Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

17/00703/FUL Gainlive Ltd , & TEDDESLEY HAY Councillor Len Bates Councillor Isabel Ford

The Lane House Top Road Acton Trussell South ST17 0RQ

Proposed residential development with four new dwellings

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site Description

1.1.1 The site is located within the Acton Trussell Development Boundary. It currently consists of an existing two storey four bedroom dwelling with a skillion and lean-to roof, surrounding garden areas and an access track leading onto Top Road. It is surrounded to the north, west and south by residential development, which largely consists of detached two storey properties. To the east is open countryside containing open fields. The site is bounded by substantial shrub and tree planting on all sides. Topographically, the site rises from west to east and forms part of an area of raised ground within the context of the wider village.

1.2 Planning History

1974 The erection of three houses with roadworks - Refused [74/00344] 2016 Proposed residential development with four new dwellings - Refused [16/00067/FUL] - Appeal dismissed (see paragraph 2.1.1 below)

1.3 Pre-application Discussions

1.3.1 Pre-application discussions took place with the applicant.

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Proposal

2.1.1 The application is essentially a resubmission of the previously refused planning application 16/00067/FUL, which has been resubmitted in light of the appeal decision on the previous application. In this appeal decision the inspector concluded, to summarise, that there were no concerns with the scheme's impact on neighbouring properties, local character or highways that warranted refusal. The appeal was dismissed solely over the inspector's concerns regarding the legal agreement provided to secure mitigation payments towards the Chase Special Area of Conservation. Subsequently, the applicants have sought to provide a satisfactory legal agreement to secure the required mitigation payments, and have resubmitted the scheme for consideration with this amended agreement. Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

2.1.2 The application proposes the demolition of the existing dwelling and associated structures, replacing these with four two and a half storey dwellings and associated garages. Plot 1 will contain a six bedroom dwelling, plot 2 will contain a five bed dwelling, plot 3 will contain a six bed dwelling and plot 4 will contain a seven bed dwelling. Each dwelling will be served by four car parking spaces, which will be provided through parking spaces at the front of each dwelling and within the associated garages. Access to the dwellings will be provided using the existing access from Top Road, although a passing bay is proposed along this as part of the development. Two trees are proposed to be removed to the north east of the site, although the numerous remaining trees within the site are to be retained. In addition to the 4 dwellings to be constructed, the applicant has agreed to enter into a Unilateral Agreement for a monetary payment towards the Cannock Chase SAC.

2.2 Agent Submissions

2.2.1 The application is accompanied by the following additional information: - Topographical Survey - Tree Report/Impact Survey - Planning Support Statement - Ecological Survey (18/10/2017) subsequently followed by an Addendum to Ecological Appraisal (18/12/2017) followed by further eDNA sampling for great crested newts on ponds in the vicinity of the proposed site (received 14/05/2018). - Appeal decision relating to previous planning application's refusal (16/00067/FUL)

3. POLICY CONTEXT

3.1 The site is within the Development Boundary of Acton Trussell

3.2 Core Strategy

National Policy 1: The Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy for Core Policy 2: Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment Policy EQ1: Protecting, Expanding and Enhancing Natural Assets Policy EQ3: Conservation, Preservation and Protection of Heritage Assets Policy EQ4: Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape Core Policy 3: Sustainable Development and Climate Change Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design Policy EQ11: Wider Design Considerations Policy EQ13: Development Contributions Core Policy 6: Housing Delivery Policy H1: Achieving a Balanced Housing Market Policy H2: Provision of Affordable Housing Core Policy 10: Sustainable Community Facilities and Services Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport Policy EV11: Sustainable Travel Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

Policy EV12: Parking Provision

3.3 National Planning Policy Framework

Chapter 3: Supporting a prosperous rural economy Chapter 4: Promoting sustainable transport Chapter 6: Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Chapter 7: Requiring good design Chapter 12: Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

3.4 Other relevant documents

Affordable Housing and Housing Mix SPD

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Councillor Len Bates Initial comments (received 04.08.2017) Further to our recent telephone conversation I wish to "call in" the above application to be determined by the Planning Committee.

