adverse effect on residential or visual amenity and has no impact on the landscape providing conditions are applied to limit occupation. The external outbuilding has not been altered externally to accommodate the annexe as such it is not considered to cause any visual harm to the landscape over and above that already existing and approved. There are no immediate residential properties which may be affected by the use of the building as an annexe in terms of amenity. A condition could be attached to any approval granted to limit the occupation and prevent future use as a separate dwelling. In this instance the proposal as a residential annexe is acceptable and should be supported. Design and Visual Impact 5.7 The proposal does not include any additional building works, merely a change of use of part of the first floor to include holiday let and residential accommodation. No external alterations have been made to the building to accommodate this change of use as such it is not considered that this proposal impact on the surrounding countryside or wider landscape of the AONB. Ecology 5.8 No ecological survey has been submitted with the application, however as the proposal does not seek to carry out any development it is not considered that the proposals will impact on on-site habitats or nesting birds. Viability 5.9 The application is unique in that it proposes a particularly charming holiday destination in a peaceful rural location with footpath access into the Hollesley. Although the application is for holiday accommodation, the application also seeks to use the building as residential accommodation this is in relation to the existing property on the site and would be ancillary, however local concern has been raised that the proposal may lead to a permanent separate dwelling. A condition can be
20
applied to any approval granted limiting the occupancy to a limit suitable to holiday let or as ancillary accommodation to the house. 5.10 The accommodation does not lend itself to be easily segregated from Vale Farm as it is located above the properties garage and workshop, it is not a separate building which could be sectioned off from the main house and ancillary outbuilding easily as such Officers are less concerned that the applicant could come back and seek the removal of such a condition, furthermore they would also need to remove the condition on approval C08/0599 which further stipulates that the outbuilding, in its entirety, is to be used solely as ancillary to Vale Farm. Highways 5.11 The site is accessed from a single unmade road known as Stebbings Lane, the lane has limited passing places and doubles up as a public right of way. Concern has been raised that the access is not suitable to accommodate additional vehicular movements, however the Highways Authority have not raised any concern in relation to this and only a few properties are accessed via this lane. The nature of the road ensure the vehicles moving down it remain slow and mindful of their surroundings. The increase in traffic is minimal in terms of the accommodation offered at the site as such officers do not consider that refusal could be based on access issues alone. Conclusions and Planning Balance 5.12 Although the proposal is contrary to policy in so far that the site is located 350 metres outside the physical limits boundary of Hollesley, a Key Service Centre, the local plan as a whole is supportive of tourism development and appropriately sized and located annexes. Given that the proposals do not warrant any development they are not considered to be harmful to the character or appearance of the site nor the wider landscape of the AONB. 5.13 The u it does ot le d itself to e easil sepa ated f o the ai d elli g Vale Fa and associating outbuildings as such Officers consider that a condition limiting occupation in this instance is suitable to ensure that a independent separate dwelling is not created within the Countryside. 5.14 On balance it is therefore considered that the positive aspects of the proposal outweigh the fact that the site is located within the countryside. In this case it is considered that an exception to policy should be made and the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION: AUTHORITY TO APPROVE subject to the consideration of any further material planning considerations received and subject to controlling conditions including the following:
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: This condition is imposed in accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
21
2. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out other than in complete accordance with Drawing No's 014/2008/01 received on 08/08/2018 and floor plans received 25/06/2018 Reason: For avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved. 3. The premises herein referred to as 'Vale View' shall be used for Office use, holiday letting accommodation or as an 'annexe' and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class C3 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) to Vale Farm. When the unit is in use as a 'holiday let', the duration of occupation by any one person, or persons, of the unit shall not exceed a period of 56 days in total in any one calendar year. The owners/operators of the holiday unit hereby permitted shall maintain an up-to-date Register of all lettings, which shall include the names and addresses of all those persons occupying the unit during each individual letting. The said register shall be made available at all reasonable times to the Local Planning Authority. When in use as an 'annexe' the unit shall not be occupied or let as a separate dwelling but shall be used only for purposes incidental to the use of the dwelling to which it relates or for occupation by a guest, relative, employee or parent of the householder or his/her spouse. Reason: The development is not such that the local planning authority would be prepared to approve as a separate dwelling in its own right. This condition is imposed to ensure that the development is occupied only as bona-fide holiday accommodation or as an ancillary annexe, in the interests of residential amenity, and the protection of the countryside. 4. The outbuilding including the 1st floor accommodation shall not be used other than for purposes ancillary and incidental to the existing dwelling, Vale Farm, and shall be used only for the purposes outlined on the drawings hereby approved and for no other purposes unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: The local planning authority would not approve the development other than for the purposes listed within the description and in association with the existing building. 5. No development (including any construction, demolition, site clearance or removal of underground tanks and relic structures) approved by this planning permission, shall take place until a site investigation consisting of the following components has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority: a) A desk study and site reconnaissance, including: - a detailed appraisal of the history of the site; - an inspection and assessment of current site conditions; - an assessment of the potential types, quantities and locations of hazardous materials and contaminants considered to potentially exist on site; - a conceptual site model indicating sources, pathways and receptors; and - a preliminary assessment of the risks posed from contamination at the site to relevant receptors, including: human health, ground waters, surface waters, ecological systems and property (both existing and proposed).
22
b) Where deemed necessary following the desk study and site reconnaissance an intrusive investigation(s), including: - the locations and nature of sampling points (including logs with descriptions of the materials encountered) and justification for the sampling strategy; - an explanation and justification for the analytical strategy; - a revised conceptual site model; and - a revised assessment of the risks posed from contamination at the site to relevant receptors, including: human health, ground waters, surface waters, ecological systems and property (both existing and proposed). All site investigations must be undertaken by a competent person and conform with current guidance and best practice, including: BS 10175:2011+A1:2013 and CLR11. Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors. 6 No development (including any construction, demolition, site clearance or removal of underground tanks and relic structures) approved by this planning permission, shall take place until a detailed remediation method statement (RMS) has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the LPA. The RMS must include, but is not limited to: - details of all works to be undertaken including proposed methodologies, drawings and plans, materials, specifications and site management procedures; - an explanation, including justification, for the selection of the proposed remediation methodology(ies); - proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria; and - proposals for validating the remediation and, where appropriate, for future maintenance and monitoring. The RMS must be prepared by a competent person and conform to current guidance and best practice, including CLR11. Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors. 7 Prior to any occupation or use of the approved development the RMS approved under condition 2 must be completed in its entirety. The LPA must be given two weeks written notification prior to the commencement of the remedial works. Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors. 8 A validation report must be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA prior to any occupation or use of the approved development. The validation report must include, but is not limited to:
23
- results of sampling and monitoring carried out to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met; - evidence that any RMS approved in pursuance of conditions appended to this consent has been carried out competently, effectively and in its entirety; and - evidence that remediation has been effective and that, as a minimum, the site will not qualify as contaminated land as defined by Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors. 9 In the event that contamination which has not already been identified to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) is found or suspected on the site it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. Unless agreed in writing by the LPA no further development (including any construction, demolition, site clearance, removal of underground tanks and relic structures) shall take place until this condition has been complied with in its entirety. An investigation and risk assessment must be completed in accordance with a scheme which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and conform with prevailing guidance (including BS 10175:2011+A1:2013 and CLR11) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Where remediation is necessary a detailed remediation method statement (RMS) must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The RMS must include detailed methodologies for all works to be undertaken, site management procedures, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria. The approved RMS must be carried out in its entirety and the Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification prior to the commencement of the remedial works. Following completion of the approved remediation scheme a validation report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation must be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors. DETERMINATION:
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No DC/18/2663/FUL and C08/0599 Committee Date: 20 September 2018
24
3. LEISTON - DC/18/2814/VLA – Variation of Legal Agreement – Section 106 signed 21.06.2017, Gas Works, Carr Avenue, Leiston IP16 4AT for Optimis Consulting.
Case Officer: Stephen Milligan
Expiry Date: 29 August 2018
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This application seeks to vary the Section 106 Legal Agreement that was signed as part of the Outline Planning Permission DC16/0527/OUT. The variation seeks to omit the requirement for affordable housing on the grounds that the scheme is unviable if affordable housing provision was maintained.
The viability of the development has been assessed on behalf of the Council by BNP Paribas who confirm the development is not viable with affordable housing included. The variation is therefore proposed for agreement.
This item has come before members because there is no delegated power to officers to determine such proposals under the scheme of delegation.
1. SITE DESCRIPTION
1.1. The application site is the former Gas Works site off Carr Avenue, Leiston.
25
1.2. The site as g a ted Outli e Pla i g Pe issio i fo E e tio of dwellings with associated paths, landscaping and boundary walls, gates and fences. Re-positio i g of e isti g ehi ula a ess to e d i e a d pa ki g a ea. efe e e C/16/0527).
1.3. The reserved matters consent was granted in 2017 ref DC/17/3653/ARM.
2. PROPOSALS
2.1. This application seeks to amend the S106 Legal Agreement that was signed in connection with the outline consent, to omit the requirement for affordable housing.
2.2. The application has been submitted under Section 106A of the Town and Country Planning (Modification and Discharge of Planning Obligations) Regulations 1992.
2.3. The S106 Agreement required the following: a) £150 per dwelling for the Habitats Regulation Mitigation Contribution. b) 5 dwellings to be for affordable housing. c) Viability assessment could be provided where the site was considered unviable.
2.4 Viability was an issue at the signing of the S106 agreement with a viability assessment presented at application stage which justified a reduction in the usual requirement for affordable housing. A clause was included within the 106 to allow reconsideration of viability prior to commencement of development. Viability was not re-assessed prior to commencement of development.
3. CONSULTATIONS
3.1. Leiston Town Council: submitted the following comments: e ers ha e o sidered the a o e proposal a d I regret to report that the ould RECOMMEND REFUSAL. Members deplore this practice of getting permission for development and then reneging on the responsibility to provide affordable homes. To get the sums wrong so often as developers seem to do does tend to erode members confidence in this process. They would hope that you be as firm as you can with regard to this and maintain some affordable homes within this develop e t if at all possi le.
4. RELEVANT POLICIES
4.1 NPPF
4.2 NPPG
4.3 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Core Strategy and Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2013) policies: DM2 – Affordable Housing on Residential Sites.
26
5. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Policy DM2 of the Local Plan provides that there should be provision of 1 in 3 affordable housing unless provision is not required due to (a) lack of identified local need in the area (b) site conditions, suitability and economic provision.
5.2 The NPPF pa a states Whe e up-to-date policies have set out the contributions expected from development, planning applications that comply with them should be assumed to be viable. It is up to the applicant to demonstrate whether particular circumstances justify the need for a viability assessment at the application stage. The weight to be given to a viability assessment is a matter for the decision maker, having regard to all the circumstances in the case, including whether the plan and the viability evidence underpinning it is up to date, and any change in site circumstances since the plan was brought into force. All viability assessments, including any undertaken at the plan-making stage, should reflect the recommended approach in national planning guidance, including standardised inputs, and should be ade pu li l a aila le. Given DM2 and NPPF para 57 it is considered reasonable to consider the viability of a development to enable completion of the housing development at Carr Avenue.
5.3 This application was accompanied by an economic viability analysis by Optimis Consulting which has been assessed by external consultants BNP Paribas on behalf of the Council. Having regard to the conclusions of the consultant, it is considered that in this instance the scheme generates a residual land value which is unable to deliver a competitive return to the developer either by on site provision or commuted sum in lieu of on site provision.
5.4 BNP Pa i as state: I ou e ie of Opti is assu ptio s, e ha e e o e ded the following amendments:
■ Adjust affordable housing revenue to reflect the current market; ■ Reduce contingency allowance to reflect current market expectations; ■ Adjust finance rate to reflect current lending rates; and ■ Adjust profit levels to reflect the current market.
We have undertaken an appraisal of the proposed Development including 100% private housing, taking into account the amendments recommended above. The proposed Development generates a residual land value (RLV) of -£282,258 providing a deficit of £282,259 against the viability benchmark. It should be noted that the deficit of £282,259 is in comparison to the deficit of £483,041 identified by Optimis.
Taking into account the recommended amendments outlined in this report, we have concluded that the proposed Development with 100% private housing generates a egati e ‘LV a d the efo e is u a le to ia l p o ide a affo da le housi g.
27
Conclusions
5.5 Given the conclusions of the BNP Paribas report, it is considered that the Legal Agreement should be varied to omit the requirement for the provision of affordable housing at this site/development.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE the variation of the S106.
DETERMINATION:
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No DC/16/0527/OUT, DC/18/2814/VLA and DC/17/3653/ARM.
Committee Date: 20 September 2018
28
4. PEASENHALL – DC/16/3514/FUL – Erection of six dwellings. Provision of public open space and allotments: Land Adjacent Bridge Cottage, The Causeway, Peasenhall, IP17 2HU for Mr Leverett-Scrivener
Case Officer: Melanie van de Pieterman
Expiry Date: 18 October 2016 (Extension of Time until 30 September 2018)
DC/16/3514/FUL – Land Adj Bridge Cottage The Causeway Peasenhall Suffolk IP17 2HU
DO NOT SCALE SLA100019684 Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning Permission is sought for the construction of six houses, access road, open space/play area and allotments at land on The Causeway, Peasenhall
This item has come before members because of the nature of the application, is advertised as a Departure from policy and the officer recommendation is one of approval having due regard to the tilted balance and benefits of the scheme which in the opinion of officers outweighs any harm associated with the proposal.
1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The 0.30 ha application site is located on the southern side of the Causeway which lies in the centre of the village and runs in parallel with The Street. The site is former
29
allotment land that has been allowed to run fallow and has not been in use for considerable amount of time and is currently overgrown with brambles. 1.2 The majority of the village of Peasenhall, including this site is within a designated Conservation Area, as defined in the local plan and to the east of the site is Bridge Cottage, a Grade II listed building that is currently derelict. Bridge Cottage was first listed in December 1984 and is owned by the applicant. It is also on the buildings at isk register as identified by Historic England and has been on the register since 2000. 1.3 The site is also located within the Special Landscape Area (SLA) as designated within the Local Plan. 1.4 The site is accessed via The Causeway which in turn is accessed off The Street. The River Yox to the front of the site separating The Causeway from The Street with both pedestrian and vehicular access. The width of the river at this point is approximately 2.5. It should be noted that parts of The Causeway are located within flood zones 2 and 3, however the site itself and the access from The Causeway are in flood zone 1. 2. PROPOSALS 2.1 The submitted application is in full and seeks approval for the construction of six dwellings with associated garages and cart lodges, roadways and access off the Causeway, and the creation of public open space/play area and allotments. 2.2 The dwellings are of the following mix and sizes:
Plots 1 &2 – two bed semi detached two-storey dwellings having a floor measurement of 80m² Plot 3 – four bed detached two-storey dwelling measuring 153m² floor area Plot 4 – three bed detached two-storey dwelling measuring 149m² floor area Plot 5 - three bed detached two-storey dwelling having a floor area of 150m² Plot 6 - four bed detached two-storey dwelling having a floor area of 190m²
As the total area of the dwellings is less than 1000m² this does not hit the threshold for the requirement of providing affordable housing on the site,however the two-bed semi-detached dwellings are to be retained by the applicant and privately rented. 2.3 The proposed play space measures approximately 1180m², with each of the eight proposed allotments measuring 6m x 27m (162m²). 3. CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Peasenhall Parish Council: support the application stating: It should e oted that there is a great deal of public concern within the village, both positive and negative, about this development and bridge. Peasenhall Parish Council is acutely aware of this and, in this regard, wishes attention to be particularly paid to No.2 in the list of recommendations.
