Land North Of, Broadwindsor Road, Beaminster Proposal

APPLICATION NUMBER: WD/D/18/000115

APPLICATION SITE: LAND NORTH OF, BROADWINDSOR ROAD, BEAMINSTER

PROPOSAL: Outline planning application for residential development of up to 100 dwellings and associated infrastructure (means of access to be determined)

APPLICANT: The Bugler Trust

CASE OFFICER: Robert Burden

WARD MEMBER(S): Cllr A Alford, Cllr P Barrowcliff

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Delegate authority to Head of Planning to approve subject to completion of a section 106 agreement to address affordable housing; provision and management/maintenance of public open space; management/maintenance of landscaping; provision of access road and other pedestrian/cycle links to remaining allocated land, appropriate measures regarding provision of bus stops, and - if conditions not appropriate- surface water drainage provisions, together with conditions.

DESCRIPTION OF SITE:

1.1 The site lies at the west end of the town, on the north side of the B3163 Broadwindsor Road. It comprises mainly ploughed farmland, being low- lying and relatively level in the eastern part, and more of a slope rising to the west and north in the western portion. The site comprises an area of 4.58 ha and has a depth of 60-80 m in the east section, and about 210m depth in the western section. To the north side of the road it is about 0.5 - 0.75m above the road level. The site on its southern edge is bounded by the B3163. There is a grass verge fronting the road of variable width, backed by a hedge on a relatively low bank. Opposite the left half of the frontage is Buglers; an agricultural equipment suppliers business/contractors business. This includes a c7m high building of brick with metal clad walls and roof, together with a plant/machinery yard. More to the east opposite the site is Lower Barrowfield Farm; a listed building of two and a half storey of random natural stone and thatch, with white timber windows. To the east of the site is a public footpath and beyond that a two storey dwelling known as All Seasons House; this is of natural stone and slate. It has ground and first floor windows facing the site with other principal windows on other elevations. Its boundary is defined by a 1.4m high blockwork wall with conifers on that line. A wooded fringe and stream lies further to the east and the Broadwindsor Road Industrial Estate beyond. The north of the site is mainly defined by a native hedgerow and to the north of that is a grass field which rises gently and is divided into pony paddocks. Moving further north-westwards the site is bounded by more pastureland, and to the west by further agricultural land, and further west a group of farm buildings of corrugated iron, blockwork and corrugated roofing for cattle and agricultural storage.

DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT:

2.1 This is an outline planning application with all matters reserved apart from the means of access and is for up to 100 dwellings. As such it seeks to establish the principle of this amount of development. Details of the means of access to the site have been submitted. This would provide a new vehicular access to serve the site opposite the entrance to Buglers premises together with a new roundabout. A pedestrian footway link would also be provided from the south-east corner of the site along the north side of the road to link with the existing footway just to the east adjacent to St James.

2.2 Although this is submitted as an outline application the applicant has provided an illustrative layout which seeks to demonstrate how 100 dwellings together with public open space and roads could be accommodated on the site. An initial illustrative outline layout has been replaced by a further one, following negotiations, which seeks to show these in a more appropriate layout. This later illustrative layout shows a landscaped linear road running northwards, with a lower hierarchy road running eastwards serving what is described as "farm stead style development" including dwellings close to the northern edge of the road and shared vehicular access areas. This includes an informal green space and an attenuation pond to the east end of the site. An area for an equipped childrens play area is also included. This area mainly shows a mix of detached and terraced properties. Moving westwards the illustrative layout shows an area which includes a "village green” and a large proportion of detached properties with the area to the west termed “low density development". Here it is proposed that the existing boundary planting is further extended with additional planting to form a "woodland buffer". An "enhanced wildlife corridor" is shown running across the site on an east-west alignment.

2.3 An existing public footpath runs from the Broadwindsor Road northwards across the site and beyond. The scheme seeks to retain that right of way on a similar alignment. Another right of way which runs north-westwards from the south-east corner of the site by All Seasons House is proposed to be diverted to run along a new pedestrian access within the site running parallel with the north side of Broadwindsor Road to link with the other public footpath.

2.4 A new vehicular access would be formed on the Broadwindsor Road frontage at a point directly opposite the existing vehicular access to Buglers agricultural contractors premises to the south. A roundabout would be formed at this point. Sections of pavement would be formed on both sides of the Broadwindsor Road east of the roundabout and bus stops provided on both sides. Moving to the south-east corner of the site, a pedestrian footway/cyclepath would be formed which would link the site to the existing footway close to St James (and therefore join up with the existing footway).

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY:

3.1 No relevant planning history.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES:

4.1 National Planning Policy Framework 2018 As far as this application is concerned the following sections of the NPPF are considered to be relevant;

2. Achieving sustainable development 5. Delivering a sufficient supply of homes 6. Building a strong, competitive economy 7. Ensuring the vitality of town centre 8. Promoting healthy and safe communities 9. Promoting Sustainable transport 11. Making effective use of land 12. Achieving well-designed places 14. Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change 15. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment 16. Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

Para 38 - Local planning authorities should approach decisions on proposed development in a positive and creative way. They should use the full range of planning tools available, including brownfield registers and permission in principle, and work proactively with applicants to secure developments that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Decision- makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible

4.2 Adopted West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (2015)

BEAM1 Land to the North of Broadwindsor Road ENV1 Landscape, seascape and sites of geological interest ENV2 Wildlife and habitats ENV4 Heritage assets ENV5 Flood risk ENV9 Pollution and contaminated land ENV10 Landscape and townscape setting ENV11 The pattern of streets and spaces ENV12 Design and positioning of buildings ENV15 Efficient and appropriate use of land ENV16 Amenity SUS1 The level of economic and housing growth SUS2 Distribution of development HOUS1 Affordable housing HOUS3 Open market housing mix COM1 Making sure new development makes suitable provision for community infrastructure COM4 New or improved local recreational facilities COM7 Creating a safe and efficient transport network COM9 Parking standards in new development COM10 The provision of utilities service infrastructure

OTHER MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

5.1 Design and Sustainable Development Guidelines 2009.

5.2 WDDC Landscape Character Assessment

5.3 Beaminster Parish Plan 2013-23 (mentions Policy BEAM1- then in draft form)

5.4 Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Parking Guidelines

HUMAN RIGHTS:

6.1 Article 6 - Right to a fair trial. Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life and home. The first protocol of Article 1 Protection of property.

