Wolverhampton City Council OPEN DECISION ITEM

Agenda Item No: 6

Committee / Panel PLANNING COMMITTEE Date: 7th April 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 (7th April 2009)

REFERENCE SITE ADDRESS PAGE NO

09/00085/FUL 40 Broad Lane South Wednesfield Page 4 Wolverhampton South West Midlands WV11 3RY

Application Type Minor Dwellings

09/00165/FUL Richmond House Bilston North Page 10 29 Wellington Road Wolverhampton West Midlands WV14 6AH

Application Type Minor Dwellings

08/01441/OUT Land Opposite 3 Wednesfield Page 16 Rookery Street South Wolverhampton West Midlands

Application Type Smallscale Major Dwelling

09/00075/FUL New Enterprise Centre East Park Page 24 Monmore Road Wolverhampton West Midlands WV1 2TZ

Application Type Smallscale Major General Industry

09/00145/VV Peel Retail Park Bushbury South Page 29 Stafford Street And Low Hill Whitmore Reans Wolverhampton West Midlands

Application Type Smallscale Major All Other Development

2 08/01537/FUL 2 Perton Grove Tettenhall Page 35 Wolverhampton Wightwick West Midlands WV6 8DH

Application Type Householder

08/01503/FUL 5 Showell Circus Bushbury South Page 40 Wolverhampton And Low Hill West Midlands WV10 9BA

Application Type Change of use

08/01285/FUL 14 Northam Walk St Peter's Page 45 Wolverhampton West Midlands WV6 0QP

Application Type Householder

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 07-Apr-09 APP NO: 09/00085/FUL WARD: Wednesfield South DATE: 02-Feb-09 TARGET DATE: 30-Mar-09 RECEIVED: 02.02.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: 40 Broad Lane South, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV11 3RY PROPOSAL: Erection of a dormer bungalow and double garage.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Kendrick Homes Ltd Tasker Street Walsall WS1 3QW

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is located in a predominantly residential area on the south east side of Broad Lane South. The application site consists of approximately 50% of the rear garden of No. 40 Broad Lane South. The site is rectangular in arrangement, the site would be accessed from a new driveway created for six new properties which were approved under application reference 06/01577/FUL.

1.2 The site backs onto public open space in Walsall.

1.3 The application site is level and grassed with boundary shrubbery. There is a substantial tree and shrub screen to the rear of the site.

2. Application Details

2.1 The application is for the construction of one dormer bungalow and double garage set to the frontage of the dwelling.

2.2 The proposed new dwelling would be positioned between an existing bungalow (38C Broad Lane South) and a new two storey dwelling which has been recently constructed.

2.3 The proposed dormer bungalow has been specifically designed in consideration of the dwellings on either side. It would consist of brickwork to the ground floor in consideration of the adjacent bungalow at 38C and the first floor would be in the roof space with small dormer projections attached at front and rear to give it more height to relate to the two storey dwelling immediately adjacent to the left. This would provide an appropriate stepping up along the street frontage.

2.4 The proposed dwelling would be accessed from a newly constructed driveway from Broad Lane South which serves the six new dwellings recently constructed and approved under application reference 06/01577/FUL.

4 3. Planning History

3.1 There is relevant planning history to the development at this site which includes a larger site where the development of six new dwellings are being completed. The relevant history is as follows:-

y Application 05/0638/FP/M, development of nine x 5 bedroomed detached dwellings and five x 4 bedroomed detached dwellings - application withdrawn on 28 June 2005.

y Application 05/1455/FP/M for the development of seven x 5 bedroomed detached dwellings and four x 4 bedroomed detached dwellings - refused by Planning Committee on 25 October 2005. The Applicants appealed against the Council’s decision and the Inspector dismissed the appeal.

y Application 06/0177/FUL for the development of six, 5 and 6 bedroomed dwellings, the application was reported to Planning Committee on 4 September 2007 where it was resolved to grant planning permission. The current application site was not included in this latter application.

y Application 08/00446/FUL for the development of one detached dwelling - application withdrawn on 23 September 2008.

y Application 08/01276/FUL for the development of one detached dwelling, application reported to Planning Committee on 6 January 2009, where it was resolved to refuse the application. The Applicants have appealed against this decision and this is being processed.

4. Constraints

4.1 The only constraint identified in respect of redevelopment on this garden land is the ecological interest in respect of possible use of the site by Great Crested Newts.

5. Relevant Policies

5.1 Relevant UDP Policies include:

Policy D1: Design Quality Policy D3: Urban Structure Policy D4: Urban Grain Policy D6: Townscape and Landscape Policy D7: Scale-Height Policy D8: Scale-Massing Policy D9: Appearance Policy D10: Community Safety Policy D13: Sustainable Development (natural resources and energy use) Policy N1: Promotion of Nature Conservation Policy N5: Protection of Sites of Local Importance for Nature Conservation and Landscape Features of Value for Wildlife or Geology Policy N7: The Urban Forest Policy N9: Protection of Wildlife Species Policy H1: Housing Policy H6: Design of Housing Development Policy AM10: Provision for Cyclists Policy AM12: Parking and Servicing Provision

5 5.2 PPS1: Creating Sustainable Development and PPG3: Housing are also relevant.

6. Publicity

6.1 In response to the publicity of the application, seven letters of objection have been received and a request from the residents of 38C Broad Lane South to speak at Planning Committee. The reasons for objection include the following:-

y Loss of privacy. y Loss of sunlight and daylight. y Overdevelopment of the site. y Bungalow unattractive in street scene. y Unacceptable proximity to adjacent dwellings. y Impact on outlook. y Too many vehicles/vehicular movements on Broad Lane South. y Traffic congestion and traffic safety. y Inadequate parking arrangements. y Out of character.

7. External Consultees

7.1 Severn Trent Water confirm no objection subject to the inclusion of a planning condition in respect of the submission of appropriate drainage details.

7.2 The Wildlife Trust for Birmingham and the Black Country confirm the presence of Great Crested Newts on adjacent land and that appropriate mitigation measures will be required prior to development.

7.3 Natural England confirm that as a mitigation strategy has been prepared for the development of this site and that a Natural England European Protected Species Licence has been issued, Natural England has no objection to this application subject to the Council securing, through the development control process, a Great Crested Newt mitigation scheme that is either the same as or equates to the one prepared in connection with the previous application.

8. Internal Consultees

8.1 Environmental Services request a condition in regard to the operational hours of building works being restricted to 0800 to 1800 Monday to Friday and 0800 to 1300 Saturday and at no time on Sundays or Bank and Public Holidays.

8.2 Landscape confirm that the proposed development would not have a significant impact on the general environment.

8.3 Transportation confirm that the proposed garage is of appropriate dimensions to accommodate two cars and at least a further two cars could be parked within the curtilage of the property. This provision meets the anticipated parking demand for the property. They reiterate their preference for an access road to adoptable standards but a refusal reason based on highway safety grounds could not be sustained. Transportation also note that the private access road for the existing six properties is incomplete and the visibility splay to the south is obstructed by part of the front garden to 42 Broad Lane South.

6 9. Appraisal

9.1 The key considerations in this case are as follows:-

y The principle of backland development. y Impact on neighbouring dwellings. y Impact on trees and nature conservation. y Transportation and access arrangements.

