Schedule of Planning Applications

Agenda Item No: 6

Wolverhampton City Council OPEN DECISION ITEM

Committee / Panel PLANNING COMMITTEE Date: 23rd June 2009

Originating Service Group(s) REGENERATION AND ENVIRONMENT

Contact Officer(s) Stephen Alexander (Head of Development Control)

Telephone Number(s) (01902) 555610

Title/Subject Matter PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Recommendation

That Members determine the submitted applications according to the recommendation made in respect of each one. PLANNING COMMITTEE (23rd June 2009)

REFERENCE SITE ADDRESS PAGE NO

09/00226/FUL & Timmins Waste Services And Graiseley Page 4 09/00386/FUL 30 Mander Street Wolverhampton WV3 0JZ

Application Type Smallscale Major General Industry & Smallscale Major All Other Development

09/00422/FUL 20 Richmond Avenue Park Page 12 Wolverhampton WV3 9JB

Application Type Householder

09/00379/FUL 8 Redhouse Road Tettenhall Regis Page 17 Wolverhampton WV6 8ST

Application Type Householder

08/01503/FUL 5 Showell Circus Bushbury South Page 21 Wolverhampton And Low Hill WV10 9BA

Application Type Change of use

09/00114/FUL New Cross Hospital Heath Town Page 27 Wolverhampton Road Heath Town Wolverhampton WV10 0QP

Application Type Smallscale Major All Other Development

09/00332/FUL The Borough Arms Bilston North Page 34 Bunkers Hill Lane Wolverhampton WV14 6JX

Application Type Smallscale Major Dwelling

09/00095/FUL Land Bounded By Viaduct And Bushbury South Page 41 Mammoth Drive And Low Hill Coxwell Avenue Wolverhampton

Application Type Largescale Major Offices

09/00267/VV Lidl Foodstore Tettenhall Page 49 Finchfield Hill Wightwick Wolverhampton WV3 9EN

Application Type Smallscale Major Retail

09/00262/FUL & Bantock House Park Page 54 09/00263/LBC Finchfield Road Wolverhampton WV3 9LQ

Application Type Smallscale Major All Other Development & Listed Building Consent (alter-extend)

09/00351/FUL Mecca Bingo Club Wednesfield Page 58 Unit D3 South Bentley Bridge Park Bentleybridge Way Wolverhampton WV11 1BP

Application Type Smallscale Major Retail

09/00231/FUL 185-189 Wednesfield Road Heath Town Page 67 Wolverhampton WV10 0EN

Application Type Minor Dwellings

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09

APP NO’s: 09/00226/FUL & WARD: Graiseley 09/00386/FUL DATE: 19-Mar-09 TARGET DATE: 18-Jun-09 RECEIVED: 19.03.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: Timmins Waste Services And 30 Mander Street, Mander Street, Wolverhampton, West Midlands PROPOSAL: Modification and extension of waste transfer/recycling centre.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Timmins Waste Services Limited Mr A J McGlue Mander Street The Westlands Wolverhampton 132 Compton Road West Midlands Wolverhampton WV3 0JZ WV3 9QB

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Introduction

1.1 Application reference 09/00226/FUL was reported to Planning Committee on 19 May 2009. Committee decided to defer the application for a site visit.

1.2 This report also considers a separate application (09/00386/FUL) for a vehicle maintenance workshop.

2. Site Description

2.1 The application site is situated 1 mile to the west of the City Centre and within a Defined Business Area.

2.2 The site is in a small commercial and industrial area, in Mander Street, which runs between Retreat Street to the east and Upper Zoar Street to the west.

2.3 Timmins Waste Services Ltd. occupy land on either side of Mander Street. The land on the northern side is approximately 50 metres wide and 40 metres deep and the land on the southern side is approximately 20 metres wide and 30 metres deep. Planning permission was granted in 1998 for a waste transfer and recycling centre on the northern area.

2.4 To the north of the northern area is the Fire Station, which fronts onto Merridale Street. To the west is a disused commercial premises at 30 Mander Street and beyond that is the Gujarati Centre which fronts onto Upper Zoar Street. To the east is a commercial premises. The nearest residential development is 100m away, on the north side of Russell Street.

2.5 Other nearby premises are a funeral directors adjacent to the fire station (PH on map) and offices in Libra House on the corner of Merridale Street and Upper Zoar Street.

4 2.6 The front boundary is defined by a high tube metal fence, which allows views into the site. The other boundaries are formed by brick walls and mesh fencing with part of the northern and western boundaries enclosed by concrete retaining wall structures.

2.7 The land, on the southern side of Mander Street, was previously used by Timmins Waste Services as a waste transfer / recycling centre, but a condition on the 1998 permission, required that use to cease. Since that time, the site has been used as office and staff parking areas, in association with the waste / recycling centre on the opposite side of the road. This area has commercial uses on all sides.

2.8 A vehicle maintenance workshop has recently been constructed within the southern area.

3. Application Details

09/00226/FUL 3.1 The application site comprises the land on both sides of Mander Street. The application seeks permission: • to extend the existing waste transfer and recycling centre to the west, to incorporate 30 Mander Street, and • for new operational works in association with that use.

3.2 The proposals include the installation of a five bay picking station and dedicated waste storage areas. New office facilities, parking and vehicular manoeuvring areas would also be provided.

3.3 A new two metre high brick wall boundary treatment is proposed along the site frontage on the northern side of Mander Street.

3.4 An existing building which fronts onto the northern side of Mander Street is to be re- modelled.

3.5 Operational hours would be 07.00 – 18.30 hours Mondays to Fridays, 08.00 – 13.00 hours on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays and Public Holidays.

3.6 There are currently ten staff employed at the site. The proposals would result in fourteen staff being employed at the site. 09/00386/FUL 3.7 The vehicle maintenance workshop within the southern area is 8.3 metres wide, 14.5 metres long and 6 metres high. The building is constructed from powder coated aluminium sheeting and includes a large roller shutter door to the north elevation.

4. Planning History

4.1 95/0404/FP – Creation of a vehicle and skip storage yard – Granted 01/08/1995

4.2 97/0729/FP – Proposed waste transfer and recycling centre – Granted 27.04.1998 (Allowed on Appeal)

4.3 03/0181/FP – Erection of a weighbridge office – Granted 07.04.2003

5. Constraints

5.1 Defined Business Area Authorised Process

5 6. Relevant Policies

6.1 National Guidance

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPS10 Planning for Sustainable Waste Management PPG13 Transport

6.2 UDP Policies

D1 Design Quality D2 Design Statement D3 Urban Structure D4 Urban Grain D5 Public Realm Public Open Private Space D6 Townscape and Landscape D7 Scale - Height D8 Scale - Massing D9 Appearance D10 Community Safety D11 Access for People with Disabilities D13 Sustainable Development Natural Energy D14 The Provision of Public Art EP1 Pollution Control EP3 Air Pollution EP4 Light Pollution EP5 Noise Pollution EP9 Sustainable Drainage Arrangements for Development EP14 Waste Management Facilities AM1 Access, Mobility and New Development AM12 Parking and Servicing Provision AM14 Minimising the Effect of Traffic on Communities AM15 Road Safety and Personal Security R7 Open Space Requirements for New Development

7. Publicity

7.1 Two letters of objection received from the Management Committee of the Gujarati Centre and one letter of objection from Councillor Mattu and Councillor Passi. The following comments were raised: • Increase traffic congestion in Mander Street • Detriment to traffic flow and highway safety • Detrimental to the users of the adjacent community centre. • Proposals would discourage use, and result in a lack of income, for the adjacent community centre • Increase risk of pests • Vehicles cause damage to the road and deposit mud, which in dry weather causes a dust problem • Drainage problems • Litter problems • Skips • Fire risk • Substandard visibility for vehicle drivers entering and exiting the site

6 8. Internal Consultees

8.1 Transportation Development has no objections

8.2 Environmental Services has no objections in principle subject to appropriate conditions and notes for information relating to the control of operating hours, noise, dust, litter and provisions for vehicle washing (including drainage).

8.3 Access and Building Control have no objections.

8.4 Neighbourhood Manager of the Bantock Local Neighbourhood Partnership objects for the following reasons:

• The site results in regular complaints about environmental nuisance. • Mander Street is difficult to clean and appears untidy because of rubbish and debris falling out of skips and onto the highway. • £9 million has been spent on the regeneration of the Graiseley Estate and this facility undermines the aspirations for the area.

8.5 Archaeology and Property Services – comments awaited.

9. External Consultees

9.1 Severn Trent Water - no objection subject to a condition requiring the submission of sustainable drainage details and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context.

9.2 Environment Agency - no objection.

10. Appraisal

10.1 The key issues to be considered when determining this application are: • The principle of the proposed use • Design, layout and appearance • Environmental issues • Access and parking • Unauthorised building

The Principle of the Use 10.2 The proposal is for the extension of an existing waste management and recycling facility and associated operational works, and therefore Unitary Development Plan policies on waste and national guidance contained within PPS10 apply.

10.3 UDP policy EP14 ‘Waste Management Facilities’ states that proposals for the establishment or extension of waste management facilities will be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the proposal represents the best practical environmental option and the risk to residential amenity and highway safety is acceptable.

10.4 This is an existing waste management facility in a sustainable location. Therefore, the proposals to extend this facility and associated works are acceptable in principle, subject to no adverse implications upon residential amenity and highway safety.

Design, layout and appearance 10.5 The design, layout and appearance of the extended site and the proposed development works are broadly acceptable and in accordance with the design policies of the Unitary Development Plan.

10.6 The existing tubular metal fence allows views into the unsightly interior of the site. The application proposes to replace this boundary treatment with a 2 metre high brick wall, which will improve significantly the visual appearance of the site and street scene. A condition should require that the proposed boundary treatment proposals are provided prior to the first use of no.30 Mander Street as an extension to the waste transfer/recycling centre.

10.7 The eastern site boundary is defined by a chain-link fence. There are clear views into the site through this fence across the car park on the corner of Mander Street and Retreat Street. The fence needs to be replaced by an appropriate solid boundary treatment. The majority of the western boundary with the Gujarati Centre is defined by a brick wall which appears to be in a poor state of repair. This wall needs to be repaired or replaced with an appropriate solid boundary treatment. The agent has been requested to submit amended boundary treatment proposals. A condition should require that the amended boundary treatment proposals are provided prior to the first use of no.30 Mander Street as an extension to the waste transfer/recycling centre.

10.8 An existing building at 30 Mander Street has been partly demolished. The remaining part of the building fronts immediately onto Mander Street. Some interesting historic features (date stone 1876, window and door heads) remain and it would be desirable to retain these. The application proposes to re-model the building. The appearance of the re-modelled building is considered broadly acceptable.

10.9 The concrete waste storage bays appear to be broadly acceptable, subject to details.

10.10 The design and appearance of the proposed vehicle maintenance building is acceptable.

Environmental issues 10.11 UDP policy E1 ‘Pollution Control’ states that development which may result in pollution of air, ground or water or pollution through noise, smell, dust, vibration, light or heat will only be permitted where it can be shown that there will be no material adverse impact on the immediate, medium or long term health, safety or amenity of land or surrounding areas; or quality and enjoyment of the environment.

10.12 The transfer and recycling of waste can often impact on local amenity. Due to the limited space available on site the large loaded vehicles have to turn and wait in the adjoining highway causing damage to the road and deposition of mud, which in dry weather can cause a dust problem.

10.13 However, the extended facility would provide for a layout which would allow the large vehicles to turn and discharge their loads within the site. As such the associated nuisance from mud disposition would be significantly reduced. It also proposes dedicated spaces for staff and visitor parking and for the storage of skips. The imposition of suitable conditions would secure the layout illustrated and ensure its retention thereafter.

10.14 The facility is governed by the licensing conditions of the Environment Agency and these include restrictions on the amount of waste processed at the site.

10.15 Environmental Services raise no objections subject to a condition requiring that the waste transfer/recycling facility and associated ancillary activities only operate within the hours proposed by the application, these are 07.00 – 18.30 hours Mondays to Fridays, 08.00 – 13.00 hours on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays and Public Holidays. They also recommend that suitable conditions be imposed to ensure that systems are provided to control noise, dust and litter and requiring provisions for vehicle washing (including drainage).

10.16 With regard to the replacement vehicle maintenance workshop, Environmental Services recommend a condition requiring the workshop doors to be closed between the hours of 19.30 – 07.00 hours Mondays – Fridays and after 16.00 hours on Saturdays with no working on Sundays or Bank Hollidays. They also recommend conditions relating to noise control, no bodywork/ vehicle refinishing (painting).

10.17 The application includes proposals for a 2m high brick wall along the Mander Street frontage. This wall will reduce the visual impact of the waste transfer facility and the likelihood of litter and dust leaving the site. The extra space at the application site would enable the provision of a picking bay and improved facilities for the storage of waste, these new facilities would reduce the likelihood of disturbance to neighbours.

Access and parking 10.18 The layout of the extended application site includes satisfactory vehicular turning facilities, which would be adequate to accommodate the turning manoeuvres of the large vehicles that would visit the site and the one way operation of the site would improve access and egress.

10.19 The applicant has provided amended plans demonstrating adequate space within the main site for two vehicles at any one time. Based upon the additional information provided by the applicant relating to trip generation for the site, it is considered that the proposed waiting area for one vehicle whilst another is unloaded would be appropriate.

10.20 In view of the above, it is considered that the proposed layout would mean that the present problems of vehicles waiting and turning on the adjacent road would not arise. Therefore the flow of traffic along Mander Street would be improved.

10.21 The cycle parking provision proposed would be sufficient to meet likely demand and would be covered and secure.

11. Conclusion

11.1 The proposed extension and development works at the site are broadly acceptable. Subject to receiving satisfactory proposals for the treatment of the eastern and western site boundaries and appropriate conditions, particularly relating to the design of the storage areas, boundary treatments, control of operating hours, noise, dust, litter and provisions for vehicle washing (including drainage) the proposals would be in accordance with the design and environmental protection policies of the Unitary Development Plan and would have the potential to improve the current situation which would be beneficial to local amenity and the free flow of traffic on Mander Street.

