PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 September 2015 SCHEDULE OF

PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 September 2015

SCHEDULE OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS

1. PURPOSE AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Purpose of Report: To consider the planning applications contained within the schedule and to receive details of any withdrawn or requested deferred applications, if any. Recommendations: It is RECOMMENDED that: The applications contained in this Schedule be determined or otherwise dealt with in accordance with the Development Management Manager’s recommendation. Portfolio Holder: Councillor M Dyer (Environment) Wards: Council-wide Contact Officer: Giles Moir, Development Management Manager

2. APPLICATION SCHEDULE

No. Application No. Site Address Pg. 1. 3/14/0871/FUL St Leonards Hospital, 241 Ringwood Road, St 6 Leonards 2. 3/15/0525/FUL Land At The Warren, Badgers Walk, Ferndown 87 3. 3/15/0540/REM Land East Of Cobham Road, Ferndown Industrial 100 Estate, Dorset 4. 3/15/0684/COU 613B Ringwood Road, West Moors, Ferndown 110 5. 3/15/0743/HOU Hillview, Broadmoor Road, Corfe Mullen 118 6. 3/15/0828/COU The Cafe On The Square, 3 The Square, Wimborne 122 Item Number 1 Ref: 3/14/0871/FUL

Proposal: A hybrid planning application comprising:

A detailed application for demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment to provide 210 dwellings; formation of a new feeder road, priority junction, site access and footpaths off Boundary Lane; estate roads and parking; a replacement cricket pavilion of 200sqm; informal open space and recreation (inclusive of retained cricket pitch); landscaping; lighting; bat barn for a replacement maternity bat roost; and a Nature Reserve. An outline application with all matters reserved for the erection of a care facility of up to three storeys and no more than 80 beds, and car parking as amended by plans received 15/10/14 and by plans received 01.07.2015 (see Schedule of Amended Plans and Schedule of Amended Documents). Site St Leonards Hospital, 241 Ringwood Road, St Leonards, for Mrs Address: Mary Miller Site Notice expired: 14th November 2014 Advert Expiry Date: 3rd August 2015 Nbr-Nfn expired: 7th November 2014

St Leonards & St Ives The following concerns still remain: Parish Council 1. The lack of public open space for 210 homes. The cricket area is protected and restricted for only cricket use so should not be appropriated as part of the public open space provision. 2. The density of the proposal will result in a cramped development with a lack of sufficient parking spaces. 3. Asbestos removal – we would ask that this is dealt with before the housing development commences 4. The Victory Oak is a memorial and needs more significant protection 5. Designs of the houses are still poor and appear very boxy, too utilitarian. 6. The site needs more recreational spaces for a family housing development 7. We do not feel that the space allocated for gardens and recreation fits with the new Government initiative to “get active”.

We would like due consideration to be given to our concerns but do not require this to go to EDDC Committee.

Response to proposal 1:  The Committee would be opposed to the total foot print of new dwellings exceeding the total foot print of the redundant buildings being removed.  We have concerns about the parking provision indicated, which we feel is inadequate. This area has poor transport links which means that access to a car is essential on this site. The lack of parking provision will lead to on road parking which will lead to issues of access for service and emergency vehicles.  Access for the housing from Boundary Lane onto the A31 is a grave concern as we do not agree with the planned access. A slip road is essential to accessing the A31 from Boundary Lane due to the volume of traffic. It is already very difficult at peak times.  Work is required to ensure basic services such as water and sewerage can be guaranteed as the existing system is already overloaded and prone to failing. The proposal needs the input and approval of Wessex Water.  There is an existing flooding situation close by and we would stress the need for a flood risk assessment to include the impact on the adjacent land ie, Oakdene and Oaktree Parks.  Permeable surfacing should be a requirement wherever possible.  We ask that the future management of the SNCI to be funded by the developers but responsibility assigned to a local environmental organisation. A detailed Landscape and Ecological Management Plan must be agreed by Dorset Wildlife Trust, the SNCI Panel, Natural England and DCC's Natural Environment Team and be part of Planning Conditions.  An assessment of the basic services such as doctors, schools, etc should be carried out to ensure future provision is provided.

In summary: We do not object in principle to the number of houses for this site but feel some further work is needed to make this an acceptable proposal

Response to proposal 2 - Outline application for a care facility:-

We are pleased with the location of the facility on the site but we feel that a three storey building is too high and will be too dominant on the site and could set a precedent for other 3 storey buildings elsewhere close by.

Environmental Documentation - We would mention that due to the complexities and volume of the environmental documentation a further supplementary response will follow in this respect on 7th November 2014.

Consultee Responses:

Wessex Water Services Thank you for your letter of 13th July advising Ltd amended plans had been submitted in respect of the above. The amended plans clarify the development's drainage strategy and as such we no longer feel a planning condition as requested in our letter of 6th November 2014 as necessary.

EDDC Tree Section The revised Landscape Masterplan shows more trees to be retained than the plan submitted in 2014. I estimate that the remaining tree cover in the area to the south of the development between the housing and the forest meets the 20% retention as set out in the Environmental Statement record of consultation dated 2nd August 2013.

Victory Oak The Oak that is subject to tree preservation order SL/149. This is the only TPO'd tree on the site because it has historical significance. It is a tree to be retained but has been shown for removal in the list contained in the Tree Report 2966-IMP/JC/imp/09/14 although it features on the landscape masterplan and other development plans.

For the avoidance of doubt the Victory Oak T220 is to be retained.

We will need a planning condition to ensure that the tree is protected during development, including demolition and site clearance.

Landscape proposals The landscaping proposals contained in the Outline Materials Schedule 121023 are acceptable except for:

 the selection of Common Ash which is not recommended due to possible risk of Chalara and which would be better replaced with another species. The American Ash (Fraxinus americana) might be a suitable replacement due to its resistance to the disease, or the designer might consider using Sycamore.  The choice of species to be planted in the housing area. The palette contains a number of forest species and the designer should consider trees more suitable for integration into the built form.

We will need a planning condition for the landscape proposals including design, implementation and maintenance.

We will also need a condition for laying out the open space, the design and installation of the play area and the management of the large open space to the south of the development. The Open Spaces Team will want to comment on this.

Tree protection Before any equipment, materials or machinery are brought onto the site for the purposes of development, a pre-commencement site meeting between the Tree Officer, Arboricultural Consultant and Site Manager shall take place to confirm the felling and retention of trees and groups of trees on the open space and the protection of the Victory Oak tree on the site in accordance with the Arboricultural Impact Appraisal and Method Statement prepared ref: 2966-IMP/JC/imp/09/14, dated 15/9/2014. The tree protection shall be erected in the position shown on as RPA on plan 2966-TPP before any equipment, materials or machinery are brought onto the site for the purposes of demolition, site clearance or development. The tree protection shall be retained until the development is completed and nothing shall be placed within the fencing, nor shall any ground levels be altered or excavations made without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority. This condition shall not be discharged until an arboricultural supervision statement, the contents of which are to be discussed and agreed at the pre- commencement meeting, is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority on completion of development.

Landscape Design 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 (eg. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc.); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (eg. 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 numbers/densities where appropriate; implementation programme.

Landscape works implementation All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the local planning authority.

Landscape management plan A landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, other than small, privately owned, domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority prior to the occupation of the development or any phase of the development, whichever is the sooner, for its permitted use. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved. No development shall take place until a schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of 5 years has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The schedule shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule.

EDDC Engineers Section The Engineering Team have viewed the relevant documentation regarding the redevelopment of St Leonards Hospital site and have no objections to the application.

Environment Agency Thank you for consulting the Environment Agency on the above mentioned planning application. We have no objection to the proposed development subject to the condition and informatives as per our letter dated 24 November 2014 being included in any planning permission granted.

Surface Water Drainage Please note that whilst we have recommend a drainage condition on this application that as of April 2015 Dorset County Council, as the Lead Local Flood Authority, may lead on surface water drainage from any future applications on this site. Therefore, you may wish to also engage with them on this proposed development.

We have no objection to the proposed development subject to the following condition and informatives being included in any planning permission granted.

Flood Risk We have reviewed the submitted FRA prepared by White Young Green Issue 1 dated August 2014, and recommend the following. Please note that we do not comment upon the foul flood risk management. This should be referred to Wessex Water, who should also be asked to review the submitted FRA.

Condition No development shall commence until a surface water management scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed. The scheme shall also show ownership of the scheme and how it will be maintained and managed after completion.

Reason To prevent the increased risk of flooding and ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage system.

Dorset Wildlife Trust Summary

 Support principle and details as set out in the revised scheme and Landscape and Ecology Management Plan  The details in the revised Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (LEMP) overcomes initial concerns, however, there is a need for updating the LEMP in accordance with the formation of a Steering Group between Natural England, Dorset Wildlife Trust, Dorset County Council and East Dorset District Council  The steering group will overlook the method of translocation of acid grassland and receptor sites and review as necessary.  DWT would be willing in principle to undertake the long term management of the Nature Reserve subject to contract.  Subject to a planning condition that is enforceable and ensures the development is carried out in accordance with an updated LEMP, agreed to by the Steering Group, as well as the CEMP, DWT is happy to accept that, with respect to the SNCI, measures have been put in place to ensure no net loss of biodiversity through this proposal and can now remove our previous objection.

Revised Comments

Thank you for consulting Dorset Wildlife Trust on this planning application.

Dorset Wildlife Trust welcomes many of the changes and additions which have been included in the revised documents for this planning application. As a result of much further consultation between the ecological consultants and DWT, there is now much detail included in the Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (LEMP) which resolves many of the concerns which we originally expressed.

DWT strongly supports the intention to form a Steering Group to oversee this project, and to include the ecological consultants, Natural England, Dorset Wildlife Trust, Dorset County Council and East Dorset District Council. We would like to see this made a condition of planning consent.

There are some remaining issues which need to be clarified, in particular regarding the details of the methodology for the translocation of the acid grassland and the restoration and aftercare of the important habitats on site. We still retain concerns about the appropriateness of some of the proposed receptor sites for the translocated acid grassland habitat, and the suggestion that some of the shredded material and soil will have to be stockpiled for a period of up to several months before it can be moved to the prepared receptor sites.

The results of the soil analysis will help to inform the final decisions on methodology, and locations for translocation. If stockpiling of material is found to be necessary, due to the timing of operations, it will be important to ensure that materials are only piled in small quantities, for the minimum period possible, and are regularly checked to ensure that they do not overheat and destroy the seed source. Guidelines on methodology could be sought from organisations which have successfully undertaken such operations before.

We consider that these points can be covered by detailed method statements for these operations, once the specialist contractors are appointed and it is essential that these method statements are incorporated into an updated LEMP and more specific Habitat Masterplan that will need to be approved by the LEMP Steering Group before the commencement of work.

There will need to be detailed monitoring of the areas of restored habitat and in particular the translocated grassland. There will also need to be some agreed criteria by which the success or failure of the translocation of the acid grassland can be measured over a period of 5-7 years following the work. We would hope to see the better quality U1 turves largely remaining intact and retaining the species and features of that community whilst we would expect the shredded material to develop into vegetation that displays affinities with that community and at the very least retains species typical of dry acid grassland, the weed species having been suppressed.

If, at the end of this period, it is clear that a proportion of the translocated grassland has failed to recover, then we consider that that area should be regarded as additional residual biodiversity loss, and this area should be calculated and included in the metric for the Dorset Biodiversity Compensation Framework.

With these safeguards put into place, we believe that the required mitigation work on habitat restoration and translocation is achievable. Subject to a planning condition that is enforceable and ensures the development is carried out in accordance with an updated LEMP, agreed to by the Steering Group, as well as the CEMP, DWT is happy to accept that, with respect to the SNCI, measures have been put in place to ensure no net loss of biodiversity through this proposal and can now remove our previous objection.

I can also confirm that DWT have been in consultation with the developers regarding the long term management of the proposed nature reserve. Should the Council be minded to approve the application, DWT would be willing in principle to undertake the long term management of the Nature Reserve subject to contract.

The proposed management agreement for the Cricket Ground should also be subject to agreement by the LEMP Steering Group since this is an important area of Priority Habitat and a part of the SNCI. Should the Cricket Club cease to exist, or at any point in the future wish to relinquish the lease of the Cricket Ground, DWT would want to see that area of grassland incorporated into the Nature Reserve.

We understand that detailed consultation has taken place with Natural England with regards to the proposed SANG, and Dorset Wildlife Trust supports Natural England’s views and requirement of any planning conditions on that matter.

I hope these comments are useful but please feel free to contact me should there be any queries about DWT’s response. Thank you for consulting Dorset Wildlife Trust on the above application. Various members of DWT staff have been involved in pre- application discussions and site visits with the consultants and this response has been produced following discussion with them.

Original Comments: The site The site at St Leonard's Hospital is a Site of Nature Conservation Interest recognised for a variety of important and vulnerable habitats which support a wide range of rare, threatened and declining species of plants and animals. The most important of these is the dry acid grassland most of which is situated around the existing buildings and hard standings of former hospital buildings. This grassland exists on thin, dry acid soils and supports a large number of rare and notable plant species. It is a much more rare and threatened habitat than any of the others on the site. (The remaining acid grassland in and around the cricket pitch, although important for its orchid populations, is of a different character lacking the open turf and species such as Sand Sedge and including plants of more intensively managed improved amenity grassland and damper conditions). The ecological consultants have highlighted the importance of this habitat in Appendix 10.4 which states:

'Lowland Acid grassland is a Habitat of Principal Importance listed within Section 41 (S41) of the NERC Act 2006. Parched acid grassland in particular can contain a significant number of notable vascular plant, bryophyte, lichen and invertebrate species. In Dorset, this habitat is largely confined to two distinct areas: the Poole Basin and periphery of the heaths, and west Dorset where they are associated with Greensand. The parched sandy grasslands of the Poole Basin are of national importance for their acid grassland plants.'

It is this most important habitat which falls within the development boundary and almost all will be lost or translocated as a result of this development proposal. (See below).

The remainder of the site comprises a variety of habitats including wet and dry heathland, heathland/acid grassland mosaic, marshy grassland, scrub and secondary woodland, including one area of conifer plantation, and areas of conifer woodland over former heathland. This variety of habitat has provided appropriate conditions for a wide range of plant and animal species including a number of nationally scarce or vulnerable invertebrates such as the silver- studded blue and dingy skipper butterflies and reptiles including the European protected sand lizard.

Policy Paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by "minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government's commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity,..."

Paragraph 118 states "When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principles: if significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused...;"

Policy ME1-Safeguarding Biodiversity and Geodiversity of the East Dorset and Christchurch Core Strategy states:

"The Core Strategy aims to protect, maintain and enhance the condition of all types of nature conservation sites, habitats and species within their ecological networks including:  Internationally designated sites (SPA, SAC, Ramsar)  Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)  Sites of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI)  Local Nature Reserves  Priority species and habitats  Important geological and geomorphological sites Riverine and coastal habitat  Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) Where development is considered likely to impact upon particular sites, habitats or species as set out within the Dorset Biodiversity Protocol, it will need to be demonstrated that the development will not result in adverse impacts."

Policy ME2 Protection of the Dorset Heathlands states:

"Any residential development between 400m and 5km of (European protected heathlands) will provide mitigation through a range of measures .... including:  Provision of on-site and off-site suitable alternative natural greenspace .  Provision of other appropriate avoidance/mitigation measures."

Additionally Policy VTSW7 relates specifically to the St Leonard's Hospital site and states:

"Prerequisites for development include: A wildlife strategy to be agreed with the Council that ensures that no harm to the Moors River SSSI, the Site of Nature Conservation Interest on the site and the adjacent internationally protected heathland will derive from the development. The Applicant will need to show that they have avoided harm to priority habitats and species. The layout of the site is likely to require compensatory measures which may include SANG provision where recreational pressure is generated. Particular regard to the water environment will be needed and in this respect the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems to mitigate any potential impacts will be expected to form part of this strategy."

The Proposed development

SNCI and Priority BAP Habitat Loss The footprint of the proposed development is larger than that of previous proposals and will result in the loss of 3 hectares of the existing SNCI

The final Ecology chapter of the ES (page E40) states that the current area of the SNCI is 18.3hectares, and that the total area of the future SNCI post development will be 17.8 hectares, a net loss of 0.5ha. Dorset Wildlife Trust does not accept this figure. It has been based on suggesting that the entire area outside of the housing development and care home will be a Site of Nature Conservation Interest. (As shown in Final Ecology Chapter Page E43, Fig 5.2, and the Habitat Strategy Plan)

The designation of an SNCI cannot be determined by the consultants for the developers; that is the role of the SNCI Panel. Parts of the area on which they have based this calculation will clearly not be of SNCI quality at least in the short term and possibly for many years. Also, the boundary of 'proposed' SNCI area includes the areas proposed for the cricket pavilion and car park area, with associated paths and tracks, which actually forms a part of the development and clearly cannot be counted as SNCI. This is therefore not an acceptable figure for the comparative size of the SNCI before and after the development.

If appropriate ground preparation of some of the areas outside of the current SNCI, followed by careful translocation of some of the acid grassland is undertaken, then we accept that there is the potential for some of the area outside of the development to become a part of the SNCI as 'new acid grassland areas'. However, even taking this additional area into account, we believe that the figure for the actual residual loss of SNCI is much higher than this and closer to 2ha, and that this should be accounted for in the figure for compensation. A large part of the area of SNCI which will be lost as a result of the development is the most important and vulnerable acid grassland habitat, although some of this is proposed for translocation. (See below).

Additionally there are a large number of discrete parcels of acid grassland around the existing buildings on the site which fall outside of the current SNCI boundary. Much of this constitutes Priority Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) Habitat. This has been recognised in the ES (E10.3 Extended Phase 1 Habitat survey, and Annex A Target notes & map). Some of these parcels are also proposed for translocation either as turfs or as shredded material and soil, but others are proposed as "Leave as is" (Ecology Page E41 Fig 5.1). Although it is not specified, it seems unlikely that this means an intention to leave these in situ and develop around them, but instead they will be dug up and destroyed, and therefore these areas also represent residual biodiversity loss which should be included in the calculation for compensation.

Translocation of Acid Grassland Habitat A large part of the best habitat on this site, i.e. the parched acid grassland referred to above, both within and outside of the SNCI boundary is proposed for translocation. Despite much previous discussion between DWT and the consultants for the developers, we remain deeply concerned about this whole aspect of the proposal.

As stated by Joint Nature Conservation Committee in 'A Habitats Translocation Policy for Great Britain', the translocation of habitats is considered by the statutory conservation agencies not to be an acceptable alternative to in situ conservation. Translocation of fragile vegetation such as this is inherently risky, with only a limited chance of successful survival of all the important species, even if best practice methods are followed.

At a Public Inquiry in 1997, in Devon, relating to development affecting a grassland SSSI Natural England (then English Nature) argued successfully that;

 the nature conservation value of translocated grassland is diminished in comparison with the value it would have had, had it not been translocated;  the botanical composition and ecological functioning of a grassland is invariably changed as a result of translocation;  translocation should only be considered as a last resort, once there is no prospect of the site habitat being retained in situ.

The SNCI Panel originally expressed a strong preference for as much as possible of the acid grassland to be left in situ within the development, and in particular the largest single area to be left as an open area within the development, and ideally with a connecting corridor to the cricket pitch in the south. This has been rejected in the current application in favour of translocating all of the dry acid within the development area.

The SNCI Panel stressed that translocation should only be used as a last resort, making it very clear that if undertaken on this site it should not be taken as setting any precedent for any future development proposal on any SNCI whatsoever. The Panel also made it very clear that translocation of areas of SNCI habitat onto a different area and different habitat on the SNCI was not desirable, and still constitutes overall biodiversity and SNCI loss, even if currently the SNCI to which it is proposed to be moved, is not in good condition, since it still has the capacity to recover in its own right given favourable management (as is intended to be the case for the rest of the SNCI from the documents concerning habitat restoration in this application).

Additionally translocation should only be considered as an option provided that meticulous ground preparation is carried out on areas which have appropriate soil conditions for the ultimate survival of that grassland once translocated. Even if these conditions are met, it does not constitute zero biodiversity loss.

However, as it stands, this proposal does not meet those criteria. Whilst some areas proposed as the receptor site for the acid grassland turves are on ground which is outside of the current SNCI boundary and with a great deal of work could be prepared to form appropriate ground (such as on the site of and around the footings of existing buildings in the south- east, and some adjacent areas, where there are some existing patches of dry acid grassland that should remain in situ), much of the proposed receptor area is within the SNCI on ground which is not, and cannot be made suitable because it is far too wet. (Ecology Page E42 Figure 5.2 and Habitat Strategy Plan). Part of the area proposed consists of an existing area of good quality wet heath, which is in itself a BAP Priority habitat, and another area is wet heath/acid grassland mosaic, with much of the rest being dominated by Purple Moor-grass, a lot of it covered in bracken and bramble. The Phase 1 survey results (Appendix E10.3, paragraphs 3.1.1 and 3.1.3) clearly demonstrate a change in soil conditions across the site

'In the north of the site an intimate mosaic of dry parched acid grassland and dry heathland had formed in places. However, much of the remnant heathland in the south west of the Site (within St Leonards Hospital SNCI) had also been classified as a heathland acid grassland mosaic …., although this vegetation is different to that in the north of the Site and has developed on wetter soils. The frequency of species including purple moor-grass, cross-leaved heath and greater bird's-foot-trefoil indicates wetter conditions.'

Thus in the first place, much of this area is valuable habitat in its own right, and certainly with appropriate management it can be a part of the desired wider area of heathland/acid grassland mosaic habitat of the Nature Reserve. Secondly, the hydrology and soil here make it totally unsuitable as a receptor site for the translocated dry acid grassland, and we believe it will result in a failure to survive of the translocated turves, as was pointed out in discussion at a site meeting with the consultants on 1st August 2014. This does not constitute avoidance, mitigation or compensation but will likely result in the loss of both donor and recipient sites. For these reasons this is simply not an acceptable solution and needs to be re- thought.

Indeed there is a fundamental problem that there is insufficient space outside of the development for the amount of good quality dry acid grassland which is proposed to be moved, without encroaching onto existing SNCI habitat. It is proposed that some of the material is shredded and taken to an external receptor site at East Parley Common as a part of a DCC biodiversity enhancement scheme, and it may be that a better solution might be to translocate more of the acid grassland to this external site instead of into the existing SNCI. However, this would still constitute an overall loss of the SNCI.

Additionally if some of the area marked on the plan as 'native scrub and understorey' adjacent to the proposed translocation receptor area were to be cleared, roots grubbed out and the soil prepared to a thin, fine tilth, then that should provide an additional receptor area, since it is at least on drier soils. Possibly the existing dense woodland area to the east of the proposed cricket pavilion, with the adjacent old tennis court and footings of old buildings could provide a further block area for translocation if appropriately prepared . As this is down as habitat mosaic in the Final Plan and included within the assumed new SNCI boundary, presumably there is some scope for this.

Section 5.3 of the Ecology ES mentions that 0.94ha of SNCI acid grassland and heath will be translocated as turfs to the habitat receptor site yet there is no mention of the areas within the SNCI that are according to Figure 5.1 to be translocated as shredded material and topsoil - which looks to be a further 0.4ha. We would seek clarification that these areas are to be translocated and where possible as turves. Further we would like to be assured that provisions have been made to translocate the nationally scarce Mossy Stonecrop (Crassula tillea) that occurs on a track at the edge of a block of SNCI.

The soils and contamination reports suggest that there will be requirements to deal with contaminated soils, and we would also want clarification that this will not impact on the ability to undertake any appropriate translocation of the acid grassland turves and soils using best practice methods. We will not be satisfied if 'removing contaminated soils' is used as an excuse to dispose of any of this important vegetation.

It is also essential that all the ground preparation work prior to translocation, as well as the actual work of moving the grassland turves is supervised by a suitably qualified specialist ecologist with heathland and acid grassland experience, not just a clerk of works, and that the translocation work is undertaken by a specialist contractor with considerable experience of this type of work, such as Alaska Environmental. This should be written into a section 106 agreement prior to granting of planning permission.

Access Road and Navitus Bay Easement The proposed access road cuts off a section of good quality acid grassland and heathland/acid grassland mosaic habitat from the rest, which will make management more difficult. The proposal in the application is that this area be used as mitigation habitat for Hazel Dormouse, including additional planting of native tree species in the north-east area.(Ecology page E45 and Ecological Mitigation Strategy P 13), but this can only be acceptable if it does not result in existing heathland/acid grassland habitat being planted up.

This north east block of land will also be transacted by a 32 metre easement being placed around the proposed route of the Navitus Bay high-voltage cables running through the eastern section of the site. Although we are still unclear as to whether this section of the cable route will be laid by entrenchment or using directional drilling techniques, it will be important through the LEMP and CEMP to ensure a minimal impact on habitats and species in this area at all stages.

Restoration and Management of the wider SNCI Area DWT welcomes the proposal for the restoration and long term management of the wider area of the SNCI outside of the development to heathland and acid grassland mosaic, by the removal of the conifer plantation along with much secondary woodland and scrub which has encroached by natural succession over many years.

However this habitat is not the same as the short turf acid grassland in the development area, and the benefit of improvements to this habitat will not outweigh the loss of the acid grassland if the translocation strategy is not improved and most of that rare and vulnerable habitat is lost.

We would prefer to see the level of tree cover reduced to a figure nearer to 10% rather than the 20% proposed, whilst recognising the need for some areas of trees and scrub to provide nesting sites for birds, and appropriate 'woodland edge' habitat for Nightjar and Woodlark.

It is also important that trees are not merely cut down, but that the roots are grubbed out to enable restoration and appropriate grazing as a part of the long term management.

Compensation for residual biodiversity loss after mitigation measures As mentioned above, the overall area of SNCI loss is substantially higher than is suggested in the planning application, and additionally the proposals for translocation of some of the acid grassland into the SNCI and to leave some acid grassland turfs to be destroyed will result in further biodiversity loss. This loss requires compensation in order to fulfil planning requirements.