This Recommendation is based on adopted Development Plan policies, the application of which does not prejudice the Human Rights of the applicant or any third party.

PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITIES DUTY:

7.1 As set out in the Equalities Act 2010, all public bodies, in discharging their functions must have “due regard” to this duty. There are 3 main aims:- • Removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics • Taking steps to meet the needs of people with certain protected characteristics where these are different from the needs of other people • Encouraging people with certain protected characteristics to participate in public life or in other activities where participation is disproportionately low.

Whilst there is no absolute requirement to fully remove any disadvantage the Duty is to have “regard to” and remove OR minimise disadvantage and in considering the merits of this planning application the planning authority has taken into consideration the requirements of the PSED. As an outline application detailed comments cannot be made on this aspect at present. However, the layout does include provisions for a safe and convenient pedestrian link to connect with the existing footway to the town - to the benefit of less able persons.

CONSULTATIONS:

8.1 Historic England- Do not wish to offer any comments. Suggest seek views of specialist conservation and archaeological advisers, as relevant.

8.2 Natural England- No objection in principle, subject to securing biodiversity mitigation and enhancement. Submitted biodiversity mitigation plan should be supported by a DCC Natural Environment Team approval certificate. Appropriate biodiversity enhancements/financial contributions secured if applicable.

8.3 Wessex Water- The site shall be served by separate foul and surface water systems constructed to current adoptable standards. Foul drainage- the applicant proposes an off-site sewer running east in Broadwindsor Road to discharge flows into the public system at the junction of Broadwindsor Road and St James. Surface water drainage- The proposed drainage strategy will require will require the approval of the Lead Local Flood Authority with supporting flood risk measures. A robust strategy for disposal of surface water is required as surface water connections to the public foul sewer network will not be permitted.

8.4 DCC Highway Authority- The County Highway Authority requires the applicant to ensure that the planned roundabout can be constructed within the highway and land they control- our assessment suggests that part of the southern spur (serving the agricultural contractors) needs to be included. Furthermore it may be advantageous to include the proposed highway works east of the roundabout that provides the continuous footway link to be included in the application site - so as to attract a condition rather than a Section 106. 8.5 Further to the request of 26/02/2018 and subsequent discussions and revised drawings, the County Highway Authority has NO OBJECTION, subject to the following conditions and provisions:

Conditions: Detailed Road Access

Vehicular access to the development shall be formed by a roundabout as shown on Drawing Number 4233/001 Rev B and must be constructed before any other operations are commenced, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the proper and appropriate development of the site.

Outline Estate Road Construction (adopted or private).

No development must commence until details of the access, geometric highway layout, turning and parking areas have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the proper and appropriate development of the site.

8.6 Senior Archaeologist, DCC - The application is accompanied by AC Archaeology’s archaeological desk-based assessment of the proposed development, as well as a report on a geophysical survey of the site and a separate statement on the archaeological potential of the site. It is common practice for a geophysical survey to be the first part of an archaeological evaluation of a proposed development site, and normally such evaluations are undertaken before a planning application is determined. In the present case, since the geophysical survey has identified the potential presence of archaeological features, in my opinion the usual second part of an archaeological evaluation, namely the excavation of trial trenches, is required before an informed planning decision can be made. Hence, I must advise that West Dorset District Council should request the applicant to undertake this second phase before the application is determined.

Further comments following submitted archaeological report:

In my opinion this evaluation has been undertaken to an appropriate standard, and the results are significant. The evidence of Iron Age occupation of the site is important, and the indication that this occupation ceased around the time of the Roman Conquest of this locality adds to this. I don’t see the presence of archaeological remains on this site as a reason for refusal, but I do consider it important that those remains that would be destroyed by the development are recorded to an appropriate professional standard.

To secure this mitigation, I suggest the following condition is attached to any grant of planning consent:

'No works shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant to, and approved by the Planning Authority. This scheme shall cover archaeological fieldwork together with post-excavation work and publication of the results.'

And my initial thought is that the archaeological recording should consist of area excavations of parts of the site where significant remains have been identified, but I would be glad to discuss the details of this with all concerned.

8.7 Flood Risk Management Team, DCC - Site lies in Flood Risk Zone 1. Some risk to south-east corner from severe rainfall. Ordinary Watercourse lies to east of site draining north to south. The submitted site-specific FRA fails to adequately substantiate the conceptual surface water strategy that is presented. Object on surface water management grounds. Therefore require further details, clarification and substantiation.

DCC FRM -Comments on Amended Information-

The additional information recently supplied is in the form of a site specific Addendum (ref: RMA-LC1742, dated 27/07/2017) to the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) compiled by RMA Environmental (ref: RMA-C1742 – Issue 2, dated 11/12/2017), upon which we have previously commented. This additional Addendum document contains the RMA compiled Concept Plan of Surface Water Sewer Requisition, dated 02/05/2018 previously submitted, as Figure 1, and relevant correspondence with both Wessex Water and DCC Highways within supporting appendices (A-C). Collectively the addendum and supporting documents demonstrate, and clarify, that a viable and deliverable surface water management scheme has been agreed in-principle with the relevant parties. The relevant scheme is to be designed on the basis of a regulated discharge to a receiving watercourse, via the adjacent highways and bridge structure. On the basis of the FRA Addendum recently supplied, we (DCC/FRM) withdraw our previous recommendation of a (Holding) Objection, and have no in-principle objection to the proposed scheme subject to the attachment of the following (2) planning conditions and informative to any permission granted.