The recommendations of 2016 with additions are as follows:- That access to the site by means of the new bridge is established before work on the site itself is commenced.
30
Peasenhall Parish Council considers that the existing access, that is along The Causeway, from either end, is totally unsuitable for construction traffic and would be damaging to the existing bridges and The Causeway itself. That Peasenhall Parish Council is fully consulted on the design and positioning of the proposed bridge in advance of its construction and is given the opportunity to comment on detailed drawings of it as soon as they become available. Peasenhall Parish Council noted the lack of detail in the drawing that it was given to consider at this meeting, and underlined that it wishes to be consulted as soon as detailed engineering drawings of the proposed bridge are available. That existing trees and hedging on the boundaries of the of the site be retained. The Council noted that the hedge to the East of the proposed site entrance is now marked 'to remain' on Drawing No. 01 B along with the hedge to the West of the entrance. That an undertaking to renovate Bridge Cottages is made by the developer. Response to amended plans and removal of bridge: By a majority vote Peasenhall Parish Council raised no objection to the above proposal. However the Council wishes to restate the recommendations that it has made in commenting on the original and subsequent applications for this site. That no construction traffic uses The Causeway during the development of the site. The Council believes that The Causeway is unsuitable for continued heavy usage. That the existing hedging to the site be retained. That the renovation of Bridge Cottages be carried out along with the main development.
All the following consultee comments have been précised and full comments are available to view on the council website:
3.2 Environment Agency: No objection to the application
3.3 Historic England: The application seeks permission for development of six new dwellings and associated access road in and adjacent to the Peasenhall Conservation Area. Historic England consider this would be harmful in terms of the NPPF. The council should assess any public benefit derived from the development when seeking justification for this harm in line with the NPPF but also the potential for the scheme to be amended to reduce the impact.
3.4 Natural England: Following submission of an Appropriate Assessment Natural England ag ees ith “CDC s o lusio that the p oposal is ot likel to ha e a ad e se effe t on any Natura 2000 site, alone, or in combination with other plans or projects.
31
3.5 Suffolk County Council - Archaeological Service: No objection subject to the imposition of conditions.
3.6 Suffolk County Council - Flooding Authority: No objection
3.7 Suffolk County Council - Fire and Rescue Service (Water Office): No response received
3.8 Suffolk County Council - Highway Authority: Further to the site meeting that Luke Barber attended and understanding that a bridge will no longer be included in the proposal, there is no objection subject to the impostion of conditions 3.9 SCDC - Waste Services Manager: No response received
3.10 Anglian Water: No objection
3.11 Suffolk Wildlife Trust: No objection subject to mitigation measures being implemented
3.12 Environmental Health: No objection subject to the imposition of conditions regarding contaminated land 3.13 Third Party Representations: 21 Letters of Objection have been received raising the following matters: Highways impact on The Causeway Concerns about the proposed bridge and impact on traffic/parking Concerns about appearance of the bridge Concerns about the junction of the bridge and exacerbation of existing parking problems Sewage Design of dwellings Detrimental to the Conservation area Loss of unique space in the village Impact on trees and green spaces Lack of consideration for further tree planting to ensure the longevity of the tree scape through the centre of the village Impact on building at risk (Bridge Cottage) adjacent to site Flooding Anxious to maintain unspoiled rural character Landscape impact Wildlife Noise Preservation of existing features and trees The Causeway is an ancient by-way Houses will look out of place above the existing hedge line
32
Contrary to policy as outside physical limits and therefore not acceptable in principle Will not protect this historic Suffolk village which is unique in layout and worthy of preservation Impact on existing properties Overlooking Loss of outlook Loss of privacy Loss of view Security Loss of property value Insufficient information supplied with regards to the bridge and property dimensions Provision of affordable housing has been ignored Opens up the possibility for backland development
35 Letters of Support have been received raising the following points:
Opportunity to use this unsightly land that detracts from the appearance of the village Increases support for local shops and businesses Adds to the visual quality of the area Will bring in a much needed play area Will allow local people to live and work in the village or locally and reduce travelling Can only be of benefit to local residents Opportunity to enhance the village Will provide a more defined village centre Inclusion of bridge is welcome for safety reasons Supply of much needed dwellings and open space Its important for children to have a safe place to play Will help to increase community spirit and values Engenders a feeling of belonging Represents a modest development on unused land Will place new residents in the heart of the village Development will be in keeping with the existing character of the village Suitable and attractive design It will bring obvious benefits to the village The land has been void for too long Offers enhancement of untidy area Will encourage young families into the village We hope that as part of this the adjacent Grade II listed Bridge Cottage will be renovated Although the play area it is small it is better than nothing (which is what the village currently has) The bridge will help with traffic calming
33
4. RELEVANT POLICIES 4.1 National Planning Policy Framework (2018)
4.2 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Core Strategy and Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2013) policies: SP1a – Sustainable Development SP1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Strategic Policy SP 3 –New Housing Strategic Policy SP27 – Key and Local Service Centres SSP38 – Special Landscape Areas
4.3 The follo i g “a ed Poli ies of the “uffolk Coastal Lo al Pla AP28 Areas to be protected from development Development Management Policy DM21 – Design: Aesthetics Development Management Policy DM22 – Design: Function Development Management Policy DM23 – Residential Amenity
5. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The key issues associated with this application are the principle of development noting the site is outside the settlement boundary, the layout and mix of development, relationship to heritage assets, highways considerations and assessment of the benefits that the site would deliver. These are discussed in turn below. Principle of Development
5.1 The first issue to be considered is that of principle of development and there is a need to acknowledge that the site is outside the settlement boundary as defined in the local plan. As such the proposed development is contrary to policy; however there are other issues that need consideration alongside this, such as wider benefits that the development will bring to the village.
5.2 It should be noted at the outset that the site had been submitted for consideration within the local plan review, however due to local objection and the mention of the site in the Conservation Area Appraisal along with access concerns, it was removed, despite being supported by the Parish Council and its clear relationship with the village and associated amenities. As such it remains that within the terms of the local plan review the development would remain contrary to policy. Nevertheless, despite this, there are other issues arising from the proposed development that would bring improved facilities to the village and members are asked to consider whether the balance of the application falls in favour of the proposal in this particular instance, giving credence to the provision of additional dwellings, play space, allotments and the works to the Grade II listed cottages on the adjacent site and whether this is sufficient
34
justification to grant consent contrary to the provisions of the existing and future local plan.
However notwithstanding the above, there is scope for development in locations such as this providing there is a significant planning gain to be created by the development proposed and that any harms identified can be mitigated and lessened by way of design, siting and landscaping, and that the benefits outweigh the harms. In this particular instance officers consider that the level of support for the scheme, proposed landscaping and the benefits generated by way of additional housing in the heart of the village, the creation of the play space and public allotments is sufficient to resolve the conflict with policy.
5.3 Nevertheless it also needs to be considered that the Council now has a confirmed five- year land supply and NPPF Footnote 11 confirms that to be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a suitable location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years and in particular, that development of the site is economically viable. The NPPF states that local planning authorities may make an allowance for windfall1 sites in the five-year supply if they have compelling evidence that such sites have consistently become available in the local area and will continue to provide a reliable source of supply but should not include residential gardens. Within Suffolk Coastal, an annual windfall allowance of 50 homes per year is included as part of the overall adopted housing requirement.
5.4 Suffolk Coastal District Council has recently published its Housing Land Supply Assessment (2018) statement which sets out the housing land supply position for 01 April 2018 to 31 March 2023 (appendix 3 of this statement). This Housing Land Supply Assessment (HLSA) confirms that Suffolk Coastal District Council has a five year (+ 20%) housing land supply of 9.3 years. The HLSA was scrutinised in detail in June 2018 at the Bell Lane, Kesgrave appeal public inquiry. This included detailed evidence on the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), which provides the most up to date Objectively Assessed Need for the HLSA. The Inspector fully endorsed both of these documents for the purpose of calculating the five year housing land supply. A copy of the Bell La e appeal de isio ef. APP/J3530/W/16/3160194) can be found at appe di . This appeal de isio o fi s the Cou il s positio that it has a . ea Housing Land Supply.
5.5 The HLSA and the Bell Lane appeal decision are recent publications that post-date the Cou il s de ision to refuse the application subject of this appeal. It is still argued by the appellant that the Council cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of housing land. However, in light of the 2018 HLSA and conclusions of the Planning Inspectorate in the Bell Lane appeal decision, it is clear that the Council has an up-to-date Development Plan with a healthy supply of housing land. As such, the tilted balance of NPPF paragraph 11 (formerly the second bullet point of paragraph 14 of the 2012 framework) is not engaged for decision-taking.
35
5.6 The needs of the village identified thus far and those discussed further on in this report, along with the positive benefits officers consider the development would bring to the village as a whole, does tilt the balance of favour towards the proposed scheme.
5.7 Nevertheless, and notwithstanding the policy implications noted above, whist this site is located outside the physical limits of the village, and the council does have a confirmed housing land supply it is very well related to the village and associated facilities and offers significant planning gains for local residents by way of play space and allotments, and as such, although finely balanced, it is considered that the development is acceptable in principle.
Design, layout, appearance & housing mix 5.8 Members will note the concerns from Historic England and the fact that the proposed development does not follow the ribbon form of The Causeway and The Street, however officers are of the opinion that the design does, in fact, sit comfortably within the site and allows for the accommodation of the allotments and play space and still be considered the most efficient use of the land. Whilst their concerns are of course, noted, there are other benefits and gains, such as additional dwellings, two of which are to be affordable private rented, much needed play space and allotments, which need to be balanced against the these concerns. 5.9 Officers are of the opinion that the submitted layout and design has been well thought out and encompasses the open space that is required in the village and will also p o ide allot e t spa e. The Cou il s P i ipal Desig a d Co se atio Offi e has been involved with this project for some time and he feels the submitted design and layout is acceptable and would not be such an alien or discordant feature within the area as to warrant refusal of the development and additionally, it would not have such a significant or detrimental on the nearby identified heritage assets by virtue of design, siting and additional planting. The views through to the tree line would be maintained via the central roadway and although there would be some impact on the overall openness of the area created by the dwellings it would not be so objectionable or harmful as to be able to substantiate a refusal. 5.10 As stated in paragraph 2.2 above, the following mix of dwellings is proposed: Plots 1 &2 – two bed semi detached two-storey dwelling for private rented accommodation Plot 3 – four bed detached two-storey dwelling (market housing) Plot 4 – three bed detached two storey dwelling (market housing) Plot 5 - three bed detached two storey dwelling (market housing) Plot 6 - four bed detached two storey dwelling (market housing or self build plot) 5.11 Policy SP3 of the local plan dictates the mix of dwellings required which states the following mixes of open market housing is required; two bed dwellings (32%), three bed dwellings (39%) and four bed dwellings (22%). The current scheme is designated
36
to equal provision of two, three and four bed dwellings (around 33% each) and although there should be a presumption in favour of higher density, smaller dwellings, this would have a greater impact on the viability of the scheme and the provision of allotment and play space, and the balance is not considered to be so unacceptable as to warrant refusal. In addition a higher density development would have a greater impact on the visual amenities and setting of the adjacent listed buildings and conservation area. 5.12 Although this mix of dwellings is not technically policy compliant in form of sizes and mixes of dwellings, it would be difficult to require a more dense form of development which would respect the character of the area whilst also seeking to accommodate the additional benefits proposed namely the open space and allotments. It is considered that the development as submitted would enhance this area which is currently overgrown, and although there will be some loss of openness through to the tree line to the rear this is not so significant as to justify a refusal on these grounds alone.
5.13 It is also important to note that the two smaller dwellings will be retained by the applicant and will be available for private rent and the larger dwellings will be available for market housing. It has also been suggested that Plot 6 may be available for self- build purposes. Highways 5.14 As Members will be aware, one of the main issues and concerns arising from this application was that of highways and, in particular, the creation of the bridge. The removal of the bridge from the scheme has overcome the initial highways concern, who now offer support for the proposed development subject to the imposition of conditions. 5.15 Nonetheless, the bridge element of the scheme was supported by a number of people, who were unaware of the technical issues it created as some local residents and the Parish Council considered that it would offer the village the opportunity to improve access to The Causeway. The Causeway is currently only realistically accessible by motor vehicles from the south-western bridge although there is an additional bridge to the north east due to its restricted width and turning angles, this is not overly suitable for use by modern cars. 5.16 Notwithstanding the support for the bridge it remains that the potential impact on the setting of The Causeway, generated by the creation of the bridge would be considerable and prove unacceptable by virtue of the impact on the current parking provision on The Street as the bridge would require the implementation of a Traffic Regulation Order and would necessitate the loss of parking, the removal of the listed telephone box and the removal of some trees, and would have a significant and detrimental impact on heritage assets. Heritage 5.17 A full heritage assessment has been submitted which addresses the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding Conservation Area and nearby listed properties, however Historic England have objected to the development for the
37
reasons outlined in their response and the potential damage to the setting of the Conservation Area and associated heritage assets. 5.18 As stated a o e, Cou il s P i ipal Desig a d Co se atio Offi e is suppo ti e of the scheme and the benefits it will bring to the village. He has considered the comments of Historic England and does not agree with their conclusion that the proposed development would cause such significant and demonstrable harms and the benefits outweigh the identified harms and impacts on the setting of the conservation area, associated nearby designated heritage assets and the area as a whole. 5.19 Whilst the comments of Historic England have been fully considered and discussed, it remains that the submitted layout was formed as part of the input of Officers and that if the development were to follow the traditional ribbon form of development along The Causeway and The Street this would block views through the site and would impact on the provision of play space and the allotments. 5.20 In addition, as noted previously, Bridge Cottage is to be renovated and restored, which will ultimately be available for private rent and this is considered by officers as a significant planning gain that further tips the balance in favour of this development as it would create two further dwellings, of a smaller scale in the village and remove a uildi g f o the at isk egiste a d ill, of ou se, e ha e the isual a e ities of the area as a whole. 5.21 The plans have been amended to specifically show Bridge Cottage as being in the ownership of the applicant and the access from the site to bridge Cottages has also been shown. It has been confirmed that the restoration will take place, should permission be granted and this again, is considered that it would be of significant benefit to the area as a whole. Officers are currently awaiting the application for Bridge Cottage to be submitted once drawings are finalised.