The SNCI Panel recommended that the planning application should go to the DCC Natural Environment Team for consideration of this using the Dorset Biodiversity Compensation Framework which has been developed from the Defra Biodiversity Offsetting metric. However the proposal within the application is that instead, "the HLS Environmental Stewardship Payment Rates for restoration of semi- natural grassland and lowland heathland based on a 10 year agreement has been used to calculate habitat / feature replacement costs." (Ecology page E43). DWT does not regard this as an acceptable way of calculating compensation for the biodiversity loss. It must be agreed through DCC NET.

Long Term Management of the Nature Reserve and SNCI DWT supports the principle of a long term management strategy supported by an appropriate funding/implementation mechanism; to be implemented via a S106 agreement and a long-term Nature Conservation Management Plan. (Ecology Page E45)

However, it is vital that the details of this are all properly agreed with the relevant organisations before planning permission is granted. It is not clear from the proposals whether the applicants assume that DWT will be the organisation to take on the long term management. DWT are not necessarily the organisation best placed to take on this role and it must be clearly understood that DWT will only consider taking on the management of this nature reserve if a sufficient financial package paid for by the developers is agreed at the outset, including funding for ongoing management, interpretation, wardening and access management etc. for the life of the development. An acceptable and comprehensive package must be built into a S106 agreement prior to granting of planning permission.

Provision of and strategy for SANG

DWT welcomes the provision of a high quality SANG which falls outside of the SNCI area. It is recognised in the document that this needs to be in place before the occupation of the first houses on the development site. However, the route of the proposed Navitus Bay cable entrenchment will run through this area, and, although it is stated that 'the SANG has been designed to avoid areas and routes where the current proposals for the Navitus Bay wayleave will be situated', it is not clear how this will be achieved. If the SANG area is disturbed for a period of time during the construction of the cable route, which seems very likely, then there will increased pressure on the heathland area of the St Leonard's site as well as surrounding designated heathland sites. The relative timing of the proposed St Leonards development and the Navitus Bay works will be crucial to ensuring that the SANG is effective.

The access to the SANG from the development will be guided along a track running through the nature reserve area. It is likely that in many instances dogs will defecate as soon as they are set free along or close to this track, and before they reach the SANG. It will be important that owners are provided with information about the sensitive nature of the habitats here, and are encouraged to ensure that their dogs do not foul this area, and that they scoop up the dog poo and put it into the bins provided at the outset of the walking routes along the SANG.

Potential for increased predation due to cats

It is calculated that the proposed development will increase the population of domestic cats in the immediate vicinity of the site by between 75 and 90. This will add considerably to the predation pressure on ground nesting birds, including potentially on birds of European importance such as Nightjar and Woodcock, small mammals and reptiles.

The proposed mitigation measures fall into two categories; the landscape design for the site including features such as permanently wet ditches and dense stands of thorny shrubs including blackthorn, holly, hawthorn and dog rose, and provision of information packs to householders regarding the presence of protected species vulnerable to cat predation and requesting that all cats wear bells.

We do not believe that these measures will prove anything like adequate in deterring cats from hunting across the nature reserve area. Simply requesting that owners put collars with bells on their animals will not make it happen. Many owners do not like their animals wearing collars as they believe they might get caught up by them and injured. And there are very few barriers which cats will not be able to cross.

It is proposed that monitoring post development will include radio tracking of cats to assess their hunting range, and a survey by owners of prey items brought home. Whilst monitoring is important, it is not acceptable to wait until after the development has been completed and then assess whether cats are having a detrimental impact.

Ideally there should be a ban on ownership of cats within this particular development since it is going to be immediately adjacent to a sensitive nature reserve area which includes habitat suitable for ground nesting birds and dormouse. If this is not possible then a formal agreement should be undertaken with cat owners that they will be kept inside overnight. The additional measures suggested such as chemical deterrents and motion-activated electronic deterrents emitting ultrasonic sound should also be implemented from the start, although, again the effectiveness of any of these measures has not been satisfactorily demonstrated.

The SANG Strategy document suggests that "Careful design and management of the SANG will enhance and increase biodiversity in the area, thereby reducing and counteracting the negative impacts of increased pet ownership within the new development." We do not accept that the negative impacts of pet ownership on the site's biodiversity will be counteracted by the SANG. In fact the SANG itself supports vulnerable heathland species, and thus the biodiversity of the SANG is also likely to be affected adversely by the large number of dogs and cats in the vicinity. Forestry Commission I confirm that the Forestry Commission and Spectrum Housing Group have agreed Heads of Terms for the provision of the SANG required at Hurn Forest. The S106 will be signed by the Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs and will refer to the agreement between the parties to construct and maintain the SANG for the required period. As such the Forestry Commission is fully committed to delivering the SANG as part of its normal forestry operations and as required to mitigate the impact of the development of the former St Leonard's Hospital site for residential development.

I also confirm that satisfactory financial arrangements have been agreed between the parties to enable the SANG to be provided as required.

Both parties have instructed solicitors and draft legal documents have been prepared. Natural England Summary  Support principle of Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space (SANG) provision to the south of the site together with the translocation of acid grassland and associated environmental works.

 Greater detail provided in revised scheme in regard to the translocation of acid grassland/receptor sites etc. which overcome concerns with the lack of clarity/details submitted in the initial submission.

 SANG would provide a more useable area by thinning out areas of woodland etc. to make a more pedestrian friendly, dog walker environment for residents of the proposed scheme . Revised Comments: No Objection

Additional information provided: 1. Plan to show access routes for the extraction of timber from the SNCI, this plan is agreed by Natural England .

2. Copy of email confirmation (19/8/2015) of legal agreement between Spectrum and the Forestry Commission to deliver the SANG, thank you this clearly confirms the intention of the parties to secure the SANG as set out in the SANG Strategy. 3. The SANG Implementation Schedule together with an appended Development Phasing Plan: The phasing approach proposed in this document is confirmed by Natural England.

4. The LEMP Implementation Schedule, this is a very useful document and provides a clear timetable for critical ecological activities in relation to the development progression/phasing.

5. Bat Technical Note, this note provides a very good summary of the proposed mitigation and avoidance work to be carried out following the granting of a permission including those elements which will be carried out under licence by Natural England.

6. Updated CEMP, this is noted by Natural England. 7. Schedule of Applicant Team responses to Natural England’s draft comments of 5, 6 and 12 August and EDDC’s email of 13 August.

Habitats Regulations 2010, as amended: The applicant has provided Natural England and the authority with an extremely useful set of further information which clarifies and demonstrates the applicants commitment to securing the required avoidance and mitigation measures necessary. In particular in addition to the SAMM contribution the applicant and land owner (Forestry Commission) have provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that a SANG of suitable size, location and quality will be secured for a suitable duration. The authority has confirmed that the range of measures set out by the authority are suitably resourced and secured through the appropriate legally binding agreements and conditions. Natural England can advise the authority that they may therefore conclude that the application will not have a likely significant effect on the nearby European and internationally designated heathlands and grant the application in respect of this consideration.

National Planning Policy Framework 2012 As set out in previous correspondence Natural England advise that the application will secure the restoration of priority BAP habitats and species and overall lead to a significant biodiversity enhancement as is in accordance with the advice set out in the NPPF. Natural England has no objection to the authority granting the planning application on the above grounds.

We would be happy to comment further should the need arise but if in the meantime you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact us.

For any queries relating to the specific advice in this letter only please contact Nick Squirrell. For any new consultations, or to provide further information on this consultation please send your correspondences to [email protected].

Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.

Original Comments: objection - further information required

Overall the application does not have sufficient detail to allow Natural England to provide a clear assessment of the proposal and therefore advise your authority about the effect of the proposals on European, international or nationally important sites, European protected species and priority biodiversity habitats and species. dHRA Natural England concurs with much of the dHRA supplied. However the HRA has several important failings which are detailed below.

The current SANG Strategy, whilst providing a suitable area does not provide a suitable level of additional capacity for new access. Natural England advises that the proposed package of measures requires substantial refocusing but this is within the scope of the FDPlan for the most part. Such modifications will reflect better the advice already provided by the authority and Natural England. There is no evidence to show how the proposed measures will be secured for the duration of the development. The HRA has not at this time taken account of the need to provide a SAMM contribution and the applicant will need to consider how this requirement accords with the districts position in respect of CIL contributions. At this time Natural England advises that these critical avoidance measures as set out in the SANG Strategy do not provide sufficient information to allow Natural England to conclude that the proposal will not have a likely significant effect on the nearby European and internationally designated sites. Further the absence of an agreed way forward on SAMM mitigation provides additional uncertainty. In the absence of this additional information Natural England advise that the authority should carry out an Appropriate Assessment under the Habitats regulations 2010. Additional information is also required in the following areas: Moors River SSSI, confirmation that ie existing crossing point has sufficient capacity for greater flows.

SNCI management, further clarification is sought in a number of areas such as proposed habitat extents, translocation areas, boundary treatments, access routes, monitoring, phasing, tree removal, landscape integration with forest, responsibilities, surface water drainage etc. Natural England advise that the applicant needs to provide a simplified map summarising the following points:

 Development boundary  Area of existing SNCI  Area of SNCI not affected by proposal  Area of land to be managed for nature conservation post development  Broad areas to be retained as heathland/acid grassland and woodland

Bats/dormice, the proposed mitigation measures need to be reviewed in the light of advice. This information may be supplied in the form of method statements etc within an agreed time frame and secured through planning agreements/conditions.

Landscape Masterplan The plan indicates substantial areas of habitat described as "Native scrub and understorey, Refer to Habitat Strategy Plan", this reference is unclear and Natural England advises that this matter needs to be resolved as it may be a proposal contrary to the objectives for the SNCI. The Masterplan does not include consideration of the adjacent SANG and is requiring screening etc on the basis that the development site is in isolation. This should be reviewed with a plan which integrates the restoration of open habitats into the more enclosed visual experience in the forest and also takes account of the potential effects of the Navitus proposals. The developer has the benefit of some good structural assets to break up the landscape in the SNCI and SANG these are not maximised at present.

Natural England's detailed comments are provided in the following Annexe. We would be happy to comment further should the need arise but if in the meantime you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact us. For any queries relating to the specific advice in this letter only please contact Nick Squirrell. For any new consultations, or to provide further information on this consultation please send your correspondences to [email protected].

Annexe 1 SANG Strategy Natural England and the local authority were consulted about the SANG requirements and have provided detailed advice. This has focussed on additional capacity through new walking routes as well as increased open areas to allow spreading room within the forest areas. The proposals made by the applicant appear to focus on using existing tracks which are already used and upgrading tracks to easy access. Further the focus for enhancement is close to an existing well used carpark as well as the Navitus wayleave and working compound which is problematical at least in the short term.

The applicant has put some weight on easy access routes however whilst this aspect must be considered in relative terms the function of the SANG is primarily aimed at those likely to have adverse effects on the nearby heathlands where such provision is very much less. The relatve prioritisation of this against other priorities must be examined. Natural England concur with the view that no additional car parking be provided.

At present the areas noted as "visually diverse" in the northernmost part of the forest, whilst close to the car park are little used as they are ridged, have dense understory and surrounding ditches preventing easy access. Natural England and EDDC have advised on the need for the creation of larger open areas which are consistent with the wooded heath objective if the applicant has secured sufficient agreement with the owner. If the tree cover of 20% suggested in the wooded heath specification is agreed as discrete areas with an open habitat matrix a more suitable and different greenspace is created. It is not clear to what extent the applicant will be able to secure suitable SANG enhancements beyond the existing pathways. The extent of the SANG proposed offers potentially substantial gains for SANG use, as noted the current policy with regards dog waste should be improved into line with the Dorset Dogs green standard.

The proposal to facilitate wild play in part of the SANG is of interest however Natural England advise that it is not appropriate to focus such use on one part of the SANG it would be more suitable to facilitate such an activity as a summer activity with a small resource provided to the Urban Heaths Team to organise a trial local event with FC participation once the development is completed. The use of sculpture is welcomed as this can lead the new residents to explore the forest/SANG, the time frame over which the provision is made and costings are not specified though. Junior orienteering/wide games - such activities are not appropriate to the SANG approach.

Natural England advise that the provision of a shelter in a primarily forested area is not appropriate to the SANG approach. Such facilities are not found on heaths nor is their justification for the diversion of resources away from securing SANG functionality for this purpose. The proposal to allow for post development modification in consultation with new residents is innovative and welcomed. Provision of benches and infrastructure at 50m intervals requires review, such provision is not consistent with heathland experience.

Access routes across the SNCI to the SANG are not agreed at this time, an existing concrete road provides ready access. This matter needs to be resolved with the Dorset Wildlife Trust.

The overall proposal for the SANG does not address issues hi-lighted in the advice of Natural England and the authority. In essence the proposal is an upgrading of the forest infrastructure rather than the provision of additional capacity to natural greenspace. The lack of substantial open spaces to draw users into the forest makes it likely that users will access the cricket ground as the nearest open space to throw a ball for their pet. The SANG could address the need to provide a sensitive and graded interface between the proposed development and the dominant dense and hard edged forestry blocks. An opportunity to provide a considered approach to this interface, given the substantial effect of the Navitus proposal, should be taken at this time. The clear advice to provide a focal point at the only available topography has not been followed. Opportunities to create/enhance wetland features remain and should be considered. The SANG strategy as currently framed does provide a sufficient area however not provide sufficient additional user capacity. Natural England advise that specific details need to be reviewed and clarified such that the proposal is clear and unequivocal.

There is no information available showing how the management of the SANG will be secured (funded or enforced) for the duration of the development. At this time Natural England advise that this critical avoidance measure as set out in the Strategy does not provide sufficient information to conclude that the proposal will not have a likely significant effect on the nearby European and internationally designated sites. In the absence of additional information Natural England advise that the authority should carry out an Appropriate Assessment under the Habitats regulations 2010.

Moors River SSSI

The applicant is proposing to upgrade the pumping of foul sewage to the Wayside Road station and thereafter to rely on existing infrastructure. Natural England is concerned that the proposed development, 210 units and 80 additional care home spaces will place a substantial additional pressure on the gravity fed link to the Palmers Ford STW during the operational phase. Natural England seek the applicants confirmation that the proposal will not be likely to lead to additional breakouts into the Moors River SSSI. Should this be the case Natural England advise that the applicant should bring forward a suitable avoidance measure agreed with the water authority.

Reptiles The survey has confirmed the presence of EPS reptiles within the application site although not within the area where development is proposed. Habitat management is proposed which will enhance the degraded habitats for the species and other reptiles. It is critical that the heathland habitats within the SNCI and out into the Forest which also supports rare reptiles are maintained and enhanced. The SANG strategy proposes a 30m buffer of trees adjacent to the development site which if implemented would prevent this movement. Similarly the habitat management plan for the SNCI needs to maintain heathland links between the heathland in the west and east to allow for movement of animals.

SPA birds Natural England advise that wintering Dartford Warblers and woodlark are recorded from elsewhere in the forest and that they may be expected to occur in the SNCI with suitable management/restoration. In addition if public access is controlled then there can reasonably be expected to be nightjar and Dartford Warblers breeding on the SNCI. Provision of a mix of fruiting trees amongst the trees adjacent to the housing area and care home would enhance the area for both wintering birds and badgers. The applicant has proposed a project to radio track cats, this is welcomed by Natural England and the applicant is advised that this measure should be secured through a specific contribution and delivered by a local partner. The use of any deterrents will need to be under the agreement and supervision of the manager of the SNCI. The effectiveness of deterrents will also impact on reptile populations. The proposed mitigation in the form of additional bird boxes is welcomed by Natural England.

Bats Natural England note the high diversity of bats present including maternity and day roosts. The mitigation measures proposed at this time, creation of a bespoke bat house and the provision of 52 bat boxes will need to be considered through the Natural England licensing process should the application be granted. Natural England raises some general points for consideration. The Bat House is considered a temporary rather than permanent solution to the loss of the bat roosts in buildings, further it is an unusual visual design which is considered likely to attract attention from local residents making the mitigation vulnerable. Natural England advise that the applicant should consider the following:

The dimensions of the bat house do not appear to be in accordance with the recommended internal dimensions for the species (5x5m)

Whilst bat boxes are proposed the bats currently use buildings and thus on a like for like basis a proportion of the new buildings should have bat access, bat bricks and access to roof spaces. This would provide a more suitable and permanent solution for the bats to utilise.

The roof space over the new cricket ground provides a good opportunity for a controlled bat roof space facility.

Dormouse survey The results indicate a transient and very low population level confined to the northern edge of the application site only. The location and status should not affect habitat restoration proposals elsewhere on the SNCI. Whilst the Navitus wayleave passes through the connecting habitat, this is a matter for their advisors, during the site visit various enhancements were discussed in respect of scrub enhancements. The planting of suitable native fruiting species will add value to mitigation proposed. Natural England advise that the number of additional dormouse boxes proposed should be reviewed in the light of discussions about habitat management in the northeast part of the site.

Habitat translocation Natural England has provided advice about the suitability of the proposed location for translocation of grassland habitats directly. The applicant has been provided with alternative and more suitable locations to translocate the grassland resource than the area proposed which represents an area of former wet heath which has the best potential for rapid restoration.

Habitat management in the SNCI Natural England advise that this is a critical aspect to securing the long term recovery of priority BAP habitats and species. The applicant will need to secure this by agreement with a suitable partner such as the Dorset Wildlife Trust. At this stage such agreement whilst possible in principle has yet to be discussed. Natural England note that the applicant agrees with the views that grazing management will be critical to restoration, a number of other issues requiring resolution before an application is determined are detailed below:  Ownership of the SNCI including cricket ground (securing the grassland value is best achieved by a lease from a conservation body to the club)  Tree felling necessary for restoration should be secured as part of the application  Compartment objectives require agreement as an outline of the Nature Conservation Management Plan  Monitoring responsibilities within the SNCI need to be resolved  Phasing of key works needs to be agreed as well as timing of transfer of land ownership

Responsibilities/liabilities need to be clarified The applicant should liaise with the Fire and Rescue Service once an agreed plan is available about a suitable location for a suitable fire hydrant(s), to be secured through a condition.

Monitoring The details of the specific monitoring proposed will need to be reviewed in the light of any agreement with the organisation managing the SNCI. In particular the duration and frequency will need to be agreed and secured so that it ties in with the development phases.

County Archaeological Previous archaeological work at this site has indicated Officer that there is a low potential for archaeological remains.

Hence, I advise that archaeology is not a matter that needs to be taken into account when this application is determined

Dorset County Council A detailed application for demolition of existing Highway Engineers buildings and redevelopment to provide 210 dwellings; formation of a new feeder road, priority junction, site access and footpaths off Boundary Lane; estate roads and parking; a replacement cricket pavilion of 200sqm; informal open space and recreation (inclusive of retained cricket pitch); landscaping; lighting; bat barn for a replacement maternity bat roost; and a Nature Reserve.

An outline application with all matters reserved for the erection of a care facility of up to three storeys and no more than 80 beds, and car parking.

I refer to the above revised/additional documents received on the 10/7/15.

The County Highway Authority has NO OBJECTION, subject to the following condition(s):

The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or utilised until the access, geometric highway layout, turning and parking areas shown on approved plans have been constructed, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, these shall be maintained, kept free from obstruction and available for the purposes specified. Reason: In the interests of road safety

No development shall commence unless and until the following works have been constructed to the specification of the Local Planning Authority: A right turn lane with associated carriageway widening and street lighting improvements in the vicinity of site access of Boundary Lane. Reason: These specified works are seen as a pre- requisite for allowing the development to proceed.

The development hereby permitted shall not commence until a Construction Traffic Management Plan and programme of works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall include construction vehicle details (number, size, type and frequency of movement), vehicular routes, delivery hours and contractors’ arrangements (compound, storage, parking, turning, surfacing, drainage and wheel wash facilities).

The plan shall also include: Inspection of the highways serving the site jointly between the developer (or his contractor) and Dorset Highways prior to work commencing and at regular, agreed intervals during the construction phase so that any damage to the edges of the carriageway and verges can be identified and suitable remedial works, to be paid for by the developer, agreed. A scheme of signing of the heavy vehicle route to the site agreed with advice/warning signs at appropriate points.

The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved Construction Traffic Management Plan. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

Informatives: The applicant is advised that, notwithstanding this consent, if it is intended that the highway layout be offered for public adoption under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980, the applicant should contact Dorset County Council’s Developer-Led Infrastructure team. They can be reached by telephone at 01305 225401, by email at [email protected], or in writing at Developer-Led Infrastructure, Dorset County Council, County Hall, Dorchester, DT1 1XJ.

The applicant should be advised that the Advance Payments Code under Sections 219-225 of the Highways Act 1980 may apply in this instance. The Code secures payment towards the future making-up of a private street prior to the commencement of any building works associated with residential, commercial and industrial development. The intention of the Code is to reduce the liability of potential road charges on any future purchasers which may arise if the private street is not made-up to a suitable standard and adopted as publicly maintained highway. Further information is available from Dorset County Council’s Developer-Led Infrastructure team. They can be reached by telephone at 01305 225401, by email at [email protected], or in writing at Developer-Led Infrastructure, Dorset County Council, County Hall, Dorchester, DT1 1XJ.

Highways Agency To fight fires effectively the Fire and Rescue Service needs to be able to manoeuvre its equipment and appliances to suitable positions adjacent to any premises. Therefore, the applicant is advised that they should consult with Building Control and Dorset Fire and Rescue Service to ensure that Fire Safety - Approved Document B of The Building Regulations 2000 can be fully complied with. Highways England (previously Highways Agency) provided a formal consultation response in respect of the planning application in January 2015. At that time it was considered that the development proposal would have an impact on the A31 which required mitigation. These mitigation works were agreed and a condition was directed to ensure these works were in place prior to the occupation of the development.

From the submitted information it is apparent that the main changes relate to internal layout issues only. Therefore it is considered that our TR110 dated 15th January 2015 remains valid, and the condition should be applied to any planning consent granted on the site.

Wessex Water Services The site will be served by separate systems of Ltd drainage constructed to current adoptable standards please see Wessex Water's Advice Note 16 for further guidance.

Please find attached an extract from our records showing the approximate location of our apparatus within the vicinity of the site. The current site is served by a private pumping station which will require updating upon redevelopment (the private rising main will also require assessment). The applicant will need to maintain close contact with Wessex Water through the design process to ensure the pumping station is designed to have minimum impact over existing upon the downstream public sewerage system infrastructure. The applicant will also need to discuss future adoption arrangements with Wessex Water.

Surface water is proposed to dispose of via SuDs which will require approval by your Authority. There must be no surface water connections to the public foul sewerage system.

As foul drainage arrangements are likely to be complex we request a planning condition to ensure appropriate consideration is afforded:

Foul Water - Planning Condition

The development shall not be commenced until a foul water drainage strategy is submitted and approved in writing by the local Planning Authority in consultation with Wessex Water acting as the sewerage undertaker

 a drainage scheme shall include appropriate arrangements for the agreed points of connection and the capacity improvements required to serve the proposed development phasing

 the drainage scheme shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and to a timetable agreed with the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that proper provision is made for sewerage of the site and that the development does not increase the risk of sewer flooding to downstream property.

I trust this is acceptable; please forward a copy of the Decision Notice once available.

EDDC Public Health - I recommend the following conditions be applied to Housing And Pollution the above application.

1. Contaminated Land: Our standard Contaminated Land Condition (some of this has been answered in their Environmental Statement (Volume 2 not seen)

Before planning permission is implemented, other than in respect of demolition works, a scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority to deal with potential contamination of the site. Such scheme shall include the following actions and reports, which must be carried out by appropriately qualified consultant(s):

(a) A Site History Report, which shall, by reference to site layout drawings of an appropriate scale, include a history of the site, past land uses, current and historical maps, site plans, locations of any known spillages or pollution incidents and the location and condition of old tanks, pits, fuel or chemical storage areas. (Please note it is the responsibility of the landowner, developer or consultant to provide and disclose all relevant information). This will be completed in accordance with CLR11 and provide a Conceptual Site Model and Preliminary Risk Assessment.

(b) If development of the site over several phases is intended the developer will submit in writing for the approval of the Local Planning Authority a Phasing Plan. No alteration of the area covered by each Phase will occur unless approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Following approval of the Phasing Plan the conditions below will need to be addressed with respect to each Phase of the development before occupation of each Phase.

(c) Before any works commence on site, should (in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority) investigation works be required, consultants appointed to carry out intrusive site investigation work must submit their sampling strategy to the Local Planning Authority for approval.

(e) Where contamination is found which (in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority) requires remediation, a detailed Remediation Statement, including effective measures to avoid risk to future and neighbouring occupiers, the water environment and any other sensitive receptors when the site is developed, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Any remediation scheme(s) or part(s) thereof recommended in the remediation statement, shall require approval to be obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority.

(f) Development shall only take place in accordance with the approved Remediation Statement.

(g) If, during works on site, contamination is encountered which has not previously been identified, the additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Any such scheme shall require approval to be obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority.

(h) On completion of all the works detailed in the agreed Remediation Statement, a Remediation Completion Report must then be completed by the environmental consultant(s) who carried out the remediation work confirming that they have supervised all the agreed remediation actions. This report is to be submitted to the planning authority confirming that all works as specified and agreed have been carried out to the point of completion. Until the Planning Authority is in receipt of said Remediation Completion Report and is satisfied with the contents of the statement and the standard of work completed, it will be viewed that the remediation of the site is incomplete. Reason: To protect controlled waters, ecological receptors, human health and property.

2. Asbestos: Prior to demolition or construction works commencing in each phase of the development information demonstrating that an appropriate asbestos survey has been completed, management procedures are in place, asbestos has been removed from the fabric of buildings and verification of asbestos removal and appropriate disposal will be submitted for the local authority’s approval.

3. Construction and Demolition Times: I should like to limit the times of demolition and construction to the following times (this is not to say they cannot work outside these times; but any works done outside these times should not generate a noise audible beyond the boundary of the site.)