CONDITION (1) No development shall take place until a detailed and finalised surface water management scheme for the site, based upon the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, and with due consideration of the construction phase, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The necessary detail design shall include all required clarification of associated works to third party assets, in addition to substantiation of the main surface water management scheme, and be implemented in accordance with the submitted details before the development is completed. REASON: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, to protect third party assets, and to improve & protect water quality

CONDITION (2) No development shall take place until details of responsibility; maintenance and management of the surface water sustainable drainage scheme and associated infrastructure have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details. These should include a plan for the lifetime of the development, the arrangements for adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker, or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime. REASON: To ensure future operation and maintenance of the surface water drainage system and to prevent the increased risk of flooding.

8.8 Countryside Access Team , DCC - No objection. The proposed works directly affect Footpaths 71 and 72, Beaminster. The footpaths must be diverted by legal order, and that Order must be confirmed before any works obstructing the path are commenced. The plan shows public rights of way 71 and 72 accommodated within the development site and is affected by the proposals.

8.9 DCP Environmental Health Officer - There is land contamination in the vicinity but the nature of those mean that I do not feel that a full condition should be placed. Potential land contamination condition advised.

8.10 DCP Senior Tree Officer- No significant arboricultural constraints on or adjoining this site and I have no objection to the application. I note the Landscape Section has been consulted with regard to the wider impact. No objection on arboricultural grounds.

8.11 DCP Senior Landscape Architect (incorporating AONB Landscape Officer comments) - Original comments (summary) - Agree with LVIA that area has medium susceptibility to change. Disagree that site is "surrounded" by modern development. Effect on landscape character considered to lean towards "substantial". AONB Landscape Officer comments: Considers the scheme to constitute a "major proposal" in the AONB. Query site area accuracy (case officer note-site area is correct), and note density towards upper end of 25-40 dph.

The Local Plan policy makes the following statements relevant to landscape and visual effects: “Views into the site from the Wessex Ridgeway which runs to the south means that substantial strategic landscaping is needed.” The wooded river channel along the eastern boundary is considered to provide: “a valuable linear wildlife habitat that should be protected as part of any development on the site, by incorporating a suitably wide green buffer zone (likely to be at least 10 metres wide).” The policy also refers to sensitive heritage assets in the wider area. I recommend you seek an opinion regarding the effects on these assets from suitable qualified advisors. It should be noted that such effects are ‘important considerations’ in relation to the AONB, as per NPPF 115.

It is clearly stated that the development should deliver a mix housing, employment and public open space, including: “structural woodland planting along the western and northern boundaries, and existing trees and hedgerows within and around the boundaries of the site, should be retained where possible. The development will also ensure the protection of the wildlife interest of the wooded river channel along the eastern boundary of the site “a positive frontage onto Broadwindsor Road, with parking and servicing requirements within the site.” “a safe and attractive pedestrian route into the town centre, which should include a footway along the Broadwindsor Road.”

Due to the issues I have identified in my review, I consider that the proposal is likely to require modification. Before reaching conclusions regarding the compliance of the proposal with the AONB’s Management Plan I would like to await a clearer parameter plan, as requested above, and invite a response from the council and/or applicant regarding the issues of density, landscaping and design that I have identified”. I would accord with the above observations from the Dorset AONB Team – which raise a number of valid points. Whether an exceptional circumstances test should be undertaken (Policy ENV1) The ‘mixed compliance’ with policy BEAM1. The relationship of the proposed woodland planting and the site boundaries within the western area of the Site (the planting shown extends into adjacent land and outside the allocated area). A parameter plan that clearly shows the areas of housing/strategic planting is required. ‘Farmstead style’ frontage development – Does the illustrative layout represent this? The introduction of a roundabout in such a rural ‘gateway’ position Given the expansion of the Clipper Tea development to the south of the Broadwindsor Road and the presence of commercial development to the west of this (Bugler) – it would seem prudent to focus additional employment use within the site lying in between the two and reviewing the available area for housing to the north of Broadwindsor Road?

Overall I would conclude that adverse landscape and visual effects would result from the development through the loss of an area of open landscape displaying locally distinctive characteristics, and through the considerable expansion of urban form in localised views. These effects would be relatively local in character but all would impact on the AONB designation.

Further comments of AONB Officer on amended illustrative plan:

My initial comments on the quantum/density are contained within my letter of 22 March (original comments). In the letter I note the relatively high density that appears to arise from the overprovision of housing number within this portion of the allocation, for example: “The proposal seeks to accommodate a disproportionately high amount of the overall housing, resulting in an average density that is high for the periphery of a rural town. Should the excluded area come forward with a similar housing density, the overall development would significantly exceed the housing numbers that were considered appropriate when the site was allocated.”

As the applicant has not reduced the housing numbers and density in response to the earlier comments, it should not be considered that the issue has been overcome. Moderating scale and density are primary mitigation measures, whereas the points referred to within DCP Landscape Officer email following the meeting are generally secondary mitigation measures. Although the secondary mitigation measures referred to would help to soften the appearance of the development to some extent and support its integration into the wider landscape context, it should not be assumed that the measures are sufficient to overcome the concerns stated previously. The high number of dwellings, with relatively small garden plots, would increase the visual impact of the development when seen from elevated viewpoints, such as the Wessex Ridgeway to the south. Reducing the density of the development and providing more room for gardens and trees within the development area would be a suitable and effective design response that would moderate the effect of the development on wider landscape.

Further comments of DCP Landscape Officer on amended illustrative layout (comments in italics on applicants statements)-

Additional tree planting to the south-western corner, wrapping the woodland around the corner of the development. I note the amendment, which is a relatively minor change. It is considered that a greater area of planting toward the south-western boundary would help to mitigate visual receptors toward the direction of Gerrard’s Hill.