Playspace Provision 5.22 Peasenhall has no current provision for play space and although the amount of land offered for this purpose is fairly limited it is of a sufficient size to allow a central play area that is accessible for remainder of the village. It is understood by officers that the Parish Council have agreed that they will take on responsibility for that space and this is subject to a Section 106 agreement between the landowner and the Parish Council which has been agreed. 5.23 In officers opinion this provision of play space is seen as being beneficial to the village as a whole as has already been stated there is currently no playspace available and although relatively small, measuring 1180m² it is considered to be a planning benefit in terms of village amenities which when considered along with the allotments is of significant benefit to the village as a whole and would go some limited way to maintaining some of the openness of the area. Allotments 5.24 The land subject to this application has been traditionally used as allotment land, and is shown on 1904 historic map as being allocated for allotments and there has been no
38
other use identified. However the site has not been used for allotments for some years and is very overgrown with grasses and brambles. 5.25 The proposed development includes the provision of allotments to the rear of site with a small parking area and provision for storage sheds on each plot. 5.26 The provision of allotment space is considered by officers as a positive move for the village as it will provide amenities that have not been available in some time. Of course, it should also be mentioned that there are significant health benefits created by allotments with fresh air, exercise and home grown produce adding to the overall well being of allotment users all of which help to create healthy communities and active lifestyles are encouraged in both local and national planning policy. Ecology/Wildlife 5.27 An ecological assessment was received and Suffolk Wildlife Trust has commented on the development and whilst they recognise that there will be some loss of habitat they are of the opinion that this can be mitigated by way of conditions and in line with the recommendations made within the assessment. 5.28 Natural England had also requested that a Habitat Regulation Assessment be carried out as the site is within 13km of Dunwich Heath and associated special protection area; however they have confirmed that they are satisfied with the findings of the submitted appropriate assessment. Nevertheless, there still remains some uncertainty as to the precise amount of financial contribution that will be required per dwelling and until further guidance is produced this has been added to the Section 106 agreement. Residential Amenity 5.29 This has been covered briefly above with regards to overlooking there are other issues that need addressing. These issues include; Privacy/overlooking, outlook, access to daylight and sunlight, noise and disturbance, the resulting physical relationship with other properties, light spillage, air quality and other forms of pollution; and safety and security and each of these aspects will be addressed in turn. 5.30 With regards to overlooking, the main dwelling to be impacted upon by this proposal is that of Rosecot and its relationship with Plot 6 as shown on the submitted block plan. The rear of plot 6 faces onto Rosecot and its rear garden, however there is a distance of approximately 12.5 metres between gable ends and there is mature hedging and trees which would obscure the view somewhat. However there is only one first floor window facing onto Rosecot and this serves a dressing room so it would not be unreasonable to expect that privacy and overlooking would be very limited. Again, the main impact will be that between Rosecot and plot 6 as there will be a large pitched roof where there is currently a clear view. Whilst there is no right to a view, the outlook does need to be considered and in this instance, given the distance and existing planting, which could be bolstered by further planting, then the outlook would not be so significantly damaged as to warrant refusal of the development on amenity grounds. 5.31 With regards to the other issues raised, the main issue of overlooking would be created by plot 6 and the adjacent property, however, given the distances involved and existing screening there would not be a significant impact generated, although of
39
course there will be some visual impact and potential loss of views, but this is not a material planning consideration as there is no legal right to a view.
5.32 Views through the site from The Street and The Causeway would be impacted on as they would be narrowed by the creation of the dwellings to either side of the site with a central roadway through, however there would still be some views through to the tree-line at the rear and these would not be completely eradicated, although it is appreciated that the view would be altered this is not sufficient to justify a refusal of the scheme given the planning gains already identified.
5.33 As a final note it has been raised by local residents that there are concerns with regards to development and construction traffic accessing the site. This is an issue as The Causeway is quite narrow and access is limited however it is possible for small vans/delivery vehicles to access the site. It has also been suggested that an alternative access for larger vehicles may be accommodated behind the site, as land is in the ownership of the applicant but officers have seen no details of this and this will need to be carefully managed and as such it is suggested that a construction management plan would be appropriate to ensure that the development is serviced in as neighbourly way as possible and to ensure the amenities of all nearby residents are maintained during the construction period. As such, if members are minded to grant approval of the development, a condition should be attached requiring details to be submitted prior to development commencing. 5.34 In the opinion of officers access to daylight and sunlight will not be significantly or detrimentally impact upon by virtue of orientation and distances and any loss of sunlight or daylight would be less than substantial even in the winter months when the sun is lower in the sky. 5.35 As already noted the main protagonist is that of plot 6 and its relationship with Rosecot. However as already noted there is approximately 12.5m between the two properties and there is hedging and trees and the relationship is not considered to be harmful or detrimental. 5.36 The other plots are well spaced and will not have any significant impact on the relationship with other properties. Plots 1 and 2 will have some impact on the setting of the adjacent Grade II listed Bridge Cottage, however, again by virtue of scale and design, distances and boundaries this is considered to be less that substantial. Light spillage, air quality and other forms of pollution 5.37 It is unlikely that the creation of the dwellings in this location would create any significant harms, however there is potential that allotment holders could burn garden waste and have bonfires. However this would be unlikely to be any more frequent than anyone else who is clearing their garden and would, anyway be subject to controls by the Parish Council who would regulate the allotments. 5.38 Noise could be considered an issue from the play space, however again, tis for the Parish Council to control and any anti-social behaviour by users would be subject to police and/or environmental health measures and legislation. As such this is outside the remit of planning and would become a civil matter.
40
Safety and security 5.39 The final consideration with regards to residential amenity is that of safety and security. As noted above, there could be scope for anti-social behaviour to become apparent, however with the location of dwellings and associated natural surveillance of allotments and play space this would be unlikely to be an issue. The close to be created is within the heart of the village and as already noted would provide natural surveillance and would, in all likelihood, go some way to limiting any potential anti- social behaviour. Again if anti-social behaviour became so significant then it would come under the remit of the Parish Council, the police and Environmental Health officers. Tilted Balance 5.40 Finally your officers believe that there is justification for the proposal by virtue of the benefits which would be yielded, namely the provision of affordable rented properties in the village, playspace, allotments and the renovations of the Grade II Bridge Cottages adjacent to the site this is sufficient to generate the tilted balance. There is a need to consider and balance the benefits of the development as a whole versus the harms identified. 5.41 In this particular instance the identified benefits include the provision of the play space, allotments, housing mix, Affordable Housing provision, New Homes Bonus, increased spend in the local economy, construction jobs, a good mix of units and dwelling sizes to cater for all markets, and access to the listed building for repairs and the renovation of the listed building itself which will bring further small housing stock into use in the village. These benefits need to weighed against the identified harms insofar as the development is contrary to policy within the current local plan and will remain so within the revised local plan, the changes to the visual amenities of the Conservation Area and the effective removal of this neutral and currently overgrown and unused part of the village landscape. Therefore in this instance, officers are of the opinion that the benefits identified outweigh the harms.
5.42 Furthermore, the proposed dwellings will generate New Homes Bonus, which is a government scheme to encourage new houses to be built, two smaller dwellings for affordable rent, along with the renovation of Bridge Cottage which add to the local housing stock and ensure the future of the listed property all of which are a material planning considerations. Conclusions 5.43 Whilst officers recognise that this application is finely balanced and the site is outside the development limits of the village as defined in the local plan, it remains officer opinion that the site is well related to the village and associated amenities and it offers the opportunity to deliver a play space and allotments which will be of benefit for the community as a whole and this is sufficient to recommend approval of the development contrary to policy. 5.44 The harms identified to heritage assets are considered to be less than substantial and again the planning gains and benefits for the wider community, by way of provision of
41
play space and allotments and the potential restoration of Grade II listed building at risk, Bridge Cottage, are sufficient to support the application. 5.45 I this pa ti ula i sta e the efo e it is offi e s opi io that these e efits out eigh the harms identified by consultees and local residents and as such the application is recommended for approval.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE subject to controlling conditions including the following: 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun within a period of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended. 2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans/drawings: Site plan (amended) dated 24 July 2018 Amended Layout & Block plan 4008:01D dated 24 July 2018 Plots 1 & 2 – Elevations 4008.02B & Floor Plans 4008.03B dated 24 July 2018 Plot 3 – Elevations 4008.04 & Floor Plans 4008.05 dated 22 August 2016 Plot 4 – Elevations 4008.06 & Floor Plans 4008.07 dated 22 August 2016 Plot 5 – Elevations 4008.08 & Floor Plans 4008.09 dated 22 August 2016 Plot 6 – Elevations 4008.10, 4008.11 and Floor Plans 4008.12 dated 22 August 2016 Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in the manner considered by the local planning authority.
3. Details of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory external appearance of the development.
4. A) No development shall take place within the area indicated [the whole site] until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured, in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The scheme of investigation shall include an assessment of significance and research questions; and: a. The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording b. The programme for post investigation assessment c. Provision to be made for analysis of the site investigation and recording d. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the analysis and records of the site investigation
42
e. Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site investigation f. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of Investigation. g. The site investigation shall be completed prior to development, or in such other phased arrangement, as agreed and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
B) No building shall be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed, submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under part A above and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition.
Reason: To safeguard archaeological assets within the approved development boundary from impacts relating to any groundworks associated with the development scheme and to ensure the proper and timely investigation, recording, reporting and presentation of archaeological assets affected by this development, in accordance with Strategic Policies SP1 and SP 15 of Suffolk Coastal District Council Core Strategy Development Plan Document (2013) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2012).
5. Before the access is first used visibility splays shall be provided as shown on Drawing No. 01C with an X dimension of 2.4m and a Y dimension of 43m and thereafter retained in the specified form. Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 2 Class A of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no obstruction over 0.6 metres high shall be erected, constructed, planted or permitted to grow within the areas of the visibility splays.
Reason: To ensure vehicles exiting the drive would have sufficient visibility to enter the public highway safely and vehicles on the public highway would have sufficient warning of a vehicle emerging in order to take avoiding action.
6. Prior to the new dwellings hereby permitted being first occupied, the new access onto the highway shall be properly surfaced with a bound material for a minimum distance of 10 metres measured from the edge of the metalled carriageway, in accordance with details previously submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To secure appropriate improvements to the vehicular access in the interests of highway safety
7. The use shall not commence until the areas within the site shown on Drawing No. 01D for the purposes of manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has been provided and thereafter that areas shall be retained and used for no other purposes.
43
Reason: To ensure that sufficient space for the on-site parking of vehicles is provided and maintained in order to ensure the provision of adequate on-site space for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles where on-street parking and manoeuvring would be detrimental to highway safety to users of the highway.
8. Before the development is commenced details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing the means to prevent the discharge of surface water from the development onto the highway. The approved scheme shall be carried out in its entirety before the access is first used and shall be retained thereafter in its approved form.
Reason: To prevent hazards caused by flowing water or ice on the highway.
9. Prior to the commencement of development, an investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:
(i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: - human health, - property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, - adjoining land, - groundwaters and surface waters, - ecological systems, - archaeological sites and ancient monuments; (iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). This ust e o du ted i a o da e ith DEF‘A a d the E i o e t Age s Model P o edu es fo the Ma age e t of La d Co ta i atio , CL‘ .
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
10. A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all
44
works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
11. The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works.
Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
12. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of Environmental Health; and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of conditions 11 & 12; which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
45
13. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
14. Within three months of the commencement of development there shall be a scheme of hard and soft landscaping works for the site submitted to the Local Planning Authority and written approval granted. Details shall include any proposed changes in ground levels and also accurately identify spread, girth and species of all existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows on the site and indicate any to be retained, together with measures for their protection which shall comply with the recommendations set out in the British Standards Institute recommendation "BS5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations"
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and the character and appearance of the area.
15. All hedges or hedgerows within the site, unless indicated as being removed on the approved drawings, shall be retained for at least five years following practical completion of the approved development, unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority; and these hedges shall be protected by the erection of secure fencing, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the relevant British Standards (BS5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations) for the duration of works on site.
Within the aforementioned five year period any parts of hedges or hedgerows removed without the Local Planning Authority's consent or which die or become, in the Authority's opinion, seriously damaged or otherwise defective shall be replaced and/or shall receive remedial action as required by the Authority. Such works shall be implemented by not later than the end of the following planting season, with plants of such size and species and in such number and positions as may be agreed with the Authority. The hedge(s) shall be reinforced with further planting where necessary to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the continuity of amenity afforded by existing hedges or hedgerow.
46
16. Within three months of the commencement of the development hereby permitted there shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before first occupation of the dwellings. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of amenity and the appearance of the locality.
17. No development shall take place until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. The agreed details shall include:
Traffic management and parking during construction Parking provision for construction workers Access to site Hours of delivery: No deliveries or construction works shall take place outside the hours of 07.30 to 18.00 Monday to Friday 08.00 to 13.00Saturdays; nor at any time on Sundays, Bank Holidays or Public Holidays.
Reason: To ensure The Causeway and associated residents are not unduly affected by the development during construction and as The Causeway cannot accommodate Heavy Goods Vehicles.
18. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures noted in the Hillier Ecology document (dated April and August 2016). In addition further ecological enhancements are suggested to include as part of the scheme. These could include, but are not limited to, nesting opportunities for birds such as swifts; roosting opportunities for bats and garden boundaries designed to allow access for hedgehogs. Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings, a scheme for the provision of these additional items shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority for the conservation and management of any protected animal species existing on the site and the scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with that approved unless otherwise agreed by the Authority.
Reason: To ensure the protection of animals, mammals and amphibians protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
19. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order) (with or without modification), the car port structures shall be retained as such and no external walls nor change of use shall occur without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the development is retained in a manner as considered by the Local Planning Authority.
47
DETERMINATION:
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No DC/16/3514/FUL Committee Date: 20 September 2018 Site Visit: Committee Date:
48
5. WALPOLE – DC/18/3026/FUL – Demolition of existing timber summerhouse of 6m by 4.5m and replacing with a new timber summerhouse of 4m by 4.5m with a 2m veranda. Landscaping to blend building into the garden at The Corner Cottage, Peasenhall Road, Walpole, Suffolk, IP19 9AP for Mr Edwards
Case Officer: Iain Robertson
Expiry Date: 16 September 2018 (Extension of time until 21 September 2018)
DC/18/3026/FUL – The Corner Cottage, Peasenhall Road, Walpole, IP19 9AP DO NOT SCALE SLA100019684
Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning permission is sought to construct a summer house within the residential curtilage of Corner Cottage, which is a Grade II listed building.
The proposed summer house would replace a similar structure and would be situated at the Southern end of the garden, slightly closer to the rear boundary than the existing but of a similar scale.