Principle of Backland Development

9.2 The surrounding area predominantly consists of dwellings fronting onto main roads. However, there are now several examples of backland development along Broad Lane South, and more importantly, immediately adjacent to the site, there are the properties numbered 38A, B and C Broad Lane South and the recently constructed development of six dwellings to the rear of 44 Broad Lane South. In fact, this piece of land is somewhat of an oddity in not being developed and quite reasonably provides a plot of land to support a large detached bungalow whilst retaining adequate private amenity space for the new proposal and the existing dwelling, No. 40 Broad Lane South. The development would accord with government policy and make more efficient use of land in built up areas as required in Planning Policy Guidance Note No. 3: Housing (PPG3), without harming the character and appearance of the area.

Impact on Neighbouring Residents

9.3 This application is a re-submission for a dwelling house in this location following the refusal of application 08/01276/FUL. With regard to architectural design and scale, the proposed new dwelling has been designed taking into consideration the immediately adjacent dwellings No. 38C Broad Lane South and No. 5 Heathfield Gardens. The proposed dormer design would create an appropriate stepping effect in the street scene stepping up from the bungalow at 38C to the full two storey height of the detached house at plot 5.

9.4 Following an assessment of the proposed siting of the dwelling, whilst the proposed dwelling would be in line with the adjacent two storey dwelling No. 5 Heathfield Gardens which has a blank side elevation, the proposed dwelling would have a much poorer impact on the amenity of the residents of No. 38C Broad Lane South. As the proposed dwelling has now been resited and pushed further back into the site it would be immediately opposite to the large kitchen window to No. 38C and at 6.5 metres in height and would lead to an unacceptable loss of sunlight, daylight and outlook from this kitchen window, which is the only window to this part of No. 38C.

Impact on Trees and Nature Conservation

9.5 Although the site is not identified in the Unitary Development Plan as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation or a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, the site in the recent past has had a number of ponds and it is apparent from ecological analysis that Great Crested Newts may be moving onto the site from the adjacent public open space in Walsall. With the previous application, the Applicants submitted a specialist detailed survey in respect of the Great Crested Newts. In addition to this survey, a mitigation report was submitted which was forwarded to Walsall’s Ecologist and Natural England for comment. The findings confirm that the proposed scheme accords with published guidance. Prior to the construction of the adjacent six dwellings, Kendrick Homes implemented the mitigation measures which have now been extended to the rear of the application site in preparation for development of this land.

9.6 There are no protected trees on the application site.

Transportation and Access Arrangements

9.7 With regard to vehicular and pedestrian access, the new private drive created from Broad Lane South to the six new dwellings under construction by Kendrick Homes, would provide the vehicular and pedestrian access to the site. Although this access way is not built to adoptable standards, in accordance with Manual for Streets, the provision of one extra dwelling would not be of such significance as to warrant a reason for refusal. In addition, with contributions from Kendrick Homes, the Council has installed traffic calming measures along Broad Lane to slow traffic in the interests of highway safety. The Highway Officer has confirmed that parking arrangements detailed and the depth and width of the proposed double garage would be acceptable.

10. Conclusions

10.1 In consideration of the location, width and depth of the application site, the principle of providing one dwelling on this site would be appropriate, this site readily lends itself to the development of one infill dwelling. No. 40 Broad Lane South is the only dwelling remaining with a garden length of in excess of 150 metres.

10.2 The proposed dwelling has been specifically designed in respect of its stepping nature from 38C Broad Lane South to No. 5 Heathfield Gardens, and in this respect the introduction of this dwelling would appear appropriate in the street scene.

10.3 The proposed infill dwelling has been set back from the dwelling previously proposed at this location, and by virtue of this positioning, would have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of the residents of 38C Broad Lane South. This is because the large kitchen window to this property is side facing and the proposed dwelling would be located immediately in front of this and at 6.5 metres in height would have an unacceptable impact on sunlight, daylight and outlook to and from this window.

10.4 The proposed development would not have any unacceptable impact on the ecology of the area, by virtue of mitigation measures already being in place.

11. Recommendation

11.1 Refuse planning permission, unacceptable detrimental impact upon the amenities of residents of 38C Broad Lane South by reason of loss of sunlight, daylight and outlook to and from the side facing kitchen window. Contrary to UDP Policy D8: Scale – Massing.

Case Officer : Martyn Gregory Telephone No : 01902 551125 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: 09/00085/FUL Location 40 Broad Lane South, Wolverhampton,West Midlands,WV11 3RY Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 396006 300120 Plan Printed 23.03.2009 Application Site Area 1853m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 07-Apr-09 APP NO: 09/00165/FUL WARD: Bilston North DATE: 27-Feb-09 TARGET DATE: 24-Apr-09 RECEIVED: 27.02.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: Richmond House, 29 Wellington Road, Wolverhampton, West Midlands PROPOSAL: Change of use to create 5 flats and erection of first floor side extension.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr Anthony Bethell Mr Justin Hughes Upper Rowley Waterloo House Wasperton Lane 92 - 94 Chapel Ash Barford Wolverhampton Warwick WV3 0TY CV35 8DQ

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 Richmond House is a late Victorian property located in a corner position on Dover Street and Wellington Road.

1.2 Part of this Victorian building is currently used as offices and the remaining is used as residential divided into four apartments units.

1.3 The immediate neighbouring property is another late Victorian building, No. 31 Wellington Road. This building currently accommodates four apartment units.

1.4 To the rear of both buildings is a tarmac parking area with a vehicular access through Dover Street. This parking area is shared with No. 31 Wellington Road.

2. Relevant Planning History

2.1 This application follows application ref. No. 08/01463/FUL, refused in January 2009 for the following reasons: • Cramped development due to inadequate provision of the shared amenity space for the apartment units, lack of cycle storage area, lack of pedestrian paths and lack of buffer zones. • Poor design out of keeping with the existing building to the detriment of its character and appearance and that of the existing streetscene and locality. • Contradictory information in respect of the existing residential units. • Poor orientation (Unit 5) and inadequate location of habitable rooms (Units Nos. 6, 7 & 9)

10 3. Application details

3.1 This application is for the change of use of the existing office area by conversion of this part of the existing building into four new apartments and the erection of a first floor extension, to provide a further one apartment.

3.2 The proposed amenity space is 49.16 square metres to be shared with 13 apartment units at No. 31 and No.29 Wellington Road.

3.3 The number of parking spaces is 9 including one disabled. Motorcycle parking is provided.

3.4 The layout of the scheme provides space for some pedestrian paths and each of the flats directly facing onto the car parking area have planting in front of their windows to provide buffer zones.

3.5 Cycle storage it also provided on an existing building at the rear of No. 31 Wellington Road.

3.6 Rear access is gained through a vehicular gate onto Dover Street with separate pedestrian access.

3.7 Bin store is also shown near the Dover Street entrance ..

4. Constraints

4.1 Mining Area

5. Relevant policies

5.1 National Policies

PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development PPS3 - Housing

5.2 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 H1 - Housing H6 - Design of Housing Development AM1 - Access, Mobility and New Development AM12 - Parking and Servicing Provision AM14 - Minimising the Effect of Traffic on Com. AM15 - Road Safety and Personal Security

11 5.3 Supplementary Planning Documents

SPG3 – Residential Development

6. Publicity and Neighbour notification

6.1 No representations received.

7. Consultees

7.1 Environmental Services – no adverse comments.

7.2 Urban Design – Highlighted the following issues: • The additional storey further erodes the original character of the Victorian development of two large detached houses. The additional height will create a terracing effect. • The existing land available is not capable of sustaining the number of units proposed across the whole development. • Flat 5 is single aspect and north facing.