Additional tree and shrub planting on the northern boundary with the adjoining land ownership. The width of the green strip has been increased. This is regarded as a positive amendment.

Additional tree planting on the western boundary providing a better connection to the northern hedgerow network. This is regarded as a positive amendment.

Reduced number of gables onto Broadwindsor Road. This is generally regarded as a positive amendment.

Clearer routes through and better defined public / private space within the eastern areas of the plan. No comment.

Creation of an additional green space within the eastern area. This is regarded as a positive amendment, helping to break up the eastern portion of the site.

Widened central green space and moved further north to create a better relationship to the adjoining land. We’ve retained the area to the west which will enable a connected wildlife and ecology route to the new woodland. A high quality shared surface street will pull the two areas together into one ‘village green’ space. This extension of the green northwards is regarded as a positive amendment, helping to break up the western portion of the site.

Reviewed parking arrangement and addressed the colouring of the highway network. No comment.

8.12 DCP Urban Design Officer - Scheme achieves mixed compliance with BEAM1 Policy; significant part of allocated area not in application (in separate ownership) - consequently no provision of employment land ; important landscape mitigation areas excluded; does not guarantee required woodland planting on northern boundary, nor protection of wildlife interest of wooded river channel to east boundary. Application seeks disproportionately high amount of overall housing allocation - causing a high density for a rural town periphery. Both application and remaining allocated area should be planned jointly. Relationship of proposed woodland to west with the housing is unclear, as is the housing location relative to Local Plan POS allocation - clear parameter plan required. Some landscaping shown outside site. Development shown on site frontage as a desirable principle, however, repetition of "farm stead style” and urban design features are overtly urban in this context. Avoid use of entrance roundabout as too urban a feature. Further consideration given to functionality of green infrastructure within site.

Further Urban Design comments on amended illustrative plan-

Concerns that the village green has been increased in size but the bisecting access road is still shown on the revised layout which would still degrade the quality of the total POS. It would be preferable to further increase the village green in size and include built form on what is currently shown as POS (west of access road). Comparing the plans, the units fronting / side on to Broadwindsor Road are identical in terms of scale and form. So the Urban Designers comment re: the positive frontage onto Broadwindsor Rd being limited by side-on gardens still stands.

8.13 DCP Technical Services-

With regards to this application I have no objection. The EA's flood maps indicate that the site is located in flood zone 1 - low probability of fluvial flooding. There is some existing surface water flood risk according to the EA's indicative surface water flood maps but I am unaware of any previous flood incidents at this location. However I would advise that you refer to the consult provided by DCC FRM team regarding the management of surface water on site, given that the scale of the proposal means it qualifies as major development.

8.14 DCP Senior Economic Regeneration Officer -

I was involved in about 2006 with SWRDA (the former South West Regional Development Agency), who undertook a development appraisal of the site, which was then allocated purely for employment uses. I recall there were exceptional costs for drainage and utility connections as well as possible contamination and need for edge planting which concluded the size may not be viable for employment uses.

I note the policy requirement for the retention of part of the site for employment uses, you may wish to reconsider this given the recent residential outline consent granted on the adjacent employment area. (Clipper Teas to east).

I note that there remains in Beaminster the BEAM2 site which if brought forward by the owner or third party could provide some future employment needs for Beaminster.

8.15 Beaminster Town Council-

Beaminster Town Council welcomes development on this site but, as the application is for access only, the Town Council reserves its position until further details are submitted. We are unable to comment at this time but would like to raise the following concerns:

Provision of off street car parking is inadequate - this would result in a majority of on-street parking leading to serious congestions problems.

The proposal for the attenuation pond within the children's play area is a major Health & Safety concern. The location of the play area on the edge of the development, together with the significant amount of screening proposed means the play area is virtually out on a limb and not adequately visible from residential properties.

Within the proposal there is no indication or inclusion of the industrial/employment use for the site (0.5 hectares). The Local Plan identifies BEAM1 for mixed development and the Town Council have always advocated live/work units for this site and firmly believes BEAM1 site should be considered in its entirety and should not be segmented.

The layout as proposed does not allow for any ecological considerations for example the potential for solar gain.

8.16 The full comments of consultees are available to view at dorsetforyou.com

REPRESENTATIONS:

9.1 Three letters of representation (two from the Beaminster Society) have been received, both offering supportive comments but also expressing some concerns and reservations. The main -planning related points are -

-support for 100 houses and the concept of housing clusters incorporating 35% affordable housing -density and landscaping suitable for this edge of town site -Aspirations expressed for site; a mix of traditional and new vernacular styles; should have external stone, slate or thatched roofs and timber windows. -should have live-work facilities in areas of site to reduce commuting and promote small enterprises -high proportion of affordable housing sought -housing should be eco-friendly -should provide parking away from houses in courtyards -informal road and pavement design should be used for "country" appearance. -ensure public right of way access through site to open countryside -fringe landscaping should include orchard, wood for coppicing and vegetable areas. -encouraged by Design/Access Statement content and character appraisal -concern over gable ends by road - out of character. -should be a combined development scheme for Bugler Trust land and Sibley Family land for a coherent development -access location suitable; but is it wise to have single access serving residential and the heavy/noisy employment traffic also. Add a further access to south-east for employment land. -welcome the belt of new woodland to north and west. -good to see green corridors in site and routes for non-motorists -problem of village green split by road -not good to have play area at remote edge of site - the housing should be of varied size for different users; it should have adequate garden space and outbuildings/garaging, with safe public open space access and energy efficient housing. -affordable housing should be controlled by a housing association or a Community Land Trust; it should remain affordable housing in perpetuity. -All affordable housing tenants should be obliged to become members of a management company so that they are taking responsibility for the maintenance of the public open space/ and non-municipal infrastructure- within a s106 agreement. -agree with landscape officer concerns, especially over density and urbanising effect on rural edge of town character.