This ite has o e efore e ers as the appli a t’s part er works at Suffolk Coastal District Council
49
1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 Corner Cottage is a Grade II listed 16th Century property situated on the junction of Peasenhall Road and Bramfield Road the Eastern elevation is attached to Lilac Cottage which is also Grade II listed. Later additions to the building and the garden area extend out along Walpole Road. The Western roadside boundary of the site is well screened with mature planting, with close boarded fencing to the East and South. 1.2 The surrounding area is designated as a Special landscape Area (SLA) but does not include the application site. 2. PROPOSALS 2.1 The proposal involves replacing the existing summerhouse (6m x 4.5m) with a similar structure 4m x 4.5m with 2m veranda and 4m in height with patio area to the front, surrounded by raised planter bed. The location of the summerhouse is around 20m from the rear elevation of the listed building, approximately 2 metres from the rear boundary. The materials proposed are clay pantile with timber weatherboarding, corrugated veranda roof supported on oak posts and braces. 3. CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Cookley and Walpole Parish: No objection 3.2 Third Party Representations: No comments received
4. RELEVANT POLICIES 4.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compensation Act 2004 states that application should be determined in accordance with the development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance, the development plan for the purpose of this appli atio is the Co e “t ateg togethe ith a sa ed poli es f o the Lo al Pla I o po ati g Fi st a d “e o d Alte atio s a d 2006). 4.2 NPPF 4.3 NPPG 4.4 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Core Strategy and Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2013) policies: SP15 – Landscape and Townscape DM21 – Design: Aesthetics DM23 – Residential Amenity 4.5 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan: Site allocations and Area Specific Policies Document (January 2017): SSP38: Special Landscape Areas
50
5. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Setting of the Listed Building 5.1 Paragraph 190 of the NPPF states that 'Local planning authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset'. The summerhouse would be in the setting of the listed building. However, given the scale and location of the proposed summerhouse and the use of a traditional palette of materials it is not considered that the proposal would harm the setting of the listed building. Residential Amenity 5.2 The structure is approximately two metres from the rear boundary, measuring approximately four metres in height. The property known as Carmon is situated to the south. The proposal would not impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of this property.
Landscape Impact 5.3 The proposed structure would not be seen in the streetscape or the wider landscape and would therefore not impact upon the surrounding Strategic Landscape Area. Conclusion and planning balance 5.4 Given the scale, location and design of the proposed summerhouse the proposal would not harm the setting of the listed building and neither would it impact upon the appearance of the streetscene/surrounding landscape or neighbour amenity. Approval is therefore recommended.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE subject to controlling conditions including the following: 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun within a period of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.
2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with approved drawing reference: 848/02 R1, 848/03 R1 and proposed summerhouse site plan received on 23rd July 2018 for which permission is hereby granted.
Reason: To secure a properly planned development.
51
DETERMINATION:
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No DC/18/3026/FUL Committee Date: 20 September 2018
52
6. WOODBRIDGE– DC/18/2409/FUL – Provision of additional car parking facility to join Station Road car park with The Avenue/Jetty Lane car park, and adjustments to existing car parking facility: Jetty Lane Car Park, Station Road, The Avenue, Woodbridge, Suffolk, IP12 4BA for Suffolk Coastal District Council
Case Officer: Nick Westlake
Expiry Date: 2 October 2018
DC/18/2409/FUL- Jetty Lane Car Park, Station Road, The Avenue, Woodbridge. IP12 4BA
DO NOT SCALE SLA100019684
Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning Permission is being sought for the provision of an additional car parking facility to join Station Road car park with The Avenue/Jetty Lane car park, along with adjustments to existing car parking facility.
This item has come before members because the applicant is Suffolk Coastal District Council and therefore is outside the scheme of delegation afforded to the Head of Planning and Coastal Management. The application is recommended for approval.
53
1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The site area includes three distinct parcels of land: The Avenue Carpark which is accessed from The Avenue to the south The southe se tio of De e “ i i g Pool Ca Pa k that is a essed o l from Station Road to the north.
1.2 A section of open grass land between the two carparks, this area of land is not open to vehicles, however is serviced by a cycle path and a footpath for pedestrians. The physical works proposed as part of this location are within this central area along with extensions to the two existing car parks to the north and south.1.2 The Station Road car park currently has 158 spaces and the Avenue Car Park 49 spaces. The overall site area is approximately 150 metres in length and between 80 and 50 metres in width. The three parcels of land, (the two car parks and land between the two) indicated within the Red line of this application are broadly the same size. The land ownership however, extends northwards, encompassing all of the Deben Swimming Pool Complex and associated car and coach parking areas. Access to the Deben Swimming Pool and associated car park is currently only available from Station Road.
1.3 The boundary of the site to the east is enclosed by a railway line, while to the west in large part by a row of mature vegetation. The site is located within the Physical Boundaries Limits of Woodbridge, Woodbridge Town Centre boundary is located approximately 50 metres to the north of the site. A public right of way boarders the southern boundary of the site, while the entire area is located within Flood Zone 2 and 3.
2. PROPOSALS
2.1 This application seeks full planning permission for the provision of an additional car park to join Station Road car park with the Avenue/Jetty Lane car park, and adjustments to existing car parking facility.
2.2 The application seeks to enlarge the Deben Swimming Pool car park and The Avenue Ca Pa ks o the este side of the site hile o e ti g the t o a eas ia the conversion of the open grass land between them to additional car parking space also. The proposal will create 68 extra spaces in total; there are 84 new spaces made and 16 existing spaces lost. As well as parking spaces the scheme includes additional ticket machines, bollards, lighting, disabled spaces, electric charging bays, wide spread plantings including trees and hedges and a new footpath.
2.3 There are no parking spaces created for Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs). All the spaces are for Cars and Light Vans.
2.4 The Deben Swimming Pool section and the Avenue section of the development is p oposed to e o st u ted of a Bitu i ous ate ial, si ila to the ate ials that
54
exist at present within these car parks. The central connecting element proposed is proposed to e uilt of esi ou d g a el, p o idi g a o t asti g pe le effe t . There is also proposed three speeds hump located centrally and at the entry points to this newly constructed central element of the car park. Post the development is will be possible to drive from Station Road to the Avenue through the enlarged car park.
3. CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Woodbridge Town/ Parish Council: We recommend approval however we feel there are insufficient lighting bollards in the Jetty Lane car park. We believe that illegal parking in the Avenue needs to be addressed. We also feel that there needs to be enhanced planting and landscaping in this new car park.
3.2 Suffolk County Council – Lead Local Flooding Authority: No Objections, subject to condition details relating to a Sustainable Urban Drainage System components and construction is implemented in accordance with approved plans
3.3 Suffolk County Council – Archaeological Service: No Objections
3.4 Suffolk County Council - Highway Authority: No Objections, subject conditions requiring the spaces being used for parking of vehicles only and subject to a Surface Water Management Plan.
3.5 Environmental Protection: No Objection, no conditions suggested.
3.6 Woodbridge Society: No Objection, generally in support of this application as a o t i utio to sol i g Wood idge s pa ki g p o le . They suggest due to the traffic flow problem on the Avenue that cars are not allowed to exit the expanded car park onto the Avenue but have to exit onto Station Road. The entrance from the Avenue should only be an entrance.
3.7 Network Rail: No Response received
3.8 Rights of Way: No Objection
3.9 Environment Agency: No Objections
3.10 Third Party Representations: Twenty Eight representations of Objection have been received raising the following material planning considerations:
Design; there have been objections to loss of vegetation in the area and the impact on wildlife with an overall negative impact on the Landscape Access, the access from the Avenue should be restricted. The car park should only be accessed from Station Road to limit the traffic going via Kingston Road, Cherry Tree Road and Kingston Farm Road to the proposed Community Centre and the Car Park via the Avenue entrance.
55
Health and Safety concerns over the increasing use of the car park especially at night leading to anti social behaviour. Also, with the Community Centre next door in the process of being redeveloped. Dominating the scenic landscape with an expanse of car parking The new consolidated car park from The Avenue will result in increased traffic down Cherry Tree Road which is already very busy for a residential road. It may also result in more overflow car parking in the surrounding roads. Increased noise, to the detriment of the residential amenity of the nearby neighbouring properties and their residents. Lack of CCTV
4 RELEVANT POLICIES
4.1 NPPF
4.2 NPPG
4.3 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Core Strategy and Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2013) policies:
SP1a – Sustainable Development SP1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SP15 – Landscape and Townscape SP26 – Woodbridge DM19 – Parking Standards DM21 – Design: Aesthetics DM22 – Design: Function DM23 – Residential Amenity DM26 - Lighting
The “uffolk Coastal Lo al Pla i o po ati g the Fi st a d “e o d Alte atio s “a ed Poli ies :
AP263 - Woodbridge Town Centre: Traffic Management (This zone is approximately 50 meters to the north east of the Station Road entrance to the site)
5 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Principle of development
5.1 The salient question this application asks is whether the centrally located section of the application site, the open grass land between Station Road and The Avenue car parks, should be converted into a car park.
5.2 As the site is ot p ote ted a spe ifi Pla i g zo es as su h the e is o i principle objection offered. The lack of Town Centre Parking is long standing concern, an Internal Cabinet Committee Report on the Remedial Drainage Works and Proposed
56
Extension and Adaptation of the Station, Station Road and Avenues Cark Park in Woodbridge published December 2017 reported:
parking in Council-owned car parks is operating at 70-80% capacity in Woodbridge, with car parks regularly full between 11am-3pm in the holiday periods. This has an impact on the economic development of the town and is a concern voiced by the Town Council .
5.3 The proposal would contribute towards Objective 15 – Physical and Community Infrastructure of the Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan (2013). It is also considered to accord with Development Management Policy DM30 – Key Facilities because the proposed use is compatible with the sites existing function and nearby community facilities. There are also predicted with the Cabinet Committee Report December 2017, positive economic development and tourism benefits accrued from having additional parking in this location as encouraged within Policy SP8 of the Local Plan (2013).
5.4 In relation to the National Planning Policy Framework (2018), Paragraph 85 and 92 of the NPPF promotes the development of local services and community facilities in town centres. While, paragraph 91 encourages decisions to plan positively for the provision and use of community facilities, ensuring they are safe and accessible. The enhanced parking facilities will likely increase the uptake of usage of the nearby community facilities, improving the social and cultural well-being of the peoples living in and visiting the town.
5.5 There is clear justification for the proposal and the principle is acceptable subject to the consideration of other material planning considerations and relevant planning policies.
Residential Amenity
5.6 In terms of impact on the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties, there are three areas of car park enlargement. Firstly, there are 13 new spaces proposed within existing Avenue section of the car park. These spaces are approximately 10 metres closer to the nearest residential dwelling at Deben View Residential Home, than the existing. However, there is still a distance of approximately 40 metres to these properties. Furthermore, no additional lighting is proposed for these spaces and the plans indicate they would not be used by HGV vehicles, and are for cars and light vans only. As such there is not likely to be any significant loss of residential amenity resulting from the proposed use and associated vehicular movements.
5.7 The second area of expansion is the Deben Swimming Pool section, again there is a decrease in distance to the nearest effected residential properties at Deben View Residential Home. The distance would reduce from 15 metres to approximately 10 metres at its closest point. However, no additional lighting is proposed and a sufficient soft ou da is ai tai ed i ludi g e t ee pla ti g to itigate agai st a significant loss of residential amenity over and above the existing arrangements.
57
5.8 Thirdly, the central parking area via the conversion of the open land to a new car park, this allows for access to both carparks to the north and south. The layout of such equates to single row of parking either side of a central access way that includes a single speed restraint. Also there is a footpath on the western side and a number of low level 1 metre high lighting bollards. In this instance due to the approximate 50 metre distance to the properties west of the site in Deben View and the proposed planting scheme associated with the development, there are not considered to be any significant impacts on the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties. The landscaping details submitted with this application are considered sufficient to maintain adequate privacy between the Care Home and the proposed enlarged car park.
5.9 There have been concerns raised from members of the public with regards anti social behaviour within the car park especially late at night. Ultimately, the Environmental Protection Department has assess this application and not objected to the proposal or suggested any planning condition. There is a speed ramp being positioned in the central section to slow vehicle movements through the site. However, it is not considered that the situation on site would be any worse than the existing arrangements given that the land is already accessible to the public 24 hours per day. Any anti social behaviour matters occurring on site should be reported to and dealt with via the Police. It is not believed that the additional spaces proposed within this application would significantly alter or increase this concern.
Highway Safety
5.10 The Suffolk County Highways Department has not objected to the application. They have recommended two highways related planning conditions, including a surface water drainage plan and that the parking spaces to be used for vehicle parking only.
5.11 Several comments have been received from members of the public in relation to the intensification of use of The Avenue entrance of the car park, with access from Kingston Road. This concern has been highlighted also due to the likely development of a Community Centre building close by next to Deben View residential care home. However, it is considered that the majority of traffic using the car park would go via Station Road. The proposed development is not thought to result in the increase in usage of The A e ue e t a e gi e that the a pa ks ould e o e ted u like the existing arrangement which could lead to additional vehicle movements if the Co u it Ce t e gets uilt i the futu e. I esse e the o e ti g of the a pa ks would most likely lower vehicle movements along Kingston Road and the Avenue, rather than increase the usage as it is considered more motorists would use the more accessible Station Road entrance and exit. As such, the layout, design and usability of the newly proposed car park is not objected to in principle. Subsequently, there are no objections to the application under DM22 Function.
58
Surface Water Run-Off and Contamination Issues
5.12 The site is located within Flood zone 2 and 3. There has been a Flood Risk Assessment submitted along with detailed drainage calculations. These has been carefully scrutinised by both Suffolk Water and Flooding Management and the Environment Agency. Both departments have offered no objections to the scheme. The Flooding and Water Management Department has requested the development is constructed in accordance with approved plans and that the Sustainable Urban Drainage System components and piped networks have been submitted before the site is operational. This cannot be a pre commencement condition as it requires the exact location of features and the condition of them once installed. This is not possible to conclude until it s ee i stalled.
5.13 Paragraph 101 of the NPPF sets out where a Sequential test should be undertaken assessing the site viability of the site in relation to there being possible other sites outside the Flood Zone that are more suitable for the proposed development. The Planning Policy department has confirmed there are no sites located in the Local Plan o that a e a aila le as Wi dfall “ites to a o odate To Ce t e Pa ki g of this number. The only other available sites are on the edge of Town. Given the fact that a car parking use exists either side of the host site and the application is effectively an enlargement of the existing, there is no objection offered with regards the fulfilment Sequential test. Furthermore, the proposed development provides wider sustainability benefits to the community that outweighs flood risk possibilities. The site-specific flood risk assessment demonstrates that the development will be safe for its lifetime taking account of the vulnerability of its users, without increasing flood risk elsewhere, which would fulfil the requirements of the Exception Test as outlined in Paragraph 102 of the NPPF.
5.14 The Environmental Protection team has raised no concerns with regards to Contamination of the site. Therefore no specific ground contamination conditions are considered necessary in this instance.
Visual Amenity
5.15 The site is an underdevelopment piece of open landscape with a developing soft boundary treatment treatments facing Deben View to the West. The proposal would retain ample space to maintain, preserve and enhance the existing developing boundary treatment on the site.
