24 February 2011 01395 517542 [email protected] To

24 February 2011 01395 517542 Hwhitfield@Eastdevon.Gov.Uk To

Date: 24 February 2011 Contact number: 01395 517542 E-mail: [email protected]

To: Members of the Development Management Committee Ward Members (Agenda & Ward applications only)

For information: East Devon District Council Knowle Head of Planning Services Sidmouth Devon Interim Development Manager EX10 8HL Senior Solicitor DX 48705 Sidmouth

Tel: 01395 516551 Fax: 01395 517507

www.eastdevon.gov.uk Development Management Committee Tuesday 8 March 2011 at 2.00 pm

The above meeting will be held in the Council Chamber at East Devon District Council Offices, Knowle, Sidmouth, to consider the matters detailed on the agenda below. Ward Members are reminded that they are entitled to speak on any application within their own Ward but are not permitted to vote.

Members of the public are welcome to attend and speak at this meeting. If you wish to speak on a particular application, simply enter your name on the sheets located near the entrance to the Council Chamber, in the corresponding section which indicates whether you are a supporter or objector. There is no requirement or facility to record the details of the speaker before the day of the meeting.

. The relevant Officer will introduce and outline the item to be discussed. The public will then be able to speak on that matter only. . All individual contributions will be limited to a period of 3 minutes – where there is an interested group of objectors or supporters, a spokesperson should be appointed to speak on behalf of the group. Extra papers and/or handouts cannot be circulated at the meeting. There is a timing clock to assist you. . Speakers should restrict their comments to planning considerations only. . The Chairman has the right and discretion to control questions and irrelevant points being raised to avoid disruption, repetition and to make best use of the meeting time. . Speakers are asked not to come to the microphone if their points have already been covered. . After the public speaking period has finished the consideration of reports will begin and the public will take no further part in the meeting. . All attendees at the meeting are asked to offer all speakers the courtesy of listening to others’ points of view, even if they do not agree with it. . The Chairman will not tolerate any interruptions from the public and is entitled to exclude people from the meeting if the business of the committee cannot be carried out effectively

Chief Executive: Mark Williams Corporate Directors: Denise Lyon (Deputy Chief Executive) Peter Jeffs · Diccon Pearse · Karime Hassan A G E N D A PART A Page/s 1 To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Development Management Committee held on 8 February 2011. 2 To receive any apologies for absence. 3 To receive any declarations of interests relating to items on the agenda. 4 To consider any items which in the opinion of the Chairman, should be dealt with as matters of urgency because of special circumstances. (Note: such circumstances need to be recorded in the minutes; any Member wishing to raise a matter under this item is requested to notify the Chief Executive in advance of the meeting). 5 To agree any items to be dealt with after the public (including the press) have been excluded. (There are no items which the Officers recommend should be dealt with in this way). Matters For Decision 6 Lympstone and Woodbury Conservation Area Appraisal and Interim Development Management Plans Manager 7 Planning Appeal Statistics Interim Development Manager To consider the matters to be determined by the Interim Development Development Management Committee Manager (For this agenda, these are arranged in District Ward order): District Ward Ref. Location 8 Broadclyst 11/0053/MRES Site of New Town Honiton Road (Grid reference: 301000 95348) 9 Clyst Valley 10/0883/FUL 2 Princes Paddock, Farringdon 10 Exmouth Town 11/0180/FUL Strand Gardens, The Strand, Exmouth 11 Ottery St Mary Rural 10/2435/MFUL Land South of Otter Close, Tipton St John 12 Seaton 10/1488/MFUL Land South of Court Lane, Seaton 13 Sidmouth Rural 10/2497/FUL & 13 Cotford Road, Sidbury 10/2498/LBC 14 Sidmouth Rural 11/0069/FUL Hatway, Sidbury 15 Sidmouth Sidford 10/2522/OUT Sidmouth Garden Centre, Stowford 16 Tale Vale 10/F0334 James Barn , and Land to Northeast, Kerswell 17 Tale Vale 10/2383/FUL James Barn, Kerswell

Members please note: The Chairman requests that that wherever possible, where a site is visible from the public highway and other public vantage points, Members should familiarise themselves self with the site before the meeting. Would those Members who sit on the Planning Inspections Committee please retain their planning application papers for use on any subsequent site visits.

Any Member who wishes a particular plan or plans to be displayed at the meeting is asked to notify Nick Wright (01395 517548) as soon as possible after receiving the agenda to ensure that the appropriate transparency is made.

 You must declare the nature of any personal or prejudicial interests in an item whenever it becomes apparent that you have an interest in the business being considered.  Where you have a personal interest because the business relates to or is likely to affect a body of which you are a member or manager as an EDDC nominee or appointee, then you need only disclose that interest when (and if ) you speak on the item. The same rule applies if you have a personal interest in relation to a body exercising functions of a public nature.  Make sure you say the reason for your interest as this has to be included in the minutes.  If your interest is prejudicial you must leave the room unless you have obtained a dispensation from the Council’s Standards Committee or where Para 12(2) of the Code can be applied. Para 12(2) allows a Member with a prejudicial interest to stay for the purpose of making representations, answering questions or giving evidence relating to the business but only at meetings where the public are also allowed to make representations. If you do remain, you must not exercise decision-making functions or seek to improperly influence the decision; you must leave the meeting room once you have made your representation.  You also need to declare when you are subject to the party whip before the matter is discussed.

Getting to the Meeting – for the benefit of visitors

The entrance to the Council Offices is located on Station Road, Sidmouth. Parking is limited during normal working hours but normally easily available for evening meetings.

The following bus service stops outside the Council Offices on Station Road: From Exmouth, Budleigh, Otterton and Newton Poppleford – 157

The following buses all terminate at the Triangle in Sidmouth. From the Triangle, walk up Station Road until you reach the Council Offices (approximately ½ mile). From Exeter – 52A, 52B From Honiton – 52B From Seaton – 52A From Ottery St Mary – 379, 387

Please check your local timetable for times.

The Committee Suite has a separate entrance to the main building, located at the end of the visitor and Councillor car park. The rooms are at ground level and easily accessible; there is also a toilet for disabled users. The doors to the civic suite (meeting rooms) will be opened ¼ hour before the start time of the meeting. Councillors are reminded to bring their key fobs if they wish to access the area prior to that time. A hearing loop system will be in operation in the Council Chamber.

For a copy of this agenda in large print, please contact the Democratic Services Team on 01395 517546

EAST DEVON DISTRICT COUNCIL Minutes of a Meeting of the Development Management Committee held at the Council Chamber, Knowle, Sidmouth, on Tuesday 8 February 2011

Present: Councillors: Andrew Dinnis (Vice Chairman in the Chair) David Atkins Ray Bloxham Bob Buxton Geoff Chamberlain Mike Green David Key Stephanie Jones Helen Parr Ian Thomas Mark Williamson Ward Members: Councillors: Chris Gibbings Roger Giles Frances Newth Sara Randall Johnson Also Present: Alderman Tony Wilkinson Officers: Andy Carmichael, Assistant Development Manager Matt Dickins, Planning Policy Manager Ed Freeman, Development Manager Christopher Holland, Democratic Services Officer Kate Little, Head of Planning Services Andrew Seddon, Senior Solicitor Apologies: Councillors: Paul Diviani Ray Franklin Steve Hall Ann Liverton Graham Liverton Steve Wragg The meeting commenced at 2.00pm and ended at 6.07 pm.

*57 Minutes

The minutes of the meeting of the Development Management Committee held on Tuesday 11 January 2011 were signed as a true record.

*58 Urgent item – Consideration of planning condition

The Head of Planning asked that Members consider an urgent report to update them on the current situation in respect of a development in Seaton. Due to the confidential nature of the up-date, this item was deferred until the meeting was in private session (Part B).

Development Management Committee 8 February 2011

*59 Exclusion of the Public

RESOLVED: that the classification given to the urgent item raised at Minute 58 above, (Para 3 Schedule 12A – information relating to the finance or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)) be confirmed, and that the reports relating to exempt information, be dealt with under Part B.

*60 Parish Plans

The Planning Policy Manager congratulated Broadhembury, Brampford Speke, Clyst St George, Combe Raleigh and Upton Pyne Parishes on their plans, which were endorsed by the Members of the Committee. Members acknowledged that there had been a great deal of work involved in the plans’ production and residents should be thanked for their contribution.

RESOLVED: 1) that Broadhembury, Brampford Speke, Clyst St George, Combe Raleigh and Upton Pyne Parish Plans be endorsed and used to inform decision making in the District and the production of the Local Development Framework. 2) that the Parish Plan Steering Groups be congratulated on their work.

*61 Planning Appeal Statistics

The Committee received and noted the report of the Development Manager setting out appeals recently lodged and recent appeal decisions notified.

*62 Applications determined under delegated powers

The Committee received and noted the Schedule of Applications for Planning Permission which had been determined under delegated powers as set out in Schedule 10 – 20010/2011. Members noted that in an effort to reduce printing and postage costs the paper report would no longer be brought to Committee as the information was available on the Council website.

*63 Applications for Planning Permission and matters for determination

RESOLVED: that the applications before the Committee be determined as set out in Schedule 10 – 2010/2011 (attached).

The following declarations of interest were made during consideration of the applications:

Councillor/ Ref. / Site Type of interest Nature of interest Officer (action taken) Councillor 10/1806/FUL Personal (remained in Councillor was an Bob Buxton Pulhayes Farm, Chamber to speak EDDC East Budleigh Road, and vote) representative on East Budleigh. the East Devon AONB Partnership Board

*64 Exclusion of the Public

RESOLVED: that under Section 100(A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the public (including the press) be excluded from the meeting as exempt information, is likely to be disclosed and on balance the public interest is in discussing the items in private session (Part B).

Development Management Committee 8 February 2011

*62 Urgent item – Consideration of planning condition

Consideration was given to the update given by the Head of Planning concerning a planning condition relating to a development in Seaton. Members considered that a meeting between the Council and all parties involved was essential to be able determine the facts surrounding the current situation and to suggest an appropriate solution.

RESOLVED: that a consultation meeting be immediately convened between the Chief Executive, Senior Solicitor, Head of Planning, Devon and Cornwall Police, Devon County Council, applicant, Chairman and/or Vice-Chairman and Ward Member to discuss action to date and future proposals regarding relevant planning conditions. A further report will be brought back to Development Management Committee.

(Councillor Stephanie Jones declared a prejudicial interest in this item as her property overlooked the development site and left the Chamber during discussion and voting thereon.)

Chairman ...... Date ......

EAST DEVON DISTRICT COUNCIL

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

HELD ON Tuesday 8 February 2011

SCHEDULE NUMBER 10 – 2010/2011

APPLICATIONS DETERMINED BY THE COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011

WOODBURY AND 10/1950/FUL LYMPSTONE (Woodbury)

Applicant: Mr R House

Location: Venmore Farm, Woodbury

Proposal: Change of use of land for the formation of new driveway and vehicular access and construction of extension to barn to form carport.

RESOLVED INSPECT

Reason: to consider the impact on highways safety, character of the area and the listed building

SIDMOUTH TOWN 10/1653/MFUL (Sidmouth)

Applicant: Blue Cedar Homes

Location: Parsons Bros Builders Ltd Foundry Yard, Mill Street, Sidmouth

Proposal: Erection of 12 no. residential dwellings with associated parking, car ports, garages and landscaping, alterations to site access and relocation of Environment Agency equipment.

RESOLVED That the Head of Planning Services in consultation with the Chairman and Ward Members be given delegated authority to APPROVE the application, subject to a legal agreement to secure the financial contributions towards open space (£44.320.62) and education infrastructure (£34,020.97) as referred to in the report and the following conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission and shall be carried out as approved. (Reason - To comply with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no works within Schedule 2 Part 1 Classes A, B, C, D, E or F for the enlargement, improvement or other alterations to the dwellings hereby permitted, or the erection or alteration of structures or hard surfaced areas within the curtilages of the dwellings hereby permitted, shall be undertaken. Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011 (Reason – To secure an appropriate degree of control over future development within the site, in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011.

3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no works within Schedule 2 Part 2 Class A for the erection, construction, maintenance, improvement or alteration of a gate, fence wall or other means of enclosure shall be undertaken. (Reason – To secure an appropriate degree of control over future development within the site in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011.

5. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the boundary wall, and details of the iron railings fronting Mill Street have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure that the materials are sympathetic to the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011.

6. During the demolition and construction phases, no works of demolition or construction shall take place other than within the hours Monday to Friday 0800 to 1800 hours, Saturday 0800 to 1300 hours and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays. (Reason – To ensure that the development does not damage the amenity of the occupiers of the adjoining residential properties).

7. No development shall take place until a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme to include the planting of trees, hedges, shrubs, herbaceous plants and areas to be grassed. The scheme shall also give details of any proposed walls, fences and other boundary treatment. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season after commencement of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - In the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.) Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011

8. The landscaping scheme (subject to any variation agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out in the first planting season after commencement of the development unless a phasing or other period is agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

9. No development shall commence until the right of way diversion order has been formally confirmed in writing and the occupation of any dwelling shall not take place until the diverted public right of way to the southern boundary of the site has been constructed in strict accordance with details which have been submitted to and agreed with the Local Planning Authority. The right of way along this footpath shall be kept clear of any obstruction in perpetuity. (Reason – In the interests of public amenity and in accordance with Policy TA4 (Footpaths, Bridleways and Cycleways)

10. The first floor window on the south elevation of units 6 and 7 illustrated on drawing no. A7 of the approved plans, shall be obscurely glazed and fixed shut unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, and retained as such in perpetuity. (Reason – To protect the privacy of the neighbouring properties and in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011).

11. Prior to the commencement of any development on the site, details of the proposed mitigation measures to ensure the protection of the slow worms on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and be undertaken in accordance with the Environmental (Ecological) Impact Assessment and Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey. (Reason - In the interests of the appearance of the development and in accordance with Policy CO10 (Protection of Nature Conservation Sites and Species) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001 – 2016, and Policy EN6 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011).

12. The former gaol wall located at the entrance of the site shall be retained in situ and shall be protected during the whole period of construction to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the wall in accordance with Policy CO7 (Historic Settlements and Buildings) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001 - 2016 and EN9 (Extension, Alteration or Change of Use of Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011.)

13. The mitigation and enhancement measures during construction shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the findings and methodology of the Ground Investigation & Environmental Assessment Report undertaken by Ruddlesden Geotechnical Ltd and dated September 2009. (Reason - To protect controlled waters and in accordance with Policy EN16 (Contaminated Land) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011) Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011

14. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. (Reason - To protect controlled waters and in accordance with Policy CO13 (Protecting Water Resources and Flood Defence) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001 - 2016, and Policy EN17 (Maintenance of Water Quality and Quantity) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011.

15. No process shall be carried on nor machinery installed which could not be carried on or installed in any residential area without detriment to the amenity of that area by reason of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, soot, ash, dust or grit, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To ensure that the development does not damage the amenity of occupiers of adjoining residential properties, in accordance with national and local planning policy and guidance, as set out in PPS 23 - Planning and Pollution Control, and policy D1 of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 - 2011.)

16. No waste or other materials shall be burnt upon the land within the application site. (Reason - To ensure that the development does not damage the amenity of occupiers of adjoining residential properties, in accordance with national and local planning policy and guidance, as set out in PPS 23 - Planning and Pollution Control, and policy D1 of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 - 2011.)

17. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning Authority.' The development shall be carried out at all times in strict accordance with the approved scheme, or such other details as may be subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To ensure that an appropriate record is made of archaeological evidence that may be affected by the development in accordance with Policy CO8 (Archaeology) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001 - 2016 and EN8 (Proposals Affecting Sites Which May Potentially be of Archaeological and Historic Interest) of East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011).

18. The existing southernmost access to Mill Street shall be effectively and permanently closed and the kerbs reinstated to full height before the occupation of any of the premises hereby approved in accordance with details which shall previously have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To prevent the use of a substandard access and to minimise the number of accesses on to the public highway and in accordance with Policy TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011) Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011

19. No part of the development hereby approved shall be brought into its intended use until the access, car, cycle and mobility scooter parking facilities and turning area have been provided and maintained in accordance with details that shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority and retained for that purpose at all times. (Reason - To ensure that adequate facilities are available for the traffic attracted to the site and in accordance with Policy TA9 (Parking Provision in New Development) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011)

20. No development shall start until a Method of Construction Statement, to include details of: (a) parking for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors (b) loading and unloading of plant and materials (c) storage of plant and materials (d) programme of works (including measures for traffic management) (e) routeing of vehicles to and from the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only the approved details shall be implemented during the construction period. (Reason - To ensure that satisfactory on-site facilities are available throughout the construction period and in the interest of highway safety )

21. Prior to the first erection of the entrance gates hereby permitted, a daylight sensor shall be fitted to the gates and fully operational which ensures that the gates remain open during daylight hours. The equipment shall be maintained such that the daylight opening restriction is retained in perpetuity. (Reason - To maintain an open attractive and welcoming environment for the area and in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan.)

OTTERY ST MARY 10/2427/FUL TOWN (Ottery St Mary)

Applicant: East Devon District Council

Location: 8 Higher Spring Gardens Ottery St Mary

Proposal: Single storey extension

RESOLVED APPROVED subject to the following condition:

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission and shall be carried out as approved. (Reason - To comply with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011

OTTERY ST MARY 10/2414/FUL TOWN (Ottery St Mary)

Applicant: East Devon District Council

Location: 30 Longdogs Lane Ottery St Mary

Proposal: Proposed first floor side extension

RESOLVED APPROVED subject to the following condition:

OTTERY ST MARY 10/2471/FUL RURAL (Ottery St Mary)

Applicant: Mr & Mrs N C Gaywood

Location: Knapp Cottage Lower Broad Oak Road

Proposal: Erection of single, detached carbon neutral dwelling

RESOLVED REFUSED for the following reason:

The proposal, by virtue of it position in an unsustainable location, outside of the defined West Hill settlement boundary where residents would be dependent on private car travel, is considered contrary to established restrictive rural policies of the development plan. The design of the dwelling and its siting is not considered to be truly outstanding and ground breaking to accord with the exceptional quality required under paragraph 11 of Planning Policy Statement 7. Therefore sufficient justification to set aside these rural policies has not been presented by the proposal. The creation of the dwelling would be contrary to policies which seek to concentrate development within existing settlements. As such the proposal is considered contrary to PPS7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas), PPS3 (Housing), policies ST1 (Sustainable Development) ST5 (Development Priority 2001 to 2016) and ST16 (Local Centres and Rural Areas), and policy S5 (Open Countryside) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan.

Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011

OTTERY ST MARY 10/1191/FUL RURAL (Ottery St Mary) Applicant: Mr & Mrs P Sainsbury

Location: Tilebarn Lower Broad Oak Road

Proposal: Demolition of existing property and erection of 3 new dwellings

RESOLVED APPROVED subject to the following conditions:-

2. No part of the development hereby approved shall be commenced until the amendments to the access, parking facilities and turning area have been provided and maintained in accordance with the application drawings and retained for that purpose at all times. (Reason - To ensure that adequate facilities are available for the traffic attracted to the site).

3. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out at all times in strict accordance with the approved scheme, or such other details as may be subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To ensure that an appropriate record is made of archaeological evidence that may be affected by the development).

4. Before development is commenced, a schedule of materials and finishes, and, where so required by the Local Planning Authority, samples of such materials and finishes, to be used for the external walls and roofs of the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure that the materials are sympathetic to the character and appearance of the area). 5. Before any development commences details of final finished floor levels and finished ground levels in relation to a fixed datum shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure that adequate details of levels are available in the interest of the character and appearance of the locality). Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011

6. No development shall take place until details of earthworks have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include the proposed grading and mounding of land areas including the levels and contours to be formed, showing the relationship of proposed mounding to existing vegetation and surrounding landform. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of the development. (Reason - In the interests of preserving and enhancing the character and appearance of the area).

7. The foul drainage shall be connected to the public sewer and shall be kept separate from clean surface and roof water. (Reason - To avoid pollution of the environment).

8. No development shall take place until details of the construction of the access, turning and parking areas have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Prior to the start of any other development on the site, the access and parking should be provided on the site to a minimum of base level. (Reason - In the interests of highway safety and to ensure that construction traffic will not park on the highway).

9. No development shall take place until a detailed landscaping scheme, which ensures in particular that a well planted margin is included between the site and the adjacent properties in Castle Farm, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the planting of trees, hedges, shrubs, herbaceous plants and areas to be grassed and also give details of any proposed walls, fences and other boundary treatment. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season after commencement of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - In the interests of amenity, to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area and in accordance with Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and D4 (Landscape Requirements) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

10. Prior to the commencement of any works on site (including demolition and site clearance or tree works), an Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) for the protection of all retained trees, hedges and shrubs, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The AMS shall adhere to the principles embodied in BS 5837:2005 and shall indicate exactly how and when the trees will be protected during the development process. Provision shall be made for the supervision of the tree protection by a suitably qualified and experienced arboriculturalist and details shall be included within the AMS. Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011

The AMS shall provide for the keeping of a monitoring log to record site visits and inspections along with: the reasons for such visits; the findings and any necessary actions; all variations or departures from the approved details and any resultant remedial action or mitigation measures. On completion of the development, the completed site monitoring log shall be signed off by the supervising arboriculturalist and submitted to the Planning Authority for approval and final discharge of the condition. (Reason - To ensure the continued well being of the trees in the interests of the amenity of the locality).

11. Prior to the commencement of any works on site (including demolition and site clearance),a detailed tree felling/pruning specification shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All tree felling and pruning works shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved specification and the requirements of British Standard 3998(2010) for Tree Work - Recommendations. (Reason - To ensure the continued well being of the trees in the interests of the amenity of the area).

12. Full details of the method of construction of hard surfaces in the vicinity of trees to be retained shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of any works on site (including demolition). The method shall adhere to the principles embodied in BS 5837 and AAIS Arboricultural Practice Note 1 (1996) and involvement of an arboricultural consultant and engineer is recommended. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the agreed details. (Reason - To ensure retention and protection of trees on the site in the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area).

OTTERY ST MARY 10/0761/MOUT RURAL (Ottery St Mary)

Applicant: Blue Cedar Homes

Location: Land north of Eastfield, West Hill

Proposal: Outline application (seeking determination of means of access only) for the erection of 50 dwellings of which 20 to be age restricted dwellings and 30 to be for general needs housing, together with associated open space and necessary infrastructure, the change of use of part of the site to educational use and provision of a new building for educational purposes.

RESOLVED REFUSED for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development would take place on an unallocated site in the open countryside where due to: a. the Local Plan development strategy which seeks to resist development in such areas (where not supported by other specific policies in the Local Plan), Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011 b. the extremely limited weight that can be attributed to the emerging Local Development framework which is currently in its infancy and c. the ability to demonstrate through the Annual Monitoring Review that there is a sufficient 5 year land supply within the sub area where the application lies,

there is no material planning reason to depart from the adopted Plan Policy. To do so would undermine the adopted development strategy and result in unplanned and speculative development in the countryside where there is no identified need or justification for local regeneration or additional housing. The proposed development is therefore considered contrary to guidance in PPS1 and PPS 3, Policies ST1 (Sustainable Development), ST5 (Development Priority), ST16 (Local Centres and Rural Areas) and ST17 (Housing and Employment provision) of the Devon Structure Plan, Policy S5 (Countryside Protection) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan and the West Hill Village Design Statement.

2. The proposed development, by reason of the application site’s location and the policy approach adopted in respect of this location, should provide a minimum of 40% affordable housing. To fail to achieve such provision on a departure site where there is no policy support for its development, results in the proposal being considered contrary to guidance contained in PPS1, and PPS3, Policy ST 18 (Affordable Housing) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policy H4 of the adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995 – 2011 to be reworded by Central team.

3. Insufficient information has been submitted to adequately demonstrate that suitable provision has been made to accommodate the additional surface and foul water drainage requirements arising from the proposed development. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy ST4 (Infrastructure Provision) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001 - 2016 and S7 (Infrastructure Related to New Development) East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011.

EAST BUDLEIGH 10/1806/FUL (Budleigh Salterton)

Applicant: Mr B A Pyne & Sons

Location: Pulhayes Farm East Budleigh Road

Proposal: Mobile poultry units

RESOLVED REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The site is situated within the open countryside where the Local Plan states that development will only be permitted where in accordance with a specific Local Plan Policy that explicitly permits such development and meets other relevant criteria listed in the policy. The proposed poultry houses by virtue of their design, position and the formation of unnatural land forms would result in an inappropriate form of development which is unduly prominent within the protected landscape (East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) for which there is insufficient agricultural justification. As such the proposal is contrary to Policies ST1 (Sustainable Development), ST5 (Development Development Management Committee, 8 February 2011 Priority 2001 to 2016) and CO3 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001 – 2016, Policies S5 (Countryside Protection) and EN1 (Development in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995 - 2011.

2. The site is located in an archaeologically sensitive area where groundworks associated with the proposed development may have a significant impact on artefacts of archaeological significance. Insufficient investigative work and evidence has been submitted to satisfactorily demonstrate that the works would not have a significant impact on any such remains and as such the proposed development is considered to be contrary to Policy CO8 (Archaeology) of the Devon Structure Plan, Policy EN8 (Proposals Affecting Sites Which May Potentially be of Archaeological Importance) of the East Devon Local Plan and Policy HE6 of Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment. 3.

Agenda Item 6

Development Management Committee 8 March 2011 SMG/C5

Lympstone and Woodbury Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plans

Summary Under Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (background paper A) Local Planning Authorities have a duty to review their conservation areas from time to time to consider whether further designation of conservation areas is called for. Following an ongoing review of conservation areas in East Devon draft Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans have been produced for conservation areas in Lympstone and Woodbury. The appraisal for Lympstone also includes substantial proposals for the extension of the existing conservation area.

Recommendation It is recommended that the attached Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans are endorsed for consultation with the relevant Ward Members, Parish Councils and statutory consultees within the boundaries of the existing conservation areas and all those who live and work within the proposed conservation area extensions.

Delegated power is given to the Head of Planning and Countryside Services to publish the documents having incorporated any appropriate amendments.

a) Reasons for Recommendation A periodic review of conservation area designation is a statutory requirement of the Local Authority. Planning Policy and Guidance has changed since many of the conservation areas were originally designated during the early 1970’s with views on the criteria for designation constantly changing. It is therefore considered expedient to take stock of the present designations and consider areas of extension. b) Alternative Options

An alternative option would be to consult on the draft Conservation Area Appraisal based upon the existing boundaries of the conservation area. However this would not give opportunity to enter into discussions with residents of Lympstone over other historic parts of the village that should be considered for statutory protection. c) Risk Considerations There are no risks to the Council. d) Policy and Budgetary Considerations

Policy considerations:

Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that ‘Every local planning authority shall from time to time determine which parts of their area are areas of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance, and shall designate those areas as conservation areas. It shall be the duty of a local planning authority from time to time to review the past exercise of functions under this section and to determine whether any parts or any further parts of this should be designated as conservation areas; and, if they so determine, they shall designate those parts accordingly.’

Budgetary considerations:

An enlarged conservation area in Lympstone would result in a very marginal increase in the number of planning applications for works that would otherwise be considered as Permitted Development.

Date for Review of Decision

The Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan would be reviewed every five years.

1 Main Body of the Report

1.1 Conservation Areas are ‘areas of special architectural or historic interest the character of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance’. East Devon currently has 33 conservation areas. Conservation Area Appraisals are documents which identify the common vernacular styles and building materials and finishes, significant views within the conservation area and areas where the character has been lost. They provide important guidance and support in determining planning applications in conservation areas and supplement planning appeal statements.

1.2 The process of reviewing the existing 33 conservation areas and designating new ones is well under way. Budleigh Salterton’s conservation area has already been reviewed and published. Exmouth's conservation area has been reviewed and is undergoing a public consultation. Interim reviews of the remaining 29 conservation areas have been published on the Council's website. East Devon has also several historic settlements where the character meets the criteria for designation as new conservation areas. These will be considered under a rolling work programme by the conservation team.

1.3 Lympstone and Woodbury are villages of a similar size and their conservation areas both encompass the historic cores of each settlement. English Heritage has recently requested that all conservation areas in the country are surveyed to ascertain which ones are at risk from erosion of character. It is considered that both conservation areas do not fall into this category although the survey data has yet to be entered into the English Heritage database.

1.4 The character of each conservation area has been defined and appraised following surveys carried out in 1999 and 2009-10, and draft management plans produced covering proposals for enhancement and identifying how the conservation areas will be managed. Maps for each conservation area identify character features of significance, building materials and finishes, and important views and spaces. The draft appraisal for Lympstone also includes proposals for significant extensions to the conservation area. The first area includes the river beach and the headland to the north of the village centre. The second area proposed for inclusion is the nineteenth century expansion of the village along Longmeadow Road. These two areas are considered important, both historically and architecturally. Conservation area designation would firstly offer some recognition of

the significance of these areas and secondly would provide some additional controls over development and help manage the character and retain a sense of place. In the case of Woodbury there is a small part of the existing conservation area that has been developed quite significantly since the designation of the conservation area in 1986. This development of the land associated with Church View House involved 5 large detached houses which were designed in a manner that is not consistent with the urban grain and character of the conservation area. It is considered that this area no longer meets the criteria by which conservation areas are designated and should be removed from the existing conservation area boundary. The trees on this site would still be offered statutory protection under the designation of a tree preservation order.

1.5 It is recommended that a programme of consultation takes place. The Conservation Area Appraisals and accompanying Management Plans would be presented to the Parish Councils, Ward Members and public. Those living and working within the proposed boundary extensions would also be contacted by leaflet and informed of the proposals. Comments will be invited to gain views on the various aspects of the proposals and documents. Once comments have been received it is anticipated that the appraisals and management plans will be reviewed and following a second brief consultation with the Parish Councils and Ward Members published.