Further comments (received 11/08/2017) The application is contrary to Policies EQ9 and EQ11 of the Council's Core Strategy. EQ9 states: "New development should take into account the amenity of any nearby residents". All of the residents who have properties adjacent to the proposed development have serious concerns regarding loss of light, loss of privacy, the impact on the amenity. EQ11 states: "Development should contribute positively to the surrounding buildings, whilst respecting the scale of spaces and buildings in the surrounding area". The overbearing nature of the proposed development would result in the exceptionally large properties, over 9 metres in height, would directly affect the light to neighbouring properties. Some of the properties would directly overlook bedroom windows on adjacent properties let into the bank on Top Road as existing screening trees have been removed prior to the initial application being made. By virtue of the height of the site the houses would have a detrimental effect on the neighbouring village of Bednall and the Cannock Chase Area of Oustanding Natural Beauty. The proposed development would not be in keeping with other developments in Acton Trussell.

The Acton Trussell, Bednall & Teddesley Hay Parish Council Parish Council do not support the application as per their letter to South Staffordshire dated 17th February 2016. In addition, local residents have written ot the Council expressing their concerns, which include:

1. The properties would be overbearing due to size and elevated position. 2. The removal of mature trees. 3. Parking and traffic problems during construction period. 4. Road safety. 5. Loss of peace and quiet and loss of wildlife. Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

6. Disruption in the event of construction work taking place.

I have "called-in" this application for determination by the Planning Committee and I shall call for refusal on the grounds that it does not accord with the Council's Core Strategy Policies EQ9 and EQ11.

Acton Trussell Parish Council (expired 25.08.2017) No comments received directly from the Parish Council.

Conservation Officer (received 15.08.2017) The application is a resubmission following the refusal of application 16/00067/FUL on 24 June 2016, and the subsequent appeal dismissed on 25 April 2017. The application as submitted is identical to the previous submission, and as such the previous Conservation Officer comments remain valid.

Summary:

This site is adjacent to a number of Locally Listed Buildings namely 1-3 Bank Cottages, Top Road and Bank Top Cottages on Bank Top Lane. There will be a slight impact on the setting of these undesignated heritage assets but this can be mitigated by robust boundary treatments and can be balanced against potential public benefits.

Comments:

Under the NPPF, paragraph 135, Local Planning Authorities are required to take into account the effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA). In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly NDHA's a balanced judgement will be require having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.

As the buildings are locally listed they can be considered as having some significance although not sufficient to merit statutory listing. There is no explicit requirement to consider their setting but the NPPF does refer to applications that indirectly affect a NDHA. The locally listed buildings are much smaller in scale than the proposed dwellings however, there will be a reasonable distance between the new development and the cottages and there is some existing screening and there is the opportunity to require this to be retained and potentially improved so that the new development has a minimal impact on the setting of the locally listed cottages.

Furthermore the NPPF requires LPA's to make a balanced judgement and in this instance the impact on the NDHA would be minimal so that, in relation to its impact on the built heritage assets, this application complies with the relevant policies of the NPPF.

Conditions:

Not applicable Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

County Highways (received 18.08.2017) There are no objections on Highway grounds to the proposed development subject to the following conditions being included on any approval:- 1. The garages indicated on the approved plan shall be retained for the parking of motor vehicles and cycles. They shall at no time be converted to living accommodation without the prior express permission of the Local Planning Authority. 2. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive, parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. 3. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until the passing bays indicated on drawing No. 1822-01 C have been constructed and completed Reasons. 1 - 3. In the interest of highway safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

County Ecology Initial comments (received 14.09.2017) I have reviewed application documents on line and the information that you have sent. To meet Natural Standing advice, ensure compliance with legal obligations, and demonstrate compliance with policy EQ1 ecological survey and assessment is required.

Demolition - no information has been provided regarding the nature of the building to be demolished. If demolition is proposed as part of this application assessment for use by bats would be required.

It appears that there may be impacts of road access on mature trees. The tree survey report states that some trees support features that bats may use for roosting. There is considerable evidence of bats in the local area including evidence of breeding. No plan accompanies the tree survey report so impacts on trees that may support bats (and other trees) cannot be assessed. It appears that the access measures proposed could involve substantial tree impacts through root area damage along the access track unless works are not required or can be carried out using a "no-dig" technique. The plan with updated passing paces that you have sent indicates substantial highway works within tree root protection areas.

I agree with the Greenscape Environmental Ltd finding that great crested newt survey should be carried out due to the potential for off-site ponds to support great crested newts and the proximity of ponds. I also agree with Greenscape Environmental Ltd that an extended Phase 1 survey or Preliminary Ecological Appraisal should be carried out to include habitat survey and assessment of trees and buildings on site to support bats and data search for protected species and species of local importance from the local records centre (Staffordshire Ecological Record) and online sources. Further bat emergence and activity survey may be required, depending on initial survey findings. Badger survey is also recommended.