5.16 It is not considered that the proposed works would seriously detract from the open spacious character of this site. There are no protected trees to be lost during the construction. The Landscape and Arboricultural Manager has viewed the application and has concluded there would be no significant adverse landscape or visual impacts arising from it when viewed from the riverside area and the AONB. Whilst some trees and elements of hedges and scrub will be lost to allow this proposal, there has been submitted a comprehensive tree and shrub planting scheme which leaves a notable nett gain in tree cover across the site, with additional notable shrub planting. The
59
submitted tree protection plan and methodology should be part of the suite of approved plans and their recommendations required to be implemented in full.
5.17 The finish material of the new car park area between the two existing areas is of a very high standard. The esi ou d g a el, p o idi g a pe le effe t shall a t as a atheistically pleasant contrast between the two existing areas tarmacked areas, while contributing towards speed control of the vehicles. Overall, there are no Landscape objections and it is not considered that the proposal will lead to any significant Landscape related harm.
Economic considerations
5.18 There are also predicted within the Cabinet Committee Report December 2017, positive economic development and tourism benefits accrued from having additional parking in this location as encouraged within Policy SP8 of the Local Plan (2013). The proposed increased numbers of car parking spaces in this town centre location would likely provide more uptake in relation to the local Swimming Pool and likely increase footfall to nearby shops and restaurants nearby. This would obviously have a positive effect on the economic wellbeing of local shops and services within Woodbridge Town centre and is therefore supported.
Conclusion
5.19 The concept of extending the two existing over used car parks in this Town Centre location next to a wealth of Community facilities would appear to make sound planning sense. At present the central area between the two existing car parks is undesignated grassland, it is associated with the nearby community facilities but has no specific purpose other than a pedestrian walk way. This pedestrian walkway is going to be maintained within the proposal. While it is accepted there shall be some loss of mature vegetation, the Landscape and Arboricultural Manager has viewed the application and has concluded there would be no significant adverse landscape or visual impacts arising from the development when viewed from the riverside area and the AONB. Indeed the planting scheme associated with the proposal would result in a notable nett gain in tree cover across the site as such no objection is raised.
5.20 With the additional parking spaces created there shall be more motorists using the facility, however the impact on residential amenity is considered to be minimal in terms of the exacerbating the existing situation on site. Furthermore, it is not considered that the enlargement of the car parks that are already open to the public 24 hours a day would lead to any increase in anti social behaviour beyond what occurs at present on site.
5.21 The existing pressures on car parking in the Town Centre are well documented and known to the peoples living in and visiting Woodbridge Town Centre. This proposal is deemed to be an appropriate and considered location to expand the car parking available in this close to Town Centre location, benefiting both tourism, the local shops
60
and services and the existing and future community faculties located in this part of Woodbridge.
5.22 The proposed development is likely to attract more traffic to the car park, this would bring with it additional noise, pollution and general human activity. While as mentioned the proposal will result in a loss of open space and some mature vegetation to an area where many local folk have noticed a wide range of wildlife frequenting. The loss of this wildlife habitat, the public open space and the additional noise and pollution incurred from an enlarged car park are all regrettable eventualities of the proposed development. However, on balance, there have been no objections from the experts who carefully monitor these areas such as Highways, Environmental Protection and the Landscape and Arboriculture Officer. Thus the planning balance when considering the increase in Town Centre Car Parking with all the positive economic, social and community benefits associated, draws the conclusion that the application should be encouraged in this Sustainable Town Centre location. At a site already mainly used for the specific purpose of car parking.
5.23 As such, there are no objections to the proposal in terms design or impact on the character and appearance of the immediate area subject to an appropriate landscaping condition and drainage details the application would therefore be in compliance with Policy SP1, SP15, DM21, DM22, DM23 and DM26.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE subject to the following controlling conditions:
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: This condition is imposed in accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
2 The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out other than in complete accordance with Drawing nos:
Hollins Drawings 1791 -2, 1791 - 3A and 1791 – 4A Received 03/08/2018 MLM, Surface Finishes GA, 668768-MLM-XX-ZZ-DR-C-0200-P04, 22/08/2018 MLM, Proposed Drainage Layout, 668768-MLM-XX-ZZ-DR-C-0100-P07, 20/08/2018 MLM, Infiltration Technical Note, 668768-MLM-ZZ-XX-FN-S-0001, 14/06/2018 MLM, Proposed Surface Finishes Details, 668768-MLM-ZZ-XX-DR-C-0110-P02, 22/08/2018 MLM, Permeable Pavement Design, 668768-PP.1, 04/07/2018 MLM, Surface Water Maintenance & Management Plan, 668768-MLM-ZZ-XX-RP-S- 0002, 22/08/2018 and the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) (dated 01/06/2018, ref: 668768-MLM-ZZ-XX-RP-S-0001) Design and Access Statement. Received 08/06/2018 Hayden's Arboricultural Consultants Tree Survey & Impact Assessment, report ref. 6750, dated 06/06/18 and drawing dated 06/06/18. Received 08/06/2018
61
Kirsten Bowden Chartered Landscape Architect drawing no. 2018/27-001 Rev A. Received 08/06/2018 Kier Construction Environmental Management Plan. Received 08/06/2018 Suffolk County Council Preliminary Ecological Appraisal dated May 2018 Received 08/06/2018 Hollins drawing nos. 17.91/09. Received 08/06/2018
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.
3. The strategy for the disposal of surface water detailed in documents; MLM, Surface Finishes GA, 668768-MLM-XX-ZZ-DR-C-0200-P04, 22/08/2018 MLM, Proposed Drainage Layout, 668768-MLM-XX-ZZ-DR-C-0100-P07, 20/08/2018 MLM, Infiltration Technical Note, 668768-MLM-ZZ-XX-FN-S-0001, 14/06/2018 MLM, Proposed Surface Finishes Details, 668768-MLM-ZZ-XX-DR-C-0110-P02, 22/08/2018 MLM, Permeable Pavement Design, 668768-PP.1, 04/07/2018 MLM, Surface Water Maintenance & Management Plan, 668768-MLM-ZZ-XX-RP-S- 0002, 22/08/2018 and the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) (dated 01/06/2018, ref: 668768-MLM-ZZ-XX-RP-S-0001) shall be implemented as approved in writing by the local planning authority. The strategy shall thereafter be managed and maintained in accordance with the approved strategy.
Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal, to ensure that the proposed development can be adequately drained. 4. The development hereby permitted shall not be operational until details of all Sustainable Urban Drainage System components and piped networks have been submitted, in an approved form, to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Autho it fo i lusio o the Lead Lo al Flood Autho it s Flood ‘isk Asset ‘egiste .
‘easo : To e su e all flood isk assets a d thei o e s a e e o ded o to the LLFA s statutory flood risk asset register as per s21 of the Flood and Water Management Act.
5 The materials and finishes shall be as indicated within the submitted application and thereafter retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development in the interests of visual amenity
6. Before the development begins, a Flood Evacuation Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of the members of the public during times of flooding.
62
7. The use shall not commence until the area within the site shown on 1791 02 for the purposes of manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has been provided and thereafter that area shall be retained and used for no other purposes.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient space for the on site parking of vehicles is provided and maintained in order to ensure the provision of adequate on-site space for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles where on-street parking and manoeuvring would be detrimental to highway safety to users of the highway.
DETERMINATION:
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No DC/18/2409/FUL, Internal Cabinet Committee Report on the Remedial Drainage Works and Proposed Extension and Adaptation of the |Station, Station Road and Avenues Cark Park in Woodbridge published December 2017
Committee Date: 20 September 2018
63
7. WOODBRIDGE – DC/18/2671/FUL – External alteration and partial demolition of Queen's House to provide 3 residential units (Class C3). Demolition of single dwelling house and Groundsman's Hut and development of 29 residential units (Class C3), replacement Groundsman's Hut and associated highway, drainage and landscape works. At Queens House, Woodbridge School, Burkitt Road, Woodbridge IP12 4JH for Rose Builders and Seckford Foundation Case Officer: Liz Beighton Expiry Date: 23 September 2018
DC/18/2671/FUL - Queens House, Woodbridge School, Burkitt Road, Woodbridge
DO NOT SCALE SLA100019684
Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning Permission is sought for the development of 32 dwellings within the converted Queens House, its immediate grounds and car park associated with the pre-preparatory school. The application follows the sale of the site to a housebuilder who is seeking certain changes to the development, which fall outside the scope of a non-material amendment to the already consented scheme. The application is presented to Members solely on the grounds that it is accompanied by a S106 Agreement.
64
1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The application site extends to 1.7 hectares and is located within the grounds of Woodbridge School, within the settlement boundary of Woodbridge and also within the Conservation Area. 1.2 The principal building on the site is Queens House, a two-storey detached building, which is used as the Pre-preparatory School (Use Class D1). It is built along the contour facing downhill to the south-east, towards Bredfield Street. Queens House itself is not a designated Heritage Asset but is an important building in its own right, being related to the school complex as a whole. Queens House was built in 1914 and before use as the Pre-Prepa ato s hool, as used as the gi ls oa di g house. Modern extensions have been added to north and rear of the building and Officers are of the view that the removal of the unappealing extensions would represent visual enhancement. 1.3 To the front of Queens House is an area of parking with a large open space beyond which runs down to Bredfield Street and which allows views to and from Queens House, particularly so as Queens House occupies an elevated position in relation to Bredfield Street. 1.4 The southern part of the site comprises a surface level car park, accommodating 47 parking spaces linked to Queens House and a two-storey three bedroom dwelling hi h as p e iousl used the “ hool s G ou ds a . 1.5 Access to the site is from Bredfield Street via a dedicated access, at the convergence with Lower Haugh Lane, Castle Street and North Hill. The access serves not only Queens House but is also used by service vehicles accessing the main school site, which would retain should permission be forthcoming. Staff, visitor and pupil traffic accessing the main school site do so via the dedicated accesses off Bredfield Road, due south of the site, and Burkitt Road. Bredfield Street is relatively narrow does not contain any Traffic Regulation Orders and Officers note that a number of properties do not have on-plot parking and therefore rely on parking on the street. It is also noted that during the school day, a number of sixth form pupils park on Bredfield Street as there is no on site provision for pupil parking. 1.6 Established residential properties immediately abut the site to the north (Lower Haugh Lane) and to the east. Members of the Committee will note the letters of representation which have been received as a result of the prescribed consultation period which are summarised in Section 3 of this Report. To the south of the application site sits the main school buildings associated with the school, including the sports dome, teaching blocks and Seckford Theatre, whilst to the west the school playing fields are located. 1.7 There are a number of mature trees within the site, and notably along the boundary to the site, mainly to the north and east. These are protected by virtue of them being located in a Conservation Area but are not subject to any Tree Preservation Orders. The Cou il s La ds ape a d A o i ultu al Ma age has assessed the p oposals a d has raised no objection to the application. 1.8 There are listed buildings within the vicinity of the site but none of the site itself.
65
1.9 The whole of the site falls within Flood Zone 1, where there is considered to be a low probability of flooding. 2. PROPOSALS 2.1 The application seeks to revise drawings approved by virtue of the original application (ref: DC/16/4008/FUL refers). The alternative drawings do not change the overall number of dwellings proposed to be developed however they do provide a different design and parking arrangement for the site. The submission of the application follows positive pre-application discussions with the Local Planning Authority. 2.2 The original application was submitted by the Seckford Foundation, who own the site. Their application was made in advance of advertising the site for sale. Subsequently Rose Builders were chosen as the preferred purchaser by the Seckford Foundation. Having reviewed the approved drawings, Rose Builders are now seeking approval for improvements to the development, although the application continues to be made the by landowner, the Seckford Foundation 2.3 A material planning consideration of significant weight is the extant planning consent for the site (ref: DC/16/4008/FUL) for E ter al alteratio a d partial de olitio of Queen's House to provide 6 residential units (Class C3). Demolition of single dwelling house and Groundsman's Hut and development of 26 residential units (Class C3), replacement Groundsman's Hut and associated highway, drainage and landscape works. Pe issio as g a ted o Ma h the Pla i g Co ittee, following a site visit, subject to planning conditions and a s106 legal agreement. The S106 Agreement has been signed by all relevant parties. 2.4 The description of the proposed development differs from the approved description o l i elatio to the u e of d elli gs that Quee s House is p oposed to e converted into (3 houses instead of 6 flats). The remainder of the dwellings are to be provided elsewhere on the site. The number of new dwellings remains at 32, a net increase of 31 dwellings to acknowledge the demolition of one existing dwelling on site. 2.5 It is proposed that Queen s House ill e o e ted fo eside tial use as th ee houses. In addition to three converted properties, the proposal includes four new flats and 25 new houses. 2.6 I o ju tio ith the de olitio of the e isti g a etake s house, the s he e ill provide a net increase of 31 no. dwellings. The proposed mix is as follows: Bedrooms Number of units Flat 1 2 Flat 2 2 House 2 5 House 3 16 House 3 7 Total 32
66
2.7 In addition to the residential development, as with the approved scheme, the existing g ou ds a s hut is p oposed to e de olished a d e-provided elsewhere on the site. 3. CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Woodbridge Town Council: No comments received 3.2 Sport England: Having assessed the revised submitted formal application, the areas of residential development are still confined to areas that are not part of the current playing field on the site, nor do they affect any other sports facility on the site. It is therefore considered that the proposed residential development meets exception E3 of our playing fields policy. The only element of the scheme which directly affects the e isti g pla i g field is the e g ou ds a s hut hi h ill e lo ated i the o th- east corner of the main playing field. This structure would not appear to affect existing sports pitch and will provide accommodation for the storage of grounds maintenance equipment. Having assessed this element of the application, Sport England is satisfied that the p oposed g ou ds a s hut eets the follo i g “po t E gla d Poli exception: E2 - The proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field or playing fields, and does not affect the quantity or quality of pitches or adversely affect their use. Sport England also raises no objection to the proposed amendments to the parking area, which will not adversely affect the playing field or other sports facilities. This being the case, Sport England does not wish to raise an objection to this application, nor do we wish to recommend any planning conditions.
3.3 Suffolk County Council - Archaeological Service: No objection subject to conditions 3.4 Suffolk County Council – Lead Flooding Authority: No objection subject to conditions 3.5 Suffolk County Council - Fire and Rescue Service (Water Office): Recommend fire hydrants are installed 3.6 Suffolk County Council - Highway Authority: have raised questions which are dealt with the Planning Considerations section of this report. 3.7 SCDC - Head of Environmental Services and Port Health: No objection subject to conditions 3.8 Third Party Representations: Two Letters of Objection have been received raising the following points: Impact of additional vehicles at already conjected junction Loss of Queens House parking will have an impact on existing roads Number of residential units should be reduced due to parking concerns
4. RELEVANT POLICIES 4.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compensation Act 2004 states that application should be determined in accordance with the development Plan unless material
67
considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance, the development plan for the purpose of this appli atio is the Co e “t ateg togethe ith a sa ed poli es f o the Lo al Pla I o po ati g Fi st a d “e o d Alte atio s a d 2006). The National Planning Policy Framework, ministerial statements are material considerations.