7.3 Transportation – Recommended the following: • 8-10 parking spaces are acceptable. • The layout is below normal standards through restriction in manoeuvring but would still function. • Relocation of bin store recommended as it will reduce pedestrian visibility to the north of the gateway. • One of the parking bays should be suitable for the disabled. • The cycle store should be covered, secure and capable of conveniently storing at least eight cycles.

8. Appraisal

8.1 The key issues are: • The principle of the development • Design & Layout • The effect on the living conditions of future occupiers • Access and Parking

Principle of the development

8.2 The proposed change of use from offices to residential development is acceptable in principle.

Design & Layout

8.3 The design of the proposed extension is one that does not appropriately relate to its neighbouring buildings as it would lead to a potential terracing effect in detriment to the character and appearance of the adjacent Victorian buildings.

8.4 In addition, the provision of a false roof design would detract from the distinctive character of the buildings. Good design and good architecture should not deceive the eye. There should be no false statement or suggestion, either in regard to the purpose, or construction, of the building. The scale of the first floor windows also do not accord with those on the existing buildings.

12 8.5 Insufficient information had been submitted to enable accurate assessment of the required amount of amenity space. However, assuming that all the existing apartments units are only one bed apartments and with the proposed number of bed spaces, the proposed scheme has the potential to accommodate 28 persons. The shared garden provision for this amount of people would equate approximately 520 square metres in accordance with Supplementary Planning Guidance No.3 (reduced to 420 square metres if we assume a 75% occupancy rate).

8.6 The amenity area as showed on the submitted plans is only 49.16 square metres in size. Therefore, the proposed provision of amenity space is insufficient.

8.7 Subject to imaginative, good design, which could be achieved through appropriate use of the rear of the property to include adequate provision of amenity space (and/or possibly the provision of a roof garden), the conversion of the existing office units into a lesser number of flats would be acceptable.

8.8 The previous reason for refusal relates to a cramped layout due to the lack of amenity space and poor design of the proposed extension. It is therefore disappointing that this has not been appropriately addressed in this scheme.

8.9 The applicant in trying to maximise the use of the site proposes a layout that has an over-dominance of hard surfaces and a lack of appropriate amenity space. These conflicts with Policy D4 Urban Grain which that states: “The relationship of buildings to the spaces around them should not constitute over development leading to cramped layouts”.

8.10 Policy D1: Design Quality of the adopted UDP encourages all new development to be of a high quality which contributes to “creating a strong sense of place”, “poor and mediocre design will be unacceptable”. PPS1 emphasises the requirement for good design, confirming that design which ‘fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area should not be accepted’. (para. 13(iv) and 34).

8.11 Therefore, the proposed increase of five apartments in addition to the eight existing apartments 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.

The effect on the living conditions of future occupiers

8.12 The internal layout of the proposed building is considered to be poor as the living rooms are situated directly above and adjacent to bedrooms. Thereby requiring sound insulation when with a re-design this could be avoided.

8.13 In addition, flat No. 8 lacks an appropriate living area as it is located in the hall, immediately adjacent to the access door, leaving very little room for a dining table and it is only 4 square metres.

8.14 Flat No. 5 would have a very low level of sunlight penetration due to its northerly orientation. With only 3 windows which are immediately adjacent to a two storey side extension, the level of sunlight into this flat would be overshadowed, thus reducing the hours of direct sunlight, or the amount of daylight, reaching into the window.

8.15 Therefore, the design of the proposed residential units does not reflect the emphasis on good design set out in Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1) and contrary to the Government’s key housing policy goal, given in PPS3, to ensure that everyone has the opportunity of living in a decent home.

13 Access & Parking

8.16 The proposed development includes 0.7 parking spaces per unit.

8.17 One disabled space is indicated.

8.18 There is no on site visitors’ parking proposed.

8.19 Notwithstanding approximate calculations from the transportation officer, insufficient information was provided to enable the proper assessment of the development with regard to the current number of people per flat in order to establish the appropriate number of car parking spaces.

9. Conclusion

9.1 It is considered that the proposed development is considered too cramped and does not demonstrate a high standard of design detrimental to the character and appearance of the existing buildings and the street scene.

10. Recommendation

10.1 Refuse, for the following reasons:

(i) The proposed development represents an overdevelopment of the site due to its cramped layout with an over dominance of hard surfaces and lack of adequate shared amenity space. The proposal is therefore, contrary to Wolverhampton’s Unitary Development Plan policies D1, D4, D6 and H6.

(ii) The proposed apartment unit No. 5 by reason of its external design, siting, orientation and internal design is contrary to the principles of good design and sustainability and as a result the proposed development does not maximise the dwelling’s potential for solar gain, contrary to Wolverhampton’s Unitary Development Plan policies D1, D13 and H6.

(iii) The internal layout of the proposed accommodation would be unsatisfactory in respect of bedrooms located directly above living rooms failing to take the opportunities available to improve the quality of development without the need for sound insulation, contrary to Wolverhampton’s Unitary Development Plan policies D1, H6 and EP5.

(iv) The proposed extension would, by reason of its height, bulk and position linking No. 31 and No. 29 Wellington Road, have an unacceptable terracing effect in 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.

(v) Due to lack of sufficient information in respect of the likely total number of occupants (No 29 & 31) to enable an accurate assessment of parking need and substandard visibility for pedestrians, the proposals 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: 09/00165/FUL Location Richmond House, 29 Wellington Road,Wolverhampton,West Midlands Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 394772 296697 Plan Printed 23.03.2009 Application Site Area 774m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 07-Apr-09 APP NO: 08/01441/OUT WARD: Wednesfield South DATE: 29-Dec-08 TARGET DATE: 30-Mar-09 RECEIVED: 21.11.2008 APP TYPE: Outline Application

SITE: Land Opposite 3, Rookery Street, Wolverhampton, West Midlands PROPOSAL: Outline Application. Erection of 22 apartments and 1 retail unit with associated car parking.

APPLICANT: AGENT: The Mid-Counties Co-operative Mr Stephen Cox PO Box 8 Gould Singleton Architects 10 Hatherton Road Earls Way Walsall Halesowen WS1 1JH B63 3HR

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Background

1.1 This application was reported to Planning Committee on 3rd March. Committee deferred determination for a site visit.

2. Site Description

2.1 The application site is situated 2.5 miles to the north-east of Wolverhampton City Centre and within Wednesfield Village Centre.

2.2 The development site forms a roughly rectangular shape, and is 0.25 hectares. The site is currently vacant and is approximately 85 metres wide and between 20 - 30 metres deep.

2.3 The site is on the south side of Rookery Street approximately 75 metres east of the Rookery Street bridge over the Wyrley and Essington Canal. The site lies between the pedestrian route through to Bentley Bridge Retail Park and the existing footpath link from Rookery Street to the Sainsbury’s superstore. To the east of the site is land currently being redeveloped to create the “Wednesfield Link”, which will include a new public square and improved pedestrian connections. Immediately behind and to the south of the site the land drops significantly to a lower level, behind a retaining wall, to part of the car park for the Sainsbury’s store. On the opposite side of Rookery Street at this point is a mix of properties including a hot food take-away, a carpet store, glazing shop, a house and a car sales dealership.

2.4 The western portion of the application site includes land which previously formed part of Backhouse Lane. Backhouse Lane was severed by the creation of the Sainsbury’s Supermarket and the Bentley Bridge Retail Park. All that remains is the redundant stub end road of Backhouse Lane.