Further comments (received 03.11.2017) 1.0 Introduction Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

1.1 I have been commissioned by South Staffordshire Council to review the planning application documentation for 17/00703/FUL for replacement of 1 no. dwelling with 4 no. new dwellings at The Lane House, Top Road, Acton Trussell. I have also reviewed information submitted by an objector.

1.2 Documents and plans reviewed: o Site Plan o Site Plan with access road passing places o Ecological Appraisal by Crossman Associates o Greenscape Environmental Ltd Ecological Assessment of Ponds at Shakan, Acton Trussell o Topographical Survey drawing o Tree Report/Impact Survey o Planning Support Statement

1.3 I have not visited the site but have viewed aerial photographs and application photographs.

2.0 Policy and Legislative context in relation to this application

2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework s.109 states: "The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment ….by minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible. s.118 states that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principle: if significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.

2.2 In accordance with this, the South Staffordshire adopted Local Plan Core Strategy policy EQ1: Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets states that permission will be granted for development that would not cause significant harm to species that are protected or under threat and that wherever possible, development proposals should build in biodiversity by incorporating ecologically sensitive design and features for biodiversity within the development scheme.

2.3 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended); along with the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, provide the main legislative framework for protection of species. In addition to planning policy requirements, the LPA needs to be assured that this legislation will not be contravened due to planning consent. In addition to these provisions, section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 places a duty on all public authorities in England and Wales to have regard, in the exercise of their functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. Section 41 refers to a list of habitats and species of principal importance to which this duty applies.

2.4 Natural England Standing Advice which has the same status as a statutory planning response states that survey reports and mitigation plans are required for Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018 development projects that could affect protected species, as part of obtaining planning permission.

3.0 Assessment of Submitted Documents and Plans

3.1 I assessed the Greenscape Environmental Ltd Ecological Assessment of Ponds at Shakan provided by an objector in October 2017 and concluded that I supported the findings of this report regarding a need for survey for great crested newts and other protected species. I also advised that an assessment was required of the existing building in regard of potential to support roosting bats and that impacts of the proposed access provisions on mature trees and there use by bats was required.

3.2 The Ecological Appraisal by Crossman Associates covers other protected species (though it is ill-informed regarding reptile rarity in the County and fails to include a Staffordshire Ecological Record search) but fails to consider the potential of the site as terrestrial amphibian habitat which is suggested as possible by the Greenspace Environmental report due to the condition of nearby ponds including some within 50 metres of the application site and very close to the access road adjacent to proposed access track works (passing places). No great crested newt survey has been carried out. It is recommended that this be required prior to consent in accordance with the SBC planning application validation guidance and Natural England Standing Advice.

3.3 The Crossman Associates survey report covers the application site only and fails to cover proposed works to the access track or to consider protected species originating on neighbouring land that could use the site The Greenspace Environmental report findings regarding potential for great crested newts are not addressed. It is recommended that the applicant and their ecological consultant be asked to address this report and provide a response regarding the approach that they propose in regard of this issue. Given the extensive site clearance required for construction it is considered that a Reasonable Avoidance Measures approach may be difficult and that survey data is required to support mitigation measures for great crested newts (if found).

3.4 The Ecological Appraisal by Crossman Associates is not in accordance with the Tree Report/Impact Survey in regard of assessment of the likelihood of on-site trees to support bats. s. 3.5 of the tree report states that some of the larger trees support features that could be used by roosting bats yet the Crossman Associates report states that there is no potential for bats in trees. This may be due to the fact that the Crossman Associates survey did not appear to include the access track and associated works areas. The Crossman Associates report does not include a records search that includes Staffordshire Ecological Record (SER) as stipulated by planning application validation guidance. SER holds a number of records of bats in the local area. Providing that all mature trees can be protected (other than the two recommended for removal by the tree report) no further bat survey is required. Should it be found that removal of any other mature trees is required to facilitate access works further bat survey may be required. This could be covered by a condition.

Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

3.5 The site supports abundant bird nesting habitat likely to be used by common garden/woodland birds. A condition is recommended requiring all vegetation removal to take place outside of the bird breeding season (Late February -August inclusive) unless immediately (within 48 hours) preceded by a survey by a suitably experienced ornithologist or ecologist demonstrating that no nesting is taking place.