4.2 NPPF 4.3 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Core Strategy and Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2013) policies: SP1a – Sustainable Development SP1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SP1 – Housing Numbers and Distribution SP3 – New Homes SP15 – Landscape and Townscape SP16 – Sport and Play SP17 – Green Space SP18 – Infrastructure SP26 - Woodbridge DM2 – Affordable Housing on Residential Sites DM7 – Infilling and Backland Development within Physical Limits Boundaries DM10 – Protection of Employment Sites DM19 – Parking Standards DM21 – Design: Aesthetics DM22 – Design: Function DM23 – Residential Amenity DM26 – Lighting DM27 – Biodiversity and Geodiversity DM31 – Public Buildings 4.4 The follo i g “a ed Poli ies of the “uffolk Coastal Local Plan (incorporating the First and Second Alterations, as saved upon adoption of the 2013 document) are relevant to the consideration of this application: AP1 – Conservation Area 4.5 Woodbridge Conservation Area Appraisal SPD – July 2011 5. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 The key issues associated with this development is the deviation in the scheme from that approved by means of application reference DC/16/4008/FUL which could
68
lawfully be implemented following appropriate discharge of condition within the three year time limit specified in condition. Principle of Development 5.2 The principle of development was established via the grant of application reference DC/16/4008/FUL on the 29 March 2018. Since the approval of the previous application, the new NPPF has been released, and officers have undertaken an assessment of the proposal in light of the revised policy document but do not believe there are any changes of substance which would warrant a different assessment in relation to the principle of development. 5.3 The application site is located within the settlement boundary of Woodbridge, where guidance contained in both the NPPF and Local Plan supports additional development. Officers are of the opinion that the location is sustainable, when tested against the three strands of sustainable development espoused in the NPPF, in that services and facilities to support additional residents are located within easy access of the site, and by means other than the private car. The NPPF states that at its heart is the p esu ptio i fa ou of sustai a le de elop e t . Fo de isio -taking this means app o i g de elop e t p oposals that a o d ith the de elop e t pla , ithout dela . The lo atio of su h, i the opi io of Offi e s, a o ds ith policies SP1 and SP1a of the Local Plan. 5.4 The site is not proposed for allocation within the adopted Site Specific Allocations DPD; however, as the site is located within the settlement boundary it would be treated as a windfall site. Table 3.2 of the Local Plan makes allowances for windfall provision during the plan period, providing an indicative provision of 850 dwellings across the District as a whole. 5.5 Policy SP26 of the Local Plan deals specifically Woodbridge. It is acknowledged in Policy SP19 that Woodbridge is a high order settlement (Market Town) and is therefore considered to be highly sustainable, but as stated in paragraph 4.81 of the Local Plan there are very limited opportunities for new housing provision in the town, with a particular need to meet locally generated needs particularly for affordable housing. With the exception of the former Council Offices site at Melton Hill (current application pending determination) and Notcutts Garden centre, Officers are unaware of any sites unapproved within the town which have the ability to provide a mix of housing. Since the initial application was approved development is underway in relation to the residential scheme at Woods Lane being developed by Bloor Homes. 5.6 The application site is considered by Officers to be a sustainable location close to services and facilities to support additional residential development. Within ease of walking distance are places of education, means of employment, shops, community facilities and public transport. Whilst it is inevitable that new residents would own a car, given the close relationship to services and facilities there would be no reliance on the private car to reach such. Quantum and Mix 5.7 The proposal retains the same number of dwellings as in the approved application, although the mix has changed slightly. The table in paragraph 2.6 of this report shows an accommodation schedule in terms of the breakdown in unit size and
69
accommodation type. The table below shows how the proposed housing mix differs from the consented scheme.
Table 2: Approve Propose Change Council Target Housing d d No. (%)* Mix Unit No. (%) No. (%) Size 1-bed 3 (9%) 2 (6%) -1 1.9 (6%) 2-bed 8 (25%) 7 (22%) -1 10.2 (32%) 3-bed 14 (44%) 16 (50%) +2 12.5 (39%) 4-bed 7 (22%) 7 (22%) 0 7.0 (22%) Total 32 32 0
5.8 No affordable housing is proposed via this application, as was the case with the previous approved scheme. It was, and remains, an agreed position that the fi a ial p o eeds f o the sale of Quee s House ill fu d edu atio al improvements at The Abbey site of Woodbridge School. An update to the viability report that accompanied the original application has submitted with this application. As shown in this updated viability report, it continues that it is not financially viable fo the Quee s House p oje t to i lude a p o isio of affo da le housi g. The viability report is currently being assessed by external consultants and the assessment will be communicated to Members via the Update Sheet.
5.9 I the e e t that the o i ed p oje t to Quee s House a d the A e site generates a sufficient financial surplus, the s106 sets a mechanism to convert part of this surplus into an affordable housing contribution. This revised application for Quee s House i ludes a d aft Deed of Va iatio . This Deed ill i d a e planning consent to the same legal terms as the previous consent. 5.10 Separate planning and listed building applications are currently pending consideration (18/2658/FUL and 18/2659/LBC) and are proposed to be tied to this current application through the S106 Agreement. Delivery and Phasing 5.11 The deli e of the p oje t at Quee s House o ti ues to e li ked to educational i p o e e ts at The A e site. Wo ks at Quee s House a e la gel depe de t o the completion of works at The Abbey site, to allow decanting of pupils and a seamless transition. Preparatory work, such as archaeological investigations and remediation can take place before decanting, as too can the construction of the epla e e t g ou ds a s hut. The o ks at The A e site a e also ti ed to minimise disruption to pupils. Clearly, the combined project is technically complicated with many inter-dependencies, not least the granting of planning permission for revised designs, but also technical approvals such as Building Regulation approval, discharge of conditions and sectional agreements with Highways and Drainage authorities.
5.12 The proposed key milestones for the project are as follows:
70
October 2018 – Start construction works at The Abbey site December 2018 – Li ited t ee lea a e at Quee s House site April 2019 – Co st u t e g ou ds a s hut July 2019 – De a t Quee s House a d commence construction September 2019 – Improvements at The Abbey site are formally opened July 2021 – Co st u tio o plete at Quee s House site Design and Appearance 5.13 The scale, height and form of the proposed design are largely unchanged from the approved design. Following feedback from local residents as part of the approved design, a traditional building style is now proposed throughout. Not only has a traditional design been utilised, but a high level of quality has been detailed 5.14 The proposed design re-design of the buildings is considered acceptable by officers having due regard to the design requirements laid out in the NPPF and Policy DM21 of the Local Plan. Although different, the revised design remains one of a high quality with positively addresses the sensitivity of the site within the Conservation Area. The public focal view remains the Queens House building which remains visually similar to the eye. Residential Amenity 5.15 Residential amenity is an important aspect of any proposal. The layout of the proposed buildings is such that it is no closer to existing dwellings than the approved layout. The only exception is a car port along the northern boundary with Lower Haugh Lane. However, it is not considered that the presence of this car port will harm the residential amenity of existing residents by virtue of its roof design, single storey height and the intervening hedge. The proposed buildings on the northern part of the site are no higher than approved dwellings. 5.16 Through minor re-siting the proposed mews homes on the southern part of the site are approximately 0.5m closer to Bredfield Street. However, these properties are sufficiently set back from Bredfield Street by approximately 45m and screened by a number of trees. As such it is considered that this change will not have any material impact on residential amenity for residents on Bredfield Street. 5.17 A new component of the design are first floor, rear balconies to plots 28 to 31 on the southern edge of the site. Given the boundary treatment of fences and soft landscaping, the separation distance and the relative land uses, there will be little or no overlooking. Such balconies will increase the amount of private amenity space that these homes will enjoy. 5.18 The new houses will have rear gardens. A minimum level of private amenity space is ot stipulated the Cou il s de elop e t pla . The ga de s do, however, have to function correctly by providing some space for sitting out, drying clothes, bike storage etc. It is important to note that not all homeowners want large gardens. The smallest ga de s p oposed a e fo the o e ted ho es at Quee s House. They are approximately 50sqm in size and comparable to the consented design. Whilst modest, this space is sufficient for the functions set out above. Furthermore, residents will have
71
the e efit of usi g the la s i f o t of Quee s House fo ela i g. These lawns are available for all residents, including the occupants of the four proposed flats. One of these flats has its own private garden too. The management and retention of these public areas will be covered by a management plan. 5.19 Members will recall that significant objection was received in respect of the first application to the impact on residential amenity, in particular those properties in Lower Haugh Lane. This application has not generated any objections on this matter, with only two being received which relate to highway matters. Highways Considerations 5.20 Whilst the overall number of proposed dwellings remains unchanged from the consented scheme, the mix and type is changing slightly. However, as has been evidenced in the Transport Statement Update (2018) which supports the application it is not considered that this will not have any materially different effect than the approved scheme on the local transport network. Members will note however that two local objections have been received citing the impact on the local road infrastructure as their concerns. The impact of vehicles on the highway and the level of development was a matter which received significant scrutiny with the earlier application and as such is not a matter to be re-visited given that the parameters of the development have not altered. 5.21 The proposed design, in the opinion of the applicant, makes a much better provision in terms of parking space number and size to accommodate more modern car sizes. Accordingly, this is likely to reduce indiscriminate parking. Not only are the spaces larger, but more spaces are proposed. Approved Proposed Change Resident Parking 40 42 +2 Resident Garage 17 19 +2 Visitor Parking 7 7 0 Total 64 68 +4
5.22 As shown above, the approved scheme shows 64 no. parking spaces. Suffolk Guidance for Parking (2015) states the garages should have an internal size of 7m x 3m, or 6m x 3m if alternative provision for cycle/bin storage is made. A total of nine no. of these approved garages are just below this standard, but are included in this assessment. Nevertheless, the provision of four additional parking spaces represents an improvement for residents.
5.23 The proposed scheme includes some garages which are consistent with guidance at 6m x 3m. These properties have separate cycle and bin storage provision on the property. The majority of the proposed garages are 7m x 3m internal size and are large enough to include a cycle and bin store.
5.24 The visibility splays at the site entrance will be unaffected by the proposal. Suffolk County Council have in their consultation response raised the following questions:
72
1 Have the access improvements outlined on Richard Jackson Drawing Number 47325-C-100-Rev-A already been carried out?
2. If the access improvements have not already been carried out, please can SCC as LHA kindly be informed as to what stage, in the proposed programme of works, are the access improvements to be carried out (for example prior to commencement or prior to occupation)?
In response, it is important to note that this proposal in terms of the access remains unaltered to that which exists at present. It was considered by officers that it would not be necessary to make such improvements given the potential reduction in vehicular activity associated with a low level residential site as opposed to a school site. The applicants however have stated their intention to make some changes and this would be outside the planning application process.
5.25 In terms of through access, condition 25 of the approved scheme requires that a pedestrian and service link to Woodbridge School be retained. The reason is to ensure site permeability for these users. The applicant believes that this condition presents a challenge. The following is states in the Planning Statement:
Wood ridge “ hool eed the ser i e li k to allo for ehi ular a ess to the theatre and kitchen. Such movements will be small scale and normally limited to certain times of the year and is not particularly problematic for the residential development. The condition also requires access for pedestrians. The issue is not pedestrian access itself, but that such a pedestrian gate will inevitably lead to the access road being used as a vehicular drop-off and pick-up point for pupils. The approved/proposed layout is not designed to accommodate vehicular school traffic and there is concern that it will lead to indiscriminate parking and turning vehicles on the site to the detriment and inconvenience of new residents. Whilst permeability is normally promoted, there is a concern that it in this instance it would be potentially outweighed by the harm it would cause to new residents. In any event, there are alternative pedestrian routes to reach Woodbridge School from both Bredfield Street and Burkitt Road and the approved scheme includes replacement staff/parent parking elsewhere on the school grounds. Accordingly, it is proposed that if this condition needs to be added to the consent for this application that it relates only to service movements and not pedestrians. The proposal would only affect those travelling on foot to Woodbridge School from the north. It would add approximately 50m (1 min) to their journey to the school. Arriving from other directions would be unaffected. The benefit would be the better functioning of the a ess road a d o e ie e of e reside ts . 5.26 Members will note that whilst pre-application discussions took place in advance of submission, this related to the design and mix and did not relate to this access. Whilst noting the concerns of the applicant, Officers take a different view on this matter. As noted above, the scheme has been designed in a way which discourages parking for those other than residents, and the method to control this is via the on site management company and also via communication between the school and parents. In the opinion of officers the retention of the access is critical to ensure appropriate
73
permeability through the site (school users and also those visiting the wider school) a d seeks also to e su e that the de elop e t does ot e o e gated o losed which is poor design and does not in the opinion of officers represent appropriate sustainable development. 5.27 The presence of the gate is clearly identified on the plans and therefore any prospective purchaser will be aware of its presence and factor that in accordingly when moving forward with a purchase. In the opinion of officers the benefit of the pedestrian gate, outweighs any limited harm and the wording of the condition reflected accordingly. Members will also recall this inclusion was also at desire of the Planning Committee. Trees and Landscaping 5.28 Landscaping forms an important part of the site and the wider conservation area and again is a matter which received significant scrutiny with the previous application. The proposed small changes to the layout have not resulted in any substantial changes to the existing trees and landscaping, as shown in the revised Arboricultural Impact Assessment. Any landscaping will work with the strengths of the site. In this instance these a e the ope la s i f o t of Quee s House, s ee i g t ees/hedges a ou d the edge of the site and the chance to create a new tree-lined street by the proposed mews homes. Landscaping will be protected and retained via the on-site management company. 5.29 As a general principle, the aim has been to retain as many mature and semi-mature trees as possible, using engineering solutions to allow retention where feasible, and aiming to remove younger, weaker trees where trees have to be removed. No Category A trees are proposed for removal to facilitate development, and only 5 Cat. B trees and 1 Cat B group are shown to be lost through development. The remaining trees and groups/hedges to be lost are either Category C or U which are considered to be low priority trees anyway, as assessed under the categorisation contained in BS5837:2012 Trees in Relation to Design., Demolition and Construction. 11no. cat B and 4no. Cat C trees will have their root protection areas affected by development, although engineering solutions are proposed to mitigate and minimise significant harmful impacts in these circumstances. Other tree works may be required such as crown lifting etc, and it is recommended that provision is made in consents for these to be agreed by exchange of email as required, rather than a full Section 211 Notification. 5.30 It is considered that any adverse impacts arising from the need to remove the 5 Cat. B trees (as well as the Cat C. trees), can be mitigated by new tree planting proposals appropriate to the new development and which will ensure ongoing tree cover on the site into the future. An arboricultural method statement to agree engineering and other tree protection measures is proposed by means of condition. 5.31 A landscape and visual impact assessment has also been submitted with the application and makes the following conclusions: That the site makes a positive contribution to the local landscape character and offers good visual amenity.
74
That the proposed development will have a moderate adverse effect on the landscape as a resource in its own right because of the changes brought about by the proposed development.
However, it is suggested that these effects will be mitigated by new tree planting in association with the development, new boundary planting between the School and the development site, and new properties being set back from Bredfield Street with new associated planting.