Legal Implications

Financial Implications

Background Papers

Draft Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan for Lympstone and Woodbury. These papers have not been submitted to the Development Control Committee before

Stephen Guy ext 1541 Development Management Committee Principal Conservation Officer 8 March 2011

East Devon District Council List of Planning Appeals Decided

Ref: 10/1489/FUL Appeal 10/00041/HH Ref: Appellant: Mrs J Oliver Appeal Site: 1 Humphries Park Exmouth EX8 4DX Proposal: Construction of rear conservatory. Decision: Appeal Allowed (with Date: 20.01.2011 conditions) Procedure: Written representations Remarks: Officer recommendation to approve, Committee refusal. Amenity reasons overruled. (DSP Policy CO6 and EDLP Policy D1). The Inspector concluded that the proposal would not harm the living conditions of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties. A condition has been imposed to ensure that the windows on the south elevation are obscure glazed and non-openable below a minimum height of 1.75m above the floor. BVPI 204: Yes Planning APP/U1105/D/10/2142087 Inspectorate Ref:

Ref: 10/1371/FUL Appeal 10/00036/REF Ref: Appellant: Hope Investments Ltd Appeal Site: Land At Rear Of 119 Exeter Road Exmouth EX8 1QE Proposal: Construction of replacement garage with storage over Decision: Appeal Dismissed Date: 07.02.2011 Procedure: Written representations Remarks: Delegated refusal. Amenity reasons upheld. (DSP Policy CO6 and EDLP Policy D1). BVPI 204: Yes Planning APP/U1105/A/10/2139825/NWF Inspectorate Ref:

Ref: 10/1394/FUL Appeal 10/00035/REF Ref: Appellant: Hope Investments Ltd Appeal Site: Land Rear Of 129 And 131 Exeter Road Exmouth EX8 1QF Proposal: Construction of replacement garages with office over Decision: Appeal Dismissed Date: 07.02.2011 Procedure: Written representations Remarks: Delegated refusal. Amenity reasons upheld. (DSP Policy CO6 and EDLP Policy D1). BVPI 204: Yes Planning APP/U1105/A/10/2139463/NWF Inspectorate Ref:

Ref: 10/1768/FUL Appeal 10/00044/HH Ref: Appellant: Mr I Dyer Appeal Site: 3 Dennesdene Close Exmouth EX8 4SJ Proposal: Extension Decision: Appeal Dismissed Date: 09.02.2011 Procedure: Written representations Remarks: Delegated refusal. Amenity reasons upheld. (DSP Policy CO6 and EDLP Policy D1). BVPI 204: Yes Planning APP/U1105/D/10/2142996 Inspectorate Ref:

Ref: 10/1259/FUL Appeal 10/00038/REF Ref: Appellant: Mr & Mrs D Abrehart-Smith Appeal Site: Land Adjacent Winson Cottage Cottles Lane Woodbury Exeter EX5 1EE Proposal: New dwelling and associated new access Decision: Appeal Dismissed Date: 11.02.2011 Procedure: Written representations Remarks: Delegated refusal. Policy reasons upheld. (EDLP Policy S5). BVPI 204: Planning APP/U1105/A/10/2139609/WF Inspectorate Ref:

East Devon District Council List of Planning Appeals Lodged

Ref: 09/1195/MOUT Date Received 26.01.2011 Appellant: F W S Carter And Sons Appeal Site: Land To The West Of Greendale Business Park Woodbury Salterton EX5 1EW Proposal: Expansion of Business Park for B1c(Light Industrial), B2 (General Industry), B8 (Storage and Distribution)and Sui Generis uses (comprising Concrete Batching Plant, Training Centre and Waste Recycling and Waste Transfer Stations). Also to include provision of estate roads, new access, landscaping and balancing pond. Appeal against the Council's decision to refuse to agree materials subject of a condition on the planning permission. Planning APP/U1105/A/11/2144065/NWF Inspectorate Ref:

Ref: 10/2152/FUL Date Received 26.01.2011 Appellant: Mr A Tweed Appeal Site: Mile End Cottage High Street Newton Poppleford Sidmouth EX10 0DU Proposal: Creation of off road parking and retaining wall Planning APP/U1105/D/11/2145509 Inspectorate Ref:

Ref: 10/1304/FUL Date Received 27.01.2011 Appellant: Mr & Mrs T Kirk Appeal Site: Woodbury Cottage Woodbury Salterton Exeter EX5 1PG Proposal: Demolition of garage and erection of dwelling. Planning APP/U1105/A/11/2145720/WF Inspectorate Ref:

Ref: 10/1193/FUL Date Received 16.02.2011 Appellant: J A Wilkinson Appeal Site: 17 Byron Way Exmouth EX8 5SE Proposal: Attached two storey dwelling Planning APP/U1105/A/11/2147299 Inspectorate Ref:

Committee Date: 8 March 2011

Broadclyst 11/0053/MRES Target Date: (BROADCLYST) 08.04.2011

Applicant: New Community Partners

Location: Site Of New Town Honiton Road (Grid Ref: 301000 95348)

Proposal: Application for approval of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, in respect of the first phase of the development of Cranbrook new town (03/P1900) comprising:-

 Development parcels for up to 1120 dwellings (excluding landscaping within the development parcels);

 Areas of strategic or common landscaping including the entrances into the site, the main square within Phase 1 of Cranbrook, Country Park threshold, former A30 frontage and retained trees and hedgerows; and

 Areas of common or strategic infrastructure including drainage basins as defined on the Cranbrook Development Framework Plan, layout, construction details, appearance and landscaping of the Main Local Route and the Parsons Lane Link road connecting to the former A30.

CONSULTATIONS

Consultation Process

Within ten days of issuing the outline planning permission for Cranbrook on 29 October 2010, EDDC were advised by the East Devon New Community Partners that they would be submitting the Reserved Matters application for the whole of the first phase during the first working week of 2011, instead of Reserved Matters for individual Parcels of land by each of the developers over time as had been expected. This is with a view to securing a Reserved Matters permission in order to be in a position to draw down government funding before the end of the financial year (i.e. March 2011). The Cranbrook Design Advisory Group was immediately set up for pre-application discussions with the applicants, their architect teams and agents. This Group included Councillors and Officers from EDDC, representatives from the applicants‟ design teams, officers from Devon County Council Urban Design and Highways teams, Urban Designers from Exeter City Council and specialist Architects, and Urban Designers from Creating Excellence – the organisation brought in as Enablers for the discussions. The Design Advisory Group was chaired by the Design & Heritage Champion and attended by the Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning and Regeneration and the Ward Members. Between November 2010 and February 2011 the design teams worked with the Design Advisory Group and met weekly as proposals were developed.

Following receipt of the Reserved Matters application for Phase 1 of the outline planning permission, the consultation exercise took place with public advertisements including the display of 6 site notices in the vicinity and neighbour notification letters being despatched to existing residents in the vicinity. The process has also included advertisements in local newspapers.

The drawings, Planning Statement, Design Statement, Drainage Strategy and other supporting documents have been made available at the Ottery St Mary Town Council Offices and at the Council Offices at Knowle. Statutory consultees and other interested parties have been also consulted.

A Cranbrook Project Team comprising some members of the Design Advisory Group continued to meet weekly with the applicants, enabled by Creating Excellence to refine and develop the submitted proposals.

An evening meeting with more than 20 representatives from the Group of Joint Parish Councils responsible for the area comprising the Cranbrook site was held by the applicants on 20 January 2011 in order to explain the application. Furthermore, principal consultees were given the opportunity to attend an open session for discussion with the applicants and officers on 27 January 2011.

GENERAL CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Environmental Health 27/01/11 - I have considered this application and I have no issues to raise at this stage.

Highways Agency Exeter 17/01/11 - Comments within 21 days

Environment Agency 28/01/11 - From a flood risk perspective, the proposed development is broadly acceptable from insofar as it;

(a) Properly respects the 1 in 1,000 year floodplain and does not propose any 'inappropriate' development in Flood Zones 2 or 3, (Medium/High Probability of flooding).

(b) Promotes the disposal of surface waters generated by the development in accordance with the principles of Sustainable Urban Drainage and to the high standards required by Planning Policy Statement 25.

(c) Promotes all habitable floor levels well above predicted 1 in 1,000 year flood water levels in the Cranny Brook, Rockbeare Stream and surface water storage lagoons.

Unfortunately, the proposal has one important failing in that it does not adequately address the serious flood risk that emanates from the minor agricultural catchment area to the south of the old A30 from where flows drain into the site in the vicinity of Treasbeare Cottages. This catchment drains an area of approximately 20 hectares and the flood risks associated with it have been well identified on our 'Areas Susceptible to Surface Water Flooding' (ASSWF) maps supplied to your Council in Summer 2009 and which are available to interested parties upon request. A copy of the current ASSWF map showing this feature is attached for your information.

We have raised the above concerns directly with Richard Day of Brookbanks consulting engineers on 26th January 2011 and have advised him that:-

(a) The flood flows that enter the site at (A) on the attached plan need to be agreed with us and;

(b) An adequately sized flood route (open channel or pipe) is required between points A and B on the attached plan. It should be stressed that while we are flexible to the resolution of this problem, if it is intended that these flood flows are to be routed into the sewers that drain the main MLR we will need to be satisfied that those adopting such a solution (Devon County Council) are satisfied that the storage lagoon and sewers have adequate capacity to receive any additional 'land drainage' flows both now and in future. Failure to resolve this drainage issue will result in an unacceptable risk of flooding on parts of land Parcels 1, 5 and 6 and would be expensive to resolve retrospectively.

Given the foregoing comments, we must ask that this application be held in abeyance pending resolution of the important matter of flood risk. If this matter cannot be resolved in the time available, we ask to be consulted again so we can discuss the best way forward.

Natural England 03/02/11 - As you know we were involved in the detailed development of conditions and assessments for the New Community outline application e.g. the Landscape, Biodiversity and Drainage Strategy (LBDS) and the Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA). With regard to this reserve matters application for part of the outline site our main concern is to ensure that the principles agreed at outline through the HRA and LBDS will be delivered through this part of the development.

Habitat Regulations Assessment The key issue of potential recreational impact on the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths SAC/SPA (EDPH) as a result of residential development on this scale was dealt with in some detail at the outline stage. One of the principles agreed at that time by NE, EDDC, the applicants and their agents was that it would be necessary to make on site provision for dog walking and safe, off-lead exercising from the time of first occupation (see notes of 31-10- 07 meeting attached). This is required to prevent habits of travel off site (possibly to the EDPH) establishing early on in the development which are then hard to break and spread to new residents by word of mouth, as has been shown to occur on other developments.

We note from the current (September 2010) version of the LBDS Plan No. 5 that the first phase of the Country Park CP1, access to which requires crossing the old A30, is not required until occupation of 250 dwellings and CP2, west of the stream and closer to the houses, by occupation of the 750th dwelling. It is our view that further provision will be required up until CP2 is available to the residents and the requirement to provide this should be made a condition of any permission granted.

This should take the form of:-

 Permissive access to areas currently not being developed of sufficient extent to create a pleasant walk of c. 1km.  One field or enclosed area which is designated for dog exercising off lead. (N.B. This was a permanent provision which was agreed at the 31-10-07 meeting so it may make sense to allocate the same piece of land at the outset to avoid confusion in the future?) It would be sensible to provide at least one dog bin at this location.  Adequate information to promote this facility to new residents so that they know it exists. E.g. Signposting, leaflet in welcome pack showing routes and areas available - incorporating green lanes and footpaths where possible, in particular the one on the W boundary of the development.

N.B. The provision may need to change over time as development progresses and a strategy for ensuring space is available and sufficiently promoted to residents will need to be agreed.

A further point regarding the HRA of the outline application which is set out as a clause in the S106 agreement is the requirement for a visitor use survey in the first season after commencement. This development will trigger the commencement clauses and the visitor use survey will therefore need to be carried out this Spring/Summer breeding season (i.e. April - July 2011). As previously stated Natural England requires that the methodology/specification for the survey is agreed with ourselves to ensure that it provides the necessary information to assess current visitor pressures, predict future use patterns and for comparison with other surveys around the UK.

LBDS The „Green Lane to be retained' in LBDS 4 on the W boundary of the application area is shown on various plans (including Green Lane Sections B-D) as being retained within the development. However it appears from layouts for Taylor Wimpey houses in parcel 1 that the eastern edge of this green lane will end up within gardens along the majority of its length. It was our understanding that important features of the LBDS such as this would be retained in the public realm to ensure their appropriate management in perpetuity. If this is green lane not managed to provide an attractive routeway for residents, with easy access from a number of locations along its length, it will become a repository for garden waste thrown over back fences. We recommend that you seek clarity from the applicants regarding how this feature will be managed and protected into the future.

Protected Species Something which we didn't discuss last week was the presence of protected species on site. Measures required to take account of protected species are identified in the LBDS: -

 Section 2.4.5 confirms that bats, badgers and slow worms were present on the site.  Plan LBDS 1 confirms that a bat roost and 2 badger setts were found in the area to which this reserve matters application refers.  LBDS 5.2 sets out the provision of bat and bird boxes on trees and structures adjacent to open space.  Section 2.4.17 sets out the pre-construction measures that will be taken for each species. There will be a need to check the status of these species on site given the period of time which has elapsed since the original surveys.  It is important that all these measures are delivered as set out in the LBDS.

N.B. there are some timing constraints relating to these measures, particularly appropriate seasons for survey, time needed to obtain licences and timing of works which the applicant needs to be aware of when planning works.

South West Water 17/01/11 - No comment

English Heritage 31/01/11 - We do not wish to comment in detail.

Network Rail 01/02/11 - Whilst we understand the current application is for a development parcel for 1120 dwellings and not the whole Cranbrook development Network Rail continues to have safety concerns over the additional increased usage of Crannaford Level Crossing. It is an Automatic Half Barrier Crossing which will see an increase in road vehicles potentially zig- zagging around the barriers on time critical journeys for example to school as a result of the development. In addition there is also the potential for school children misusing the crossing when the schools are provided for as part of the overall scheme.

We understand that there is a financial requirement for the developers to pay £200,000 towards the safety improvements of the level crossing as part of the S.106 agreement, although this will not to remove all our safety concerns. Network Rail's preferred option would be the closure of the level crossing to both pedestrian and vehicular traffic to address our safety reservations.

Whilst we accept we did not formally object to the application 03/P1900 in November 2006, a meeting recently took place in June 2010 between the Devon County Council, consultants Parsons Brinkerhoff, The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR), and Network Rail to discuss the safety of the level crossing post Cranbrook development. Network Rail subsequently outlined our safety concerns to you in a letter from Andy Coston (General Manager) in June 2010, some four months before the decision notice was issued to the applicant New Community Partners. As this letter was received prior to the issue of the decision notice it should have been a material consideration of your members and reported back to them. In addition to Network Rail's letter of 28th June 2010, the HM Inspector of Railways of the ORR also wrote a further letter dated 18th June 2010 who remain concerned. In their conclusions they suggest "strong consideration to the elimination of this additional risk by replacing the level crossing with a bridge"

The ORR did write to outline their reservations in November 2006 to application 03/P1900 and suggested the cost to upgrade the level crossing to a full barrier crossing was in the region of £1.5m. The amount required in the S.106 is £200,000 and has some £1.3m shortfall in the cost of implementation.

I enclose copies of the ORR letter of November 2006 and June 2010 as well as Network Rail's letter of June 2010.

Unfortunately due to the location of the site being directly on the boundary of the Network Rail Wessex and West Country area there has been some confusion internally on whose responsibility this planning application and level crossing safety sign off should be as the new station will be in Wessex whilst the level crossing is in West Country. We apologise for this and would ask that going forward all correspondence relevant to town planning should be sent to the Bristol office.

In conclusion although we understand this current application is for reserved matters for housing layout, we cannot express strongly enough the need for a new road bridge to be provided as part of the overall scheme and the closure of the level crossing.

Please feel free to get in contact if you have any questions.

HM Railway Inspectorate 17/01/11 - The proposed development would create additional risk to public safety at Crannaford level crossing due to the strong likelihood of increased pedestrian usage resulting from the provision of houses, school buildings and associated leisure facilities near to the crossing. Therefore my advice is that you should give strong consideration to either closing Crannaford Lane or include, as a planning condition that a bridge should be built to cross the railway in place of the level crossing.

Please find attached copies of our previous relevant correspondence to you for reference.

National Trust 04/02/11 - The Trust's land ownership in relation to the Killerton Estate extends south of the railway line towards Young Hayes Farm and borders the site boundary along the north-east edge of the site.

The Trust appreciates that outline planning permission has been given for the development on the 29 October 2010, but it would like to raise the following issues for clarification:

1. The Trust strongly supports Green Infrastructure (GI) forming an integral part of the vision for a sustainable growth in the Exeter and East Devon Growth Point area. In response to the recent consultation on East Devon's Core Strategy Preferred Approach Report (Sept 2010) the Trust seeks greater clarity, as soon as possible, as to how the major development proposals in the West End will contribute to implementation and management of GI initiatives and schemes (Trust's letter dated 25 November 2010). Now that the Cranbrook development is progressing, with the Section 106 having been signed, the Trust would like clarification on the contributions to GI schemes that are being sought as a result of this development. It is noted that Schedule 11 of the S106 secures an off-site landscaping contribution; the Trust would also like clarification on the extent that the planned off-site landscaping will be used to mitigate the visual impact of the development on the landscape, with more detail on what consideration has been given to the need for new screening outside the site.

2. The Trust would like to be consulted on the Country Park and Nature Reserve Specification and Management Plan when it is submitted for approval in accordance with clause 10.1 of the S106 agreement, as the proposed Country Park will adjoin the Trust's land.

3. In relation to the strategic infrastructure proposed under the current application, it would be helpful to have sections provided across the site shown on plan 2429/18A, where it borders the Trust's land, in order that the impacts can be fully assessed.

The Trust would like clarification on these matters before commenting further.

The Barn Owl Trust 04/02/11 - The three Barn Owl nestboxes that are to be erected to the west of the development site and adjacent to the Country Park (referred to in the Landscape, Biodiversity and Drainage Strategy Final Issue September 2010) should be erected within buildings rather than on trees, and thereafter maintained, in line with guidance contained in Natural England Standing Advice; "Barn Owls and Rural Planning Applications - a Guide" available at http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/barnowl-rpa_tcm6-12652.pdf

Provision for Barn Owls within (i.e. inside) buildings lasts significantly longer and provides much greater shelter from the elements than outdoor boxes, which may only last a few years before they need replacement. Provision inside buildings may also provide greater security for Barn Owls (a Schedule 1 breeding species) in such a public place.

Details of how to make permanent provision with buildings, including roost/nest sites in the roof voids of dwellings and other buildings can be found in the aforementioned document.

Plans and elevations for a purpose-built wildlife tower with provision incorporated for a number of species, including Barn Owl, Little Owl, Kestrel, passerine species, bat species, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates can be obtained from the Barn Owl Trust on request.

EDDC Conservation Officer 07/02/11 - Rockbeare Bridge - 30.6.61 - II Road Bridge now by-passed by A30. Rebuilt by G Reed, 1790. Red sandstone and volcanic trap. Single round arch, long abutment walls and parapets with semi- circular coping stones; the profile of the parapet above the arch is markedly triangular. 2 inscription panels have been reset on the south wall, east side (facing A30). (1) 'This Bridge repaired beyond ye age of man is repaired by County in eighty one. 1681. John Hall, Ralph Hakert'. (2) 'Built by G Reed 1790'.

How will the proposed alterations affect the historic character of building and its setting:-

I have attempted to find information relating to intended use of the bridge as a pedestrian and cycle link. This would involve some repair work to the structure primarily associated with the surfacing of the bridge. I would hope that the proposed development would enable these repairs which should include the removal of vegetation growth, re-pointing of the stonework in lime mortar and an appropriate reinstatement of the ground surface which is presently grass, earth and some visible rubble. Subject to the nature of these proposed works an application for LBC may be required.

In terms of the setting of the listed bridge the principle elevations of units 56-62 of parcel 3 will have varying degrees of impact. While there are no overriding objections to the form of residential development which does have a suburban approach to layout and design the quality of finishes and boundary treatments ought to be considered with the setting of the bridge in mind. The character of the setting is presently rural and I suspect that the intention for the peripheral area of Cranbrook ought to form a comfortable transition and hierarchy between the higher density of the settlement centre and the surrounding open countryside. An abrupt edge to the urban grain of the development would probably appear as an awkward and inappropriate juxtaposition. With this in mind I would question the use of more formal estate railings in front of unit 59 and would suggest that a more continuous native hedge would be more appropriate in the context of the immediate setting of the bridge. A softer pallet of materials would also help contribute a more positive transition between the development and the open landscape to the east. I would hope that natural slate is used as opposed to concrete equivalents which give hard shadow lines and that clay pantiles can be used which give a softer weathered appearance to manmade versions.

Provisional recommendation - proposal acceptable in principle but the relationship between the edge of the development and the bridge must be addressed together with any intended works to the listed structure.

East Devon District Council Estates 12/01/11 - Further to your recent planning consultation, I confirm that I have no objection to this reserved matters planning application as the Council does not own or have an interest in any land or property that would be adversely affected by this development.

Economic Development Officer Nigel Harrison 13/01/11 - Do not wish to comment, as the points should be picked up in the Housing team's response.

EDDC Head of Housing and Social Inclusion 20/01/11 - We have had limited time to date to consider these proposals. However, our initial observations are:

1. That most of the affordable housing is grouped together, and not pepper potted throughout each parcel. To build a more sustainable community we would prefer to see the affordable housing be dispersed throughout each of the parcels.

2. It is apparent that a high percentage of the affordable housing is located either adjoining the Main Local Routes or very close to them.

3. We have some concerns about the car parking areas that adjoin the affordable housing, in particular the parking provision in parcel 5 (H10) this appears to be very dominate.

It is important to ensure that the housing designs are tested against the Registered Providers design brief to ensure that the affordable housing meet the Homes and Communities Agency build and design standards and the Code for Sustainable Homes.

We would expect that all affordable housing be tenure blind, be available in perpetuity and transferred to and managed by a Registered Provider.

The affordable housing mix should reflect the affordable housing mix as stated within the Section 106 agreement / affordable housing schedule.

South West Councils 12/01/11 - Do not wish to comment

Exeter & Devon Airport Ltd 01/02/11 - As part of the planning process, Exeter International Airport has to be consulted on all aspects of this development, due to it's close proximity to the airfield.

Whilst no specific application has been received for consultation, we can comment on the overall proposal.

In terms of the Air Navigation Order, it is an offence to endanger an aircraft or its occupants by any means. In view of this we have included, as attachments, some safeguarding notes which all developers and contractors must abide by during the construction and commissioning of this new town.

These include: AoA Advice notes:-

1. Safeguarding of Aerodromes. 2. Lighting near Aerodromes. 3. Potential Bird Hazards from Amenity Landscaping and Building Design. 4. Cranes and other Construction Issues. 5. Potential Bird Hazards from Landfill Sites. 6. Potential Bird Hazards from Sustainable Urban 7. Drainage Schemes (SUDS). 8. Wind Turbines and Aviation. and: Interim CAA Guidance on Solar Photovoltaic Systems.

Exeter International Airport will have no Safeguarding Objections to this proposal provided that it is consulted on all developments and that all safeguarding criteria have been met, as stipulated in the AoA Advice Notes.

County Highway Authority 24/01/11 – The detailed submissions have been the subject of numerous pre-application discussions and negotiations with the applicants and all interested parties. The detailed plans have been checked throughout by the Highway Authority to ensure compliance with

Devon's Design Guidance and the nationally accepted residential design guidance 'Manual for Streets'. This consideration has assessed highway safety for all highway users and the tracking and turning of large service vehicles throughout the site. The Highway Authority is satisfied that the layout plans submitted comply with all elements of that Design Guidance although no details of street lighting have yet been provided.

The Highway Authority confirms that the plans conform to the conditions imposed on the outline planning permission

Recommendation: Does not wish to suggest conditions.

Other Representations

No letters of representation have been received

Parish Councils

31/01/11 Parish Council - Broadclyst

Comments:

1. The roundabout & junction is only shown as an artist's impression; are there no detailed plans to refer to? This indicates that the main access for 1120 dwellings may only be a single carriageway in both directions. We would have serious concerns that this would not be adequate for traffic flow at peak times and ask that you ensure the access will be adequate for this size of development.

2. The design of houses provides variety.

3. Sewage provision

We noted from the developer's information that not all buildings will have soakaways. Our concern with retaining water in underground basins to empty into the river course is that this area is prone to a rapid build up of floodwater.

The existing sewage works can only cope with some of the new builds planned and the Reed Bed proposals are awaiting further results of studies into their effectiveness on this scale.

4. „Green' development

There is no provision for Allotments in the first phase of over 1,000 houses. This should be rectified, as experience has shown the need and it is a duty to provide allotments. Under Section 23 of the 1908 Allotments Act, „the government has a legal responsibility to provide an allotment to anyone who wishes to have one'. Small Holding & Allotments Act 1908, ss. 23, 26, and 42 Broadclyst village, with less than 500 households, provides 120 allotments (and only 3 currently vacant). With Cranbrook cited as a „Green development', allotment provision must be integral to the first phase.

5. Public Transport & Commuting

We applaud the efforts made to encourage greater use of public transport and would welcome any travel plans which discouraged commuters from using the rural roads, particularly over the Crannaford crossing or Station Road, Broadclyst.

However, we still have concerns that the total number of new worksites will not ultimately sustain the housing provision being planned: Cranbrook; Blackhorse; Old Park Farm; Old Quarry, Pinhoe - there is a potential shortfall of up to 20,000 places in the job market, working on the premise that most families need 2 incomes per household.

North Devon has experienced this with major housing development but a shortfall of employment, causing them problems. We would suggest some of the land used for job creation in the place of some of the housing.

6. Cycle Lanes

Should be planned foremost for commuters, rather than leisure cycling. Commuters will only use the cycle lanes if they provide a direct route, otherwise they will opt for using the road or alternative transport.

7. Parking

Despite new developments attempting to change the trend from 2 cars to 1 per household by restricting additional parking, this has not been proven to work. So we would suggest 2 parking spaces allocated per dwelling in close proximity.

8. Crannaford Crossing

Comments made by HM Railway Inspectorate, in the Consultee Comments section of the planning permission on the website, with copies of correspondence going back to 2006 in the Documents section (Consultee Replies Tuesday 18th January 2011): He states his view that the increased pedestrian use of the level crossing at Crannaford that is likely to result from the building of houses, school and leisure facilities close by has serious implications for safety at this half-barrier crossing, adding that it is not a question of whether there would be a fatality there, but just a question of when (letter, 30th November 2006).

This leads to his recommendation that either a bridge should be built there, or the crossing should be closed.

There is grave concern at the option to close Crannaford Road crossing. Although a quiet rural road, it is vital for the following reasons:

Pupils from Broadclyst will need through access to the new secondary school when Clyst Vale Community College closes.

Broadclyst residents will need to access the facilities which will have been moved from their village to the new town: including the library, sports hall provision and adult education classes.

Cyclists would use the: Elbury Lane - Crannaford route to school or for commuting from the new station. An alternative route through: Pinhoe - Ambassador Drive -

A3015 Honiton Road would not be practical if reducing car movements is to be achieved (especially for school pupils).

We urge you strongly to resist all attempts to close this crossing, either by ensuring a bridge is built as a condition of planning, or by upgrading the crossing to full barriers. This surely would be a more forward-thinking way of addressing the safety issues. Later on, when population density warrants, a supervised crossing could be considered to ensure a safe crossing point for cyclists/pedestrians - as installed at the St. David's level crossing, accessing Exwick (a similar population to that planned for Cranbrook).

9. Construction Phase

Construction and its associated traffic movements should be restricted to sociable hours: no work or movements between 6pm and 8am, to keep noise at an acceptable level for the residents; except when special circumstances warrant.

Station Road, Broadclyst, and Crannaford Crossing should not be used by Construction traffic, as they are unsuitable and have existing traffic problems.

10. S106 & Contingency

We accept that the elements of the education, health care, etc provision in Cranbrook do not from part of the current application which focuses on the details of the layout, design and external appearance and associated landscaping only for the first 1120 dwellings; these elements having been granted planning permission and are governed by the Section 106 agreement.

However, it is vital that there is a contingency plan in place, should the essential facilities assured in the S106 agreement not be forthcoming, despite a high percentage of the housing being completed. This could happen if developers become insolvent, or if building is halted before completion of the 1120 dwellings due to unforeseen circumstances - how would the Cranbrook residents be provided with essential education & health care services, when existing facilities in Exeter & Broadclyst will have difficulty coping with even the first stage of population increase?

Funding the new Secondary School:

S106 agreements will ensure developers contribute £12 million towards the new secondary school. However, the additional shortfall of at least £38 million cannot be generated by selling the existing Clyst Vale Community College site alone, as not all of the site is County owned. Again, although this is not within the scope of our comments now - it must be thought through ahead of the new town being started.

Adjoining Parish - Clyst Honiton Parish Council 14/02/11 - Councillors regret they are not able to comment on the amended plans received last week on a disc as there was not enough time allowed to organise a meeting and respond by 5 pm today.

However the councillors wish to respond to the previous version of the plans, also received on disc.

1. At the roundabout of the main entrance to local route of Phase I, our Councillors wish to express that it is vital to have two lanes for traffic, so that there is a continuous

flow of traffic both towards Exeter and Honiton as well as entering and exiting the new community. The same should apply at the second roundabout (junction to Parson Lane). 2. Councillors also wish to express that Parsons Lane should be 'one way' only, allowing traffic to exit but not enter from the roundabout. 3. Our Councillors are concerned that there is no provision for allotments. 4. Our Councillors are concerned about the construction phase of this development and state that construction vehicles should be kept away from Airport Lane, Clyst Honiton and all the surrounding lanes in Clyst Honiton Parish. 5. Our Councillors would expect an agreed Traffic Management Plan to be put into place during construction phase.

Adjoining Parish - Rockbeare Parish Council

08/01/11 - Design Statement Views are as follows:-

1. It is important to us that Cranbrook provides a well designed and attractive environment on the basis that this should attract a population that will be good neighbours to the parishes around. As far as we can judge the detailed work to achieve this has been done, but only time will tell. If funds flow proves insufficient to maintain the planned pace of development and the quality standards set out in the design statement, then we would be very concerned about what the finished – or unfinished -article would be like to live next to.

2. The design statement, by its nature, addresses what is going to go on “within the box” that is Cranbrook Phase1. The surrounding areas are interested in the collateral impact it has on its hinterland and this is not dealt with in the documentation. The documentation implies that we will need to refer the Outline Planning Permission to see how this is has been planned and we will do so and correspond as necessary.

3. In this context Rockbeare is particularly concerned about how the changes to the old A30 will impact on safety and average transit times. New roundabouts, and speed limits both during the build phase with its heavy works traffic, and afterwards, when an extra 1200 households are using the road, are bound to have a significant impact which has not as yet been addressed. Through the auspices of the Cranbrook Joint Parishes Group we would like the planners and the developers to present their up to date analysis on the likely impact on the road through the various phases of development and what mitigating action, if any, may be required. This analysis will also need to deal with the impact on other key thoroughfares such as Station Road Clyst Honiton and Parsons Lane, Rockbeare.

4. Finally we will observe with interest the development of the Country Park within the Cranbrook envelope and will look forward to close consultation as plans are developed to extend the park south of the old A30.

Adjoining Parish - Whimple Parish Council 03/02/11 - Whimple Parish Council welcomes the work carried out to get to this stage and is encouraged that the developers have addressed EDDC's requirement for high-quality design and permeability of the site. Community facilities are well-situated with potential for all to take advantage.

The Councillors are keen to see the retention of as many existing trees and hedgerows as possible. They are also keen for the building to be phased.

Concerns regarding inadequacy of parking - older children now continue to live at home for longer - more cars and parking are required per house - 3/4 not unusual. Nearby allotments required - within walkable distance

Adjoining Parish - Aylesbeare Parish Council 04/02/11 - Members of Aylesbeare Parish Council have noted this application.

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

03/P1900 A new community comprising up to 2,900 Approval 29.10.2010 residential dwellings; a town centre and a with local centre including retail , residential and conditions employment; assembly and leisure uses; non- residential institutions (including two primary schools and one secondary school); sports and recreation facilities; a Country Park; a railway station; landscaping; engineering works; associated infrastructure; and car parking for all uses

07/0784/MFUL The carrying out of engineering operations Approval 10.11.2010 comprising the construction of a road, with drainage basins and sewers to connect to the conditions existing system and associated infrastructure. The road is otherwise known as the Main Local Route (MLR) (part of)

07/2441/FUL Construction of multi-purpose community Approval 08.12.2010 building including associated access road, with groundworks and infrastructure conditions

POLICIES

Devon Structure Plan Policies

ST1 (Sustainable Development) ST3 (Self Sufficiency of Devon‟s Communities) ST4 (Infrastructure Provision) ST5 (Development Priority 2001 to 2016) ST10 (Exeter Principal Urban Area) ST11 (Exeter Principal Urban Area Housing and Employment Provision) ST12 (East Devon New Community Proposal) ST17 (Housing and Employment Land Provision) ST18 (Affordable Housing) ST18A (Mix and Type of Housing) ST19 (Strategic Development Sites) ST23 (Concept of new Community Development) ST24 (New Community Implementation) ST25 (New Community Landscape Setting)

CO1 (Landscape Character and Local Distinctiveness) CO6 (Quality of New Development) CO7 (Historic Settlements and Buildings) CO8 (Archaeology) CO9 (Biodiversity and Earth Science Diversity) CO10 (Protection of Nature Conservation Sites and Species) CO11 (Conserving Energy Resources) CO12 (Renewable Energy Developments) CO13 (Protecting Water Resources and Flood Defence) CO14 (Conserving Agricultural Land) CO15 (Air Quality) CO16 (Noise Pollution) WM1 (Waste Management) TR3 (Managing Travel Demand) TR5 (Hierarchy of Modes) TR6 (Network Integration) TR7 (Walking and Cycling) TR9 (Public Transport) TR14 (Airports) TR15 (Freight Distribution Network) TR17 (Strategic Network Investment Proposals) SH1 (Shopping Facilities (Sequential Approach) SH2 (Shopping Facilities and Settlement Hierarchy)

East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011 Policies (Adopted July 2006)

S1 (Strategic Development in the East Devon Part of the Exeter Principal Urban Area) S5 (Countryside Protection) S7 (Infrastructure Related to New Development) D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) D2 (Sustainable Construction) D3 (Access for the Disabled) D4 (Landscape Requirements) D5 (Trees on Development Sites) D6 (Public Art) D7 (Shop Fronts) EN6 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) EN7 (Nationally and Locally Important Archaeological Sites) EN8 (Proposals Affecting Sites Which May be of Archaeological Importance) EN9 (Extension, Alteration or Change of use of Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest) EN10 (Demolition of Listed Building) EN15 (Control of Pollution) H1 (Residential Land Provision) H2 (Residential Land Allocation) H3 (Range and Mix of New Housing Development) H4 (Affordable Housing) SH1 (Shopping Facilities (Sequential Approach) SH2 (Shopping Facilities and Settlement Hierarchy) SH3 (Retail Warehousing) SH4 (Shopping Facilities in Rural Settlements) RE1 (Retention of Land for Sport and Recreation) RE2 (Open Space, Sports Facilities and Parks) RE3 (Open Space Provision in New Housing Developments) RE4 (Allotments)

RE5 (Recreation Facilities in the Countryside and on the Coast) C1 (Community Buildings) C2 (Local Community Facilities) C3 (Shared Communal Facilities) C5 (Power Lines) C6 (Renewable Energy) C7 (Telecommunications) TA1 (Accessibility of New Development) TA2 (Traffic Management Schemes) TA3 (Transport Assessments /Travel Plans) TA4 (Footpaths, Bridleways and Cycleways) TA6 (Park and Ride) TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) TA8 (Safeguarding of Land Required for Highway and Access Improvements) TA9 (Parking Provision in New Development) TA12 (Aerodrome Safeguarded Areas and Public Safety Zones) PUA 1 (New Community) PUA 2 (Intermodal Facility for the Transfer of Freight and a Freight Distribution Centre) PUA 3 (Strategic Employment Land at Skypark) PUA 4 (Development at Exeter Airport) PUA 5 (Clyst Honiton Eastern By-Pass and Other Transport Works)

National Planning Policy Guidance

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) PPG11 (Regional Planning) PPG13 (Transport) PPG15 (Planning and the Historic Environment) PPG16 (Archaeology and Planning) PPG17 (Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation) PPS22 (Renewable Energy) PPG24 (Planning & Noise) PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk)

SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The application site for the New Community at Cranbrook is located between Broadclyst, Whimple and Rockbeare to the north of the former A30, to the east of Station Road (Broadclyst) and to the south of the Waterloo to Exeter railway line. The land comprises the area identified in the East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011 as the preferred location for the New Community for which outline planning permission has been granted.