11.2 Circular 11/95 states that planning conditions should not be imposed unless they are both necessary and effective, and do not place unjustifiable burdens on applicants. It is considered that the proposed conditions meet these criteria and as such could be lawfully enforced.

12. Recommendation

12.1 In respect of 09/00226/FUL:-

Grant subject to conditions to include: • Submission of amended proposals for the treatment of the eastern and western boundaries of the site. New boundary treatments to be provided

9 prior to the first use of no.30 Mander Street as extension to waste transfer/recycling centre. • Materials • Landscaping, including hard surfaces and boundary treatments • Parking and turning areas to be provided and retained • Maximum height for skip storage • Suppression of noise, dust and litter measures • Drainage (including drainage of vehicle washing area) • No buildings or other structures or machinery without agreement by the local planning authority • The land on the south side of Mander Street shall not be used as a waste transfer and recycling centre and shall be used only for the purposes ancillary to the waste transfer and recycling centre on the north side of Mander Street, with skip storage • Hours of use • No air/ventilation systems without prior approval • Cycle storage provision • Details of storage bays • Storage of waste only within designated storage bays • Waste shall not be stored in excess of the height of the storage bays • Details of levels • No external lighting without prior approval. • No mechanical washing or drying equipment without prior approval. • Elevations and floor plans for retained office building (on north side of Mander Street) • Approved layout, boundary treatments, hard surfaces, drainage etc to be provided prior to the first use of no.30 Mander Street as extension to waste transfer/recycling centre. • No vehicle bodywork repairs or painting to be carried out on the site.

12.2 In respect of 09/00386/FUL (vehicle maintenance workshop):-

Grant subject to conditions: • No bodywork or vehicle body refinishing (painting) shall be undertaken in the building. • No work shall be undertaken on Sundays or on Public Holidays. • All roller shutter doors to the workshops shall be kept closed between the period 19.30 h to 07.00 h (the next day) Mondays to Fridays and after 16.00 h on Saturdays. • Any air compressor and ventilation system, including vehicle exhaust extraction system (if fitted,) shall be designed to achieve no more than LAeq 30 dB at any point one metre from any sensitive building façade (including the Gujarati Centre).

Case Officer : Phillip Walker Telephone No : 01902 555632 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

DO NOT SCALE Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Wolverhampton CC Licence No 100019537. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.

Planning Application No: 09/00226/FUL & 09/00386/FUL Location Timmins Waste Services And 30 Mander Street, Mander Street,Wolverhampton,West Midlands Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 390850 297939 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 APP NO: 09/00422/FUL WARD: Park DATE: 17-May-09 TARGET DATE: 12-Jul-09 RECEIVED: 17.05.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: 20 Richmond Avenue, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV3 9JB PROPOSAL: Two storey side, two storey rear extension and ground floor front extension with canopy.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr W Collett Mr Michael Davies 20 Richmond Avenue 7 Mill Pool Close Wolverhampton Wombourne West Midlands Wolverhampton WV3 9JB WV5 8HS

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is located approximately 2km west of Wolverhampton City Centre, the surrounding area is predominantly residential.

1.2 The property concerned is one of seven number properties of a particular design, at the head of a cul-de-sac location. The properties are modern in appearance with gable frontages, and garages set to the side/rear of the properties, providing an element of space between each property, creating a particular pattern within this part of Richmond Avenue.

1.3 The property itself has a landscaped frontage with a drive leading to a garage at the rear, and an average sized rear garden, where the levels fall away to the rear. There are no previous extensions at the property.

2. Application details

2.1 The proposal consists of a bay window to the frontage at ground floor, two extensions, both two storey, one to the side providing hallway, w.c. and utility at ground floor and a bedroom above, and the other a rear extension to the dining room, with a further bedroom above with ensuite facilities. The proposal also incorporates internal alterations converting the existing bedroom three into an ensuite bathroom. There will be three double bedrooms in all.

2.2 The bay window has a width of 4.3 and a depth of 0.90m.

2.3 The two storey side extension measures 2.5m wide, 7.2m in depth, set back from the existing front elevation by 1.3m at ground floor and 2.65m at first floor, the extension remains flush with the existing rear elevation.

2.4 The two storey rear extension measures 3m deep and 5.9m wide.

3. Planning History

3.1 09/00158/FUL for two storey side, two storey rear extension and ground floor front extension with canopy. Refused, dated 27.04.2009. This application was refused due to the insufficient level of proposed parking.

4. Relevant policies

4.1 AM12 - Parking and Servicing Provision AM15 - Road Safety and Personal Security D1 - Design Quality D4 - Urban Grain D7 - Scale - Height D8 - Scale - Massing D9 - Appearance SPG4 - Extension to Houses

5. Neighbour notification and publicity

5.1 Seven representations received and a request to speak to Planning Committee. Objections include:

• Loss of parking, and associated problems with regards to possible on street car parking on the only turning head, which is directly outside the application site. • Two storey extension will be imposing, impacting on the outlook, from gardens and properties, especially as there are level differences between those properties neighbouring the site • Loss of privacy from windows overlooking, loss of natural light, and maintenance of boundaries would be difficult. • Drainage and Soak aways. • No private access. • Disturbance from noise during construction. • Health & Safety issues due to the close proximity of the garage.

6. Internal consultees

6.1 Transportation Development – the proposal has been carefully considered alongside the requirements of Planning Policy Guidance 13 “ Sustainable Transport“ and the Unitary Development Plan AM12 - Parking and Servicing Provision, AM15 - Road Safety and Personal Security. Although there is concern with regards to the level and layout of the proposed car parking arrangement, and there is limited alternative on- street parking, however, it is considered that two cars could be parked in a position so as to be clear of the highway. It is considered that on balance, whilst the scheme is not ideal, a refusal on Transportation grounds could not be sustained.

7. Appraisal

7.1 Key Issues:

• Design/Street Scene • Parking & Highway Safety • Neighbouring Amenities (outlook, light, sunlight and privacy)

13 Design/Street Scene 7.2 It is considered that the design of the two storey side extension and two storey rear extensions are in keeping with the existing property, and those within the surrounding street scene. Although there are no other bay windows within this particular part of the street scene; it is considered that the design of the bay window would have no detrimental impact on the character or appearance of the surrounding area. Therefore, the proposal is in accordance with Unitary Development Plan Policies D1 - Design Quality, D4 - Urban Grain, D7 - Scale – Height, D8 - Scale – Massing, D9 – Appearance and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 4 Extension to Houses.

7.3 There is an element of space between each property at the head of this cul-de-sac. The extension would remove some of this spatial character, however, this is an end property; therefore, the two storey side extension would have no detrimental impact on the street scene or the sense of space between each property. Therefore, the proposal is in accordance with Unitary Development Plan Policies D1 - Design Quality, and D4 - Urban Grain.

Parking and Highway Safety 7.4 The parking is quite restricted to the frontage and within the street scene, where parking on the highway occurs on the turning head at the top end of this cul-de-sac, however, there are considered to be no Transportation grounds for refusal that could be sustained.

7.5 The two storey side extension would involve demolition of the existing garage. Therefore, all parking would be located to the front of the property.

7.6 There are two cars displayed on the proposed plans, and parking would be tight with both the two storey side extension, and the projecting bay preventing any more provisions.

7.7 There are considered to be no parking and highway safety grounds for refusal that could be sustained on appeal. Therefore, the proposal is in accordance with Unitary Development Plan Policies AM12 - Parking and Servicing Provision AM15 - Road Safety and Personal Security.

Neighbouring Amenity 7.8 The properties south of the site, would look directly onto the side of the two storey side extension, and the two storey rear extension, from both the rear of their properties and the garden areas. There is also a level distance as the ground falls away south/west of the site.

7.9 There is an approximate distance of 13.5m between the proposed structure and the rear facing windows of the neighbouring property at No. 18, and 17.5m between the rear extension and the neighbouring property at No.16, which is in accordance with Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 4 “Extensions to Houses”.

7.10 Both the front and rear windows, of the two storey side extension should be obscurely glazed, and fixed to restrict direct overlooking of the neighbouring property and perceived loss of privacy.

7.11 The neighbouring property north of the site at No. 22, will be slightly hemmed in between the proposed extension and the neighbouring extension at No. 24 which is similar to that proposed. There is, however, a detached garage separating the structure at ground floor, providing an element of space between the extension and the neighbouring property, reducing the prominence of the proposed extension.

7.12 Therefore, due to the position of the extensions with those neighbouring properties, coupled with obscure glazing, it is consider that there would be no significant detriment

14 to any of the neighbouring properties which would warrant a refusal of planning permission. Therefore, the proposal is in accordance with Unitary Development Plan Policies D1 - Design Quality, D4 - Urban Grain, D7 - Scale – Height, D8 - Scale – Massing, D9 – Appearance and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 4 Extension to Houses.

8. Conclusion

8.1 Proposal is considered to be acceptable, subject to conditions with regards to removal of permitted development rights for first floor windows, obscure glazing, and car parking facilities, to secure Unitary Development Plan Policies, in relation to overlooking as well as parking and highway safety.

8.2 Recommend Grant subject to conditions.

9. Recommendation

9.1 Delegated Authority to the Director of Sustainable Communities to Grant, Subject to the following Conditions:

• Removal of Permitted Development for first floor windows in the North/West or south/east side elevations. • Obscure Glazing • Provision of car parking area. • Hours of operation during construction.

Case Officer : Tracey Homfray Telephone No : 01902 555641 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00422/FUL Location 20 Richmond Avenue, Wolverhampton,West Midlands,WV3 9JB Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 389611 298457 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 343m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 PP NO: 09/00379/FUL WARD: Tettenhall Regis DATE: 01-May-09 TARGET DATE: 26-Jun-09 RECEIVED: 01.05.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: 8 Redhouse Road, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV6 8ST PROPOSAL: Rear extension, conversion of part of garage

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr Nick Bowerman Mr Nigel Bevan 8 Redhouse Road 19 Lime Tree Gardens Wolverhampton Codsall West Midlands Wolverhampton WV6 8ST South Staff's WV8 1NR

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The property concerned is a traditional bungalow, with a feature dormer window. The street scene consists of varying properties, detached, semi detached, houses and bungalows, of individual character and design. This bungalow is one of four. The surrounding area is predominantly residential.

2. Application details

2.1 The application seeks to extend the bungalow at ground floor to the rear in line with the existing bedroom, with a pitched roof design. This will provide extra living space at ground floor, and an extension to the loft area for a possible loft conversion in the future. The proposal also incorporates a canopy to the front of the garage.

2.2 The extension measures 8.2m wide with a depth of 2.4m.

3. Planning History

3.1 The previous planning application No. 08/01279/FUL for a similar extension was refused due to the extension with overly large front dormer windows being out of character detracting from the appearance of the existing property and the street scene, and the proposed extension and alteration to the roof having a detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties, such as loss of outlook, light and sunlight.

4. Constraints

4.1 Landfill Gas Zones Tree Preservation Order - TPO Ref: 06/00467/TPO

17 5. Relevant policies

5.1 AM12 - Parking and Servicing Provision D1 - Design Quality D4 - Urban Grain D9 - Appearance D7 - Scale - Height D8 - Scale - Massing EP15 - Landfill Activities SPG4 - Extension to Houses

6. Neighbour notification and publicity

6.1 Two representations received, objections to loss of light/sunlight, outlook from properties and garden areas, security and the extension would be out of character with the surrounding street scene.

7. Internal consultees

7.1 Environmental Services - No observations.

7.2 Trees - No comments.

8. Appraisal

8.1 The key issues are:

• Design/Street Scene • Private Amenities (Garden Space and Parking) • Neighbouring Amenities (Outlook, light, sunlight, privacy)

Design/Street Scene 8.2 The design of the extension is in keeping with the existing property and the only element evident from the street scene being the canopy frontage to the garage.

Private Amenities 8.3 The property has sufficient parking to the frontage, and sufficient garden area to the rear to support both the extension and the possible future use of the roof space for bedrooms.

Neighbouring Amenities 8.4 The neighbours at number 6, are concerned about the light to their driveway and kitchen area, and subsequent security issues and the expense to light these areas. There is also concern that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the street scene.

8.5 The neighbours at number 10 are concerned about loss of light/sunlight to the lounge, utility, and breakfast room, they also consider that the outlook from the windows associated with these areas, and to the rear garden, will be affected. There is also an objection to the roof design which is considered to be disproportionate, impacting on the character and appearance of the street scene.

8.6 It is, however, considered that the proposal would have no significant impact on the light/sunlight, or outlook from either of these neighbouring properties, however, the outlook from the rear garden areas would be affected, due to the size and height of the

18 proposed roof element, resulting in a structure which would appear overbearing, contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policies D1 Design Quality, D7 - Scale – Height, D8 - Scale – Massing, and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 4 – Extensions to Houses.

8.7 Amendments to the proposal would be necessary, changing the roof design to the rear extension from a pitch to a hipped roof design. This would remove a bulk of the roof extension, reducing the overall size and overbearing nature of the structure.

9. Conclusion

9.1 The current proposal is contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policies D1 Design Quality, D7 - Scale – Height, D8 - Scale – Massing, and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 4 – Extensions to Houses, due to the size and height of the proposed roof, therefore, necessary amendments are required to address this element.

9.2 If satisfactory amendments received recommend grant via officer delegation, subject to standard conditions, and removal of permitted development rights for side facing first floor windows, to ensure that the proposal accords with Unitary Development Plan Policies.

9.3 If amendments are not received recommend refusal due to the detrimental impact on the neighbouring amenities, and outlook from their rear garden areas, contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policies D1 Design Quality, D7 Scale-Height, D8 Scale- Massing and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 4 Extensions to Houses.