5.32 With new planting geared towards meeting the aims of the Woodbridge Conservation Area Appraisal, within which this site falls, it is suggested that the effects on landscape character will remain adverse, but will reduce to slight in the long term as new planting matures. 5.33 With regards to visual effects, it is suggested that, on completion of the development, the isual effe ts a isi g f o it ill a ge f o ode ate ad e se to o ha ge , depending on the location of the visual receptor. As with the moderation of landscape effects through mitigation, visual effects will be similarly moderated as planting matures and where they are moderate adverse on completion of construction, they a e e pe ted to edu e to slight . The ost se e e ad e se isual effe ts ill e experienced from Bredfield Street east of the site, residential properties off Lower Haugh Lane north of the site, 40/41 Bredfield Street occupants (for whom effects could be substantially adverse during construction). 5.34 The overall conclusion is that the measures put forward as part of the landscape strategy accompanying the application respond to the recommendations and, therefore the long term effects of the proposal with mitigation will be limited, being slight for the landscape resource and slight adverse to no change for the visual esou e. The Cou il s La ds ape a d A o i ultu al Ma age has ot sought to disagree with these conclusions and therefore raises no objection to the application. Conclusion 5.35 It is considered by officers that the changes proposed to this scheme are acceptable when having due regard to localised and longer terms visual impacts, the relationship to surrounding residential properties, heritage assets and the Conservation Area. The principle, layout, design principles, parking, access and lack of affordable housing are matters which have already been agreed to via the grant of the earlier consent. 5.36 The only matter of disagreement between both parties is the retention of the pedestrian link through the site, and for the reasons outlined in the report officers believe that the benefits of its retention outweigh any limited harm to future residents. 5.37 The application is recommended for approval subject to the satisfactory completion of the S106 Agreement and appropriate conditions.
75
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE subject to: the satisfactory completion of a S106 Agreement the conclusions of the viability assessment being satisfactory and the following conditions: 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun within a period of five years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.
2. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until it has been completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the following plans, for which permission is hereby granted or which are subsequently submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and in compliance with any conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authority.
1190/01D – Site Plan 1190/02A – Queens House Floor Plans (plots 1-3) 1190/06A – Floor Plans and Elevation Plots 4, 5, 6, 15, 16 & 17 1190/07B - Floor Plans and Elevation Plots 18, 19, 20 & 21 1190/08B - Elevation Plots 22-27 and garages for plots 7 & 22 1190/09B - Floor Plans and Elevations Plots 22-27 1190/14D – Accommodation Plan 1190/15A – Refuse Store Plan Plots 4, 5, 6 & 17
Reason: To secure a properly planned development.
3 Samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved samples.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory external appearance of the development.
4 Prior to the commencement of development, a Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. This statement should set out the site management practices for the development of the site.
Reason: In the interest of residential amenity
5 No development shall commence until details of the strategy for the disposal of surface water on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal, to ensure that the proposed development can be adequately drained
76
6 No development shall commence until details of the implementation, maintenance and management of the strategy for the disposal of surface water on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The strategy shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure clear arrangements are in place for ongoing operation and maintenance of the disposal of surface water drainage.
7 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of all Sustainable Urban Drainage System components and piped networks have been submitted, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for inclusion on the Lead Local Flood Authority's Flood Risk Asset Register.
Reason: To ensure all flood risk assets and their owners are recorded onto the LLFA's statutory flood risk asset register
8 No development shall commence until details of a construction surface water management plan detailing how surface water and storm water will be managed on the site during construction is submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The construction surface water management plan shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved plan.
Reason: To ensure the development does not cause increased pollution of the watercourse in line with the River Basin Management Plan.
9 No development shall take place within the area indicated [the whole site] until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured, in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation for evaluation, and where necessary excavation, which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The written scheme of investigation shall include an assessment of significance and research questions; and: a. The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording b. The programme for post investigation archaeological assessment c. Provision to be made for analysis of the site investigation and recording d. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the analysis and records of the site investigation e. Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site investigation f. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of Investigation. g. The site investigation shall be completed prior to development, or in such other phased arrangement, as agreed and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
77
Reason: To safeguard archaeological assets within the approved development boundary from impacts relating to any groundworks associated with the development scheme and to ensure the proper and timely investigation, recording, reporting and presentation of archaeological assets affected by this development, in accordance with Strategic Policies SP1 and SP 15 of Suffolk Coastal District Council Core Strategy Development Plan Document (2013) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2018).
10 No buildings shall be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed, submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under Condition 9 and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition.
Reason: To safeguard archaeological assets within the approved development boundary from impacts relating to any groundworks associated with the development scheme and to ensure the proper and timely investigation, recording, reporting and presentation of archaeological assets affected by this development, in accordance with Strategic Policies SP1 and SP 15 of Suffolk Coastal District Council Core Strategy Development Plan Document (2013) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2018).
11 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved a full arboricultural method statement including site monitoring shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the trees are protected during construction.
12 The use shall not commence until the area(s) within the site shown on 1190/01D for the purposes of [LOADING, UNLOADING,] manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has been provided and thereafter that area(s) shall be retained and used for no other purposes.
Note: The submitted car parking provision is not in accordance with Suffolk Guidance for Parking 2015 which requires a minimum of 3 car parking spaces for a dwelling of 4+ bedrooms.
Reason: To ensure that sufficient space for the on site parking of vehicles is provided and maintained in order to ensure the provision of adequate on-site space for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles where on-street parking and manoeuvring would be detrimental to highway safety to users of the highway.
13. The areas to be provided for storage of Refuse/Recycling bins as shown on 1190/01D and 1190/15A shall be provided in its entirety before the development is brought into use and shall be retained thereafter for no other purpose.
78
Reason: To ensure that refuse recycling bins are not stored on the highway causing obstruction and dangers for other users.
14 A detailed remediation method statement (RMS) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA prior to the commencement of any development (including any construction, demolition, site clearance, removal of underground tanks and relic structures). The RMS must be written in accordance with prevailing guidance and good practice (including CLR:11) and must include, but is not limited to: * an explanation, including justification, for the selection of the detailed remediation methodology; * detailed information for all works to be undertaken including drawings and plans, materials, specifications and site management procedures; * proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria; * proposals for validating the remediation and, where appropriate, for future monitoring.
As a minimum the RMS must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.
Reason: To ensure that contamination is appropriately dealt with
15 Prior to any occupation or use of the approved development the approved Remediation Method Statement must be completed in its entirety. The LPA must be given written notification two weeks prior to the commencement of the remedial works.
Reason: To ensure that contamination is appropriately dealt with
16 A validation report must be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA prior to any occupation or use of the approved development. The validation report must include, but is not limited to: * evidence that the approved Remediation Method Statement has been carried out competently and effectively in its entirety; and * evidence that the remediation has been effective and that the site is now suitable for the approved development.
Reason: To ensure that contamination is appropriately dealt with
17 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials; minor artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc); proposed and existing functional services
79
above and below ground (e.g. drainage power, communications cables, pipelines etc indicating lines, manholes, supports etc); retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant. Soft landscape works shall include planting plans; written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed number/densities where appropriate; implementation programme.
Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscape design.
18 The trees shown to be retained within the approved Arboricultural Impact Assessment by Landscape Planning Limited dated 26 June 2018 shall be retained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To secure an appropriate landscape scheme for the site and in the interest of retaining trees on site
19 No development shall take place until the existing trees on site, agreed with the Local Planning Authority for inclusion in the scheme of landscaping, have been protected by the erection of temporary protective fences of a height, size and in positions which shall previously have been agreed, in writing, with the Local Planning Authority. The protective fences shall be retained throughout the duration of building and engineering works in the vicinity of the tree to be protected. Any trees dying or becoming severely damaged as a result of any failure to comply with these requirements shall be replaced with trees of appropriate size and species during the first planting season, or in accordance with such other arrangement as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, following the death of, or severe damage to the trees.
Reason: For the avoidance of damage to protected trees included within the landscaping scheme in the interests of visual amenity and the character and appearance of the area.
20 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order) (with or without modification), no building, walls or fences of any kind shall be erected without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To secure a properly planned development and to respect the importance of the site with the Conservation Area.
21 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No. 2) (England) Order 2008 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order) (with or without modification), no building or structure permitted by Classes A (extensions or alterations) or E (buildings or enclosures within the curtilage of the house) of Schedule 2 Part 1 of the Order shall
80
be erected without the submission of a formal planning application and the granting of planning permission by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To secure a properly planned development.
22 No external lighting shall be installed within the approved application site unless the details have been submitted to the Local Planning Authority first for approval. Any lighting installed shall be done so and retained in the approved form in perpetuity.
Reason: In the interest of visual impact and residential amenity
23 Prior to the occupation of any dwelling hereby approved a scheme for the maintenance of all public areas within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The maintenance shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory maintenance of all public areas
24 The pedestrian and service link through to Woodbridge School as shown on plan reference 1190/01D shall be retained for such use in perpetuity and made available at all times for pedestrian permeability through the site to Woodbridge School.
Reason: To ensure that appropriate permeability is retained to the school site for service vehicles and pupils/staff 25 Prior to development commencing plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority detailing the Staff Car Parking Improvements and Amendments to Short Term Parking Area within the wider Woodbridge School Area. The improved parking shall be made available for use prior to the relocation of the Queens House element of the school and retained in its approved form in perpetuity. Reason: To ensure suitable alternative on site provision is made available once the existing Queens House car park is lost to development.
A number of informatives are also included on the decision notice relating to, but not limited to, swift boxes, hours of construction and compensatory car parking. BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No DC/16/4008/FUL, DC/16/4009/FUL, DC/16/4010/LBC, DC/18/2658/FUL and DC/18/2659/LBC Committee Date: 20 September 2018 Site Visit: 6 March 2017 Committee Date:
81
8. WOODBRIDGE – DC/18/1658/FUL – Proposed demolition of existing 1970's block to The Abbey, and replacement with a contemporary extension accommodating four additional classrooms; a proposed new astro turf multi use surface (adjacent to The Abbey building); a 7-aside all-weather pitch. Reconfiguration of car park, together with associated drainage, landscaping and highway works, including the widening of access from Cumberland Street. Listed building consent for internal works to the existing 'Old Building' and Tile and Dewer Building, and new wrought iron rail to terrace (material amendment to extant permission DC/16/4009) at At The Abbey School, 27 Church Street, Woodbridge IP12 1DS for The Seckford Foundation Case Officer: Liz Beighton Expiry Date: 19 August 2018
DC/18/2658/FUL - The Abbey School, 27 Church Street, Woodbridge, IP12 1DS
DO NOT SCALE SLA100019684
Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning Permission is sought for the construction of an all-weather pitch together with reconfigured car park and other alterations to the Abbey Preparatory School in Woodbridge (Use Class D1). The application is linked to application reference DC/18/1671/FUL which seeks to convert the existing Queens House and promoted residential development within the grounds to facilitate the move from Queens House to the Abbey site. This is a resubmission of application reference DC/18/2009/FUL
82
This application has come before Members at the discretion of Officers due to its relationship to DC/16/4008/FUL and a site visit has been recommended in advance of the meeting. Members will however note that there are no technical objections to the application from statutory parties, and that Woodbridge Town Council do not seek to object to the application. The works proposed is considered sympathetic having due regard to the setting of the Church, main Abbey building, the Conservation Area and the function of the school as a whole. The comments from all consultees are noted however the recommendation is one of approval subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The Abbey Preparatory School is located off Church Street in central Woodbridge and serves as the prep school to Woodbridge School, whose main site is off Burkitt Road. The whole of the site is located within the Woodbridge Conservation Area. 1.2 The ai A e “ hool uildi g, is G ade * a d its i ediate eigh ou “t Ma s Church is Grade 1. There are a number of other listed buildings in close vicinity of the site including the Meeting House in Turn Lane (Grade II), Nos 3 and 4 Turn Lane (Grade II) and Nos 30 to 38 Cumberland Street (Grade II). 1.3 The principle vehicular access to the site is via Cumberland Street, to the south, which leads to an on-site car park, and Members will note that part of the proposals for consideration include reconfiguration and resurfacing of the car park to provide greater capacity.
2. PROPOSALS 2.1 The application proposes a number of alterations and developments within the grounds of The Abbey Prep school to facilitate the move from Queens House. This report is to be read in conjunction with that for the Queens House development (DC/18/2671/FUL). 2.2 The application seeks approval for the following works:
P oposed de olitio of e isti g . s lo k to The A e , a d replacement with a contemporary extension accommodating four additional classrooms Improvement and expansion to the existing sports facilities on site, through the provision of a proposed new astro turf multi use surface (adjacent to The Abbey building), and a proposed new 7-aside all weather pitch The improvement and increase to existing onsite car parking traffic flow and access, through the reconfiguration of car park, and widening of access from Cumberland Street
83
Listed uildi g o se t fo i te al o ks to the e isti g Old Buildi g , Tile and Dewar Building, together with associated drainage and landscaping, and new wrought iron rail to terrace
2.3 The only changes proposed that differ from that of the extant permission on the site (application reference DC/16/4009/FUL approved on 3 March 2017), is the extension to the o th of the site, a d the de olitio of the . s extension to the north west of The Abbey building. The approved extension to the west (to accommodate the Activity Studio) and external alterations to the Tile and Dewar building are no longer proposed.
2.4 In terms of the proposed additional staff numbers, and student numbers, these are the same as those approved under the extant permission and therefore have already been considered acceptable to the local planning authority. The vehicle movements and intensification of the site are the same as that proposed under the extant permission.
2.5 In light of the above, the principle of the site accommodating additional built form, and the additional two astroturf multiuse pitches, have already been established. The determining factor therefore is whether the proposed extension and demolition is acceptable in terms of its scale, bulk, siting, design, their impact on neighbouring amenity, and on the setting of the listed building. 2.6 The original application was granted subject to a s106 legal agreement, which linked the fi a ial p o eeds f o the sale of Quee s House to i p o e e ts at the A e . This agreement also set out the mechanism for affordable housing contributions, should the Quee s House/A e p oje t e ia le to suppo t the . This e ised planning application would continue to be bound by the same legal agreement by virtue of a Deed of Variation; a draft of which will shortly follow this application. The satisfactory completion of the S106 Agreement is linked to application reference DC/18/2671/FUL.