The whole site for Cranbrook comprises 176 hectares of land that is presently farmed, with a small part of the site to the south-east formally in use as a nursery. This reserved matters application is for most of the Phase 1 land for Cranbrook and comprises the area to the west of the Rockbeare Stream and east of the existing green lane leading to Bluehayes, but excludes the area identified in the approved Development Framework Plan as the neighbourhood centre. This and the remaining Phase 1 land will be addressed in subsequent reserved matters applications. The site is presently farmed and topographically, the land falls away from a high point midway along the former A30 to the river valleys to the north (the Cranny Brook) and east (the Rockbeare Stream) and also to what will become the main access into the site at the south-western corner.

Within and adjoining the site are two existing dwellings. Included within the application boundary is Young Hayes Farm which is due to be demolished and outside, but adjoining the southern boundary, is South Whimple Farm which is in private ownership.

No development, apart from agreed essential infrastructure (which includes the station to the north and the continuation of the Main Local Route eastwards to Phase 2 of Cranbrook) will be located within the 1 in 1,000 year floodplain as defined in the Landscape, Biodiversity and Drainage Strategy. Accordingly, none of the development Parcels in this application includes land within that return event and, to compensate for the limited essential infrastructure within part of Phase 1 of the development, three linear drainage basins are to be excavated on the margins of the floodplain to the north and east of this site to assist in the attenuation of the surface water runoff and to ensure it does not exceed the current run-off rates.

There are no veteran trees or borderline trees within this site, but there is a substantial copse forming an important tree group in the centre, with a smaller tree group further to the west and outside the development Parcels in the northern part of the site parallel to the railway line. There are three strategic hedgerows which are to be retained as part of the landscape structure, either in full or in part, whilst other hedgerows are of less value and are not proposed to be retained.

Overall, the study of the visual impact of the development carried out within the Environmental Statement, concluded that the undulating folds of stream valleys and minor ridges mean that the New Community as a whole will have limited visual impact in the surrounding landscape.

Rockbeare Bridge adjacent to the easternmost part of the boundary is a listed structure, but will not be demolished or altered as a result of the development.

In the wider context the proposed New Community is sited to the east of strategic employment and infrastructure developments identified in the Structure Plan. Planning permission has now been granted for each of the major developments in the Growth Point Area including the Science Park adjacent to the M5 motorway and the A30 dual carriageway; the strategic employment site known as Skypark to the south of the old A30, including the proposed Energy Centre which will provide the district heating for the proposal site located less than 1km to the west; the Intermodal Rail Freight Facility to the north of Skypark and the Clyst Honiton Bypass. There are strong physical connections between the application site and major employment concentrations to the east of Exeter on both sides of the M5. These include the Meteorological Office, as well as other strategic developments in the vicinity. In February this year, an important piece of infrastructure in the form of the pedestrian/cycleway bridge was erected across the M5 at Redhayes which will eventually link with the pedestrian/cycleways included in this application.

DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Outline planning permission was granted for the Cranbrook new community on 29 October 2010 as follows:-

“A new community comprising up to 2,900 residential dwellings; a town centre and a local centre including retail , residential and employment; assembly and leisure uses; non-residential institutions (including two primary schools and one secondary school); sports and recreation facilities; a Country Park; a railway station; landscaping; engineering works; associated infrastructure; and car parking for all uses”

Condition 1 requires the submission of details of the access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for each sub-phase of development and for the Main Local Route (MLR) or parts thereof, prior to the commencement of development of the relevant phase of development or section of the Main Local Route.

Application is now made for the approval of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, in respect of the first phase of the development of Cranbrook new town (03/P1900) comprising:-

 Development parcels for up to 1120 dwellings (excluding landscaping within the development parcels);  Areas of strategic or common landscaping including the entrances into the site, the main square within Phase 1 of Cranbrook, the Country Park edge, former A30 frontage and retained trees and hedgerows; and  Areas of common or strategic infrastructure including drainage basins as defined on the Cranbrook Development Framework Plan, layout, construction details, appearance and landscaping of the Main Local Route and the Parsons Lane Link road connecting to the former A30.

Phase 1 of Cranbrook comprises the area to the west of the Rockbeare Stream. The full extent of the reserved matters application is shown and described on Plan WCN048/201 Rev E although the extent of the red line is generously defined. For instance, within the area shown as Country Park on the Development Framework Plan that forms part of the outline planning application, only those works that comprise the Country Park edge plus the drainage basins plus the outfalls to the existing watercourses are included. Details for the full extent of the Country Park will be the subject of a separate reserved matters application. Other than the outfalls providing for discharges from the drainage basins to the existing watercourses no works are proposed in the reserved matters applications within the 1 in 1000 year floodplain.

Development Parcels

This application seeks approval of the reserved matters (comprising layout, scale, appearance and access) for the development parcels within Phase 1 of the Cranbrook scheme that will accommodate up to 1120 dwellings (the revised drawings show 1089 dwellings).

In discussion with the Local Planning Authority, landscaping within the development parcels will be addressed by a subsequent reserved matters application, only strategic landscape is included. Nevertheless the application includes details of potential tree locations within the development parcels and the application materials includes supporting illustrative material showing how landscaping elements might be addressed in the subsequent reserved matters application.

The proposals have been developed taking account of the Strategic Design Guidance and responding directly to the guidance set out therein in relation to the creation of distinctiveness in Cranbrook through specific approaches to different character areas such as the Main Local Route Frontage, the Square, the Country Park edge and „hamlets‟.

Notwithstanding the co-ordinated design of the reserved matters proposals, the Phase One development parcels comprise six constituent development parcels which are shown on Drawing Number DLA WCN048/249.

These may be summarised as follows:-

 Those phases to the west and north west of the MLR to be implemented by Taylor Wimpey Developments including at the entrance point (Parcel 1);  The phase to the east of the MLR entrance into Cranbrook at the western end of the first phase (Parcel 6) to be implemented by Redrow Homes Limited;  Parcels to the east of the main square within the first phase of development and to the west of the eastern access point (opposite Parsons Lane) into the first phase of development (Parcels 2 and 5); and  Parcels to the south of the main square within the first phase of development and to the east of the eastern access point (opposite Parsons Lane) into the first phase of development (Parcels 3 and 4) to be implemented by Persimmon Homes Limited.

The application documentation for each of the four sub-phases comprises:-

 Site layout;  Affordable housing layout;  Adoption plan;  Plans and elevations of each house type;  Dwelling materials details; and  Boundary details and materials where these front onto the public realm.

The details set out above also includes those requirements of reserved matters applications sought by the following conditions on the outline planning permission that are attached to the outline planning permission for the Cranbrook development and include:

 Information in relation to existing and proposed ground levels and finished floor levels (FFLs) (condition 2);  Details of walls and boundary treatments on boundaries with the public highway (condition 22);  Details of external refuse and recycling facilities (condition 23);  Details of on and off street parking (condition 28); and  Schedule of materials and finishes for buildings and hard finishes (condition 37).

The application details are supported by:-

 Selected street elevations prepared in relation to key character areas identified in the Cranbrook Strategic Design Guide;  A strategic drainage statement; Details of the „tracking‟ of the principal elements of the street network.

Strategic Landscaping Details

This reserved matters application includes all reserved matters in respect of landscape details in relation to substantial areas of public realm/common landscape infrastructure areas. These comprise details of:-

 The western entrance into the site;  The second eastern entrance into the Phase 1 area (opposite Parsons Lane)  The public square located on the north side of the Main Local Route (MLR);

 The landscape details of the Country Park edge as it abuts the development parcels of the first phase of development (but not of the majority of the Country Park itself) – the Country Park threshold;  Those areas of public realm within which existing landscape features including hedgerows to be retained; and  The areas of landscaping alongside the former A30.

These are summarised in a composite landscape plan produced by Cooper Partnership.

The landscaping details included with the application include street furniture and hard materials schedules for these areas.

The proposals have been developed taking account of the Landscape, Biodiversity and Drainage Strategy which describes proposals for the protection and retention of strategic trees and hedgerows. The application proposals include plans for the tree and hedge protection, retention and removal plans for the reserved matters area.

The proposals also include all reserved matters layout, scale, appearance, landscaping and access in relation to each of the three Infrastructure Drainage Basins as shown on the Development Framework Plan for Cranbrook and located within the Country Park threshold.

Main Local Route

Proposals for the Main Local Route which provides access through the first phase of the development and, to the station, have already been granted a separate detailed planning permission (07/0784/MFUL).

However application is made in this application for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the Main Local Route as part of this reserved matters application.

Parsons Lane Link

Proposals for a second access from the former A30 into the first phase of the Cranbrook development (the eastern access of “Parsons Lane Link”) are the subject of a parallel planning application. The proposals (Planning Application No: 10/1848/MFUL) include the alignment of a road from the former A30 opposite Parsons Lane to the MLR within Cranbrook and the details of the roundabout junction with the former A30.

Application is made in this application for reserved matters for the Parsons Lane link as part of this reserved matters application.

Information in respect of the Main Local Route and Parsons Lane Link includes and is supported by:-

 Layout details  Highway construction details;  Storm and foul water drainage layout;  Vehicle swept paths  Longitudinal and cross sections

Future Submissions

Although located within the first phase of the Cranbrook development, no reserved matters details are submitted at this stage for the neighbourhood centre, place of worship and school, all within Phase 1 of Cranbrook. The multi purpose building (MPB) however already has planning consent.

The delivery and provision of each is addressed in full in the Section 106 agreement tied to the outline planning permission. They will each be the subject of separate reserved matters submissions timed to enable the obligations of the Cranbrook section 106 in relation to the delivery of each, to be met.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSSESMENT REVIEW

The applicant has correctly identified that, in accordance with „Environmental Impact Assessment‟ regulations, reserved matters applications need to be screened to determine whether or not their potential environmental implications have been properly considered, even where the outline application was accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES).

The applicant sets out that the parent outline planning permission of this reserved matters application was subject to an appropriate ES, where the likely environmental implications of the development of the new community were fully considered in order to inform the decision on the planning application, and that the ES encompassed the parameters and layout of the development proposed in this reserved matters application. In addition the applicant considers that there have been no new or additional significant environmental effects arising from the reserved matters. Therefore the applicant concludes the original ES is appropriate and does not require updating or assessment of new effects.

Officers of the Council have considered the applicants case and have also independently screened the reserved matters application and conclude that the ES for the outline planning permission provides a proper assessment of the likely significant effects on the environment arising from this subsequent application for reserved matters. The current application for reserved matters falls within the parameters of the outline planning permission and the environmental impacts assessed by the accompanying Environmental Statement as updated. No significant differences or changes in circumstance since the preparation of the updated ES have been identified.

Assessment: The ES is considered to be compliant with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999 as amended and addresses the scope of the impacts presented by this reserved matters application and no update to the ES is required to address new or changed information or circumstances.

ACCESS – HIGHWAY ISSUES

The details of the plans submitted with the reserved matters application were examined by the Highway Authority and their detailed comments were passed to the applicants at a meeting with officers and the applicants on 20 January 2011, for the applicants‟ consideration and revision as appropriate. Following receipt of amended plans on 7 February 2011, the highway elements of the scheme were reassessed.

The detailed submissions for the reserved matters application have been the subject of numerous pre-application meetings, discussions and negotiations with the applicants and all interested parties, including the Highway Authority. The detailed plans have been checked throughout by Officers of the Highway Authority to ensure compliance with Devon's Design Guidance and the nationally accepted residential design guidance 'Manual for Streets', particularly with respect to the extensive use, where appropriate, of shared surfaces. Shared surfaces are mixed movement areas shared by all highway users where suitable design restricts vehicle speeds and minimises potential conflicts. They also result in a layout which is not car dominated so the pedestrian or cyclist feels safe using the highway.

This consideration has assessed all aspects of highway safety for all highway users and the tracking and turning of large service vehicles throughout the development. The Highway Authority has also considered the geometry, gradient and visibility at all private accesses, junctions, parking areas and all other transportation aspects through the detailed plans.

Having regard to highway issues raised by the Parish Council and some adjoining parishes in their consultation responses, it should be noted that the suitability of the roundabout junctions with the old A30 and Main Local Route to accommodate the vehicular traffic generated from the whole of the outline planning application site (2900 dwellings plus ancillary development) was assessed in detail by the Highway Authority at the outline stage and accepted. Additionally, detailed planning permission for those elements of the layout within the Main Local Route was granted by EDDC on 10 November 2010. The Highway Authority confirms that the widths of all approaches and exits are adequate in this instance to deal with the anticipated traffic and this applies to the proposed roundabout at Parsons Lane, too.

The approved design therefore accommodates the anticipated traffic from that level of development and the pedestrian and cycle routes throughout the site have all be designed to provide safe cycle and pedestrian access for both leisure and commuting purposes including easy pedestrian access to bus links.

Assessment: The Highway Authority advises that it is satisfied that all the layout plans submitted now comply with all elements of that Design Guidance although no details of street lighting have yet been provided for consideration. This aspect will be a matter of further consideration, prior to the preparation of road adoption agreements. Furthermore, no detailed travel plans have yet been submitted, but these are required by the outline planning permission conditions, so they will become available in due course in accordance with the specified trigger points.

The Highway Authority therefore confirms that in all aspects the plans conform with the transportation conditions imposed on the outline planning permission and there are no further conditions that the Highway Authority would recommend over and above those included on the outline planning permission and Section 106 Agreement.

APPEARANCE, LAYOUT AND SCALE

Scrutiny of design quality based on ‘Building for Life’ pre-assessment notes published by Creating Excellence, the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE)

Introduction and Overview

The Strategic Design Guidance and the Development Framework Plan set out the vision for Cranbrook. These describe a vibrant town that is „of Devon‟; one that embraces the principles of sustainable development, is set firmly within its local landscape and delivers inclusivity. The aim is to establish a high quality built environment, a contemporary Devon response. The Cranbrook Reserved Matters application is for the first phase of this New

Community and will provide up to 1120 homes. As such as well as functioning well in its own right this phase must set the scene for the development of the town in the future.

The project is led by David Lock Associates on behalf of a consortium of developers. The Phase One application is divided into six residential parcels, designed by three architect and four developer teams. These teams are working with a landscape architect on strategic landscape and landscape within the parcels.

The following design quality assessment is introduced by an overview of the Strategic Design Guidance. This is followed by a Building for Life assessment of Phase One that draws on comments from the Design Advisory Group. „Building for Life‟ is the national design standard for well-designed homes and neighbourhoods. The 20 Building for Life criteria (www.buildingforlife.org) were devised by: CABE, The Home Builders Federation and Design for Homes in 2001. The assessment compiles the observations of the Design Advisory Group towards the end of the Reserved Matters Application process. i. Strategic Design Guidance

Prior to the approval of outline planning application for Cranbrook, EDDC and its partners secured the preparation of the Strategic Design Guidance (SDG) for Cranbrook. The Cranbrook SDG was prepared in consultation with a number of stakeholders and addresses:-

 The urban design principles to be adopted in Cranbrook;  The means by which distinctiveness is to be achieved in Cranbrook; and  More detailed design guidance in relation to character areas within the town.

The SDG sets out the structure of the town, its spaces and the areas requiring specific responses. It identifies the locations at which access from the former A30 is to be taken. The structure employs a “permeable” network of routes that promotes on-street movement by all modes, encourages frontages to streets so that they are active and well over looked. An urban form is presented that provides access to facilities, services and open space. Emphasis is placed on the Main Local Route as the principal linking element of Cranbrook and the focus for movement and activity.

The structure of Cranbrook set out in the SDG is derived from the local context and good urban design principles.

The Main Local Route is identified as the most significant element of the new town – a movement corridor punctuated by spaces such as the neighbourhood centre and, in particular, a formal Square. Development will be generally 2 storey with in places 2.5 and 3 storey development. Finishes will generally be render (in light colours – cream or white). Low boundary walls and railings are proposed. A strong building line is intended with parking to be accommodated in courtyards behind and visitor parking on the MLR. Contemporary and traditional styles will be appropriate. The SDG seeks a distinctive response in the development of, and around, the Square.

The parkland frontage also represents a more prominent location where care needs to be taken to develop an appropriate relationship with the Country Park. Open aspects and the Country Park edge treatment will be the means by which to reinforce the relationship with the Country Park beyond. Dwellings will generally be family housing with render finishes, on-plot parking and a low key Country Park link.

Elsewhere, the area will be less visually prominent. Quieter in character and with a different palette proposed by the SDG, with simply detailed buildings and wall finishes generally of brick although this does not preclude more localised use of alternative finishes such as render. Within these areas, a small number of „hamlets‟ are to be created, where the street geometry will be more relaxed and/or provide opportunities for localised open space and variety in the built form.

Alongside the former A30, the historic hedgerow will be preserved. Dwellings will present a positive relationship to the former A30, visible from behind the hedgerow and served by low key lanes or private drives (in the manner envisaged in relation to the Country Park edge).

Collectively the guidance set out in the SDG for each part of Cranbrook will ensure distinctive approach. Irrespective of character area development should follow perimeter block principles and identify opportunities where buildings can contribute to, or punctuate, the street scene.

Throughout the consultations that have taken place during the design process, care has been taken to ensure that the principles set out in the SDG have been adopted. The structure of the town designed around a permeable and legible street network (that also satisfies the County Highway Authority) is clearly set out in the reserved matters proposals, in the manner envisaged in the SDG.

In particular specific design solutions have addressed the areas that bring distinctiveness to the Cranbrook development, such as the MLR, the Square, Country Park edges, hamlets and former A30 frontage. Consultation throughout the development of the reserved matters details has resulted in an iterative process during which proposals for those areas identified in the SDG as requiring particular attention, have been substantially improved and now fully accord with the aspirations of the SDG.

Proposals for the Square, including that part of the MLR which forms the fourth side, now present a strong urban form that draws on the best practice examples of other squares in Devon. A single building line with predominantly terraced form has now been achieved with parking removed to the rear. A consistent architectural style is adopted on all sides of the Square. It is considered that this will make a strong contribution to the Phase 1 development.

Similarly the proposals for the MLR and in particular the Western Entrance, in their final iteration, adopt a character similarly evident in other Devon towns. Consistent elevation treatments and form have been achieved that nevertheless incorporate the variety that the consultation process sought. Render predominates and boundary treatments are consistent with the SDG as is the mix of more contemporary and traditional responses. The introduction of a greater range of colour than was originally intended in the SDG within the palette range was one of a number of instances where the detail in the SDG has been capable of refinement or development that has enhanced the reserved matters proposals whilst remaining consistent with SDG principles.

With the proposals for the MLR itself – its form and the materials to be adopted – it is considered that the design response along the MLR offers a unified but varied character that is appropriate to the status and prominence of the MLR as the principal street within Cranbrook.

The reserved matters proposals for the former A30 and the Country Park edge provide for predominantly family housing that looks outward and responds to the historic hedgerow, and Country Park respectively, in a coherent form. Densities are lower as befits the edge of this phase of development and the streets or access points low key in nature. The guidance of the SDG is followed in the choice, generally, of render as a finish – generally of a lighter colour.

Three hamlets are proposed in the Reserved Matters application – one more than was supposed in the SDG. As was the intent of the SDG, each has a different appearance and form depending upon its immediate context whether that be an intersection in the street network (in Parcel 6), an existing copse (in Parcel 1) or at a point where pedestrian movement might be anticipated. Each has the capacity to provide local open space and will provide variety visually and in the street form.

In conclusion the SDG has provided a strong framework for the development of the reserved matters proposals. Those proposals now reflect the aspirations and principles of the SDG. ii. Environment and Community

Community Facilities - The area enclosed by the hatched red line within the red line boundary of the application site will be the subject of reserved matters applications to follow for a neighbourhood centre, land for a place of worship and the first primary school, all to be submitted in due course in accordance with a timescale laid down in the Section 106 agreement. To put the dwellings the subject of this application in context, the neighbourhood centre will comprise a range of local shops with residential units above, including a convenience store for food and groceries (up to 350sq m) and the multi-purpose building (planning permission granted 8 December 2010) which is to be completed and open for use for community activities by the time the first 150 dwellings are occupied. The building is designed to accommodate an interim library until the permanent building is provided in the Town Centre. Apart from the convenience store, the function of the shops will be subject to market forces, but will be typical of those types found in small local centres and may include a cafe.

The first primary school, together with its playing fields, opposite the neighbourhood centre will be open by the occupation of 300 dwellings. An area of informal public open space suitable for children‟s play is to be provided prior to the occupation of 500 dwellings, adjacent to the southern boundary of the school. This will include a local equipped area of play (LEAP) together with a neighbourhood equipped area of play (NEAP) and a multi-use games area (MUGA).

In addition to buildings and public open space, it is important to note that Phase 1 will also benefit from a Country Park officer (from commencement), a community development worker, a youth worker (both at 500 dwellings or within 3 years of commencement whichever is sooner) and a dwelling for a church worker(at 50 occupations). These posts will aim to assist in engendering a sense of community for the early residents.

Access and public transport - The neighbourhood centre will be linked to the surrounding residential areas within Phase 1 by footways and cycle paths to enable easy, safe access on foot and cycle to encourage less dependence on the private car. Similarly, footpath links to the Country Park will also be established to enable residents to benefit from the rural surroundings of the new community and will include areas accessible for pushchairs, wheelchairs and those with mobility impairment.

Nearly all dwellings in Phase 1 will be within 400m (approx 10 mins) walking distance of the Main Local Route which will be served by a bus service to Cranbrook Railway Station, Skypark, the Science Park and Exeter City Centre. The service will begin with two buses an hour within 12 months of the first dwelling being occupied, then increasing in frequency and hours of operation as the development progresses as set out in the Section 106 Agreement.

Accommodation mix - The proposal includes a mix of residential accommodation ranging from 1 bedroom flats, 2 bedroom houses and flats (some terraced, some three storey, some detached) to 5 bedroom detached houses, but no bungalows. The demographic mix for Cranbrook cannot be predicted or controlled other than by making a variety of dwelling types and sizes available in an attempt to create a balanced community comprising a mixture of households. The mixed tenure of private market housing integrated with affordable housing will further contribute towards this aim.

Environmental Impact - All dwellings will be constructed to meet the Code for Sustainable Homes 3. Phase 1 also benefits from district heating or combined heat and power (CHP).

Mitigation and enhancement is identified within the Environmental Statement and the Landscape, Biodiversity & Drainage Strategy (LBDS), which was commenced early in the design process to ensure impacts of the development were dealt with in a comprehensive and fully integrated manner. The LBDS has significantly influenced the overall design of the development from layout to selection of species and will continue to guide the long-term management and maintenance regimes to ensure a successful development.

One of the key principles identified is to respect the historic field pattern and promote the retention of good and important hedgerows within the public domain to help in assimilating the development into the landscape. Additional benefits include a net gain in biodiversity, improved legibility across the site and developing a strong and identifiable character for this new community.

A large Country Park is proposed (albeit in Phase 1 only land west of the Rockbeare Stream will be delivered), which will deliver many benefits ranging from mitigation, flood attenuation, biodiversity enhancement and access to open space. It is noted that, in some Parcels adjoining the Country Park, plans have been amended to ensure there is a well-thought through „green gradient‟ that draws the greener spaces of the Country Park and hedgebanks right through those areas. This is followed through into the detailed design of landscape and boundary treatments. The submitted drawings and information generally comply with the commitments set out in the EIA and LBDS. On balance the proposals go a long way towards reducing the environmental impacts.

Assessment: The Development Framework has put in place the means for delivering good access to amenities and a good standard of mobility. The accommodation mix of the neighbourhood centre provides spaces that will create a focus for the New Community. The tenure mix facilitates the aim of creating a diverse community. The development protects and adds to biodiversity and should achieve the standards of resource efficiency required by Building Regulations.

iii. Character

The Strategic Design Guide sets out design principles for the form of the new community of Cranbrook. These organising principles define the character of the main spaces and how the form of development should shift from the urban to rural edges. Within this Development Framework the design teams have worked hard to realise the vision of a vibrant town that is „of Devon‟. They have responded thoughtfully to the comments of the Design Advisory Group and paid special attention to delivering locally relevant design.

A specific approach to the design of the MLR and the Town Square elevations has been developed for each parcel. It has also been accepted that across the Parcels individual buildings should contribute to making the new settlement distinctive. Consequently some distinctive and Cranbrook specific buildings along with and special bay and gable end windows are used in the hinterland (areas behind the Main Local Route).

Development generally works with the existing field boundaries, landscape features and topography. The LBDS sets out new green spaces and, together with new and existing landscape features, will contribute significantly to the character and provide an important green infrastructure for the town. Retained landscape features will aid legibility around the site, help distinguish one area from another and provide an existing structure from which the newly designed spaces can link visually as well as physically for the new residents.

Character varies from Parcel to Parcel and from street to street. The distinctiveness of individual places within the overall framework has continued to develop well but in places where the house types used are less locally specific the quality of architectural detail, street landscape and materials will be especially important. Retained landscape features will aid legibility around the site, help distinguish one area from another and provide an existing structure from which the newly designed spaces can link visually as well as physically for the new residents.

Generally streets are defined by a well-structured building layout, especially along primary routes. However the distinctions between different tertiary streets may be developed through the location of street trees in Parcels within the Reserved Matters landscape details to be submitted or by the use of boundary/ground materials.

Assessment: The Phase 1 proposal begins to define the character of the New Community. The key spaces are distinctive and landscape existing and proposed is generally well deployed. The proposals generally follow the principles laid down in the LBDS and if correctly implemented will help re-enforce the local distinctiveness, „sense of place‟ and identity for the settlement. Detailed consideration of topography, landscape and public realm within each parcel is key to the success of the proposal. This emerging character may be further developed and refined in future phases along with the approach to legibility and street design and the treatment of existing retained features, in particular the „Green Lanes‟ as identified on the Constraints Plans, which need to be considered more sensitively and incorporated into the public realm as essential multi-functional corridors benefiting sustainable movement, legibility, biodiversity, „urban cooling‟ from trees and a range of other functions. This must be addressed according to landscape conditions attached to the outline planning permission and as identified in the LBDS.

iv. Streets, Parking and Pedestrianisation

Within Cranbrook the aim is to create a low speed pedestrian and cycle friendly environment. The design teams have worked collaboratively with the County highways engineers to achieve this. Generally highways do not dominate and where they have a greater impact such as at the main entry from the former A30 care has been taken to develop the building layout carefully so that this defines the character of the space.

Finding a successful and clear approach to parking in the higher density areas of Phase One is demanding. This is usually best achieved by using a variety of approaches. Generally parking has been well integrated and the teams have improved most areas of concern during the design workshops. In future phases it may be of value to consider using on street parking as a greater part of the mix.

The streets are pedestrian, cycle and vehicle friendly. Care has been taken to integrate pedestrian and cycle movement and take advantage of lower order streets as places friendly to pedestrians and cyclists in particular. Generally the parcels are well connected to one another and to routes beyond the boundary of Phase One. The Design Advisory Group recommend see greater clarity to vehicle movement networks in future phases.

Attention has been given to all parcels to ensuring that streets are overlooked and that gable end elevations have windows to aid natural surveillance. This attention to detail should be continued along with care in the lighting of streets, pedestrian/cycle routes and in particular parking courts, where tree and shrub planting will help improve the quality and use of spaces.

Assessment: Generally highways do not dominate and pedestrian and cycle movement is given priority but this approach needs to be taken through in detail. The reliance on parking courts in some areas leads to an inefficient use of space where parking sometimes dominates. Here too these spaces need to be carefully considered in detail and well lit. Natural surveillance is generally good and this has been further extended by the inclusion of windows on gables.

The exact number and position of street trees, owing to the uncertainty of exact location of services and energy pipes, is of concern and the layouts have provided indicative locations to give a flavour of the intended street scene. Further details are required to secure an appropriate level of street planting to help mitigate and achieve a satisfactory character for the settlement. Further Reserved Matters will be submitted in relation to detailed landscaping within the Parcels which is specifically excluded from this application.

The quality of detailed design and workmanship, in particular within public realm areas, is paramount to the success of the scheme and an appropriate condition has been imposed to secure these necessary details. v. Design and Construction

The strategic landscape and public ream spaces have developed well alongside the layouts for the parcels. The Western entrance has been designed to provide a suitable introduction to Cranbrook and the Town Square has been carefully designed to provide amenity and improve and retain biodiversity. Landscape details within the development parcels are to be subject to further Reserved Matters details but it has been important to establish principles for the location of street trees and the treatment of the ground plane as these are important defining elements of the settlement‟s sense of place.

During the process of design development some principles have been established for architectural quality and a material palette has been outlined for each parcel. However there remains a need for further coordination of details and colours (when or where these should have a relationship to one another). Some parcels have offered very clear descriptive drawings of elevations with indications of the construction details of how materials and details will be handled. However further consistent clarity on the quality of design and construction details, materials and colours will need to be established for each Parcel. These details must include railings, gates, steps, walls, etc for all public realm. The outline conditions require sample panels to be constructed on site, but it is critical that the exact specifications are agreed and quality of workmanship demonstrated to ensure consistency and to provide the benchmark standard for all the developers to achieve.

Generally buildings exhibit architectural quality and their composition and design has been carefully considered. The teams have invested energy in making the architecture for each parcel specific in some way. To a degree there remains an over reliance on standard types and in future there may be scope for more bespoke design.

There is scope for buildings in the lower density areas to be adapted, converted or extended as needs change. However in the higher density areas of the site many two and three bedroom types have a low standard of space provision. No particular emphasis has been given to using advances in construction technology, although this would not be expected to be demonstrated in a Reserved Matters application. Cranbrook will benefit however from the provision of Combined Heat & Power Unit (CHP), which will lead to an increase in environmental performance overall.

Assessment: Key public spaces are well designed and a commitment to good design in secondary spaces has been given. The quality indicated in illustrative drawings must be consolidated as detailed design progresses. Generally buildings exhibit architectural quality and their composition and design has been carefully considered. There is an important ongoing role for the applicants‟ lead Urban Designer in place of the Design Code to coordinate the design of the public realm and buildings and make sure that each of the consultant teams for the developer‟s work together to shared principles and quality standards.

In future there may be scope for an evolution of house types for Cranbrook and for more innovation in the design of homes generally.

LANDSCAPING – Strategic or Common Landscape Areas

Entrances into the site

The western entrance way has been designed to create a „sense of arrival‟ with a distinctive architectural form complemented by proposed large native and non-native trees to re-enforce the link with the neighbouring countryside and to help establish a recognisable character for the new settlement.