10. Recommendation

10.1 Delegated authority to the Director for Sustainable Communities to grant subject to the receipt of satisfactory amended plans, and subject to the conditions:

• Matching Materials • Removal of Permitted Development for first floor side facing windows.

Or:

Delegated authority to the Director for Sustainable communities to refuse due to the following reason:

• Detrimental impact to the neighbouring amenities. • Contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policies D1, D7 and D8 and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 4.

Case Officer : Tracey Homfray Telephone No : 01902 555641 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00379/FUL Location 8 Redhouse Road, Wolverhampton,West Midlands,WV6 8ST Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 388050 300258 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 475m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 APP NO: 08/01503/FUL WARD: Bushbury South And Low Hill DATE: 08-Dec-08 TARGET DATE: 02-Feb-09 RECEIVED: 05.12.2008 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: 5 Showell Circus, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV10 9BA PROPOSAL: Change of use of ground floor for A2 purpose as a licensed betting office.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr Robert Bradley-Richards William Hill Organization Ltd 55 Bridge Street Walsall WS1 1JQ

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Introduction

1.1 The application was on the ‘Schedule of Applications’ to be considered at the Planning Committee meeting on 19 May 2009, however, the report was withdrawn by officers pending a clear consultation response from the Police.

2. Site Description

2.1 The application site is a three storey premises containing a shop on the ground floor with residential above. The premises are within a defined local centre, Showell Circus, which surrounds a large roundabout. There is a parking lay-by in front of the shops and a service road to the rear.

2.2 The property is vacant however was previously used as a fruit market, the date of when it closed is unknown.

2.3 There is a flat above with separate front entrance and there is a fire escape staircase at the rear.

2.4 The opening hours of the adjacent shops are:

Property No Use Opening Hours 1 Café Monday to Friday: 7.30am – 3.00pm Saturday: 7.30 – 2.00pm 2 Pet Shop Monday to Saturday: 9.00am – 5.00pm 3 Post Office Monday to Friday: 8.30am – 5.30pm Saturday: 9.00am – 12.30pm 4 Butchers Monday to Saturday: 7.30am – 5.00pm 5 Application Site Vacant 6 A1 Retail Shop Monday to Saturday: 9.00am – 6.00pm Sunday: 10.00am – 2.00pm 7 News Express Monday to Saturday: 9.00am – 6.00pm

21 Sunday: 7.00am – 12.00pm 8 Pharmacy Monday to Friday: 9.00am – 6.30pm Saturday: 9.00am – 1.00pm 9 Bargain Booze Monday to Saturday: 8.00am – 7.00pm Sunday: 10.00am – 2.00pm 10 Cards & Gifts Monday to Saturday 8.30am – 5.00pm

2.5 Whilst the shops listed above are situated adjacent the application site, a further five shops exist to the south-west of the site adjacent to Third Avenue, with these closing at 5.00pm. A detached property which is in use as a hot food take-away is a stand alone building situated around the corner from the application site on Annan Avenue opens from Monday to Saturday 11.30am – 8.00pm.

3. Application Details

3.1 The proposal seeks to change the use of the existing vacant retail premises to a licensed betting office. Information accompanying the application confirms that this proposal is to relocate the existing betting office adjacent to the Bushbury Arms Public House to this location. This is as a result of the existing premises being too small and falling short of the standard expected by their customers.

3.2 The proposed opening hours of the betting shop are Monday to Saturday 0730 – 2200 and on Sundays and Bank Holidays 1100 – 1800.

4. Relevant Policies

4.1 Relevant Unitary Development Plan Policies

D1 - Design Quality D6 - Townscape and Landscape D9 – Appearance D10 – Community Safety SH9 - Local Shops and Centre Uses SH10 - Protected Frontages B5 – Design Standards for Employment Sites EP5 – Noise Pollution AM12 – Parking and Servicing Provision

5. Neighbour Notification and Publicity

5.1 Six letters of objection have been received. Two are from local ward councillors, two from local residents and one from the local neighbourhood partnership and local community centre. In addition to these, two petitions of objection containing 14 and 60 signatures have also been received.

5.2 The reasons for objecting to the proposal are that the bookmakers would result in nuisance from clients of the bookmakers gathering outside resulting in anti-social behaviour along with the increase in opening hours, increase in litter and noise affecting residents in flats above, confusion for bus drivers due to the close proximity of the bus stop, harmful effect to the retail centre, loss of greengrocers, the unnecessary need for another betting office, increase in parking problems and the proposal is not considered as meeting the needs of the community.

5.3 The comments further state that Showell Circus is a vibrant shopping facility and residents are keen to maintain it as a key focal point for the community and the

22 introduction of a betting shop would affect the performance of other local businesses in the parade and the general wellbeing of the local economy and people in the community.

5.4 Further concerns relate to the location of the betting shop adjacent to a pharmacy and retail premises and the potential for customers of the betting shop congregating outside the premises, consuming alcohol and smoking cigarettes which would not only give rise to litter problems but increase anti-social behaviour as a result.

5.5 A petition containing 150 signatures has also been received in support of this proposal.

6. Internal Consultees

6.1 Environmental Services – there is residential accommodation situated above this, and adjacent, premises. Activities within the proposed betting office are likely to include the use of televisions/monitors to show races etc and it is likely that noise will be created by this viewing equipment. It is recommended that a noise assessment be undertaken to determine noise levels that would be experienced by residents of the first floor accommodation from the betting office.

6.2 Other commercial properties in the parade currently open until 7pm at the latest. The proposed betting office is to open until 10pm. Due to the recent smoking ban it is likely that smoking customers of the betting office will stand at the front of the premises and cause disturbance to residents living in the first floor accommodation.

6.3 Transport Strategy – no objections as this proposal would generate a similar amount of trips as the previous use, a greengrocer. There is sufficient parking provided in the close vicinity and this will be further improved and formalised with parking and pedestrian facilities improvement works due to be installed in the next few months. As part of these improvements the existing bus stop would be moved closer to the carriageway and further away from the proposed betting shop further reducing the chances of customers of the betting shop disturbing waiting passengers.

6.4 West Midlands Police – originally sent in details relating to incidents reported by staff at the existing betting office at Showell Circus of which there were seven. The Police have clarified that this was provided for information only by Sgt Mark Bates of Low Hill Police Base. They state that it was not provided as an objection to the planning application. To put the figures into proper context, during the same period from November 2007 to March 2009, there were a total of 184 incidents reported to the Police at various locations in Showell Circus. Inspector Mills and Sgt Cooper who are responsible for the Policing of the area do not consider that the number and type of incidents at the current William Hill location at Showell Circus gives them cause for concern and therefore they do not object to this proposal.

7. Appraisal

7.1 The main issues to consider in respect to this application are as follows:

• Principle of Proposed Use • Residential Amenities • Community Safety • Transportation

Principle of Proposed Use 7.2 Unitary Development Plan Policy SH10: Protected Frontages aims to protect the overall function of the centre/group of shops and ensure they are not undermined.

23 Permission will not be granted where non A1 uses constitute any of the following: i) more than 30% of the shops units in the centre concerned; ii) more than 30% of the frontage length; and iii) more than three consecutive units. In addition any proposed use should make a positive contribution to the overall role of the centre/group of shops.

7.3 In this particular group of shops there are 93.3% of A1 uses within the centre and 6.7% of non-A1 uses which are within the 30% limit set by policy SH10 for non-A1 uses. The centre as a whole is considered to have a healthy balance of uses and the use of the application property for an A2 use would result in the percentage of 13.3% of the units being within non-A1 uses which is unlikely to have an adverse effect on the mix of uses or the health of the centre and is therefore considered acceptable.

7.4 Policy SH8: Local Centres states that the role of a local centre is to provide for day-to- day convenience shopping needs of a population mostly living within walking distance. Policy SH8 states that centre uses appropriate in scale to the role and function of these centres and their catchments within their defined boundaries will be supported subject to Policy SH2 and environmental and traffic considerations. In Policy SH2: Centre Uses, it states where appropriate in scale, that along with retail, leisure, entertainment facilities and offices both commercial and those of public bodies are regarded as centre uses. As betting shops falls within Use Class A2 similar to that of an office to be used as a bank, building society or an estate agent, it is considered that the use would not significantly harm the vitality and viability of the local centre and would not result in a significant increase in traffic movements to an extent to harm the vitality and viability of the local centre.

Residential Amenities 7.5 Nearby residents have raised concerns in relation to noise disturbance and nuisance from clients of the betting office. People who visit betting shops may stay there longer than they would in an average A1 retail shop and they may occasionally smoke outside the premises. People may move between the proposed betting office and the public house on the opposite side of the green.

7.6 The proposed hours of opening are Monday to Saturday 0730 – 2200 and Sunday and Bank Holidays 1100 – 1800. The majority of the shops in the parade close between 6pm and 7pm and open as early as 7.30am. The parade is generally quieter after 6pm when the majority of the other shops are closed, however the proposed betting office would be open until 10pm Monday to Saturday and until 6pm Sunday and Bank Holidays

7.7 This proposal has certain similarities to that of a hot food take-away in the potential for noise disturbance later in the evening when the parade is generally a lot quieter. This is as a result of customers congregating outside the premises to smoke or to wait between races, arriving and leaving by car and on foot, the revving of engines, car radios and the slamming of car doors. There are flats immediately above the premises with windows directly above the door where customers would stand and smoke. The proposal is therefore considered to adversely affect the amenities of the nearby residents by virtue of the reasons stated of an unacceptable level of noise disturbance contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policies EP5 – Noise Pollution and B5 – Design Standards for Employment Sites.

7.8 It is worth considering whether the proposal could be conditioned until 6.00pm. The applicants have made it clear, because of the way their business operates that such a condition would be unreasonable. It is considered that such a condition would be unduly restrictive and unreasonable. This is because given the way the proposed business would operate and the nature of the sporting calendar, it would effectively nullify the benefit of the permission because the business would not be able to operate adequately. Therefore, such a condition is not considered to pass the test of “reasonableness” (one of the six tests for conditions in Circular 11/95). Therefore as

24 the strong concern regarding noise disturbance in the evening remains, it is considered that this is not a suitable location for the proposed use.

Community Safety 7.9 Neighbours have also raised the issue of possible anti-social behaviour. Unitary Development Plan Policy D10 states that “Proposals should take full account of the need to prevent crime, reduce the fear of crime and promote community safety throughout the design process”. The Police have no objection to the proposal (see 6.3 above). The details of crime in the area and the neighbour responses indicate that anti- social behaviour is a problem generally. The proposed use may give rise to some fear of crime in the community, but there is no convincing evidence that crime will be a particularly a problem at or in connection with the proposed betting shop. It is considered that the proposal is unlikely to make the existing situation significantly worse, therefore a reason for refusal on the grounds of detriment to community safety could not be justified or sustained on appeal in this case.

Transportation 7.10 There is an existing bus stop and a separate parking lay-by to the front of these premises and the introduction of this proposal is considered not to interfere with this existing arrangement. This will be further improved as a result of improvements works due to be installed in the next few months.

7.11 There are no transportation grounds for refusing the application.

8. Conclusion

8.1 The proposed change of use is considered to be compatible with Unitary Development Plan frontage policies. However the proposal is considered to be unacceptable as the proposal would result in the amenities of the residents at first floor level being adversely affected by noise disturbance, contrary to Policies EP5 “Noise Pollution” and B5 “Design Standards for Employment Sites”. It is considered that this harm cannot be overcome by conditions.

9. Recommendation

9.1 Refuse:-

• The proposed change of use of the ground floor for A2 purposes as a licensed betting office would result in the amenities of the residential occupiers at first floor being adversely affected by noise and general disturbance. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to the provisions of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan Policy EP5 and B5.

Case Officer : Ragbir Sahota Telephone No : 01902 555616 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 08/01503/FUL Location 5 Showell Circus, Wolverhampton,West Midlands,WV10 9BA Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 392473 301412 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 250m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 APP NO: 09/00114/FUL WARD: Heath Town DATE: 17-Feb-09 TARGET DATE: 19-May-09 RECEIVED: 09.02.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton Road, Heath Town, Wolverhampton PROPOSAL: Detailed application for the provision of 2 surface car parks to the rear of the School of Nursing Building and associated works.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust Mr M Alcock C/O Agent Halcrow Group Ltd Lyndon House 62 Hagley Road Edgbaston Birmingham B16 8PE

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is within the existing New Cross Hospital. The site covers an area of approximately 23.6 hectares. The site has been developed over a long period of time, with a medley of buildings of varying size, scale, condition, age and type. The site also includes a number of relatively modern additions including the Heart and Lung Cardiac Centre.

1.2 The subject area is to the north east of the hospital site and abuts the rear garden boundaries of residential dwellings along Victoria Road and Highfield Crescent.

1.3 Upon visiting the site it was noted that a number of trees had been removed and the previously grassed area surrounding the staff accommodation (The Ashes) and the School of Nursing Building had been removed. This land was not previously used for car parking but it would appear to have provided green open space around the staff accommodation. The trees and vegetation provided a landscape buffer between the hospital site and the neighbouring residential accommodation.

2. Application details

2.1 The application has been made for the provision of two surface car parks to the rear of the School of Nursing and adjacent to the staff accommodation building to the north of this. The two car parks would be linked by a strip of land to provide drainage works within that area. There would be no vehicular or pedestrian access connecting the two car parks.

2.2 The supporting statement sets out that the proposed provision of surface car parking is required to support the continued development of the hospital in

27 accordance with the hybrid application 08/00696/OUT for the redevelopment of the hospital site and would be for a temporary period of up to ten years. As part of the overall masterplan, it is proposed, that the land in question, would form part of the northern residential zone.

2.3 The proposed car park to the west of the School of Nursing building would provide 48 parking spaces and an area has been allocated for a cycle store. It is proposed to create a new access from the existing east car park extending along the south of the School of Nursing building.

2.4 The car park to the north of the staff accommodation building, the Ashes, would provide 34 spaces and would be accessed from the existing car park that lies adjacent to the site.