16 2.5 The site is identified as being highly accessible according to the criteria as set out in Wolverhampton Unitary Development Plan. The Rookery Street frontage is subject to a highway improvement line. The proposed “5Ws” Metro line would pass along Rookery Street.

2.6 There are two trees at the rear of the site that are of amenity value, but they are not protected by a Tree Preservation Order.

3. Application Details

3.1 The application is for outline permission, but only landscaping details are reserved for later approval. Layout, scale, external appearance and means of access are all submitted for approval at this stage.

3.2 The application proposes 2 buildings, one either side of a centrally located vehicular access from Rookery Street, accommodating 22 dual aspect flats (2 with one bedroom and 20 with two bedrooms) and a single 118 sq.m. shop unit. The retail unit, which would be on the eastern side of the development, would look towards the Wednesfield Link and its proposed public square.

3.3 The buildings, which would enclose on three sides a rear car parking area providing 28 parking spaces, present three storeys onto Rookery Street, stepping down to one and two storeys at the sides. Four staircases would give residents access to the front and rear of the buildings.

3.4 The redundant stub road of Backhouse Lane would be outside the area enclosed by the buildings and is proposed to be landscaped.

3.5 The design of the apartment development is contemporary in character and appearance.

3.6 The proposed materials include coloured facing block work, through-coloured render, reconstituted-stone feature banding and facing brickwork. The aluminium roof would be a distinctive “gull wing” design.

3.7 The proposed buildings would be set back from Rookery Street but do not appear to be fully behind the Highway Improvement Line (HIL). The north-western elevation of the building would be constructed along the alignment of the HIL.

4. Planning History

4.1 07/01088/OUT – Outline Application for residential development comprising the erection of a 3 storey building containing 32 flats. Withdrawn 01.11.2007.

4.2 00/1175/OP - Three storey retail/residential development and car parking comprising of 7 retail units and 14 two bed flats and 2 one bed flats. Granted 16.01.2002.

5. Constraints

5.1 Authorised Processes Road Improvement Line Sites and Monuments Entry Wednesfield Town Centre

17 6. Relevant Policies

6.1 National Guidance PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPS3 Housing PPS6 Planning for Town Centres PPG13 Transport PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment

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 part D13 Sustainable Development Natural Energy D14 The Provision of Public Art H1 Housing H6 Design of Housing Development H8 Open Space, Sport and Rec. Req. new Dev. H9 Housing Density and Mix H10 Affordable Housing HE24 Management and Protection of Archaeological Sites SH2 Centre Uses SH3 Need and the Sequential Approach SH4 Integration of Development into Centres SH6 Bilston Town Centre and Wednesfield Village Centre SH9 Local Shops and Centre Uses SH10 Protected Frontages SH11 New Retail Development - Comparison Goods WVC2 Improved Linkages and Connectivity WVC3 Midland Metro WVC6 Frontage Use Policy WVC7 Housing EP1 Pollution Control EP3 Air Pollution EP4 Light Pollution EP5 Noise Pollution EP9 Sustainable Drainage Arrangements for Development 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

6.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance

SPG3 Residential Development

18 7. Publicity

7.1 No representations received.

8. Internal consultees

8.1 Environmental Services - request further information and recommend conditions and notes for information in relation to noise, ventilation, refuse storage, trading hours and delivery times for shop and contaminated land remediation.

8.2 Property Services - no objection.

8.3 Archaeology - no objection but recommend a condition requiring an archaeological watching brief.

8.4 Transportation Development - no objection in principle subject to the resolution of the following matters:

(i) The proposed uses may lead to inappropriate parking along Rookery Street. To ensure against this the applicant should provide a financial contribution towards the installation of Traffic Regulation Orders. (ii) Submission of a servicing strategy for the retail unit, including deliveries and refuse collection. (iii) The Highway Improvement Line needs to be formally amended as the building would encroach on the existing HIL.

8.5 Access officer - made detailed building control comments.

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.

9.3 Police - no objection.

9.4 Centro – no objection subject to the proposed development not impeding upon any future operation of the proposed “5Ws” Metro scheme.

10. Appraisal

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

• The principle of mixed use residential and retail development • Design, layout and HIL • Boundary treatments • Private shared amenity space • Access and parking • Refuse store • Section 106A requirements

19 The Principle of the Uses

Residential Use 10.2 Although the site is not allocated for a specific use in the UDP, it is within the Wednesfield Village Centre where policy WVC7 states that the Council will support residential uses in suitable locations, particularly as part of mixed use development. This is considered to be a suitable site for residential development.

Retail Use 10.3 UDP policy SH2 identifies retail as a ‘centre use’. The application site is located 300 metres outside of the Wednesfield Primary Shopping Area and therefore in accordance with UDP policy SH4, it is in an “edge of centre” location. UDP policy SH3 sets out that proposals for the development of centre uses in edge of centre locations will be permitted provided that it has been demonstrated that:

1. There is a need for the proposed development; 2. A sequential approach to site selection has been adopted; and 3. The proposed development is of a scale and nature appropriate to the location concerned.

10.4 UDP policy SH3 states that when adopting a sequential approach to site selection the first preference should be for sites within a defined centre. Only in the absence of such sites should edge of centre sites be considered.

10.5 Where an edge of centre location, such as the application site is proposed, applicants should demonstrate that sites within the main shopping areas are not suitable, viable and likely to become available over the period which the need is likely to arise.

10.6 The applicants have not shown that there is a need for the proposed retail development, and have not demonstrated a sequential approach to site selection. Therefore the proposed retail use does not comply with UDP policies SH2 and SH3.

10.7 Although the site is located outside of the Primary Shopping Area, it is within Wednesfield Village Centre in an accessible location. It is at a key position between the Primary Shopping Area, Wednesfield Link, Bentley Bridge Retail Park and Sainsburys food store. UDP policy WVC2 seeks to ensure improved linkages and connectivity in Wednesfield. In accordance with policy WVC2, the proposed retail use would contribute towards extending the focus of the centre and help to secure the integration of Sainsburys food store. The proposed shop front would face onto the Wednesfield Link, and provide an active frontage, generating street level activity and a strong physical and functional linkage between Wednesfield Village Centre and Bentley Bridge Retail Park. In this case, these matters are considered sufficient to outweigh policies SH2 and SH3, and so the principle of retail development of the scale proposed is acceptable at this location.

Design and Layout

10.8 Although the building is set back from Rookery Street further than would normally be desirable, this is necessary because of the HIL.

10.9 While it is unfortunate that the building line does not extend further to the west, over the stub of Backhouse Lane, the agents state that this is not possible because the land is not in the applicant’s ownership.

10.10 The site is affected by an active HIL along Rookery Street but the land necessary for the Midland Metro is less than the extent of the HIL and it is appropriate to amend the HIL to accommodate the development. Therefore there is no objection to the siting of the building in relation to the HIL, providing that the HIL is formally amended.

10.11 The buildings will be of sufficient height to positively contribute to a sense of enclosure of the public realm. Elevations will be in scale with the proportions of the adjacent space and provide a sense of place to the streets and spaces to which the development will provide a built edge.

10.12 The car parking provision would be catered for at the rear of the buildings and as such it would not detract from the effectiveness of the built up frontage in defining the public realm.

10.13 The application originally proposed a ramped entrance to the shopping unit which was considered to be a visually obtrusive and incongruous feature. The ramp has been omitted from the proposals and a stepped access is proposed instead.