This space contains a significant highway junction but through the integration of pedestrian and cycle routes helps promote sustainable forms of transport and through sensitive design, including variation in surface treatments, new planting areas and the incorporation of „Art‟ signage the design results in a positive „gateway‟ into Cranbrook.

Assessment: Every effort must be made to ensure the Street Trees are not compromised. Also we are awaiting South West Water‟s approval in writing to ensure a satisfactory compliance to their standards – an issue over the mature height of trees has still not been resolved.

The Main Square within Phase 1

The Town Square has been considered in great detail in recent design workshop meetings and will perform a critical role for a wide catchment of residents. This formal space close to the Neighbourhood Centre will offer a range of functions, including a pleasant route through connecting to the Country Park and Railway station, seating, bicycle stands and a formal play area (LEAP) enabling safe play for a range of age groups close to residential properties. Two large Oak trees have been retained and provides immediate benefit given the scale of the proposed residential properties and will improve the quality of the space in terms of visual amenity and biodiversity. A Management Company is being set up by the East Devon New Community Consortium to manage all open spaces within Cranbrook (Note: EDDC have made provision to adopt the play areas should this be necessary and the appropriate agreements are put in place at that time).

Assessment: The Cranbrook Design Advisory Group were pleased with the overall design principles and form of this important space. Further information is required by condition to ensure details are satisfactory and consistent with adjacent properties, including railings, seating, steps and walls.

Country Park Threshold

The Country Park edge will perform a number of functions, including access around and into the Country Park, establish a „green‟ hedgebank boundary to promote biodiversity gain and enhance the character of this important space and edge of development.

A half-hedgebank has been proposed which is considered acceptable and meets part of the requirement for this important edge to development. Further details are required to incorporate additional trees to help establish appropriately scaled trees, mitigate for the development, enhance biodiversity, develop a distinctive character for these areas by frame views.

Assessment: The proposals are generally acceptable but additional native trees within the hedgebank to establish a „rural‟ setting for the development may be required in accordance with the LBDS and to reinforce the requirements set out in the Environmental Statement. This is particularly important due to the severe restrictions placed by the Environment Agency on planting within the floodplain. The setting of the listed bridge adjacent to the C832 (former A30) will be dealt with as part of the Country Park Reserved Matters Application.

Former A30 Frontage

Here housing faces out of the site and the scheme successfully retains a considerable length of existing hedgebank within the public realm along with a footway cycleway. Large tree species will be planted within the site along the road frontage to supplement the existing boundary and to enhance the setting of the development. This will help ameliorate the development into the surrounding landscape and improve the overall character, biodiversity and general appearance of Cranbrook.

Assessment: The proposals are considered to be generally acceptable for the periphery of the development. Management and maintenance of these natural boundaries is critical to the long-term success of the development and further details of the hedgebank management details will be required by condition.

Retained Trees and Hedgerows

The necessary assessments and surveys have been undertaken by the developer‟s consultants and EDDC officers have been fully engaged throughout the process, in order to achieve a satisfactory outcome. The principles contained within the LBDS have been adhered to and the development proposals will result in the majority of existing „worthy‟ trees and important hedgerows being retained. The incorporation of a considerable amount of new planting will contribute towards assimilating the development into the landscape.

The LBDS describes the need for inspections, monitoring of works and production of a site log (record) by a qualified Arboriculturalist/Ecologist as „Clerk of Works‟ role to ensure the principles set out are adhered to by all developers and contractors on site throughout the life of the construction operations.

Post construction a Management Company will be responsible for maintaining the trees and vegetation within the public realm (with the exception of the MLR trees which are proposed to be managed under license from DCC assuming the appropriate agreements are in place) and an appropriate specification (Service Level Agreement) has been attached to the Section 106 Agreement.

Assessment: The information submitted is considered to be generally acceptable. Further details to ensure exact management and maintenance operations, including timings will be conditioned.

INFRASTRUCTURE – Strategic or Common Infrastructure

Drainage basins

The designs for Drainage basins integrate pure engineering solutions with positive landscape, biodiversity and informal recreation benefits.

From a flood risk perspective, the Environment Agency has assessed and considers the proposed development is broadly acceptable in so far as:- a) Properly respects the 1 in 1,000 year floodplain and does not propose any „inappropriate‟ development in Flood Zones 2 or 3 b) Promotes the disposal of surface waters generated by the development in accordance with the principles of Sustainable Urban drainage and to the high standards required by Planning policy Statement 25 c) Promotes all habitable floor levels well above predicted 1 in 1,000 year flood water levels in the Cranny Brook, Rockbeare Stream and surface water lagoons. d) The EA receives additional drawings that confirm the surface water flows that enter the development site near Treasbeare Cottages are safely managed in accordance with the principles identified within the EA letter dated 16 February 2011 letter ref: DC/2011/108944/02-L0.

A Management Company is intended to manage and maintain these features in accordance with an approved methodology and specification.

The Engineering drawings submitted appear to be generally acceptable but further details will be requested for i) any safety fencing requirements around headwalls, channels and basins to ensure they are design sensitively to match the character of the Country Park; and ii) to ensure the maintenance operations achieve the desired outcome for drainage but with additional multiple functions as described in the LBDS, including enhanced biodiversity, character, quality visual amenity and informal access.

Appearance and landscaping of the Main Local Route and the Parsons Lane Link Road

The Main Local Route (MLR) has been designed to perform as the main transport route through the settlement for a range of modes of travel. Tree planting along the MLR is considered to be an essential component to the success of the development not only for mitigation or aesthetic reasons but to help perform traffic calming measures, legibility around the development, urban cooling and shade and improve biodiversity long-term. It is intended that the MLR trees would be adopted by East Devon District Council under license from Devon County Council and this is detailed within the Section 106 Agreement.

The division between carriage way and the cycleways will vary from a grass verge at the periphery of the site to a hard porous material (designed to not restrict tree growth) closer to the Neighbourhood Centre to embrace the sense of becoming more urban.

The MLR is a considerable space and will be utilised by a broad range of users from pedestrians, cyclists, buses, car users, commercial and other service vehicles. The overall composition is critical to the develop as this route will be used by visitors as well as residents and particularly for Phase One where it will act as the „shop window‟ from which all will assess the quality of the development (professional and non-professional).

Assessment: The scheme meets highway approval and incorporates a range of materials and street trees to achieve a well-defined space with its own distinctive character as expressed in the Strategic Design Guidance.

The Parsons Lane Link will perform a secondary access point into Cranbrook. This access point is considered by many local people to be extremely positive in that it will slow traffic at a notoriously dangerous position along the C832 (Former A30). Situated at a relatively high point on the southern edge of the site and along the historic parish boundary the highway design has been adjusted to enable the reconstruction of native hedgebanks to retain a rural character and achieve a less highway dominant junction.

This secondary access point also performs an important link into the countryside and connects to the „Green Lane‟ which links to the MLR and the railway station. As part

of the sustainable movement network the design will help promote healthy and active lifestyles and is considered to be a significant addition within the overall Masterplan for Cranbrook.

Assessment: Generally the proposals are acceptable and the consultants are amending the current plans to incorporate a hedgebank with native species and re- establish a „rural‟ character for this secondary access point. An amended drawing is expected to be submitted for approval prior to Committee.

COMPLIANCE WITH STRATEGIES

Archaeology Strategy

The Cranbrook Archaeological Mitigation Strategy is included within the Section 106 agreement relating to the outline planning permission for Cranbrook and is referred to in Condition 8 of the outline permission. The strategy was drawn up in consultation with Devon County Council Archaeological Officers and covers the whole of the area comprising the outline planning permission.

The strategy summarises the results of a programme of archaeological investigations undertaken in relation to the development set out in the outline planning permission. The strategy was based on the results of a series of complementary techniques that included walkover and geophysical surveys and targeted trial trenching to investigate areas of potential archaeological interest identified in the archaeological assessment and geophysical surveys.

The Strategy concludes that the investigations to date have been widespread but have failed to recover any significant level of archaeological materials. As such both the remains revealed by fieldwork to date and any hitherto unidentified deposits are agreed to be likely to be of local importance only. However within the site, the strategy does identify four small areas where a mitigation strategy of conservation by record (but limited specifically to strip map and record) should take place, prior to construction.

Within the area that is subject of the reserved matters application there is just one such location – the former site of South Whimple Farm (Site A in the Archaeological Strategy). The site is located within the northern part of Parcel 1 close to the western boundary and Drainage basin one. A second area is located within the site for the primary school and place of worship but no reserved matters details are submitted in relation to that area.

Assessment: The archaeological implications of the development reserved matters proposals have therefore been fully considered and agreed. The mitigation strategy is agreed with the County Archaeologist. The implementation of the mitigation/archaeological strategy is secured through condition 8 of the outline planning permission which, in relation to the reserved matters proposals, will require a programme of recording to be agreed and carried out within one small area in the north-west part of the reserved matters application area. The method by which such recording will be carried out is set out in the agreed Archaeological Strategy.

Phasing Strategy

The Phasing Strategy seeks to secure the smooth co-ordination of development across Cranbrook as a whole and identifies a broad sequence of development.

The Phasing Strategy indicates that development of Cranbrook should commence on land west of the Rockbeare Stream (Parcel Group A on Figure 1). This will enable the most effective co-ordination of infrastructure and easy access to related community and physical infrastructure. The Reserved Matters proposals accord fully with this Phasing Strategy expectation.

Moreover, whilst there is no requirement imposed by the Phasing Strategy to submit details for Cranbrook for the whole of the Parcels Groups identified in Figure 1 of the Strategy, by addressing the whole of the residential and related areas in Parcel Group A in the Phasing Strategy, the reserved matters proposals clearly comply with those objectives of the Phasing Strategy to deliver co-ordinated development. By providing details, at the same time, of the Country Park edge, strategic landscaping and of the drainage provisions for the first phase of development, the reserved matters proposals are able to demonstrate a fully co-ordinated approach to development.

Triggers in relation to the delivery of related infrastructure requirements are set out in the Phasing Strategy – articulated in relation to completed numbers of dwellings. These triggers are set out in detail in the Section 106 agreement for Cranbrook and, therefore, will be secured through compliance with the Section 106 rather than the Phasing Strategy. That the reserved matters proposals seek the details of the residential elements of phase 1 but do not include the primary school for instance, has no bearing on the obligation to deliver the primary school by the appropriate trigger in the Section 106 agreement. The Main Local Route and Multipurpose Building for instance already have planning permission and it will be for the applicants to secure the necessary approvals to ensure that the Section 106 triggers are met. It is understood that work is progressing on the outstanding details of elements such as the details of the primary school.

Detailed conditions appertaining to the outline consent will further ensure the co-ordination of development through the requirements for further details to be submitted and approved in relation to drainage for instance.

Assessment: The proposals are consistent with the Phasing strategy. The comprehensive nature of the submission – alongside the detailed consents for the MLR and MPB – further ensures a co-ordinated approach to development west of the Rockbeare Stream.

Landscape, Biodiversity and Drainage Strategy

Mitigation and enhancement identified within the Environmental Statement (ES) and the Landscape, Biodiversity & Drainage Strategy (LBDS) was commenced early in the design process to ensure impacts of the development were dealt with in a comprehensive and fully integrated manner.

The LBDS has significantly influenced the overall design of the development from layout to selection of species and will continue to guide the long-term management and maintenance regimes to ensure a successful development.

One of the key principles identified is to respect the historic field pattern and promotes the retention of good and important hedgerows within the public domain to help in assimilating the development into the landscape. Additional benefits include a net gain in biodiversity, improved legibility across the site and developing a strong and identifiable character for this new community.

A large Country Park is proposed (albeit in Phase 1 only west of the Rockbeare Stream will be delivered), which will deliver many benefits ranging from mitigation, flood attenuation, biodiversity enhancement and access to open space.

“Careful analysis of the topography and latest Masterplan has allowed a scheme to be developed that replaces the previously proposed below ground detention tanks with above ground features, while minimising the impact on developable area. This change has permitted increased landscape amenity to be brought into the development area. Furthermore, the above ground features will provide enhanced passive treatment to the quality of water discharged from the development, by removing suspended solids and other contaminants associated with urban run-off. The increased extent of above ground features will also provide further ecological enhancements by way of niche habits for flora and fauna”.

Assessment: The submitted drawings and information generally comply with the commitments set out in the ES and LBDS. On balance the proposals go a long way towards reducing the environmental impacts.

Further details are required to ensure accurate Management Plans are produced and taken forward as development progresses, including confirmation of the exact timing of ecological enhancements. An appropriate pre-commencement condition is imposed accordingly

Sustainability Strategy

The outline planning application (03/P1900) was accompanied by a „Sustainability Strategy‟ which set out how the development of Cranbrook New Community would meet sustainability objectives. In order to deliver a more sustainable development the Strategy includes a number of „Sustainability Commitments‟ which were derived from either; the outline application itself; the S106 Agreement and/or „Sustainability Commitments‟ set out within the Sustainability Strategy. The development proposal, reflecting these commitments, was subject to a Sustainability Appraisal which demonstrated that the proposed development was rated as „Very Good‟ in BREEAM sustainability terms.

There is need to ensure that the various commitments proposed are delivered in order to ensure that the New Community does perform to a high standard of sustainability as expected by the outline planning permission. The delivery of these commitments is provided through a number of measures, primarily being: the conditions attached to the outline planning permission and the S106 Agreement.

The Sustainability Strategy and the S106 Agreement requires that each and every home in the new community will achieve at least level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes and this requirement is delivered via a process of testing and certification, prior to first occupation of each home. This Strategy and S106 Agreement provides for reduction in carbon use by requiring that at least 16.7% of the development‟s energy needs must be provided by on- site renewable energy sources which will now be met by the recently approved Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plant and low carbon district heating scheme. Delivery of the Energy Centre and CHP is secured through planning permissions and associated planning legal agreements.

In relation to this current Reserved Matters application there is a need to ensure any relevant commitments tied to this stage are appropriately addressed and delivery is secured. Few of the Commitments explicitly are required to be addressed through the reserved matters application although in some instances, for example the protection of landscape features and provision of cycle storage, could be addressed in Reserved Matters applications.

Assessment: The majority of the sustainability commitments are secured through the S106 Agreement and conditions attached to the outline planning permission. This reserved matters application is consistent with the requirements and expectations of the Sustainability Strategy such as the protection of the site‟s existing features in line with the outline permission. Therefore the aspects of this reserved matters application that relate to the „Sustainability Commitments‟ are considered to be acceptable.

Affordable Housing

The outline planning permission secured 40% affordable housing in each phase of development on the basis of 30% social rented and intermediate, or shared equity housing, and 10% affordable by design. The drawings submitted with this application show the disposition of the 30% social rented and intermediate dwelling units in clusters of no more than 30 within each Parcel of the development– a stipulation required by the registered social landlords who will ultimately manage these units. In the case of the 10% of the affordable by design dwellings, minimum sizes of units are set out in the Section 106 agreement in order to meet the criteria.

It is also a feature of the affordable housing that all units must be constructed such that their external appearance is materially indistinguishable from the open market dwellings (i.e. tenure blind).

Assessment: The provision and distribution of the 40% affordable housing accords with the proportion and disposition required by the outline application and the detailed drawings for the dwelling units indicate that they also meet the requirement that the affordable units must be tenure blind.

Compliance with Section 106 Agreement

The outline planning permission for Cranbrook was subject to a Section 106 planning agreement signed on 29 October 2010. The Section 106 Agreement relates to the whole of the Cranbrook development. It describes those actions required to be undertaken by the developers prior to the commencement of development and then sets out the trigger points at which further actions are required to have taken place.

Prior to commencement actions generally relate to the approval of details of locations for facilities or, for instance, of street furniture details.

A number of the triggers set out in the Section 106 will arise during the development of the area for which the reserved matters application is made. These include for instance:-

 Provision of annual bus service contributions following the occupation of the 50th dwelling;  Provision of the multi-purpose building prior to the occupation of 150 dwellings;  The provision of the primary school prior to the occupation of the 300th dwelling;  The provision of agreed contributions in relation to off-site minor highways, footpaths and cycleways, youth facilities, community development worker and the town council contribution.

A Management Company is being set up by the applicants to manage all open spaces within Cranbrook, as this Council has declined the offer to adopt them.

A number of the parish councils have raised issues in their responses including drainage, public transport, cycleways, employment, funding for education provision, routes for construction traffic and the Crannaford Crossing, which was also commented upon by Network Rail and HM Railway Inspectorate. Whilst these comments are noted they are not under consideration with this Reserved Matters, but each of these issues were addressed during the consideration of the outline planning permission and are subject to detailed provisions in the Section 106 agreement. Various trigger mechanisms have been agreed to ensure timely delivery beyond which no further dwellings can be occupied. It was agreed that allotments for the town will be included in the future extension of Cranbrook.

Assessment: It is the responsibility of this Council to ensure that the provisions of the agreement are monitored and enforced prior to and during the course of the development described in the Reserved Matters proposals. Such provisions do not impact upon the determination of the Reserved Matters application but ensure that the implementation of the development and the provision of services and facilities will be carried out in an orderly manner.

The remaining provisions of the Section 106 include securing consistency of development with the Strategies attached to the outline permission and the provisions of the Section 106 in relation to affordable housing, each of which are assessed in separate sections of this report.

The outline planning permission has been subject to Appropriate Assessment and the issues are addressed by the outline planning permission with mitigation measures set out in the S106 Agreement for the whole of the New Community. This Reserved Matters application does not present impacts which have not been previously assessed. The mitigation measures proposed remain appropriate and will be secured through the implementation of the mitigation measures in the Section 106 agreement.

It is concluded that the Reserved Matters proposals comply with the Section 106 Agreement.

NOTE: The New Community Officer for Cranbrook, funded by the applicants under the Section 106 has been appointed and will be in post at EDDC the day before this Committee (7 March). This three year post will oversee in the implementation and monitoring the crucial initial stages of the development.

CONCLUSION

This reserved matters application for up to 1120 dwellings marks the first major stage in seeking to meet the requirements for the development of Cranbrook sought by the conditions that are attached to the outline planning permission which address access, appearance, landscaping (excluding landscaping within the development parcels), layout and scale.

Access - The detailed proposals for the highway elements within Phase 1 including the geometry, gradients and visibility at all private accesses, junctions and parking areas shown on the submitted drawings have been examined by the Highway Authority and some changes have been made as a result. Also considered, was the capacity for the tracking and turning of large service vehicles within the resulting road network. The proposal includes shared surfaces in certain residential streets which are intended to restrict vehicle speeds and to allow mixed movement areas where vehicle speeds are restricted resulting in an environment which is not vehicle dominated and where pedestrians can feel safe.

The whole site is permeated by pedestrian footways and cycleways, including easy access to the neighbourhood centre, first primary school, bus services and some linking to footpaths beyond the boundary of this application, for example, to the Country Park and to adjoining „Green Lanes‟. In all instances, the Highway Authority has been satisfied that the routes are appropriately designed for safe access for both leisure and commuting purposes.

The layout and construction of the Main Local Route granted full planning permission in November 2010 and the Parson‟s Lane Link, the subject of a separate full planning application, have been found to be satisfactory by the Highway Authority.

Appearance, Layout and Scale - The key overarching documents governing the vision for Cranbrook are the Strategic Design Guidance summarised in this report and the approved Development Framework Plan. The Reserved Matters drawings provide the details for Phase 1 in terms of the built environment to include the layout of the development and how it sits within the topography of the site, the hierarchy of the streets, dwelling types, elevational drawings and materials to be used for individual buildings, boundaries and in the public realm generally.

The detailed plans and drawings for each of the Parcels were scrutinised by the Cranbrook Design Advisory Group as they became available at the pre-application stage and by the Cranbrook Project Team following receipt of the Reserved Matters. As a consequence, the appearance, layout and scale of the proposed dwellings and public realm bordering the MLR and the frontage along the former A30 were subject to considerable changes which has resulted in a much improved design solution.

The scrutiny of the design quality using the „Building for Life‟ was thorough and sought answers to 20 basic criteria grouped under five main subject headings:-

 Environment and Community – This looked at the way in which the development will function for the benefit of its residents. It was found that there is good access to amenities, and a good standard of mobility. The range of accommodation sizes, types and tenure will encourage a diverse demographic mix that will contribute to a balanced community with access to the amenities to be afforded at an early stage in the neighbourhood centre. The environment will not be harmed by the development which will actually enhance biodiversity and meet the sustainability criteria laid down in the outline planning application.

 Character – The identity of the New Community will begin to form by the manner in which this proposal is implemented. The disposition of distinctive spaces and landscaping treatment are key elements, as identified in the LBDS and it is considered these as proposed will engender a „sense of place‟ and local distinctiveness. Again, the topography, landscape and treatment of the public realm within each Parcel are important elements which have been shown to have been considered in the layout of the residential and public areas.

Streets, Parking and Pedestrianisation – It is found that the priority of pedestrian and cycleway movement is successful in reducing the dominance of the roads, thus being likely to encourage more sustainable modes of moving around by the residents. From a safety aspect, additional windows on gables adjacent to public areas were successfully added to the appropriate elevations to aid informal surveillance of those thoroughfares. Similarly, the parking courts have been

redesigned, or a redesign is expected in amended drawings, in several locations with improved detailing which results in parking which is less dominant.

There is an outstanding issue regarding the exact number and position of street trees in relation to the location of services and energy pipes which is still being negotiated. The street trees will be important to mitigate the impact of the settlement and will contribute to its character.

 Design and Construction – Both key public spaces, such as the Town Square, and secondary spaces, such as those in the hamlets, have been examined in terms of good design and their contribution to the ambience of the place. The architectural quality of the buildings, their composition and overall design has been carefully examined plot by plot. In the case of both the open spaces and the buildings, an effort has been made to exhibit characteristics which make each Parcel distinctive from the next. Further clarity must be sought to establish exact specifications and quality of workmanship on some architectural detailing, railings, gates, steps, walls, etc in some locations

Landscaping (excluding landscaping within the development parcels)

The application specifically includes areas of strategic or common landscaping, but it must be noted that the on-plot landscaping within the development Parcels is to be submitted in due course and will contribute greatly to the overall appearance of Phase 1.

In the main, the strategic and common landscaping proposals, which include the MLR, main entrances into the site, the Town Square, Country Park threshold, retained trees and hedgerows and Drainage Basins, are considered to be acceptable. On balance the proposals have taken forward the principles identified within the guiding documents and Strategies to achieve a positive scheme. The management and maintenance details of all landscaped areas is considered to be critical to the long-term success of the development and further details are required to be submitted for approval prior to commencement of the relevant areas in accordance with the Section 106 and the LBDS.

To ensure consistent quality, on-plot landscaping within the development Parcels is to be submitted prior to commencement and will contribute greatly to the overall appearance of Phase 1.

Overall Assessment: Generally, the proposals are considered to adhere to the principles secured by the Strategic Design Guide, the Strategies, Section 106 requirements and the principles of development established at the outline planning stage. On balance the reserved matters submitted are acceptable in terms of access, appearance, landscaping (excluding landscaping within the development parcels), layout and scale in respect of the first phase of the development. Nevertheless, further details are required by conditions, mainly because of the extremely short timescale within which it has been necessary to determine this application, but there is no reason to believe that a satisfactory outcome cannot be achieved prior to commencement of the relevant phases from the ongoing negotiations on detail.

The timing of the delivery of the open market dwelling units and the affordable housing is all controlled by the Section 106 Legal Agreement accompanying the outline planning permission, as are the facilities and services associated with the development.

Subject to the imposition of a number of further conditions and compliance with those conditions still extant on the outline planning permission, it is recommended that the proposal be approved.

The conditions as presently drafted may need amendment as the negotiations proceed with regard to the additional details that are currently being drawn up by the applicants for some of the Parcels at the time of writing this report. Consequently, delegated authority is sought for the Head of Planning Services to amend and alter these as appropriate.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that:-

East Devon District Council as local planning authority HEREBY APPROVES THE FOLLOWING RESERVED MATTERS of the above described development proposed in the application numbered as shown above and in the plans and drawings attached thereto, copies of which are attached to this notice, relating to:- a) access b) appearance c) landscaping (strategic) d) layout and scale

This Reserved Matters application numbered as shown above is made pursuant to the Outline Planning Permission (ref. no. 03/P1900/MOUT) granted on 29 October 2010.

The following reserved matter has yet to be approved:-

Landscaping within the development parcels.

The following condition attached to the Outline Planning Permission referred to above is discharged:

The obligations set out in the following conditions attached to the Outline Planning Permission referred to above, to provide details or plans or schedules of information as part of Reserved Matters applications, have been met in respect of Phase 1 and the Reserved Matters submission that is the subject of this approval, but remain to be complied with in respect of subsequent sub-phases or phases of the development:

2,18,22,23,28,37

The reserved matters details hereby permitted also include those details for the protection of retained trees during construction thereby satisfying the requirement in Condition 20. The requirements in relation compliance with those details, or variations thereto, are set out in each of the above conditions.

Subject to the Head of Planning Services being given delegated powers to add to or amend, the following conditions attached to the Outline Planning Permission referred to above must be adhered to in relation to the reserved matters details hereby approved:

1 5, 6, 8, 9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,24, 29, 31,34,35,

For the avoidance of doubt, where such conditions require actions prior to commencement of development or construction within each sub-phase, the definition of sub-phase shall include any smaller part of the development parcels or areas of strategic landscaping or infrastructure for which reserved matters details are hereby approved.

Subject to the Head of Planning Services being given delegated powers to add to, revise or amend, the following additional conditions are attached to this Reserved Matters approval:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of two years from the date of this permission and shall be carried out as approved. (Reason - To comply with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to comply with the grant of outline planning permission ref: 03/P1900/MOUT).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans listed in Schedule A (attached). (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning).

3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved (or part thereof) detailed indicative architectural drawings showing the following design of elements of the buildings in that Parcel or part thereof have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These drawings shall comprise the following:-

i. Windows – to show head, reveal and cill detail of ordinary and projecting windows ii. Design of and material and finish to be used for windows and doors (including garage doors) iii. Roof – to show eaves and ridge detailing iv. Dormer details v. Door, door canpy and threshold details vi. Junctions between different materials on elevations generally and junction with the ground vii. Thresholds/front gardens (service access points)

For the avoidance of doubt, the drawings shall be to an appropriate scale and shall include a plan section and elevation(s), or can alternatively be 3D drawings if they are clear and do not omit important parts of the detail. The drawings shall be fully annotated and describe all materials, finishes and colours. The development shall thereafter only be constructed in accordance with the approved details, or such other details as shall subsequently be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To clarify details of the design and to describe the level of quality that will be delivered in the interests of the character and appearance of the locality in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Dictinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan).

4. Tree pits for Street Trees

Prior to the commencement of construction, further details showing the tree pits for all street trees, together with a phased delivery and long-term management and maintenance programme, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The tree pits shall then be provided and managed in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - In the interests of visual amenity and to secure ongoing management and maintenance provision in accordance with Policy D4 (Landscape Requirements) of the East Devon Local Plan).

5. Boundary Treatments and Landscape Details

Save such works that the Local Planning Authority may approve in writing, prior to the commencement of construction of the Square and any residential dwellings fronting the Main Local Route(MLR) and Square, further details of railings, gates, walls, steps and ramps fronting the MLR and Square, etc must be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details, unless subsequently otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason: To establish a set of „common details‟ which will help ensure consistency of design in public areas and consistency of design quality throughout the development in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and D4 ( Landscape Requirements) of the East Devon Local Plan).

6. Hedgebank and Ditch Management Plan details

Save such works that the Local Planning Authority may approve in writing, prior to commencement of works to existing or new hedgebanks, further details for the management and maintenance of new and existing hedgebanks and ditches will be required to be submitted for approval. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, this additional information must include:

i) accurate plans indicating style of management to be applied to specific sections of all hedgebanks (existing and proposed) be it laying or flailing of hedges ii) provide details on the methodology for „casting up‟ iii) a phasing plan (schedule) to ensure management operation take place on a rotation basis iv) clearly state the methodology to select individual trees within the hedgebank (new and existing) to grow on to maturity, for example „tagging‟ and protecting with stakes during maintenance operations. (Reason - To enhance the character and biodiversity of these features and to achieve the retention of a proportion of vegetative structure at all times by avoiding management of all hedgebanks on site at one specific time in accordance with Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness), D4 ( Landscape Requirements) and D5 (Trees on Development Sites) of the East Devon Local Plan).

7. Maintenance and Fencing Details for Drainage Channels and Basins

Save such works that the Local Planning Authority may approve in writing, prior to commencement of construction of each drainage channel or basin, further details for management of that drainage channel or basin and the erection of safety fencing must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include plans and sections, indicating the extent of regularly cut areas for the different drainage features and extents of fencing (for safety around headwalls, etc). These works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. (Reason: to ensure these features perform their drainage function but also achieve positive biodiversity and avoid an over-manicured character adjacent to the Country Park in accordance with Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and Policy D4 (Landscape Requirements) of the East Devon Local Plan)

8. Dog Walking Area with Access Route

Save such works that the Local Planning Authority may approve in writing, prior to commencement of construction a plan indicating the location of a temporary area for dog walking within Phase 1, including safe access thereto, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan must describe any temporary fencing and gates. The scheme shall be implemented on a temporary basis in accordance with the approved plans, prior to occupation of the first dwelling, or as otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To help set a pattern for new residents; to assist in avoiding illegal access to unsafe parts of the site during the construction period; and to encourage dog walking locally rather than requiring a car journey in accordance with Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and D4 ( Landscape Requirements) of the East Devon Local Plan. It is understood that the long-term provision will be implemented prior to the occupation of 750 units but it is expected that a temporary facility will be required prior to the provision of elements of the country park whereupon the Local Planning Authority will confirm that such temporary provision is no longer required).

9. Footway/Cycleway Access to link with Southern Part of exisitng „Green Lane‟ on Western Boundary

Notwithstanding the details shown on Drawing No: 750-TW-101 Rev B (Parcel 1a Site Layout), detailed drawings showing a public footway/cycleway linking the „Green Lane‟ to the west with the development between Plots 14 and 15 indicated on the above Drawing No: 750-TW-101 Rev B, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to occupation of the adjacent dwelling units 14 and 15. These details shall accord with those indicated in the drawings contained within the Design Statement (in particular on page 60 „Permeability‟ and page 63 „Placemaking‟) and the proposed footpath route within the development shown on Drawing No: 1679/303/E of the Landscape, Biodiversity and Drainage Strategy, The development shall then be provided in accordance with the approved details. (Reason – To clarify the details of the submitted layout of Parcel 1 in accordance with Policy TA4 (Footpaths, cycleways and bridleways) of the East Devon Local Plan. In addition, the first section of Blue Hayes access road is „private‟ and not a Public Right of Way. This link will put in place the important pedestrian/cycle connection from the development along the „Green Lane‟ directly to the Country Park, as identified within the documents referred to in the condition).

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

1. IN GRANTING PLANNING PERMISSION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION: The proposal complies with the Devon Structure Plan 2001-2016 Policies and the adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011 Policies as set out in the report.

2. In respect of Condition 5, for the avoidance of doubt, drawings are required for the construction or landscape details of boundary treatments fronting or forming part of the MLR or Square including, unless otherwise agreed in writing: dimensions of steels used in railings and state whether they are to be solid or tubular; details of fixings (to ensure compatibility and matching of finished colour; finishes (painted, powder coated, galvanised, RAL colours, etc).

3. In respect of Condition 6, the LBDS describes the principles of management and maintenance for the hedgebanks and ditches retained within Cranbrook. This work is described as „Advanced Management works‟ in 3.1.10 of the LBDS and the details required are to ensure this work is undertaken precisely and according to an organised and well-defined programme.

These additional Management Plan details are of particular importance for the western boundary „Green Lane‟ and hedgebank in Parcel 5 adjacent to the Open Space. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, the operations and requirements should include re-planting of gaps (with native species) and provision of adequate educational information within householder packs providing details on the management and maintenance procedures.

4. REASONS FOR APPROVAL

Generally, the proposals are considered to adhere to the principles secured by the Strategic Design Guidance, the Strategies, Section 106 requirements and the principles of development established at the outline planning stage.