Monday – Friday 07:00 – 19:00 Saturday 07:00 – 13:00 Not Sundays or Bank Holidays

4. Construction and Demolition Times: No burning shall be permitted on site during demolition and construction.

5. Noise: Some mitigation methods are required to prevent adverse impacts on health and quality of life. To protect the amenity of residents occupying the new dwellings the noise mitigation measures as set out in Chapter 6 of WYG noise assessment (A 080844) to include glazing and ventilation strategy must be implemented as set out in 6.1 so that BS8233 internal noise levels (from traffic noise) are met across the development for day and night-time noise.

6. The Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) submitted as part of the Environmental Statement must be followed as it outlines various good practice techniques for reducing noise, dust and odour during construction.

The site has been characterised and a risk assessment process undertaken. Although contamination is not widespread the report details actions to deal with contamination and the identified contaminant linkages of concern. The remediation scheme may need to be adjusted following an update of human health risk assessment. The scheme is further detailed within the CEMP but again this may need further attention. The scheme will need to be approved by the authority but this is not appropriate at this time. Conditioning has been previously discussed with James Wilson of WPA and advice has been given regarding site/development phasing. At the present time the Phase 2 aspects of investigation require updating and cannot be approved. Further issues may become apparent during site works.

County Planning Officer Comments from Dorset Nature Environment Team. Overall the application is large and complex with multiple and varied ecological issues both in respect of on-site wildlife interests; protected species including EPS and the SNCI, and the proximity to internationally designated sites within 4km and closeness to the Moors River SSSI. As there are off site considerations including the delivery of a SANG it raises the question as to the suitability of the Biodiversity Appraisal Protocol as the appropriate mechanism to effectively deal with the scope of issues at St Leonard's. This has been heightened by the concerns raised by Dorset Wildlife Trust (DWT) and the ETAG. There appears to be a discrepancy between what had apparently been agreed with DWT/Natural England (NE) regarding the SNCI and translocation of acid grassland as stated in the ecological report. ' 9th December 2013 (letter)Translocation of acid grassland and heathland is a reasonable option with respect to this site - Translocation strategy agreed with NE and DWT during site visit on 7th November 2013 (and subsequent map issued for consultation); and site visit of 15th April 2014.' Reference St Leonards - Final Ecology ES Chapter 11th September 2014.

Clearly this must be resolved through further dialogue between the applicant's ecologist and DWT and we suggest NE are appropriate brokers this. This is beyond what the Biodiversity Appraisal (Biodiversity Mitigation Plan approval) process is able to facilitate and we do not have the resources currently to do this.

However, we would like to offer help and guidance as far as currently possible and therefore make the following comments around a few of the key points;

 The area of loss of SNCI which DWT suggest is nearer 2ha rather than 0.5ha requires clarification.

 Clarification on whether or not acid grassland outside of the SNCI is to be retained rather than translocated.

 Including land outside of the SNCI to become part of the SNCI has been questioned by DWT as it may or may not attain suitable quality to qualify under the existing criteria. Could a further assessment be made by the applicant with a probability rating used to show the likelihood of success of meeting the SNCI standard? If not and they are unable to show what is required, including the offer of resources to bring it to condition, then it should not be considered as additional SNCI land but as a loss which requires compensation. The Dorset Biodiversity Compensation Framework can be used to quantify any compensation required.

 Accepting that translocation is a last resort and should only take place where a suitable receptor has been prepared, we would suggest there may be justification for translocation of turfs to part of the SNCI which is not in a favourable condition unless it can be shown that the condition was likely to improve without translocation. i.e. simple scrub clearance would achieve the same result for less effort and cost. It would be better in this case to ensure that money is spent where it is most effective in securing long term benefit i.e. into a 106 Landscape & Ecology Management Plan. It might be worth the applicant reviewing a condition assessment of the SNCI which shows clearly those areas which are unlikely to qualify regardless of this development. It could then be agreed that there are some areas which in the absence of management do not qualify as SNCI and in future would be undesignated, and therefore this proposal is an opportunity to restore and secure long-term gain with better quality habitat than currently exists in the absence of any conservation management.

 It will be important to ensure that the retained priority habitats such as wet/humid heath are better managed rather than replaced with acid grassland.

 With regard to reducing tree cover to 10% we would urge some caution as trees capture important air-borne pollutants and ameliorate temperature extremes which is a wider and long term concern. Opening up areas to increased wind exposure is likely to increase windthrow of any remaining trees especially those in sandy and wet soils as root plates are often shallow we suggest that transitional habitat of open to wooded with a graded edge is established through careful thinning of trees is a much better option which can help open habitat species to disperse and colonise newly restored/created habitat. There was concern that the preparation of receptor sites requires grubbing out of roots and stumps. We would suggest that consideration is given to creating carefully shaped bunds and mounds with existing soils to increase the effective area and provide further niches onto which translocated material could be laid/spread.  There might be merit in considering how this project relates to the code for sustainable homes accreditation in which case all landscape elements should be considered as potentially qualifying for habitats. Presumably some of the important grassland has arisen as a result of the lawn areas surrounding the hospital and so it should be straightforward to establish acid grassland given the correct treatment.

Given the above we would not wish to be pressed for signing off a Biodiversity Mitigation Plan (BMP) as the scale and complexity requires further discussion between DWT and the applicant. We would also suggest that NE are involved and that they might offer to broker a resolution. The extent of this project would be better served through a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan rather than a BMP which captures all of the issues throughout the life of the development and beyond, to secure a sustainably managed nature reserve with funds secured by 106 to manage the site for its nature conservation interests. This was the consensus view when we met with Phil Sterling yesterday.

In summary I believe the best mechanism to resolve the above issues will be for the applicant to meet with DWT and NE and put together a LEMP delivered through a section 106 and not through a BMP which adds another layer of bureaucracy. Hospital Services Cricket Club We are happy with the amended plans and have no specific issues to raise regarding the development of the pavilion, car parking and access as it affects us.

However there is still concern regarding the removal of asbestos during the demolition of the old buildings which includes our pavilion. Are all the old buildings to be demolished at the same time prior to any building taking place, which seems reasonable to mitigate against any risk?

If that is the case then we require some form of adequate temporary accommodation to be provided prior to demolition and our new pavilion built shortly afterwards.

DCC Adult/Community Services We are happy with the proposal for 20% being allocated to public sector.

Architects Panel Comments The panel welcomes the improvement to the street design and the highway design looks convincing with a good balance and hierarchy of shared surfaces, pedestrian routes and streets with on- street parking and traffic calming measures

• The incorporation of additional planting within the streets is welcomed although it is disappointing that Dorset County Council will not adopt street trees - forcing them into the private domain • Minor adjustments to the layout at the western end of the site are welcomed and the route to the footbridge appears clearer • Additional detail on the design of the buildings has been submitted and the panel supports the design approach. The palette of materials is restrained. • The panel notes the incorporation of bin storage and rear access to garden. Overall the dwellings have fairly generous plots. • The panel would have welcomed some variation in building height or the incorporation of some colour/interest but appreciates that there is a rigour and coherence to the design as presented.

The panel recommends Approval with regard to design:

• The layout is legible, reposed and sits comfortably within the surrounding landscape • The design of the dwellings are contemporary and crisp, referencing traditional forms without recourse to pastiche • However, this 'stripped back' approach means that he success of the scheme will depend largely on the landscaping treatment between the buildings rather than the buildings themselves (which provide enclosure and a backdrop). Accordingly detailed landscape plans showing surface treatments, boundaries, street furniture, planting and signage should be adhered to if approved.

Officers Report:

Executive Summary

This application comes to Committee by reason of the scale of the development because it is a major application subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment, and is identified as a previously developed site within the Green Belt, in accordance with the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework. In addition, although there are no nearby properties directly affected by the proposals, there have been 3 letters of objection to the scheme relating to the principle of the proposed environmental works, disabled access provision together with the proposed residential density. These matters are fully addressed within the body of the report.

A further 25 –page letter has been received from ETAG (now known as East Dorset Environment Partnership), a copy of which is available on file. This letter, and accompanying appendices relating to the protection of dark skies, raises concerns about the environmental impact of the development and the need to ensure that the scheme is carried out in an environmentally sensitive manner. The points raised are summarised as follows:  The need to comply with both national and local policy.  Acid Grassland and proposed translocation – concerns about the possible loss of SNCI habitat and request that the advice of NE and DWT is sought in relation to this matter.  Care Home – concerns about the possible impact of light pollution from the development, adverse impact of construction and impact on local hydrology on the SNCI adjacent.  Ecological Mitigation Strategy – Natural England and DCC Environment Team should advise on the acceptability or otherwise of the proposed mitigation and compensation for impact on Protected Species.  SCNI and nature reserve management – ETAG strongly supports the future management of the SNCI to be funded by the developers with the future responsibility to be assigned to a local environmental organisation.  Lighting Strategy and Street Lighting Report – ETAG welcome the lighting strategy to avoid bat corridors, but advises that the strategy has failed to address the impact of new forms of LED lighting on residents of the Care Home and the local wildlife and have provided additional information to support this claim.  SANG strategy – ETAG is concerned about the potential impact of the proposed route of the cable entrenchment for Navitus Bay on Hurn Forest, and the SANG for this site in particular. Comments on individual elements of the SANG Strategy.  It is essential that the LEMP (Landscape Environment Management Plan) should be specific in its requirements for biodiversity gain and where this is to be achieved.

The points raised in this letter are addressed in the comments from Natural England and the Dorset Wildlife Trust, both of whom now support the application subject to the completion of a S106 agreement which requires that the SANG be laid out and managed in perpetuity in accordance with an agreed SANG Strategy, and a condition requiring the amended LEMP to be implemented in full. DWT will be managing the SCNI nature reserve, funded by the developer, as requested above.

The proposal is for the construction of 210 new units of residential accommodation on a previously developed brownfield site of 7.75 ha in the Green Belt known as St. Leonards Hospital. In addition, the proposal includes an outline application for an 80 bed care home to the south-west of the site. Indicative plans illustrate a two-storey building together with the layout, however, as the scheme is outline all matters are to be reserved and subject to a full planning application. The application also includes the construction of a new access from Boundary Lane, the provision of open space within the site and the establishment of a substantial Nature Reserve on land currently designated as a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI). It also includes a replacement cricket pavilion and works to the existing cricket pitch. The scheme is accompanied by details of the establishment of a significant SANG (suitable alternative natural greenspace) in the adjacent Hurn Forest, which will be provided with the Forestry Commission. The developable area is part of the larger 25.9ha site. The site is the subject of Policy VTSW7 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan – Part 1 Core Strategy (2014) (the Local Plan) and the principle of residential development on the site has been considered in a Development Brief for the site which was approved by Planning Committee on 22nd July 2014 in accordance with the above policy.

The site is geographically located in a relatively isolated position and is bounded by the A31 to the north, Boundary Lane to the east and forest plantations to the south and south west. There is a residential park home site to the south west (Oak Tree Park) and a leisure park, Oak Dene Holiday Park, to the South. These two sites share an access to the A31 with the existing hospital and ambulance facilities, which will be remaining on the site. The proposed scheme is not considered to have a harmful impact on residential amenities given the distance from any adjoining sites.

The site lies within the Green Belt where residential development is normally inappropriate. However, this development has to be judged against the guidance set out in paragraph 89 of the NPPF which allows for limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt, and the purposes of including land within it than the existing development. It is considered that the scale of the development proposed meets the criteria set out above and that the scheme does not constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The layout of the site focuses around a central area of open space which encloses the protected Victory Oak tree. A new access road would be formed from Boundary Lane and the scheme proposes that the roads will be adopted by the County Council as Highways Authority . The intention of the scheme is to provide a pedestrian friendly residential development where the car has less emphasis than the pedestrian.

The dwellings themselves are relatively spacious with a generous plot sizes and amenity areas with a residential density of 30.6 dwellings per hectare. A simple design form has been pursued for dwelling types which includes a mix of brick and render and a palette of materials which are of good quality in design terms which will give the units a crisp and contemporary finish. 40% of the proposed units will be affordable dwellings in accordance with adopted policy LN3 of the Local Plan.

Part of the site is a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI). It is proposed to remove large areas of existing tree cover to return the site to its natural state – acid grassland. New planting and existing planting would be retained at approximately 20% cover to effectively screen the proposed development from the north and east of the site.

A Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space (SANG) would be provided to the south of the site to serve the proposed residential scheme. The SANG would be accessible from the proposed development by a new cycle/pedestrian path. The SANG area forms part of Hurn Forest at present. The works involve thinning out certain areas of tree cover and creating a variety of landscape forms to make the area more useable as an amenity area for dog walkers and inhabitants of the residential scheme. The future maintenance and monitoring of the SANG has been agreed by all the relevant bodies and this has been incorporated in a Section 106 agreement.

The scheme is considered to be acceptable and result in planning gain because it would:

 Provide a well- designed contemporary housing development of 210 units in accordance with the guidance set out in the NPPF, and Policy VTSW7 of the Local Plan  Utilize a previously developed brownfield site, and will not be inappropriate development in the Green Belt  Provide 40% of the units as social/affordable provision  Return the site to its natural state – acid grassland  Result in no harm to visual/residential amenities  Have an operational SANG at the south of the site

Proposal

The site is subject to Policy VTSW7 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan Part 1 -Core Strategy (2014). The pre-requisites for development in accordance with this policy are: subject to the approval of a development brief by the Council, a wildlife strategy and the agreement of a comprehensive travel plan. The application is made by Spectrum Homes and is a hybrid application which includes a full application for 210 dwelling together with outline consent for an 80 bedroom care home. The planning application is submitted in hybrid form and entails: • A detailed application for demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment to provide 210 dwellings; formation of a new feeder road, priority junction, site access and footpaths off Boundary Lane; estate roads and parking; a replacement cricket pavilion of 200sqm; informal open space and recreation (inclusive of retained cricket pitch); landscaping; lighting; bat barn to provide a replacement maternity bat roost; and a Nature Reserve. • An outline application with all matters reserved for the erection of a care facility of up to three storeys and no more than 80 beds, and car parking.

The housing will be inclusive of 40% affordable housing in accordance with policy LN3 of the Local Plan and informed by guidance in the Councils’ Housing and Affordable Housing SPD. An Affordable Housing Schedule detailing the delivery of the units will be included in the Section 106 Agreement. The proposed breakdown by house size, type and tenure is defined in the separate Housing Statement and draft Heads of Terms submitted with the planning application.

In accordance with Policy ME2 of the Local Plan, the heathland mitigation strategy defined by the Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework 2012-2014 SPD and emerging Dorset Heathlands Framework 2015-2020 SPD, a Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) is proposed on adjoining Forestry Commission land within the Hurn Forest to the south of the site. This will entail various landscaping improvements and upgrading and new paths and tracks to provide a 2.5 kilometre walking route. Details of the SANG development, implementation and long-term maintenance to the satisfaction of Natural England are set out in the SANG Management Plan and supporting documents, and will be annexed to the Section 106 Agreement.

Other ecological mitigation measures as advised by the EIA will be set out in the Landscape and Ecology Management Plan (LEMP). The delivery of elements of this Plan will be controlled by conditions attached to this application.

Highway works will be required to Boundary Lane to safely accommodate the new road junction and pedestrian crossings. These will be the subject of a legal agreement with the County Council.

The development will be brought forward in phases according to the programme outlined in the Environmental Statement, which formed part of the EIA, and accompanying Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). Prior to the construction phase, a period of extensive demolition and clearance will be necessary and ecological translocation to on-site receptors will take place under the appropriate licences. The SANG will also be commenced off-site, at this stage.

In support of the application, an illustrative masterplan, development movement principles plan, access road plan, and illustrative perspectives drawings and cross- sections have been provided, together with documents comprising an Environmental Impact Assessment, Arboricultural Impact Appraisal Report, Transport Assessment, Planning Statement, Affordable Housing Statement, Planning Obligations Statement; Drainage Strategy, and Design and Access Statement. Glossary

AH Affordable Housing BMP Biodiversity Mitigation Plan CS Core Strategy (Christchurch and East Dorset CS adopted 2014) EA Environment Agency EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ES Environmental Statement DCC Dorset County Council EDDC East Dorset District Council GB Green Belt HAHSPD Housing and Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document LEAP Local Equipped Area of Play NPPF National Planning Policy Framework SANG Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space SHMA Strategic Housing Market Assessment SPG Supplementary Planning Guidance SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest TP Travel Plan UKBAP United Kingdom Biodiversity Action Plan WW Wessex Water

Site Characteristics

The site forms the majority of land that was formerly utilised as a hospital complex for the rehabilitation of American servicemen during the Second World War. It was built in 1942 and acquired by the Department of Health in 1950. It has been owned by the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) and its predecessor economic regeneration arm, English Partnerships, since 2005.

It is situated at the eastern edge of East Dorset District and within the South East Dorset Green Belt that surrounds the conurbation of Poole, Bournemouth and Christchurch. It is situated between Ferndown town and the adjoining settlement of West Moors to the west, and St Leonards and St Ives villages to the east. New Forest District starts four miles to the north-east at Ringwood.

Various holiday sites are located in proximity to the A31 including camping and touring caravan sites and several hotels. Bordering the western boundary is an extensive park homes development (Oak Tree Park). Opposite is the Woodman public house.

The A31 forms the north-western boundary. This is a dual carriageway and a designated trunk road managed by Highways England (formerly known as the Highways Agency). Access to the existing hospital and adjacent facilities is via the A31. There is an existing bus stop on either side of the A31, linked by a pedestrian footbridge, which serves the site.

Boundary Lane runs across the northern corner at its roundabout junction with the A31 before heading eastbound to join the A338 to Bournemouth. A secondary site access from here was closed off some time ago. On account of the developed area remnant from the hospital the site is afforded brownfield status in the South East Dorset Green Belt. Under the former Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 2 of 1995, Annex C, it was a ‘Major Developed Site’ affording it the ability to be redeveloped under the status of an appropriate form of development in the Green Belt. This status, and some of the associated tests to ensure that redevelopment has no greater impact on Green Belt openness, has been carried forward under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which has superseded the PPG, and the Local Plan.

The site has an area of 25.9 hectares. This excludes 1.7 hectares split between three plots west of the central area, all of which are to be retained and not subject to the development proposal. They are occupied by the St Leonards Community Hospital which is managed by the Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust, together with the east divisional headquarters of the South Western Ambulance Service. These uses will not be affected by the proposed development of the remainder of the site.

Around one quarter of the site is made up of retained single-storey buildings of pre- cast concrete, blockwork and asbestos construction; together with flat-level hardstanding, resulting from phased demolition in 1998 and 2004/05. This is focussed around the excluded plots at the centre of the site, with the majority of the hardstanding located in a compound along the site frontage and obscured by conifer screening. A car park east of the Community Hospital is also included within the site. The remaining three quarters of the application site comprise the former hospital grounds to the north-east, south and south-west of the developed area. They contain coniferous woodland which forms the periphery of Hurn Forest which extends several miles to the south-east. There are a number of isolated and smaller groups of specimen and native deciduous trees throughout the site, including self-seeded stands of birch, and the ‘Victory Oak’ which is covered by Tree Protection Order (TPO) no SL/1491/I (designation confirmed 8 September 2009) on account of its historical interest. There are no other TPOs on the site. The adjoining Forest is managed by the Forestry Commission but the trees on the site are entirely in the care of the HCA.

The grounds contain three Priority Habitats of the Dorset Biodiversity Action Plan. In addition to a small amount of Deciduous Woodland they contain Lowland Heathland and Lowland Dry Acid Grassland. On account of these habitats value the large majority of the site is designated a Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) by the Dorset Wildlife Trust.

A mosaic of grass and heathland colonised large parts of the site inside and outside the SNCI several decades ago. The grassland habitat generally pertains to those central parts that are sun-parched and sustained by absence of any formal management other than rabbit grazing and recreational use of the cricket pitch; this has been found to host rare flora including mossy stonecrop (Crassula tillaea) and green-winged orchid (Anacamptis morio). Alongside this, in the compound outside the SNCI, and in eastern and southern parts of the site within the SNCI, pockets of heathland have regenerated. However, the mosaic has been undergoing encroachment and degradation by scrub and birch, willow and conifers. Absence of management has also allowed a diverse range of reptile species to thrive which add rich ecological interest. The recorded species on site are the four common reptile species: common lizard (Zootoca vivipara), slow worm (Anguis fragilis), adder (Vipera berus) and grass snake (Natrix natrix); as well as sand lizard (Lacerta agilis), which is a European Protected Species (EPS). Various protected birds and mammals have been identified in recent surveys. A small area adjacent to the A31 has been found to support Hazel Dormouse whilst one main badger sett and some outlier setts have been identified. No Great Crested Newts have been recorded on site.

The presence of a maternity colony of brown long eared bats has been confirmed with a further sixteen buildings having been found to support individual bat roosts of common pipistrelle (Soprano pipistrelle), brown long-eared bats and a Myotis bat.

Conversely, under -management has also allowed non-native and invasive species to colonise including the conifer woodland noted earlier, Rhododendron and Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).

Also within the ground is a water tower, which stands adjacent to the footbridge and is its most visually prominent feature from outside the site, and remnants of former recreational facilities for the servicemen including a cricket pitch. The latter is still used in summer months by the Hospital Services Cricket Club. There is evidence of fly-tipping in parts of the site. In the southern part is a former sewage plant, whilst a derelict swimming pool has recently been filled in. There are no considered to be any flood risks associated with the site.

There are no known Public Rights of Way through the site and the section of footpath at the site frontage has no designated status on the County Council’s Definitive Map.

The site lies amid, but excluded from, a network of 37 separate Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) which represent some of the best areas of remnant wet and dry heathland habitat in England, which affords them national protection, and which host a number of protected species of flora and fauna. The closest of these is the Moors River system which is located half a mile to the west and with an outlying unit half a mile to the south. It is equidistant between the Parley Common SSSI to the south-west and St Leonards and St Ives Heaths SSSI to the east and south-east, each approximately three miles away. Hurn Common SSSI lies approximately five miles to the south and there are several more beyond this range.

Some of these heathland areas also form part of the Dorset Heath Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and the Dorset Heathland Special Protection Area (SPA) which are collectively defined as ‘Natura 2000’ sites. Natura 2000 is a network of areas designed to conserve natural habitats and species that are rare, endangered, vulnerable or endemic within the European Community (EC). Specifically, SACs are designated under the Habitats Directive for their habitats and/or species of European importance and SPAs under the Birds Directive for rare, vulnerable and regularly occurring migratory bird species and intentionally important wetlands. Some are also wetlands of international importance (Ramsar sites) designated separately under the ‘Ramsar Convention’ of 1971. Planning History The site has an extensive planning history and the more recent applications are listed below. Prior to the submission of these applications there were a number made by the Department of Health in the early 1990s - all of which were withdrawn prior to determination. These include outline applications for a business park and ancillary uses including a hotel in one scheme, and garden centre in another. In 1995, pre- application discussions took place for a multiplex cinema scheme but this did not progress. Application Decision Decision Description Applicant reference date of no. application 03/09/0914/E Approved 18/02/10 Extension of HCA TL time for the implementati on of 03/04/0067/F UL 03/07/0925/R Approved 08/10/07 Reserved English EM matters Partnerships pursuant to 03/01/0666/O UT 03/04/0067/F Approved 09/07/04 Variation of Secretary of UL conditions 3, State for 20 and 24 of Health 03/01/0666/ OUT to allow for limited demolition of buildings 03/01/0666/O Approved 17/10/02 Outline Secretary of UT application State for for care Health village and community and recreation facilities

03/99/0861/O Not No date Outline Secretary of UT determined, application State for appeal for care Health withdrawn in village and 2001 community and recreation facilities 03/84/2192/H Refused 15/01/85 Outline East Dorset ST application Health for residential Authority development The most recent consent expired on 17 February 2013, meaning that the site no longer has any valid planning consent for re-development.

The key application is that approved in 2002, in outline, and which sought to develop a care village on the site. It fell within the C2 Use Class, for residential institutions. The applicant viewed this as being the most sensitive use for the site at that time and it was subject of EIA.

It sought demolition of the remnant hospital buildings on the site and erection of nursing home and dwellings in their place, accessed via the A31. Conditions on the application restricted the dwellings to single storey and an age restriction of over 55 years for their occupants. Technical conditions included agreement of a scheme to protect against A31 road noise and remediation of contamination on land identified as a ‘tip’.

Inclusive of a proposed bowling green, upgraded tennis court and cricket pitch, and replacement community centre and sports pavilion, the development was restricted to a gross external floor area of 15,000 sqm on the basis that this would give a comparable footprint to that formed by the previous hospital buildings, and an overall developable area of seven hectares. These restrictions were necessary to ensure compliance with PPG2 on Green Belt which was then in operation.

The remainder of the site would be subject to heathland regeneration and managed as a Nature Reserve in accordance with measures set out in a Nature Conservation Strategy and Management Plan. There was no specific provision within that scheme for a Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG).

The 2004 consent then relaxed three conditions so as to allow the demolition of two rows of buildings at the site frontage. It retained all of the other conditions from the outline consent. It also facilitated an extension of time by rolling forward the end date for the submission of reserved matters from October 2005 to July 2007.

The 2007 reserved matters consent established a level of development extending to 13,025 sqm (1.3 ha) and a density of 30 dwellings per hectare. The age restricted dwellings were arranged in clusters totalling 128 bungalows. This has not been implemented due to a lack of commercial viability and land ownership concerns over the approved access off the A31 preventing a suitable development partner coming forward.

In 2010, the final consent carried forward the expiry date for the outline application from 16 October 2007 to 17 February 2013. This introduced an additional condition reflecting updated ecological surveys which confirmed bats to be present, and measures for their protection. It also rolled forward the Section 106 Agreement attached to the outline consent and which committed to provision of 25% affordable housing, a contribution towards community transport and a restriction of the keeping of predatory pets by occupants.

A detailed comparison of the care village and current proposal is provided in the ES for this application. Environmental Impact Assessment

The current proposal is informed by the site’s physical constraints and opportunities some of which have evolved (for example ecology) since the care village scheme was consented. For example, the heathland and grassland mosaic has been encroached and degraded by scrub and birch, willow and conifers, and remnant buildings in which bats roosts have become more dilapidated in condition.