10. PLANNING ISSUES:

Principle of development Residential development on allocated site/relationship to Policy BEAM1 Affordable housing Employment issue Effect on Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty/visual amenity Layout/design/public open space Effect on setting of heritage assets. Foul and surface Water drainage Residential amenity Ecological issue Archaeology Highways Community Infrastructure Levy

11. PLANNING ASSESSMENT:

11.1 Principle of development- This site is located within a site allocated for development under Policy BEAM1 (Land to the north of Broadwindsor Road) of the adopted Local Plan and lies within the defined development boundary. Beaminster is a market town (population about 3,100) with a range of services and facilities making it a suitable location for development. The Policy states:

i) Land to the north of Broadwindsor Road, as shown on the policies map, is allocated for housing, employment and public open space. ii) The development will include structural woodland planting along the western and northern boundaries, and existing trees and hedgerows within and around the boundaries of the site, should be retained where possible. The development will also ensure the protection of the wildlife interest of the wooded river channel along the eastern boundary of the site. iii) The development shall create a positive frontage onto Broadwindsor Road, with parking and servicing requirements within the site. iv) The development will provide a safe and attractive pedestrian route into the town centre, which should include a footway along the Broadwindsor Road.

11.2 As such, the principle of development of the site is considered acceptable providing all relevant planning considerations are addressed correctly. Although this application has been submitted on land allocated for development it only concerns that part of the allocation owned by the Bugler Trust (4.6ha). The remaining allocated land is within separate ownership (2.2 ha) to the north-east. Given that the application submitted does not include the full allocated area the consequences of this need to be carefully assessed and this will be explored in the report; it is important that this application does not compromise the delivery of the north-eastern section of the allocation.

11.3 The Council cannot currently demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites. The Councils have 4.88 years of supply across the local plan area. This means that para 11, footnote 7 of the NPPF is ‘engaged’ and relevant policies for the supply of housing, including Policy SUS 2, may no longer be considered to be up-to-date. Where a 'relevant policy' such as SUS 2 is considered to be 'out-of-date', Para 11 of the NPPF is also engaged, indicating that in such cases planning permission should be granted unless:

i) the application of policies in the framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed, or

ii) any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the framework taken as a whole

The lack of a 5 year supply, even if the supply is only marginally below 5 years (4.88), means that less weight has to be given to policies such as Policy SUS 2 in decision-making. The local plan inspector's comments, which raised concerns about the marginal nature of the council's housing land supply, remain just as relevant to decision-making, now the supply has slipped below 5 years. Based on the requirement to assist in the lack of five year housing supply, and subject to compliance with other policies in the local plan, the proposal must be carefully considered .

11.4 Policy BEAM1 has an expectation that about 0.5 ha of land will be developed for employment use. The submitted application does not include any employment land. Having said this, the allocation would still allow the remaining land to include the employment land. However, on this topic it is expedient to mention that under the current Local Plan Review the proposed land-use allocation is changing. The emerging development strategy for Beaminster as set out in the preferred options version of the emerging review of the Local Plan is for development to be focused to the west and north of the town. As mentioned, the adopted Local Plan contained a mixed use allocation on land North of Broadwindsor Road (BEAM1). This site contained a requirement for employment land to be provided adjacent to the existing employment uses to the east of the site. Subsequently the area to the east of the site (Clipper Teas site) has now been granted permission for residential development lessening the rationale for employment uses to be located adjacent (the reserved matters application WD/D/18/002592 for 38 dwellings is currently under consideration). The case for employment land in BEAM1 has now changed; the emerging strategy proposes to remove the requirement for employment land on the BEAM 1 site. It is now proposed that land to the south of Broadwindsor Road (BEAM4) is proposed for employment uses (up to 3.8ha) in the emerging local plan allowing for the expansion of existing businesses and for new businesses to move in or start. BEAM4 is located between Clipper Teas and Lower Barrow Farm. (As part of that Review Land to the West of Tunnel Road is proposed for residential development in the emerging local plan, and Land at Lane End Farm is allocated for employment uses as in the adopted local plan).

11.5 The removal of employment use from the current BEAM1 allocation is further reinforced by the comments that were made by the Senior Economic Regeneration Officer:

I note that there remains in Beaminster the BEAM2 site (Land at Tunnel Road) which if brought forward by the owner or third party could provide some future employment needs for Beaminster.

11.6 Under adopted Planning Policy the scheme should deliver 35% affordable housing on site. The applicant has indicated agreement on that point. The Housing Enabling Team have indicated there are currently 80 households on the housing register with a connection to Beaminster. The local housing need is greatest for one or two bedroom properties. They indicate that the tenure is likely to be split 70% rented and 30% intermediate. It is suggested that priority for affordable homes should be for households with a local connection to Beaminster. A December update indicates there are 1704 applications on the West Dorset Housing Register. These live applications include 95 households with a connection to Beaminster. They conclude that there is an affordable need for affordable housing in Beaminster and West Dorset that these homes would help to meet that need.

Effect on Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and visual amenity-

11.7 The site lies within the AONB, is visible from public land and is crossed by two public rights of way. It lies within the Brit Valley Landscape Character Area. It is therefore a visually sensitive site. Policy BEAM 1 recognises this and specifically includes a requirement for: "structural woodland planting along the western and northern boundaries, and existing trees and hedgerows within and around the boundaries of the site, should be retained where possible”. The applicant has submitted a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) with the application. This has been considered by the AONB Landscape Officer and the DCP Senior Landscape Officer.