3.6 A condition is recommended requiring a landscape plan that takes account of recommendations on the Crossman Associates report section

4.10-4.11. In addition installation of three bat boxes on a suitable tree and of a few bird boxes is recommended. This would be in accordance with policy EQ1.

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

4.1 It is recommended that survey of ponds within 250 metres of the application site for great crested newts be required prior to consent with appropriate mitigation incorporated into proposals.

4.2 Conditions are recommended requiring bat survey should removal of any mature trees be required and for protection of breeding birds.

4.3 A condition is recommended requiring submission of a landscape plan that includes ecological enhancements

Further comments (received 29th May 2018)

I have been commissioned by South Staffordshire Council to review the documentation for the above application.

Documents and plans reviewed: o Letter and test results regarding Great Crested Newts (GCN)

I have not visited the site but have viewed aerial photographs.

Assessment of the Submitted Documents and Plans

I am satisfied that environmental DNA sampling of the ponds surrounding the application site has been carried out satisfactorily. No evidence of GCN was found during this survey.

Conclusions and Recommendations

No further survey work is required for GCN. The remaining conditions recommended by Ali Glaisher (letter 3 November 2017) stand, and are re-stated here for reference.

Conditions are recommended requiring bat survey should removal of any mature trees be required and for the protection of breeding birds. Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

A condition is recommended requiring submission of a landscape plan that includes ecological enhancements.

Severn Trent Water (received 09.08.2017) With Reference to the above planning application the company's observations regarding sewerage are as follows.

I can confirm that we have no objections to the proposals subject to the inclusion of the following condition: o The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and o The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use. This is to ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to prevent or to avoid exacerbating any flooding issues and to minimise the risk of pollution.

Neighbours

5x objections received (08/08/2017 - 05/09/2017) A number of responses have been received from neighbours raising objections to the proposal. These raise a number of objections. These can be summarised as being for the following reasons: - Overlooking from the proposed properties to existing dwellings adjacent to the site. - 3 storey properties not in keeping with the village and would exacerbate overlooking issues. - Proposals high ridge lines and elevated position mean properties will be overbearing in their relationship to existing village. - A number of trees have been removed prior to the tree report being undertaken. Loss of further trees may further increase overlooking to neighbouring properties. - Levels of car parking are inadequate for the number of bedrooms to be provided. - Lack of sufficient passing places to allow residential traffic and construction traffic. - Sloping nature of the site will result in drainage impacts on properties lying downhill. - Loss of peace and quiet. - Loss of wildlife on the site and surrounds. - Construction work will cause negative noise, traffic, disruption, dust and smoke and damage to neighbours. - General lack of traffic infrastructure to accommodate development. - Contravention of individuals rights to a peaceful enjoyment of their possessions, home, private and family life. - Traffic to access development will pass adjacent to neighbouring properties. - Driveway required to access the land is substandard, being only 3m in width for most of its length and 140m in length with no standard passing place. No agreement has been secured to improve this existing access from the landowners. - A third party ecology assessment (undertaken by Greenscape Environmental Ltd) indicates that further ecological survey is required prior to determination, in particular with respect to newts, bats, badgers and nesting birds. Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

Site notice (expired 04.09.2017)

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 This application has been called in to Planning Committee by Councillor Len Bates.

5.2 Key Issues

- Principle of Development - Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC) - Locational Sustainability - Affordable Housing - Ecology - Highways and Parking - Neighbouring Amenity - Impact on Character - Representations

5.3 Principle of Development

5.3.1 The proposal is within Acton Trussell, which falls within 'Other Villages and Hamlets' in the Core Strategy. Core Policy 1 states that such settlements are not identified for growth, except for rural affordable housing developments to meet local needs, which is not what this application proposes. Therefore, the proposal does not conform to the settlement hierarchy set out in Core Policy 1 of the Core Strategy. However, it should also be stressed that Core Policy 1 emphasises the importance of the efficient use of land across the District, and the proposal would achieve this by delivering 4 dwellings in place of the 1 dwelling currently occupying the site, which sits within the development boundary. Furthermore there are other material considerations which weigh in favour of the application, outweighing the harm caused by lack of conformity with Core Policy 1. These include the services and facilities present within Acton Trussell (see 'Location' in 5.5 below) and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework/Planning Practice Guidance. It is also important to note that the Council currently lacks a five year housing land supply. Therefore, the presumption in favour of sustainable development that is engaged in paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework, meaning that the development should be approved unless specific circumstances set out in the NPPF apply.