The 2001 EIA for that scheme is out of date and a new assessment has been undertaken for the current proposal. Applying the EIA process has given full consideration to any adverse effects and defined measures for mitigation in the ES and CEMP. It comprises technical reports on:

• Soils and contamination; • Water; • Ecology, nature conservation and biodiversity; • Landscape and visual impact; • Traffic and transport; • Noise and vibration; • Air quality; and • Socio-economics.

In concluding the EIA, the ES confirms that there will be no significant impacts of an adverse nature. Beneficial significant impacts are likely to arise in relation to remediation of existing ground contamination (primarily asbestos) and a number of socio-economic benefits namely job creation; access to a range of house types, including family homes and affordable tenures that will help rebalance the local housing stock and the population structure; and opening up the site for recreation.

Planning Policy Background

The proposed new neighbourhood will deliver much needed market and affordable rented and shared ownership housing.

Policy VTSW7 of the newly adopted Local Plan is specific to the application, and Policies KS2 (Settlement Heirarchy), KS3 (Green Belt), KS4 (Housing Provision), KS9 (Transport Strategy), KS11 (Transport and Development), KS12 (Parking Provision), ME1 (Safeguarding Biodiversity and Geodiversity), ME2 (Protection of Dorset Heathlands), ME3 (Sustainable development standards for new development), ME4 (Renewable energy provision for residential and non-residential developments), ME6 (Flood management , mitigation and defence), HE1 (Valuing and conserving our historic environment), HE2 (Design of new development), HE3 (Landscape quality), HE4 (open space provision), LN1 (Size and type of new dwellings), LN2 (Design, layout and density of new housing development), LN3 (Provision of affordable housing), and LN6 (Housing and Accommodation Proposals for Vulnerable People) are relevant.

Policies HODEV2 (Housing layouts), DES2 (impacts on development from pollution), DES6 (landscaping schemes), and DES11 (development infrastructure) of the East Dorset Local Plan are applicable as these have been saved in the 2014 Local Plan. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the newly introduced Planning Practice Guidance are also relevant.

The supplementary planning guidance (SPG) contained in the following documents is applicable to the proposal;

Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework 2012 to 2014; EDDC's SPGs entitled Trees and Development; Flood Risk, Groundwater and Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems, and the newly adopted Housing and Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document (HAHSPD).

Provision of Affordable Housing (AH) and the mix of the size and type of the dwellings to be provided

Optimising the provision of affordable housing is a priority of East Dorset District Council. The Council has advised that as a brownfield site allocated as part of the Core Strategy, and in order to accord with Policy LN3 of the Local Plan the proposal should provide up to 40% of the residential units as affordable housing.

CS Policy LN1 requires the proposed market and affordable housing to reflect current and projected local housing needs in the latest Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), to ensure the development contributes towards achieving a sustainable and balanced housing market. This requirement is subject to site specific circumstances and the character of the local area.

The development proposes 40% affordable housing.

Existing hospital Three working NHS facilities currently exist on the site occupying a number of buildings. These facilities are outside of the planning application site and are to be retained. These include the following:

 St Leonards Community Hospital is managed by Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust. The Community Hospital also includes staff and visitor parking on hardstanding.

 Ambulance Service Training Centre is operated by South Western Ambulance Service NHS Trust. The facility also includes three additional temporary buildings, plus staff and visitor parking on hardstanding.

 The Acorn Building is used by Dorset NHS Primary Care Trust as a wheelchair clinic, by South Western Ambulance Service NHS Trust as a vehicle maintenance workshop and communication centre, and by NRS National Care. The facility includes staff, customer and service vehicle parking on hardstanding.

All three NHS facilities are accessed directly off the A31 Ringwood Road Residential Use

The redevelopment of the site offers the opportunity to create a high quality sustainable community set on the edge of a new nature reserve and with links to local communities and the Hurn Forest.

A variety of homes are being provided ranging from two, three and four bedroom houses; one bedroom flats; two bed flats over garages and 2 bedroom mobility flats providing for, individuals, families, the elderly and those with specific needs.

The site is well connected to nearby established residential centres and presents a sustainable location for a new housing neighbourhood. St Leonards, St Ives and Ringwood are the closest to the north east of the site alongside the A31.The residential areas of West Moors and Ferndown lie to the west of the site. Local services such as primary and secondary schools, post office, shops, parish hall and Doctors surgeries are located across these residential centres. Health facilities are provided by the St. Leonards Community Hospital located on the St Leonards site (although the existing hospital site is outside of this planning application).

Non-residential use

In addition to the residential uses an area of the site to the south of the Ambulance depot, opposite the existing hospital, has been identified for the provision of an 80 bed care home. The care home will be accessed and serviced off the hospital’s existing access road from the A31. The care home is the subject of an outline planning application.

Policy LN6 of the Local Plan requires that proposals for specialist housing for older or vulnerable people should have the prior approval of Dorset County Council to ensure that there is public provision of such specialist accommodation. DCC Adult and Community Services have confirmed that the 20% provision of publically available beds is acceptable and therefore the proposal is policy compliant.

A modest cricket pavilion is also being proposed to replace the existing on site provision which currently operates on a temporary basis from an existing redundant hospital ward building. The existing building will be demolished as part of the larger redevelopment of the site. The new cricket pavilion building is proposed providing 200m2 of accommodation. The pavilion is located to the south of the residential area. An area for car parking is also provided for pavilion use

Housing

The proposal is considered to create a sustainable community in accordance with the NPPF. The development comprises 210 no residential dwellings. There are a total of 12no house types and 5no flat types including 1 bed and 2 bed mobility compliant flats.

60% of the dwellings are open market housing and 40% will be provided as affordable tenures in accordance with the definition of Annex 2 of the NPPF, and policy requirements of the Core Strategy and Housing and Affordable Housing SPD. The detail is expanded upon in the supporting Housing Statement. Of the 84 affordable units 28 are flats and 56 are houses.

Of the 126 market units 7 are flats and 119 are dwellings.

The development is divided into 11 no neighbourhood parcels ranging between 7no and 36 no dwellings over a total developable area of 7.75 hectares.

The proposed development, excluding the care home site and feeder road, achieves a density of 30.6 dwellings per hectare. This is in line with the 30dph preferred under the Local Plan Policy LN3.

The mix of affordable housing has not been modified since the original submission of the application. The Council advised that the proposal should provide no less than 70% of affordable housing units for rent and no more than 30% for affordable home ownership (shared ownership). The applicant has recognised that 10% of the affordable homes must be designed and built for special needs or supported housing as required in the Core Strategy. The affordable housing provision accords with Policy LN3 of the Local Plan.

The Council advised that the Section 106 agreement needs to include mechanisms to agree the final tenure mix and location of affordable housing at the Reserved Matters stage and that;

• The affordable homes will be provided by an approved provider • The affordable homes are appropriately allocated and occupied to meet Council approved Local Connection and Housing Need criteria • The affordable homes will meet HCA design and construction standards • The affordable homes are integrated into the development in small clusters and not recognisable as affordable houses (i.e. tenure blind) The application as submitted meets these criteria.

Principle of Development

The site is relatively flat and is not located adjacent any dwellings or residential properties. The caravan park to the west is located to the west of the remaining hospital buildings and will not be overlooked by any of the proposed buildings. The development will also have a separate access to the existing uses on site.

The proposed development would also be well screened from view from the A31/Boundary Lane and the existing plantation to the south of the site.

The site is well-related to existing footpaths and the highway network and would provide opportunities for informal recreation which would not require use of motorised vehicles. Future residents would also be able to walk or cycle to shops and services in the nearby areas of Ferndown.

A new vehicular access is to be provided onto Boundary Lane.

Pedestrian and cycle access will be possible from the south and proposed SANG via a new path. Open space is to be provided in the centre of the proposed housing development which will centre around the protected Victory Oak together with an area of open space to the western side of the scheme which will include a children’s play area.

The NPPF directs that permission should be granted where a proposal is in conformity with the Development Plan.

The proposed development will make efficient use of the site thus helping the Council to implement its Local Plan in respect of Policy VTSW7. This affirms the principle of the site’s redevelopment which follows on from the previous, similar designation in the East Dorset Local Plan.

Moreover, the redevelopment principle has been established through the care village schemes that have been approved, though never implemented due to viability constraints. The national drive for housing delivery and the need for the Council to maintain a pipeline of deliverable sites has formed the opinion that the residential use is the most appropriate; the Development Brief which this Committee approved for the site (as required by VTSW7) on 22 July 2014 sets the relevant parameters in which this can be permitted and delivered.

The proposal has been drawn up in consideration of the detailed design policies and makes appropriate provision for mitigation measures as informed by the EIA process that has been undertaken.

The SANG is provided in accordance with Policy ME2 and the Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework SPD, thus making appropriate alternative provision to mitigate against increased recreational pressure arising from future occupants of the proposed development.

As also required by VTSW7, an Ecological Mitigation Strategy and Travel Plan are submitted with the planning application. Dorset County Council and the Highways Agency have been consulted on the appropriateness of the proposed access off Boundary Lane. The Ecological Mitigation Strategy (in the form of the LEMP) is especially important in ensuring no adverse impact on important habitats as per Core Strategy Policy ME1 and has been devised with extensive advice from Dorset County Council, Dorset Wildlife Trust, the Forestry Commission and Natural England.

The affordable housing meets the 40% requirement under Policy LN3, the details of which are set out in the accompanying Housing Statement. The care home for which outline permission is sought is subject of the separate Care Needs Assessment which demonstrates its ability to meet the needs of the ageing population in accordance with the requirements of Policy LN6.

Overall, the EIA has shown that there will be no significant impacts of an adverse nature arising from the development nor will existing conditions give rise to adverse effects on construction workers or future occupants. Information provided to the Council as part of this application allowed it to undertake Appropriate Assessment of the development proposal as the nominated competent authority under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). A range of parking approaches has been employed across the site. These include on plot, on-street, garages (some on plot and some with flats above), carports and some small parking courtyards. Garages and carports are positioned to ensure that main routes are not dominated by blank frontages.

Parking levels are set based on the site’s location, the number of bedrooms and the number of allocated parking spaces associated with the development. A combination of allocated and unallocated parking spaces are based on the methodology set out in Residential Car Parking Provision, Local Guidance for Dorset.

Parking spaces are dimensioned greater than the typically acceptable minimum dimensions to accord with Dorset County Council requirements e.g. a standard bay perpendicular to the road is 2.8mx5.0m.

Alternative Layouts and Green Belt Impact

Although the care village consent has expired, it is materially relevant and remains as a gauge against which the quantum of development has been critically assessed as an alternative layout in Section 6, Volume 1 of the ES.

The care village was approved in the context of strict criteria in PPG2 which required application of the same height and area as the hospital buildings in the footprint. It is relevant that the NPPF does not impose this same restriction, rather it states in more general terms that redevelopment must not “have greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development” (NPPF, paragraph 89, bullet point six).

This resulted in an earlier scheme with buildings restricted to 15,000 square metres floor area (reserved matters consent fixed this at 13,025 square metres) and single storey (limited to six metres above ground level). This was also informed by different ecological conditions to those that have evolved to the present day.

It is concluded that the expired proposal, in being dense and rigid, did not afford the best layout for the site in visual/landscape terms; moreover it resulted in a development that did not prove commercially viable. It is therefore rejected as a realistic alternative to the current proposal and, in preparation of the now approved Development Brief, care had been taken to agree with the Council the extent to which the development can extend beyond the existing footprint into the Green Belt. The overall extent of the built form on the site has only slightly increased beyond that that existed at the time of the 2002 applications. Areas of built form on the south west edge of the site have been relocated to the north west, to maximise the site’s development potential within the Green Belt, whilst at the same time minimising the impact on the protected species and habitats on the site. This approach was set out in the Development Brief that was approved by Committee in July of last year and the development, the subject of this application, faithfully follows the development boundary agreed in that document.

The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) conducted as part of the EIA has provided a useful check to ensure that the appearance of the development is not detrimental from public viewpoints in the vicinity. Due to the nature of the existing vegetation bounding the site there is a restricted number of locations which offer views into the site even during winter months; these include the A31 footbridge to the north, the A31 road junction with Boundary Lane to the north-east and the Community Hospital car park, all of which have been assessed.

Achieving Sustainable Development

The Planning Statement which accompanies the application sets out the applicant’s arguments to demonstrate the care that has been taken to ensure a sustainable form of development can be delivered on the site. The main sustainable benefits of the scheme are summarised below: • A masterplan that offers a realistic prospect of redevelopment, balanced with minimal impact on the Green Belt and ecology. • The development of warm, secure and low carbon homes that will achieve high levels of resource, water and energy efficiency inclusive of much needed affordable housing and a mix of smaller and family size dwellings currently lacking in the local market. • Opening up the site for recreation through defined attractive public access routes between on-site open space for formal and informal recreation and the off-site SANG, which in turn provide the Forestry Commission with opportunity to implement its Forest Design Plan. • Creation of jobs during construction and in the operation of the care home, while the addition population will help support existing local services thus helping to sustain and enhance the vitality and viability of the community.

Policy VTSW7 requires the scheme to be accompanied by a comprehensive travel plan. The scheme has been negotiated to include the provision of sustainable means of transport including pedestrian flow as illustrated on the submitted plan together with corridors through the site which connect pedestrian and cycle routes to nearby conurbations such as Ferndown and West Moors together with the amenity areas to the south of the site. In addition, the site is located adjacent the A31 and major transport routes served by frequent bus services. There is an existing bus stop immediately adjacent the site.

Layout and the evolution of the development proposals

During the pre-application discussions in respect of this site, the applicants and their agents accepted the early ecological constraints put forward by Natural England and the Dorset Wildlife Trust which identified the south of the site directly to the west of the cricket pitch as highly sensitive due to species and habitats in this vicinity. In the previously consented scheme this was identified as developable area.

Feedback on this scheme principally from Natural England (NE) concluded that the centrally retained acid grassland was not shown large enough and did not also include the mosaic of surrounding important habitats adjacent to the acid grassland.

This lead to the next iteration of the plan which saw an increase to the area provided to support the retention of the central acid grassland and the associated habitats. Alongside this was a response to the NE request to move further northwards with the developable areas and away from the south western corner. Density was increased in the area of the site north of the existing hospital buildings. Feedback of this version of the masterplan concluded that a continuous and meaningful band of restored heathland should be provided around the perimeter of the whole development.

The third reiteration of the masterplan supported the provision of a continuous provision of heathland around the site.

On review of the masterplan, NE and the applicant’s design team concluded that the translocation of the central acid grassland and a further move northward of the developable area, would better protect and preserve the Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) and valuable habitats on the site. It was also reinforced by your officers that a central amenity space should still be provided to support the development and retain the Victory Oak.

The subsequent revised version of the masterplan pulled the development northwards surrounding a central amenity space with a larger protected habits to the east and south of the development. It also tested the location of the care home in the another corner of the site in response to the opportunity identified by NE to further increase the protected area to the south as well as providing better access to the care home.

Feedback from this scheme from your officers however concluded that the Green Belt case was being compromised with a larger developable edge to the development supporting both increased density in the northern part of the site and the care home. Also the central space was not felt to be sufficient to support the housing provided.

A revised masterplan was prepared as part of a draft Development Brief. The care home site was relocated from the corner of Boundary Lane to an area to the south of the existing ambulance depot. The open space was consolidated to the centre of the site and enlarged. Blocks fronting the A31 were revised and their density reduced, allowing for the creation of tapered edges, aiding visual openness. Feedback from your officers focussed on scheme viability and the Green Belt case for extending the developable area as far to the east. The extent of ecological mitigation costs needed to be reviewed against reduction of dwelling numbers and potential changes to eastern boundary.

After taking account of the previous advice, a revised masterplan was produced as part of an updated Development Brief. The eastern boundary was reviewed and these blocks pulled in to reduce the developable area and to soften this edge. The central open space was shifted to the west and all blocks reviewed to improve permeability and wider connections to the Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) and A31. This plan formed the basis of the now-approved Development Brief for the site in July 2014.

The planning application, submitted in September 2014, progressed the development brief masterplan and added detail around hard landscape treatments and parking. The overall framework of the development blocks remained broadly unchanged, with the most significant amendments being to the parcels adjacent to the A31, where rear parking courts were introduced. Following highways design input, the internal site access along the A31 was also amended to limit straight stretches of road and to slow traffic.

The applicants were given feedback on the proposed layout by the Architects’ Panel and DCC Highways which focussed on pedestrian /cycle safety within the scheme, domination of car parking within the public realm, the creation of a clearer gateway into the development site, and comments on the palette of hard landscape materials - particularly the use of coloured tarmac. The discussions also centred around the provision of the Cricket pavilion and its environs, the desire for a second play area located within the western part of the site, the need to comply with the Dorset Waste Partnership’s design guidance, and the need to ensure that the roads would meet adoptable standards. There were also discussions with DWT and NE about the SANG provision and the treatment of the SNCI.

These many and varied discussions, taking on board the comments of consultees to the application, resulted in the planning application being resubmitted in July 2015, which made adjustments to the landscape along the development site boundary, using this to improve screening and soften the development edge. In combination with a traffic calming crossing feature, the landscape is used to create a stronger gateway into the development. Parking has been reviewed and more onstreet, unallocated spaces are provided, freeing up the streets to the north and creating safer pedestrian and cycle routes linking to the A31. The layout of the western part of the development has been revised, including the creation of a secondary public square containing an informal play area. The detailed design of street sections and road surfacing materials have been agreed with DCC Highways without compromising the overall layout of the development. It was considered important to ensure that the detailed highway designs were agreed prior to the planning consent being granted as this site is tightly constrained by the Green Belt and the nature conservation designations and your officers required all matters to be resolved at this stage, rather than being dealt with by way of condition.

The site has been developed to encourage walking and cycling and to create links to / from the wider surroundings of the site. The following road user hierarchy has been adopted: • pedestrians • cyclists • public transport users • specialist service vehicles (emergency • services, waste etc.) • other motor traffic

Streets are important public spaces and their landscaping and design should create an individual character for the site. A clear hierarchy of routes has been established to aid legibility and to promote a safe, accessible residential environment. This road layout is a significant improvement over the originally submitted scheme and should lead the development being a safe and pleasant environment for its inhabitants.

Dorset’s Crime Prevention Design Advisor was contacted to provided comment on the masterplan layout. A number of suggestions were made and incorporated into the revised layout. The applicants will be applying for A Secure By Design designation from the Police to demonstrate that best practise has been adhered to and that the development will achieve Section 2 compliance.

The redevelopment of the site offers the opportunity to create a high quality sustainable community set on the edge of a new nature reserve and with links to local communities and the Hurn Forest.

It is anticipated that housing will comprise the principal land use within the developable area. The scheme proposes 210 dwellings in total. A variety of homes are being provided ranging from two, three and four bedroom houses; one bedroom flats; two bed flats over garages and 2 bedroom mobility flats providing for, individuals, families, the elderly and those with specific needs

Health facilities are provided by the St. Leonards Community Hospital located on the St Leonards site (although the existing hospital site is outside of this planning application).

In addition to the residential uses an area of the site to the south of the Ambulance depot, opposite the existing hospital, has been identified for the provision of an 80 bed care home. The care home will be accessed and serviced off the hospitals existing access road from the A31. The care home is the subject of an outline planning application.

Open Space The proposal will provide an area for children's play in a central green space on the site. This will be easily accessible for children and parents and it will be a good distance from the nearest dwellings to minimise noise and disturbance issues to the occupants of these dwellings. There is a second, smaller play area identified in a small Square on the western side of the development. The applicant has agreed to fund the provision of the play spaces and their equipment, and their maintenance when the development is complete. The larger play area is set within a much larger area of open space which forms the focal point of the development and which contains the Victory Oak. This space is well served by pedestrian and cycle routes through the site, both to the bus stops on the A31 and to the footpaths and cycleways through the site to the SANG and the rest of Hurn Forest and beyond. The approach to play has been influenced by the character of the site with a focus on informal play using sustainable materials. The central play area incorporates fixed inclusive play units as well as informal play boulders and gentle landform. There is a network of new footpaths around the perimeter of the site which will afford views across the Nature Reserve that is going to be managed by Dorset Wildlife Trust which will encompass the restored SNCI on the site. This Nature Reserve will largely be open grassland and heathland interspersed with native trees and will provide a landscape setting for the whole development, as well as providing a biodiversity gain.

The open space proposed is considered to be acceptable and accords with Policy HE4 of the Local Plan. An integrated landscape approach is seen as a key opportunity for the St. Leonard's development. The landscape design aims to protect the openness of the Green Belt; respond to the on-site translocation of existing habitats and to enhance and protect the site ecology; provide well-designed and appropriate play and amenity facilities; support the place making strategy through well-considered design of the public realm; and promote legibility through a clear road hierarchy and network of roads and paths

The following types of open space are accommodated within the new development: amenity green space; children’s and young people’s space; natural and semi natural green space, recreation grounds in the form of the cricket pitch; and suitable alternative natural green space (SANG). The details of provision are expanded upon in the submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Landscape Strategy, SANG Strategy and Schedule.

Pedestrian Routes The Local Transport Plan identifies the following, “many people are discouraged from walking and cycling because of the dangers (both real and perceived), of pollution and intimidation caused by passing traffic, and because of breaks in the continuity of networks”. The St Leonards development gives priority to pedestrian and cycle movement to create an environment that encourages people to walk and cycle regularly out of choice.

Route ways through the site are overlooked by buildings where possible to provide natural surveillance. Shared pedestrian /cycle routes are wide enough to safely accommodate both user types.

Pedestrian and cycle routes are made through the site connecting with the Hurn Forest to the east as part of a network of SANG routes. Two access points to the east will create a short loop walk for future residents as well as connecting to this wider network.

A main shared route flows through the site north to south, this is 3m wide to allow for cycle and pedestrian use. It will be surfaced with self - binding gravel except where is makes use of proposed roads. Away from surfaced footways paths will be self - binding gravel to blend with the rural landscape. Some mown paths are proposed, one provides a secondary link to the SANG the other cuts across a small section of habitat.

Boundary treatments in the form of fencing and planting will inform of access restrictions and provide barriers to pedestrian movement to the more sensitive habitat areas. Design

Scale/Storey Heights The Green Belt status of the site is respected and preserved in the development of the scheme. Spread of development, density, height, massing and terracing effects are considered as potentially negative impacts to the Green Belt status through the form of development.

The height of the residential housing across the site has been restricted to two storeys to minimise the developments impact on the Green Belt. The built form has also developed in response to the context of the local vernacular and is discussed in greater detail later in the appearance section of this report.

Lengths of terraced houses are restricted in most instances to 3no dwellings. Longer terraces occur in close proximity to the existing hospital. Their visual impact is considered acceptable due to their close proximity to the existing hospital facility.

The care home site is located to the south of the ambulance depot and to the west of the existing hospital where it’s visual impact would be significantly mitigated by being associated with, and located next to these existing retained facilities.

Built-form/Design The existing housing stock in the surrounding residential centres of St. Leonards, Ferndown, West Moors and St. Ives tend to lack a general sense of identity and built form or character.

A Character Assessment of traditional rural residential buildings in the wider East Dorset context was carried out by the applicants’ agents prior to the submission of the application with the aim of finding common characteristics, forms and materials to inform the design philosophy of the housing and proposed development. Terraced, semi-detached, detached and barn conversions were assessed during this process.

The applicants’ final design philosophy is to provide a contemporary re-interpretation of the Dorset vernacular and to incorporate a palette of natural contextual materials referencing the rural vernacular thus responding to the sites wider context.

A variety and wide range of affordable and open market dwelling types are provided across the development. The dwelling layouts are well tested where the majority are based around Spectrum Housing’s house types. The layouts are very efficient providing a good level of accommodation. The affordable dwellings are designed to meet the Lifetime Homes criteria and all dwellings are designed to achieve Code Level 3.

The dwellings are dispersed in small ‘tenure blind’ clusters across a proportionate range of house types in location clearly defined on the house types plan. There is no change or visible distinction in the external appearances of affordable and open market housing.

The site is contained by mature trees, established hedges and other vegetation. These features will help soften the edge of the development in the landscape, and the provision of lower density housing on the fringe of the site will also have this effect.

With an appropriate mix of two storey dwellings, the appearance and scale of which is considered that the number of dwellings proposed can be accommodate on the site.

Building heights will be 2-storey across the site.

The development on the edges of the site will have a lower density and these areas will be characterised by larger family dwellings with bigger plots.

The site has excellent views out of it over the surrounding landscape, and it is noted from the Design and Access Statement (D & A Statement) that the use of high quality materials, dwellings in clusters will assist in providing a high quality scheme.

Early concept house designs were developed in line with the applicants’ design philosophy to provide a contemporary re-interpretation of the Dorset vernacular. Particular attention was paid to the individual forms and mix of the various house types to create interest across the neighbourhood parcels and a sense of place across the development site as a whole.

The predominant forms of the proposed dwellings are closely linked with the character of the vernacular housing as stated above. The forms are two storey high, roof pitches are steep running front to back, frontages are flat with the exception of entrance canopies and occasional recessed entrances.

Common features include extruded sections, gable end windows, clipped verges, brick banding and chimneys to the largest detached properties.

External wall materials are used in single blocks where terraces, semi-detached and detached dwellings are constructed from a single material of either render or facing bricks. Two types of facing bricks are used on certain house types to create a contrasting affect referencing the vernacular brick banding feature.

On the flatted blocks, timber cladding is proposed at first floor level with facing bricks at ground floor. This treatment makes reference to the barn conversions.

Roof materials implemented throughout the development are modern imitations of slate and plain clay tiles. In general terms the slate imitation tile is used with rendered walls and the plain clay imitation tile is used with brickwork. There are instances where this rule is broken but it is considered an acceptable variation to create interest across the house types.