2.5 It is proposed that the car parks would be used by hospital staff only and would be operational between the hours of 07.30 and 18.30 Monday to Saturday. It is proposed that the lighting will be switched off when the car parks are not in use.

2.6 Drainage details have been provided proposing that surface water from the Ashes car parks would be positively drained to a linear drainage channel along the southern kerbed edge of the car park. These flows would then be discharged and combined with the surface water flows from the School of Nursing car park, which are drained through trapped gullies. The combined flows are then passed through a bypass interceptor before being discharged to a soakaway. This has been designed to accommodate a 1 in 100 year storm event plus a 30% allowance for climate change.

2.7 A ground investigation study was conducted which identified that the earth below the proposed car parks was predominantly clay, this was deemed unsuitable for surface water infiltration. Therefore to address this, the scheme proposed to combine the flows from both car parks to a suitable soakaway rather than the provision of porous paving.

2.8 The proposed lighting columns would be 4m high and located around the exterior of the car parks adjacent to the boundaries with the residential dwellings. It is proposed that the illuminance would be of 5-10 lux. In terms of security it is also proposed to install a CCTV camera on the south east corner of the School of Nursing building and to the north east corner of the staff accommodation building. It is stated in the application that views into adjacent properties will be blacked out.

3. Planning History

3.1 On 24th June 2008, Wolverhampton City Council’s Planning Committee resolved that the Director for Sustainable Communities be authorised to approve planning application 08/00696/OUT for the redevelopment of New Cross Hospital and new residential development on two sites. This was subject to the negotiation and signing of two Section 106 Agreements, one for the hospital site and the other for the residential development.

3.2 There have been numerous planning applications for hospital related development on the site.

4. Relevant policies

4.1 The following Unitary Development Plan (UDP) policies are relevant:

D1 - Design Quality D3 - Urban Structure

28 D9 - Appearance D10 - Community Safety D13 - Sustainable Development Natural Energy EP4 - Light Pollution EP5 - Noise Pollution EP9 - Sustainable Drainage Arrangements for Development AM12 - Parking and Servicing Provision C6 – New Cross Hospital

5. Publicity

5.1 A petition was received from Cllr Jaspal and Cllr Siarkiewicz comprising of 46 signatures objecting on the grounds that works were being carried out in preparation for two temporary car parks, the works would be detrimental to the quality of life currently enjoyed and the removal of trees and vegetation has resulted in a loss of privacy.

5.2 10 individual letters of representation were also received objecting to the proposal on the following grounds.

(i) Noise and disturbance to neighbouring residents (created by car alarms, engines, voices, door slamming etc) - especially if car park is for 24 hour use. (ii) Security as car parking extends up to rear garden boundaries - proposed boundary treatment is not acceptable. (iii) Proposed lighting would be invasive (iv) Drainage (v) Air pollution – adversely affecting enjoyment of rear garden areas. (vi) Removal of vegetation (work carried out) now overlooked by the nurse accommodation building. (vii) Loss of privacy – via provision of security cameras

6. Internal consultees

6.1 Environmental Services - The car parks are close to residential properties and incorporate artificial lighting. The design illuminance of 5-10 lux in the car park is relatively low and is unlikely to give rise to light spill at nearby residential property which exceeds the requirements of the Institution of Lighting Engineers' Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Light Pollution. In order to safeguard local residents, it is recommended conditions are attached to ensure lighting does not adversely affect residential amenity.

6.2 Planning Policy Section – No objections in principle

6.3 Transportation Development – As the access to the School of Nursing car park is fairly narrow the safety of pedestrians has been have carefully looked at. It is considered that there are no grounds to object to the proposed parking layout and pedestrian access.

6.4 Details of cycle shelter should be submitted.

7. External consultees

7.1 Severn Trent Water Ltd – No objection

29 8. Appraisal

8.1 Key Issues:

• Impact on neighbouring residential amenity. • Landscaping and boundary treatment • Design and layout of car parks • Drainage • Lighting • Loss of open useable space for residents of the staff accommodation building

Impact on neighbouring residential amenity 8.2 It is proposed that the car parks would only be used between the hours of 7.30am and 6.30pm, Monday to Saturday. By restricting the hours of use it is considered that this would avoid undue noise and disturbance to residents at unsociable hours of the day therefore limiting the overall impact that the proposed car parks would have on existing residential amenity. It is therefore considered that this would protect the amenity and environment of local residents in accordance with Policy C6 “New Cross Hospital” of the UDP.

8.3 A car park management statement and entrance/exit barriers are required to demonstrate how the hours of use will be enforced this information can be obtained via condition.

Landscaping and boundary treatment 8.4 The proposed car parks would be located in close proximity to the rear common boundary with the adjoining residential dwellings; however the operation of the car parks during aforementioned hours would limit the impact on residential amenity. To the rear of adjacent residential dwellings there is mixture of boundary treatments varying in form and substance. It is therefore considered that the provision of a consistent boundary treatment, forming close boarded fencing, is required for security and visual amenity.

8.5 The proposed siting of the boundary treatment gives rise for concern. The proposed plans illustrate that the fencing would be set some 0.6m from the existing boundaries to the rear of the adjacent residential dwellinghouses. This would create a narrow passage between the two boundaries that could provide opportunities for criminal activity. In its current format the proposal would be contrary Policy D10 “Community Safety” which seeks to reduce the fear of crime through the design process. The proposed fencing should be relocated to ensure that it does not create a useable space between the two boundaries, this would overcome the aforementioned concerns regarding Policy D10, amended plans have been requested.

8.6 In addition to the proposed boundary treatment, it is considered that suitable landscaping would still be required to providing adequate screening and limiting the impact of the proposed car parks to an acceptable level. It is considered that there is sufficient space along the boundaries adjoining residential boundaries which could provide an adequate landscape buffer.

Design and layout of car parks 8.7 In terms of layout the spaces would be adequately sized with sufficient manoeuvrability space. A provision has been made for the storage of cycles. Details of the final design have not been provided.

Drainage 8.8 Details of the proposed drainage system to be installed have been provided with the application. No objections have been raised to the proposed drainage system. It is

30 accepted that the proposals are adequate to provide suitable drainage measures for the two car parks in accordance with Policy EP9 “Sustainable Drainage Arrangements for Development”.

Lighting 8.9 Lighting details have been provided, it is considered that the proposed design illuminance of 5-10 lux would be unlikely to give rise to light spill at nearby residential properties. It is considered that provided that this level of illuminance is conditioned to remain at this level that the proposals would not adversely affect existing residential amenity. It is proposed that the car park would only operate between 07.30 and 18.30 and therefore the use of artificial lighting would be limited. It is considered that this would be in accordance with Policy EP4 “Light Pollution”.

Loss of open useable space for residents of the staff accommodation building 8.10 The proposed car parks would be sited in close proximity to the staff accommodation building within the hospital site. The application site had provided an attractive green environment for its residents and therefore the loss of this space for the provision for car parking is unfortunate. It is appreciated that application has been made to support the redevelopment of the hospital (Ref/08/00696/OUT). The phased development of the hospital will require the use of some existing car parking areas to facilitate building, demolition and construction and contractor compounds. The application does confirm that the car parking provision would be used to replace the displaced car parking. In accordance with Policy C6 “New Cross Hospital” it is considered that the loss of the green environment to provide adequate car parking facilities can be justified to support the long terms needs of the hospital by supporting the redevelopment of the site.

8.11 Although the proposal does not accord with the final masterplan, it is considered a crucial element to support the operational hospital, during the development phases, however this should not be at the detriment to neighbouring residential amenity. Hence the proposed boundary treatment, lighting, hours of use and landscaping conditions are considered to be necessary.

9. Conclusion

9.1 The proposed car parks are required to support the displacement of parking during the redevelopment of the hospital. The loss of the green open space around the School of Nursing and staff accommodation building is unfortunate, however this does not form part of long term vision for the hospital and its masterplan. It is considered a crucial element to support the operational hospital during the development phases in order for the requirements of Policy C6 “New Cross Hospital” to be achieved. It is therefore considered that the principal of the proposed car parks is acceptable.

9.2 Although it is stated that the proposed car parks would be temporary it is anticipated that they will be required for up to ten years. As this is a considerable period of time the development should be of a standard to be considered acceptable permanently. Therefore it would not be justifiable to recommend a condition for a temporary permission.

9.3 In terms of impact on neighbouring residential amenity the provision of appropriate boundary treatment, landscaping, lighting and hours of use are required.

9.4 Amendments are required to the proposed siting of the boundary fencing to ensure that its position does not create a useable passageway for persons navigate along the rear garden boundaries without being observed and hence providing opportunities for criminal activity.

31 10. Recommendation

10.1 Delegated Authority to the Director of Sustainable Communities to Grant subject to receiving satisfactory amended plans demonstrating adequately positioned boundary treatment to overcome the aforementioned concerns.

10.2 Conditions to include:-

• Landscape details • Cycle shelter details • Hours of use and lighting • Limit levels of illuminance • Details of measures taken to prevent use of car park outside of hours, including barriers • Detailed design of boundary treatments

Case Officer : Mark Elliot Telephone No : 01902 555648 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00114/FUL Location New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton Road,Heath Town,Wolverhampton Plan Scale (approx) 1:7500 National Grid Reference SJ 393526 300185 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 240706m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 APP NO: 09/00332/FUL WARD: Bilston North DATE: 21-Apr-09 TARGET DATE: 21-Jul-09 RECEIVED: 21.04.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: The Borough Arms, Bunkers Hill Lane, Wolverhampton, West Midlands PROPOSAL: Redevelopment of the site to provide 12 No. apartments

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr S Pawar Mr Mark Welsford 6 Grasmere Avenue St Michaels Church Sutton Coldfield Queens Street West Midlands Derby B74 3DG Derbyshire DE1 3SU

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 This site was formerly the site of The Borough Arms Public House, which has recently been demolished, the site is now vacant.

1.2 The site is located approximately 3km north of the centre of Bilston. The application site fronts onto Bunkers Hill Lane and has a frontage length of 42 metres. The site extends some 62 metres on its southern edge and 43 metres on the northern edge and is approximately 0.2 hectares in area.

1.3 Adjacent to the north is a bungalow (number 106) and to the south is a pair of two- storey, semi-detached houses. The surrounding area is predominantly two storey, semi-detached and detached houses.

2. Application Details

2.1 The applicant seeks permission for 12 apartments, ten with 2-bedrooms and two with 1-bedroom, with associated parking and amenity space.

2.2 The proposed apartment building is roughly rectangular. The proposed building is three storeys high in the centre and reaches a maximum ridge height of 10.3 metres. At the sides, adjacent to existing dwellings, the building would be two storey, 6m to the eaves and 9m to the ridge. The building would be set back from the back edge of the adjacent footway by 7.7 metres and follow the established building line.

2.3 Vehicular and pedestrian access is from Bunkers Hill Lane, through a gated ground floor opening near to the southern end of the building, to a rear parking area. The car park would provide 18 parking spaces, including two disabled spaces, a motorcycle store and a cycle store.

2.4 A shared amenity space is provided of 450 square metres. In addition the two end ground floor flats would have small private walled gardens at the side of the building,

34 all four ground floor flats would have a small front “deck” and six of the flats on the upper floors would have a front balcony. Four flats would have no private outside amenity area.

2.5 Proposed external materials are: • Artificial roof slates • Red brick • Fibre cement weatherboarding • Glazed louvers • White painted timber

3. Planning History

3.1 Application 08/00894/FUL for 14 apartments - withdrawn.

4. Relevant Policies

4.1 National Policies

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPS3 Housing PPG17 Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation

4.2 UDP Policies

D1 Design Quality D2 Design Statement D3 Urban Structure D4 Urban Grain D5 Public Realm Public Open Private Space D6 Townscape and Landscape D7 Scale - Height D8 Scale - Massing D9 Appearance D10 Community Safety D11 Access for People with Disabilities part D13 Sustainable Development Natural Energy D14 The Provision of Public Art EP16 Energy Conservation C3 Community Meeting Places R1 Local standards for Open Space, Sport and Recreation Facilities R3 Protection of Open Space, Sport and Recreation. R7 Open Space Requirements for New Development H3 Housing Site Assessment Criteria H6 Design of Housing Development H9 Housing Density and mix H12 Residential Care Homes AM1 Access, Mobility and New Development AM12 Parking and Servicing Provision AM15 Road Safety and Personal Security

4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance

SPG3 Residential Development

35 5. Neighbour Notification and Publicity

5.1 Two letters have been received which object on the following grounds:

• Overlooking from balconies • Lack of tree cover to block views onto the site • Height of the development • Out of character with the area • Garages too close to the boundary causing disturbance

6. Internal Consultees

6.1 Tree Officer - no objections.

6.2 Planning Policy - no objections. As the site is for more than 10 dwellings it is subject to an open space and play facility contribution. The amount payable is £25,349.91 subject to annual review. This would be achieved through a Section 106 agreement.

6.3 Transportation - • Accessibility to public transport is not particularly good. • The required visibility splay should be easily achievable given the width of the existing footway, the landscaping should be maintained below 60mm. • The applicant should demonstrate that a vehicle entering the site can clear the highway / footway and leave sufficient room for a vehicle to emerge. A vehicle priority scheme may be necessary. • The surface of the underpass should be delineated for pedestrians and also well lit to improve safety and reduce the fear of crime. • Parking is acceptable and disabled space could be reduced to one. • A locking rail should be provided for motorcycle storage. • More cycle storage is required. • Welcome packs including travel information should be provided. • Access points to be completed before first occupation. • The refuse store requires relocating to within 25 m of the building. • At the vehicular entrance to the site a heavy duty footway crossing should be provided (not a kerb radii).

6.4 Food and Environmental Safety - • A condition should be included restricting operational hours during construction. • All habitable rooms should be fitted with thermal double glazing • The site may be contaminated and a site investigation should be carried out and any remedial works undertaken as required.