11.8 The Landscape officers have expressed the view that the number of units and density is relatively high for a rural town periphery. Concerns have also been expressed over the extent of boundary planting - particularly on the west and north boundaries. The site is visible from the Wessex Ridgeway to the south. The comment has been made (also from representations and from the Town Council) that the remainder of the allocated site (to the north) should be considered at the same time as this application. That land is in separate ownership and no application has been received. In these circumstances this application needs to be assessed "on its own merits"; the lack of the northern land means the landscaping for this part of the site needs to be “self-sufficient" for the site to be adequately landscaped in its own right. Policy BEAM 1 's requirements therefore need to be carefully assessed as not all the land expected to be in an application is currently under consideration. The BEAM 1 expectation of structural woodland planting on the west and north boundaries needs to be satisfactorily addressed as part of this (reduced area) application and any other implications assessed.

11.9 Officers have met with the applicants to explore landscaping, layout and other issues. This has resulted in an amended illustrative layout being submitted. Although the number of units remains at "up to 100", this layout has provided improved areas of landscaping on the north and west boundaries of the site. (The applicant owns additional land on the west/north-west of the site immediately outside the allocated site which would be available for some additional landscaping if necessary in addition to that expected on the allocated site). The revised illustrative layout does show a slightly lower density to the west side and a higher density to the south edge near the Broadwindsor Road - a general approach which is sought. The AONB Landscape Officer continues to feel the scale and density should be moderated. The DCP Landscape Officer does however feel, at a more detailed level, that the additional landscape measures shown are helpful. These include:

-additional tree-planting on the south-western corner -additional tree planting on the northern boundary with the adjoining land ownership (the width of the green strip has been increased) -additional tree planting on the western boundary.

It is considered that, subject to appropriate reserved matters submissions, the scheme would have an acceptable effect on the character of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Layout/design/public open space -

11.10 It must be remembered that the submitted layout is illustrative only; however illustrative layouts can be a useful tool to show how the site could be developed, having regard to the planning elements which need to be included. The revised layout has a lower density towards the west and north-west which would help with the "edge-of-site" context. The density is increased toward the central area and on the southern edge which helps with the policy requirement of creating a positive frontage to Broadwindsor Road (the gabled designs have been replaced with more appropriate dwelling alignments facing the road). The scheme indicates the dwellings would largely be two storey in height, indicating a range of maximum of 11m to ridge and a minimum of 8m to ridge. The layout shows a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced properties. The development is suggested to be served by roads which then have shared vehicular accesses off them with dwellings having a mixture of on-plot parking, garages and communal parking courtyards. Some shared surfaces are suggested.

11.11 Regarding public open space the size of development means some on- site public open space provision is required. A figure of 1.6ha is indicated in the submission. A "village green" is suggested in the central western portion of the site. This currently suggests a bisecting road through it; this could be improved by making the area one continuous green area. The existing/planted boundaries of the site could provide linear green space. On the eastern side of the site the revised layout shows a childrens play area with potential for equipment provision (this should be 400m2 in area). (This was originally proposed as a combined play area but has been revised due to safety concerns- partially in response to the Town Councils concerns) - informal green space is now suggested with a wildflower meadow at the far south-eastern corner.

11.12 Various comments have been received from consultees regarding density. Policy BEAM 1 refers in the supporting text to the overall site accommodating "around" 120 homes across the whole allocation. This scheme proposes "up to" 100 homes on 4.6ha of the total allocated site (6.8 ha) - albeit that it was originally envisaged this would also include "approximately" 0.5ha of employment land. In summary, the revised illustrative layout is considered to form an initial basis for a reserved matters layout, but would require significant changes to ensure the appropriate disposition of densities, public open space, area and location of landscaping, and any other relevant considerations. The dwelling densities range from 25 to 40 dwellings per hectare (an average density of about 37 per hectare). A mix of housing types/sizes is suggested ranging from 2 bed flats up to 5 bed houses. This is a higher density than the policy envisages but it is a density which could be achieved with an appropriately detailed layout.

11.13 It is important to note that the application is not for 100 dwellings, but for "up to" 100 dwellings. In these circumstances officers would only support 100 if the layout/design/landscaping was convincing in terms of its impact on the character of the area and on the AONB. Indeed, a planning condition would be applied to indicate that this assessment would be made; a lower number may only be acceptable. It is noted, for example, that a greater proportion of terraced properties (relative to detached or semi-detached) than that currently shown on the illustrative layout would help.

11.14 Public footpaths W21/71 and W21/72 run through the site, north from the Broadwindsor Road and north-westwards from the south-east corner respectively. It would be necessary to divert these as a consequence of this development such that they continue to provide links across the site to other land. Formal footpath diversion applications would be required.

Effect on Heritage Assets-

11.15 A Statement of Heritage significance was submitted with the application. The Heritage assets in the vicinity include Horn Park, Horn Park Tunnel, Horn Park Farmhouse, Horn Park Farm Cottage, Lower Barrowfield Farmhouse (opposite the site) and the Beaminster Conservation Area (which extends as far as the Clay Lane/Stoke Abbot junction away to the east). These assets are mainly at a significant remove from the site itself, with the exception of the grade II listed Lower Barrowfield Farmhouse and associated buildings to the south of the site on the opposite side of the road. Historic England have been consulted and do not wish to offer comments. The DCP Conservation Officer notes that the principle of residential use is established by the allocation. He does not consider the new vehicular access will cause significant harm to designated heritage assets, and has no objections to the scheme. The case officer notes that Lower Barrowfield Farmhouse is about 15m south of the site, being positioned gable end-on to Broadwindsor Road. This distance, coupled with sensitive siting of development on the application site in this vicinity, could satisfactorily respect the setting of this listed building and the other identified assets. Due consideration has been given to Section 12 of the NPPF, Sections 66 and 72 of the 1990 Act and Policy ENV 4 of the Local Plan in reaching this assessment.