The Architects’ Panel assessed the scheme when initially submitted, and again once it had been substantially amended. The Panel’s comments on the revised scheme are set out below and are generally supportive of the design approach adopted in the application:- • The panel have previously considered the proposals and given recommendations • The panel welcomes the improvement to the street design and the highway design looks convincing with a good balance and hierarchy of shared surfaces, pedestrian routes and streets with on-street parking and traffic calming measures • The incorporation of additional planting within the streets is welcomed although it is disappointing that Dorset County Council will not adopt street trees - forcing them into the private domain • Minor adjustments to the layout at the western end of the site are welcomed and the route to the footbridge appears clearer • Additional detail on the design of the buildings has been submitted and the panel supports the design approach. The palette of materials is restrained. • The panel notes the incorporation of bin storage and rear access to garden. Overall the dwellings have fairly generous plots. • The panel would have welcomed some variation in building height or the incorporation of some colour/ interest but appreciates that there is a rigour and coherence to the design as presented.

The panel recommends Approval with regard to design: • The layout is legible, reposed and sits comfortably within the surrounding landscape • The design of the dwellings are contemporary and crisp, referencing traditional forms without recourse to pastiche • However, this 'stripped back' approach means that the success of the scheme will depend largely on the landscaping treatment between the buildings rather than the buildings themselves (which provide enclosure and a backdrop). Accordingly detailed landscape plans showing surface treatments, boundaries, street furniture, planting and signage should be adhered to if approved.’

The following principles have been applied to the dwellings: • accessible gradients and level access to the front door approach • flush thresholds to front and back doors • entrance door widths accommodate wheelchairs • no level changes on the ground floors • ground floor living accommodation

Lifetime Homes All homes with the exception of two and three bedroom open market dwellings are Lifetime Homes compliant providing adaptable accommodation into the future for the users.

Wheelchair Accessible Dwellings - 10% of the affordable housing are defined wheelchair accessible units provided to serve the needs of households who require specially adapted or supported housing;

Landscaping The existing landscape features and the habitats it supports have been thoroughly examined to ensure the approach to landscape embraces the ecological requirements of the site and minimises the impact of the development from outside the site. As part of this work and site analysis the applicants identified a series of site constraints. These have been identified as:

1. Habitats • Retention and translocation of existing habitats • Protection of habitats and associated species • Incorporating ecological mitigation features

2. Edges • Major east west A road, fast moving dual carriageway • Road noise, especially along northern edge of site • Boundary treatments vary from trees to low fencing • Boundaries with existing uses on site need consideration

3. Trees • Retention of High amenity value trees and Root Protection Zones (RPZ) • Victory Oak tree (centre) to be retained • Selective retention to provide green infrastructure to the development, mitigate against visual impact of development and to offer solar shading to dwellings.

4. Navitus Bay • Future service route through north eastern area of the site. To have a wide 30m easement • Subterranean route but features above may be restricted

These, together with the ecological requirements for the site, have been used to establish the developable area within the site and help determine the positioning and arrangement of the proposals and their associated landscape infrastructure.

An integrated landscape approach is seen as the key opportunity for St. Leonard's to respond to and help promote many of the design principles that underpin the application.

SANG

The Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) required to mitigate the impact of the residential development on the nearby internationally protected heathlands will be delivered by the creation of the SANG within the adjacent Hurn Forest. The proposed SANG has been negotiated with the applicants, Natural England and the Forestry Commission (who will provide and maintain the SANG in perpetuity) to accord with Policy ME2 and Appendix 5 of the Local Plan and will link to Forestry Commission Forest Design Plans for this part of Hurn Forest. The landscape design of the housing site provides a useable and meaningful link to SANG to help protect the existing habitats nearer the development and provide the necessary amenity provision for the new residents. Full details of the SANG design, strategy and long term management schedule are set out in documents which form part of the planning application and will form part of the S106 agreement to ensure that it is delivered and maintained to Natural England’s requirements.

The application site lies within 5km and beyond 400m of Ferndown Common Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which is part of the Dorset Heathlands Special Protection Area (SPA) on account of rare or vulnerable heathland bird species. It is also part of the Dorset Heaths Special Area of Conservation (SAC) on account of rare or vulnerable heathland and associated habitats and some individual species).

At the time of preparing the Local Plan, an Appropriate Assessment was carried out under Regulation 61 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. This concluded the development would be unlikely to have a significant effect on the heathland interest features of the Ferndown Common Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and other SSSIs within 5 km of the application site which are part of the Dorset Heathlands Special Protection Area (SPA) and Dorset Heaths Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

The applicant has agreed to provide a contribution for Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM), which Natural England require to fund measures to educate visitors to the Special Protection Areas of heathland, such as wardens and educational noticeboards. This forms part of the provisions of the S106 Agreement.

The applicant has submitted a detailed layout plan and development and maintenance schedule for the SANG which NE has been asked to comment upon, and it is hoped to be able to update Members of NE's final comments at the committee meeting.

However your Officers consider that the SANG proposal meets the guidelines set out in Appendix 5 of the Local Plan (Guidelines for the establishment of SANG), and would provide an appropriate SANG for the proposed residential development.

The ownership of the SANG will remain with the Forestry Commission and your officers are satisfied that the necessary agreements are in place to ensure that the SANG will be delivered and maintained as required.

With the SANGS in place, the proposal will provide the appropriate mitigation to avoid an adverse impact on the Dorset Heathlands SPA, and accord with Policy ME2 of the Local Plan and Section 11 of the NPPF.

Impact on biodiversity and ecology

The applicant has undertaken ecological surveys to understand the biodiversity of the application site and the site for the proposed SANGS. These comprise an Ecological Desk study, Updated Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Building and Tree Assessment; and an Ecological Surveys Report.

The site was found to support habitats capable of being used by protected species of fauna. There are also veteran and mature trees which provide suitable habitat for bats.

The proposed retention of vegetation corridors around the site will permit commuting and foraging bats to use the area, and the SANG would allow areas for bats to forage. The Report advises that the SANG should remain a dark area, and that the proposed lighting for the development will be limited to minimise impact on bats and general light pollution. Navitus Bay Off-Shore Windfarm Proposals

A 32 metre easement route transecting the woodland in the eastern section, in a broadly north-east direction, is part of the agreed route for an underground high- voltage cable for transmission of power from the Navitus Bay offshore wind farm to the National Grid. The wind farm is proposed to be located west of the Isle of Wight and the cable will end north of West Moors at Mannington, with a new sub-station.

It is understood from the Navitus Bay ES, and following discussions with Natural England who have been consulted on the application itself, that the cable will be trenched after the access road in this development has been laid, and that a temporary compound will be positioned close to the site at the Boundary Lane entrance to the Hurn Forest.

The Development Consent Order was accepted for examination by the Planning Inspectorate on 8 May 2014. The Examination Authority completed its examination of this application on 11 March 2015. The panel will now report to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change on or before 11 June 2015, who is expected to make a decision on or before 11 September 2015. If the decision has been released prior to Planning Committee, Members will be updated on its implications for this application at the Meeting.

However, to date, NE have advised that the implications of the possible Navitus Bay cable route have been incorporated into the SANG design and that the mitigation factors required as part of the Navitus Bay scheme will enhance, rather than detract from, the SANG management within Hurn Forest.

Highways, Parking Provision and Access

The site is bounded by the A31, Ringwood Road to the northwest and by Boundary Lane to the northeast. A narrow access road runs to the west of the site leading to the nearby caravan park development, which also serves the existing hospital and ambulance facilities adjacent to the application site.

A single vehicular access point into the development is proposed via a new road junction on Boundary Lane. The junction is located a minimum of 90m from the A31 roundabout in order to provide the necessary visibility splays for vehicles entering and exiting the site. The applicant’s transport consultant have paid attention to the design of the proposed site access/Boundary Lane priority Junction, the entrance road into the site and the A31Ringwood Road/Boundary Lane roundabout junction following the comments of this committee to the Development Brief which was considered in July 2014. Further details of the junction are contained within the Transport Assessment.

Current existing access into St Leonards Hospital is via a left in / left out slip road from the A31, Ringwood Road, which will be retained as the hospital is not part of this application. Vehicle access to the proposed care home will also be via this access. There will be no vehicular access to the proposed residential development from this access road.

The development site includes a hierarchy of routes for vehicles that are based on national estate road guidance. Roads will be designed to reduce vehicle speeds (typically 20mph) with shared surface routes having an even lower design speed. Design features to reduce vehicle speeds include: changes to surface materials, raised areas, positioning of on-street parking and landscape features.

The Local Transport Plan identifies the following, “many people are discouraged from walking and cycling because of the dangers (both real and perceived), of pollution and intimidation caused by passing traffic, and because of breaks in the continuity of networks”. The St Leonards development gives priority to pedestrian and cycle movement to create an environment that encourages people to walk and cycle regularly out of choice.

Route ways through the site are overlooked by buildings where possible to provide natural surveillance. Shared pedestrian /cycle routes are wide enough to safely accommodate both user types.

Whilst the site is not physically connected in built form and smaller road networks to the nearby centres of Ferndown and West Moors it is within 500m to the edges of these centres and within 1000m of West Moors middle school and the Sainsbury's’ on the A31 into Ferndown. Whilst it would not be not anticipated that the majority of new residents would use the Sainsbury’s on foot, the site is served by the 38 bus running between Ferndown and Ringwood accessed from adjacent to the site and serviced by the footbridge. This forms a major design driver for the site which has used this pedestrian connection to the north to form a major pedestrian entrance into and across the site.

Homes front on to this route, it will be well lit and safe and will also help to connect the wider cycle networks from the north across the site to the south into the Hurn forest.

The site layout also facilitates movement within the site to provide a legible street hierarchy facilitating pedestrian movement to the central amenity play space and the cricket pitch and new pavilion, as well as, the routes to the new Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace(SANG), the Nature reserve and the Hurn forest to the south and south –east.

Inclusive access has been considered as an integral part of the design process. The applicants state that their aim is to provide inclusive design and access for all users of all ages, allowing them to move and integrate safely, easily and freely around the site and buildings.

The applicant’s agents have worked in accordance with best practice guidance and developed general principles for providing and achieving inclusive ground level access around the site and level access into all ground floors. These principles have been negotiated in great detail with officers of Dorset County Council to ensure that the scheme as submitted for planning permission will also meet the County’s standards for the adoption of the highways within the site.

Servicing - all roads and access points are designed to ensure that residential units are suitably serviced by Dorset Waste Partnership refuse vehicles as well as emergency vehicles. A vehicle tracking exercise has been undertaken by the transport engineers to ensure compliance.

Parking – A range of parking approaches have been employed across the site. This includes on plot, on-street, garages (some on plot and some with flats above) and some small parking courtyards. Garages are located to ensure that main routes are not dominated by blank frontages.

Dorset County Council does not apply fixed parking standards to residential developments. They require parking levels to be set based on location, number of bedrooms and number of allocated parking spaces associated with the development. DCC officers have raised no objection to the proposal in respect of the parking provision indicated.

In general unallocated parking spaces are used more efficiently and can often accommodate visitors as well as residents. In contrast allocated spaces are often more valuable to buyers; however a greater number of spaces are required overall because spaces are not shared. A combination of allocated and unallocated spaces are used based on the methodology set out in Residential Car Parking Provision, Local Guidance for Dorset.

The application is considered to meet the requirements of Policy KS11 of the Local Plan, subject to the provision of a highway contribution to off-set the impacts of the development on the local highway network via a Section 106 obligation, conditions to require details of the new access to be agreed by the Council, which will be the subject to a Separate Section 278 agreement to be entered into with Dorset County Council and subsequently constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to work starting on the site for the dwellings, a Travel Plan, and an acceptable construction traffic management plan forming the new access onto Ringwood Road and internal access road and during construction generally.

Surface water drainage and flooding

The development would have implications for surface water runoff from the site, and is likely to increase it with a large area of the existing pasture replaced by buildings and hard surfaces.

The applicant recognises this issue and has submitted a preliminary drainage strategy prepared by Such Salinger Peters, which has been examined by the Environment Agency (EA) and Wessex Water (WW).

WW advise that the local drainage network has limited capacity to serve the proposed development, and there is potential from the predicted foul flows for an increased risk of downstream flooding. It advises that further appraisal is needed to consider network capacity improvements. The developer would be expected to contribute to this appraisal and the resultant improvements. WW advise that soakaways and other Sustainable Urban Drainage arrangements are used to dispose of surface water from the development, and recommends a planning condition to require the submission of a foul and surface water drainage strategy to be submitted and approved before development starts.

The site is currently served by a private sewage treatment works. Wessex Water have advised that this system is inadequate to serve the new development and the current application contains a new pumping station adjacent to the new cricket pavilion, which shares an access with this facility. This new station will provide for the foul drainage needs of the development.

The EA has no objection to the proposal, and advises several conditions to cover surface water management. It also requires a scheme for water efficiency measures for the new dwellings to be submitted and approved before development starts. These would include water efficient systems and fittings within the dwellings and their curtilages.

The EA also advise a condition is imposed to require a Construction Environmental Management Plan to minimise the risks of pollution from the development during its construction, and that the development is built using sustainable design and construction to minimise the impact on climate change, which would also reduce the running costs for future occupants.

Conditions are suggested to address the provision of suitable foul and surface water draining solutions for the proposed development, subject to the final approval of Wessex Water and the Environment Agency. With these in place, it is considered the application accords with Policy ME6 of the CS, the NPPF and government's Planning Practice Guidance.

Conclusion

This application proposes the construction of 210 dwellings on the site together with an outline application for an 80 bed care home, with associated highway improvements, open space, local nature reserve, SANG, drainage facilities and new cricket pavilion . It is on the edge of the existing developed area of Ferndown and benefits from a significant green edge in the form of mature trees and vegetation which will soften the dwellings in the wider landscape.

40% of the proposed dwellings will be affordable, which will secure a valuable contribution to the stock of affordable housing in the district, whilst helping to meet one of the Council's key planning aims. This figure is in accordance with Local Plan Policy LN3. The open market housing will provide a mix of house types which will add to the choice of housing within the area.

The site is well-related to existing transport links and will provide easy access to Ferndown via links to existing pedestrian and cycle routes. Future residents will have ready access to the proposed SANGS.

There is also play spaces to be provided. These provisions will aid the health and well-being of future residents. The development makes good use of the site whilst providing a density that respects the size of the site. No adverse impacts are foreseen for the occupants of these properties.

Although the new access will necessitate the removal of a number of trees, this impact is not considered significant in the context of the benefits the application will bring.

The indicative layout and design principles to be employed should ensure the development respects its context and forms an attractive neighbourhood which people will be happy to inhabit. The principle of the number of dwellings proposed is acceptable and the application is recommended for approval by officers.

The scheme fully complies with the provisions of Policy VTSW7 and the previously approved Development Brief approved in July 2014 and is accompanied by a comprehensive set of plans which successfully illustrate the scheme and demonstrate a suitable residential development which reflects this previously developed site within the Green Belt. The standard of housing meets an acceptable quality of design and has a well developed layout focused on a central area of open space. The scheme also secures substantial biodiversity gains and a suitable alternative natural green space/amenity area to serve the new residential accommodation to the south of the site.

Recommendation:

GRANT SUBJECT TO A SECTION 106 AGREEMENT TO INCLUDE:

 Provision of 40% affordable housing  Nature reserve secured in perpetuity with maintenance and management to be undertaken in line with the Nature Reserve Management Plan  Transport Contribution Payment  SAMM payment  Delivery of the SANG and its maintenance in perpetuity  Commitment to separate legal agreement between Spectrum Housing Ltd and the Forestry Commission in relation to the management of the SANG

AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development hereby permitted, for the residential development and associated works, shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Details of the access, appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale for the 80 bed care home hereinafter called the Reserved Matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. The development hereby permitted for the proposed care home shall be begun before 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 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure)(England) Order 2010. . 2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 121023 L(0)100A Site Location Plan 121023 L(0)101 Site Survey 121023 L(0)105F Proposed Site Plan 121023 L(0)106E Proposed House Types Plan 121023 L(0)107E Proposed Parking Plan 121023 L(0)110E Block Plan West 121023 L(0)111F Block Plan North 121023 L(0)112E Block Plan East 121023 L(0)200D Landscape Masterplan 121023 L(0)2012D Central Area Detailed Plan 121023 L(0)202D Cricket Pavilion Area – Detailed Plan 121023 L(0)203B A31 Boundary Detailed Plan 121023 L(0)204D Boundary Treatment Plan 121023 L(0)206C Planting Strategy Plan 121023 L(0)207C Tree Removal and Retention Plan 121023 L(0)208 Tree in Soft Detail 121023 L(0)209 Typical Swale Detail 121023 L(0)210A Typical Boundary Details Timber Fencing 121023 L(0)211A Site Boundary Sections 121023 L(0)219B Typical Street Elevations and Plans 121023 L(0)301D Street Elevations – Sheet 1 121023 L(0)302D Street Elevations – Sheet 2 121023 L(0)303C Street Elevations – Sheet 3 Proposed Materials 121023 L(0)571 121023 L(0)401 House Type A1 Affordable 2B4P Terrace 121023 L(0)402 House Type A2 Affordable 2B4P Terrace 121023 L(0)411 House Type B1 Affordable 3B5P Terrace 121023 L(0)421 House Type D1 Affordable 3B5P Terrace 121023 L(0)422 House Type D2 Affordable 3B5P Terrace 121023 L(0)423 House Type D3 Affordable 3B5P Terrace 121023 L(0)431 House Type E1 Affordable 4B6P Semi Detached 121023 L(0)441 House Type F1 Open Market 2B4P Terrace 121023 L(0)442 House Type F2 Open Market 2B4P Terrace 121023 L(0)451 House Type G1 Open Market 3B5P Stepped Terrace 121023 L(0)452 House Type G2 Open Market 3B5P Stepped Terrace 121023 L(0)453 House Type G3 Open Market 3B5P Detached 121023 L(0)454 House Type G4 Open Market 3B5P Detached 121023 L(0)461 House Type H1 Open Market 3B5P Terrace/ Semi Detached 121023 L(0)462 House Type H2 Open Market 3B5P Terrace/ Semi Detached 121023 L(0)463 House Type H3 Open Market 3B5P Terrace/ Semi Detached 121023 L(0)471 House Type I1 Open Market 4B6P Detached 121023 L(0)472 House Type I2 Open Market 4B6P Detached 121023 L(0)481House Type J1 Open Market 4B6P Detached 121023 L(0)482House Type J2 Open Market 4B6P Detached 121023 L(0)491 House Type K1 Open market 4B8P Detached 121023 L(0)501 House Type L1 Open Market 4B6P Detached 121023 L(0)502 House Type L2 Open Market 4B6P Detached 121023 L(0)511 House Type M1 Open Market 3B5P Terrace 121023 L(0)512 House Type M2 Open Market 3B5P Terrace 121023 L(0)513 House Type M3 Open Market 3B5P Terrace 121023 L(0)514 House Type M4 Open Market 3B5P Terrace 121023 L(0)521B Flat Type A Affordable 1B2P Flat Plans and Section 121023 L(0)522 B Flat Type A Affordable 1B2P Flat Elevations 121023 L(0)531B Flat Type B Affordable 2B3P Mobility Units Plans and Sections 121023 L(0)532B Flat Type B Affordable 2B3P Mobility Units Flat Elevations 121023 L(0)541Flat Type C Open Market 2B3P FOG 121023 L(0)551Flat Type D Open Market 2B3P FOG + Study 121023 L(0)561C Cricket Pavilion Plan 121023 L(0)562B Proposed Bat House Sheet 1 121023 L(0)563 Single and Double Garage Types Design & Access Statement Rev A Environmental Statement Volumes 1 and 2 0202-05.RPT M13 Planning Statement REV1 0202-06.RPT M13 Care Needs Assessment REV1 0202-07.RPT M13 Housing Statement REV1 A080884 Street Lighting Design Report A080844 Flood Risk Assessment Traffic and Transport Assessment A080844 Noise Assessment SANG Strategy for St Leonards Hospital Utilities Assessment Report Revision 0 Energy Statement 2966-TPP Tree Protection Plan 2966-IMP/JC/imp/09/14 Tree Survey and Impact Assessment Statement of community Involvement 121023 LEMP Habitat Montage Rev A 121023 Outline Landscape Specification Rev A 121023 L(0)217B Western Square Detailed Plan 121023 L(0)218A Tree Retention Strategy Plan 121023 L(0)219B Typical Street Elevations and Plans 121023 L(0)220B Pedestrian Flow Plan 121023 L(0)304 Street Elevation Extracts – Sheet 1 121023 L(0)523A Flat Type A1 Ground Floor Mobility 1B2P Plan and Section 121023 L(0)524A Flat Type A1 Ground Floor Mobility 1B2P Elevations 121023 L(0)564 Proposed Bat House - Sheet 2 121023 L(0)565B Cricket Pavilion Plan 121023 L(0)572 House Type A Sectional Detail 121023 L(0)573 House Type J Sectional Detail 121023 L(0)574 House Type L Sectional Detail 121023 L(0)575 Flat Type A Sectional Detail 121023 L(0)591A Care Home Illustrative Plan 121023 L(0)592 Care Home Indicative Section and Elevation A080844_1110 Proposed Highway Adoption Plan WYG drawing A080844 _A_017 Rev A Junction Plan Visibility Splay Plans Autotrack Analysis Phasing Plan dated 21st August 2015 Access Plan for Arboricultural Contractors dated 21st August 2015

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

3 Prior to commencement of works on site, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, samples of all bricks, roofing materials and finishes to be employed on the external faces of the dwellings hereby permitted, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. All works shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the details as approved.

Reason: To be satisfied about the details of the external appearance of the buildings.

4 Prior to commencement of works on site, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, samples of all materials to be used for hard landscaping of front gardens, private driveways, shared surfaces footpaths or road surfaces shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All surfaces shall be installed as approved prior to the occupation of the dwelling or group of dwellings to which they are associated.

Reason: To ensure a good visual appearance to the overall development.

5. Before any equipment, materials or machinery are brought onto the site for the purposes of development, a pre-commencement site meeting between the Tree Officer, Arboricultural Consultant and Site Manager shall take place to confirm the protection of the Victory Oak tree on the site in accordance with the Arboricultural Impact Appraisal and Method Statement prepared ref: 2966-IMP/JC/imp/09/14, dated 15/09/2014. The tree protection shall be positioned as shown on the Tree Protection Plan, 2966- TPP before any equipment, materials or machinery are brought onto the site for the purposes of the development. The tree protection shall be retained until the development is completed and nothing shall be placed within the fencing, nor shall any ground levels be altered or excavations made without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority. This condition shall not be discharged until an arboricultural supervision statement, the contents of which are to be discussed and agreed at the pre-commencement meeting, is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority on completion of development.

Reason: To ensure the effective landscaping of the site.

6. No development, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, 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 (eg. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc.) proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (eg. drainage power,etc.); retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant.]

Reason: To ensure the effective landscaping of the site.

7. A landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, other than small, privately owned, domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority prior to the occupation of the development or any phase of the development, whichever is the sooner, for its permitted use. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved. Prior to the occupation of the first dwelling on the site hereby approved, the applicants shall submit to the local planning authority, for approval in writing, a schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of 5 years. The schedule shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule.

Reason: To ensure the effective landscaping of the site.

8. No development, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, shall commence until a surface water management scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed. The scheme shall also show ownership of the scheme and how it will be maintained and managed after completion.

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

9. Each phase of the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or utilised until the access, geometric highway layout, turning and parking areas shown on approved plans have been constructed in that phase, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, these shall be maintained, kept free from obstruction and available for the purposes specified.

Reason: In the interests of road safety

10. The development, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, hereby permitted shall not commence until a Construction Traffic Management Plan and programme of works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall include construction vehicle details (number, size, type and frequency of movement), vehicular routes, delivery hours and contractors’ arrangements (compound, storage, parking, turning, surfacing, drainage and wheel wash facilities).

The plan shall also include:

Inspection of the highways serving the site jointly between the developer (or his contractor) and Dorset Highways prior to work commencing and at regular, agreed intervals during the construction phase so that any damage to the edges of the carriageway and verges can be identified and suitable remedial works, to be paid for by the developer, agreed. A scheme of signing of the heavy vehicle route to the site agreed with advice/warning signs at appropriate points.

The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved Construction Traffic Management Plan.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

11. The development, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, shall not be commenced until a foul water drainage strategy is submitted and approved in writing by the local Planning Authority in consultation with Wessex Water acting as the sewerage undertaker A drainage scheme shall include appropriate arrangements for the agreed points of connection and the capacity improvements required to serve the proposed development phasing

The drainage scheme shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and to a timetable agreed with the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that proper provision is made for sewerage of the site and that the development does not increase the risk of sewer flooding to downstream property.

12. Before planning permission is implemented, other than in respect of the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Plan and demolition works, a scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority to deal with potential contamination of the site. Such scheme shall include the following actions and reports, which must be carried out by appropriately qualified consultant(s):

(c) Before any works commence on site, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, should (in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority) investigation works be required, consultants appointed to carry out intrusive site investigation work must submit their sampling strategy to the Local Planning Authority for approval.

(d) A Site Investigation Report (based on the information contained in the site history report), will be required where the appointed consultant and/or the Local Planning Authority anticipate that contamination may be present in, on or near the proposed development area. The site investigation report must characterise and identify the extent of contamination, identify hazard sources, pathways and receptors and develop a conceptual model of the site for purposes of risk assessment. (e) Where contamination is found which (in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority) requires remediation, a detailed Remediation Statement, including effective measures to avoid risk to future and neighbouring occupiers, the water environment and any other sensitive receptors when the site is developed, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Any remediation scheme(s) or part(s) thereof recommended in the remediation statement, shall require approval to be obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority.

(f) Development shall only take place in accordance with the approved Remediation Statement.

Reason: To protect controlled waters, ecological receptors, human health and property.

13. Prior to demolition or construction works which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, commencing in each phase of the development information demonstrating that an appropriate asbestos survey has been completed, management procedures are in place, asbestos has been removed from the fabric of buildings and verification of asbestos removal and appropriate disposal will be submitted for the local authority’s approval.