5.4 Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and the Habitat Regulations

5.4.1 The proposed site lies within the 0-15km zone of influence for the Cannock Chase SAC, where any new development may have a significant effect on the Cannock Chase SAC if satisfactory mitigation/avoidance measures are not provided. In agreement with Natural England, the Council seeks a payment of £232 per net dwelling increase within the 0-8km zone of proximity to the Cannock Chase SAC to Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018 ensure the relevant avoidance and mitigation measures are provided. The applicants have agreed to provide this payment as part of a future Unilateral Agreement.

5.4.2 It is important to note that the planning inspector handling the appeal on the previous application (16/00067/FUL) had concerns over the Council's approach to this matter. In particular, concerns were raised by the inspector that the Council's approach would not be consistent with the pooling restrictions to planning obligations set out in the CIL Regulations 2010.

5.4.3 Following the previous appeal and the inspector's concerns, further legal advice has been sought on this matter. It has been confirmed with the Council's legal team that the purpose of the £232 per net dwelling payment is to give the Council the legal authority to determine the application as a competent authority under the Habitat Regulations. The supplied Unilateral Agreement provided by the applicants has been appropriately worded to reflect this, so I am satisfied that the required payment towards the Cannock Chase SAC can be secured without contravening the pooling restrictions of the CIL Regulations 2010. Therefore, the Council can proceed to determine the application whilst satisfying its duty to avoid significant effects to the Cannock Chase SAC under the Habitat Regulations.

5.5 Location

5.5.1 Paragraph 55 of the National Planning Policy Framework emphasises that new housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities and that new isolated homes in the countryside should be avoided. Furthermore, the government's Planning Practice Guidance makes clear that rural housing is essential to ensure the viable use of local facilities and that blanket policies restricting housing development in some settlements and preventing other settlements from expanding should be avoided unless their use can be supported by robust evidence. This government guidance is an important material consideration in judging the acceptability of housing in this location.

5.5.2 Whilst Acton Trussell does lack some facilities, such as a convenience store or a school, it does contain other facilities in the form of The Moat House hotel and restaurant, St. James Church and the Acton Trussell and Bednall Community Centre. There is also a limited bus service allowing public transport access to Stafford Town Centre. The proposed development could make a small contribution to ensuring the vitality of these services and facilities. Whilst occupants of the proposed dwellings may rely to some degree on private car transport, Acton Trussell's proximity to Stafford and Penkridge will help to limit the distance of such journeys and there are some limited opportunities to access some services and facilities via more sustainable means of transport. Furthermore, the proposal is well related to the physical form of the village, sitting within the village development boundary in close proximity to other built residential form. In my view, these matters and the fact that the proposal would only result in a limited degree of housing growth weigh in favour of the application.

5.6 Affordable Housing Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

5.6.1 Updates to the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) have indicated that affordable housing contributions should not be sought from housing developments of this type. This follows the order of the Court of Appeal dated 13 May 2016, which give legal effect to the policy set out in the Written Ministerial Statement of 28 November 2014, which is an important material consideration. This ministerial statement requires that on developments of 10 units or less affordable housing contributions should not be sought, due to the disproportionate burden of developer contributions on small scale developers.

5.6.2 Therefore, despite the requirements of the Affordable Housing and Housing Mix SPD and Policy H2, it is not considered that it is appropriate to require an affordable housing contribution in light of this Written Ministerial Statement. Furthermore, whilst the Council's Policy H1 requires 2 or 3 bed properties to be provided, the character of the surrounding area and the relatively small nature of the site means that the provision of such properties would introduce a sharp change in character from the surrounding development, which is largely characterised by large detached properties sitting in generous plots. Therefore, in these circumstances, I do not consider that there are any reasons to refuse the application on the above grounds.

5.7 Ecology

5.7.1 Concerns have been raised by a third party objector regarding the initial lack of ecology evidence provided to support the planning application. To substantiate this, a third party ecology assessment of the ponds at Shakan (a neighbouring property) has been provided, which highlighted the potential for protected species in the ponds in the immediate surrounds, which required further survey before determination of the application. This evidence was supplied to the County Ecologist, who agreed with the need for further survey work in order to support the application.