Surface Water drainage –

11.16 The site falls within Flood Zone 1 (low risk- fluvial flooding). A Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted. The site broadly drains from the west/north-west down towards the eastern edge of the site. Accordingly, it is proposed to form an attenuation pond in the south-east corner of the site. Negotiations have taken place between the applicant, Wessex Water, DCC Flood Risk Management and DCC Highway Authority to evolve an appropriate discharge point for the site; an arrangement of surface water discharge via the highway and existing bridge structure (about 35m east of the site) into the Ordinary Watercourse has been agreed in principle, subject to detailed submissions. (The additional information recently supplied is in the form of a site specific Addendum (ref: RMA-LC1742, dated 27/07/2017) to the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) compiled by RMA Environmental (ref: RMA-C1742 – Issue 2, dated 11/12/2017), upon which we have previously commented. This additional Addendum document contains the RMA compiled Concept Plan of Surface Water Sewer Requisition, dated 02/05/2018 previously submitted, as Figure 1, and relevant correspondence with both Wessex Water and DCC Highways within supporting appendices (A-C)). Accordingly the Flood Risk Management Team recommend conditions to address this.

Foul drainage-

11.17 This would be via an off-site sewer running east in Broadwindsor Road to discharge flows to the public system at the junction of Broadwindsor Road and St James'. Agreement on connections would be with Wessex Water.

Residential Amenity-

11.18 The site lacks a common boundary with existing residential development apart from All Seasons House - a two storey dwelling close to the east edge of the site. This is a multi-aspect house and has ground and first floor windows facing the site. It is likely that the area immediately adjacent to this property is to be used for the attenuation pond and associated space - so it is unlikely overlooking would be an issue. Similarly, Lower Barrowfield Farmhouse is about 15m south of the site boundary and therefore unacceptable overlooking is unlikely to occur. It is considered that the development of this site for "up to" 100 dwellings is likely to be acceptable in residential amenity terms subject to appropriate design and layout.

Ecological considerations-

11.19 Policy BEAM1 includes the following reference: The development will also ensure the protection of the wildlife interest of the wooded river channel along the eastern boundary of the site. The submitted application affects part of this boundary but a large part is located on land to the north which although allocated is not part of this application. However part is and can therefore be included. Furthermore, significant structural woodland landscaping would be expected to take place along the northern and western site boundaries, forming a (largely) uninterrupted green "corridor" which would provide wildlife habitat and ecological connectivity.

11.20 In addition to this a bio-diversity mitigation plan has been submitted. The site supports species including dormice, bats, birds etc. The measures include woodland planting particularly to the west, north and east boundaries, together with other ecological enhancement areas. Bat and bird boxes would be provided. Since this is an outline application the precise details of measures would need to be specified at reserved matters stage. Therefore a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) would be required using a condition.

Archaeology-

11.21 An archaeological desk-based assessment, geophysical survey and archaeological potential statement were submitted as part of the application. Subsequently the Senior Archaeologist DCC requested excavation of trial trenches. This lead to evidence of Iron Age occupation and to an indication that this ceased around the time of the Roman Conquest of this locality. Accordingly the Senior Archaeologist has asked for a planning condition to secure the implementation of a programme of archaeological work.

Highway issues-

11.22 The outline scheme includes access details to be considered as part of this application. A formal Transport Assessment was submitted. An enlarged vehicular access would be formed at a point on the site frontage opposite Buglers premises (agricultural equipment suppliers) and a new roundabout installed. New bus stops would be provided on both the north and south sides of the road, together with sections of 2m wide footway and drop kerbs. The main access road into the site would be 6.1 m wide with 2.1m wide footways. The illustrative layout then suggests a spine road running northward within the main site then served by lower order roads extending to west and east with parking and communal parking areas including some shared surface areas served off them.

11.23 Policy BEAM 1 also includes the requirement: The development will provide a safe and attractive pedestrian route into the town centre, which should include a footway along the Broadwindsor Road. In line with the policy the scheme includes a link to the existing footway near St James' Road to the east of the site. This would include a 3.5m wide shared emergency service access route into the site itself, and a 2m wide footway and the existing road slightly re-aligned with a 5.5 - 6m width. This would allow the pedestrian/cycle routes within the site to “flow" out at this point in order to reduce journey towards the town centre (about 15 mins walk). The provision of the footways within the site would also improve the pedestrian network to the west of the town.

11.24 As mentioned earlier it is essential that this scheme does not prejudice the development of the remainder of the allocation. The applicant recognises this and the submitted information in the Design and Access Statement states: The framework plan. . also shows how the land outside of the clients ownership can be developed together with the proposed illustrative layout in delivering the objectives set out in the BEAM1 policy (para 5.2) And: An important characteristic of the framework plan included. . a new vehicular route ensuring deliverability of land outside the Bugler Trust ownership

11.25 Similarly, the Traffic Assessment (TA) endorses this linkage point: The internal roads providing access to the allocated employment land located to the east of the application site will have a minimum carriageway width of 6m to allow for the appropriate manoeuvring of large vehicles in and out. (para 4.15)

11.26 Some comments have been received regarding whether a roundabout is necessary for the junction with Broadwindsor Road. The Highway Authority are supportive of this provision for the following reasons: it would provide in effect an element of traffic calming on this road section; it would facilitate the safe operation of the HGV's serving Francis Buglers premises opposite and it would "futureproof" the junction to accommodate potential further development growth to the north.

11.27 The scheme would also result in the 30 mph signs moved from the east end of the site to the roundabout - so adding to reduced traffic speeds on this road section. The TA concludes that the development will not bring about a significant increase in the volume of traffic flows on the local highway network. The DCC Highway Authority supports this application subject to conditions including the new footway linkage to St James' Road.

11.28 The applicant has submitted the rationale for a draft Travel Plan as part of the application. This is considered a desirable measure to facilitate sustainable transport and would include review and monitoring. A planning condition would be used to address this.