The key overarching documents governing the vision for Cranbrook are the Strategic Design Guidance summarised in this report and the approved Development Framework Plan. The Reserved Matters drawings provide the details for Phase 1 in terms of the built environment to include the layout of the development and how it sits within the topography of the site, the hierarchy of the streets, dwelling types, elevational drawings and materials to be used for individual buildings, boundaries and in the public realm generally.

There is good access to amenities, and a good standard of mobility. The range of accommodation sizes, types and tenure will encourage a diverse demographic mix that will contribute to a balanced community with access to the amenities to be afforded at an early stage in the neighbourhood centre. The environment will not be harmed by the development which will actually enhance biodiversity and meet the sustainability criteria laid down in the outline planning application.

The identity of the New Community will begin to form by the manner in which this proposal is implemented. The disposition of distinctive spaces and landscaping treatment are key elements, as identified in the LBDS and it is considered these as proposed will engender a „sense of place‟ and local distinctiveness. Again, the topography, landscape and treatment of the public realm within each Parcel are important elements which have been shown to have been considered in the layout of the residential and public areas.

It is found that the priority of pedestrian and cycleway movement is successful in reducing the dominance of the roads, thus being likely to encourage more sustainable modes of moving around by the residents. From a safety aspect, additional windows on gables adjacent to public areas were successfully added to the appropriate elevations to aid informal surveillance of those thoroughfares.

The strategic and common landscaping proposals, which include the MLR, main entrances into the site, the Town Square, Country Park threshold, retained trees and

hedgerows and Drainage Basins, have taken forward the principles identified within the guiding documents and Strategies to achieve a positive scheme.

NB: A SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT RELATES TO THIS PLANNING PERMISSION.

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

Committee Date: 08.03.2011

CLYST VALLEY 10/0883/FUL Target Date: (23.06.10) (Farringdon)

Applicant: Mr T Mahon

Location: 2 Princes Paddock Farringdon Exeter EX5 2JZ

Proposal: Retention of use of land for the siting of 2 mobile homes, 4 touring caravans, proposed construction of day room and storage shed and the creation of an additional pitch for 1 gypsy family INTRODUCTION

Members will recall that this application was brought to the Committee on 29 June 2010 at which meeting the committee resolved to grant the permission subject to an additional condition restricting the site to one pitch only. The application was considered alongside a separate but similar application for land to the south which was also approved subject to an amendment to the condition restricting business use.

However, after the decision was issued, it came to light that one of the planning conditions on the decision notice contradicted the description and this has caused the decision to be a nullity, and as a consequence we have had to bring the application back to the Committee for re-determination.

The description of development remains the same, however an amended site layout plan has been submitted to help clarify what is being applied for and positions of the proposed buildings.

All consultation responses and letters of representation previously submitted in respect of the application have been taken into consideration, as detailed below. All parties previously consulted or having made representations on this application have been notified of the re-determination of the application and given the opportunity to provide additional comments. The additional consultation responses received as a result of this and in response to the amended plan submitted are summarised in the consultation section below.

The contradiction on the previous decision notice relates to the number of pitches. The application proposes the retention of an existing gypsy site and the creation of an additional pitch for 1 gypsy family. Although approved by the committee, condition 9 of the approval stated that the site shall be considered as one pitch only and shall be occupied by one family. For clarity, more information on what a ‘pitch’ means is detailed below.

DEFINITION OF A PITCH

A ‘pitch’ in the context of gypsy and travellers is not defined in planning law, but the guidance document Designing Gypsy and Traveller Sites – A Good Practice Guide (DCLG, 2008) Chapter 7 advises:

There is no one-size-fits-all measurement of a pitch as, in the case of the settled community, this depends on the size of individual families and their particular needs. In designing a new site, account should be taken of the likely characteristics of families on the waiting list and identified as a result of the Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment, as there may be a larger element of families with children approaching teenage years, who are likely to need to supplement their accommodation with one or two additional small touring caravans on the pitch as separate sleeping accommodation, until their children are old enough to move on to a separate pitch.

Nevertheless, as a general guide, it is possible to specify that an average family pitch must be capable of accommodating an amenity building, a large trailer and touring caravan, (or two trailers, drying space for clothes, a lockable shed (for bicycles, wheelchair storage etc), parking space for two vehicles and a small garden area.

Smaller pitches must be able to accommodate at least an amenity building, a large trailer, drying space for clothes and parking for at least one vehicle).

The guidance goes onto advise that an ‘amenity building’ should be provided on each pitch, this can be provided across two pitches as two separate and entirely self contained semi-detached units. The amenity building must include, as a minimum: hot and cold water supply; electricity supply; a separate toilet and hand wash basin; a bath/ shower room; a kitchen and dining area. The access to the toilet should be through a lobbied area or by separate access direct from the pitch. The inclusion of a day/living room in the amenity building for family meals is recommended.

A ‘site’ can accommodate one or more pitches, in the same way that an application site for houses can accommodate a number of building plots or houses.

CONSULTATIONS

The following consultations have been dated to show whether they were received prior to the committee on 29.06.10 or as part of re-consultation on the re-determination with amended plan layout.

County Highway Authority 11/05/10 – Recommends the following condition be applied to any approval:

Adequate turning areas and pitch spaces shall be laid out and maintained for those purposes and preserve the Public Footpath in perpetuity in accordance with details that shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure the provision of adequate facilities within the site for the traffic generated by the development

No response to re-consultation.

Environment Agency

19/05/10 - We welcome the submission of a Foul Drainage Assessment (FDA) with this application. There is concern however, that the applicant plans to use a cesspit/pool to serve the proposed development. It is our understanding from previous dealings with the neighbouring site that the plots at Princes Paddock had septic tanks with soakaways to deal with sewage effluent. As set out in DETR Circular 03/99, this method of drainage is considered to be more sustainable. Unfortunately, the submitted FDA does not provide justification for the proposed use of a cesspit/pool as opposed to more sustainable methods of foul drainage disposal. As your Council will know, for reasons of poor maintenance, irregular emptying, inadequate capacity etc, frequent overflows from cesspits/pools and potential pollution can occur in practice. As such, this foul drainage method is considered the least sustainable option and in line with the provisions of DETR Circular 03/99, should only be employed as a last resort where other more sustainable solutions have been thoroughly investigated and exhausted.

Given the above, further information should be provided to show that more sustainable methods of foul drainage have been properly considered. Reference to DETR Circular 03/99 and the attached Pollution Prevention Guideline 4 should be made in this respect.

In the event that use of a cesspit/pool can be justified, the following further information should also be provided:

1. A site plan on which the location of the cesspit/pool is clearly marked. 2. Details of the capacity of the tank. 3. How often the tank will be emptied and by whom. 4. Where use of the cesspit/pool is planned to be temporary; details of alternative future sustainable sewage disposal methods.

Until this information is provided, in line with DETR Circular 03/99 and Pollution Prevention Statement 23, your Council may wish to hold your decision on this application in abeyance.

07/02/2011 - Thank you for your letter of 28th January 2011. Following assessment of the amended site layout plan, I can advise that our earlier comments of 18th May 2010 remain unaltered.

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL

19/05/10 - This application has arisen yet again following the lapse of temporary planning consent granted on appeal in March 2006 for only 2 mobile homes and 2 caravans. We note that the application is an increase over the previous approved application. We strongly object to the increase in the site usage. The site is totally unsuitable as a gypsy and travellers site as confirmed by the inspector in his appeal report 14 March 2006.

On 13 June 2006 Mrs Kate Little, Head of EDDC Countryside and Planning, addressed the Parish Council and gave a talk outlining EDDC Policy on Gypsy Sites. She confirmed that EDDC were actively looking for a site and agreed that current provision was inadequate. She informed the PC that since January 2006 EDDC were now obliged to provide sites for Gypsy families. As a consequence EDDC had requested Plymouth university to assess the educational and associate needs for gypsies and after this consultation process was complete EDDC would acquire sites that will be properly serviced, close to facilities and fulfil the children's educational needs. At the meeting she stated it was anticipated that by 2008 new sites will be up and running.

The PC cannot understand why the commitment to provide a suitable gypsy site has not been fulfilled. It is now over 3 years since this commitment was given. The sites in our parish do not even come close to the agreed criteria for permanent gypsy and traveller sites. Temporary permission was granted in order for EDDC to find more suitable sites.

The Parish Council has been sensitive to the situation in the past as demonstrated by our previous recommendation of temporary renewal to give EDDC more time to deliver on their commitment to provide suitable long term site solutions to the general issue of gypsy and traveller accommodation within East Devon, yet no provision is forthcoming.

Farringdon Parish Council has no alternative but to recommend refusal. EDDC must fulfil their commitment to provide proper sustainable long term solutions to the gypsy and traveller problem.

Further comment received: The Parish Council would like to make it clear that it in no way, dilutes our clear objection but if the District Council decides to approve the application contrary to the views of the Parish Council, then a section 106 preventing the selling of plots of parcels of land should be made a condition of approval. A precedence has been set by the S106 of the same nature on the Mary Stanley gypsy site next door.

10/02/2010 - Farringdon Parish Council objects to this application in the strongest possible terms. Rather than repeat previous comments that have been made over the chequered history of this location, we urge the Planning officer to study our previous objections and comments made when past applications for Gypsy and Traveller sites on this piece of land have been submitted. They are as valid today as they were in the past.

Is the officer aware of the legal restrictions of section 106 agreement signed in 2006 for the Mrs Mary Stanley site (See letter attached)? Is he aware of the Appeal ruling by the Inspector in January 2006 limiting the Mahon site to Mr & Mrs Mahon and their children and one set of disabled grandparents?

If there is any doubt that your records may be incomplete, the Parish Council will be very willing to meet with the planning officer to discuss the matter before a decision is made and share our comprehensive files with you. They are too numerous to reproduce here. In those files he will find many strong reasons why this application cannot be approved, including past statements by your own Head of Planning.

If you need one of the many objections we have to be fully stated, it is primarily, on the grounds of impact on the local environment - both visually and culturally. The parish consists of only 180 or so dwelling clustered in small groups in what is predominantly open landscape. The proposed positioning and scale of this Gypsy and Traveller site would totally swamp and intimidate the small cluster of residents homes adjacent to the proposed site. The disparity in social values between the two would lead to continued disharmony and grievance on both sides. There has been a catalogue of verbal abuse, anti-social behaviour and danger from uncontrolled dogs.

Visually, the impact is enormous. It can be clearly seen from both the A3052 and is smack in your face when you take the predominant route into Farringdon. Previous site restrictions clearly limit the number of permanent and temporary caravans on site and state that no business activity should be run from the site. This has blatantly and frequently been flouted by the inhabitants, as any unannounced visit to site will show.

Farringdon residents have had, at the best, a patchy response from EDDC when previous complaints have been made. The site is an unenforceable eyesore most of the time, with remarkable temporary recovery prior to official visits by EDDC.

In the past these sites had temporary planning consent with strong limits within the conditions, namely limiting occupancy/ownership to Mary Stanley and three other women on one site and to Mr Mahon and his immediate family on the other site. Both were of a temporary nature. Both were granted permission for a second temporary period to enable Mr Mahon's Children to continue in a settled environment when EDDC had failed to meet its obligation under RSS obligation to secure a sustainable permanent site for East Devon's Gipsy and Traveller population. Again this was granted with strict conditions. Your own Head of Planning had informed Farringdon Parish Council that the permission was of a very temporary nature and cited sound reasons why it was only temporary. In the past we have supported this temporary approach because we have felt compassion for the needs of the inhabitants, but at the same time have urged EDDC to find a more suitable site to ensure that their needs are fully catered for.

We now feel that Farringdon is being dumped on from a great height by EDDC for the sake of expediency. The local residents now say enough is enough. This present government has made it clear to Councils that the RSS quotas have been scrapped. EDDC has now gone long way to fulfilling their previous RSS commitment by approving a number of sites such as Hawkchurch , that have now been made permanent. There is no need to increase facilities at this location in Farringdon. The people of Rockbeare objected to the site proposed at the Grange and were heard. If you think that was public outrage, you have no idea how upset the residents of Farringdon and their supporters will be.

There is an election in May. Please ensure you actually support the views of the voting, rate-paying full-time residents of East Devon, if you want their support in the future.

WARD MEMBER

The initial comments of the Ward Member Cllr R Peachey are -

17/05/2010 - Based on the information I have :-

This Application is a variation and addition to a no. of previous applications on this site that have been refused by the Authority and through the Appeal system, as there has been no material change I see no reason to justify any change in decision.

The Authority needs come to a conclusion with regard to the allocation of sites, to avoid these regular applications

In the event that this application comes to Committee I would reserve my position until I am in full possession of all the relevant facts and arguments for and against.

Note: discussed planning history with Cllr Peachy who is aware of history but terms a temporary permission as being a refusal of permanent permission.

10/02/2011 - I again refer to the above application and reiterate my original comments and ask that this application is REFUSED, the Authority have had a continued problem with the temporary approvals in controlling the site, and Farringdon Village has had to accept a very difficult situation during this time.

REPRESENTATIONS

Objection

The Farringdon Residents Association has objected to the application, raising the following points: Contrary to Farringdon Parish Plan Site unsuitable and unsustainable as shown by Appeals Inspector report in 2006 Numerous breaches of the conditions imposed on this site which have been reported EDDC have failed in their responsibility to provide suitable gypsy sites In the event of the Committee being minded to accept this application, it is very important that a Section 106 order be placed on the northern site. A Section 106 order is currently in place on the southern site, setting a precedent. This was done following the recommendation of EDDC to prevent the selling of plots or parcels of land.

In addition, two letters have been received raising objection to the proposal, and although signed, the letters do not give a name or address so have not been formally registered. The letters replicate comments made above and raise the following additional points:

Clearly visible from main road Adversely affects enjoyment of nearby residents (by virtue of noise, dogs, personal conduct, litter etc)

An email received just prior to the Committee on 29.06.10 requested the Committee to address the points relating to:

Alternative sites Use of S106 agreement Expansion of the site Noise/dogs/personal hygiene and Human Rights of local residents Environmental Heath not being consulted Consideration of condition for fence within roadside boundary hedge to prevent dogs and children from getting out and screen the site in winter months

In response to the re-consultation on the re-determination, a further letter of representation has been received which notes:

The amended site layout plan is now showing an additional day room situated directly opposite Princes Cottage and Hazel Cottage – hoped this would be left un-occupied due to noise complaints. Day room has appearance of luxury bungalow Suggest Council determine the position of the caravans and mobile homes and stipulate how many ‘visitors’ are allowed in summer months which is additional source of noise and use of surrounding gateways and footpaths as toilets

Comments

One letter has been received which makes various comments - not clearly objecting or supporting the application. It raises the following points:

Insufficient detail – proposed day room on current site of mobile home – location of additional gypsy site Number of caravan and mobile homes, along with vehicles will give overcrowded appearance Inadequate or inappropriately used toilet facilities for visitors Any permission should be temporary until suitable permanent sites are found

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

Application site:

App.No: Proposal Decision Date

09/0390/FUL Retention of 2 mobile homes, 4 Approved 2yr temp, 11.05.09 touring caravans and construction of personal condition, day room and storage shed subject to conditions

07/1986/FUL Retention of 2 small touring Approved subject to 10.10.07 caravans, erection of temporary day conditions, including room and storage shed to be removed on or before 14th March 2009

05/0258/FUL Siting on land of two mobile homes Refused then granted 14.03.06 and two caravans for gypsy family on appeal allowing a including creation of new access personal permission for 3years, subject to conditions

And relevant history on adjacent site:

App.No: Proposal Decision Date

10/0583/FUL Use of land for one mobile home, Approved subject to 01.07.10 four touring caravans and one utility conditions day room for gypsy family

06/0777/FUL Application for one mobile home and Approved 3yr temp, 02.03.07 4 touring caravans personal condition and S106 agreement

96/P1235 Use of land for siting of mobile home Approved subject to 16.10.96 personal condition

PLANNING POLICIES

Government Guidance

ODPM Circular 01/2006 - Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites PPS 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development PPS3 – Housing PPS7 – Sustainable development in Rural Areas

Devon Country Structure Plan (2001-2016)

Policy ST5 – Development Priority Policy CO6 – Quality of New Development Policy TR10 – Strategic Road Network

East Devon Local Plan (1995-2011)

Policy S5 - Countryside Protection Policy D1 – Design and Local Distinctiveness Policy TA1 – Accessibility of New Development Policy TA7 - Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access Policy EN15 – Control of Pollution EN19 – Private Sewage Treatment Systems

Farringdon Parish Plan

SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The site is located within gently rolling countryside on the edge of the village of Farringdon – southwest of Parsonage Lane and northwest of Waldron’s Farm business units. The site is accessed from Parsonage Lane approximately 300m from the junction with the main A3052 Sidmouth to Exeter Road (Farringdon Cross). There is a group of buildings and houses to the south at Farringdon Cross and another group of houses a short distance to the north

The site lies in the countryside outside any specific development limits but not within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty or designated area.

The site has been occupied by a gypsy family for several years, and this application seeks a permanent permission (as the current permission is temporary until May 2011), with the further addition of an additional pitch for a second gypsy family.

The site is approximately triangular in shape. Established hedge-banks bound the east and west boundaries, whilst the southern boundary is a post and rail fence separating the site from land adjacent, with a relatively short section of close-boarded timber fence in the vicinity of the recently constructed day room on ‘pitch 1’. The site is separated into two distinct parts: the southern part comprises an area of hardcore on which there was at least 6 touring caravans, a small utility block and two old lorries at the time of the most recent site visit (27.02.10), and an area of grass. To the north the land is left to grass with a small shed towards the northern point (apparently used for storage) and a touring caravan awaiting disposal. The division between the hardcore (southern) area and grassed northern area equate to pitch 1 and 2 as shown on the amended site layout plan.

Some of the touring caravans within ‘pitch 1’ are clearly visible from the village road through the sturdy gates (with breezeblock piers), along with the hardcore/gravel laid down to access them.

The land abuts a field to the south that also has a history of use for gypsies and travellers - see planning history of adjacent site.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Retention of use of land for the siting of 2 mobile homes, 4 touring caravans, proposed construction of day room and storage shed and the creation of an additional pitch for 1 gypsy family.

The amended site layout plan submitted 28.01.2011 shows two pitches to be contained within the site, each with a utility day room and storage shed.

Plans and elevations of the: utility day rooms (13..8m x 6.1m) with pitched roof and a total of 8 windows/doors storage facilities (6.0m x 3.0m) with pitched roof Materials are not given.

CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

As this is the same application as that considered at the Committee meeting on 29.06.2010, much of the consideration and assessment remain the same. However, the amended plan submitted 28.01.2011 gives further clarity as to the proposed site layout, and further consultation responses have been received, as detailed above.

To avoid unnecessary repetition, a copy of the previous committee report is attached with the relevant sections highlighted. The additional consultation responses are addressed below.

Amended plan consideration

Visual impact: The day room on pitch 2 is well screened from wider views by the existing boundary hedges. The day room on pitch 1 (now almost complete) is considered acceptable in terms of appearance.

Response to additional points made

The RSS has not been abolished by the Coalition Government and therefore remains a material consideration although the governments intention to abolish the RSS is material. The identified need for sites has not been met/exceeded by recent approvals such as Hawkwell Park, Hawkchurch, and the Grange application for 20 permanent and 10 transit pitches was refused partially on the basis of its scale, lack of justification and ecological impacts.

The Environmental Health department have been consulted (specifically relating to noise/disturbance of neighbours) but have not provided any comments on this application. In the absence of an objection from Environmental Health, the location of pitch 2 opposite existing residential properties as opposed to being in the southern part of the site is not considered to warrant the application for refusal on grounds of noise/disturbance nuisance.

A condition requiring a fence on the eastern hedge boundary (as suggested by an objector) is not considered reasonable or necessary as the hedge present provides screening and is more appropriate in the setting of Parsonage Lane.

It is acknowledged that there have been difficulties in enforcing the number of units on the site in recent years, which have been increased above permitted numbers apparently by visitors and also during the construction of the day room by replacing the former mobile home by 2 touring caravans. Touring caravans are transient by nature, however it is important in both visual terms and in relation to traffic and potential noise generation from the site, for the Council to restrict the number of caravan units on the site. It is however acceptable for friends and family to visit the site and stay for short periods – such visitors will often bring their own caravans. In this regard, further information has been sought on the personal circumstances of the applicant.

It is understood that Mr & Mrs Mahon’s youngest daughter attends Woodbury school. They have a daughter who has married in the last year and lives in her own caravan on the site. Their son is also of marrying age, but is not yet married.

The retention of a total of 6 caravans of which a maximum of 2 mobile homes is considered acceptable given the current family status (pitch 1). More than this causes the pitch to appear overly cluttered. The additional pitch proposed is not identified for any particular family at this time, and therefore we turn to the government guidance on pitches for an average family which suggests a total of 3 caravans of which a maximum of 1 mobile home, in addition to a day room and lockable shed. Should the married daughter wish to stay close to her parents, there is potential for her family to occupy ‘pitch 2’.

CONCLUSIONS

The Committee report for the Development Management Committee of 29.06.10 recommended the application for approval subject to several conditions and concluded that the site will become part of the approved stock of sites available in the district to help fulfil the recognised need [for Gypsies and Travellers] identified in the study undertaken by Plymouth University in 2008.

The additional points received since the report in June 2010 are addressed above and taken with the considerations and assessment in the attached report, are not considered to significantly alter the balance of material considerations which resulted in the previous recommendation for approval. As such, in re-determining this application, the Committee is again recommended to approve this application. However, the Committee’s attention is drawn to the recommended conditions below which reflect some amendments in line with the points addressed above.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to the following planning conditions:

1. Notwithstanding the time limit to implement planning permission as prescribed by Sections 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), this permission being retrospective as prescribed by Section 63 of the Act shall have been deemed to have been implemented on the 28 April 2010. (Reason - To comply with Section 63 of the Act.)

2. The site hereby permitted shall not be occupied by any persons other than gypsies and travellers, as defined in paragraph 15 of the ODPM Circular 01/2006. The site will be considered as two separate pitches for two gypsy/traveller families. (Reason – The site is in an open countryside location where a residential use would not normally be permitted but is justified by the special circumstances of the occupiers and to ensure future occupation of the site is in accordance with these special circumstances.)

3. In addition to the utility day room and storage building (to be constructed) on each pitch, Pitch 1 shall be occupied by no more than six caravans of which a maximum of two shall be mobile homes; and Pitch 2 shall be occupied by no more than three caravans of which a maximum of one shall be a mobile home. The mobile homes and touring caravans shall be in accordance with the definition of a caravan as defined by Section 29 (1) of the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960. (Reason - To restrict the quantity of development to that which is reasonably required for the family and visitors, and to protect the open countryside from further development.)

4. The site entrance, including vision splays, shall be maintained as existing on 8 June 2010 for the duration of the development. (Reason - To maintain acceptable visibility splays with the adjoining highway in the interests of highway safety.)

5. No business or commercial activity shall take place on the land. (Reason - To protect neighbouring residential amenity.)

6. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no fences, gates or walls shall be erected within the site without the express consent of the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To retain the rural character of the landscape.)

7. The existing hedge boundaries on the west and east boundaries of the site shall be retained unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All retained planting shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - In the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area.)

Informatives

For the purposes of Condition 2 paragraph 15 of ODPM Circular 01/2006 identifies gypsies and travellers as persons of nomadic habit of life whatever their race or origin, including such persons who on grounds only of their own or their family’s or dependants’ educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily or permanently, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling show people or circus people travelling together as such.

With regards to Condition 7 (landscaping), retention of the existing hedge and trees bounding the east and west of the site observed on 27 January 2011 is encouraged.

Reasons for approval

The proposal adheres to government guidance in the form of Circular 01/2006 and a permanent planning permission is considered to be justified given the lack of alternative sites within the District. The site causes no demonstrable harm to the visual amenities of the area, and does not impact significantly on matters of highway safety.

Approved plans

LOCATION Location Plan 26.04.10 PLAN

SITE LAYOUT Amended Plans 28.01.11

A - DAYROOM Plan Proposed 26.04.10

B - STORAGE Plan Proposed 26.04.10 SHED

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

Committee Date: 8 March 2011 EXMOUTH TOWN 11/0180/FUL Target date: (Exmouth) 23.3.11

Applicant: Devon County Council

Location: Strand Gardens The Strand Exmouth

Proposal: Construction of new pavilion building comprising cafe, performance space, bus shelter and ancillary storage

POLICIES

Devon Structure Plan Policies ST15 (Area Centres) ST21 (Regeneration Priority) CO6 (Quality of New Development) CO7 (Historic Settlements and Buildings) ST1 (Sustainable Development) ST5 (Development Priority 2001 to 2016) ST3 (Self Sufficiency of Devon’s Communities) CO13 (Protecting Water Resources and Flood Defence)

East Devon Local Plan Policies S2 (Built-up Area Boundaries for Area Centres and Local Centres) S4 (Development Within Built-up Area Boundaries) D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) SH1 (Town Centre Shopping Areas) D2 (Sustainable Construction) EN9 (Extension, Alteration or Change of use of Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest) E2 (Employment Generating Development in Built-up Areas) TA1 (Accessibility of New Development)

Planning Policy Statement PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development)

PPS4 (Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth)

PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment)

PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk)

CONSULTATIONS

Parish/Town Council 09/02/11 - OBJECTION on the following grounds: - Building totally out of keeping with the local character of the area.

Over-development of the site. Footprint is too large. The structure is excessive in size and height. Concern with extra noise generated for local residents. Saturation policy for cafes. The Strand area is already sufficiently serviced with cafes and restaurants.

County Highway Authority 08/02/11 - Does not wish to comment

Other Representations A petition with 210 signatures has been received raising a number of objections to the proposal which can be summarised as:

Another cafe is not needed Waste of tax payers money- too expensive Unsuitable building for its location Unnecessary expense Will ruin local trade and threaten jobs in the area Will attract seagulls- Maintenance and cleaning costs for the building No more modern buildings within Exmouth Would prefer a fountain in the gardens.

At the time of writing the report 58 letters of objection have been received raising a number of concerns which can be summarised as:

No disabled access to first floor Thermal qualities of glazing Maintenance and cleaning costs- Seagulls The design, size and scale is out of keeping with the area and the surrounding Victorian buildings Impact on the Grade II listed buildings and war memorial Position of bus shelter Not supportive of local businesses Loss of public space Waste of tax payers money Conflict of interests Will attract anti-social behaviour Commercial gain for EDDC Over development of the site Noise and disturbance to residents Overlooking from the restaurant Food smells and waste Over provision of cafes within the Strand Needs a new building to attract families Would not enhance the character of the area Threat of loss of jobs to existing businesses

Any additional comments received will be updated orally to members at the committee meeting

OFFICER REPORT

Site Location and Description:

The application relates to The Strand area of Exmouth which consists of an area of public gardens owned by East Devon District Council which are surrounded by 3-4 storey buildings of some architectural merit which accommodate a diverse mix of independent shops, cafes, restaurants and drinking establishments at street level and a mix of office and residential accommodation on the floors above. The gardens are popular with pedestrians and sit within a vibrant part of the town centre. The historic character of the area is reflected by the surrounding period buildings, some of which are listed, and also the gardens themselves which house an important war memorial which is Grade II listed in its own right. In planning policy terms, the site is located within the built-up area boundary of the town and is not subject to any other landscape or townscape designations. It does however fall within an area defined in the Local Plan as the Town Centre Shopping Area for the town and is within a Flood Zone 3a area.

Proposed Development:

The proposal is for the construction of a pavilion building on the north eastern edge of the gardens adjacent to Rolle Street which will accommodate a cafe over two floors with an ancillary storage area and an external bus shelter, performance area and seating areas for the cafe. The internal floor area equates to approximately 115 sq metres. The proposed building is of a striking contemporary design which incorporates a floating roof structure which oversails the building and arcs along its length to kick up at the north eastern end such that its overall height varies from 5.4 metres at its lowest end to reach 10.0 metres at the northern end of the building. The external appearance of the development would comprise a palette of materials which is reflective of its contemporary design which will include large areas of glazing, stainless steel cladding and a single ply membrane roof. The building has been designed to be as transparent as possible in an attempt to ensure that it does not compete with, but rather more respects, its historic setting and context within the Strand area of Exmouth.

Considerations and Assessment:

The main issues to consider in determining the application relate to the design, size and scale of the proposed building and its impact on the character and appearance of the area, the impact upon the vitality and viability of the town centre, the impact of the use of the building and the outdoor performance area on the residential amenities of the surrounding neighbouring residential properties, the implications for flood risk and any highways issues.

Background:

It is pertinent to note that the proposed pavilion building forms part of a wider objective for the redevelopment and enhancement of the Strand area which has been a joint venture between East Devon District Council, Devon County Council and Exmouth Town Council who have all contributed to the proposal. Members may be aware that the plans for the regeneration of the Strand gardens are a culmination of a consultation process which began some time ago with the involvement of the local community and businesses. The application is accompanied by a Statement of Community Involvement which gives detail of a specific public consultation process that took place at Exmouth Town Hall with the attendance of a number of interest groups and members of the public. The positive and negative comments from the consultation exercise can be viewed online.

A significant part of the redevelopment has already taken place which has included the removal of the existing thatched public shelter and the busy traffic carriageways on two sides of the gardens which have now been pedestrianised. In addition the gardens have been enhanced by further works which have included the provision of seating and lighting as well as hard landscaping which has reinstated the pedestrian links through the garden area. Details of the works to the Strand gardens can be seen on plan no CO8020/33A attached to this report.

The works that have taken place within the gardens are not yet complete although it is noted that it has created an attractive area for residents and visitors and has provided opportunities for street cafes and other uses within the area to contribute to the cafe quarter envisaged for the area. It is the intention that the pavilion building would be taken over and maintained by Exmouth Town Council who will be responsible for organising and running acts that wish to use the outdoor performance area.

Design and Visual Impact:

It is fully acknowledged that the Strand and surrounding area has a strong character, a localised grandeur and appealing architecture which makes it a distinctive part of the town centre. The buildings around the Strand front the gardens on all four sides which provides a strong frame around the site. The application site therefore lies within an area where there is a distinctive defined character in terms of existing built form. The site is not constrained by any townscape designations although there are a number of listed buildings around the gardens as well as the Grade II listed war memorial.

Whilst it is fully acknowledged that opinions over design are always likely to be subjective, it is considered that the contemporary approach to the design of the pavilion building is well articulated and provides interest as a building in its own right which at the same time will respect its historic context and setting and the open character of the gardens. It is considered that a contemporary approach to a building in this location is the most appropriate and that its stark contrast to its surroundings will ensure that it does not compete with or over dominate the surrounding built form within the area and thus ensure that its character is maintained. Whilst concerns have been raised which relate to over development of the site, it is considered that

the proposed building is of an appropriate size and scale which will sit comfortably within the gardens. When compared with the existing built form within the area, the proposed building will be significantly lower in height such that the buildings to the north of the site will rise above and be viewed behind the proposed building. Furthermore, the substantial amount of glazing to sections of the building will give the building a lighter and softer appearance which will also complement the open character of the gardens and the Strand area, again in contrast to the heavier built form of the surrounding buildings.

The scheme is for an extremely well conceived and articulated contemporary building, the majority of which will be glazed which will give the building a transparent feel and maintain views through to the gardens. The success of a contemporary scheme such as this will come down to the finer details including the finish and choice of materials for the building. It is therefore considered essential, should favourable consideration be given to the proposal, to require further detailed drawings of the fenestration, access doors, eaves detailing, roof junctions etc to ensure that a high quality well detailed finish is achieved for the building given its publicly prominent position within the area. This detail should be conditioned as part of any permission that is granted.

Economic Development and Impact upon Town Centre:

Planning policy in the form of PPS4 (Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth) has an overarching objective of sustainable economic growth which specifically includes promoting the vitality and viability of town and other centres as important places for communities. Included within this policy the government promotes new economic growth and development of main town centre uses to be focused in existing centres with the aim of offering a wide range of services to communities in an attractive and safe environment. It also encourages competition between retailers and enhanced consumer choice through the provision of innovative and efficient shopping, leisure, tourism and local services in town centres which allow genuine choice to meet the needs of the community. PPS4 also specifically states that local planning authorities should promote competitive town centre environments and provide consumer choice by supporting a diverse range of complementary evening and night time uses which appeal to a wide range of social groups.