7. External Consultees

7.1 The Campaign for Real Ale - object to the loss of the public house as a community facility and do not consider that the demolition of the pub overcomes this objection. No information is included on alternative facilities. The building is out of context with the area and the plot should be used for family housing. Three storey development is not suitable and it will have an adverse affect on the street scene and an overbearing impact. The number of car movements will increase.

7.2 Severn Trent Water - no objection subject to a sustainable drainage condition.

7.3 West Midlands Fire Service - confirm that fire access is satisfactory.

36 8. Appraisal

8.1 The main issues to consider are: • Loss of a community facility • Design and layout • Residential amenity • Transportation matters • S106 contributions

Loss of a Community Facility 8.2 Policy C3 seeks to protect land in community use for alternative community uses. Although the pub has been demolished the previous and recent use was clearly a community use.

8.3 This policy could be used to protect the land for another community use e.g Doctors surgery. However in this case the site is relatively small and surrounded by residential property in close proximity. Therefore it is considered that the residential use of the site is appropriate.

Design and Layout 8.4 The frontage of the building would be consistent with the current building line and provide a strong frontage development. The proposed building would have front gable features reflecting existing elements in the street scene. The reduction in the three storey building height to 2 storeys at each end, would avoid a jarring contrast in the street scene. The proposed development is therefore considered to comply with policies D1, D4, D5 and D6 of the UDP.

8.5 Given the above it is considered that an apartment block can be accommodated in the street scene without having an overbearing or incongruous impact. The development complies with provisions of the development plan in terms of its form and layout and as such it is considered that the apartment block responds well to its context and as such is acceptable in terms of the requirements of PPS3 ‘Housing’.

8.6 The proposed external materials (including surface materials) are broadly acceptable, subject to approval of samples.

8.7 The proposed low walls and railings at the front are acceptable, subject to details.

8.8 The bin store is too far from the building and no elevational drawings have been provided for the bin/cycle store or motorcycle store. The agent has been asked to amend the location of the bin store and provide details of the elevational treatments.

Residential Amenity 8.9 The reduction in the three storey building height to two storeys at each end, together with roofs which would slope away from the neighbouring properties would avoid a dominating impact on the occupiers of those dwellings.

8.10 One neighbour, whose rear garden backs onto the rear part of the site. has raised privacy issues relating to overlooking windows and “Juliette balconies”. However, the rear boundaries of the neighbouring properties are some 20 metres away and the nearest principle window is some 35 metres away. Also, the “Juliette balconies” do not provide any usable outside space. It is therefore considered that there would be no unacceptable loss of privacy in accordance with policy H6 of the UDP.

8.11 Another neighbour has raised the issue of garaging being located to the rear of the property. There is no garaging proposed on the site, but there is rear outside parking. There is a 1.8m wide landscaping strip between the parking spaces and the boundary. It is considered that careful attention to landscaping ground levels and adequate

37 boundary treatment would provide adequate protection to the neighbouring garden, in accordance with Policy H6 of the UDP.

8.12 The proposed development would provide 34 bedspaces. On the assumption that an occupancy rate of 50% could reasonably be expected, there would be a requirement for 610sq.m. of communal amenity space. Only 450 sq.m of communal amenity space is proposed, 74% of the required amount. However, in this case, because the proposed space would be in a single useable block and most of the flats would have their own small private outdoor amenity space, the shortfall is considered acceptable.

Transportation 8.13 The proposed development is considered to be broadly acceptable in transportation terms. However, there are some matters of detail that need amendment, relating to: • Size and design of cycle store. • Omission of pedestrian gate from vehicle entrance (there are alternative routes for pedestrians for all apartments apart from one, which can be provided through an amendment which has been requested.)

Section 106 Contributions 8.14 A S106 agreement is required to secure: • A contribution towards off-site recreational open space and play facilities of £25,349.91 (BCIS indexed). • Public art. • Targeted recruitment and training. • Provision of sustainable travel welcome pack to residents

9. Conclusion

9.1 Residential development is acceptable in principle. The design and layout are broadly acceptable. The proposed development would not unduly affect the amenity of neighbouring residents and is complaint with the above mentioned policies of the Unitary Development Plan. Some detailed amendments and a S106 agreement are required before the grant of permission. Other matters can be dealt with by conditions.

9.2 Outstanding matters:

• Relocation and design of bin store • Size and design of cycle store. • Design of motorcycle store. • Omission of pedestrian gate from vehicle entrance and provision of a further pedestrian entrance to apartment 1.

10. Recommendation

10.1 Delegated authority to the Director of Sustainable Communicates to Grant subject to:

1. The satisfactory resolution of outstanding matters as set out in paragraph 9.2 above. 2. A Section 106 agreement to secure a recreational open space and play contribution of £25,349.91 (BCIS indexed), public art, targeted recruitment and training and the provision of a Sustainable travel welcome pack to residents.

38 10.2. Conditions to include:-

• Sustainable drainage • Contaminated land • Materials • Landscaping • Boundary Treatments • Levels • Refuse / cycle store, details, provision and retention • motorcycle storage details (including locking rail), provision and retention • Operational hours • Visibility • Design of vehicular access • Provision of car park and access. • No vents, flues, meter boxes etc without prior approval • Exterior of building to be completed prior to occupation • Site and building security • Provision and retention of communal amenity space

Case Officer : Charlotte Ward Telephone No : 01902 551357 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00332/FUL Location The Borough Arms, Bunkers Hill Lane,Wolverhampton,West Midlands Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 395328 297324 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 2230m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 APP NO: 09/00095/FUL WARD: Bushbury South And Low Hill DATE: 09-Apr-09 TARGET DATE: 09-Jul-09 RECEIVED: 04.02.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: Land Bounded By Viaduct And Mammoth Drive, Coxwell Avenue, Wolverhampton, West Midlands PROPOSAL: Proposed three storey office building including associated parking and landscaping

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr M Bucknall Mr M Adey Wolverhampton Science Park Fairhursts Design Group Technology Centre Bank Chambers Glaisher Drive Faulkner Street Wolverhampton Manchester Lancashire M1 4EH

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 Wolverhampton Science Park is approximately 1.5 miles to the north of the City Centre. It is a flagship initiative which seeks to foster the development of new high technology orientated companies that will help to diversify the local and sub-regional economy. It is intended to provide a high quality development within a prominent location adjoining a major route into the City Centre, raising the image of Wolverhampton. Phases 1 and 2 were completed in 1995 and 2000 respectively with Phase 3 completed in 2004. The proposed development constitutes Phase 4 of the overall Science Park site.

1.2 The application site is generally level and a roughly triangular shape. It has an area of 0.75 hectares, being bounded by Coxwell Avenue to the south and west, Mammouth Drive to the north and the Grade II listed viaduct, which carries the west coast main rail line, to the east. On the opposite side of Coxwell Avenue, there is a vacant development site and beyond that is the Birmingham Canal (Wolverhampton Level) which is defined as a Conservation Area and includes the Grade II listed Lock 15.

2. Application Details

2.1 The application seeks permission to erect a three storey building providing 2,880sqm of B1(a) office space.

2.2 The three storey building would be roughly horse shoe shaped, the open end facing Coxwell Avenue and with a courtyard at its centre. A second floor bridge link would provide a connection between the new building and Phase 3 development, on the other side of Mammouth Drive.

41 2.3 The proposed development would be of a contemporary design and would be predominately clad in blue and grey brickwork and composite profiled metal sheet cladding panels. Brise soleil would be installed along the south-east and south-east courtyard elevations of the building.

2.4 Low level landscaping is proposed throughout the site to maintain the open aspect of the Science Park. A 1.8 metre high fence would be erected along the eastern boundary of the site adjacent to the viaduct. CCTV surveillance is proposed to deter intruders. External lighting would be erected on the building and within the car parking and pedestrian walkways.

2.5 The main vehicular access would be from Coxwell Avenue to the south of the proposed building. There would be 119 car parking bays, including 6 spaces for disabled persons, 2 motorcycle bays and 31 uncovered cycle spaces. The surface material for the car parking areas would be tarmacadam. The servicing area would be to the rear of the building, accessed from Mammouth Drive, to the east of the building.

2.6 There would be an estimated 500 new jobs. The development cost is likely to be approximately £7 million.

3. Relevant Planning History

3.1 C/0264/93/OUT – Phase 1 of Wolverhampton Science Park for research and high- technology use. Granted 28.05.1993.

3.2 C/1034/93/FUL – Phase 1. Erection of buildings, access roads, car parks and landscaped areas. Granted 20.04.1994

3.3 99/0839/FP – Phase 2. Erection of buildings for commercial, educational and research uses. Granted 15.10.1999.

3.4 02/0499/FP – Erection of buildings for educational and high-technology uses. Granted 08.11.2002

3.5 07/01449/FUL Erection of 2 No. four storey office buildings and 1 No. five storey office building, including associated car parking and landscaping. Granted 24.01.2008.

4. Constraints

4.1 Flood Risk Zones 1, 2 and 3 Authorised Process Listed Building

5. Relevant Policies

5.1 National Guidance PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG13 Transport PPG 15 Planning and the Historic Environment PPG24 Planning and Noise

5.2 Unitary Development Plan Policies D1 Design Quality D2 Design Statement D3 Urban Structure

42 D4 Urban Grain D5 Public Realm Public Open Private Space D6 Townscape and Landscape D7 Scale - Height D8 Scale - Massing D9 Appearance D10 Community Safety D11 Access for People with Disabilities part D12 Nature Conservation and Nature Features D13 Sustainable Development D14 The Provision of Public Art EP1 Pollution Control EP3 Air Pollution EP4 Light Pollution EP5 Noise Pollution EP6 Protection of Groundwater, Watercourses and Canals EP9 Sustainable Drainage Arrangements for Development B3 Business Development Allocations B5 Design Standards for Employment Sites B6 Offices B9 Defined Business Areas B12 Access to Job Opportunities HE1 Preservation of Local Character and Distinctiveness HE2 Historic Resources and Enabling Development HE3 Preservation and Enhancement of Conservation Areas HE4 Proposals Affecting a Conservation Area HE5 Control of Development in a Conservation Area HE13 Development Affecting a Listed Building HE14 Alterations and Extensions to a Listed Building HE17 Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building AM1 Wolverhampton – The Accessible City AM7 Travel Plans AM9 Provision for Pedestrians AM10 Provision for Cyclists AM12 Parking and Servicing Provision AM15 Road Safety and Personal Security

6. Publicity

6.1 No representations received.

7. Internal consultees

7.1 Transportation - no objections subject to the resolution of the following issues; • Submission of an acceptable Transport Statement and Travel Plan; • Provision of additional covered and secure motorcycle and cycle parking stores; • Demonstration that service vehicles can manoeuvre safely within the site; • Provision of car park access barriers; • Submission and approval of details relating to the design of the vehicle access for each car park entrance (bell mouth / dropped kerb).

7.2 Environmental Services - recommend a condition in relation to contaminated land remediation works and a note for information about the design of any external chimneys flues.

43 7.3 Conservation - The proposed parking areas are too close to the listed viaduct and as such would be likely to detract from its setting. The design of the proposed bridge is poor.

7.4 Structures (Highways) - detailed comments relating to the design of the proposed second floor link bridge.

7.5 Landscape - recommend amendments to the landscape scheme.

7.6 Access - detailed comments relating to Part M of the Building Regulations.

7.7 Trees, Building Control, Planning Policy and Neighbourhood Partnership - no objections.

8. External consultees

8.1 Severn Trent Water - no objections subject to a condition requiring the submission of sustainable drainage details and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context.

8.2 British Waterways - no objections subject to conditions and notes for information relating to external lighting, landscaping and boundary treatments, refuse storage and drainage. Also, recommend that that the applicant be required to make a financial contribution to improvements of the towpath of the nearby Old Main Line Canal.

8.3 Environment Agency - object as the Flood Risk Assessment is unacceptable.

8.4 Police - comments are awaited.

9. Appraisal

9.1 The key issues to be considered when determining this application are:

• Principle of Office Use • Design and Layout • Parking and Access • Landscaping and Boundary Treatments • Flood Risk Protection • Section 106 Agreements

Principle of Office Use 9.2 Unitary Development Plan (UDP) Policy B3 “Business Development Allocations” identifies the site as B3.4 (Wolverhampton Science Park) and states that it is of sub- regional importance having the potential to attract regional, sub-regional and national operators. UDP policy B3 specifically states that Wolverhampton Science Park is a site where the provision of B1(a) office uses is acceptable, and that allocation is also supported by policy B6 “Offices”. The applicant proposes a use class B1(a) office use at the site and this would accord with UDP policies B3 and B6.

Design and Layout 9.3 Wolverhampton UDP includes a chapter of policies relating to the design of new developments. The overarching policy in this chapter is Policy D1 ‘Design Quality’. This states that all development proposals should demonstrate a high standard of design and contribute towards creating a strong sense of place. Proposals should evolve from an understanding of local distinctiveness and the historic context.

44 9.4 UDP Policy D6 “Townscape and Landscape” states that new development proposals should create or re-enforce local distinctiveness by comprising site-specific design solutions that respond explicitly to the site and its context.

9.5 UDP policy D9 ‘Appearance’ states that the quality of materials and finishes contribute to the attractiveness of a proposal’s appearance and the character of an area. Furthermore, the use of good quality materials will be required.

9.6 The original Master Plan for the Science Park required high quality frontage development of a modern design, with landscaping fronting on to streets and parking and servicing areas concealed from general view. It is considered that the design and layout of the proposed development scheme would broadly be in accordance with this guidance and UDP policies D1, D6 and D9.

9.7 The building would be constructed from modern materials, including brickwork, profiled metal cladding panels, glazing and brise soleil. These materials would generally complement those used on other contemporary development at the Science Park.

9.8 However, the proposed link bridge, which would be clad in metal cladding panels, would appear visually heavy and unattractive and as such would not comply with UDP policies D1, D6 and D9. The agent has been requested to revise the design, to show a predominately glazed link, which would appear light weight and more aesthetically attractive in the street scene.