5.7.2 Following these concerns being raised, three separate pieces of ecological evidence have been submitted by the applicants, addressing both the general need for ecology survey on the site and the specific need to test the relevant ponds for the presence of Great Crested Newts. Each of these surveys has been provided to the County Ecologist, who have confirmed on 29th May 2018 that there are no outstanding concerns regarding the development's impact on protected species. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impacts upon ecology and is compliant with Policy EQ1 of the Core Strategy.

5.8 Highways and Parking

5.8.1 Objections have been received from neighbouring properties with regards to the proposed highways access to the development, as well as the level of proposed car parking to be provided. The proposed level of car parking is in accordance with the recommended standards in Appendix 5 of the Core Strategy, which set out what the Council will consider to be an acceptable level of parking provision on new residential development. The County Highways officer has been consulted on the Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018 proposed application and has concluded that the proposed access and parking arrangements indicated on the submitted plans are acceptable subject to conditions. Furthermore, the planning inspector handling the appeal on the previous application (16/00067/FUL) concluded that there were no reasons to dismiss the proposal on highways grounds. Therefore, I consider the proposal to be acceptable in terms of its highways access and parking proposals.

5.9 Neighbouring Amenity

5.9.1 Policy EQ9 and the space about dwellings requirements in Appendix 6 of the Core Strategy set out the relevant requirements.

5.9.2 The distances between the rear elevations of plots 1 to 3 and the properties to the west along Top Road significantly exceed the minimum distances required by the Council's Space About Dwellings standards. There is also substantial boundary screening to the southern end of the site's western boundary where the gap between the proposed properties and those fronting onto Top Road narrows. Plot 4's rear elevation faces south towards the rear garden of 3 Bank Top Cottages and Ash House and does fall just short of the required rear garden depth at its garden's south eastern corner, leaving a distance of 10m between plot 4's rear elevation and the adjacent dwelling's garden. However, plot 4's rear garden depth generally exceeds the required 10.5m and will not introduce any habitable room windows which will fall short of the minimum required separation distance of 21m. Furthermore, any concerns regarding insufficient planting along this boundary can be addressed by an appropriately robust landscaping scheme.

5.9.3 There is an existing property (Shakan) to the north of the proposal. However, Plot 1 will be orientated so that no facing habitable room windows will be introduced between the two properties. Furthermore, Plot 1 will be sited to the east of much of the properties' rear elevation and garden, reducing any risk of overshadowing. The proposed access road will pass by the side elevations of Mayfield and Graze Brook along Top Road. However, it is separated from the properties themselves by approximately 15m and 10m respectively. Given this, the amount of screening planting along the access road and the relatively limited scale of the development, I am not of the view that the proposed access will have a substantial effect on the amenity of the adjacent residents.

5.9.4 In summary, I am therefore of the view that there are no unacceptable impacts on neighbouring amenity arising from the application. This is further reinforced by the appeal decision on the previous planning application (16/00067/FUL), where the inspector concluded that the proposal would not conflict with Policy EQ9 of the Core Strategy and would be consistent with the requirements of the NPPF.

5.10 Impact on Character

5.10.1 Policies EQ11, EQ3 and EQ4 set out the relevant requirements. The dwellings are located on a raised area of land towards the eastern end of Acton Trussell which abuts the countryside to the east. There are a variety of dwelling types surrounding Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018 the site, but predominately the surrounding residential area is characterised by sizable detached two storey dwellings. The site is located such that it will be accessed from a private drive and does not form part of the built frontages along Top Road and Bank Top Lane, reducing any effects on the character of the surrounding residential area. It has also been noted that there are locally listed buildings adjacent to the site. Having consulted with the Council's Conservation Officer, it is viewed that there will only be slight impacts upon the setting of these buildings, which in any event can be mitigated by robust boundary treatments.

5.10.2 Whilst the site is adjacent to wider countryside to the east, there are numerous examples of residential development along Acton Trussell's eastern border which can already be seen from the surrounding countryside. In particular, there is already a visually prominent belt of residential development along Bank Top Lane, which projects into the countryside to the east in a raised location. Given the fact that the site slopes downhill from Bank Top Lane and contains substantial tree planting at the north east of the site, it is unlikely that this development will be significantly prominent when viewed from the surrounding area.

5.10.3 Therefore, despite the scale of the buildings, there will not be any unacceptable impacts upon the character of the surrounding area. This is further reinforced by the appeal decision on the previous planning application (16/00067/FUL), where the inspector concluded that the scheme would comply with Policy EQ11 of the Core Strategy and would be consistent with the requirements of the NPPF.