The application seeks the provision of a pavilion building with a cafe and open performing arts area and, as previously stated, forms part of the wider aims and objectives of redeveloping and enhancing the Strand area. This forms part of a proposal to open up the area as a flexible space within the heart of the town centre that can be used for outdoor performances and markets which will in turn attract more people into the area. The wider aims of this redevelopment are to assist the businesses in the area and the town centre as a whole by creating an attractive area for residents and visitors to the town.

Whilst the concerns of a number of objectors and the town council are noted with regards to the fact that there are already a number of cafes in the area to the point of saturation, it should be noted that in planning policy terms this area is not within a part of the town centre defined as Primary Shopping Frontage but is defined as forming part of the broader Town Centre Shopping area. Local plan policy SH1

relating to Town Centre Shopping Areas specifically promotes uses in classes A2 and A3 of the Use Classes Order which do not undermine the shopping character and visual amenity, vitality or viability of the town centre. Variety and activity are important and essential elements of the vitality and viability of town centres where different but complimentary uses can reinforce each other to attract large numbers of people thereby ensuring the vibrancy of town centres both during the day and the evening. Whilst the intended operator of the cafe is not yet known, it is not the intention to undermine the existing businesses within the area. Indeed, it is considered that the provision of a pavilion building and use of the performance area has the potential to attract significantly more people to the Strand and that this could in turn greatly benefit the existing cafes and restaurants in the area. There is no evidence to suggest that this part of Exmouth has reached saturation point and it is considered that the provision of a new building in the gardens would enhance the area and have the potential to benefit existing businesses around the Strand by attracting more people through events. It is considered that the use proposed will compliment the existing character of the area and will further enhance and contribute to the cafe quarter culture that has been envisaged for it.

Highways Issues:

The County Highway Authority raise no objections to the application. The proposed building would be within the town centre and would occupy a sustainable location being easily accessible via a variety of modes of transport. Due to its town centre location, there is no requirement for parking provision to serve the development.

Impact on Listed Buildings and War Memorial:

The comments of the Council's Conservation Officer are as follows:

This is a very prominent site within a recently landscaped park surrounding the listed war memorial. The proposals will impact upon the setting of several listed buildings but particularly the war memorial. The site is also proposed to be included within an extension to the existing conservation area. This will be subject to a public consultation within the next few weeks.

“The proposed building offers an imaginative design which appears to be consistent with the overall design approach to the re-ordering of the Strand gardens. The concept is perfectly valid in my view and presents a pavilion building befitting of its context and time. Admittedly it would be a large structure and it would need to respond positively within the urban space with regards to its scale, massing and proportions. However the design offers a significant degree of transparency and the overall impact would be a light-weight building. The sweeping roof would also describe an interesting and articulate roof line. My only concern relating to any contemporary building is one of detailing and longevity of the materials and finishes. The submitted scheme proposes more of a building concept than the finished article and I would therefore advise that a comprehensive list of conditions is attached to any approval requiring large-scale sections through all of the principal thresholds and junctions. I would also advocate that materials are conditioned and considered with their weathering properties in mind. I would question the use of acrylic for the roof

light as I doubt that this would appear the same after 10 or 20 years. Is there a more suitable PVC-free alternative? I am happy that this is conditioned”.

Impact on Residential Amenity:

The area surrounding the Strand is diverse and comprises a variety of uses associated with town centre living. In particular, as well as retail uses there are a number of cafes, restaurants, drinking establishments as well as takeaways that create a lively and vibrant character, both during the day and at night. A number of the premises within the Strand have residential uses above at both first and second floor level and the impact of the proposed development on the living conditions of these residents needs to be carefully considered. The comments of the Environmental Health Officer raise no significant concerns over the principle of the use of the development as both a cafe and outdoor performance area. The uses will be set within the context of the existing diverse nature and number of premises and activities within the area and, in having due regard for the fact that the site is located within the town centre, it is not considered that the use of the performance area would cause an unreasonable level of noise or disturbance to residential properties in the vicinity. However, in accepting the principle of the use of the cafe and the performance area in this location, the Environmental Health Officer has requested that control over the hours of operation during both construction and operation stage of the building are the subject of a condition should it be resolved to grant planning permission for the scheme.

The Environmental Health Officer has clarified that the number of performances and any live and recorded music conditions will be considered at the premises licence application stage to safeguard the amenities and living conditions of occupiers of residential properties within the locality.

Concerns have also been raised over the issue of overlooking from the first floor of the building. There will be approximately 13.0 metres between the proposed building and the properties opposite which are separated from the site by Rolle Street. Whilst it is unclear as to how many of the buildings contain residential uses above, it is considered that there will not be significant levels of overlooking from the first floor of the proposed building. The plans show the majority of the north eastern elevation to be clad in steel sheeting with the provision of three narrow openings at first floor level. When considering the size and number of the openings, the use of the building as a cafe and the distance between the proposed building and the properties opposite, it is not considered that the development would result in an unacceptable level of overlooking and loss of privacy.

opposite, it is not considered that the development would result in an unacceptable level of overlooking and loss of privacy.

Sustainable Construction:

One of the key objectives of the planning system is to promote sustainable forms and patterns of development. Policy D2 (Sustainable Construction) of the East Devon Local Plan aims to positively encourage sustainable construction techniques and incorporation of high levels of energy efficiency and renewable energy technology into new developments. Whilst the development falls well short of the floorspace thresholds of the policy above which states that new developments should incorporate renewable energy equipment to provide at least 10% of the energy requirements of the building, the issue of sustainability has been addressed in the design and access statement accompanying the application. Reference is made to the intention for the glazing for the building to be coated against solar gain and have high insulation properties. In addition reference is made to incorporating a green energy system within the building in the form of either a solar photovoltaic array or air source heat pumps to meet the energy requirements of the building. Further discussions with the agent have revealed that due to the curvature of the roof any photovoltaics would need to be in the form of a flexible type of sheet membrane solar panel which would incur further considerable cost. As such a decision has been made to use two air source heat pumps as a means of incorporating sustainable energy measures into the building..

Flood Risk:

The aims of planning policy on development and flood risk in the form of PPS25 are to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding and to direct development away from areas at highest risk. Where new development is, exceptionally, necessary in such areas, policy aims to make it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere and, where possible, reduce flood risk overall. Whilst the application site lies within a Flood Zone 3a area which is classified as being an area having a high probability of flooding (1 in 100 from river flooding or 1 in 200 from the sea), the use of the building as a cafe is considered to be a 'less vulnerable' use in terms of flood risk. As such, the cafe is considered to be an appropriate form of development within a Flood Zone 3a area and there is no need for the proposal to go through the sequential or exceptions tests set out in PPS25.

The advice from the Environment Agency is that development proposed in Flood Zone 3 areas classified as being a 'less vulnerable' use should be accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA). This application is accompanied by an FRA which is being considered by the Environment Agency whose comments are awaited and will be reported at the committee meeting.

CONCLUSION

This application is clearly controversial and has generated a number of objections in the form of a petition from businesses and residents within Exmouth and individual letters from members of the public. Whilst a significant number of concerns have

been raised over the need for a new building, the competition it will create with existing businesses within the Strand and the costs of the building being a waste of public money, these objections are not considered to be material to the determination of this proposal having regard to the planning merits. When considering this proposal in terms of material planning considerations it is argued that it complies with a number of planning policies in terms of its economic impact on the vitality and viability of the town centre, flood risk, highway safety and the underlying principles of achieving sustainable development.

It is considered, in terms of design and impact on the character and appearance of the area, that the scheme represents a contemporary form of development where its successful integration into the existing townscape will derive from its significant contrast to the built form of the surrounding development. The proposed building will have a striking design with its main feature being the gently arcing roof which will overhang the building. It is considered that the development has been well conceived with good articulation and an appropriate palette of materials and the extensive use of glazing will ensure that the visual impact of the development is softened. In this regard it is not considered that the proposed building will have an adverse affect on the character and appearance of the area. Indeed, it is thought that it will make a positive modern contribution to the evolving development of this part of the town centre without any detrimental impact upon existing development.

This proposal should be considered in the wider context of the regeneration and economic benefits, the development coupled with the enhancement of the gardens, will bring to the town. The construction of a 'landmark' building in this location is part of the wider aims and objectives to re-develop and enhance the Strand area where the intention is to create a vibrant and active town centre space which will encourage a variety of uses such as the farmers market, events and street performances, cultural and arts festivals and enhance the creation of a cafe and restaurant culture. It is considered that the use of this public space will reinforce Exmouth as a key tourist attraction for visitors and boost the local economy of the town with mutual benefits to residents and businesses within the area.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to the following conditions:

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.)

3. No development shall take place until samples of the materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning

Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure that the materials are sympathetic to the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policies CO6 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001-2011 and D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011).

4. Prior to the commencement of development, typical detailed drawings at a scale of not less than 1:20 shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority for aspects of the proposed development pertaining to the fenestration, access doors, eaves detailing and the junction of the external cladding materials and glazing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure that a high quality well detailed finish is achieved for the permitted development in accordance with Policies CO6 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001-2011 and D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

5. No cooking of food shall take place on the premises at any time until an extraction system specification and detailed plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development thereafter shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To safeguard the amenities and living conditions of occupiers of other premises in the locality in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

6. There shall be no burning of any kind on site during construction. (Reason - To protect adjoining occupiers from excessive noise in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

7. No noisy machinery shall be operated during construction outside the following hours: 0800 to 1800 Monday to Friday and 0800 to 1300 Saturdays and not at all on Sundays or public holidays (Reason - To protect adjoining occupiers from excessive noise in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

8. No development shall take place until details of a dust suppression scheme to be operated as required during construction have been submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To protect adjoining occupiers from excessive noise in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

9. There shall be no deliveries of materials during construction by lorry to the site outside the hours 08:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays or public holidays.

(Reason - To protect adjoining occupiers from excessive noise in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

10. The premises shall only be operated during the hours of 08:00 until 12 Midnight Monday to Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays and Bank Holidays. (Reason: To protect adjoining occupiers from excessive noise in accordance with policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

11. The outdoor performance area shall only operate between the hours of 10:00 to 21:00 Monday to Friday, Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. (Reason - To protect adjoining occupiers from excessive noise in accordance with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

12. No goods deliveries by lorry to the site shall take place outside the hours 08:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays or public holidays. (Reason: To protect adjoining occupiers from excessive noise in accordance with policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011.)

13. Prior to the development hereby permitted being brought into use the proposed air source heat pumps shall be fully installed and operational and shall thereafter be retained. (Reason - To ensure that the development is constructed using modern sustainable technologies to minimise its carbon footprint in accordance with the aims of Policy D2 (Sustainable Construction) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

1. IN GRANTING PLANNING PERMISSION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION:

The proposal complies with the following Devon Structure Plan 2001-2016 Policies and the adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011 Policies:

The proposal does not adversely affect the privacy and/or amenity of neighbouring properties.

The design and external appearance of the proposal does not harm the visual amenity of the site and surrounding area.

The proposal does not harm the character and appearance of the conservation area.

The proposal is contained with the defined built-up area boundary of the settlement.

The proposal does not cause a significant flood risk.

The proposal would not generate a level of noise that would unreasonably affect the amenity of nearby properties.

Approved Plans

P2 P3 P5 P6 P7

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

Committee Date: 08 March 2011

OTTERY ST MARY RURAL 10/2435/MFUL Target Date: (Ottery St Mary) 14.03.2011

Applicant: Devonshire Homes

Location: Land South Of Otter Close Tipton St John

Proposal: Proposed erection of 56 new dwellings (including 22 affordable), Construction of new Highway access, the closure of the "sunken lane" to vehicles and the creation of a new footpath/cycleway

CONSULTATIONS

Devon County Archaeologist

05/01/11 - I refer to the above application. The proposed development lies in an area where little in the way of formal archaeological work has been undertaken and in a landscape where prehistoric activity is demonstrated by findspots of flint tools. Groundworks for the construction of the fifty-six new dwellings have the potential to expose archaeological and artefactual material associated with the known prehistoric activity in the wider landscape. For this reason and in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5) (2010) I would advise that any consent your Authority may be minded to issue should carry the condition as worded below, based on model Condition 55 as set out in Appendix A of Circular 11/95, whereby: ‘No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning Authority.' The development shall be carried out at all times in strict accordance with the approved scheme, or such other details as may be subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason 'To ensure that an appropriate record is made of archaeological evidence that may be affected by the development'

Environment Agency

06/01/11 - PROPOSED ERECTION OF 56 NEW DWELLINGS (INCLUDING 22 AFFORDABLE), NEW HIGHWAY ACCESS, CLOSURE OF 'SUNKEN LANE' TO VEHICLES AND CREATION OF NEW FOOTPATH/CYCLEWAY. LAND TO THE SOUTH OF OTTER CLOSE, LANCERCOMBE.

Thank you for inviting us to comment on the above application.

10/2435/MFUL

Providing development proceeds in accordance with the submitted details, including the Flood Risk Assessment dated November 2010, we have no objections to the proposal.

Your Council/the applicant should be aware that the site is within 250 metres of Stonehill Quarry authorised landfill. This factor should be taken into account in any development design.

Environmental Health

06/01/11 - I have assessed the application and suggest the following standard condition:

NO(B)3 a. There shall be no burning of any kind on site during construction, demolition or site preparation works. b. No construction or demolition works shall be carried out, or deliveries received, outside of the following hours: 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 1pm on Saturdays, and not at all on Sundays or Public Holidays. c. Dust suppression measures shall be employed as required during construction. Reason: To protect the amenity of local residents from smoke, noise and dust.

County Highway Authority

09/02/11 - The site has been the subject of numerous pre-application discussions including a public exhibition in the village hall last year. The access arrangements to the site have also been explored in detail with the highways consultant WSP and various options have been considered.

The current detailed access layout (plan 31080/PHL/03/E) shows a simple T-junction with geometry and sight lines that comply with current design criteria contained in Manual for Streets 2 which was published in October 2010.

It is also proposed to close the sunken lane to vehicles other than cycles at its junction with Ottery St. Mary Road. The existing junction is seriously substandard with respect to geometry, alignment and visibility so its closure to vehicles is welcomed by the highway authority. Consideration was previously given to re-routing the road into the site, but this was considered an impractical solution, as explained in WSP's Transport Assessment. The planning authority need to be aware that the provision of the sight lines may have a significant effect on the vegetation alongside the carriageway of the Ottery St Mary Road either side of the proposed junction.

There have been representations made about the suitability of the Ottery St Mary road to cope with the additional traffic that would be generated by the proposed development. The increase in traffic, less than 10% when compared to the existing flow using this road, means the highway authority do not believe that an objection could be sustained for that reason although there are serious inadequacies in carriageway width to the north of the site in Wiggaton.

10/2435/MFUL

The site is not ideally located with respect to sustainable alternative modes of travel. Although Tipton St John does have the benefit of some local facilities and services, the reality is that the majority of residents from the development would have to drive to Sidmouth, Exeter, Ottery St Mary for employment, shopping, Secondary School, doctors, dentists and a range of other facilities. The development of the site would therefore be contrary to National Guidance and County and Local Plan Policies on the suitable location of residential development.

The internal layout of the site appears to have been designed in accordance with principles contained in the nationally accepted design guidance, Manual for Streets, and there are no specific highways related issues about the suitability of the internal layout. It would be preferable to provide a pedestrian and cycle link to Mallocks Close, but it is noted that the applicant does not control sufficient land to provide it.

Although the highway authority accepts that the detailed design of the junction and the internal layout are suitable to serve the number of units proposed, the highway authority believe that the development is not suitably located with respect to services, employment, education and other facilities. It is therefore recommended that the application is refused for that reason.

However, if the planning committee are minded to approve the application, the highway authority would wish to be re-consulted about the imposition of appropriate conditions on any planning permission granted.

Recommendation:

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT, ECONOMY AND CULTURE, ON BEHALF OF DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL, AS LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, RECOMMENDS THAT PERMISSION BE REFUSED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:-

1. The proposed development would be located where it is remote from adequate services, employment, education, public transport etc., and would therefore increase the need for travel by private vehicles contrary to Policies TR2 and TR5 of the Devon County Structure Plan and Policy TA1 of the East Devon District Local Plan.

Parish/Town Council

12/01/11 - The application is not supported by the Committee. Concerns are: o Outside the building line o Scale and density of the proposal o Overdevelopment o Poor access o Increase in traffic o Against the Tipton St John Village Design statement o Runoff and sewage treatment

10/2435/MFUL

DCC Children & Young Peoples Services 23/12/10 - A contribution towards education infrastructure via a Section 106 Agreement is sought in respect of the above application.

The primary school affected is Tipton St John C of E Primary (Summer 2010 number on roll 93, pupil place capacity 105). 56 family dwellings could be expected to produce 14 primary aged pupils, which will cause a shortfall of 2 places at the school. The contribution required is £22,148 which would be used to part fund teaching accommodation plus £575 for ICT equipment. These calculations are based on the DFE Cash Multiplier Extension rate for Devon.

The secondary school affected is The Kings School (Autumn 2010 number on roll 1105, pupil place capacity 1107). 56 family dwellings could be expected to produce 8.4 secondary aged pupils which will cause a shortfall of 6.4 places at the school. The contribution required is £107,462.40 which would be used to part fund teaching accommodation plus £9,280 for ICT equipment. These calculations are based on the DFE Cash Multiplier Extension rate for Devon

In addition to the contribution figures quoted above, the County Council would wish to recover legal costs incurred as a result of the preparation and completion of the Agreement. Legal costs are not expected to exceed £250.00 where the agreement relates solely to the education contribution. However, if the agreement involves other issues or if the matter becomes protracted, the legal costs are likely to be in excess of this sum.

Should you require any further information regarding either of the above please do not hesitate to contact me.

*These contributions should be adjusted on the date of payment in accordance with any increase in Building Cost Information Service (BCIS) all in tender price index.

Section 106 : Education Contributions

Background The Town and Country Act 1990, Section 106 allows a local planning authority to enter into an agreement with the owners of land in their area. This agreement allows us to request a restriction or to regulate the development or use of the land, either permanently or during such period as may be stated in the agreement.

The Strategic Planning team has a statutory responsibility to provide pupil places for all school aged children aged 5-16 and are only able to seek a contribution for education infrastructure if a need is recognised as a direct consequence of a proposed new development.

Each development of 5 or more family dwellings (2 bed plus) is considered. At the time of the planning application the net capacity and current pupil numbers on roll of the schools in the catchment area of the development only are reviewed in order to check there are sufficient pupil places within the school to accommodate the likely number of pupils the development would generate. There is no difference in the process for VA schools.

10/2435/MFUL

Devon County Council's Children and Young People's Services (CYPS) Directorate currently work on the formula that each family dwelling is likely to generate 0.25 primary aged pupils and 0.15 secondary aged pupils. If the proposed development is estimated to create or exacerbate a shortfall in pupil places at the local school(s), then the CYPS Directorate will request a contribution for educational infrastructure based upon the shortfall of pupil places directly linked to the proposed development. The value of the contribution is calculated on a cost per pupil derived from the build cost of a standard classroom divided by 30. The current rates are as follows: -

Calculations DFE Cost Multiplier 2009-10 Rates including Devon's regional factor of 1

Primary Education New Build £13,042 per pupil Extension £11,074 per pupil

Secondary Education New Build £19,588 per pupil Extension £16,791 per pupil

The above DFE cash multiplier rates do not include for ICT equipment, which is also required;

At 1:2 pupils ratio for primary £575 At 1:1 pupils ratio for secondary £1,450

If the District Council, being the planning authority, supports the LA's request, a legal Section 106 agreement is prepared in order to secure a contribution from the developer for use at the school(s) for which the contribution has been requested. Section 106 funding is used to provide additional accommodation only; the funding cannot be used to remedy existing deficiencies, remodel or update inappropriate accommodation or pay ongoing revenue costs.

PLANNING APPLICATION REF: 10/2435/MFUL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT: LAND SOUTH OF OTTER CLOSE, TIPTON ST JOHN

SCHEDULE OF CALCULATIONS

1 a Estimated additional primary pupil numbers expected by development = 14 (estimate based on 0.25 pupil places per housing unit- Infants 3/7th; Junior 4/7th) b Estimated additional secondary pupil numbers expected by development = 8.4 (estimate based on 0.25 pupil places per housing unit- Infants 3/7th; Junior 4/7th)

DFE Cost Multiplier 2009-10 Rates including Devon's regional factor of 1.00

10/2435/MFUL

Primary Education New Build £13,042 per pupil Extension £11,074 per pupil

Secondary Education New Build £19,588 per pupil Extension £16,791 per pupil

The above DFE cash multiplier rates do not include for ICT equipment, which is also required;

At 1:2 pupils ratio for primary £575 At 1:1 pupils ratio for secondary £1,450

CONTRIBUTIONS REQUESTED

Primary 12 places available at Tipton St John C of E Primary £11,074 x 2 = £22,148 £287.50 (ICT allowance per primary pupil) x 2 = £575.00

Secondary 2 places available at The King's School £16,791 x 6.4 = £107,462.40 £1,450.00 (ICT allowance per secondary pupil) x 6.4 = £9,280

£139,465.40 Total contribution requested (plus legal costs)

2 Contribution time limit for return if not used - 10 years.

South West Water

22/12/10 - I refer to the above application and would advise that the public foul drainage system both sewerage and sewage treatment works do not have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposal and therefore any intention to make a connection to such cannot be supported.

In recognition of this the applicant/their agent have proposed the use of a temporary private sewage treatment plant to which there are no objections subject to the prior agreement of the Environment Agency.

Should the application be approved on the basis of private foul drainage being used we will require a suitable planning condition/section 106 agreement to be drawn up the wording of which we would wish to agree specifically precluding any connection to the public foul drainage network until such time as South West Water has confirmed that capacity is available.

10/2435/MFUL

Housing Strategy Officer Paul Lowe

08/02/11 - We would expect that the development proposal satisfy the various planning tests and in the first instance meet locally generated housing need as identified in a rural Housing Needs Survey.

If this site meets the planning tests we expect that a minimum of 22 be affordable, and be available in perpetuity. All nominations to come from the Common Housing Register/ Southwest Homes. Preference will be sort to nominate to individuals who have a local connection, a cascade mechanism being in place that allows nominations to be made from adjoining parishes and ultimately the district. Stair casing to be restricted to 80%.

All the affordable housing will be transferred to and managed by a Registered Provider. We expect to see a tenure split of 70 / 30% in favour of social/ affordable rent the remaining amount as a Low Cost Home Ownership product that accords with Planning Policy Statement 3.

We understand that the affordable housing be provided without Homes and Communities Agency Grant.

All affordable housing to be constructed in line with the Homes and Communities Agency Build and Design Standards and to the appropriate Code for Sustainable Homes level at that time.

Other Representations

76 representations have been received in respect of the proposal, with 70 raising objections, 1 was supportive.

Objections

Overdevelopment of the site Size of the development is disproportionate to the size of the village Highway safety Closure of the sunken lane Outside the built-up area boundary Contrary to LDF Location is unrelated to the village Poor design Detrimental to the character and appearance of the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty to which it is adjacent Detrimental to the existing wildlife on the site Increased risk of flooding and surface water run-off Increased light pollution Unsustainable location

10/2435/MFUL

Support

The development is necessary for the continued viability of the village Affordable housing is needed and to be welcomed

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

02/P1037 Residential Development (Outline) Refused 13.08.2002

91/P0963 Low Density Residential Development Refused 16.04.1994 And Private Sewerage Treatment Plant

90/P2468 Low Density Residential Development Withdrawn 15.05.1991

POLICIES

Government Guidance

Planning Policy Guidance

PPG13 (Transport) PPG17 (Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation)

Planning Policy Statement

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) PPS3 (Housing) PPS9 (Biodiversity and Geological Conservation) PPS10 (Planning for Sustainable Waste Management) PPS23 (Planning and Pollution Control) PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk)

Devon Structure Plan Policies

DT1 (Sustainable Development) ST4 (Infrastructure Provision) ST5 (Development Priority 2001 to 2016) ST16 (Local Centres and Rural Areas) ST17 (Housing and Employment Land Provision) ST18 (Affordable Housing) ST18A (Mix and Type of Housing) CO9 (Biodiversity and Earth Science Diversity) CO10 (Protection of Nature Conservation Sites and Species) CO11 (Conserving Energy Resources) CO13 (Protecting Water Resources and Flood Defence) CO14 (Conserving Agricultural Land) WM1 (Waste Management) TR2 (Co-ordinating Land Use/Travel Planning)

10/2435/MFUL

TR4 (Parking Strategy, Standards and Proposals) TR5 (Hierarchy of Modes) TR6 (Network Integration) TR7 (Walking and Cycling) TR9 (Public Transport)

East Devon Local Plan Policies

S2 (Built-up Area Boundaries for Area Centres and Local Centres) S4 (Development Within Built-up Area Boundaries) S7 (Infrastructure Related to New Development) D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) D2 (Sustainable Construction) D4 (Landscape Requirements) D5 (Trees on Development Sites) EN6 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) EN8 (Proposals Affecting Sites Which May be of Archaeological Importance) H1 (Residential Land Provision) H2 (Residential Land Allocation) H3 (Range and Mix of New Housing Development) H4 (Affordable Housing) RE3 (Open Space Provision in New Housing Developments) TA1 (Accessibility of New Development) TA3 (Transport Assessments /Travel Plans) TA4 (Footpaths, Bridleways and Cycleways) TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access)

Supplementary Planning Guidance

Tipton St John Village Design Statement

SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The site is located on the northern side of the village of Tipton St John, to the west of the minor county road (C808) which provides the main link between Sidmouth and Ottery St Mary. To the immediate eastern boundary is a sunken lane which runs from the Sidmouth Road steeply down to the main access into the village.

The site is greenfield land located between two built up areas, with the main village being located to the south of the site and a small residential development, Otter Close, which was developed in the 1960’s being located to the north. The land to the east is open countryside, whilst to the west the land slopes steeply down to the River Otter playing fields and floodplain.

The site comprises a large and relatively level field of 1.19 ha, occupying an elevated position, although there is a slight fall from north to south and a further fall towards the south east corner. The site has been used for grazing and is bounded by existing hedgerows, with the rear gardens of the properties in Otter Close abutting the northern boundary and those of Mallocks Close to the south and wrapping around the south western corner of the field.

10/2435/MFUL

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Detailed planning permission is sought for the erection of 56 new dwellings, of which 22 would be affordable, together with construction of new a highway access, the closure of the sunken lane to vehicular traffic, and the use of this as a pedestrian/cycleway.

The dwellings proposed comprise a mix of 5 four bedroom houses, 27 three bedroom dwellings (of which 7 would be social rented housing), 16 two bedroom dwellings (6 social rented and 3 intermediate housing), 4 two bedroom flats/maisonettes (1 social rented and 1 intermediate) and 4 one bedroom flats/maisonettes (2 social rented and 2 intermediate). The properties comprise a mixture of flats, bungalows and two storey housing, with the bungalows being the predominant form to north of the site.

Within the layout a village green area is indicated near to the entrance of the site, with a further open space area located in the south eastern corner of the site, which will also provide a drainage area, and a proposed play park in the centre of the scheme.

CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

The principle considerations are:-

Principle of Development and Policy Context Landscape and Visual Impact Access, Highways and Sustainability Foul and Surface Water Drainage Design and Layout Residential Amenity Ecology Trees Archaeology Open Space Education Affordable Housing Other Issues Proposed Section 106 Contributions

Principle of Development and Policy Context

Members will recall the recently refused planning application for residential development on the site known as ‘Eastfield’ in West Hill (planning ref; 10/0761/MOUT). Although differing in density levels and number of dwellings proposed the two sites share some characteristics and policy issues.

The application site lies outside the built-up area boundary of Tipton St John as defined within the East Devon Local Plan. It is therefore in principle contrary to Policy

10/2435/MFUL

S5 of the East Devon Local Plan which limits development in the countryside to that which accords with a specific Local Plan policy.

As a result there are two key policy issues that arise;

1. The weight that can be attributed to the emerging Local Development Framework, and 2. In the absence of any policy justification, whether guidance in respect of the need for a 5 year land supply which is set out within PPS3 can be fulfilled.

Local Development Framework

Currently the East Devon Local Plan is in the process of being superseded by the Local Development Framework (LDF). In preparation for this, two exercises have already taken place. A Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) has been carried out for the District. The SHLAA is not part of the housing allocation process but helps to inform this process in terms of the ability to deliver and develop various sites over the plan period. The SHLAA report, dated April 2010 identifies sites in the settlements of Ottery St. Mary, West Hill and Tipton St. John where major investment is required to provide sewerage capacity. All sites found to be developable have been put in the 11-15 year period.

Last year the Council also published the first draft of the Core Strategy Preferred Approach which set out the preferred approach for the development of the District over the plan period. This document was prepared following community consultation and itself was subject to a further consultation exercise. This consultation concluded in December 2010 and the responses are currently being assessed by our planning policy department. This version of the core strategy identified Tipton St John as a smaller village with a built-up area boundary capable of accommodating a further 20 houses (40% of which would be affordable) – the total to be delivered over the plan period. The preferred approach states there will be flexibility over homes numbers/scale of development to reflect size of settlements, local needs, local aspirations for growth and potential development site characteristics. Whilst analysis of the responses is not yet completed, the emerging picture is one of too much housing being proposed and that the scale of growth and development should be reduced. Growth would need to comprise a planned mix of market and affordable houses, employment and community facilities and be phased to provide development to meet the settlement’s needs over the next 20 years.

Furthermore the Localism Bill has recently been published and confirms the intention by the Government to scrap the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) which has previously set the predicted housing numbers required for each District. As such weight must be given to the views of local residents. A recent High Court ruling has confirmed that the intended abolition of regional strategies can be taken into account when making planning decisions. This judgement – brought by the CALA homes case – has confirmed that scraping of the RSS is a material consideration in the determination of applications. The pending RSS remains part of the statutory development plan, but in light of this High Court judgement and the declared intention of the Government it is considered that only limited weight can be attributed

10/2435/MFUL

to this document, and as such does not outweigh the established policies of the district and local plan.

The recent consultation response has caused uncertainty with regards to housing numbers of small villages. Given the uncertainty over the approach with the LDF, the potential fall in housing numbers and drive to a more local agenda, the LDF document carries very little weight - as it has not yet completed statutory procedures or the rigours of public inspection. The policy response therefore has to fall back on the adopted Local Plan and the Built Up Area Boundaries. In this regard the development is considered to conflict with the established policy.

5 Year Land Supply

Planning Policy Statement 3 requires Local Authorities to be able to demonstrate that they have a deliverable 5 year land supply. This comes about from the desirability of having an established and steady approach to development and ensuring that there is a continuous supply of houses that are delivered evenly over time. This helps not only with the housing market but also the related infrastructure that is needed for any new development.

East Devon is a District split in its geography and character, subject to influence from the urban centre of Exeter and the remainder a more rural environment characterised by market towns and a hierarchy of villages set within an attractive landscape much of which is designated as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. This geography is recognised in the Structure Plan and Local Plans where reference is made to the Principal Urban Area (PUA). The PUA encompasses Exeter city centre and a projection of land to the east which extends into East Devon. The justification for this definition rests on the growth, role and function of Exeter and availability/suitability of sites in the City boundary to meet housing needs (in comparison with sites outside the City boundary). The Structure Plan clearly sees Cranbrook and the PUA in East Devon as a contributor to the role and development of Exeter where it is relevant to note that the Exeter City Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) showed a land supply in excess of the targets necessary.

The division between the two sub areas of East Devon which is most clearly shown within the Devon Structure Plan to 2016 Key Diagram demonstrates that the PUA extends no further to the east than the new community (Cranbrook) boundary and identifies land almost wholly sandwiched between the new A30 and the Exeter. This split and the reasons behind it relates to the housing supply figures for East Devon.

The 2009/10 LDF Annual Monitoring Report (reporting to a year end date of 31 March 2010) contains assessment of land supply in East Devon. The previously completed SHLAA exercise (also reporting to an end date of 31 March 2010) provided further data on land supply, albeit to a slightly different methodology but showing similar conclusions. The Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) shows that taking East Devon as a whole there was a calculated 4.24 year supply of land for housing. This supply figure is worked out on the basis of assessments of Devon Structure Plan requirements; houses already built and projected future completions. Whilst it is acknowledged that East Devon as a whole does not therefore have a five year supply the AMR provides separate data for two sub areas of East Devon.