3. CONSULTATIONS 3.1 Woodbridge Town Council: Recommend approval 3.2 Environment Agency: No comments as outside their remit for consultations 3.3 Historic England: Historic England have been consulted on these proposals prior to the submission of the current application and assessed their potential for impact on the significance of the grade II* listed school building, its associated boundary walls and the adjacent grade I listed parish church of St Mary. Historic England has concerns regarding the application on heritage grounds. We would prefer to see a g ee oof o side ed fo the e lass oo uildi g a d a e o e ed the introduction of artifical surfacing and a sports pitch close to the listed buildings to be harmful to their historic significance. The full consultation response is appended to this report. 3.4 Suffolk County Council - Archaeological Service: No objection subject to conditions
84
3.5 Suffolk County Council - Flooding Authority: Holding objection at this Time because the design has not accounted for groundwater levels and looks to be located below the water table. 3.6 Suffolk County Council - Highway Authority: no objection subject to condition 3.7 Woodbridge Society: We support this application as it is an improvement on the p e ious o se t, a d e e og ise the eed fo the s hool s edu atio al fa ilities to continue to be improved. There are some reservations among our planning group members about the use of Corten, but recognise that this is a popular material with architects and has been used elsewhere in Woodbridge. 3.8 SCDC - Head of Environmental Services and Port Health: no objection subject to condition 3.9 Head of Economic Development: No objection 3.10 Third Party Representations: Two Letters of Objection have been received raising the following points: We write to point out that the pier to the left of the existing school gate, which you plan to rebuild to match its twin, does not belong to you. This pier is part of our garden wall, the boundary to our property, and is not to be interfered with without our permission – for note this is a civil matter and lies outside the remit of this planning application. Whilst totally in favour of the reconfiguration of the buildings, and layout and general up-dating I cannot agree to the use of Corten as being suitable cladding material in this context. Although very fashionable with architects these days it has no place in this particular redevelopment. There is no reason why suitable bricks could not be used. It would seem that a very awkward profile will be adopted at the western end of the new buildings which will not sit very comfortably with the existing structures.
4 RELEVANT POLICIES 4.1 NPPF 4.2 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan – Core Strategy and Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2013) policies: SP1a – Sustainable Development SP1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development SP15 – Landscape and Townscape DM19 – Parking Standards DM21 – Design : Aesethics DM23 – Residential Amenity DM31 – Public Buildings DM32 – Sport and Play
85
4.3 The following Suffolk Coastal Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents are of particular relevance to the determination of this application: SPG: Woodbridge Conservation Area Appraisal (July 2011) 5. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 The key issues associated from this development are the principle of increasing the school size at the site and whether there is sufficient space for such, impact as a result of increased pupils on the vehicular entrance and local highway network, the design and appearance and the subsequent relationship of such to the listed buildings and character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The matters will be discussed in turn. 5.2 The development has extant consent by virtue of application reference DC/16/4009/FUL. Paragraph 2.2 and 2.3 above detail the scope of this application and the differences between the approved scheme.
Principle of development 5.3 Although this application is to be determined on its own merits, Members of the Committee are referred to application reference DC/18/2671/FUL, also on the agenda for consideration. The purpose of the application is to relocate the pre-preparatory school, currently residing in Queens House on the main campus, to the Abbey site to ensure that the junior and senior functions of the school operate as effectively as possible. This enables the pre-prep pupils to share the facilities, and indeed teaching staff, that the prep school benefits from. Justification for this is provided in detail in the other application report presented which deals with the Queens House application. 5.4 Officers are of the opinion that the co-location of Queens within the Abbey grounds is appropriate for the school to deliver the best education and facilities for existing and future pupils. Members will however need to weigh up the impacts of this amalgamation on the heritage asset and residential amenity. 5.5 The Abbey School is a Grade II* listed building, which is adjacent to the Grade I listed Church of St Mary and lies within the Woodbridge Conservation Area. The proposals include demolition and rebuilding of the existing 1970s block, a new artificial surface multi-use area adjoining the Abbey building; a new all-weather pitch; works to the car park and access; internal alterations and new railings to the terrace. This is a revision to a previously approved scheme (DC/16/4009/FUL & DC/16/4010/LBC) although some elements of the current proposals remain as the approved scheme with the main revision being to the proposed addition and demolition of the existing 1970s extension. 5.6 The application is supported by a detailed Heritage Statement which considers the impact of the proposed development and a Design & Access Statement which sets out the design approach to the proposed works. The existing 1970s extension is flat roofed with red facing brickwork, white painted fascia panels and white Crittall casement windows and doors and overall is of low architectural quality and does not contribute to the heritage significance of the building. I have no objections to demolition and replacement. The proposed addition will provide additional facilities and an improved internal layout and will have facing brickwork to the rear elevations
86
which face the churchyard and Corten steel cladding with black anodised aluminium doors and windows to the outward facing elevations. 5.7 The Cou il s P i ipal Desig a d Co se vation Officer has no objections to the general form, scale and massing of the new extension and its design and materials will create a distinctly contemporary addition to the building, which will be a considerable enhancement and is a design approach which I consider to be appropriate in this context. In his opinion the proposed extension will not have an adverse impact on the setting of the building or the church, or the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Subject to matters of detailed design and materials he support the proposals for the demolition and rebuilding of the 1970s extension. 5.8 The proposed internal and external alterations to the existing building have previously been considered and were acceptable under the extant permission and I have no further comments to add. The multi-use surface, car parking and highway works etc., have also been approved as part of the extant permission and no further comments ith ega ds to su h a e p o ided the Cou il s P i ipal Desig a d Conservation Officer. 5.9 Members will note the appended consultation response from Historic England. It is noted that the inclusion of a multi-purpose sports pitch was included under the previous application. Officers are of the opinion that the wider setting of Dewar House is one of sports pitches and school facilities and therefore the inclusion of a new facility is not out of character with the wider setting. It will also yield additional improvements for the wider school in terms of it being able to provide for a greater sport provision and therefore there are acknowledged public benefits which in the opi io of offi e s still out eighs a ha . The Cou il s P i ipal Desig a d Conservation Officer does not object on these grounds. 5.10 Members will note the holding objection from the Local Lead Flood Authority and whilst these are noted, it is important to acknowledge that a development of a very similar nature can take place on site subject to appropriate discharge of conditions. It is therefore not considered appropriate or realistic in this instance to refuse permission or seek additional amendments for a scheme which has already been considered acceptable. As with the previous application conditions are proposed to deal with surface water drainage. Conclusion 5.11 The application is considered acceptable and well thought out having due regard to the impact on the Conservation Area and heritage assets. Although views through the site will alter, and relationships change slightly, these are not in the opinion of officers of sufficient magnitude to warrant refusal of permission. The design and appearance of the element of the proposal are considered acceptable and welcomed by the Cou il s P i ipal Desig a d Co se atio Offi e . 5.12 The changes over and above the approved scheme are considered to be of a minor scale and not unacceptable when tested against relevant policies. 5.13 Officers are supportive of the intention of the school to co-locate the junior functions of the school on one site in terms of the benefits that will ensue for both existing and
87
future pupils. The application is considered to be acceptable and compliant with policy and recommended for approval. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE subject to the following conditions:
1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun within a period of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.
2 The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until it has been completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the following plans, for which permission is hereby granted or which are subsequently submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and in compliance with any conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authority.
WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1000 - Site Location Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1001 – Existing Block Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1002 – Existing Sport England Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2301 – Proposed Sport England Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2300 – Proposed Block Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2400 – Abbey Extension Plans WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2401 – Abbey Proposed Floor Plans WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1100 – Abbey Existing Floor Plans WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2500 – Abbey Proposed Elevations WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1200 – Abbey Existing Elevations
Reason: To secure a properly planned development.
3 The materials and finishes shall be as indicated within the submitted application and thereafter retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development in the interests of visual amenity
4 No buildings shall be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed, submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation submitted with the application (Broadland Archaeology document ref 2018/057, dated 31/07/2018/ revision 2), and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition.
Reason: To safeguard archaeological assets within the approved development boundary from impacts relating to any groundworks associated with the development scheme and to ensure the proper and timely investigation, recording,
88
reporting and presentation of archaeological assets affected by this development, in accordance with Strategic Policies SP1 and SP 15 of Suffolk Coastal District Council Core Strategy Development Plan Document (2013) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2018).
5 Before the development is commenced details of the areas to be provided for the [LOADING, UNLOADING,] manoeuvring and parking of vehicles including electric vehicle charging points, powered two vehicle provision, secure covered cycle storage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be carried out in its entirety before the development is brought into use and shall be retained thereafter and used for no other purpose.
Reason: To ensure the provision and long term maintenance of adequate on-site space for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles in accordance with Suffolk Guidance for Parking (2015) where on-street parking and manoeuvring would be detrimental to highway safety.
6 Gates shall open only into the site and not over any area of the highway.
Reason: In the interests of road safety.
7 No development shall commence until details of the strategy for the disposal of surface water on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal, to ensure that the proposed development can be adequately drained
8 No development shall commence until details of the implementation, maintenance and management of the strategy for the disposal of surface water on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The strategy shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure clear arrangements are in place for ongoing operation and maintenance of the disposal of surface water drainage.
9 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of all Sustainable Urban Drainage System components and piped networks have been submitted, in an approved form, to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for inclusion on the Lead Local Flood Authority's Flood Risk Asset Register.
Reason: To ensure all flood risk assets and their owners are recorded onto the LLFA's statutory flood risk asset register
10 No development shall commence until details of a construction surface water management plan detailing how surface water and storm water will be managed on
89
the site during construction is submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The construction surface water management plan shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved plan.
Reason: To ensure the development does not cause increased pollution of the watercourse in line with the River Basin Management Plan.
11 The trees shown to be retained on approved plan tree protection plan that form Appendix 4 of the Arboricultural Impact Assessment shall be retained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To secure an appropriate landscape scheme for the site and in the interest of retaining trees on site
12 No development shall take place until the existing trees on site, agreed with the Local Planning Authority for inclusion in the scheme of landscaping, have been protected by the erection of temporary protective fences of a height, size and in positions which shall previously have been agreed, in writing, with the Local Planning Authority. The protective fences shall be retained throughout the duration of building and engineering works in the vicinity of the tree to be protected. Any trees dying or becoming severely damaged as a result of any failure to comply with these requirements shall be replaced with trees of appropriate size and species during the first planting season, or in accordance with such other arrangement as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, following the death of, or severe damage to the trees.
Reason: For the avoidance of damage to protected trees included within the landscaping scheme in the interests of visual amenity and the character and appearance of the area.
13 Prior to the commencement of development, a Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. This statement should set out the site management practices for the development of the site. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No Planning Application File Ref No DC/16/4008/FUL, DC/16/4009/FUL, DC/16/4010/LBC, DC/18/2658/FUL and DC/18/2659/LBC Committee Date: 20 September 2018 Site Visit: 6 March 2017
90
91
92
93
9. WOODBRIDGE– DC/18/2659/LBC – Listed Building Consent - Proposed demolition of existing 1970's block to The Abbey, and replacement with a contemporary extension accommodating four additional classrooms; a proposed new astro turf multi use surface (adjacent to The Abbey building); a 7-aside all-weather pitch. Reconfiguration of car park, together with associated drainage, landscaping and highway works, including the widening of access from Cumberland Street. Listed building consent for internal works to the existing 'Old Building' and Tile and Dewer Building, and new wrought iron rail to terrace (material amendment to extant permission DC/16/4009 at At The Abbey School, 27 Church Street, Woodbridge IP12 1DS for The Seckford Foundation Case Officer: Liz Beighton Expiry Date: 19 August 2018
DC/18/2659/LBC - The Abbey School, 27 Church Street, Woodbridge, IP12 1DS
DO NOT SCALE SLA100019684
Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Listed Building Consent is sought for an all-weather pitch together with reconfigured car park and other alterations to the Abbey Preparatory School in Woodbridge (Use Class D1). The application is linked to application reference DC/18/2671/FUL which seeks to convert the existing Queens House and promoted residential development within the grounds to facilitate the move from Queens House to the Abbey site. There is an associated full planning application (DC/16/2658/FUL) which is being presented separately with the same recommendation. This application has come before Members at the discretion of Officers as it is linked to the full application DC/18/2658/FUL. The recommendation is one of approval
94
1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The Abbey Preparatory School is located off Church Street in central Woodbridge and serves as the prep school to Woodbridge School, whose main site is off Burkitt Road. The whole of the site is located within the Woodbridge Conservation Area. 1.2 The ai A e “ hool uildi g, is G ade * a d its i ediate eigh ou “t Ma s Church is Grade 1. There are a number of other listed buildings in close vicinity of the site including the Meeting House in Turn Lane (Grade II), Nos 3 and 4 Turn Lane (Grade II) and Nos 30 to 38 Cumberland Street (Grade II). 1.3 The principle vehicular access to the site is via Cumberland Street, to the south, which leads to an on-site car park, and Members will note that part of the proposals for consideration include reconfiguration and resurfacing of the car park to provide greater capacity.
2. PROPOSALS 2.1 The application proposes a number of alterations and developments within the grounds of The Abbey Prep school to facilitate the move from Queens House. This report is to be read in conjunction with that for the Queens House development (DC/18/2671/FUL). 2.2 The application seeks approval for the following works: • P oposed de olitio of e isti g . s lo k to The A e , a d epla e e t with a contemporary extension accommodating four additional classrooms • Improvement and expansion to the existing sports facilities on site, through the provision of a proposed new astro turf multi use surface (adjacent to The Abbey building), and a proposed new 7-aside all weather pitch • The improvement and increase to existing onsite car parking traffic flow and access, through the reconfiguration of car park, and widening of access from Cumberland Street • Listed uildi g o se t fo i te al o ks to the e isti g Old Buildi g , Tile a d Dewar Building, together with associated drainage and landscaping, and new wrought iron rail to terrace
2.3 The only changes proposed that differ from that of the extant permission on the site (application reference DC/16/4009/FUL approved on 3 March 2017), is the extension to the north of the site, and the demolition of the c. s e te sio to the o th est of The Abbey building. The approved extension to the west (to accommodate the Activity Studio) and external alterations to the Tile and Dewar building are no longer proposed.
95
3. CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Woodbridge Town Council: Recommend approval 3.2 English Heritage:Refer to forma response contained in association with DC/18/2658/FUL 3.3 Third Party Representations: None received 4. RELEVANT POLICIES 4.1 NPPF 5. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 The commentary in relation to the planning and listed building aspects of this application are considered in the sister report reference DC/16/4009/FUL. The application in terms of the listed building elements are considered acceptable and the application is recommended for approval.
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE subject to the following conditions: 1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: This condition is imposed in accordance with Section 18 of the Act (as amended).Plans/drawings considered/approved 2 The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until it has been completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the following plans, for which permission is hereby granted or which are subsequently submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and in compliance with any conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authority.
WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1000 - Site Location Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1001 – Existing Block Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1002 – Existing Sport England Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2301 – Proposed Sport England Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2300 – Proposed Block Plan WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2400 – Abbey Extension Plans WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2401 – Abbey Proposed Floor Plans WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1100 – Abbey Existing Floor Plans WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-2500 – Abbey Proposed Elevations WABBEY-IW-XX_XX_DR-A-1200 – Abbey Existing Elevations
Reason: To secure a properly planned development.
3 The materials and finishes shall be as indicated within the submitted application and thereafter retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.
96
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development in the interests of visual amenity DETERMINATION:
BACKGROUND PAPERS: Planning Application File Ref No Planning Application File Ref No DC/16/4008/FUL, DC/16/4009/FUL, DC/16/4010/LBC, DC/18/2658/FUL and DC/18/2659/LBC Committee Date: 20 September 2018 Site Visit: 6 March 2017 Committee Date:
97