Reason: To ensure the safe removal of asbestos

14. Demolition and construction shall be limited to the following times only. Any works done outside these times should not generate a noise audible beyond the boundary of the site.) Monday – Friday 07:00 – 19:00 Saturday 07:00 – 13:00 Not Sundays or Bank Holidays

Reason: In the interests of residential amenities. 15. No burning shall be permitted on site during demolition and construction, other than where required in the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and LEMP Implementation Schedule.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenities.

16. To protect the amenity of residents occupying the new dwellings the noise mitigation measures as set out in Chapter 6 of WYG noise assessment (A 080844) to include glazing and ventilation strategy must be implemented as set out in 6.1 so that BS8233 internal noise levels (from traffic noise) are met across the development for day and night-time noise.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenities.

17. Prior to commencement of works on site, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, full details of the working methods to be employed for activities within the Root Protection Area of retained trees in accordance with the principles of "No-Dig" construction, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority to be approved in writing. Work shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the future health and amenity value of the trees.

18. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the works shown in WYG drawing A080844 _A_017 Rev A are completed and open to traffic, unless any variation in the design of the proposals is otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the safety and free flow of traffic on the Strategic Road Network.

19. The development hereby approved shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved Construction Environment Management Plan dated xxx August 2015 (or any subsequent revised and approved versions).

Reason: In the interests of environmental management.

20. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Landscape Environment Management Plan (LEMP) V1.2 (or any subsequent revised and approved versions), the Bat Technical Note (August 2015) and the LEMP Implementation Schedule (August 2015).

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a manner that protects the environmental sensitivities of the site and its environs.

21. No works shall commence to prepare habitats for translocation unless and until a detailed method statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the LPA in conjunction with Natural England which confirms the methodology, locations, evidence secured, timing, aftercare and monitoring of the works proposed.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a manner that protects the environmental sensitivities of the site and its environs.

22. Prior to the occupation of the first dwelling on the site hereby approved, a Steering Group comprising representatives of the Planning Authority, the Developer, the Forestry Commission, Natural England and the Dorset Wildlife Trust shall be established to oversee the provision of the SANG and the implementation of the LEMP and its accompanying Implementation Schedule.

Reason: To ensure the SANG and all other environmental works set out in the LEMP and its associated documents are delivered in a satisfactory manner in accordance with the provisions of the S106 legal agreement signed between the East Dorset District Council, Homes and Communities Agency and Spectrum Housing Limited dated…

23. Prior to the commencement of development, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP Implementation Schedule, a Lighting Strategy and accompanying Plan, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with that approved Strategy and Plan

Reason: To ensure that the development hereby approved mitigates the impact of light spillage on the surrounding environmentally sensitive areas and protected species on and adjacent to the site.

24. Prior to the occupation of the first dwelling hereby approved, the Suitable Natural Alternative Greenspace (SANG) established in the accompanying S106 Agreement dated xxx shall be complete and available to residents in accordance with the SANG Implementation Schedule date August 2015.

Reason: To ensure the impact of the residential development on the European protected Heathlands is suitably mitigated.

25. Prior to the commencement of the development, which shall be considered to exclude the necessary ecological mitigation works set out in the LEMP and the LEMP implementation schedule, full details of the play areas together with the children’s play equipment shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include a means of monitoring and maintaining the play areas and shall be fully completed in accordance with the agreed details prior to the occupation of the first dwellings on the site.

Reason: To secure the safe delivery of the necessary play equipment. 26. Prior to the clearance of the open spaces for receptor sites and heathland restoration, in accordance with the Landscape Ecology Management plan and the Tree removal and retention plan, the trees and groups of trees that are to be retained shall be identified and marked for retention to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority’s Tree and Landscape Officer. The trees and groups of trees to be retained shall be protected and the protection shall be retained until all the site clearance has been completed.

Reason: To ensure the effective landscaping of the site.

Informatives:

1. The applicant is advised that, notwithstanding this consent, if it is intended that the highway layout be offered for public adoption under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980, the applicant should contact Dorset County Council’s Developer-Led Infrastructure team. They can be reached by telephone at 01305 225401, by email at [email protected], or in writing at Developer-Led Infrastructure, Dorset County Council, County Hall, Dorchester, DT1 1XJ.

2. The applicant should be advised that the Advance Payments Code under Sections 219-225 of the Highways Act 1980 may apply in this instance. The Code secures payment towards the future making-up of a private street prior to the commencement of any building works associated with residential, commercial and industrial development. The intention of the Code is to reduce the liability of potential road charges on any future purchasers which may arise if the private street is not made-up to a suitable standard and adopted as publicly maintained highway. Further information is available from Dorset County Council’s Developer-Led Infrastructure team. They can be reached by telephone at 01305 225401, by email at [email protected], or in writing at Developer-Led Infrastructure, Dorset County Council, County Hall, Dorchester, DT1 1XJ.

3. To fight fires effectively the Fire and Rescue Service needs to be able to manoeuvre its equipment and appliances to suitable positions adjacent to any premises. Therefore, the applicant is advised that they should consult with Building Control and Dorset Fire and Rescue Service to ensure that Fire Safety - Approved Document B of The Building Regulations 2000 can be fully complied with. Highways England (previously Highways Agency) provided a formal consultation response in respect of the planning application in January 2015. At that time it was considered that the development proposal would have an impact on the A31 which required mitigation. These mitigation works were agreed and a condition was directed to ensure these works were in place prior to the occupation of the development.

4. To fight fires effectively the Fire and Rescue Service needs to be able to manoeuvre its equipment and appliances to within a specified distance of any premises. The applicant should be advised to consult with Building Control and Dorset Fire and Rescue Service to ensure that Fire Safety - Approved Document B of The Building Regulations 2000 - can be fully complied with as this may be an issue. 5. Consultation is recommended with those providing waste removal as there may be issues relating to the access constraints imposed by the trees and the parking in the central "square" of the site.

6. Sustainable design and construction should be implemented across the proposed development. This is important in limiting the effects of and adapting to climate change. Running costs for occupants can also be significantly reduced.

7. Water efficiency measures should be incorporated into this scheme. This conserves water and allows cost savings for future occupants. We therefore recommend the following informative.

The development should include water efficient systems and fittings. These should include dual-flush toilets, water butts, water-saving taps, showers and baths, and appliances with the highest water efficiency rating (as a minimum). Greywater recycling and rainwater harvesting should be considered. Applicants are advised to refer to the following for further guidance http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/beinggreen/118941.aspx http:/www.savewatersavemoney.co.uk/

8. Safeguards should be implemented during the construction phase to minimise the risks of pollution and detrimental effects to the water interests in and around the site. Such safeguards should cover the use of plant and machinery, oils/chemicals and materials; the use and routing of heavy plant and vehicles; the location and form of work and storage areas and compounds and the control and removal of spoil and wastes. We recommend the applicant refer to our Pollution Prevention Guidelines, which can be found at: http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/topics/pollution/39083.aspx.

9. Should this proposal be granted planning permission, then in accordance with the waste hierarchy, the Local Planning Authority wish the applicant to consider reduction, reuse and recovery of waste in preference to off-site incineration and disposal to landfill during site construction.

10.If any controlled waste is to be removed off site, then the site operator must ensure a registered waste carrier is used to convey the waste material off site to a suitably authorised facility. If the applicant require more specific guidance it is available on the Environment Agency website www.environment- agency.gov.uk/subjects/waste/.

11.In England, it is a legal requirement to have a site waste management plan (SWMP) for all new construction projects worth more than £300,000.The level of detail that your SWMP should contain depends on the estimated build cost, excluding VAT. You must still comply with the duty of care for waste. Because you will need to record all waste movements in one document, having a SWMP will help you to ensure you comply with the duty of care. Further information can be found at http://www.netregs.co.uk 12.This grant of permission is to be read in conjunction with the S106 Agreement dated xxx entered into between East Dorset District Council, Homes and Communities Agency and Spectrum Housing Group Ltd.

13.The applicant will be expected to have secured the agreement of Natural England and the Dorset Wildlife Trust for the method statement referred to in Condition 21 above relating to the translocation of habitat. The applicant may commence the preparation of the identified receptor sites following the grant of planning permission without further consultation with the above bodies.

14.The applicant is required to submit details of the new access which will be the subject to a Separate Section 278 agreement to be entered into with Dorset County Council and subsequently constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to work starting on the site for the dwellings.

Item Number 2 Ref: 3/15/0525/FUL

Proposal: Variation of Condition 12 of Application 3/12/0738/OUT to allow the installation of a cabinet within each care unit containing equipment for the heating and consumption of prepared food and preparation of hot drinks and washing of crockery and utensils and a refrigerator and larder. Site Land At The Warren, Badgers Walk, Ferndown, for Stanborough Address: Developments Ltd Site Notice expired: 3 July 2015 Nbr-Nfn expired: 24 June 2015

Parish Comments: OBJECT (Unanimous) Members considered that the food preparation and storage units proposed would be inappropriate for and unsafe for unsupervised access by residents who as specified in Schedule 1 of the associated Planning Obligations "are in need of nursing care by reason of frailty, or are suffering from dementia or other mental illness, or have a physical disablement which severely restricts mobility". If approved, the facilities would become appropriate for able-bodied residents who would be capable of recreating on the nearby Slop Bog SSSI in contravention of the original reason for condition 12. Members believed that there was no reason to remove this important safeguard which should be retained to ensure protection of the neighbouring internationally designated heathland.

OBJECT: Further to its previous objection to the removal of Condition 12, the Town Council also objects to the proposed amendment to Condition 12. It was noted that the drawing euphemistically entitled "Care facility general arrangements" included a microwave oven, a sink, a refrigerator and food storage space within each apartment. The proposal clearly comprised kitchen facilities in direct contravention to the provisions of the unilateral undertaking associated with the original proposal which states: "No Kitchens shall be introduced within any of the care apartments the subject of this application at anytime". In addition Members considered that the inclusion of a microwave oven within each apartment would constitute a substantial safety hazard given that the occupants will all be "in need of nursing care by reason of frailty, or are suffering from dementia or other mental illness, or have a physical disablement which severely restricts mobility". Members were aware of several dangerous incidents involving microwave ovens and people with such conditions, including one which had recently necessitated the evacuation of a local care home. They were not convinced that the proposed requirement to keep the cabinets locked when members of staff were not present would always be observed. They concluded that Condition 12 should remain unchanged to provide an essential safeguard to residents.

Consultee Responses: Natural England Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development, Habitats Regulations 2010, as amended.

Natural England advises that the proposed revised condition is acceptable to Natural England and allows me to advise your authority that it may reasonably conclude that the risk to European and internationally protected heathland sites is not increased to a level where there would be a likely significant effect under the Habitats Regulations.

Natural England does not object to the proposed amendment as drafted.

Officers Report:

This application comes before Committee at the request of Councillor Cathy Lugg. Two letters of objection have been received from 11 and 16 Badgers Walk Introduction This Application seeks to vary Condition 12 of Application 12/0738 /OUT, which granted permission for the construction of 51 care apartments for the elderly in five two storey blocks at The Warren, Ferndown, the reserved matters of which were approved on 27.6.2014 under reference13/1181/REM. The Variation of Condition 12 of Application 3/12/0738/OUT is to allow the installation of a cabinet in each care unit containing equipment for the heating and consumption of prepared food and preparation of hot drinks and washing of crockery and utensils and a refrigerator and larder.

Condition 12 currently states:

'Both in the first instance and subsequently, no cooking or food preparation facilities shall be installed in the individual care apartments permitted by this permission.

Reason: To prevent the occupation of the apartments by persons not rendered incapable by age, frailty or illness, and therefore capable of recreating on the nearby Slop Bog SSSSI, a Dorset Heathland with international designations.'

Site Description

The application site forms part of Area D of a site known as The Warren and accessed from Badgers Walk off Wimborne Road East in Ferndown with its western end abutting properties in Martins Drive. The area is grassed, uneven and contains some mature trees and some badger setts. The application site is within 400 metres of Slop Bog Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), a Dorset Heathland with international designations. This SSSI is also part of the designated Dorset Heathlands SPA (Special Protection Area) and a Ramsar site, and is also part of the Dorset Heaths SAC (Special Area of Conservation)

Planning History

The overall site of The Warren consists of 5 areas of development A to E. Areas A, B, C and E have all commenced construction for two storey houses. Area D in the centre of the site has two permissions for C2 Care Home uses, and both sites have also commenced development. A previous outline application (3/11/0186) for 36 residential care apartments for the elderly was registered on 6.4 2011. The submitted drawings showed a living/dining area with one wall devoted to kitchen equipment including a fixed sink and drainer and a four ring hob. Despite negotiations both this Council and Natural England considered that the Applicant had not demonstrated that sufficient measures were in place to prevent harm to the nearby Slop Bog. Subsequently the Applicant lodged an appeal on the grounds of non-determination.

The application was reported to the Planning Committee to ascertain what the recommendation of Members would have been, had the application not been appealed on the grounds of non-determination. The Planning Committee’s recommendation stated:

'The proposal is for a development of 38 residential care apartments within 400m of the Slop Bog Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). This SSSI is also part of the designated Dorset Heathlands SPA (Special Protection Area) and Ramsar site, and is also part of the Dorset Heaths SAC (Special Area of Conservation). The proximity of these European sites (SPA and SAC) means that determination of the application should be undertaken with regard to the requirements of the Habitat Regulations 1994, in particular Regulations 48 and 49.

If the Council had been minded to grant permission in all other respects it would have to carry out an appropriate assessment in accordance with the advice and procedure set out broadly in Circular 06/2005. The applicant has failed to demonstrate in accordance with the Habitat Regulations that the proposals will cause no harm to the SPA and SAC heathland due to the occupants egressing onto Slop Bog S.S.S.I. It is clear, on the basis of advice from Natural England that, the proposed development would in combination with other plans and projects within close proximity to heathland, be likely to have an adverse effect on the heathland special features including those which are SPA and SAC features. Having regard to the Waddenzee judgement (ECJ case C-127/02) the Council is not in a position to be convinced that there is no reasonable scientific doubt to the contrary. For these reasons, and without needing to conclude the appropriate assessment, the proposal is considered contrary to the Environment policies A, B, C and D of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Structure Plan as well as the recommendations of the Bern Convention Standing Committee on urban development adjacent to the Dorset Heathlands and also Policies NCON1 and NCON4 of the East Dorset Local Plan.'

In dismissing the appeal the Inspector opined that unlike the nearby care home:

'…the appeal site would provide 38 two-bedroom self-contained flats, each flat having a small kitchen with sink and cooking hob in the living/dining area. There would also be a shared bathroom serving both bedrooms . . . Four of the five blocks would have no communal facilities apart from a few seats in entrance lobbies, while the fifth block (block C) would have a large kitchen and a dining room seating about 44 people. . . There are no facilities for care staff . . . so all support would be delivered remotely.'

The decision goes on: '. . . . The design of the flats and their facilities suggests occupation by some people who have an appreciably greater degree of independence than those whose care needs could only be met in a care home environment. The provision of meals is a good example. It is said that the kitchens in the flats are intended mainly for use by care staff, but it is acknowledged that light snacks could be prepared by some residents; in practical terms there is little difference between preparing light snacks and heating ready-prepared meals that can be delivered by supermarkets and specialist suppliers. If, however, residents preferred to use the communal dining room, all those living in block C (the one with the communal dining area) - for example, those living in blocks A and E would have to travel more than 100m each way for their meals.'

He also considered that the list of services provided were at the lower end of personal care and could be appreciably less than that required by occupants of the care home particularly for the less needy of a couple. He considered there was a distinct possibility that some residents who satisfied the criteria would nevertheless be able to follow a lifestyle which had a fair degree of self-containment. He also referred to the two types of Class C2 accommodation identified by Natural England (NE) likely to be acceptable within 400m of protected heaths. Firstly, schemes for the frail elderly where there is an element of close care provided on site 24 hours a day, the level being above that in warden accommodation and schemes for the disabled (such as dementia sufferers) where due to the nature of the disability there is unlikely to be any impact upon heathland. He noted the Section106 Agreement for the application failed to refer to the frail elderly (his italics) as did the agreement for the care home adjacent.

He also noted the reference to 'personal care' rather than 'nursing care' which indicated the occupants at the apartments would require an appreciably lower level of care. He considered the fact that Natural England had objected to this scheme but not the earlier care home an important consideration and in itself an indication that the two schemes were not comparable.

Subsequently, Application reference 3/12/0738/OUT was received for 51 care apartments in five blocks for the 'frail elderly'. Each unit comprised a bedroom, living room and bathroom with each block having a ground floor communal sitting /dining area, a nurses station, therapy room and staff kitchen.

The accompanying Section 106 Agreement stated the accommodation shall only be occupied by frail elderly persons who have undergone a standard medical assessment by a health care professional to verify they are in need of nursing care by way of frailty, or suffering from dementia or other mental illness or have a physical disability that severely restricts movement and are at least 65 years of age. It also states that no kitchens shall be introduced within any of the care apartments the subject of this application at any time. There is also a ban on the keeping of any pet or animal whatsoever.

In response to the criticism regarding monitoring of future occupants levelled at the refused application, the future owners were required by the legal agreement to maintain a register of all residents which would be available for inspection by the Council provided at least 24 hours’ notice was given. The register would confirm the age of each resident and the level of care received together with a description of the physical and/or mental condition of the resident, and be endorsed by a health care professional.

After discussions and with the agreement of Natural England the application was permitted on 7.2.2013 under Reference 3/12/0738/OUT. The most significant physical change was the requirement by Natural England under Condition 10 to erect a 2m chain link fence preventing pedestrian access to Martin's Drive and the Heathland beyond but with a gate secured by an emergency services padlock. The condition stated the fence and gate shall be maintained in a condition that will prevent pedestrian access to Martin's Drive 'thereafter'. This condition will be re- imposed on this variation of condition application.

Planning Policy As this application seeks variation of a condition that was imposed solely in relation to the Protection of the Dorset Heathlands, the only relevant planning policy in relation to this application is ME2 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan Part 1 - Core Strategy. Planning Considerations

The only issue for consideration in this application is whether or not the variation of wording for Condition 12 to allow limited kitchen facilities in each care apartment has implications for the capacity of residents or carers to physically access the nearby heathland for recreation, whereby harm would be caused to the Dorset Heathland and SSSI of Slop Bog. The Section 106 Agreement would still apply to the ensure the residents are defined to be frail elderly and certified to be in need of nursing care, have dementia or a physical disability restricting mobility.

This Council relies upon the guidance of Natural England through the consultation process regarding applications that may impact upon heathland due to their expertise in habitat conservation. Their input was essential in shaping a permission that was acceptable in terms of any potential harm to Slop Bog SSSI.

With the original application Natural England considered there were sufficient safeguards in the form of the development, the appended conditions and the associated legal agreement so that any concerns regarding potential harm to Slop Bog were satisfied. The issue with this application is therefore firstly, whether harm would be caused to the natural interest by the removal of Condition 12 and, secondly, whether any identified harm could be prevented by the imposition of a further or varied condition.

It was considered that the original condition was reasonable and justified in the light of the Inspectors comments in dismissing the earlier appeal. The thrust of the conditions and the clauses in the legal agreement are to prevent occupation by persons who would be capable of perambulating on the nearby heathland. Unlike the earlier care home application the outline permission reference 3/12/0738/OUT also contained the condition that a 2m fence and gate to prevent even able bodied occupants such as care staff accessing the heath during free time.

Following the permission reference 3/12/0738/OUT the applicant enquired of Officers whether there could scope to vary the condition that would improve the quality of life of future occupants and the choices available to them without encouraging occupation by the more physically able. It was explained that it was likely that sometimes residents would not wish to join in with all the meals being prepared in the communal kitchen by staff due to religion or personal choice. The applicant considered that the insertion of a cabinet would allow an alternative meal to be stored and heated and allow good hygiene seemed reasonable and would not be such a degree of change from the existing arrangements that it would constitute the formation of a kitchen as embargoed by Para. 3 of the Schedule appended to the Legal Agreement. The applicant also explained that the concept of the lockable kitchen cabinet addressed the comments of the Inspector in dismissing the earlier application in the context of drawings that showed a permanent kitchenette with a hob and sink and drainer in each unit.

Officers considered the differences between the type of kitchen facilities now proposed including consideration of whether occupation of a unit of this type would be attractive with its implication of 'end of life' care to anyone who did not require this degree of care. Officers concluded that limiting any heating facility to a microwave device would limit the type of meal that could be prepared and when coupled with the lack of any food preparation area would make the kitchen provision unattractive to an occupier not in need of nursing care. Therefore a suggested replacement condition was sent to Natural England for their comment. This was considered acceptable by Natural England. The condition states:

'Only the cabinet as detailed in drawing 400 accompanying this application or one agreed in writing by the LPA shall be installed in each care apartment and this cabinet or cupboard shall not contain either an oven or top hob or any means of heating or cooking food that is not operated on the microwave principle nor shall one be installed anywhere in the units other than as shown on drawings 104E, 105F, 106F, 107F and 108F ( the drawing showing the position of the cabinets in the living areas) unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA , and that the cabinet shall be kept locked when care staff are not present and removed when it becomes redundant.'

Natural England responded on 22.7.2015 saying:

“Natural England advises that the proposed revised condition is acceptable to Natural England and allows me to advise your authority that it may reasonably conclude that the risk to European and internationally protected heathland sites is not increased to a level where there would be a likely significant effect under the Habitats Regulations.

Natural England does not object to the proposed amendment as drafted.”

Natural England’s advice was sent to Ferndown Town Council who continued in their objection and has been followed by the request of the Ward Councillor that the matter be considered at Planning Committee.

Officers consider it would be difficult to sustain a refusal of this application at appeal without the support of Natural England. Natural England’s objection to the earlier scheme was essential in both justifying the reasons for refusal and in the subsequent dismissal at appeal. The response from Natural England states:

'Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.'

Without the support of Natural England any objection on habitat grounds would be difficult for the Council to justify and if appealed it would be highly likely that, an Appeal inspector noting the comment of no objection from Natural England the Secretary of State would consider that permission had been unreasonably withheld by the Council and would grant permission and potentially award costs against the District Council.

The Town Council's objection also refers to the risk of injury from scalds or accidental fires. It is posited that scalds are no more likely from hot drinks and food prepared by care staff in the room than from beverages and hot meals carried up flights of stairs and across landings from a central location. However, these are not material planning considerations, they are Health and Safety issues, which lie outside the remit of this application.

Impact on Neighbouring Properties Two neighbouring properties objected to the scheme concerned with increased traffic in Badgers Walk, too many nursing homes in Ferndown which would still attract visitors to the heathland and also objection to provision of kitchen facilities within individual apartments which would be inconsistent with the frail elderly occupancy requirement.

The traffic in Badgers Walk and the number of Nursing Homes in Ferndown do not form part of the material considerations of this application.

The concern that fully equipped kitchens in each apartment conflicted with the definition of frail elderly to the previous appeal inspector is a material consideration. However, the proposed kitchen cabinets are not considered to constitute fully equipped kitchens as now proposed; and together with the Unilateral Undertaking ensuring the occupants are frail elderly and the cabinets are lockable, will satisfy the concerns of Natural England about physical access to Slop Bog from the occupants of the apartments.

There is therefore not considered to be any harmful impact from the change of kitchen facilities within the apartments upon neighbouring properties

Conclusion

For all of the reasons above the Committee is respectfully requested to approve this application. Any approval of the kitchen cabinets will be subject to the revised Unilateral Undertaking provided for this application, reciting all the previous clauses concerning frail elderly occupants but excluding the former requirement for a transport contribution, which is no longer a valid requirement of the planning permission since 28 November 2014.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than 26 June 2016.

Reason: To ensure the proper planning of the development.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:101H, 104E, 105F, 106F, 107F and 108F, 111A,112A,113A and 114A.

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

3 The roadways and footways and street lighting shall be constructed in accordance with Drawings 1154/P502A and 1154/P503 or as agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority in liaison with the Highway Authority.

Reason: To ensure the proper planning of the development.

4 The proposal for the landscaping of the site, as shown on the submitted plan LANDP002, including the planting of additional trees and shrubs, and the provision of walls and fences, shall be carried out during the planting season October/March inclusive, (in accordance with the appropriate British Standards for ground preparation, staking, etc., in BS4428:1989 (1979)) immediately following commencement of the development. Any plants found damaged, dead or dying in the first five years are to be duly replaced and the whole scheme thereafter retained or as otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: Pursuant to Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and the locality.

5 The building hereby permitted shall not be occupied until works for the disposal of sewage have been provided on the site to serve the development hereby permitted, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA.

Reason: To ensure the proper planning of the development.

6 The building hereby permitted shall not be occupied until surface water drainage works have been implemented in accordance with details that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Before these details are submitted an assessment shall be carried out of the potential for disposing of surface water by means of a sustainable drainage system in accordance with the principles set out in Annex F of PPS25 (or any subsequent version), and the results of the assessment provided to theLPA. Where a sustainable drainage scheme is to be provided, the submitted details shall: i) provide information about the design storm period and intensity, the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged from the site and the measures taken to prevent pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface waters; ii) include a timetable for its implementation; and provide a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by any public authority or statutory undertaker and any other arrangements to secure the operation of the scheme throughout its lifetime.

Reason: To ensure the proper planning of the development.

7 The building hereby permitted shall not be occupied until space has been laid out within the site for refuse storage bins and this shall be retained at all times thereafter for this purpose. Reason: To ensure the proper planning of the development.

8 Measures for water efficiency shall be installed in the development in accordance with the scheme submitted by Bourne Electric Ltd on 10.2.2012.

Reason: To ensure the principle of sustainability is promoted as required by the National Planning Policy Framework.

9 The external facing and roofing materials of the building hereby permitted shall accord with approved Drawings 110,111A,112A,113A and 114A or as agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Samples of materials shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing prior to their use on the buildings hereby permitted.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory.