10/2435/MFUL

These sub areas relate to that part of East Devon at the Exeter Principal Urban Area (PUA) with the second being the rest of East Devon – these areas are broken down in line with the areas identified above. Following this disaggregation approach it is clear that the shortfall arises solely in the area of East Devon located within the PUA, while the rest of East Devon has a significant over supply of housing which has previously been calculated as a 9 year supply.

It is considered that appeal decisions from elsewhere in the country, most particularly in Wiltshire and more recently Blady in Leicestershire, favour this approach. PPS3 requires a flexible and responsive supply of housing land and it is clear from the AMR that this does not exist for the district as a whole. There is little merit in assessing the supply of housing land for the whole district with an identified shortfall and requirement within the defined PUA. An oversupply outside of the defined PUA could reduce the pressure to provide housing within and around this area. This would undermine the Devon Structure Plans ST10 policy and ‘Key Elements of the Devon Strategy’, which states that the PUAs should be the primary focus for strategic development to provide the bulk of Devon’s new housing and economic investment at those centres – minimising the need for commuting and maximising accessibility to employment. Policy aims to provide for a significant scale of additional housing necessary to meet needs and support Exeter’s regional economic role.

Landscape and Visual Impact

The site occupies a prominent position on high ground to the north of the main part of the village of Tipton St John. There are expansive views from the site towards East Hill and over the Otter Valley and from those vantage points back to the site. In particular the proposed development would be prominent in views from Sidmouth Road to the east and from the playing fields and footpaths alongside the River Otter.

Alongside Sidmouth Road the majority of the existing planting would be retained and strengthened. However, gaining safe access to the site would necessitate a wide hard surfaced roadway rising up to the north west corner. To create this access the sunken lane would be terminated and ground levels raised considerably to the level of Sidmouth Road. The combined effect of these works would be to create a very suburban-like feature in what is otherwise a rural setting. Even the entrance to Otter Close just to the north of the proposed entrance does not intrude significantly on the character of the road. Furthermore, in spite of the planting on the eastern boundary, the built development would be apparent to passers-by and would create a visual intrusion where currently the landscape is distinctly rural.

From the much lower land alongside the River Otter the site occupies a prominent position on the brow of a hill. It sits between the developments of Otter Close on one side and Mallocks Close on the other. However, those two existing developments are comprised mainly of bungalows which, in the case of Otter Close, nestle in the landscape and benefit from mature landscaping within and around. The two bungalows immediately adjacent to each side of the site in this view, while being prominent, benefit from appearing lower than the level of the top of East Hill beyond. In contrast, the much denser development of this proposal would form a mass of buildings which would be unbroken by any significant landscaping and sit proudly on

10/2435/MFUL

the horizon. The resultant linear arrangement of buildings on the ridge comprising Mallocks Close, the site and Otter Close, would be a significant visual intrusion into the countryside and would harm the landscape character. Furthermore, the loss of hedgerows and trees on the eastern boundary of the site would give undue prominence to the built development.

Access, Highways and Sustainability

The relationship with the existing highway network, the sustainability of the location and the provision of safe and appropriate access arrangements is one of the main considerations in the determination of the application. Additionally the parking provision, internal layout and proposed pedestrian links need to be taken into account.

The Local Highway Authority have assessed the scheme and site access. It is noted that a previous application in 1991 for low scale residential development was refused for a number of reasons including: “The formation of the new access road together with the closure of the attractive rural lane leading through to the B3176 would be detrimental to the amenities of the area which lies on the periphery of the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.”

While it is noted that a number of objections have been received on this application and many of these raise the issue of highway safety and visibility, the site access has been assessed by the Local Highway Authority on the basis of guidance contained within Manual for Streets. This recognises that visibility splays should be designed to accommodate traffic travelling on the road at the 85th percentile of the typical speeds. On this basis and despite the number of concerns generated the applicant has demonstrated that suitable visibility at the junction can be achieved such that a safe access can be formed. It is recognised that this splay would involve land on the opposite side of the sunken lane which would be closed. This clearly has implications for the landscape and character owing to the loss of vegetation found on this strip of land but from a technical point of view can be achieved.

The second tenet of the approach to form a new access in this location is the necessary closure of the road known as the sunken lane. This lane appears to be little used and is recognised as a road itself with a dangerous access. As such its closure to vehicular traffic would affect the few who do use it but on balance is considered to be a net benefit. Its use as a pedestrian and cycle way is therefore appropriate providing significantly improved access for pedestrians from both the currently proposed development and existing occupiers in Otter Close to access the village centre.

Despite the improved access to the village centre and the lack of highway reasons for refusal on the technical aspects of the access, concern still exists in terms of sustainability. This assesses the degree of access which future occupiers of a development have to schools, shops and other facilities as well as alternative means of transport. While Tipton St John has a small school on the opposite side of the valley, a pub, local shop and village hall, its bus service is extremely limited. Given the separation distance to particularly the school, and the lack of alternative means

10/2435/MFUL

of transport, the site is considered less than ideal in terms of sustainability. As the site is unallocated, in the open countryside and poorly served by means of facilities and transport, the application is considered to fail to accord to planning policy.

Foul and Surface Water Drainage

As with a number of other applications assessed recently the Fluxton Treatment works are again being cited as being at capacity and any additional development which links into the system could cause a pollution incident. In addition with the current scheme being based north and east of Tipton St John, there are also capacity problems both at Tipton sewage pumping station and the rising main. South West Water are therefore objecting to any development which proposes connection to the main. To overcome this issue the applicants are proposing the provision of a private treatment system on site with a discharge to the Mill Leat. Such discharge is controlled by the Environment Agency and requires a permit separate to any permission obtained in respect of the Planning Regulations.

In this instance the applicants have justified the private sewage treatment system on the basis of the capacity problems and would put in place necessary infrastructure to connect to the public system at a time when the facilities have been enhanced. Despite some concerns locally this has been assessed by the Environment Agency and no objections raised.

In respect of surface water the site is located within Flood Zone 1 where the risk from fluvial and tidal flooding is low. However owing to the site size, the application is accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment which considers the impact of surface water. The drainage strategy adopted is SuDS and is proposed to comprise a network of underground pipe work, underground cellular storage, swales and an infiltration basin. Using this set up the applicants claim that they can manage the flood risk against the 1 in 100 year flood event plus a 30% allowance for Climate change which is the adopted standard. The Environment Agency have assessed this information and seek to raise no objections to the proposed development. Despite local concern therefore no objections can be sustained to the proposed scheme on grounds of flooding or drainage.

Design and Layout

The layout adopted for the proposed development comprises a single access point taken from the main Ottery to Bowd Road leading into a single circular estate road with houses both around the edge and positioned centrally within an island formation. It is recognised that given the constrained site with existing housing to the south and north, the main road to the east and steeply falling land to the west, there is limited scope for imagination. However while a couple of small courtyard arrangements are taken off this main ring, there is little to add interest or character to the arrangement itself and it is typical of a standard housing layout. Elements around the village green are good and it is likely that there would be a generally pleasing and welcoming approach into the estate at this point. However the northern arm beyond the green and the southern arm (particularly the southwest corner) lapse into a typical suburban layout which fails to acknowledge the more organic way in which places and particularly more rural villages have evolved and developed. While

10/2435/MFUL

Tipton St John already has a couple of estates which do not readily lend themselves to a typical rural image, these were constructed under a different approach/era and should not necessarily set the pattern for future development. New and future development including proposed layouts needs to be continually reassessed and evolve rather than adhere to the past layouts.

The mix of house design and types is more varied than the layout would initially suggest and with detail on these houses including porches, cills, chimneys and exposed eaves, there is an attempt to pick up some of the detailing found in vernacular architecture in the village. The composition of the details within the overall house form is not imaginative but if the mix could have been increased slightly a more organic scheme could have been developed. The house types therefore remain generally standard and coupled with the layout and arrangement details discussed above lead to a scheme which is poorly related to the character of the host village. Concern is also expressed in the change in styles within the site as there appears to be a somewhat clumsy transition between bungalows and two storey dwellings within the scheme. The elevations for plots 11 and 12 have been handed differently to those shown on the site arrangement plan and would need clarification.

Located centrally within the site it is proposed to provide a play park while to the eastern edge there is a rear parking courtyard. Both these aspects can, when handled appropriately be acceptable and actually enhance a layout adding interest and character. However in this instance neither have suitable or sufficient passive surveillance and are considered contrary to guidance in Safer by Design. While crime and disorder in Tipton St John is considered low, the proposed layout is inappropriate in terms of providing a happy safe and welcoming environment.

Residential Amenity

As with all schemes the impact of the proposed development on the amenity of occupiers of existing properties needs to be considered and in this instance those to the north and south in particular need assessing. Existing properties to the north are large detached dwellings with rear garden depths typically of around 13-15m with a boundary to the site comprising a mixed hedging with a couple of more mature trees. Such an open rear boundary has provided these properties with a very attractive outlook and a high degree of privacy. The proposed properties that would be positioned close to this boundary would be typically set 5-10m from the joint boundary. This would provide a distance between rear elevations of between 20m and 22m. With the exception of the property to the south of Otter Bank which would be two storey and present a gable elevation to the property behind, properties to the south of Uplands, Emminence and Hill Croft are all single storey bungalows. While their plan form varies their primary outlook is north-south. In this instance however and with a bulk and mass limited to single storey with a pitched roof and no roof windows the identification of harm to the amenity of the existing properties is difficult to quantify. It is recognised that they would lose their view, but this in itself is not a material planning consideration. Dominance overshadowing and overlooking are not considered to be so severe as to warrant refusal of the scheme.

10/2435/MFUL

Development is also proposed close to the western and southern boundaries where properties in Mallocks Close exist. Due to topography these existing properties are set on ground which is significantly lower than the application site and existing boundaries comprise mature hedgerows. The two properties to the west have an outlook towards the site but this comprises their front elevation. Given their position lower than the site and the steep bank forming the respective boundary there is a possibility that development close to the edge could dominate. However the closest structures are only garage buildings and these are set 5m from the edge. This is less than ideal but as the garage buildings are small scale and of limited height and width, it is not considered that objections can be sustained.

Far greater concern exists however in terms of the relationship between the proposed properties in the southwest corner of the site and along the southern boundary and their relationship with the properties in Mallocks Close. There is a again a very steep drop to the existing properties but in this instance the dwelling on plot 12 is a 4 bedroom 2 storey structure with detached garage. This is set 3.5m from the boundary with the garage set 1.0m away. Given the height of both these structures the tight relationship to the boundary and the steep drop to the existing garden below, the degree of harm would be excessive. As such this relationship is considered to cause a degree of dominance which is not appropriate and would harm the amenity of the occupiers of the properties to the south. Further to the east the separation distance increases to 12m to the boundary which is sufficient to overcome harm that may arise.

Within the site itself there are a number of relationships that are a little tight and where slight dominance may occur. However in the main these are considered reasonable within a new housing development where it would be a case of ‘buyer beware’. However the relationship between plots 1 and 2 is poor. This results from the change in form and juxtaposition of a two storey dwelling with rear elevation facing the front elevation of a single storey bungalow with only a 12m separation distance between the two. While some private amenity space exists to the rear, the front of the bungalow looks to the road with patio door proposed. This garden area and the driveway associated with the property would be both dominated and overlooked by Unit 1. Such a relationship is extremely awkward and would limit the quality of amenity enjoyed by occupiers of the bungalow.

Ecology

A report has been submitted which details the findings of a phase 1 survey which was carried out on 16 February 2009. This was followed up by a repeat survey on 19 July 2010 to confirm the findings of the first survey and identify any new issues. The results show that the findings of the first survey remain valid. One of the key issues arising from the findings is how the proposed landscaping works would impact on wildlife habitats identified in the ecology report. Evidence of dormice has been found on the site and the report raises concern about the potential for hedgerow habitats to be harmed or lost as a result of the proposal. In the absence of a mitigation strategy it cannot be assumed that habitats would not be harmed, particularly on the western boundary where it appears that existing arboricultural features would be lost.

10/2435/MFUL

In respect of bats, it was noted that the oak tree in the south east corner of the site, which would be retained, provides a suitable roosting site. This tree (T13) is a category ‘B’ tree of average condition of which the arboricultural survey recommends removing the major dead wood over the road. As for dormice, no mitigation has been proposed. The remainder of the species identified by the report, namely, birds, badgers, reptiles and ‘other species’, are not considered to represent a constraint to development. However, work would need to be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations of the ecological report.

Trees

The site is an open field bounded on all sides by trees and hedges. The main group of trees are around the south west corner of the site with widely spaced trees on the other boundaries. There are some trees on adjoining land which would potentially be affected by the development. An arboricultural constraints report has been submitted which identifies 20 trees (or groups of trees) and hedges around the site. None are considered to fall into the ‘A’ category of the most significant trees of high quality and value. One small tree, a dead elm at the entrance to the site, falls into the category that should be felled. The remainder of the trees and hedges fall into the ‘B’ and ‘C’ categories and those towards the south, east and north boundaries would mostly be retained. Of those that would be lost, one is a ‘B’ category tree on the eastern boundary and would be replaced by new planting. The remainder of the trees that would be lost are on the west boundary and would fall within the rear gardens of the proposed dwellings. Presumably because of the views available over the Otter Valley to the west the submitted landscaping plan does not show any replacement planting. The landscape impacts of this are addressed elsewhere.

The main area of new planting shown on the landscaping plan would be on the eastern boundary and inside the site entrance and would help strengthen the screening provided by the existing trees and hedges. Overall the proposal would preserve and protect the best arboricultural features of the site but the proposed loss of trees and hedges particularly on the western boundary without any replacement is regrettable given the impact the built development would have on the landscape.

Archaeology

No information has been submitted in respect of the archaeology of the site however a response to a consultation with the Historic Environment Service has been received. This indicates potential for archaeological and artefactual material to be exposed resulting from known pre-historic activity in the area. While this would not prevent development going ahead, a programme of archaeological work is recommend prior to any development taking place.

Open Space

The submitted application proposes open space areas within the site comprising two small areas at the entrance to the site; a green area and a proposed open space/ drainage area. In addition a small central play park is proposed.

10/2435/MFUL

Whilst there may be some scope for the identified areas to contribute towards the informal play space requirement, no mechanism or proposal has been put forward to justify the lack of a contribution towards formal recreational provision, and as such, and without any contributions being offered, it is considered that the development as submitted fails to accord with the Council’s adopted planning policy RE3.

Education

Devon County Council as Education Authority have requested that appropriate contributions be made for educational infrastructure where a new development would create or exacerbate a shortfall in pupil places at the local school(s). In this instance the contribution requested is detailed in the consultation response at the start of this report. The applicant’s have indicated that they would be prepared to offer such a contribution and have offered a contribution of £117,159.30. The figure required by DCC is calculated at £139,465.40. Following discussions with the applicant’s agent the Council have been advised that the developer is willing to make the revised figure, although no formal confirmation of this has been received to date.

Affordable Housing

Policy H4 of the East Devon Local Plan requires that on developments of this size, affordable housing must be provided at a minimum of 40%, generally on the basis of 70% socially rented and 30% shared equity. Additionally nomination rights should be with EDDC.

The scheme that Devonshire Homes are proposing contains 22 units of affordable housing (40%), with the 70/30 % tenure split stated in the draft S106 Heads of Terms, and therefore complies with EDDC policy H4 in this respect. This offer would be expected from a departure site. According to the applicants statement Devonshire Homes have identified a development partner, Magna Housing Association (a Registered Social Landlord), who will take ownership of the affordable dwellings once built.

The application has not included a survey to identify the local housing need, which would have strengthened the weight attributed to this aspect of the proposal. However, it is understood that this is currently ongoing.

PPS3 expects new affordable housing to be integrated within open market dwellings to achieve a suitable housing mix. In this respect the layout is considered to be acceptable and offers a range of affordable dwellings to meet needs of intended occupants.

Subject to the completion of a legal agreement securing appropriate contributions on the basis of the submitted information and in accordance with planning policy, no objection is raised in respect of affordable housing provision.

10/2435/MFUL

Proposed 106 Contributions

Heads of Terms

A draft Heads of Terms has been submitted with the application to secure appropriate obligations and financial contributions towards the provision of necessary infrastructure, including:

Affordable Housing – 40 % of the units affordable secured in perpetuity, securing the mix of housing types and the tenure split. The Housing Strategy team wish to see nominations from the Common Housing register/Southwest Homes. These nominations will have a preference to those with a local connection, with a cascade mechanism in place to allow nomination form adjoining parishes and ultimately the district. As part of the agreement the authority wishes to limit on grant funded shared ownership property to a maximum of 80% of the value of the property. All affordable housing should be constructed in line with the Homes and Communities Agency Build and Design Standards and to the appropriate Code for Sustainable Homes level at that time. Open Space – An area of the open space is allocated on the plans in the north east corner of the plot. Therefore a financial contribution is not included within the Heads of Terms. Education – In order to secure a contribution for use at the school(s) the applicants have suggested a financial contribution of £117,159.30, however Devon County have recommended a figure of £139, 465.40. Off Site Highway Works – The developer is to enter the suitable highway agreement required for additional off site highway works to be carried. Foul drainage – The developer has offered contribute to South West Water for improvements to the local sewer networks – although the figure is yet to be agreed. South West Water would wish to preclude any connection to the public foul drainage network until such times as SWW has confirmed that capacity is available.

Whilst the above offer is noted it is considered that at the present time insufficient information has been submitted to ensure that appropriate contributions towards the provision of necessary infrastructure would be forthcoming.

CONCLUSION

Whilst there may not be any insurmountable physical or technical difficulties to the development of this site, there are a number of constraints which render the proposal unacceptable.

The site is located outside the built-up area boundary of Tipton St John as defined within current policy, and as such is contrary to Policy S5 of the East Devon Local Plan which limits development in the countryside to that which accords with another specific local plan policy. Given the uncertainty regarding the potential for future development, the location and scale of that proposed, particularly in relation to the size of the village, and the early stages of the LDF which can only be afforded very

10/2435/MFUL

limited weight, there are no other material circumstances to justify a departure from policy.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development would take place on an unallocated site in the open countryside where due to: a. the Local Plan development strategy which seeks to resist development in such areas (where not supported by other specific policies in the Local Plan); b. the extremely limited weight that can be attributed to the emerging Local Development framework which is currently in its infancy; c. the intended abolition of the South West Regional Spatial Strategy as a result of the Localism Bill and the limited weight that can be attributed to this policy document; and d. the ability to demonstrate through the Annual Monitoring Review that there is a sufficient 5 year land supply within the sub area where the application lies,

there are no material planning reasons to depart from the adopted Plan Policy. To do so would undermine the adopted strategy and result in unplanned and speculative development in the countryside where there is no identified need for local regeneration or additional housing. The primary focus for strategic development to provide the bulk of Devon’s new housing and economic investment should be focussed within or around identified PUAs – minimising the need for commuting, maximising accessibility to employment and supporting Exeter’s regional economic role. The proposed development is therefore considered contrary to guidance in PPS1 and PPS 3, Policies ST1 (Sustainable Development), ST5 (Development Priority), ST16 (Local Centres and Rural Areas), ST10 (Exeter Principal Urban Area) ST17 (Housing and Employment provision) TR2 (Co-ordination of Land Use/travel Planning), TR5 (Hierarchy of Modes and Transport Assessment) of the Devon Structure Plan, Policies S5 (Countryside Protection) and TA1 (Accessibility of New Developments) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan and the West Hill Village Design Statement.

2. The proposed development by reason of the relationship between existing properties in Mallocks Close and the proximity of the proposed development – particularly plot 12, would be overbearing and result in excessive dominance that would harm the residential amenity of existing occupiers. Such development is therefore contrary to good practice and Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan.

3. The proposed development by reason of the estate layout and boundary treatment found within it, would result in an environment that fails to reflect the character and appearance of the area, is insufficiently varied in its plan form and fails to reflect good practice through passive surveillance of sensitive areas including car parks and rear courtyards and an enclosed play area. The

10/2435/MFUL

proposed development is therefore contrary to national guidance in PPS1 and Safer by Design, Policy C06 (Quality of new development) of the adopted Structure Plan and Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan

4. The proposed development would be located where it is remote from adequate services, employment, education, public transport etc., and would therefore increase the need for travel by private vehicles contrary to Policies TR2 (Co-ordinating Land Use/Travel Planning) and TR5 (Hierarchy of Modes) of the Devon County Structure Plan and Policy TA1 (Accessibility of New Development) of the East Devon District Local Plan.

5. Insufficient information, and no appropriate mechanism, has been submitted to ensure that sufficient and appropriate contributions towards the provision of necessary infrastructure to serve the demands of the proposed dwellings would be forthcoming. As such the proposal would be contrary to Policy ST4 (Infrastructure Provision) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001 – 2016, and Policies S7 (Infrastructure Related to New Development), RE3 (Open Space Provision in New Housing Development) and TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 -2011.

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

10/2435/MFUL

Committee Date: 08 March 2011

SEATON 10/1488/MFUL Target Date: (Seaton) 09.11.2010

Applicant: Cavanna Homes (South West) Ltd

Location: Land South Of Court Lane, Seaton

Proposal: Development of 12no dwellings including garages and parking.

CONSULTATIONS

County Highway Authority 04/02/11 - Further observations based on amended plans dated 12 January 2011. It is noted that the proposed footpath link between St Clare's Close and Court Lane has now been removed from the proposals. Whereas the reasons for this are understood, as stated in my earlier comments, the highway authority would have preferred it to remain.

Although the principle of permeable paving is acceptable to the highway authority, the details will need to be agreed with the highway authority at the adoption agreement stage as this type of drainage solution is relatively untested in Devon.

Recommendation:

Subject to the developer first entering into an appropriate agreement to fund the variation of the Traffic Regulation Order controlling waiting on the carriageway of St Clare's Close, together with any alterations to signing and road markings:-

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT, ECONOMY AND CULTURE, ON BEHALF OF DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL, AS LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, RECOMMENDS THAT THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE INCORPORATED IN ANY GRANT OF PERMISSION:-

1. The proposed estate road, cycleways, footways, footpaths, verges, junctions, street lighting, sewers, drains, retaining walls, service routes, surface water outfall, road maintenance/vehicle overhang margins, embankments, visibility splays, accesses, car parking and street furniture shall be constructed and laid out in accordance with details to be approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before their construction begins, For this purpose, plans and sections indicating, as appropriate, the design, layout, levels, gradients, materials and method of construction shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure that adequate information is available for the proper consideration of the detailed proposals.

2. No part of the development hereby approved shall be commenced until:

10/1488/MFUL

A) The access road has been laid out, kerbed, drained and constructed up to base course level for the first 20 metres back from its junction with the public highway B) The ironwork has been set to base course level C) A site compound and car park have been constructed to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority

REASON: To ensure that adequate on site facilities are available for all traffic attracted to the site during the construction period, in the interest of the safety of all users of the adjoining public highway and to protect the amenities of the adjoining residents

3. The occupation of any dwelling in an agreed phase of the development shall not take place until the following works have been carried out to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority: A) The cul-de-sac carriageway including the vehicle turning head shall have been laid out, kerbed, drained and constructed up to and including base course level, the ironwork set to base course level and the sewers, manholes and service crossings completed; B) The cul-de-sac footways and footpaths which provide that dwelling with direct pedestrian routes to an existing highway maintainable at public expense have been constructed up to and including base course level; C) The street lighting for the spine road and cul-de-sac and footpaths has been erected and is operational; D) The car parking and any other vehicular access facility required for the dwelling by this permission has/have been completed; E) The verge and service margin and vehicle crossing on the road frontage of the dwelling have been completed with the highway boundary properly defined;

REASON: To ensure that adequate access and associated facilities are available for the traffic attracted to the site

Environment Agency 01/02/11 - Thank you for inviting us to comment on the amended plans for the above application.

I am happy to advise that our comments of 24th August 2010 remain unaltered. I attach a copy of these comments for ease of reference.

Parish/Town Council 02/02/11 - Recommend refusal.

Emma Snow Police Architectural Liaison Officer 04/02/11 - I write with reference to the above planning application following amendments to the original plans.

I wish to make the following comments relating to crime and disorder:

10/1488/MFUL

o The addition of the coach house provides surveillance over parked vehicles accessed via the drive through in plot 5. o All other car parking spaces appear to be overlooked. o The removal of the footpath link between St Clare's Close and Court Lane is welcomed. o Doors from the rear or side elevations of the garages must lead into private areas such as a garden, to increase security. o Access to the rear of plot 3 adjacent to plot 5 should be securely gated to increase security at the rear of the property. o The dwellings should be built to meet full Secured by Design accreditation.

If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

Seaton - Cllr P Burrows

Suggested Action: Object to the application

In the event my recommendation and that of the planning officer differs, I wish the application to be refered to the Development Control Committee: Yes

Reasons For Action: My objections to this development of a lovely open space still remain. Because Cavanna Homes have enclosed it the intrinsic value is not taken away. The amendment is worse than the original no open space and some homes I would imagine are at risk because of the contrived access. Refuse please.

In the event that this application comes to Committee, I would reserve my position until I am in full possession of all the relevant facts and arguments for and against.

In the case of Enforcement action the Ward Member should indicate if they are in support of such action: Yes

Devon County Council Education Dept 10/08/10 - Following receipt of your letter dated 10th August 2010, a contribution towards education infrastructure via a Section 106 Agreement is sought in respect of the above application. The primary school affected is Seaton Primary (Summer 2010 number on roll 341, pupil net capacity 384). 12 family dwellings could be expected to produce 3 primary aged pupils, which will not cause a shortfall of places at the school. No contribution will be requested towards primary education. The secondary school affected is The Axe Valley Community College (Autumn 2009 number on roll 875, pupil place capacity 858). 12 family dwellings could be expected to produce 1.8 secondary aged pupils which will increase the shortfall of places at the school. The contribution required is £30,223.80 which would be used to part fund teaching accommodation plus £2,610 for ICT equipment. These calculations are based on the DfE Cash Multiplier Extension rate for Devon. In addition to the contribution figures quoted above, the County Council would wish to recover legal costs incurred as a result of the preparation and completion of the Agreement. Legal costs are not expected to exceed £250.00 where the agreement relates solely to the education contribution. However, if the agreement involves

10/1488/MFUL

other issues or if the matter becomes protracted, the legal costs are likely to be in excess of this sum.

Emma Snow Police Architectural Liaison Officer 13/09/10 - I write with reference to the above planning application and specifically the concerns raised by local residents regarding the planned introduction of a footpath link between St Clares Close and Court Lane.

St Clares Close is a private and self policing community where, according to police logs and the PCSO for the area, crime is very low. The cul de sac location means that there is no reason for non residents to enter the close unless they are in the area for legitimate reasons such as making deliveries or visiting friends or relations. Residents are generally alerted to strangers within the close and will question their activities. This type of environment deters crime as a potential offender will feel uncomfortable knowing that they are more likely to be noticed.

Cul de sacs which are short in length and not linked are very safe environments in which to live. Secured by Design New Homes 2010 states that research shows that where cul de sacs are linked by footpaths, crime can increase.

Research by Stephen Town Permeability, Access Opportunities and Crime, 2002 has consistently found that inappropriate access provides offenders with the opportunity to enter additional areas. They become familiar with the layout of their surroundings and search for vulnerable targets. They make themselves aware of escape routes to avoid being seen by residents or being caught by the police. The proposed path could give potential offenders an excuse to be in an area where they would normally have no legitimate reason to be.

The Home Office document Safer Places The Planning System and Crime Prevention 2004 states that homes in cul de sacs can be highly secure, providing they are not linked by footpaths which can be used irregularly but increase the possibility of criminal activity.

The decrease in distance, should the planned footpath link go ahead, is relatively minor as alternative routes such as Meadow Lane can and are used. There are no important facilities requiring this link such as a school or other community building, and it is questionable as to how much use this path would receive. Current routes back from the town are likely to be via Fore Street and into Colyford Road, or along Queen Street which leads to Harepath Road and Seaton Down Hill.

A scan of the police logs and evidence from the local PCSO reveals that Fore Street experiences the majority of problems with late nigh disorder and anti social behaviour due to people using this route from the town centre, back to their homes.

An increase in permeability could have a negative effect on the quality of life experienced by the current residents in St Clares Close. Properties along this route have good defensible space; a clear definition between the public and private realm. A footpath link in this area has the potential to increase the opportunity for crime and anti social behaviour as well as the fear of crime. It is therefore preferred if the footpath is removed from the current plans.

10/1488/MFUL

Environment Agency 01/09/10 - We have no objections to this proposal.

County Highway Authority 06/09/10 - Recommendation

Subject to the developer first entering into an appropriate agreement to fund the variation of the Traffic Regulation Order controlling waiting on the carriageway of St. Clares Close, together with any alterations to signing and road markings

2. No part of the development hereby approved shall be commenced until A) The access road has been laid out, kerbed, drained and constructed up to base course level for the first 20 metres back from its junction with the public highway B) The ironwork has been set to base course level C) A site compound and car park have been constructed to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority REASON To ensure that adequate on site facilities are available for all traffic attracted to the site during the construction period, in the interest of the safety of all users of the adjoining public highway and to protect the amenities of the adjoining residents

3. The occupation of any dwelling in an agreed phase of the development shall not take place until the following works have been carried out to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority A) The cul-de-sac carriageway including the vehicle turning head shall have been laid out, kerbed, drained and constructed up to and including base course level, the ironwork set to base course level and the sewers, manholes and service crossings completed B) The cul-de-sac footways and footpaths which provide that dwelling with direct pedestrian routes to an existing highway maintainable at public expense have been constructed up to and including base course level, C) The street lighting for the spine road and cul-de-sac and footpaths has been erected and is operational

10/1488/MFUL

D) The car parking and any other vehicular access facility required for the dwelling by this permission has/have been completed E) The verge and service margin and vehicle crossing on the road frontage of the dwelling have been completed with the highway boundary properly defined REASON To ensure that adequate access and associated facilities are available for the traffic attracted to the site

Parish/Town Council 20/09/10 - Recommend Refusal Footpath to be removed, over development, 12 houses deemed too much for size of site and more space is needed around dwellings. Dwellings need to be more in keeping with existing surrounding properties.

Seaton - Cllr J Knight 23/09/10 - In my role as EastDevon District Councillor for the Seaton Ward I would recommend this application for refusal: 10/1488/FUL

This application is over development of a site that will join with the existing properties that are already in situ at St Claire's Close which is designed of detatched properties that were a credit to the area this application does not lend itself to good design and is totally out of keeping with the street scene. Does this application not conflict with policies PPS3and H2. I have spoken to the police and they are of the same opinion as myself with regards to the public walk through pathway and that is that no pathway should be allowed on this site as it would allow the criminal easy access to disappear into the shadows of the night after commiting illegal acts of crime within the area and any access onto Court Lane would allow a more accident prone area worse with the meeting of two 90% bends meeting each other at this point.

I reserve the right to change my mind for or against if more information is brought before me.

Councillor Jim Knight

Seaton - Cllr P Burrows

Suggested Action: Object to the application

In the event my recommendation and that of the planning officer differs, I wish the application to be refered to the Development Control Committee: Yes

Reasons For Action: I strongly oppose the building of Houses on this site which is one of the few green spaces in Seaton. This was turned done on Appeal before and I personally see nothing has changed. I will comment more if it goes to Committee.

In the event that this application comes to Committee, I would reserve my position until I am in full possession of all the relevant facts and arguments for and against.

10/1488/MFUL

Natural England 17/08/10 - Based on the information provided, Natural England has no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of our recommended conditions and the proposal being carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application. The reason for this view is that we consider that the proposal will not have a significant effect on any protected species if the following conditions are adhered to. We advise that the mitigation measures are assured through a planning condition, using all the recommendations set out in the Ecological Impact Assessment by EAD Ecological Consultants dated June 2010. The protection afforded these species is explained in Part IV and Annex A of ODPM Circular 06/2005 to PPS9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation Statutory Obligations and their Impact within the Planning System. Paragraph 98 of the Circular states that the presence of a protected species is a material consideration when a planning authority is considering a development proposal that, if carried out, would be likely to result in harm to the species or its habitat. The applicants should be informed that planning permission, if granted, does not absolve them from complying with the relevant law, including obtaining and complying with the terms and conditions of any licences required as described in Part IV B of the Circular 06/2005.