9.9 The proposed building would be three storeys and responds satisfactorily to the heights of adjacent development, including the Grade II Listed viaduct.

9.10 The proposed car parking and servicing areas would be positioned immediately against the listed viaduct and as such are likely to detract from its setting. To address this issue the agent has been requested to reconfigure the layout to create a landscape buffer between viaduct and car parking.

9.11 The agent has been requested to amend the proposed surface material for the car parking and servicing areas from tarmacadam to porous block paving.

9.12 No details of a refuse store have been provided. These have been requested.

Parking and Access 9.13 The site layout includes an acceptable number of car parking spaces. However, the staff cycle storage needs to be covered and securely enclosed and visitor cycle parking needs to be covered and conveniently located near to the entrance. Motorcycle parking is not shown. There is a requirement for motorcycle parking. The agent has been asked to provide details.

9.14 The agent has also been requested to demonstrate that service vehicles can satisfactorily manoeuvre within the site. Details of a barrier to control access into the car parking areas have also been requested.

9.15 The submitted Transport Statement is unsatisfactory. The agent has been requested to submit a revised version. A Travel Plan should be required by condition.

9.16 Further details of the design of the vehicle access for each car park entrance (bell mouth / dropped kerb) are also required. This should be secured through a condition.

Landscaping and Boundary Treatments 9.17 The original Master Plan for the site stated that low level planting and low level boundary treatments should define boundaries to give the Science Park an open and spacious character. The landscaping and boundary treatment proposals generally

45 respect that design approach. However the agent has been requested to make minor amendments to the landscaping proposals. These can be required by condition if necessary.

9.18 The agent has been requested to submit details of the design for the proposed fence adjacent to the viaduct. This can be required by condition if necessary.

9.19 Proposals for a landscaping strip between the car park and the listed viaduct (see paragraph 9.7 above) are required prior to determination.

Flood Risk Protection 9.20 The submitted Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is unacceptable and the Environment Agency has therefore objected. The agent has engaged with the Environment Agency with a view to submitting a revised FRA.

Section 106 Agreements 9.21 British Waterways has requested that the applicant make a financial contribution towards improvements of the canal. However, the canal is 50 metres from the development site and it is not considered that it would be reasonable to require a financial contribution for this purpose.

10. Conclusion

10.1 The proposed office use is in accordance with planning policy.

10.2 The design and layout is broadly acceptable. However, there are outstanding matters of detail to be resolved, relating to:

(i.) Amendment to the design of the proposed 2nd floor link bridge (ii.) Provision of landscaping between car park and viaduct (iii.) Amendment to car park surfacing material (iv.) Provision of secure and covered cycle parking (v.) Provision of motorcycle parking (vi.) Installation of car park access barriers (vii.) Demonstration of service vehicle manoeuvring (viii.) Transport Statement (ix.) Provision of refuse store

10.3 There is an outstanding objection from the Environment Agency which needs to be resolved through the submission of a satisfactory Flood Risk Assessment.

11. Recommendation

11.1 Delegated authority to the Director for Sustainable Communities to Grant subject to:

1. Satisfactory resolution of the current objection from the Environment Agency.

2. No significant objections from outstanding consultees.

3. Satisfactory resolution of outstanding matters as set out at paragraph 10.3 above.

4. Conditions to include: • Material samples • Large scale architectural details • Refuse storage

46 • Cycle storage • Motorcycle storage • Landscaping scheme • Boundary treatments • External lighting • Drainage • Parking to be provided and retained • Car park management plan • Servicing plan • Building and site security • Contaminated land remediation • Car park barrier • Exterior of building to be completed in accordance with approved plans and details prior to occupation • Travel plan • No external plant, ventilation equipment, meter boxes, vents, flues, aerials, satellite dishes etc without written approval • Targeted recruitment and training • Public art • Details of the vehicular access for each car park access • CCTV

Case Officer : Phillip Walker Telephone No : 01902 555632 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00095/FUL Location Land Bounded By Viaduct And Mammoth Drive, Coxwell Avenue,Wolverhampton,West Midlands Plan Scale (approx) 1:2500 National Grid Reference SJ 391545 300427 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 7503m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 APP NO: 09/00267/VV WARD: Tettenhall Wightwick DATE: 30-Mar-09 TARGET DATE: 29-Jun-09 RECEIVED: 30.03.2009 APP TYPE: Vary of Condition(s) of PreviousApproval

SITE: Lidl Foodstore, Finchfield Hill, Wolverhampton, West Midlands PROPOSAL: Variation of condition to previously approved application 08/01364/FUL to change opening times from 8.00am - 8.00pm Monday to Saturday and 10.00am - 4.00pm on Bank Holidays to Monday to Saturday and Bank Holidays 8.00am - 9.00pm.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Miss Charlotte Davies Suite 2 Parkside House Oldbury Road Rowley Regis B65 OJR

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is located in a prominent position at the junction of Finchfield Hill, Oak Hill and Finchfield Road West, opposite Finchfield local centre. On the southern boundary lies the former St Thomas’s Church (a locally listed building currently vacant) and behind this newly constructed detached housing. On the northern boundary is No. 42 Finchfield Hill, this residential property is also owned by Lidl and currently boarded up. The western boundaries of the site are marked by existing residential properties in The Terrace and those dwellings which front onto White Oak Drive.

2. Application Details

2.1 The application seeks permission to vary condition 22 (opening hours) of planning permission 08/01364/FUL. This condition states:

“Hours of opening and access for deliveries and collection of goods and refuse shall be limited to 08.00 am to 08.00pm Monday to Saturday and 10.00 am to 4.00pm Sundays and Bank Holiday Mondays.”

2.2 The application proposes to vary the existing opening hours as follows:

• Monday to Saturday 08.00 am to 09.00 pm • Bank Holiday Mondays 08.00 am to 09.00pm

2.3 This would provide an additional hour of opening on Monday to Saturday in the evenings (i.e. moving the time from 08.00 pm to 09.00pm). On Bank Holiday Mondays the opening times would commence at 08.00 am rather than the current 10.00am and conclude at 09.00pm rather than the current 04.00pm.

49 2.4 The application does not propose to change the existing opening hours on Sunday which would remain as 10.00am to 04.00pm.

2.5 The application does not propose to change the existing hours for deliveries and collection of goods and refuse which would remain as set out in paragraph 2.1.

2.6 As this is a Section 73 application, a new planning permission is sought with a different condition to that on the previous permission. If a new permission is granted, it would be an alternative to the original permission. If the application for the new permission is refused, Lidl can continue to operate under their existing permission.

3. Relevant Planning History

3.1 08/01364/FUL - Neighbourhood food store and car parking. [revised application to retain the development as constructed, 830mm higher at the front and 650mm at the rear than approved under application 08/00371/FUL]. Granted 25.03.2009.

3.2 08/00998/ADV - Erection of 1No. 6m high flagpole with 1.95m internally illuminated logo and two 2.5m illuminated logo signs. Split Decision. Permission was refused for the 6m flagpole with 2.5m internally illuminated logo. Permission was granted for the two logo signs - 24.10.2008.

3.3 08/00371/FUL - Neighbourhood food store and car parking. Granted 15.08.2008.

4. Relevant Policies

4.1 National Guidance PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG13 Transport PPG24 Planning and Noise

4.2 Unitary Development Plan Policies

D1 Design Quality D2 Design Statement D3 Urban Structure D4 Urban Grain D5 Public Realm Public Open Private Space D6 Townscape and Landscape D7 Scale - Height D8 Scale - Massing D9 Appearance D10 Community Safety D11 Access for People with Disabilities part D12 Nature Conservation and Nature Features D13 Sustainable Development D14 The Provision of Public Art EP1 Pollution Control EP3 Air Pollution EP4 Light Pollution EP5 Noise Pollution SH2 Centre Uses SH3 Need and the Sequential Approach SH4 Integration of Development into Centres SH8 Local Centres SH9 Local Shops and Centre Uses

50 SH13 New Retail Development - Foodstores AM1 Wolverhampton – The Accessible City AM7 Travel Plans AM9 Provision for Pedestrians AM10 Provision for Cyclists AM12 Parking and Servicing Provision AM15 Road Safety and Personal Security

5. Publicity

5.1 Twenty five letters of objection and one letter stating no objection have been received. Comments raised are as follows:

• Traffic congestion; particularly adjacent to traffic junction and schools • Detrimental impact on highway and pedestrian safety • Permission was previously refused for the proposed opening times • Detriment to neighbour amenity • Increase in atmospheric pollution, noise pollution and light pollution • Proposed hours not consistent with other Lidl stores • Likely detrimental impact on surrounding businesses • Anti-social behaviour • Result in a change from a neighbourhood store to a supermarket

6. Internal Consultees

6.1 Environmental Services – Object due to the close proximity of residential properties the opening hours should be restricted to those approved by the previous application 08/01364/FUL. These hours mirror the trading hours of other Lidl stores within Wolverhampton.

6.2 Transportation – No objections

7. Appraisal

7.1 The key issues to be considered when determining this application are:

• Centre policy • Environmental implications • Transportation considerations

Centre policy 7.2 In accordance with Unitary Development Plan policy SH8 ‘Local Centres’, the application site is located within Finchfield Local Centre. Policy SH8 states that within Local Centres, retailing and centre uses appropriate in scale to the role and function of these centres will be supported, subject to environmental and traffic considerations.

Environmental implications 7.3 Wolverhampton Unitary Development Plan includes a chapter of policies relating to environmental protection and new development. Policy EP1 ‘Pollution Control’ is the overarching policy in this chapter. It states that development which may result in pollution of air, ground or water or pollution through noise, smell, dust, vibration, light or heat will only be permitted where it can be shown that there will be no material adverse impact on the immediate, medium or long term health, safety or amenity of land or surrounding areas; or quality and enjoyment of the environment.

51 7.4 Unitary Development Plan Policy EP4 ‘Light Pollution’ states that development proposals should ensure that light spillage from external lighting is kept to a minimum. The reasoned justification of this policy sets out that poorly designed or located lighting can cause nuisance to nearby residents, detract from the character of townscapes and landscapes and waste energy.

7.5 Unitary Development Plan policy EP5 ‘Noise Pollution’ states that developments which are likely to give rise to unacceptable levels of noise pollution will not be permitted. The reasoned justification of this policy sets out that noise pollution can have a significant adverse effect on the environment and the quality of life enjoyed by individuals and communities.

7.6 The north, west and southern boundaries of the application site immediately adjoin residential properties.

7.7 During the additional opening hours proposed there would be a significant increase in the level of noise and other forms of general disturbance as a result of customers calling at the premises, by vehicles and on foot, and glare from external lighting, which would be likely to result in unacceptable disturbance and nuisance to occupiers of neighbouring houses for the additional hours of opening requested. As such, it is not considered that the proposed extension of opening hours would comply with Unitary Development Plan policies SH8, EP1, EP3 and EP5.

Transportation considerations 7.8 The layout and design of the car parking, servicing and access areas is satisfactory and it is not considered that the proposed extension of the opening hours would compromise highway safety or the free flow of road traffic.

8. Conclusion

8.1 The proposed extension of the opening hours would be likely to result in unacceptable levels of noise and other forms of general disturbance which would be detrimental to the living amenities of occupiers of neighbouring houses and contrary to Unitary Development Plan policies SH8 ‘Local Centres’, EP1 ‘Pollution Control’, EP4 ‘Light Pollution’ and EP5 ‘Noise Pollution’.

9. Recommendation

9.1 Refuse, For the following reasons:

• The proposed extension of the opening hours would be likely to result in unacceptable levels of noise, light and general disturbance which would be detrimental to the living amenities of occupiers of neighbouring houses. The proposal is therefore contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policies SH8 ‘Local Centres’, EP1 ‘Pollution Control’, EP4 ‘Light Pollution’ and EP5 ‘Noise Pollution’.

Case Officer : Phillip Walker Telephone No : 01902 555632 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00267/VV Location Lidl Foodstore, Finchfield Hill,Wolverhampton,West Midlands Plan Scale (approx) 1:2500 National Grid Reference SJ 388401 298128 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 4825m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 APP NO’s: 09/00262/FUL & WARD: Park 09/00263/LBC DATE: 20-Apr-09 TARGET DATE: 20-Jul-09 RECEIVED: 27.03.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application and Listed Building Consent

SITE: Bantock House, Finchfield Road, Wolverhampton, West Midlands PROPOSAL: New timber gates to rear courtyard.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Helen Steatham Mr Alan Davies Adults And Community Learning (Cultural Property Services (Project Delivery) Services) Civic Centre Bantock House Museum St Peter's Square Finchfield Road Wolverhampton Wolverhampton WV1 1RL West Midlands WV3 9LQ

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description and Background

1.1 The application site is located 1.5 miles to the west of Wolverhampton City Centre and is bounded by Finchfield Road to the north, Bradmore Road to the east and Broad Lane to the west. Vehicular access into the site is from Finchfield Road.

1.2 Bantock House Museum is a Grade II listed building set within 43 acres of parkland, which is recorded on the Council’s local list as land of historical and amenity value. The building is within Bantock House Conservation Area.

1.3 The outbuildings at the rear of Bantock House have been converted into a courtyard complex with activity rooms, a community space, tea room and library.

1.4 The rear yard is currently enclosed by open-framed timber gates which were erected as part of the refurbishment and conversion of the outbuildings. However, whilst the gates are substantial and CCTV is present, they do not adequately prevent ingress into the yard outside opening hours. The posts and gates are too low and there is space to crawl underneath. The gates failure to satisfactorily secure the site is demonstrated by a recorded increase in the numbers of acts of illegal entry and vandalism at the site.