10.14 A standard condition to prevent obscuring of the shop front windows would be appropriate, to ensure a continuing attractive and active frontage onto the public space to the east.

10.15 The refuse stores are acceptable and this has been confirmed by Environmental Services. A condition is required to ensure their provision and retention.

Boundary Treatments

10.16 The proposals for the treatment of the site boundaries are broadly acceptable subject to details.

Private Amenity Space

10.17 UDP policy H6 requires proposals for residential development to have adequate provision of private amenity space. The proposed level of amenity space is significantly substandard. However, the design imperative to enclose the site on 3 sides by buildings plus the requirement to respect the Highway Improvement Line means that there is not sufficient space within the site to provide the normal amount of amenity space. The amenity space deficiency has been eased by private terraces to all but one of the ground floor flats and large balconies to all but two of those on the upper floors.

Access and Parking

10.18 The site layout includes an adequate number of car parking spaces, including disabled parking. The cycle storage is considered acceptable and the applicant has demonstrated suitable visibility splays and that service vehicles can satisfactorily manoeuvre within the site.

10.19 The proposals have the potential to create unacceptable additional on-street parking on Rookery Street. It would therefore be appropriate to require that the applicant provides a financial contribution towards the installation of traffic regulation orders along the south side of Rookery Street to prevent inappropriate on–street parking, which could be detrimental to highway safety and the free flow of traffic.

Section 106 Agreements

10.20 There is a requirement for a S106 agreement to secure:

• affordable housing (policy H6) • public open space/play contribution - BCIS indexed (policy H8). • public art (policy D14) • traffic regulation orders along Rookery Street at developer’s expense.

21 • management company for communal areas.

11. Conclusion

11.1 The proposed mix of uses is acceptable.

11.2 The design and layout of the development is considered acceptable, subject to details and the formal amendment of the Highway Improvement Line.

12. Recommendation

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

1. Formal amendment of the HIL.

2. Negotiation of a S106 Agreement to secure affordable housing, public open space/play contribution (BCIS indexed), public art, a contribution towards traffic regulation orders along Rookery Street and a management company for communal areas.

3. Conditions to include: • Materials, including hard surfacing • Exterior of building to be completed in accordance with approved plans and details prior to occupation • Large scale architectural details • Refuse storage • Motorcycle and cycle storage • Implementation of landscaping scheme • Area to the west of the buildings (stub road) to be landscaped prior to occupation. • Boundary treatments • Drainage • Noise attenuation • Parking to be provided and retained • No external plant, ventilation equipment, meter boxes, vents, flues, aerials, satellite dishes etc without written approval • Car park and retail delivery and servicing plan • Building and site security • Restrict shop to A1 (retail) use • Hours of shop opening and maintaining open shop front display • Contaminated land remediation • Archaeological watching brief

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

Planning Application No: 08/01441/OUT Location Land Opposite 3, Rookery Street,Wolverhampton,West Midlands Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 394257 300072 Plan Printed 23.03.2009 Application Site Area 2542m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 07-Apr-09 APP NO: 09/00075/FUL WARD: East Park DATE: 28-Jan-09 TARGET DATE: 29-Apr-09 RECEIVED: 28.01.2009 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: New Enterprise Centre, Monmore Road, Wolverhampton, West Midlands PROPOSAL: Change of use to end of life dismantlers, including 'open workshop' and portable/demountable buildings.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr R Singh Seven Design Unit 10 20 Bridgnorth Road New Enterprise Centre Wombourne Monmore Road South Staffordshire Wolverhampton WV5 0AA West Midlands WV1 2TZ

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is located within the Stowheath Industrial Estate, off Monmore Road, approximately 2km south-east of the city centre. The site itself covers an area of just over 0.2hectares and is currently used to store commercial vehicles, the boundary of which is defined by a 1.8m high metal chain-link fence. The rest of the estate is characterised by a mix of other waste transfer stations and other small industrial uses.

2. Application details

2.1 The application is a resubmission following the grant of planning of permission on the 30th of September 2008 following the receipt of delegated authority from Planning Committee on the 23rd of September 2008.

2.2 Subsequent to the approval of planning permission, amended plans were submitted showing a very different layout for the same use. The applicants were advised that the amended plans were significantly different to those which had been approved, such that a new application for the scheme would be required.

2.3 The application proposes to use the site for ‘end of life’ dismantling of motor vehicles. Approximately half the site would be used for the outside storage of vehicles. The remainder of the site would be occupied by a relatively large workshop and two relatively small portcabins. The perimeter of the site would be secured with a 2.15m high galvanised fence of an unspecified type.

2.4 The workshop would be approximately 27m wide and 37m in depth. The highest part of the roof would be approximately 8.5m high, with the lowest point being approximately 6.5m above ground level.

2.5 The two portacabins would accommodate a small office and a staffroom/wc. Each portacabin would be approximately 3m wide, 7.5m in length and 3m high. No materials are indicated on the proposed drawings.

3. Planning History

3.1 08/00874/FUL for Change of use to end of life dismantlers, including 'open workshop' and portable/demountable buildings. Granted 30/9/08.

4. Constraints

4.1 Authorised Processes Landfill Gas Zones Mining Areas

5. Relevant policies

5.1 National Policies

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG4 Industrial, commercial development and small firms PPG13 Transport PPS23 Planning and Pollution Control PPG24 Planning and noise

5.2 UDP Policies

D1 Design Quality D7 Scale - Height D8 Scale - Massing D9 Appearance EP1 Pollution Control EP3 Air Pollution EP5 Noise Pollution EP9 Sustainable Drainage Arrangements for Development EP11 Development on Contaminated Unstable Land EP13 Waste and Development EP14 Waste Management Facilities B1 Economic Prosperity B5 Design Standards for Employment Sites B9 Defined Business Areas B11 Ancillary Uses in Employment Areas AM1 Access, Mobility and New Development AM9 Provision for Pedestrians AM10 Provision for Cyclists AM12 Parking and Servicing Provision AM15 Road Safety and Personal Security N3 Protection of Sites of importance for Nat Con R4 Development Adjacent to Open Spaces R6 The Greenway Network

5.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance

SPG1 Business, Industrial and Warehouse Development

6. Neighbour notification and representations

6.1 The application was advertised by press and site notices. No response has been received.

7. Internal consultees

7.1 Environmental Services - This site formerly comprised a number of very small yards, which have been used for a variety of recycling uses and have periodically given rise to complaints, especially with regard to unattended fires. Against, this background the application is welcomed as the proposals create a workable area.

7.2 Whilst it would be preferable to have an enclosed workshop, the proposals are still welcome, and are considered unlikely to give rise to complaints from existing housing, given the heavily industrialised nature of this location.

7.3 Transportation Development – No objection in principle to the proposed use of the site, however there is some concerns that the visibility for drivers exiting the proposed staffing parking bays may be obscured, due to possibility of storing materials within the site.

7.4 It is therefore requested that the plans are amended to relocate the staff parking to a more suitable location which provides acceptable visibility and sufficient space for drivers and passengers to access vehicles parked in the bays.

8. External consultees

8.1 Environment Agency - They have no objections to the proposed scheme and confirm that the necessary Environment Permit for the proposed use is already in place.