10 Notwithstanding the details accompanying Landscape Plan LANDP002, any access, either vehicular or pedestrian from the application site to Martins Drive shall be prevented by the construction of a emergency access gate as shown on Drawing 809033/300 in the position shown on Drawing 809033/301. The 2000mm high galvanised chain link fencing shall be extended from the gate until it meets the boundary of Nos. 17 and 19A Martins Drive and terminated in a manner that will prevent the boundary formed by the gate and fencing being circumvented by pedestrians. This fencing and gate shall be installed before the building hereby permitted is occupied and maintained in good order thereafter.

Reason: The site abuts Slop Bog, a Dorset Heathland with international designations. Research by Natural England has demonstrated that recreation on Dorset heathland has a deleterious effect upon its flora and fauna due to trampling and disturbance and that this is worsened by the creation of new households or other forms of residential accommodation nearby. For this reason due to the proximity of the application site it is desirable to prevent staff or visitors recreating on Slop Bog.

11 Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions the first floor window on the south west elevation of Block A as shown on Drwg 110 received on 5.12.2013 shall be glazed with obscure glass and shall either be a fixed light or hung in such a way as to prevent the effect of obscure glazing being negated by reason of overlooking. Furthermore, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any subsequent re-enactment, no further fenestration or door shall be installed in the said elevation above ground floor ceiling joist level without express planning permission.

Reason: To preserve the amenity and privacy of the adjoining properties in Martin's Drive. 12 The building hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of the timing of shift work have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Occupation of the proposed buildings shall thereafter be in accordance with the approved details

Reason: To minimise disturbance to adjacent occupiers.

13 The applicant/management body will provide a biannual written confirmation to the LPA detailing the compliance with the pet covenant, the number of residents and their age.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the occupation restrictions on residential accommodation within 400 metres of heathland with international designations.

14 Only the cabinet as detailed in drawing 400 accompanying this application or one agreed in writing by the LPA shall be installed in each care apartment and this cabinet or cupboard shall not contain either an oven or top hob or any means of heating or cooking food that is not operated on the microwave principle nor shall one be installed anywhere in the units other than as shown on drawings 104E, 105F, 106F, 107F and 108F unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA , and that the cabinet shall be kept locked when care staff are not present and removed when it becomes redundant.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the occupation restrictions on residential accommodation within 400 metres of heathland with international designations.

15 The layout, specification and construction programme for the roads, footways, parking areas and drainage shall be laid out as shown in Drawings 101A, Escher Silverman DRWG 1154-P5002,502A and 503 or as subsequently agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing in conjunction with the Highway Authority.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and to ensure the well-planned and proper construction of the highway.

16 Prior to the occupation of any unit the new estate roads and footways shall be constructed and completed, except for wearing surfaces, in accordance with the details shown on Drawing Number 101 H and/or any subsequently agreed details.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and to ensure that adequate means of access is provided when the unit is occupied.

17 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or utilised until the accesses, turning and parking areas shown on Drawing Number 101H has been constructed. Thereafter, these areas shall be maintained, kept free from obstruction and available for the purposes specified. Reason: In the interests of road safety.

18 The development hereby permitted shall comply with the Construction Traffic Management Plan and programme of works received on 9.12.2013 or as approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Highway Authority. Upon commencement of works details shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority in writing showing construction vehicle details (number, size, type and frequency of movement), vehicular routes, delivery hours and contractors' arrangements (compound, storage, parking, turning, surfacing, drainage and wheel wash facilities).

Upon commencement of works there shall be an inspection of Badgers Walk jointly between the developer (or his contractor) and Dorset Highways prior to work commencing and at regular, agreed intervals during the construction phase so that any damage to the edges of the carriageway and verges can be identified and suitable remedial works, to be paid for by the developer agreed. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved Construction Traffic Management Plan and the submitted details.

Reason: In the interests of road safety.

19 Prior to the occupation of the building hereby permitted the measures in the Travel Plan submitted by I-Transport dated 29.8.2013 or any variation approved by the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Highway Authority shall be secured by legal agreement. Monitoring fees will apply in accordance with Dorset County Council's published guidance Dorset Travel Plans Fees. The legal agreement shall refer to the approved Travel Plan or its approved success and include:

 Targets for sustainable travel arrangements.  Effective measures for the ongoing monitoring of the Travel Plan.  A commitment to delivering the Travel Plan objectives for a period of at least five years from first occupation of the development.  Effective mechanisms to achieve the objectives of the Travel Plan by the occupiers of the development

The development shall be implemented only in accordance with the approved Travel Plan.

Reason: In order to reduce or 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.

20 The building hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a bus shelter has been erected on the northern carriageway of Wimborne Road East in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 21 Prior to the commencement of works measures to protect the badger setts on this site shall be installed in accordance with the recommendations of the badger survey carried out by Julian Brown Consultancy in May 2011. In addition, a badger sett check survey shall be undertaken before start on site to confirm the location of setts already identified and to determine if any new setts have been established since the last survey carried out in May 2011.

Reason: To prevent harm to any protected species on the site, namely badgers.

22 The premises shall be used only as a residential institution for the provision of nursing homes and for no other purpose whatsoever, (including any other purpose in Class C2) of the schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 or any subsequent re-enactment).

Reason: In order that the Council may be satisfied about the details of proposal due to the particular character and location of this proposal.

23 Before any further equipment, materials or machinery are brought onto the site for the purposes of development, a further pre-commencement site meeting between the Tree Officer, Arboricultural Consultant and Site Manager shall take place to confirm the protection of trees on and adjacent to the site in accordance with the updated Tree Survey and Tree Impact Assessment compiled by Treecall Consulting, ref: DS/42912 and dated the 12th September 2012. The protection of the trees shall be carried out in accordance with this report. The position of the tree protection shall be confirmed during the pre-commencement meeting and erected before any equipment, materials or machinery are brought onto the site for the purposes of the development. The tree protection shall be retained until the development is completed and nothing shall be placed within the fencing, nor shall any ground levels be altered or excavations made without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority. This condition shall not be discharged until an arboricultural supervision statement, the contents of which are to be confirmed at the pre-commencement meeting, is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority on completion of development.

Reason: To ensure the retention of protected trees on the site and the visual amenity of the local area.

Informatives: 1 In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF the Council, as Local Planning Authority, takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. The Council works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by offering a pre- application advice service, and as appropriate updating applications/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application and where possible suggesting solutions. In arriving at a decision to APPROVE the application:  The application was acceptable as submitted and no further assistance was required.

2 The narrowing outside the front of the main building was discussed with Dorset County Highways Officers at pre-planning to be a ramped feature. This now appears to be a narrowing without the ramp and as a result would encourage speeding (clear the gap before on coming / waiting traffic). A ramped feature would also provide a level pedestrian crossing point - an advantage for the elderly and disabled (consider the purpose of the development), whereas a dropped crossing point would result in a 1:12 crossfall on the footway at that point (permissible but not ideal). This amended detail should be included as part of the development.

3 The applicant is advised that this approval is to be read in conjunction with a unilateral undertaking dated confirming eligibility for occupation of the care units and the arrangement of the care units.

Policy Considerations and Reasons

In reaching this decision the policies in the Development Plan for the area, which currently comprises the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan, Part 1 - Core Strategy 2014 were taken into account. Saved policies within the East Dorset Local Plan 2002, were also taken into account. These include specifically the following policies: ME2 HE2

Item Number 3 Ref: 3/15/0540/REM

Proposal: Reserved Matters submitted to address Condition 1 (Scale and External Appearance) of Outline Planning Permission 3/06/1330/OUT together with Discharge of Conditions: 2 (Finished Floor Levels); Condition 10 (Phasing); Condition 11 (Car Parking); and Condition 13 ( Noise Impact Assessment) Site Land East Of Cobham Road, Ferndown Industrial Estate, Dorset, for Address: Glenbeigh Developments Ltd. Colin Whelan & Steve Lefort Site Notice expired: 9 August 2015 Advert Expiry Date: 14 August 2015

Parish Comments: NO OBJECTION (3 in favour of no objection: 1 abstention) The Town Council notes that this application concerns a 24 hour/day operation which will generate considerable noise in close proximity to residential properties. It therefore recommends that strong enforceable conditions accompany permission along the lines of paras 4.20 and 4.21 of the associated Environmental Noise Report and that a review of the effectiveness of measures taken should be carried out after twelve months of operation. It further requests that consideration be given before approval to the height of the bund which appears to be too small to reduce noise levels given the site topography and elevation of nearby residential properties

Consultee Responses: County Highways The County Highway Authority considers the Development Liaison Officer submitted proposals satisfy the requirements of Condition 11 and therefore has no objection.

County Rights Of Way The proposed works directly affect Bridleway 9 - Officer Ferndown as recorded on the County Definitive Map and Statement of rights of way. However, I am unaware of any unrecorded paths that may be affected.

It appears from the plans received, that the development directly affects the bridleway and as such I would recommend that a condition of any planning approval stipulates that: 1. If any access road is constructed across the bridleway, that dropped kerbs are installed, along with appropriate signage to inform drivers of motorised vehicles that a public bridleway crosses the road 2. That the bridleway from Wimborne Road West to it's termination be surfaced with appropriate material, to allow improved access from Wimborne Road West 3. That any surfacing is appropriate for the designation of the route, that of a public bridleway for pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, i.e coarse surface if tarmac, so good grip for horses 4. Clearance is undertaken on the length of the bridleway to allow access for legitimate users of the route 5. That good site lines are available where the road crosses the bridleway or the installation of a Pegasus crossing point 6. That during any development, the bridleway surface is kept in a good state of repair on a rolling program whilst works are undertaken. It is not acceptable to damage the surface and leave it in this condition until the development is finished and then repair it.

The bridleway must not be obstructed during any development nor must its width be diminished in any way, either prior to works taking place, during development works or after works have been finalised. It should be noted that no barriers or structures can be place across the bridleway without authorisation from the Highway Authority. Any barriers/structures installed without lawful authority can be removed with possible subsequent legal aid being taken, as deemed appropriate.

It may be that the bridleway will need to be legally closed during any works, on health and safety grounds. If this is the case then a Temporary Path Closure Order must be obtained. This can be applied for through this office but the application must be completed and returned at least thirteen weeks before the intended closure date. It should be noted that there is a fee applicable to this application.

It should be noted that use of this public right of way by vehicular traffic, without lawful authority, is an offence contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1988. Any damage to the surface of the path attributable to the development must be repaired to Dorset County Council's specification, in accordance with Section 59 of the Highways Act 1980.

EDDC Tree Section No objection to reserved matters application

EDDC Public Health - Please can you ask the noise consultants for their Housing And Pollution BS4142 assessment which should have been in appendix D, but the appendix D they have sent is a plan / map showing the location of the noise barrier. However, even without this I am satisfied to say the following.

I have looked at the additional information in relation to the noise report. I recommend a condition to say.

The development must be constructed and operated as specified in the Noise report by Shapes Redmore Acoustic Consultants Project / Report number 1414500 of 15th April 2015. In particular, before first occupation, the mitigation measures including a 3 meter high barrier along the southern boundary of the loading bay, and the acoustic barrier as detailed in appendix D of this report, must be in place. Also the Service yard Management Plan (SYMP) must be fully implemented. The acoustic barriers and SYMP procedures must maintained.

Whilst the report demonstrated mathematically that the development will not cause a significant adverse impact on health and quality of life of the local residents, it should be noted that there will be some impact. It will hopefully be as predicted "Noticeable and not intrusive" but experience has shown this depends upon the perception and sensitivity of the receiver. I am slightly nervous of this proposal will be more intrusive than the mathematical modelling estimates.

Officers Report:

This application comes to Committee as the Officer recommendation is for approval and there have been 6 representations of objection from the public.

The objections have raised issues of noise and light pollution, traffic congestion, inappropriate external materials, overlooking or nearby properties and CCTV.

The Ferndown and Uddens Business Improvement District (BID) has also advised that it is disappointing that so much of this important and valuable site is being developed for a B8 use rather than other uses that provide more opportunities for employment and the development of local supply chains, but the timing of the development is an important and welcome assertion about the state of the local economy and support for Ferndown as a business location. The BID states that the Local Planning Authority will wish to ensure the correct balance is struck involving the need to be conscious of both the amenities of residential properties and the legitimate requirements of the business occupiers on this allocated and permitted site.

The proposal

The application seeks approval for the Reserved Matters relating to Outline Planning Permission 3/06/1330/OUT in respect of the southern part of the site where a B8 use is proposed in the form of a Geopost/DPD parcel distribution business.

The matters reserved following outline approval which are to be considered under this application are scale and external appearance only.

Additionally the applicant has submitted an application for approval of details reserved by condition, as part of this Reserved Matters application. These details relate to the finished floor levels (Condition 2); Phasing (Condition 10); Car Parking (Condition 11); and Noise Impact Assessment (Condition 13) are also submitted for agreement.

For clarity Members are advised that the matters before them relate to the reserved matters of scale and appearance of the southern part of the site only. The conditions that have been incorporated in the application will receive a separate letter of discharge when satisfied, as a delegated procedure, and these do not form part of the Reserved Matters application to the Outline Planning Permission.

Site Description and Operations

The proposed building for the parcel distribution service on the southern part of the site will have a total gross floor area of 3,975 sq metres and is a use that conforms to the approved Development Framework plan for the outline consent. The site will function as a regional warehouse operating 24 hours a day. HGVs will arrive and unload directly into the building using a level loading platform. The parcels are then sorted and loaded into small vans for delivery. The building has large roller doors on its north, south and west sides and no openings for vehicular access on the east.

The applicant’s consultant advises that the small delivery vans will drive into the building from the south elevation where they will be loaded with parcels and then drive through the doors on the northern side of the building. This is a different operation from the HGV deliveries which are unloaded directly into the loading bays on the western side of the building and the loading bay will be screened by a 3m tall acoustic barrier on its southern side and the level of the bay will be 1.2m below that of the main building. This will provide screening of the HGVs whilst they unload.

The movement of the vans has been assessed in the noise report and the main impact is the vehicular activity of the vans moving around the site. The loading of vans is carried out internally and is mainly carried out by hand and therefore is not considered a noisy operation. The doors on the southern elevation are only to allow small delivery vans to enter the building between 0600 – 2100 hours and there will be no HGV activity in this area.

Unloading of the HGVs will not require fork lifts, pallet trucks or scissor lifts, and goods are rolled off the lorry into the building.

Goods are delivered to the site between midnight and 06:00 during which time they will be unloaded as described above. Delivery drivers will arrive from 06:00 then move the vans from the car park into the building to start loading. The vans will operate in waves with the first wave leaving the site at about 06:30 to deliver parcels before returning to the site. All vans will return to the site by approximately 21:00.

There will be no loading/unloading outside the building.

Planning history

The outline permission was for the erection of 40,512m sq of employment (B1, B2 and B8) floor space including access, road layout, drainage and strategic Landscaping. This approved the matters of Layout, Access and Landscaping.

This allowed the development to be carried out in a phased manner (under Condition 1 reserved matters), and reserved matters approval (3/13/0813/REM) has already been granted for Units 38 and 39 which are on Site B near the site's entrance onto Cobham Road. These are shown to be in Phase 3 on the Phasing Plan.

A Non-Material Change to the outline consent was granted earlier this year under planning permission 3/15/0558/NMC to make minor changes to the plot sizes of areas F, G and H, which lie adjacent to the site's south boundary with properties in Wimborne Road East. This change was also to amend the strategic landscaping to accord with the revised plot sizes.

The proposed use will occupy Sites F and G of the approved Development Framework Plan (Drwg No. 2520/PL/02/F). The application site lies next to the south boundary of the outline consent. Residential and commercial use lies beyond. A bund was approved along this boundary under the outline consent. Details of the construction and landscaping of the bund have been submitted as part of the landscaping condition, as a separate application for approval of details reserved by condition. The details the bund will be discharged under delegated powers. The bund would help address impacts of noise, light and the visual impact of the proposed use.

Reserved Matter issues for consideration by Members are the details of the scale and appearance of the new building for site F and G only. All the other matters are covered by conditions of the outline planning permission which will be discharged separately.

Scale and appearance

Policy HE2 of the Core Strategy requires the design of development to be of high quality, recognising local distinctiveness in terms of its layout, site coverage, architectural style, scale, bulk, height materials, landscaping and visual impact.

The reserved matters of the external appearance and scale of the proposed building are therefore assessed against these criteria bearing in mind the location within an established industrial estate and ensuring measures are in place to ensure it complies with Policy HE2.

The proposed building is a very large structure that will be 11.4m tall, 32m wide and 113m long. It is to be sited with its longest sides facing south and north and will be visible to the occupants of the adjacent properties to the south. It will be 48m from the south boundary and between 35m and 40m from the east boundary, which satisfies Condition 9 of the outline consent.

The bund, to partly screen the building from residents to the south, is shown to be a minimum of 1.5m tall which will be planted to give additional height. The bund will provide a satisfactory degree of screening of the building and parking area from the south. The bund will provide greater screening in the east of the site due to existing ground levels being higher here and the plateau level of the application site being lowered by 1m since the outline approval. The cross sections through the site illustrate this, and these have been agreed on the Non-Material Change application.

The planting to be positioned on the bund which will further enhance the screening of the building and reduce the impact of its scale has been agreed with the Council's Tree and Landscape Officer when considering the discharge of conditions from the outline permission.

Metallic silver cladding and grey aluminium cladding is to be used for the walls and roof of the building, which is considered to be appropriate for this new section of the industrial estate. Due to its length the use of a uniform colour will minimise the impact of the external appearance and the bund will screen it to the extent that the backdrop of the building will have a neutral impact. The design which comprises a two storey building with sizeable eaves overhang and low pitched roof is an appropriate design for the site's context. The building will be some 80m from the nearest dwellings in Wimborne Road East, and this distance is sufficient to prevent an adverse impact on the amenities of their occupants, especially given the intervening planted bund.

The external appearance and scale therefore fully complies with the requirements of Policy HE2.

Impact on Neighbouring properties

Neighbouring properties, the BID and the CPRE have objected raising concerns about highway and parking impacts, noise impacts, drainage, rights of way, lighting, CCTV, size of bund, position of the building and oppressive reflective materials used on the building.

The majority of these issues were considered at the outline application stage and relevant conditions imposed to satisfy them. Noise concerns have been addressed by further conditions as these were required as part of the reserved matters submission for this southern part of the site.

The landscaped bund is only to be considered in relation to the external appearance of the building as part of this application, as its construction details form a delegated matter as part of the discharge of the landscape condition.

It is concluded that the external appearance and scale of the building is at a satisfactory distance from neighbouring properties such that it will not have a harmful impact upon neighbours with the grey finish which is only reflective in part, and of a subdued colour such that its appearance will blend into the backdrop.

Discharge of Conditions

Conditions for separate consideration, not under this reserved matters application, are: finished floor levels; phasing; car parking and noise.

Finished floor levels

The proposed building is to have a finished floor level of 23.450m, which accords with the Non-Material Change permission. This will be similar to, or below that of the ground levels to the south which vary between 23.340m and 27.000m. This means the building will be more effectively screened by the bund on the south boundary in the east of the site where the existing ground levels are highest.

Vehicles parked in the parking area will be largely screened by the planted bund with the proposed levels, and the building height will not exceed the 12m permitted by the outline consent. The proposed levels are therefore considered acceptable.

Phasing

Condition 10 of the outline approval states that the estate's development may be undertaken in a phased manner provided that details of the phasing arrangement have first been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This was designed to help the implementation of this development.

The phasing proposed shows the reserved matters site (Sites G and F) and the new access, internal roads and highway improvements to Cobham Road and Nimrod Way to be carried out as Phase 1, with Phase 2 being Sites C, E and H (Site H immediately to the west of the reserved matters site and the others immediately to the north), and phase 3 being Sites A and B which lie to the north of the internal site access road and bordering Cobham Road.

This phasing strategy will accord with the outline permission as the new access and highway improvements are done first, and it is considered acceptable.

Parking

Condition 11 of the outline permission states that car parking is a reserved matter and details of this have been submitted.

Parking for vans (60 spaces) and HGVs (10 spaces) will be adjacent to the landscaped bund on the south boundary, with parking for staff and customers (90 spaces in total) to the north of the building. There would be a turning circle for HGVs adjacent to the west side of the building outside the HGV loading area.

Dorset County Council Highways has advised that the submitted proposals satisfy the requirements of Condition 11 and has no objection.

The proposal is considered to accord with Policy KS12 of the Core Strategy accordingly.

Noise

Condition 13 of the outline permission required buildings on Sites F, G and H to have noise impact assessments submitted as part of the reserved matters, and the application is accompanied by an Environmental Noise Report prepared by Sharps Redmore Acoustic Consultants (project no.1414500 dated 15.4.2015).

The Council's Public Health Officer has looked at this report and the additional information provided by the applicant's agent in response to his enquiries. He notes that whilst the report has demonstrated mathematically that the development will not cause a significant adverse impact on health and quality of life of the local residents, it should be noted that there will be some impact.

He is hopeful the impact will be "Noticeable and not intrusive" as the report states, but experience has shown this depends upon the perception and sensitivity of the receiver, and he has some concern that the proposal will be more intrusive than the mathematical modelling estimates.

However, he has not raised an objection and advises a condition is imposed to require the development to be constructed and operated in accordance with the Environmental Noise Report. He has also specified that before first occupation, the mitigation measures including a 3 meter high barrier along the southern boundary of the loading bay, and the 4m tall acoustic barrier along the site's east boundary as detailed in appendix D of this report, must be in place. The Service Yard Management Plan (SYMP) must be also be fully implemented, and the acoustic barriers and SYMP procedures maintained.

With the loading/unloading taking place solely within the building; the mitigation measures in place that are offered in the noise report; the intervening planted bund and the separation distance between the site and the nearest properties, it is not anticipated that there would be a significant impact on the amenities of the occupants of the nearest properties. The proposal is considered to accord with Saved Policy DES2 of the East Dorset Local Plan and the advice set out in the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance relating to noise.

Given that Condition 13 of the outline permission required buildings on Sites F, G and H to have noise impact assessments submitted as part of the reserved matters, it is considered appropriate for this reserved matters application to impose further noise conditions 2 and 3 to be satisfied that the impact on neighbouring residents will be acceptable with the recommended additional mitigation.

Conclusion

The details of the scale and appearance of the new building, together with the noise impact assessment submitted are considered acceptable and approval is recommended.

Discharge of conditions for of finished floor levels, phasing, car parking and bund details will be issued simultaneously with the reserved matters approval decision notice to satisfy those detailed matters reserved by condition.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: Michael Sparks Associates Drawing No. 2520/PL/100: Site Location Plan dated May 2015 Michael Sparks Associates Drawing No. 2520/PL/101: Site Layout Plan dated May 2015 Michael Sparks Associates Drawing No. 2520/PL/105: Illustrative Elevations dated May 2015 Michael Sparks Associates Drawing No. 2520/PL/106: Phasing Plan dated May 2015 Michael Sparks Associates Drawing No. 2520/PL/102: Floor Plans dated May 2015 Michael Sparks Associates Drawing No. 2520/PL/103: Elevations dated May 2015 Capita Drawing No. CS/074543-CA-0-G00-DSP-SE-001-P03: Drainage Layout and External Levels dated July 2014 Barry Chinn Associates Drawing No. BP11: Phase 1 Landscape Concept Plan dated 6.5.15 Connect Consultants Note 006: Geopost Parking Provision dated 12.05.2015 Connect Consultants Note 007: Geopost Access Arrangements dated 6.05.2015

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

2 The development shall be constructed and operated as specified in the submitted Environmental Noise Report by Sharps Redmore Acoustic Consultants Project Number 1414500 of 15th April 2015. Before the site is first occupied, the mitigation measures which include a 3 metre high barrier along the southern boundary of the loading bay, and a 4m tall acoustic barrier along the site's east boundary as detailed in appendix D of the Environmental Noise Report must be in place, and the Service Yard Management Plan (SYMP) must be fully implemented with the acoustic barriers and SYMP procedures maintained.

Reason: To mitigate against noise emitting from the site in the interests of the amenity of the occupants of the nearest properties.

3 Before the first operation of the building hereby approved, details of the position, design and appearance of the 3m and 4m tall acoustic barriers as specified in the Environmental Noise Report by Sharps Redmore Acoustic Consultants Project Number 1414500 of 15th April 2015 shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. These barriers shall then be erected in accordance with the approved details before the approved use is started and left in the approved positions and maintained in perpetuity.

Reason: To ensure an effective noise attenuation scheme for the site to minimise the impact of noise on the occupants of nearby properties.

4 Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the roller doors on the south elevation of the building shall only be opened between 06:00 and 21:00 hours as this is the time period when the vans are loaded inside the building.

Reason: To minimise noise from the operation of the business.

Informatives:

1 In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF the council, as Local Planning Authority, takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. The Council works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by; offering a pre-application advice service, and as appropriate updating applications/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application and where possible suggesting solutions. In arriving at a decision to APPROVE the application:

 the applicant/agent was updated of any issues after the initial site visit,  the applicant was provided with pre-application advice,  The applicant was provided with the opportunity to address issues identified by the case officer and permission was granted.

2 Regard was had to the advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and national Planning Practice Guidance 2014 in the determination of the application.

Item Number 4 Ref: 3/15/0684/COU

Proposal: Change of use of premises from commercial use to A3

Site 613B Ringwood Road, West Moors, Ferndown, for Miss Holly Cole Address: Site Notice expired: 6 August 2015 Nbr-Nfn expired: 6 August 2015

Parish Comments: No Objection:

However the planning authority to be advised that both Dorset County Council and the Highways agency needed to take a serious look at the junction of the A31 and Priory Road and that adequate signage needs to be located on the A31 to highlight the layby (truck stop) a short distance from the proposed café on the A31 for HGV's and large vehicles to use rather than pulling into Priory Road or stopping go on the A31, as these actions may be dangerous to other road users.

Members also requested that although they did not have any material planning consideration objections to the application they felt that the application should be considered by the EDDC planning committee and not at officer level.