2. Application Details

2.1 The application seeks permission to erect new 2 metre high gates and posts to enclose the rear yard.

2.2 The new gates and posts would be taller than the existing and finish closer to the ground. Flush solid boarding and covered hinge positions will deter unauthorised

54 ingress. The spacing and positioning of the posts will be as existing, but the larger opening, will be split with two equal width gates.

2.3 During opening hours the gates will normally be open. Finishes, gradients and levels of the yard will be reinstated upon completion. It is proposed that the new gates will have a painted finish to match the existing.

3. Relevant Policies

3.1 National Guidance PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG13 Transport PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment PPG16 Archaeology and Planning

3.2 Wolverhampton Unitary Development Plan (UDP) D1 Design Quality D2 Design Statement D5 Public Realm Public Open Private Space D6 Townscape and Landscape D7 Scale - Height D8 Scale - Massing D9 Appearance D10 Community Safety D11 Access for People with Disabilities part D13 Sustainable Development HE1 Preservation of Local Character and Distinctiveness HE2 Historic Resources and Enabling Development HE3 Preservation and Enhancement of Conservation Areas HE4 Proposals Affecting a Conservation Area HE5 Control of Development in a Conservation Area HE12 Preservation and Active Use of Listed Buildings HE13 Development Affecting a Listed Building HE14 Alterations and Extensions to a Listed Building HE18 Preservation and Enhancement of Local List Buildings and Sites HE19 Development Affecting a Local List Building or Site HE21 Historic Parks and Gardens R4 Development Adjacent to Open Space AM9 Provision for Pedestrians AM10 Provision for Cyclists AM12 Parking and Servicing Provision AM15 Road Safety and Personal Security

4. Publicity

4.1 No reply or comments had been received at the time of writing this report.

5. Internal consultees

5.1 Conservation - no objections.

5.2 Access - comments awaited.

55 6. External consultees

6.1 English Heritage - no objections.

7. Appraisal

7.1 The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 [LB & CA Act] provides specific protection for listed buildings and conservation areas. The Act places a duty on planning authorities to have special regard to the desirability of preserving any listed building or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Planning authorities are also required to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of any conservation area.

7.2 The solid form, detailing, materials and overall scale and massing of the gates in relation to surrounding buildings and spaces would be appropriate. The proposals would reinforce the boundary to the rear courtyard and deter intruders. It is considered that the design and appearance of the proposed boundary gates would be in accordance with advice in PPG 15 and the Historic Environment policies in the UDP. The listed building and its setting would be preserved as would the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

7.3 As this application affects a Council owned listed building, the listed building consent would need to be referred to the Secretary of State to make the decision, if the Planning Committee is minded to grant.

8. Conclusion

8.1 The proposals are in accordance with Unitary Development Plan policies. The design and appearance of the proposed boundary gates would be in accordance with advice in PPG 15 and the Historic Environment policies in the UDP. The listed building and its setting would be preserved as would the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

9. Recommendation

9.1 In respect of planning application 09/00262/FUL: Grant planning permission subject to conditions, relating to materials and external finishes.

9.2 In respect of listed building consent application 09/00263/LBC: Refer to the Secretary of State, recommending approval subject to conditions relating to materials and external finishes.

Case Officer : Phillip Walker Telephone No : 01902 555632 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00262/FUL and 09/00263/LBC Location Bantock House, Finchfield Road,Wolverhampton,West Midlands Plan Scale (approx) 1:7500 National Grid Reference SJ 389656 298026 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 172321m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09 APP NO: 09/00351/FUL WARD: Wednesfield South DATE: 27-Apr-09 TARGET DATE: 27-Jul-09 RECEIVED: 27.04.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: Mecca Bingo Club, Unit D3, Bentley Bridge Park, Bentleybridge Way PROPOSAL: Part change of use (Class D2 to Class A1), subdivision and an additional non-food retail unit (Class A1) including associated external alterations, and revised servicing and car parking arrangements.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Life Property Ltd Mr Tim Rainbird C/o Agent 10 Queen Street Mayfair London W1J 5PF

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description and Background

1.1 The application site is situated 2.5 miles to the north-east of Wolverhampton City Centre and within Bentley Bridge Retail Park on the outskirts of Wednesfield.

1.2 The application site is the former Mecca Bingo Club and its car park. The building is positioned close to the junction of Backhouse Lane and Bentley Bridge Way. The car park fronts onto Wednesfield Way and Bentley Bridge Way.

1.3 The building provides 3,209 square metres of floor space and is single storey with a low pitched mansard type roof. Materials used are modern cladding and brickwork.

1.4 There are accesses into the site from Backhouse Lane and Bentley Bridge Way. There has been some evidence of the tipping of materials on the site and the building itself appears to be deteriorating. The building has been vacant since 2000.

1.5 To the north and west is Bentley Bridge Retail Park, which is in the same ownership as the application site.

2. Application Details

2.1 The application proposes a change of use and extension to the building and its subdivision into three units:-

Unit 1 - On the northern side of the building, an A1 retail food store (possibly an “Aldi”) facing onto the car parking area and covering 1,572 square metres. Unit 2 - Within the central portion of the building, a D1 leisure unit, possibly a twenty- four hour gym facility operated by “The Gym Group”, which would cover 1,394 square metres.

58 Unit 3 - On the southern side of the building and occupying the proposed extension, would be an A1 non-food bulky goods retail unit (possibly “Just for Pets”) facing onto the car park and covering 604 square metres.

2.2 The application also proposes the formation of three new shop fronts along the western elevation. There would also be other external alterations including a new roof, new cladding and entrance features.

2.3 The servicing arrangements would be re-configured to allow all three units to be serviced from a new service yard via a dedicated servicing access from Backhouse Lane. A roller shutter door to the building on the southern elevation would allow vehicular access to a servicing corridor for the proposed food store. The layout of the customer car parking area would be revised and overall parking numbers would reduce from the previously consented 229 parking spaces to 185 car spaces, of which 9 of these would be disabled bays.

2.4 A total of 14 cycle parking spaces would be provided in the form of “Sheffield” stands. This would include 6 covered staff spaces in the service yard, 2 customer spaces for each of the two retail units and 4 customer spaces for the leisure unit. The customer spaces would not be covered.

2.5 Letters have been provided from “Aldi”, “The Gym Group” and “Pets for You”, all of which express an interest in occupying the proposed units.

2.6 The development is anticipated to result in an investment in the site of approximately £6 million. There would also be the creation of approximately 55 new jobs.

3. Relevant Planning History

3.1 Mecca Bingo - BCX0261 - Proposed erection of a social club (Bingo) within Use Class D2 with associated car parking, landscaping and access. Granted 12.02.1996.

3.2 Mecca Bingo - 03/1170/FP - Change of use to D2 leisure use and associated retail and hot food / drink uses. Granted 06.11.2003.

3.3 Mecca Bingo - 07/00026/FUL - Change of use to D2 leisure use and for an A1 retail food store and non-food bulky goods retail use. Granted 02.07.2007

3.4 Bentley Bridge Retail Park - BCX 0285– Demolition of derelict office block (James House). Erection of a built leisure and retail complex with ancillary office development. Granted 04.04.1996.

3.5 Bentley Bridge Retail Park - 99/0797/VV – Section 73 Application - Alternative Master Plan to Vary Development Brief under the terms of Condition No.4 of planning permission BCX/0285 – Granted 11.10.1999.

3.6 Bentley Bridge Retail Park - 99/0525/RM - Class A1 retail development with associated car parking servicing pedestrian and vehicular routes and landscaping, relating to outline permission BCX/285. Granted 14.10.1999.

3.7 Bentley Bridge Retail Park – 00/1115/VV - Section 73 Application - Alternative master plan to amend Development Brief under the terms of Condition No.4 on Outline Planning Permission BCX285 – Granted 25.10.2000.

3.8 Bentley Bridge Retail Park – 98/0966/RM – Class A1 Retail development, including associated car parking, servicing, pedestrian and vehicular routes and landscaping Approval of reserved matters for BCX/285. Granted 01.11. 2000.

3.9 Bentley Bridge Retail Park – 99/1039/OP - Class A1 (Retail) with associated car parking, servicing, pedestrian and vehicular access and landscaping. Granted 22.02.2001.

4. Constraints

4.1 Authorised Processes Landfill Gas Mining Areas Sites and Monuments

5. Relevant Policies

5.1 National Guidance PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG13 Transport PPG 15 Planning and the Historic Environment PPG24 Planning and Noise

5.2 Unitary Development Plan Policies D1 Design Quality D2 Design Statement D3 Urban Structure D4 Urban Grain D5 Public Realm Public Open Private Space D6 Townscape and Landscape D7 Scale - Height D8 Scale - Massing D9 Appearance D10 Community Safety D11 Access for People with Disabilities D12 Nature Conservation and Nature Features D13 Sustainable Development D14 The Provision of Public Art EP1 Pollution Control EP3 Air Pollution EP4 Light Pollution EP5 Noise Pollution EP6 Protection of Groundwater, Watercourses and Canals EP9 Sustainable Drainage Arrangements for Development SH1 Centres Strategy SH2 Centre Uses SH3 Need and the Sequential Approach SH4 Integration of Development into Centres SH9 Local hops and Centre Uses SH10 Protected Frontages SH11 New Retail Development – Comparison Goods SH12 New Retail Development – Bulky Goods SH13 New Retail Development - Foodstores B12 Access to Job Opportunities HE26 Requirement for Archaeological Evaluation HE28 Development Affecting Other Archaeological Sites AM1 Wolverhampton – The Accessible City AM7 Travel Plans AM9 Provision for Pedestrians

60 AM10 Provision for Cyclists AM12 Parking and Servicing Provision AM15 Road Safety and Personal Security

6. Publicity

6.1 No representations received.

7. Internal Consultees

Planning Policy 7.1 The unimplemented planning permission (07/00026/FUL) for Unit D3 would provide 1,000sqm of retail, 548sqm restaurant and 2,303sqm of leisure uses. The current application proposes 1,572sqm of convenience retail, 1,394sqm of leisure and 604sqm of bulky comparison goods. These proposals represent an increase in gross floor space from 3,709sqm (the existing unoccupied unit) to 3,932sqm - an uplift of 223sqm. This equates to a marginal uplift of 81sqm when compared to the 2007 unimplemented consent.

7.2 In terms of the size of the proposed elements of the scheme compared to the existing consent, there would be the removal of the 548sqm restaurant, a reduction in leisure provision by 909sqm from 2,303sqm to 1,394sqm, a reduction in non-food retail by 396sqm from 1,000sqm to 604sqm, and the provision of 1,572sqm convenience retail floor space.

7.3 Because of the site’s out-of-centre location, the proposed convenience retail element requires justification in terms of PPS6, as reflected in Policy SH3. It is considered that the tests of need, sequential test, scale and impact have been satisfactorily addressed by the information provided in the planning statement. It is accepted that there is a sufficient surplus of convenience expenditure within Wednesfield’s catchment area to justify the uplift in convenience floor space, provided that the applicant and owners of the site enter into a Section 106 agreement. There is currently an extant planning permission for 1,016 square metres of unimplemented convenience A1 retail floor space in the adjacent Bentley Bridge Retail Park (blocks A, B and C) by virtue of planning permission BCX/285 (1996). If this was also utilised the proposal may have a detrimental impact on the vitality and viability of Wednesfield Village Centre. Therefore it is considered a Section 106 agreement is required to remove the ability of 1,016sqm of A1 convenience retail floor space being utilised in the north of the adjacent retail park. A Section 106 agreement and appropriate planning conditions would ensure that the specific offer of a deep discounter (such as “Aldi”) would not undermine the vitality and viability of Wednesfield Village Centre. In the supporting planning and retail statement, the applicant states that the owner would be willing to enter into such a Section 106 agreement.

7.4 In terms of the sequential test, it is also accepted that there is no sequentially preferable location within or on the edge of Wednesfield Village primary shopping area that could accommodate the proposed quantum of floor space.

7.5 Although the 604sqm non-food bulky goods unit is smaller than the minimum unit size of 929sqm as indicated in Policy SH3 of the adopted UDP, the supporting planning statement does outline how this element would meet a specific local need, and the 'Just for Pets' operator has a specific requirement for this size of unit.

7.6 It is recognised that there is a qualitative and regenerative argument to see this long vacant building brought back to an appropriate use, and it has been indicated that if

61 approved, work would commence swiftly on-site. Significantly, letters have been provided from “Aldi”, “The Gym Group” and “Pets for You”, all of which express a firm interest in occupying the proposed units.

7.7 In order to ensure that the proposal results in appropriate uses, it is suggested that appropriate planning conditions are included relating to the floor space of the various elements within the scheme, the specific types of goods sold within the units, re-issue relevant conditions from previous applications, and any other relevant matters e.g. restricting future sub-division and installation of mezzanine floors.

7.8 Transportation Development - has no objections subject to the resolution of the following matters: • The service yard is an acceptable design. However, as the proposed access is significantly wider than existing a S278 agreement would be required to control the alterations to the adopted highway. • The access to the car park from Bentley Bridge Way is opposite the access to the car park to the northern part of Bentley Bridge Retail Park. In order to avoid conflicting traffic movements, which would be likely to cause queuing on the highway, the access to the retail park needs to deter right hand turns out of the site. • Gates are required to secure the service yard. • The vehicle drop off point outside Unit 1 (food store) would be likely to be misused and this would add to traffic congestion at this critical point. As such, the drop off point should be removed and amended plans submitted. • The proposed motorcycle parking should be moved to a more visible location. • Customer cycle stand should be covered and one additional stand is required for the gym.

7.9 Environmental Services - recommend a condition relating to the detailed design of the bin store.

7.10 Access Team - make detailed comments about Part M of the Building Regulations and recommend that 11 disabled bays are provided (as opposed to the currently proposed 9 disabled bays).

7.11 Landscape - recommend that a detailed landscape plan be provided. The landscape plan should include additional trees to replace those that would be removed. This could be secured through a condition.

7.12 Archaeology, Property Services and Building Control - have no objections.

8. External Consultees

8.1 Severn Trent Water Ltd – has no objections subject to a condition requiring the submission of sustainable drainage details and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context.