9. Appraisal

9.1 The key considerations in determining this application are:

• The acceptability of proposed use • Design & appearance • Residential amenity • Transportation

Acceptability of the proposed use

9.2 The site is currently used to store commercial vehicles and is located within an existing industrial area, which is allocated as a Defined Business Area identified under Policy B9 of the Wolverhampton UDP. In general terms the Defined Business Area is suitable for waste management facilities, as supported by Policy B9 and EP14. Policy EP14 specifically requires the minimisation and mitigation of any adverse impacts on the environment, local wildlife.

9.3 There is a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) within 50m. As a result policies N3, R4 and R6 which seek to protect the integrity of the SINC and ensure that development does not have an adverse impact on it, apply. It not considered that the type of use proposed or the proximity of the proposal to the SINC will be to the detriment of nature conservation.

26 Design & appearance

9.4 The new workshop would have a design and materials similar to those of the existing units within the industrial estate. Although, the building would have a fairly standard industrial design, it would be appropriate given the nature of the use and would not adversely affect the visual amenity of the area.

Residential Amenity

9.5 Policy EP14 requires the minimisation and mitigation of any adverse impacts on the general wellbeing and amenity of local people. Amenity is also a specific consideration of Policy B5 (1). Environmental Services advise that the proposal is unlikely to give rise to complaints from existing housing given the industrial nature of the area.

Transportation

9.6 As explained in paragraphs 7.3 & 7.4 there is no objection in principle to the proposed use. However, amended plans should be submitted which reduce the possibility of driver visibility being obscured.

10. Conclusion

10.1 The proposal is considered to be acceptable in principle, subject to the Transportation concerns points being addressed.

11. Recommendation

11.1 Delegated authority to the Director for Sustainable Communities to grant, subject to the overcoming of Transportation concerns and conditions to include:

• Submission of materials • Boundary Treatment • Cycle/Motorcycle storage details • Refuse Storage details • Operational hours • Lighting scheme and details • Restrict the height of vehicle storage

Case Officer : Richard Pitt Telephone No : 01902 551674 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00075/FUL Location New Enterprise Centre, Monmore Road,Wolverhampton,West Midlands Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 393288 297455 Plan Printed 23.03.2009 Application Site Area 1716m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 07-Apr-09 APP NO: 09/00145/VV WARD: Bushbury South And Low Hill DATE: 19-Feb-09 TARGET DATE: 21-May-09 RECEIVED: 19.02.2009 APP TYPE: Vary of Condition(s) of PreviousApproval

SITE: Peel Retail Park, Stafford Street, Whitmore Reans, Wolverhampton PROPOSAL: Development of land without complying with condition 8 of planning permission C/0955/86 to allow a wider range of goods to be sold.

APPLICANT: AGENT: Peel Holdings Mr M Saunders The Trafford Centre Adamson House Manchester Towers Business Park M17 8AA Wilmslow Road Manchester M20 2YY

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The site is situated north of the junction between A449 Stafford Street and A460 Cannock Road and comprises four non-food retail units with customer access off Stafford Street and rear servicing access off Bone Mill Lane.

2. Application details

2.1 An application has been made to not comply with condition 8 imposed on the original planning application A/C/955/86.

3. Background

3.1 Planning permission A/C/955/86 for the retail park included a condition (no. 8) which restricts the goods that can be sold. This application seeks approval for an alternative condition in respect of the goods that can be sold. The condition on permission A/C/955/86 is worded as follows:

29 3.2 In 1997, this condition was twice ‘varied’ by planning permissions C/0309/97 and C/1082/97. Condition 2 of permission C/1082/97 (the condition which currently applies) reads as follows:-

"The use hereby permitted shall be for the purpose applied for namely for the storage, display and retail sale of non-food goods consisting furniture, carpets, electrical goods and domestic appliances, paints, wall coverings, curtains, fabrics, floor coverings, tools, hardware, light fittings, garden and leisure products, homecare and DIY products, auto parts, spares and accessories and playground equipment and in the case of Unit 1 only, cycles, traditional and electrical toys, computer games, nursery equipment, children’s books, notelets and stationery, sports recreation and leisure goods and in the case of Units 4/5 only, a live pet sales department, limited to one area of no more than 600 square metres, selling live pets, cages, aquariums, bulk pet food items and other ancillary products”.

4. Application Details

4.1 This application seeks to vary the wording of the condition which restricts the range of goods which can be sold from the existing retail park. The applicant contends that in the current climate they need a position which allows them to target as wide a spectrum of occupiers as possible, without changing the character of the retail park and in a way which is consistent with the 2007 permissions for the redevelopment of the retail park.

4.2 The alternative condition submitted for consideration reads as follows: -

"Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes Order) 1987, or any other equivalent provision in any statutory instrument revoking or re enacting that order with or without modification, there shall be no sales of:

• food and drink (including alcoholic drink but excluding pet food and the ancillary sale of food and drink for consumption on the premises); • clothing and footwear (excluding gardening and protective clothing, overalls and sports clothing and sports footwear); • books, magazines (excluding gardening/DIY books and magazines), newspapers, stationery and greetings cards; • records, CDs, videos, DVDs or other recorded media; • cosmetics, toiletries, perfume or chemist and pharmaceutical products; • confectionery; • jewellery, silverware, watches and clocks; • sports and recreational goods other than from within a single unit with a maximum floor area not exceeding 1,500 sqm; • tobacco; and • non durable household goods;

For the avoidance of doubt, notwithstanding the above list of exclusions, the sale of computer games, nursery equipment, children’s books, notelets and stationery is permitted from unit 1"

30 5. Planning History

5.1 07/01739/RC for Application to carry out development without complying with condition 27 (restricting 1,421m to sale of sports and recreation goods) and condition 28 (restricting goods to be sold) attached to planning permission 07/01170/OUT (for redevelopment and extension of retail park) – Granted 14.10.2008.

5.2 07/01176/FUL for Full Application for the proposed conversion of the existing Stafford Street/Cannock Road signalised junction to a signalised gyratory system - Granted 03.12.2007.

5.3 07/01170/OUT for Redevelopment and extension of retail park to increase retail (A1) floor space from 7,807sqm to 10,306sqm and additional 2,550sqm of leisure (D2) floor space [Outline Application] - Granted 30.11.2007.

5.4 05/0060/FP/M for Renovation and redevelopment of existing retail park. Granted 11.04.2005

5.5 97/1082/VV for Variation of condition 8 on planning permission C/0955/86 to allow sale of sports recreation and leisure goods - Granted 07.01.1998.

6. Constraints

6.1 Authorised Processes

7. Relevant policies

7.1 National Policies PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPS6 Planning for Town Centres

7.2 UDP Policies SH1 Centres Strategy SH2 Centre Uses SH3 Need and Sequential Approach SH4 Integration of Development into Centres SH5 Wolverhampton City Centre SH11 New Retail Development – Comparison Goods SH12 New Retail Development – Bulky Comparison Goods

8. Publicity

8.1 The application has been advertised by site and press notice and letters to adjacent occupiers. No response has been received.