5.11 Representations

5.11.1 Several objections have been received to the proposed development and most of the relevant points have been addressed in the sections above. Aside from the points raised above, it is important to note that despite disputes over land ownership of the access drive, the application form indicates that the relevant notices have been served on all other landowners within the site boundary. Seven Trent Water have been consulted regarding this application and have raised no objections subject to conditions.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1.1 The proposal is in a settlement not identified for housing growth under Core Policy 1. However, the proposal will represent an efficient use of land, assist the provision of housing land supply and help to support the limited existing facilities and services in Acton Trussell. There will be no adverse impacts in terms of neighbouring amenity, the character of the surrounding area, protected trees or highways.

6.1.2 Therefore, on balance, I consider that the proposal is a sustainable form of development. Consequentially, I recommend the application for approval subject to the completion of a Unilateral Agreement for a monetary payment towards the Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

Cannock Chase SAC, which will ensure the Council has the legal authority to issue a decision without contravening the Habitat Regulations.

7. RECOMMENDATION -

Delegate APPROVAL to the Development Management Team Manager, to issue the decision on completion of a satisfactory Unilateral Undertaking agreeing to pay the agreed SAC and affordable housing contributions.

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: Drwg. No. 1822-0, Drwg. No. 1822-02A, Drwg. No. 1822-03A, Drwg. No. 1822-01C (received 03/08/2017).

3. Notwithstanding what is shown on the approved plans, before development commences, details of the facing materials to be used on the wall and roof of the development shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The development shall be carried out in the approved materials.

4. Before the development commences a landscape scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. This scheme must include the recommendations set out in paragraphs 4.10-4.11 of the document titled 'Ecological Appraisal of the Lane House, Acton Trussell', dated 18 October 2017 (reference T1102.049). The approved scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and completed within 12 months of the completion of the development. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the scheme has been completed. Any failures shall be replaced within the next available planting season and the scheme shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

5. No existing trees, shrubs or hedges on the site or its boundaries shall be lopped, topped or cut down without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority other than those removals that are strictly necessary for the implementation of the planning approval. If any other existing trees, shrubs or hedges are cut down or die, they shall be replaced with the same species (unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority) within the next available planting season and shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

6. Before the development commences the existing trees, shrubs and hedges on the site shall be protected by fencing constructed in accordance with BS5837:2012 in the positions shown on drawing no. 1822-01C and in accord with the tree report submitted with the application.

Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

7. Before development commences all construction work, drainage runs and other excavations within the protective fencing/root protection areas of the trees shown to be retained on the approved plan shall be agreed by the Local Planning Authority. All work shall be carried out in accordance with BS5837:2012 Guide for Trees in relation to Construction.

8. The destruction by burning of any materials during the construction period shall not take place within 6 metres of the canopy spread of any trees or hedges shown to be retained on the approved plans.

9. There shall be no storage of construction materials or equipment or oil tanks within the protective fencing/root protection areas of the trees or hedges shown to be retained on the approved plans.

10. All vegetation removal must take place outside of the bird breeding season (Late February -August inclusive) unless immediately (within 48 hours) preceded by a survey by a suitably experienced ornithologist or ecologist demonstrating that no nesting is taking place.

11. The garages indicated on the approved plan shall be retained for the parking of motor vehicles and cycles. They shall at no time be converted to living accommodation without the prior express permission of the Local Planning Authority.

12. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive, parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans.

13. The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use.

Reasons

1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

3. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

4. In order to safeguard the amenity of the area, in accordance with Policy EQ11 of the Core Strategy, and to ensure the scheme complies with Policy EQ1 of the Core Strategy.

Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

5. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

6. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

7. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

8. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

9. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

10. In order to protect any protected species on the site in accordance with EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.

11. In the interest of highways safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. In the interest of highways safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

13. This is to ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to reduce the risk of creating or exacerbating a flooding problem and to minimise the risk of pollution.

INFORMATIVE - ECOLOGY AND LANDSCAPE The landscape plan required by condition 4 should also include the provision of three bat boxes on a suitable tree and bird boxes within the site.

Proactive Statement

In dealing with the planning application the Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner in accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer – Planning Committee 19/06/2018

17/00703/FUL - The Lane House Top Road Acton Trussell Stafford South Staffordshire ST17 0RQ