Consultee Responses:

County Highways The County Highway Authority as The County Development Liaison Highway Authority has NO OBJECTION to the Officer proposal which is similar to a previous application for which was referred to HIGHWAYS ENGLAND for their consideration and comment.

Highways England Thank you for providing Highways England (Highways Agency as was) with the opportunity to comment on the above planning application. We have considered the submitted documents in line with current guidance contained within DfT Circular 02/2013 'The Strategic Road Network and the Delivery of Sustainable Development' and the DCLG National Planning Policy Framework . We note that this is a further resubmission of proposals following the refusal of applications ref 3/14/1037/COU and 3/15/0058/COU on the grounds of noise and odour affecting local amenity.

In terms of traffic impact, the current proposals remain unchanged from those previously considered and commented on. We are aware that local comments have been submitted regarding the impact of parking and turning movements on the safety of the adjacent A31/ Priory Road junction. However, we have considered the relative trip generation between the extant and proposed uses and are satisfied that the change of use will result in fewer trips in the peak period. We have also checked our incident records which show there is no reported collision history at this location in the last few years.

We therefore continue to have no objection to this proposal and I attach our formal recommendation to that effect.

EDDC Public Health - The applicant has now submitted additional Housing And Pollution information in response to concerns raised about odour and noise abatement from the extraction system.

The odour abatement proposals meet the requirements contained within the DEFRA guidance for a very high level of odour control. The information on the latest plan under Extract and Silencer Sound Power Data indicates a sound pressure level following silencer of 56dB(A) 1m, this would equate to a sound pressure level of approximately 42dB(A) at the nearest residential opening therefore the level of silencer should be satisfactory.

The current plans are showing a concrete plinth for a cold room assembly at the rear of the premises in the courtyard however the applicant has advised this will now be used as a dry store only and any refrigeration units will be within the building. I would suggest the following condition is included:

Before the use hereby permitted begins, equipment to control the emission of fumes smell and noise from the premises shall be installed in accordance with the scheme submitted as part of the application Drawing number V505822-2 dated 28/05/15. All equipment installed as part of the approved scheme shall thereafter be operated and maintained in accordance with that approval and retained for so long as the use continues.

Reason: To protect the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties and staff working at these premises.

Officer Report

The application is brought to Committee (i) at the request of the West Moors Parish Council; and (ii) as five letters of objection have been received and the views expressed are at variance to the recommendation of the Planning Officer.

The planning application has been supplemented by a further plan showing 6 parking spaces that are shared with No.613 Ringwood Road.

Seventeen letters of objection have been received from local residents concerned at noise, disturbance and odours from the use, lack of parking and highway safety.

Site Description

The application site is located on the corner of Priory Road and the A31 in West Moors.

The premises comprise a small flat roof extension to an existing shop – Hunter’s Biltong Shop (A1 Retail Use). This extension has been separated from the shop and is currently empty. To the rear is a small service yard, to the front is a parking forecourt which is shared with the shop, this provides 5 parking spaces. To the north- east of the site is a separate car sales business that occupies the northern part of the car park.

The area is predominantly residential with 35 Priory Road to the north and 615 Ringwood Road to the north-east. On the opposite side of Priory Road are 16 flats at Priory Gardens, these have a private parking court.

History

The site has an extensive planning history; the salient points are summarised below.

In 2005 planning application 3/05/1048/COU was granted to ‘Retain use for sale of motorcycles (Retrospective)’ at ground floor. In 2007 planning application 3/07/1599/FUL was granted for a ‘Single storey side extension and continue use of the premises for the sale of motorcycles.’ This extension is the part of the building that is subject to this current planning application.

A planning application 3/09/1149/FUL in 2009 for the ‘Removal of condition 3 on planning permission 3/07/1599 to allow for the sale of four wheel vehicles’ was refused but subsequently allowed on appeal.

In 2011 planning application 3/11/0509/COU was permitted for a ‘Change of use from sale of motor vehicles to a class A1 shop (relief from condition No.3 of planning permission 3/07/1599)’

In 2012 a planning application 3/12/0546/COU was permitted for a ‘Change of use - lounge to office for car sales’. This lounge was on the north-eastern side of the building.

It is apparent that there are at the time of this application two lawful planning units, the first is Hunters Biltong Shop (A1 retail use) that is the larger unit and occupies the central portion of the building, this has a small flat roofed extension to the south-west; it is this extension that is subject to the current planning application. This unit has five parking spaces that are available.

The second smaller unit is a car sales business (Sui generis use) that occupies the north-eastern part of the building and a portion of the car park for displaying motor vehicles.

Proposal

The application seeks a change of use of the flat roofed side extension from Retail Shop (A1) to Restaurant (A3) use; the serving floorspace (excluding kitchen and w/c) is approximately 40msq - allowing approximately 16-20 covers.

To service the café an extract duct is to be fitted with fans and filters which will vent through the roof. Waste and recycling will be kept in the rear yard along with a storage container.

The applicant has supplied suggested hours of use of 06:00-22:00 Monday to Saturday and 08:00-22:00 Sunday and Bank Holidays.

Parking will be provided within an existing shared parking area to the front of the premises.

Planning Policy

Economic and business development is key to providing a thriving community. Christchurch and East Dorset Core Strategy Polices KS1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development), KS6 (Town Centre Shopping), KS7 (Role of Town and District Centres) and PC5 (Shop and Community Facilities in Local Centres and Villages) all support the provision of new services in principle. Saved Policy DES8 of the East Dorset Local Plan balances the needs of new development against the impact on neighbours in terms of noise, disturbance and odour emissions.

Considerations

The key issues for consideration are (i) The impact of the proposed change of use on the amenity of nearby residents, notably noise, disturbance, and potential cooking odours; (ii) Parking; and (iii) Highway Safety.

(i) The impact of the proposed change of use on the amenity of nearby residents. Noise and odour emissions -The applicant has provided information that shows a kitchen extraction system that vents through the roof towards the rear of the premises. This includes an electrostatic precipitator to remove oil and grease, followed by a carbon filter to remove smells; the fan unit is mounted at ground floor level behind the premises to reduce the potential for noise.

The applicant has engaged at pre-application stage with the Council’s Environmental Health Team with the view of providing the correct extraction system. The Environmental Health Team has been again consulted during the course of the application and confirms that:-

‘The odour abatement proposals meet the requirements contained within the DEFRA guidance for a very high level of odour control. The information on the latest plan under Extract and Silencer Sound Power Data indicates a sound pressure level following silencer of 56dB(A) 1m, this would equate to a sound pressure level of approximately 42dB(A) at the nearest residential opening therefore the level of silencer should be satisfactory.

On the basis of the above the proposal would not cause undue odour or noise that might adversely affect the amenity of neighbours. In this respect the application is in accordance with saved Policy DES2 of the East Dorset Local Plan.

Noise and disturbance – The proposed use has the potential to cause noise and disturbance to nearby residents by patrons using the premises; an example would include car doors shutting early morning or late at night.

In this particular instance the proposed use is an A3 Café and not an A5 Take Away use, this combined with the fact that the premises is small would limit the number of patrons and therefore the level of disturbance. In coming to this view officers are also mindful that the premises subject to this application were originally part of the A1 retail shop at No. 613 Ringwood Road which dependent on the type of shop could generate a high footfall itself. The applicants have requested that the cafe be allowed to open between 06:00 and 22:00 Monday to Saturdays and from 08:00 until 22:00 on Sundays and Bank Holidays. Whilst officers appreciate the argument that early opening hours are beneficial to the business it is considered that a 07:00 opening is more appropriate given the close proximity of residential properties. A condition will be applied to this effect.

In summary, given all the above, and the close proximity of the A31 trunk road, an objection on noise and disturbance grounds could not be sustained.

(ii) Parking A considerable amount of local objection has focussed on the perceived lack of parking to serve the premises.

To the front of the premises are 5 parking spaces that are shared with 613 Ringwood Road (Hunters Billtong shop); the applicant proposes forming one further parking space taking the total to 6 spaces. Parking on Priory Road is unrestricted, save in close proximity to the junction with the A31.

The applicant notes that the shop currently opens 10:00-17:30 and as such there will be times when the café will have the full use of the parking spaces by virtue of the shop next door being closed.

Officers are of the view that given the actual proposed use of the premises as a café, (not takeaway), the limited size of premises and the extant planning use, that there is adequate parking to serve the premises. Furthermore there is amble on street parking in Priory Road that is available at busier times.

Whilst local residents are concerned about patrons of the premises utilising on street parking, this is perfectly legal and an objection on the grounds of lack of parking would be difficult to sustain. The proposal meets Core Strategy Policy KS12 (Parking Provision).

(iii) Highway Safety The premises is located close to the junction of Priory Road with the A31 Trunk Road, to this effect Highways England (Formally known as the Highways Agency) have primacy over Dorset County Council Highways when commenting on highway safety issues.

Highways England have been consulted and made aware of local opposition to the proposal, their comments are as follows:-

‘In terms of traffic impact, the current proposals remain unchanged from those previously considered and commented on. We are aware that local comments have been submitted regarding the impact of parking and turning movements on the safety of the adjacent A31/ Priory Road junction. However, we have considered the relative trip generation between the extant and proposed uses and are satisfied that the change of use will result in fewer trips in the peak period. We have also checked our incident records which show there is no reported collision history at this location in the last few years. We therefore continue to have no objection to this proposal and I attach our formal recommendation to that effect.’

Given the above a refusal of the scheme on highways safety grounds could not be sustained.

Summary

The proposed change of use has generated considerable local opposition, and the points raised by the community are fair considerations.

Nevertheless, the applicant has worked with the Council to provide a professionally designed kitchen extraction system that will ensure the premises can be operated without causing noise or odour that might affect the amenity of local residents. Given the limited size of the premises and extant use there is sufficient parking to serve the premises. Whilst the premises are close to a junction, Highways England has confirmed that they have no objection in highways safety terms.

A favourable recommendation is given, subject to conditions.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 (Standard Commencement) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 (Approved Plans) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Location Plan Block Plan and Floor Plan Drawing number V505822-2 dated 28/05/15 Carford Catering Equipment Quote – including Purified Air and System Air (Fan) details. Parking Plan Location and Block Plan

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

3 (Hours of use) The use hereby permitted shall only operate between 07:00 and 22:00 on Mondays to Saturdays, between 08:00 and 22:00; on Sundays and Bank or other National Public Holidays. Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area and adjoining and nearby residential properties.

4 (Install extraction equipment before use) Before the use hereby permitted begins, equipment to control the emission of fumes smell and noise from the premises shall be installed in accordance with the scheme submitted as part of the application Drawing number V505822-2 dated 28/05/15. All equipment installed as part of the approved scheme shall thereafter be operated and maintained in accordance with that approval and retained for so long as the use continues.

Reason: To protect the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties and staff working at these premises.

5 Parking The car parking facilities shown on the deposited plan shall be laid out and provided prior to the change of use of the building to cafe; such parking facilities shall thereafter be permanently retained for that purpose.

Reason: To ensure provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.

Informatives:

1 In assessing this proposal the local planning authority has had regard to the guidance contained within the Government's National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF the council, as local planning authority, takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. The council works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by offering a pre- application advice service, and advising applicants/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application and where possible suggesting solutions.

In arriving at a decision to APPROVE the application: the applicant was provided with the opportunity to address issues identified by the case officer and permission was granted Item Number 5 Ref: 3/15/0743/HOU

Proposal: Alterations and additions to include second storey front extension

Site Hillview, Broadmoor Road, Corfe Mullen, for Mr & Mrs S Brown Address: Site Notice expired: 21 August 2015 Nbr-Nfn expired: 13 August 2015

Parish Comments: Support. The previous proposal was refused which is puzzling in view of the granting of planning permission next door. We would hope therefore that this amended proposal is approved.

Officers Report:

Introduction:

This application comes to Committee because the Parish Council have supported the proposal and the recommendation is to refuse. No letters of representation have been received on this application.

Hillview is a two storey detached house in a long, open, rectangular plot located on the east side of Broadmoor Road in Corfe Mullen. The site lies within the South East Dorset Green Belt and the Corfe Mullen Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV). The property is set back from the road and the surroundings are open. The immediate neighbouring property is Knoll View which is also a two storey detached dwelling and lies about 8 metres to the south. A pair of semi-detached properties are situated on the opposite side of the road, with their rear elevations facing Broadmoor Road at over 50 metres distance.

Planning History:

Extensions to the property were approved under application 3/87/1454/FUL which comprised of a wraparound rear, side, and front extension and a first floor side extension. A rear extension was refused on Green Belt grounds under application 3/06/0759/FUL.

More recently permission was refused to erect a first floor front extension and a single storey side extension, (reference 3/14/1171/HOU). The Parish Council had no objection to the proposal and no letters of representation were received. The application was refused due to its impact on the Green Belt for the following reason:

"The proposed extensions, taken together with the earlier extension to this property, would result in a building that would be disproportionately larger than the original dwelling which existed when the Green Belt was established on 5th February 1980. The proposal is therefore contrary to paragraph 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework and saved policy GB3 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Core Strategy 2014. No supporting information has been submitted with the application and therefore the Local Planning Authority do not consider that the applicant has demonstrated that there are any circumstances that are so special so as to outweigh the Green Belt policies, the harm to the openness of the Green Belt and the reason for including the land within it."

Proposal:

The current application is a revised scheme of the previously refused application and is for the first floor front extension with a canopy over the new front door. The existing integral garage would also be converted to living accommodation with the garage door replaced with two windows. The front extension, measuring 1.8m by 3.15m would have a pitched roof with a front facing gable set lower than the height of the existing hipped roof at 7.1m. A curved window would be inserted in the proposed first floor elevation.

Considerations:

The main policy considerations of the proposal are paragraph 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework, policies HE2 and HE3 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Core Strategy, and saved policy GB3 of the East Dorset Local Plan. The main concerns of the proposal are the impact on the Green Belt, the AGLV and the impact on neighbour amenity.

Impact on the Green Belt:

The original floor space of the property was 140.32m2. The extensions approved in 1987 increased the floor area of the property to 206.5m2 which is an increase of 47.16%. This application proposes an increase to the floor area of 4.1m2, not including the filling in of the porch canopy, which would bring the total floor area of the property to 210.6m2. This would amount to an increase over the original floor area of 50.08% which could be considered proportionate in terms of floor space alone.

However, the figure of 50% to measure proportionality is only a guideline and is not prescriptive with the extent to which extension will or will not harm the purpose of the Green Belt, varying according to the individual circumstances of each case, as emphasised by the Inspector when allowing the appeal (reference: APP/U1240/D/313/2203498) to raise the ridge and eaves by 1.6m, add 6 dormers and a balcony at Trapalanda, Rushall Lane, Corfe Mullen.

It is noted that the proposal as part of this application is relatively small in terms of floor area, when taken on its own, however, regard has to be given to the cumulative impact of the previous extension granted since the establishment of the Green Belt together with the nature and design of the current proposal.

The extension in 1987 extended to the rear and side of the dwelling and there was also a large first floor side extension which resulted in the dwelling have a double frontage. The existing hipped roof was then extended across the first floor extension thereby increasing the bulk of the property.

This proposal comprises of a first floor extension on the front elevation which projects over the existing canopy porch. The height of this front element would be 7.1m and therefore this increases the bulk of the dwelling and along with the ostentatious design of the proposal, would result in the extension being more visually prominent. Furthermore, Hillview is an exposed property that is slightly elevated from the road and sits within an open plot and therefore the further bulky and dominating extension proposed will be conspicuous, causing harm to the openness of the Green Belt.

It is considered that whilst the proposed total floor area of the property is approximately at the 50% guideline, given the extension previously allowed in 1987, the further first floor extension proposed, where its height is raised to 7.1m, in combination with the previously approved two storey extension, would result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building prior to the establishment of the Green Belt. The resulting property would, as a consequence, be materially larger than it was in 1980 when the Green Belt was designated.

No supporting information has been submitted with the application and therefore it is not considered that the applicant has demonstrated that there are any circumstances that are so special so as to outweigh the Green Belt policies, the harm to the openness of the Green Belt and the reason for including the land within it. As a result this application is contrary to both national and local Green Belt policy.

Impact on the Area of Great Landscape Value

The prominence of the proposed first floor extension on the front of the property in the elevated position within the landscape setting would make it obtrusive and harmful to the landscape quality of the Waterloo valley where its siting, design, scale and materials are unsympathetic to the particular landscape quality of the Area of Great Landscape Value. At present the brown brick blends into the landscape and has only a small rendered element. The impact of rendering the whole dwelling and also creating a gable above the eaves with render would increase the visual impact beyond the existing situation.

Impact on Neighbour Amenity:

In terms of the impact on neighbours, it is considered that the proposal would not have a negative impact on the amenity of the occupants of Knoll View through overlooking or overshadowing as the extensions are sited away from the private, sensitive areas of Knoll View. The properties on the west side of the road are at over 50 metres distance and therefore with intervening landscape such that there would be no harmful impact to their amenities.

Conclusion:

It is considered that the proposed extension, taken together with the earlier extension to this property, would result in a building that would be disproportionately larger than the original dwelling which existed when the Green Belt was established on 5th February 1980. This proposal is therefore contrary to paragraph 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework and saved policy GB3 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan Part 1 Core Strategy 2014. No supporting information has been submitted with the application and therefore it is considered that the applicant has not demonstrated that there are any circumstances that are so special so as to outweigh the Green Belt policies, the harm to the openness of the Green Belt, and the reason for including the land within it. Furthermore, the prominence of the proposed first floor extension on the front of the property in the elevated position within the landscape setting would make it obtrusive and harmful to the landscape quality of the Waterloo valley where its siting, design, scale and materials are unsympathetic to the particular landscape quality of the Area of Great Landscape Value. As such it is recommended that this application is refused.

Recommendation: REFUSE – FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The proposed extension, taken together with the earlier extension to this property, would result in a building that would be disproportionately larger than the original dwelling which existed when the Green Belt was established on 5th February 1980. The proposal is therefore contrary to paragraph 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework and saved policy GB3 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Core Strategy 2014. No supporting information has been submitted with the application and therefore the Local Planning Authority do not consider that the applicant has demonstrated that there are any circumstances that are so special so as to outweigh the Green Belt policies, the harm to the openness of the Green Belt and the reason for including the land within it.

2 The prominence of the proposed first floor extension on the front of the property in the elevated position within the landscape setting would make it obtrusive and harmful to the landscape quality of the Waterloo valley, where the siting, design, scale and materials are unsympathetic to the particular landscape quality of the Area of Great Landscape Value, contrary to Policy HE3 of the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan Part 1 Core Strategy 2014.

Informatives:

1 In determining this application, regard was had to the NPPF.

2 In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF the Council, as Local Planning Authority, takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. The Council works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by; offering a pre-application advice service, and as appropriate updating applications/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application and where possible suggesting solutions. In arriving at a decision to REFUSE the application:

 The applicant/ agent did not take the opportunity to enter into pre- application discussions.

3 For the avoidance of doubt, the plans hereby refused are:

Proposed Floor Plans: 14_165_03 Rev B dated 13.10.2014 Proposed Elevations: 14-165-04 Rev B dated 13.10.2014 Policy Considerations and Reasons In reaching this decision the policies in the Development Plan for the area, which currently comprises the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan, Part 1 - Core Strategy 2014 were taken into account. Saved policies within the East Dorset Local Plan 2002, were also taken into account. These include specifically the following policies: HE2 HE3 and GB3

Item Number 6 Ref: 3/15/0828/COU

Proposal: Change of use of footpath to form external seating area outside café (Retrospective) Site The Cafe On The Square, 3 The Square, Wimborne, for Mr T Address: Ockenden Site Notice expired: 10 September 2015

Parish Comments: No comments received

Consultee Responses: None Received

Neighbour Comments: None Received

Officers Report:

This retrospective application comes before Committee at the request of Councillor Janet Dover

Site Description

The northern section of Wimborne Square was laid out as a public area as part of the town centre improvements since 2010 and is referred to as the events area. The surface is laid with flagstones in a pale buff artificial stone. It was envisaged at the design stage that this open area should be used for social and community purposes. The land is owned by East Dorset District Council. It is also managed by East Dorset District Council on behalf of Dorset County Council in relation to the adopted highway.

The application site consists of a small area of paving immediately in front of the shop window of the Café on the Square which is occupied by tables and chairs under the existing café canopy. The area is demarked by two planters on either end of the frontage and currently contains four small tables with two chairs per table.

Proposal

This application is for the retrospective and temporary change of use of the area immediately in front of No.3 The Square (The Café on the Square) to an external seating area in connection with that business which involves a small area under the canopy of the café and immediately adjoining it. There is a comfortable width of pavement between the edge of the proposed small seating area adjacent to the café and the larger separate seating area known as Area A on the main section of the Square. A pavement café licence has already been granted by this Council for this small area immediately outside the café until 24.6.2015.

Planning History

Two previous permissions have also been granted for the use of the Square for seating in connection with nearby cafés. Permission 14/0511 was granted for the use of an area demarked by studs on the eastern side of the square (referred to as Area B on the licence map) until 11.11.2017 in connection with the nearby Costa Coffee business. The planning permission expires on the same date as the pavement licence issued by this Council. A further temporary planning permission was issued under Application 15/0151 for the use of the western side of the Square (referred to as Area A) as a sitting out area in connection with the Café on the Square business. This was given temporary permission until 31.3.2018. This planning permission again expires on the date of the pavement café licence.

This Council manages the Square on an Agency basis on behalf of Dorset County Council. The Pavement Café Licence for the current planning application under consideration which involves the seating on the pavement under the canopy outside No 3 The Square, was given by East Dorset District Council under the Highways Act 1980 on 25th June 2015 and runs for one year.

Planning Policy

The relevant Policies are HE1, HE2, WMC1 and KS7 of the Core Strategy. Saved Policy DES2 is also relevant regarding resisting harm caused by noise, smells or disturbance.

Considerations

With both of the existing planning permissions, for seating in Areas A and B of The Square, it was decided not to place any conditions on the temporary permission as the conditions imposed by the Pavement Café Licence were the most appropriate vehicle for controlling the proper use of the area. In particular Condition 26 of the Pavement Café Licence allows for the revocation of the Licence should there be any non-compliance or subsequent breach of the other conditions of the licence.

The licence for the site at No 3 The Square has already been granted by this Council. The limitations of the licence are that the permitted hours are 7am to 9pm each day. The number of tables and chairs are limited to 4 and 8 respectively and shall not be added to without variation of the Licence. The licensee shall keep the area in a clean and tidy condition and to remove stains caused by spillage. Tables and chairs shall be sufficiently spaced to enable wheelchair/pram access. The licensee shall remove the tables and chairs if deemed necessary for the safety of pedestrians for the duration of any event on The Square.

The use of the pavement currently forming this planning application is in an area of the Square where the management by this Council may change in the long term, which would make it appropriate to allow permission for a limited time period. This would give the licensee some certainty whilst retaining long term control by the Council. For these reasons it is considered appropriate to grant permissions that would cover the life of the current licences and overlap to any renewal of these licences, should this Council consider this appropriate.

The principal concern, as before, is the effect on the amenities of the Wimborne Conservation Area and the vitality of the Wimborne Primary Shopping Area, which covers the units facing the Square.

It was always envisaged that the Square should be used for community activities and when not in use for that purpose it may be used for commercial purposes that would enhance the vitality of the retail centre. This appropriate activity adds life to the Square and contributes to the amenity and attraction of the Conservation Area.

The experience of the other licenced areas is that the existing café seating area has had a positive effect on the shopping experience and the general use of The Square. The only minor concerns have been regarding litter and the expansion of the activity beyond the designated area. This has now been resolved by demarcation of the existing agreed seating area.

One concern that has been raised, and does not form part of the current planning application, is that on occasions an ice cream dispenser is sited at the eastern end of the paving outside the cafe. The dispenser is discreet and on wheels and is removed indoors at the end of the day. This dispenser comes under street trading laws, as they are actually trading goods, rather than placing an A Board or seats for example on the pavement, which would be dealt with under the Highways Agreement with Dorset County Council. Shops are permitted to place objects and structures in front of their premises as long as an obstruction is not caused under street trading laws. It sits under the café canopy. It is not considered that the harm it causes on an occasional basis when queues may occur and the pavement may be temporarily blocked is a sufficiently frequent occurrence to justify enforcement action. However, this is a separate matter, and should not form part of Members consideration of the current planning application.

Conclusion

For all of the above reasons the proposal is considered to be a welcome asset to the vitality of the town and accords with Policies HE1, HE2, WMC1 and KS7 of the Core Strategy. It is therefore recommended for approval subject to the permission ending at the same date as the licence.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 This change of use permission shall only apply to the area shown on the Licence drawing 1139/04.

Reason: To maintain the long term control over the use of this area. 2 This permission shall expire on 24.6. 2016 by which date the use shall have been discontinued and the land restored to its previous authorised use as a paved area in all respects.

Reason: To reserve to the Local Planning Authority control over the long- term use of the land.

Policy Considerations and Reasons In reaching this decision the policies in the Development Plan for the area, which currently comprises the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan, Part 1 - Core Strategy 2014 were taken into account. Saved policies within the East Dorset Local Plan 2002, were also taken into account. These include specifically the following policies: HE1, HE2, WMC1, KS7.

3. IMPLICATIONS

Corporate Plan & Council Objectives 3.1. To ensure East Dorset’s natural and built environment is well managed.

Legal 3.2. The Council is the Local Planning Authority and has delegated to the Planning Committee the responsibility for determining planning applications in accordance with the provisions of the Local Plan, statutory and non-statutory guidance in the form of legislation and Planning Policy Statements.

Environmental 3.3. Any issues are contained within the body of this report.

Financial and Risk 3.4. The risk implications relate to the potential for judicial review or maladministration if the applications being reported have not been considered properly in a procedural sense or there is a substantial flaw in the consideration.

Equalities 3.5. Planning application determination requires a positive and questioning approach by the decision maker to equality matters. Where a particular issue requires a focused consideration there will be a reference in the particular report