9. Internal consultees

9.1 Planning Policy – Re-impose all relevant conditions, impose conditions that remove sub-division and mezzanine floors (consistent with wording in the 2007 permissions on the site) and re-impose amended condition 8 with the following amended wording: -

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Use Classes Order) 1987 (or any other equivalent provision in any statutory instrument revoking and re- enacting that Order with or without modification):

In Unit 1 (as indicated on drawing no. 1977_A (TP) SO-001 Rev 01) there shall be no sales of:

• Food and drink (including alcoholic drink but excluding the ancillary sale of pet food, and the ancillary sale of food and drink for consumption on the premises); • Clothing and footwear (excluding gardening/DIY overalls and protective clothing; and sports clothing and sports footwear); • Books, magazines (excluding gardening/DIY Books and magazines; and children's books), newspapers and greetings cards (excluding notelets); • Records, CD's, videos, DVD's or other recorded media (excluding computer games); • Cosmetics, toiletries, perfume or pharmaceutical products; • Confectionery; • Jewellery, silverware, watches and clocks; • Tobacco and related products; • Non-durable household goods

In Units 2-5 (as indicated on drawing no. 1977_A (TP) SO-001 Rev 01) there shall be no sales of:

• Food and drink (including alcoholic drink but excluding the ancillary sale of pet food, and the ancillary sale of food and drink for consumption on the premises); • Clothing and footwear (excluding gardening/DIY overalls and protective clothing); • Books, magazines (excluding gardening/DIY Books and magazines), newspapers, stationery and greetings cards; • Records, CD's, videos, DVD's or other recorded media; • Cosmetics, toiletries, perfume or pharmaceutical products; • Confectionery; • Jewellery, silverware, watches and clocks; • Sports and recreational goods; • Tobacco and related products; • Non-durable household goods

9.2 Transportation – no objections

10. Appraisal

10.1 The current condition (no. 2 of C/1082/97) restricts goods that can be sold by listing those goods which it is permissible to sell. However, the condition proposed by the applicant and the modification suggested by Planning Policy, would be based on a list of items that can’t be sold. This approach is consistent with that taken with the 2007 permissions for a redevelopment of the retail park, and is considered acceptable. 10.2 The condition as proposed by the applicant, while broadly acceptable is considered to lack clarity and Planning Policy’s rewording corrects this deficiency without undermining that which the applicant seeks to achieve.

10.3 Conditions which remove the right to sub-divide the units and add mezzanine floors are necessary to ensure the character and scale of the retail development is not significantly altered in a way which would adversely impact on the vitality and viability of established retail centres and is consistent with UDP Policies SH3 and SH12 and the 2007 permissions.

32 11. Recommendation

11.1 Grant subject to the condition as advised by Planning Policy (para. 9.1)and conditions to cover:- • no external lighting without approval • retention of vehicle parking and manoeuvring • no mezzanines • no subdivision below 929m2

Case Officer : Jenny Davies Telephone No : 01902 555608 Head of Development Control – Stephen Alexander

Planning Application No: 09/00145/VV Location Peel Retail Park, Stafford Street,Whitmore Reans,Wolverhampton Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 391568 299575 Plan Printed 23.03.2009 Application Site Area 19252m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 07-Apr-09 APP NO: 08/01537/FUL WARD: Tettenhall Wightwick DATE: 07-Jan-09 TARGET DATE: 04-Mar-09 RECEIVED: 17.12.2008 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: 2 Perton Grove, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV6 8DH PROPOSAL: Front and first floor extension

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mr A Bhella Mr P Tyler Belle View Windows & Home Improvements Seven Design Build Belle View House 20 Bridgnorth Road Bridge Street Wombourne Wolverhampton Staffordshire WV5 0AA

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is located in an exclusively residential cul-de-sac off Perton Road.

1.2 The street scene is characterised by detached houses and bungalows set within spacious open frontages with a number of large mature trees.

1.3 The application site is set in a row of five properties which are staggered along the street frontage, with No.1 set forward of the application site and No. 3 set back.

1.4 No. 1 is situated approximately 25m south of the application site and occupies a prominent corner location. The property is set in a large garden, which surrounds each elevation.

1.5 Some of the properties in the immediate vicinity, along with the application site, have asymmetrical roofs and roof balconies running along the front of the properties and above a double garage to the side.

1.6 The application site has a flat roof canopy above the entrance which is at the same level as the flat roof garage.

2. Application details

2.1 This application was reported to Planning Committee on the 3 March 2009, where it was resolved to defer a decision on the application until a Committee site visit had been undertaken. 2.2 The proposed development is for a two storey front extension to be located on the southern half of the existing building and first floor front extension to be located on top of the flat roof garage (northern half of the existing building).

35 2.3 The two storey extension would project from the existing front elevation by approximately 6m, including a two storey glazed porch entrance located in the middle of the proposed front elevation, with a single pitched roof on top.

2.4 The pitched roof fall of the proposed porch is opposite to the pitched roof fall of the existing building. The porch would project by approximately 1.8m from the proposed front elevation.

2.5 The extension, at first floor level, would incorporate a balcony to be located on top of the flat roof garage of approximately 5.5sqm. The second small balcony, of approximately 1.2sqm would project from the front of bedroom 1, in close proximity to the rear boundary wall of No. 1.

2.6 At ground floor level the extension would incorporate: a new stair well, dinning room, hall and porch.

2.7 At first floor level, the extension would include an additional bedroom with a dressing room, large sitting room and en-suite.

2.8 The proposed balcony located on the southern part of the building would be located in close proximity to the rear garden of No.1 Perton Grove and this is considered unacceptable as the proposed extension would allow overlooking into the rear garden.

2.9 Amended plans omitting southern balcony were received on the 2nd March 2009 in order to address overlooking into No. 1 Perton Grove.

3. Constraints

3.1 Tree Preservation Order - TPO Ref: 06/00105/TPO

4. Relevant policies

4.1 National Policies

PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development

4.2 UDP Policies

D1 - Design Quality 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, Motabaility and New Development AM12 - Parking and Servicing Provision

4.3 Supplementary Planning Documents

SPG4 – Extension to Houses

36 5. Publicity and Neighbour notification

5.1 Six letters of objection received and a letter from Rob Marris MP raising the following issues: • Loss of light to No. 3 Perton Grove • Eyesore development • Glassed porch out of character • The proposed sitting room can be transformed into an additional bedroom • Detrimental to the open character of the area. • Increase in noise and traffic • Overdevelopment • Loss of privacy to No. 21 Perton Grove • Speculative multi-occupation on a commercial basis • Overshadowing/overbearing effect on No. 3 Perton Grove • Detached effect

5.2 Objectors have been re-consulted regarding the removal of the small balcony close to No. 1 Perton Grove. Four letters of objection have been received since asking the Committee to consider the following: • Increase in occupancy in a small site, in particular, a sitting room on the first floor. • The proposed 2nd storey will completely obliterate No. 3’s southern outlook. • Glazed porch is out of keeping. • Increase of number of cars. • The size of the property is out of keeping with surrounding properties. • Disturbance during its construction.

6. Consultees

6.1 Tree Officer – No objections to the proposal.

7. Appraisal

7.1 The key issues are: • Design & appearance • Effect on immediate locality/neighbours amenity

Design & Appearance

7.2 With regard to the character and appearance of the proposal in relation to the street scene, it is evident that there are not many two storey front extensions in the immediate locality.

7.3 However, it is considered that the proposed two storey and first floor front extensions meet the required design standards as they would not project forward of the existing building line. The staggered nature of the building along the street frontage at Perton Grove would be retained.

7.4 The proposed extension would mostly occupy the current foot print of the existing building.

7.5 The total area of the existing front garden is approximately 172sqm. The proposed extension would only occupy 16s.q.m of this space.

37 7.6 The fascia of the two storey element would be recessed 1.8m from the proposed glassed porch. The application site is the last of the properties facing onto Perton Grove and abuts the rear garden of No.1.