Local Financial Considerations:

11.29 Having regard to S70(2) of the Town and Country Planning act the proposal does have local finance considerations.

Community Infrastructure Levy:

11.30 The adopted charging schedule only applies a levy on proposals that create a dwelling and/or a dwelling with restricted holiday use. All other development types are therefore set a £0 per square metre CIL rate. The development proposal is CIL liable.

11.31 The rate at which CIL is charged is £100 per sqm. As this is an outline application the CIL charge will be calculated at reserved matters stage. Confirmation of the final CIL charge will be included in a CIL liability notice issued prior to the commencement of the development.

CONCLUSION/SUMMARY:

12.1 This scheme represents an opportunity to secure a significant number of dwellings on an allocated site in a sustainable location. The details of the scale, appearance and landscaping would be addressed in the reserved matters application. Regarding the threads of sustainable development from an economic objective the scheme would provide jobs during construction and residents would be likely to spend in the local shops helping to sustain the town businesses. Turning to the social objective the scheme includes the useful provision of affordable housing. It would also provide areas of public open space to facilitate a healthy and pleasant environment. From an environmental objective the scheme would include significant additional planting, the retention/enhancement of hedgerows/trees and would provide bio-diversity benefits to the locality. In the light of the above it is considered that the scheme is consistent with the above mentioned policies and national guidance.

RECOMMENDATION:

13.1 Delegate authority to Head of Planning to approve subject to completion of a section 106 agreement to address affordable housing (35%); provision, management/maintenance of public open space; management/maintenance of landscaping; provision of access road and other pedestrian/cycle links to remaining allocated land, appropriate measures regarding provision of bus stops, and - if conditions are not appropriate- surface water drainage provisions, together with conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Site & Location Plan - Drawing Number 160802 L 01 01 Proposed vehicle access 4233/001 B

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 Approval of the details of the layout, scale and appearance of the building(s), the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called the Reserved Matters) shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.

REASON: To ensure the satisfactory development of the site.

3 Application for approval of any 'reserved matter' must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

REASON: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

4 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

REASON: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

5 This outline permission is for up to a maximum of 100 dwellings. The final number of dwellings will be determined by an assessment of the matters reserved having regard to the relevant objectives of Policy BEAM1, the sensitive location of the site at the periphery of the settlement, the provision of appropriate public open space and the achievement of additional structural woodland and other planting.

REASON: To clarify that the maximum number of dwellings approved in this application will be determined by an assessment of the reserved matters.

6 No development shall take place until a detailed and finalised surface water management scheme for the site, based upon the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, and with due consideration of the construction phase, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The necessary detailed design shall include all required clarification of associated works to third party assets, in addition to substantiation of the main surface water management scheme, and be implemented in accordance with the submitted details before the development is completed.

REASON: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, to protect third party assets, and to improve & protect water quality

7 No development shall take place until details of responsibility, maintenance and management of the surface water sustainable drainage scheme and associated infrastructure have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details. These should include a plan for the lifetime of the development, the arrangements for adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker, or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime.

REASON: To ensure future operation and maintenance of the surface water drainage system and to prevent the increased risk of flooding.

8 No dwelling hereby approved shall be first commenced until details of the finished floor level(s) of the building(s) hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such levels shall be relative to an ordnance datum or such other fixed feature as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In the interests of visual amenity

9 No development shall take place until all existing trees, shrubs and other natural features not scheduled for removal have been fully safeguarded and fenced in accordance with a scheme to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such fencing shall be maintained during the course of the works on site. No unauthorised access or placement of goods, fuels and chemicals, soil or other materials shall take place inside this fenced area. The soil levels within the fenced area shall not be raised or lowered and no trenching or excavation shall take place. In the event that protected trees (or their roots) become damaged, are lost or become otherwise defective in any way during such period, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately and a programme of remedial action as directed by the Local Planning Authority shall be carried out within a timescale to be specified by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure that trees, shrubs and other natural features to be retained are adequately protected from damage to health and stability throughout the construction period in the interests of amenity.

10 In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development, it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority and an investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of BS10175. Should any contamination be found requiring remediation, a remediation scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The approved remediation scheme shall be carried out to a timescale to be first agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared and submitted which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure risks from contamination are minimised.

11 No dwelling hereby approved shall be first occupied until a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) - informed by the submitted bio-diversity plan dated 3 April 2018- and incorporating a lighting mitigation strategy shall first have been implemented in accordance with details and to a timescale which shall first have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The LEMP shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In the interests of nature conservation.

12 No dwelling shall be first occupied until details of a lighting scheme for the site shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To minimise light pollution.

13 No works shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant to, and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall cover archaeological fieldwork together with post-excavation work and publication of the results.

REASON: In the interests of safeguarding the archaeological record.

14 Vehicular access to the development shall be formed by a roundabout as shown on Drawing Number 4233/001 Rev B and must be constructed before any other operations are commenced, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure the proper and appropriate development of the site.

15 No development shall commence until details of the access, geometric highway layout, turning and parking areas have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling shall be first occupied until the agreed scheme has been fully carried out, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

REASON: To ensure the proper and appropriate development of the site.

16 No dwelling hereby approved shall be first occupied until the proposed pedestrian and cycle improvements as indicated on plan 4233/002A (in Appendix F of PCL Transport Assessment dated 5 December 2017) unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority, shall first have been completed.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

17 No dwelling hereby approved shall be first occupied until a Travel Plan shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Travel Plan shall include; targets for sustainable travel arrangements; effective measures for the on-going monitoring of the Travel Plan; a commitment to delivering the Travel Plan objectives for a period of at least 5 years from first occupation of any dwelling on the development; effective mechanisms to achieve the objectives of the Travel Plan by the occupiers of the development. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed Travel Plan.

REASON: To mitigate the impacts of the development upon the local highway network and surrounding neighbourhood by reducing reliance on the private car for journeys to and from the site.