8.2 Environment Agency – No objection.

62 9. Appraisal

9.1 The key issues to be considered when determining this application are:

• Planning Policy • Design and Layout • Parking and Access • Landscaping and Boundary Treatments • Section 106 Agreements

Planning Policy 9.2 There is no objection to the proposal in terms of centre’s policies, subject to the applicant and owners of the site entering into a Section 106 agreement removing the ability of 1,016sqm of floor space in the north of the adjacent retail park being utilised for the sale of food, and subject to conditions. These issues are explained in detail in paragraphs 7.1 to 7.6 above.

Design and Layout 9.3 In terms of the alterations to the existing building, these represent a significant improvement over the current appearance of the site. The extension to the south elevation of the building and the new shop fronts, which would include visually pleasing curved canopy roofs and the extensive use of glass, would create a vibrant frontage and improve the relationship of the site with the surrounding pedestrian routes and enhance the vitality of the surrounding area. The proposed roller shutters to the service corridor would be 3 metres high and would be largely screened if the service yard is enclosed.

9.4 The submitted layout plan shows the service yard un-enclosed, except for a 1 metre high 3 bar fence on the southern and western sides and landscape planting. The service yard needs to be enclosed by a wall, at least 2 metres high and gated, in the interests of security and visual amenity. The applicants have been asked to show this on an amended plan.

Parking and Access 9.5 The site layout includes an adequate number of car parking spaces.

9.6 Customer cycle stands should be covered and one additional stand are required for the gym. There is a canopy proposed across the front of the building which would provide suitable weather protection. The agents have been asked to show customer cycle parking located beneath the canopy on an amended plan.

9.7 The motorcycle parking should be relocated to a more visible and secure location. The agents have been asked to show these changes on an amended plan.

9.8 The vehicle drop off point outside unit 1 would be likely to be misused and this would result in traffic congestion within the car parking areas. The agents have been asked to show the omission of the drop-off on an amended plan.

9.9 In the same way that the access to the car park has been designed to deter right hand turns out of the site, the access to the retail park opposite needs to be amended to deter right hand turns out of the site. This can be required by condition.

Landscaping and Boundary Treatments 9.10 Insufficient landscaping and boundary treatment details have been provided. These details could be secured by a condition.

63 Section 106 Agreement 9.11 In order to ensure that the proposals do not undermine the vitality and viability of Wednesfield Village Centre the applicant and owners of the site have agreed in principle to enter into a Section 106 agreement removing the ability of 1,016sqm of floor space in the north of the Bentley Bridge Retail Park being utilised for the sale of food.

9.12 Public art and targeted recruitment and training can be included in the S106 agreement.

10. Conclusion

10.1 The application is in accordance with Unitary Development Plan “Shopping and the Role of Centres” policies, subject to the applicant and owners of the site entering into a Section 106 agreement removing the ability of 1,016sqm of A1 convenience retail floor space in the north of the adjacent retail park being utilised for the sale of food, and subject to conditions as recommended.

10.2 The design and layout is broadly acceptable. However, there are outstanding matters of detail to be resolved, relating to:

Enclosure of service yard; Bin store Additional customer cycle parking and location of customer cycle parking beneath the canopy; Relocation of motorcycle parking; and Omission of drop off point adjacent to unit 1.

10.3 Subject to the resolution of the outstanding matters detailed above and the imposition of conditions as recommended, the design and layout would be in accordance with “Design” and “Access and Mobility” policies in the UDP.

11. Recommendation

11.1 Delegated authority to the Director for Sustainable Communities to grant subject to:

1. Satisfactory resolution of outstanding matters as set out at paragraph 10.2.

2. Negotiation and completion of a Section 106 Agreement to; remove the ability of 1,016sqm of floor space to in the north of the Bentley Bridge Retail Park being utilised for the sale of food and secure targeted recruitment and training and public art.

3. Conditions to include: • Materials; • Large scale architectural details; • Refuse storage; • Cycle storage; • Motorcycle storage; • Landscaping scheme; • Boundary treatments; • External lighting; • Drainage; • Parking to be provided and retained; • Servicing plan; • Building and site security, including gates to service yard; 64 • Physical changes to access to Bentley Bridge Retail Park on north side of Bentley Bridge Way; • No external plant, ventilation equipment, meter boxes, vents, flues, aerials, satellite dishes etc without written approval; • Exterior of building to be completed in accordance with approved plans and details prior to occupation; • That permitted development rights be removed for each unit for mezzanine floor erection or expansion; • That all units not be able to be further subdivided into smaller units; and • Restrict the quantity of retail floor space and types of goods sold.

Notes for Information:

• The widening of the service yard access from Backhouse Lane would require agreement under Section 278 of the Highway Act 1980. You are advised to seek advice from the Council’s Transportation Department on 01902 55 4241

Case Officer : Phillip Walker Telephone No : 01902 555632 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00351/FUL Location Mecca Bingo Club, Unit D3,Bentley Bridge Park,Bentleybridge Way Plan Scale (approx) 1:2500 National Grid Reference SJ 394179 299826 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 12075m2

66 PLANNING COMMITTEE - 23-Jun-09

APP NO: 09/00231/FUL WARD: Heath Town DATE: 29-Apr-09 TARGET DATE: 24-Jun-09 RECEIVED: 22.03.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: 185-189 Wednesfield Road, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV10 0EN PROPOSAL: Two storey rear extension to create 2 additional dwelling units at first floor and storage area at ground floor. Single storey rear extension and new shopfront.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr Onkar Singh Mr Gurprit Benning 185-189 Wednesfield Road 82a Holyhead Road Wolverhampton Wednesbury West Midlands WS10 7PA WV10 0EN

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The site is located approximately 1.2km northeast of Wolverhampton City Centre and is approximately 0.04Ha in area. The application site faces onto Wednesfield Road and is part of the A4124 which is an important arterial route into Wolverhampton.

1.2 Properties No. 185-189 Wednesfield Road are part of a small row of shops with residential accommodation on top (No. 175-191 Wednesfield Road). This small parade of shops is mostly trading and provides a valuable local facility for Heath Town residents.

1.3 The application site at first floor level is currently vacant. However, according to the Design and Access Statement, this area was previously used as residential housing consisting of three flats.

1.4 The site has five parking spaces and an outbuilding at the rear. Access is obtained through a private gated access road, located immediately adjacent to No. 191.

2. Application details

2.1 This planning application proposes the following: • a two storey rear extension to create 2 additional dwelling units at first floor level • a single storey rear extension to include new storage area and, • a new shop front

2.2 At ground floor level, the proposed development would increase the retail area from 125sq.m to 180sq.m.

67 2.3 At first floor level, two additional residential units are proposed with some internal renovations of the vacant residential units and the creation of an additional independent access for one of the existing flats.

2.4 Pedestrian and vehicular access to the proposed flats is gained towards the rear. There would be no direct pedestrian access through the front.

2.5 The two proposed flats, located at the proposed first floor extension, would have a single aspect orientation.

2.6 The proposed shop front would remove the existing window and door located at unit No. 187 to replace them with a new larger window.

2.7 There is no amenity space proposed. The proposed number of parking spaces is four and no disabled parking or motorcycle parking is provided. Three cycle bays are provided and a bin store is also provided at the rear of the application site. The proposed materials are to match the existing.

3. Constraints

3.1 Policy: Local Centre- Heath Town

4. Relevant policies

4.1 National Policies

PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development PPS3 - Housing

4.2 UDP Policies

D1 - Design Quality D2 - Design Statement D3 - Urban Structure D4 - Urban Grain D5 - Public Realm Public Open Private Space D6 - Townscape and Landscape D7 - Scale - Height D8 - Scale - Massing D9 - Appearance D10 - Community Safety D11 - Access for People with Disabilities part AM1 - Access, Motability and New Development AM12 - Parking and Servicing Provision AM14 - Minimising the Effect of Traffic on Com. AM15 - Road Safety and Personal Security SH1 – Centres Strategy SH8 – Local Centres

4.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance

SPG3 - Residential Development

68 5. Publicity and Neighbour notification

5.1 A petition in support of the planning application, with 29 signatures was submitted with the application.

6. Consultees

6.1 Access Officer- no objections in principle.

6.2 Environmental Services- recommend refusal for the following reason: The proposed residential developments are located in very close proximity to two hot food takeaways. Parts of the residential development are immediately adjacent to a fish and chip shop. The fish and chip shop currently trades from midday to midnight 7 days a week. The second hot food take away has a premises licence which limits the sale of hot food to the public until 1am on Friday and Saturday. Based on the current trading hours, the nature of the food businesses and the proximity of the proposed residential accommodation, it is considered likely that potential occupants would be subject to nuisance/disturbance caused by odour and noise caused by extraction systems and/or members of the public using the hot food takeaways.

6.3 Transportation- do not support the application due to insufficient information in respect of access, servicing, lighting and car parking space dimensions.

7. External consultees

7.1 Fire Department- • unsatisfactory for fire service to the additional dwellings. • inadequate vehicle access for a pump appliance to be within 45 metres of all points within the dwelling. • the adopted access road from the front of the building to the rear does not appear suitable for fire services.

8. Appraisal

8.1 The following key issues are:

• Scale and Siting • Layout & Accessibility

Scale and Siting 8.2 The proposed extension is one that does not appropriately relate to its neighbouring buildings and immediate surroundings.

8.3 The length of the proposed two storey rear extension would be approximately 20m and would occupy the full length of the rear of the existing plot. None of the adjacent properties and surrounding buildings have extended towards the rear at both, ground and first floor level.

8.4 The immediate surrounding properties have elongated rear gardens. The addition of the proposed extension would appear out of character as it would reduce the spaciousness perceived at the rear of these properties. Therefore, the proposed first floor rear extension, by virtue of its length and height would result in a loss of spaciousness which is a characteristic feature and part of the quality of this

69 environment, and so would detract from the existing character and appearance of the locality.

8.5 The proposed rear residential accommodation would be located at first floor level with two windows directly facing towards the private rear amenity space for house No. 183 Wednesfield Road. Therefore, by virtue of their orientation the proposed first floor rear extension would be overlooking No. 183’s rear amenity space.

8.6 Although the rear garden of property No. 191 is in poor condition, the siting of the proposed first floor extension would not be acceptable in relation to property No. 191. The extension is in close proximity to this neighbouring property and amenity area which, by virtue of its height and location, would lead to a loss of spaciousness and would have an overbearing impact when viewed from the adjacent property and the rear amenity area.

8.7 All these conflict with policy D4 Urban Grain of the UDP which states: ‘The relationship of buildings to the spaces around them should not constitute over development leading to cramped layouts’ and policy D1: Design Quality that encourages all new developments to be of a high quality which contributes to ‘creating a strong sense of place’ it emphasizes that ‘Proposals should evolve from an understanding of local distinctiveness and the historic context. Poor and mediocre designs will be unacceptable’. The proposed development would be out of character with the surrounding area and does not take account of the local scale of plot and building bulks.

8.8 Therefore, the proposed rear extension does not comply with policies D1, D4, D9, H1 and H6 from the Wolverhampton Unitary Development Plan and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note – 3 Residential Development.

8.9 With regards to environmental services comments, the proposed residential units would be located in close proximity to property No. 191 Wednesfield Road which is currently occupied by a hot food takeaway shop. By virtue of its close proximity to No. 191 hot food take away the proposed residential units would have a detrimental effect caused by odour and noise caused by extraction systems and/or members of the public using the hot food takeaway in the evening. This is contrary to UDP policy SH8- Local Centre which states that complementary residential use may be appropriate subject to the creation of a satisfactory residential environment.

Layout & Accessibility 8.10 The applicant in trying to maximise the use of the site proposes a layout that has an over-dominance of building and hard surfaces and no amenity space/landscaping areas.

8.11 The proposed parking provision is one that uses substandard dimensions and there is no disabled parking.

8.12 There is no direct pedestrian access through the front. This means that future occupants when coming by foot would have to walk along the private access drive, which is unlit and in very poor condition.

8.13 In addition, there is no explanation of how the bins would be collected as there is no direct access through the retail area and the private access drive is permanently locked.

9. Conclusion

9.1 A total of five residential units at this location are considered overdevelopment and therefore the proposed development is not acceptable in principle. It is considered that

70 the proposed development is far too cramped, does not demonstrate a high standard of design, and is detrimental to adjacent properties (No. 183 and 191 Wednesfield Road) and the character and appearance of the existing buildings.

10. Recommendation

10.1 Refuse, for the following reasons:

(i) The proposed development represents an overdevelopment of the building and hard surfaces and lack of shared amenity space. The proposal is therefore, contrary to Wolverhampton’s Unitary Development Plan policies D1, D4, D6 and H6.

(ii) The proposed extension would, by reason of its height, bulk and siting, have an unacceptable overbearing effect on the rear amenity of property No. 191 Wednesfield Road and an overlooking effect into the rear amenity of property No.183 Wednesfield Road to the detriment of the character and appearance of the adjoining buildings and of the street scene, contrary to Wolverhampton’s Unitary Development Plan policies D1, D4, D6, D7, D9 and H6.

(iii) By virtue of its close proximity to property No. 191 Wednesfield Road which runs a hot food take away, the proposed residential units would be likely to have an unacceptable degree of disturbance for future occupants caused by potential noise and odours from this hot food take away. Relevant UDP Policies: D1, H1, H6 and SH8.

(iv) Due to lack of disabled parking, substandard parking provision and inadequate accessibility for pedestrians, the proposal would be detrimental to highway safety. The proposal is therefore, contrary to Wolverhampton’s Unitary Development Plan policies D1, AM12 and AM15.

Case Officer : Marcela Quinones Telephone No : 01902 555607 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00231/FUL Location 185-189 Wednesfield Road, Wolverhampton,West Midlands,WV10 0EN Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 392651 299369 Plan Printed 11.06.2009 Application Site Area 486m2