7.7 The proposed extensions would maintain the asymmetrical design of the existing property. The proposed glassed porch, would also have an asymmetrical roof in keeping with the character of the property. The design of the proposed glassed porch is considered an honest contribution to the existing building, intentionally made with an ‘opposite pitch roof’, a contemporary style and contemporary materials.

7.8 Therefore, the proposed extension responds positively to the established pattern of the buildings, spatial character and building lines.

Effects on immediate locality

7.9 The application site, as well as the majority of the properties along Perton Grove, including No. 2, has an eastern to western orientation. The application site is located immediately adjacent to No. 3’s double garage. The proposed extension would be sited approximately 9m away from No.3’s main building. Any projecting shadow would be considered minimal for most of the year and would only affect part of the double garage which is not a habitable room or amenity space. Therefore, it is considered, that there is sufficient gap in between properties and there would be no adverse overshadowing impact on the neighbours property or loss of sunlight/day light.

7.10 The application site is located approximately 26m away from No. 21 Perton Grove. The application site faces toward No. 21’s side boundary wall and side elevation. Due to this separation it is considered that there would be no over looking effect on No. 21 Perton Grove.

7.11 The proposed front extension incorporates, at first floor level, an additional bedroom that is linked to a large sitting room area that would have access to an en-suite bathroom. The existing property has four bedrooms; the proposed development would retain the same number of bedrooms and there is no evidence to suggest multi- occupation. Therefore, due to the scale of the proposal, there would be no significant increase in levels of noise or traffic around the area.

8. Conclusion

8.1 The proposed front extensions are considered acceptable in terms of design and street scene.

9. Recommendation

9.1 Grant Planning Permission.

9.2 Conditions to include:

• Submission of Materials • Large scale drawings of all external architectural elements.

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

Planning Application No: 08/01537/FUL Location 2 Perton Grove, Wolverhampton,West Midlands,WV6 8DH Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 386637 298878 Plan Printed 23.03.2009 Application Site Area 507m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 07-Apr-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 deferred from Planning Committee on 3rd March 2009 for a site visit.

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 namely 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.

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.

40 4. Relevant Policies

4.1 Relevant Unitary Development Plan Policies

D1 - Design Quality D6 - Townscape and Landscape D9 – Appearance SH9 - Local Shops and Centre Uses SH10 - Protected Frontages 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 this a petition of objection containing 14 signatures has 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 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 shops 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.

6. Internal Consultees

6.1 Environmental Services – recommend sound attenuation scheme to safeguard amenities of residents of flat above.

6.2 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.

6.3 West Midlands Police – no objections.

41 7. Appraisal

7.1 The main issues to consider in respect to this application are as follows: • Principle of Proposed Use • Residential Amenities • 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. 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 particular to nuisance from clients of the betting office gathering outside resulting in increased noise and anti-social behaviour. 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. These factors may give rise to unacceptable noise disturbance late in the evening.

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 around 6pm and the café opens as early as 0730. In order to safeguard resident’s amenities, in particular the residents of the accommodation above, it is considered that the hours of opening should be restricted to Monday to Saturday 0830 – 2130 and Sunday and Bank Holidays 1100 – 1800 which has been confirmed as acceptable by the applicant. In addition to this it is considered that if customers exiting the betting office depart with their betting slips, the provision of a litter bin should be provided by way of a condition in order to minimise the disposal of litter onto the highway.

7.7 It is considered that to reduce the impact of noise and disturbance to the occupants of the residential accommodation above, a condition should be imposed for details to be submitted in respect of a sound attenuation scheme to safeguard their amenities.

42 Transportation 7.8 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.

7.9 There are no transportation grounds for refusing the application.

8. Conclusion

8.1 Taking into consideration all of the above, the change of use is considered acceptable as it meets the criteria as set out in the councils UDP policies.

9. Recommendation

9.1 Grant subject to the following condition:

• Hours of opening: Monday to Saturday 0830 – 2130 and Sunday and Bank Holidays 1100 - 1800 • Provision of litter bin • Sound attenuation scheme

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 23.03.2009 Application Site Area 250m2

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 07-Apr-09 APP NO: 08/01285/FUL WARD: St Peter's DATE: 27-Oct-08 TARGET DATE: 22-Dec-08 RECEIVED: 08.10.2008 APP TYPE: Full Application

SITE: 14 Northam Walk, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV6 0QP PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension

APPLICANT: AGENT: Mrs Zatoon Shah Mr Roy Makin 14 Northam Walk Black Country Housing Wolverhampton 134 High Street West Midlands Blackheath WV6 0QP West Midlands B65 0EE

COMMITTEE REPORT:

1. Site Description

1.1 The application site is a bay fronted mid-terraced property situated in a street scene of similar properties. The area is predominantly residential in character.

1.2 The area to the front of the property is hardsurfaced with no boundary treatments and to the rear are detached garages accessed from Evans Street. The boundary treatments to the rear consist of 1.5/1.8metre high fencing and many of the adjoining properties appear to have been unaltered.

2. Application details

2.1 This application is a resubmission of application reference 08/00215/FUL which was refused on 8 May 2008 as the proposal was considered to affect the amenities of the adjoining neighbours.

2.2 This proposal has been amended and the proposed extension has a rear projection of 4.1metres although on the boundary with No.15 Northam Walk the extension is 2.75metres. The extension has a width of 3.4metres and a height of 2.8metres with a flat roof.

3. Relevant policies

3.1 Relevant Unitary Development Plan Policies

D1 - Design Quality D6 - Townscape and Landscape D7 - Scale - Height D8 - Scale - Massing D9 – Appearance

3.2 Supplementary Planning Guidance

SPG4 - Extension to Houses

4. Neighbour notification and representations

4.1 Two letters of objection have been received from the terraced properties adjoining the application site. Both have objected for similar reasons in that the extension will result in the loss of daylight/sunlight, loss of outlook, overshadowing, the height of the wall of the extension and the proposal devaluing their property.

5. Appraisal

5.1 The key issue in determining this proposal is:

• Impact on Neighbouring Amenities

Impact on Neighbouring Amenities 5.2 The proposed extension has been reduced so that the rear projection of the extension along the boundary with No.15 Northam Walk is 2.75metres. Whilst this exceeds the Councils advice in Supplementary Planning Guidance Note No.4 – Extension to Houses which requires single storey rear extensions to be no more than 2.5metres, consideration needs to be taken into account for the need of the development to accommodate a disabled persons w.c.

5.3 Whilst the proposal will have an impact on the amenities of the adjoining neighbours to some extent in terms of outlook and loss of light, part of the extension has been reduced to 2.75m on the common boundary with No.15 Northam Walk and is considerably set off the boundary with No.12 Northam Walk. Taking into account of the reduction on part of the extension, the single storey flat roof nature of the extension and the need for the proposal to accommodate a disabled person, the proposal is therefore considered not to adversely affect the amenities of the neighbouring amenities to an extent to justifiably refuse the application.

6. Conclusion

6.1 The proposal has been amended since it was first submitted under application reference 08/00215/FUL from a 4metre to a 2.75metre projection on the common boundary with No.15 Northam Walk. The proposed extension would not now have an impact which could justify a refusal of planning permission.

7. Recommendation

7.1 Grant subject to the following condition:

• Matching Materials

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

Planning Application No: 08/01285/FUL Location 14 Northam Walk, Wolverhampton,West Midlands,WV6 0QP Plan Scale (approx) 1:1250 National Grid Reference SJ 390620 299779 Plan Printed 23.03.2009 Application Site Area 168m2