Environmental Health 27/08/10 - I have considered the application and, in view of the proximity of the development to local residents, I recommend that the following condition is applied to any consent : a. There shall be no burning of any kind on site during construction, demolition or site preparation works. b. No construction or demolition works shall be carried out, or deliveries received, outside of the following hours: 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 1pm on Saturdays, and not at all on Sundays or Public Holidays. c. Dust suppression measures shall be employed as required during construction. Reason: To protect the amenity of local residents from smoke, noise and dust.

Environment Agency 26/08/10 - NO OBJECTIONS

Devon County Archaeologist 17/08/10 - I refer to the above application. The proposed development lies in an area where the HER records a findspot of a Roman coin dating to the latter part of the first century AD and to the north of an area where 13th century pottery was recovered during archaeological excavations in advance of the construction of the Manor Road extension westward. In addition, the HER records several prehistoric flint hand axes being found in this area. Given the potential for groundworks associated with this development to expose and destroy archaeological and artefactual material associated with the possible prehistoric, medieval and later activity in the area, and in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment PPS5 2010. I would advise that any consent your Authority may be minded to issue should carry the

10/1488/MFUL

condition as worded below, based on model Condition 55 as set out in Appendix A of Circular 11/95, whereby: No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out at all times in strict accordance with the approved scheme, or such other details as may be subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason To ensure that an appropriate record is made of archaeological evidence that may be affected by the development I would envisage a suitable scheme of work as taking the form of staged programme of archaeological investigating commencing with the excavation of a series of evaluative trenches to allow the significance of the heritage asset to be determined, allow the impact of the proposed development upon the heritage asset to be understood and the requirement and scope of any further archaeological work to be determined and implemented during the programme of construction work. The results of the fieldwork and any post-excavation analysis undertaken would be presented in an appropriately illustrated and detailed report. I will be happy to discuss this further with you, the applicant or their agent. I can provide the applicant with a Brief setting out the scope of the works required, as well as contact details for archaeological contractors who have recently carried out similar work in Devon.

Other Representations Original Submission:

43 objections:

- Inadequate road width for construction traffic - Increase in vehicle movements and traffic at junction - Use of access by children's centre - Pedestrian safety with traffic increase - Footpath link will lead to crime/vandalism/noise/disturbance/littering - Footpath link unnecessary - No historic public right of way extending through land - Maintenance of informal open space will be ongoing issue (dog mess, litter) - Informal space should be used as play area - Use of informal space as play area with footpath link will cause danger to children exiting onto road - Different road surface will divide community - Noise levels and disruption during construction requires hours restrictions - Maintenance/cleaning of public road and paths - St Clare's Close is designed as cul de sac - Form and number of houses not in keeping with St Clare's Close - Overlooking to adjacent properties - Lack of on street parking due to yellow lines - Yellow lines will need to be extended into development - Parking spaces not in keeping with character of area of traditional front gardens

10/1488/MFUL

- Plot 12 too close to perimeter fence resulting in loss of privacy, fumes from boiler flue - Hardsurfacing of parking areas affecting drainage and tree roots - Petroleum and oil leaks from service vehicles will affect soil quality/trees - Impact on tree health causing risk to people/property - Parking likely to occur on Court Lane to access properties adding to congestion - Interference with existing accesses - Conflict with PPS3 as site is a greenfield site - reference to previous use a school/recreation uses - Conflict with sequential ordering process of Policy H2 - brownfield land has met need - Public open space within the development is inadequate to meet existing and future needs - Scale of development represent over development and urban cramming - Materials not in keeping with adjacent properties and character - Conflict with Policy D1 - massing, height and fenestration will adversely affect neighbouring properties - Removal of Silver Birch tree will emphasise massing of buildings - All trees should be retained together with additional tree planting to screen development - Excessive garage heights - Boundary treatments need to be in keeping with area - Impact of floodlights/noise from Tennis Club on properties fronting Court Lane - No cohesion between properties fronting Court Lane and rest of properties - Properties fronting Court Lane will dominate townscape of Court Lane - Number of inaccuracies identified within supporting documents - Historic public use of land evidenced in Local Plan enquiry so development represents a loss of open space - Impact on existing boundary treatments - Noise/light pollution from parking areas - Insufficient screening from Court Lane - Land should be donated to the town - Wildlife value of site - Space minimises impact of existing developments on Court Lane - Police Liaison comments that crime is low in St Clare's Close is inaccurate

Non planning issues:

- Covenants on existing properties - Devaluing of properties

Amended Submission:

25 objections:

- Removal of open space - Removal of footpath link - Property with driveway underneath not acceptable - problems with delivery lorries and potential damage to property - Overdevelopment of the site - urban cramming, mass, height and visual intrusion

10/1488/MFUL

- Historic use of land as formal and informal open space - Greenfield site should not be developed - Insufficient screening from Court Lane - Lack of recreation space in Seaton - Development of site represents loss of open space - Loss of trees unwarranted - Screening from Tennis Court - Inadequate landscaping/tree planting - Boundary wall to Court Lane not in keeping with local character/vernacular - Materials not in keeping - Impact of garage height - Impact on open character of Court Lane - No change from previous appeal decision - Higher density than St Clare's Close - Coachouse and semi detached not in keeping - Boundary treatments to existing properties should be of sufficient height - Lighting to parking areas - Impact of construction work/traffic - Noise from rumble strips - Layout for plots 1 - 6 appears congested

3 general support

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

02/P2408 Residential Development Of 6 Appeal - 12.04.2003 Dwellings And Associated Open dismissed Space (Outline with all matters reserved apart from siting and means of access)

POLICIES

Devon Structure Plan Policies CO6 (Quality of New Development) TR10 (Strategic Road Network) CO8 (Archaeology) CO16 (Noise Pollution)

East Devon Local Plan Policies S4 (Development Within Built-up Area Boundaries) D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) D4 (Landscape Requirements) D5 (Trees on Development Sites) RE3 (Open Space Provision in New Housing Developments) TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) EN8 (Proposals Affecting Sites Which May be of Archaeological Importance) EN6 (Wildlife Habitats and Features)

10/1488/MFUL

EN15 (Control of Pollution)

Site Location and Description

The application site is a roughly square piece of land laid to rough grass with some overgrown bushes, brambles and trees within the Built Up Area Boundary of Seaton.

To the south is the residential cul de sac of St Clare's Close which comprises detached two storey properties in a mix of render, brick and reconstituted stone under stonewold tiles. At the end of the cul de sac is an area laid to grass through which the access road into the new development would be taken. This new section of road would run in front of Numbers 6 and 7.

To St Clare's Close the site is bounded by a 1.8 - 2 metre high vertical boarded timber fence and there is no public access to the site. There is an existing gate onto St Clare's Close but this is kept locked.

The site has a 'public' frontage onto Court Lane opposite the Tennis Club which is currently formed by a low reconstituted stone wall with brick piers abutting the pavement with the timber fence set to the rear. There are a number of small trees along this frontage and a protected Silver Birch set just behind the fence. There is a further protected tree set towards the western boundary of the site.

The remaining site boundaries are formed by fences abutting the rear gardens of the adjoining properties.

While St Clare's is a more recent development of similar designed and proportioned houses constructed by the current applicants the properties to the east are a varied mix of more traditional properties predominantly constructed from stone and slate. The two properties to the north are bungalows of render and slate construction and the properties to the west are of mixed scale constructed from a mix of brick and render under tile.

Proposed Development

Full planning permission is sought for the construction of 12 dwellings with associated access, garaging and parking.

The scheme has been amended in response to the consultations and officer concerns and proposes a largely two storey development comprising 3 no. detached properties (Plots 6, 11 & 12), 2 no. pairs of semi detached properties (Plots 7, 8, 9 & 10), 1 no. terrace of three properties (Plots 1, 2 & 3) and 2 no. coach house style properties with garaging/access at ground floor and the accommodation at first floor (Plots 4 and 5).

In form, scale, design and materials Plots 6, 11 & 12 are reasonably similar to the existing properties on St Clare's Close and would be accessed from St Clare's Close.

10/1488/MFUL

The remaining plots introduce a more mixed form of development to the site reflecting the mixed character of the area. Materials are proposed as a mix of render, brick and reconstituted stone for the walls and mini stonewold and artificial slates for the roofs (Plots 1 -3).

Plots 1 - 3 would face onto Court Lane with pedestrian access from the front and vehicular access and parking to the rear off St Clare's Close.

The two coach house units are set within the site although they would be partly visible from Court Lane. Plot 4 proposes a smaller one a and half storey development with dormers and Plot 5 provides a drive through access to Plot 4 and the communal parking area.

All of the properties have associated private amenity space and garaging/parking spaces.

Consideration and Assessment

Relevant Planning History

An outline application (02/P2408) for 6 dwellings and an area of open space was refused in 2003 on appeal (the application was appealed for non-determination) with the main issues being, firstly, the effect of the proposal on the character and amenity of the locality taking into account the then proposed designation of the site as Land of Local Amenity Importance under the draft Local Plan and, secondly, the form of the development envisaged.

In relation to the first issue the Inspector considered the evidence produced as to the historic use of the land as informal and formal open space, the proposals of the applicants to fence off the land, demand for recreational space in Seaton and the potential for the land to be brought into public ownership. The Inspector concluded that the site had potential value as informal amenity space within the town and its loss would be damaging to the visual amenity and contribution which it makes as a greenspace to the character of the area.

In relation to the second issue the Inspector accepted that the scheme sought to replicate the existing form of development on St Clare's Close but that the dominance of the road, lack of enclosure to the head of the proposed cul de sac, lack of relationship with the open space and impact on views from Court Lane across the open space were not acceptable or in line with policy aims of improving the quality of development.

As this appeal decision was 8 years ago it will be necessary to consider whether the site/policy circumstances have significantly changed since the decision.

Principle of Development

The land was formally designated as Land of Local Amenity Importance (LLAI) under the draft Local Plan but when considered by the Inspector the policy was generally

10/1488/MFUL

found to be unnecessary on the basis that public recreation land would be protected through being designated as public open space and private land providing a visual amenity would be protected through Policy D1. The policy was retained in the Local Plan with only a handful of sites identified and the current site was one of the sites removed from the designation.

A large number of the objections received refer to the former public use of this land but the land is privately owned, there is no legally established public access/use rights over the land and since 2002/3 it has been securely fenced such that it is not open to public views.

Therefore in strict policy terms, as the site falls within the Built Up Area Boundary of Seaton and is not formally designated as public open space/amenity space, it is suitable for residential development in principle but the acceptability of the development in terms of the loss of the site as an undeveloped space and the form of the development proposed will need to be considered.

Loss of the Site as an Undeveloped Space

As set out above the site is fully enclosed by 1.8 - 2 metre high fencing such that it is not publically visible. While there are a few small trees growing in front of the fence on the Court Lane frontage and the Silver Birch is partly visible, the existing wall and fence facing onto Court Lane are not particularly attractive or sympathetic features. Similarly the fence when viewed from St Clare's Close is also not particularly attractive. The site does however provide a gap between the existing developments either side of the site when viewed from Court Lane and will be visible as a green area to the surrounding properties.

In considering the 2003 appeal the Inspector placed some weight on the historic use of the site as open space/recreation and the aspirations of the Council and local residents for the site to be brought forward as public space. Since then the site has been entirely private, it has not been formally designated as open space or amenity land in the Local Plan and there are no viable plans for the site to be made public. The Inspector considered that the site provided a visual amenity in terms of providing a green space and specifically considered that the site being fenced would be less harmful than the site being developed. However on assessing the visual impact of the site as existing and the contribution it makes to the visual amenity and character of the area it is not considered that it does make a positive contribution. The wall and fence represent a harsh suburban treatment not mitigated by the modest tree planting to the front of the site and it is considered a well conceived development with a suitable boundary treatment would significantly enhance the Court Lane frontage of the site.

As the site is not in public/recreation use the development of the site will not represent a real loss of open space facilities in the town and in accordance with Policy RE3 of the Local Plan contributions towards the provision of open space within the town can be secured to address the open space needs of the development. Comments made about the removal of the open space from the first submission are noted but this has been addressed through increasing the open space contribution required.

10/1488/MFUL

Form of Development Proposed

The main change to the scheme has been the omission of the footpath and open space primarily in response to the comments of the Police Architectural Liaison Officer (discussed in more detail below) but to also enable the retention of the protected Silver Birch through altering the layout of the plots fronting Court Lane. As originally submitted 2 no. pairs of semi detached properties were proposed fronting onto Court Lane but to retain the tree a terrace of three properties is now proposed with semi-private gardens to the sides of the terrace. The front boundary treatment is proposed as a low brick wall with railings to provide views of the semi private garden areas of the properties and the silver birch. A 1.8 metre high brick wall is detailed adjacent to the rear of the properties to enclose the private garden area of these properties with a more appropriate treatment than a timber fence. While a number of objections have been made in reference to the form of the boundary treatments and the lack of cohesion between these properties and the rest of the site, it is a more acceptable design solution for the properties to face onto Court Lane to provide a meaningful frontage. The boundary treatments are considered to be acceptable given the relatively mixed character of the area. The design of the terrace has been negotiated to represent a more traditional form of development than the rest of the development and better quality roofing materials are proposed (artificial slates as opposed the mini stonewold) on these units to be more in keeping with adjacent properties fronting Fore Street.

The other notable change is the provision of Plot 4 in lieu of the unit removed at the front of the site but this is considered to be a reasonable proposal which while being open to views from Court Lane, will appear as a subservient building set to the rear of Plots 1 - 3 and the silver birch. The comments made about the character of the two coach house properties being at odds with the form of the properties in St Clare's Close are noted but it is considered that the development can comfortably accommodate a range of property styles without detriment to its character and appearance of the development or wider area.

The changes secured to Plots 7 - 10 and 12 were in the interests of the amenity of adjacent occupiers and will be discussed in more detail below.

The remaining plots more closely resemble the existing properties on St Clare's Close, notwithstanding the semi detached units, but given that these properties will not be open to public views and are sufficiently in keeping with the existing properties, they are considered to be acceptable. The proposed use of brick has been criticised but brick is present in the area and it is not considered that the use of brick within the development is unacceptable. The proposed mini stonewolds are not generally considered to be a suitable roofing material but these are already in use on the St Clare's Close properties and it is not considered it would be reasonable to resist their use on the plots that are more contained within the site.

Comments have been made about the height of the garages but it is not considered that this height is excessive.

With respect to the previous appeal the features the Inspector specifically identified as causing concern have been largely addressed in that the road is not quite as

10/1488/MFUL

dominant, there is good sense of enclosure created through the proposed layout and the treatment and design of the properties fronting onto Court Lane is felt to represent an improvement over the existing fence and wall. The current scheme also provides for a more mixed form of development in terms of property type and sizes than the refused scheme, which proposed six detached properties matching the existing properties on St Clare's Close.

The specification of the materials is detailed on the plans and are acceptable although samples of the roofing materials for Plots 1 - 3 would need to be conditioned.

Amenity Impact

The relationship between the plots is considered to be acceptable and allows for sufficient mutual amenity.

In terms of the impact on the existing properties the amended plans have repositioned Plot 12 further away from the boundary with 8 and 9 St Clare's Close to reduce the overbearing impact on the rear gardens of these properties and the house type for Plots 7 - 10 has been altered so that the rear first floor windows are smaller to reduce the perception of overlooking. With these amendments the positioning of the plots in relation to the existing properties and the distances to the boundaries is considered sufficient to mitigate adverse levels of overlooking/overbearing impact.

The access into the development will involve a new section of road being provided immediately to the front of 6 and 7 St Clare’s Close but it is not considered that the relationship of these properties to the new road will be so close or unusual as to be significantly harmful to the amenity of these units.

With respect to the comments about the use of the parking areas, boundary treatments and lighting it is not considered that the provision of parking areas and the associated use will adversely affect residential amenity in any way. Existing boundary fences or new walls are detailed on the proposed plans to secure the privacy of adjoining gardens and external lighting can be conditioned to ensure an appropriate low level treatment.

No objections have been received from the Environmental Health Officer in terms of the impact of the proposed development although they have recommended conditions covering the construction works/hours and given the proximity to residential properties this is considered to be reasonable. The comments made about the impact of the construction works are noted but this could not form a refusal of planning permission.

Secure By Design

The original scheme included a footpath link through the site from Court Lane and a small area of informal open space but this was subject to objections from the Police Architectural Liaison Officer and a large number of the objectors. While this was in planning terms seen as a beneficial feature for future occupiers and existing

10/1488/MFUL

occupiers on St Clare’s Close, in light of these objections the footpath link was removed from the scheme and there will be no access through the site from Court Lane.

While the omission of the footpath has now attracted a number of objections to its removal the Police Liaison Architectural officer is now satisfied with the scheme.

Highway Impact

No objections have been received from the Highways Authority in respect of the amended plans and the removal of the footpath link (albeit this was a preferred feature) and they have confirmed that St Clare's Close is adequate to serve as an access to the additional units proposed and the junction geometry and visibility are acceptable. They have however confirmed that the developer will need to enter into an appropriate agreement to fund the variation of the Traffic Regulation Order controlling waiting on the carriageway of St Clare's Close, together with any alterations to signing and road markings and this will be dealt with through the S106 agreement.

The objections on highway safety grounds have been noted but in the absence of technical highway objections it is not considered that these concerns would warrant a refusal of planning permission.

Trees

The scheme has been amended from the original submission to retain the protected Silver Birch to the Court Lane frontage although the other trees within the site will be removed. The Arboricultural Officer confirmed informally that he would be satisfied with the removal of these trees on the basis of their limited value and poor condition. The submitted landscaping scheme secures a number of replacement trees within the rear of the site and suitable shrub planting adjacent to the communal access road.

Other Issues

Natural England has made no objections to the scheme subject to the mitigation recommended in the Ecology report and this will be conditioned together with the archaeology recording required by Devon County Archaeology.

Section 106 Requirements

Affordable housing accrues at developments of 14 units and above and as 12 units are proposed affordable housing is not required on this scheme. It is not considered that the site could reasonably be developed at a higher density.

As the informal open space has been removed with the footpath link the scheme attracts the full open space contributions of £44,320.62 which will be secured through a 106 legal agreement together with education contributions negotiated with Devon County Education (originally identified as £33,5843.80 for Axe Vale Community College) and the required highway measures.

10/1488/MFUL

A draft agreement is currently being prepared and approval is recommended subject to receipt of a satisfactory S106 agreement.

CONCLUSION

The site is considered to be suitable for development and the proposed scheme is considered to be an appropriate form of development in respect of the character and appearance of the site and the amenity of adjacent occupiers. The objections have been considered but for the reasons set out in the report the application is considered to be acceptable. Approval is therefore recommended subject to an appropriate Section 106 legal agreement to secure contributions towards education and open space and off site highway works.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to a Section 106 Agreement to secure:

- Open space contributions - Education contributions - Highway works and the following conditions:

3. No development shall commence until samples of the roofing materials for Plots 1 - 3 have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure an appropriate treatment for these plots and to accord with Policy CO6 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

4. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Ecological Impact Assessment dated June 2010. (Reason - In the interests of protected species which may be present on the site and to accord with Policy EN6 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

5. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a

10/1488/MFUL

written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out at all times in strict accordance with the approved scheme, or such other details as may be subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, (Reason: To ensure that an appropriate record is made of archaeological evidence that may be affected by the development in order to comply with Planning Policy Statement 5 (Planning for the Historic Environment), Policy CO8 (Archaeology) of the Devon Structure Plan, and Policy EN8 (Proposals affecting sites which may potentially be of archaeological imporance) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

6. The landscaping scheme set out in the approved plans shall be carried out in the first planting season after commencement of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - In the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policy CO6 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and D4 (Landscape Requirements) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

7. The proposed estate road, cycleways, footways, footpaths, verges, junctions, street lighting, sewers, drains, retaining walls, service routes, surface water outfall, road maintenance/vehicle overhang margins, embankments, visibility splays, accesses, car parking and street furniture shall be constructed and laid out in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. For this purpose, plans and sections indicating, as appropriate, the design, layout, levels, gradients, materials and method of construction shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. (Reason: To ensure that adequate information is available for the proper consideration of the detailed proposals and to accord with Policy TR10 (Strategic Road Network) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policy TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

8. No part of the development hereby approved shall be commenced until: A) The access road has been laid out, kerbed, drained and constructed up to base course level for the first 20 metres back from its junction with the public highway B) The ironwork has been set to base course level C) A site compound and car park have been constructed to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority (Reason: To ensure that adequate on site facilities are available for all traffic attracted to the site during the construction period, in the interest of the safety of all users of the adjoining public highway and to protect the amenities of the adjoining residents and to accord with Policy TR10 (Strategic Road Network) of

10/1488/MFUL

the Devon Structure Plan and Policy TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

9. The occupation of any dwelling in the development shall not take place until the following works have been carried out to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority: A) The cul-de-sac carriageway including the vehicle turning head shall have been laid out, kerbed, drained and constructed up to and including base course level, the ironwork set to base course level and the sewers, manholes and service crossings completed; B) The cul-de-sac footways and footpaths which provide that dwelling with direct pedestrian routes to an existing highway maintainable at public expense have been constructed up to and including base course level; C) The street lighting for the spine road and cul-de-sac and footpaths has been erected and is operational; D) The car parking and any other vehicular access facility required for the dwelling by this permission has/have been completed; E) The verge and service margin and vehicle crossing on the road frontage of the dwelling have been completed with the highway boundary properly defined; (Reason: To ensure that adequate access and associated facilities are available for the traffic attracted to the site and to accord with Policy TR10 (Strategic Road Network) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policy TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

10. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Tree Survey dated October 2010 and full tree protection measures in accordance with BS 5837 shall be carried out at all times. (Reason - In the interests of the protected tree within the site and the wider amenity of the area and to accord with Policy CO6 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and D5 (Trees on Development Sites) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

11. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no fences, gates or walls shall be erected within the curtilage of any dwellinghouse other than those shown on the approved plans. (Reason - In the interests of the character of the development and to accord with Policy CO6 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

12. No development shall commence until details of any external lighting to the parking areas shown on the approved plans has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - In the interest of the character and appearance of the locality and residential amenity and to accord with Policy CO6 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

10/1488/MFUL

13. No construction or demolition works shall be carried out, or deliveries received, outside of the following hours: 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 1pm on Saturdays, and not at all on Sundays or Public Holidays and dust suppression measures shall be employed as required during construction and there shall be no burning of any kind on site during construction, demolition or site preparation works. (Reason: To protect the amenity of local residents from smoke, noise and dust and to accord with Policy CO16 (Noise Pollution) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and EN15 (Control of Pollution) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

1. IN GRANTING PLANNING PERMISSION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION:

The proposal complies with the following Devon Structure Plan 2001-2016 Policies and the adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011 Policies:

Devon Structure Plan Policies CO6 (Quality of New Development) TR10 (Strategic Road Network) CO8 (Archaeology) CO16 (Noise Pollution)

The proposal does not adversely affect the privacy or amenity of neighbouring properties.

The design and external appearance of the proposal does not harm the visual amenity of the site and surrounding area.

The proposal does no harm to wildlife interest.

The proposal does not harm an identified archaeological site or deposit.

The proposal does not harm or give rise to a perceived threat from important trees on or adjacent to the site.

10/1488/MFUL

The proposal is contained within the defined built-up area boundary of the settlement.

The access to serve the proposal does not prejudice highway safety.

Note to applicant:

The application should be read in conjunction with the associated Section 106 Legal Agreement.

Approved Plans

IL1147/0002-01 Location Plan 26.07.10

11C Amended Plans 07.01.11

21 Amended Plans 07.01.11

10E Amended Plans 07.01.11

12B Amended Plans 07.01.11

13 Amended Plans 07.01.11

14B Amended Plans 07.01.11

15B Amended Plans 07.01.11

16A Amended Plans 07.01.11

17 Amended Plans 07.01.11

18A Amended Plans 07.01.11

19A Amended Plans 07.01.11

20A Amended Plans 07.01.11

22 Combined Plans 07.01.11

4397-L-01 B Amended Plans 12.01.11

140 P04 Amended Plans 12.01.11

DR002 P05 Amended Plans 12.01.11

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

10/1488/MFUL

Committee Date: 08.03.11

SIDMOUTH RURAL 10/2497/FUL & 10/2498/LBC Target Date: (Sidmouth) 16.02.2011

Applicant: Mrs Stephens

Location: 13 Cotford Road, Sidbury

Proposal: Demolition and reconstruction of part of existing boundary wall to enable alterations to vehicular access

CONSULTATIONS

Parish/Town Council 20/01/11 - Support

Sidmouth Rural - Cllr A Reed 02/02/11 - This proposal to realign a part of the LISTED boundary wall to enable safer access and egress at this property has my full support, I trust The Conservation Officer will think like wise.

Conservation

This site was the subject of a previous enquiry 08/3507/ENQ regarding alterations to the boundary wall of no's 13 & 14 Cotford Road which are both listed Grade II and within the Sidbury Conservation Area. The front boundary wall is constructed from stone and it appears that historically there were 2 separate accesses to the cottages and that the current access closest to No 12 Cotford Road may well have been enlarged more recently to allow for vehicles. It is appreciated that this is a difficult corner and that the movement of vehicles is restricted by the lack of visibility in both directions.

Any revised access, be that a central access, as previously suggested or even improving the existing access, as now submitted, would involve further alteration to the wall, possibly including the loss of historic fabric and a splayed access to improve visibility which would alter the original boundary line, see attached map. In addition, the sense of enclosure currently enjoyed by these two cottages which are set back from the main road and which characterise this part of the Conservation area and the setting of the listed buildings would be lost (see Character appraisal p7 & listing description).

The loss of the wall immediately adjacent to No12 Cotford Road would be regrettable and has very little impact on the improvement of the visibility. Any new wall be it in reclaimed and matching materials will still impact on the character of the conservation area and setting of the listed buildings. In addition, it is considered that the alterations will make little change to the visibility splay.

10/2497/FUL & 10/2498/LBC

NB. It appears from looking at old photos, aerial maps etc that the amount of vegetation/ trees within the gardens have been reduced since 2004 and a picket fence or gate also now removed. All of these are eroding the sense of enclosure of this part of the Sidbury Conservation Area.

PROVISIONAL RECOMMENDATION – PROPOSAL UNACCEPTABLE

REASONS FOR REFUSAL: the alterations to the boundary wall would result in the loss of historic fabric, be an alteration to the original boundary line, and in addition the sense of enclosure currently enjoyed by these two cottages which are set back from the main road and which characterise this part of the Conservation area and the setting of the listed buildings would be lost. The proposals detract from the setting of the listed buildings and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Other Representations No third party representations have been received.

PLANNING HISTORY

None Relevant

POLICIES

Devon Structure Plan Policies CO1 (Landscape Character and Local Distinctiveness) CO3 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) CO6 (Quality of New Development) CO7 (Historic Settlements and Buildings)

East Devon Local Plan Policies S4 (Development Within Built-up Area Boundaries) D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) EN1 (Developments Affecting Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) EN11 (Preservation and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) EN9 (Extension, Alteration or Change of use of Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest)

Planning Policy Statement PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment)

Site Location and Description

13 Cotford Road is a grade ll listed building situated within the Sidbury Conservation Area and the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), and is one of a large number of listed buildings in the area. However, this application relates to proposed alterations to the wall forming the curtilage boundary of the property. The wall in question runs parallel to the A375 and creates a sense of enclosure for 13 Cotford Road, as well as the neighbouring property of 14 Cotford Road (which is also a grade ll listed building), as both properties are set back from the road. The wall,

10/2497/FUL & 10/2498/LBC

which is approximately 1.5 metres high, is constructed from chert and is an integral part of the setting of the area due to its appearance and historic fabric. The wall is attached to 15 Cotford Road, which is also a grade ll listed building, and the wall is therefore considered listed in its own right.

Considerations and Assessment.

The proposed works consist of the demolition of a small section of wall on the south- western edge of the wall frontage between the drive entrance and 12 Cotford Road. However, the main element of the proposed works relates to the demolition of part of the wall and its reconstruction to create a visibility splay from the existing driveway. The new wall will be constructed using stone from the demolition as well as new material to match the existing. The height of the wall will remain the same - 0.6 metres. The key areas for consideration in the determination of these applications are as follows:

1) Impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

The Sidbury Conservation Area Appraisal recognises that chert walls are common in the village and form an integral part of the nature of the Conservation Area. Clearly, the wall in question forms a key part of the setting of the listed buildings to which it forms the frontage, as well as being prominent in the setting of the immediate area. Consequently, it is considered that any removal or alteration to elements of the wall would be detrimental to the setting of the conservation area. The Council's Conservation Officer states that proposed works would be regrettable and that, even with the use of reclaimed materials, the proposed works would still be detrimental to the character of the Conservation Area.

2) Impact on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding listed buildings.

The listed wall forms a key element to the setting of the buildings in the area. Especially 13 and 14 Cotford Road, which are set back from the main road with the wall forming the boundary between the front garden area and the road, and providing a sense of enclosure for these buildings. This setting and the sense of enclosure provided by the wall are a key element of the character and appearance of the buildings. Consequently, any alterations to the wall which result in either a loss of the wall or an alteration to the historic boundary formed by the wall, will be detrimental to the character and setting of the listed buildings. Furthermore, although it is proposed to use materials from the demolished wall as well as some new matching material, it is considered that this will still impact upon the setting of the listed buildings as some historic fabric would have been lost. The proposed works will result in the creation of an un-natural curve in the wall, which is not in keeping with the nature of such walls. These views are also shared by the Council's Conservation Officer.

3) Highway Safety.

The primary reason for the proposed works is to improve visibility from the driveway into 13 Cotford Road. However, the submitted plans show that the increase in visibility is negligible. The lack of visibility of the access is largely a result of parking

10/2497/FUL & 10/2498/LBC

on the adjacent highway rather than the wall. The proposed alterations to the wall are unlikely to significantly change this situation. Consequently, although the proposed works would result in a marginal improvement in visibility and safety, the gain is not considered sufficient to justify the detrimental impact of the works on the character of the Conservation Area, the listed wall, and near-by listed buildings.

4) AONB Impact.

The development site is situated within the East Devon AONB but, as the site is within a developed area, the overall impact of the development on the AONB is minimal. Consequently, it cannot be argued that the development has a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the AONB.

CONCLUSION

Considering the comments above, it is clear that the proposed alterations to the boundary wall would result in a loss of historic fabric, and would alter the original boundary line. Additionally, the sense of enclosure enjoyed by the cottages would be further eroded. Consequently, it is considered that the proposals will be detrimental to the setting and character of the listed buildings.

Additionally, it is considered that the proposed works would be harmful to the character and appearance of the Sidbury Conservation Area as well as the setting of the near-by listed buildings, and the listed wall itself. As the proposals will result in a negligible increase in visibility, it is not considered that the harm to the character of the Conservation Area, or to the listed wall, can be justified. Consequently, it is recommended that this application is refused.

RECOMMENDATION

10/2497/FUL - REFUSE for the following reasons:

1. The proposed works would result in the formation of an un-natural curve, and loss of traditional design and materials, to a wall which is of historic value and forms a key element of the character and appearance of the Sidbury Conservation Area, as well as the setting of numerous listed buildings. Consequently, the proposal would neither preserve or enhance the conservation area and would be detrimental to the setting of listed buildings. Therefore, the proposal is contrary to the guidance provided in PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) as well as to Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness), EN9 (Extension, Alteration or Change of Use of Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest) and EN11 (Preservation and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) of the East Devon Local Plan and Policies CO1 (Landscape Character and Local Distinctiveness), CO6 (Quality of New Development) and CO7 (Historic Settlements and Buildings) of the Devon Structure Plan.

2. THE REFUSED PLANS ARE THOSE LISTED BELOW:

10-2429-02 - Proposals 10-2428-03 - Location Plan

10/2497/FUL & 10/2498/LBC

10/2498/LBC - REFUSE for the following reasons:

1. The proposed alterations to the boundary wall would result in a loss of historic fabric and cause the realignment of the original boundary line which, together, are considered detrimental to the character, appearance and integrity of the historic wall. The proposals are, therefore, contrary to the guidance provided in PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) as well as to Policy EN9 (Extension, Alteration or Change of Use of Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest) of the East Devon Local Plan and Policy CO7 (Historic Settlements and Buildings) of the Devon Structure Plan.

2. THE REFUSED PLANS ARE THOSE LISTED BELOW:

10-2429-02 - Proposals. 10-2428-03 - Location Plan.

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

10/2497/FUL & 10/2498/LBC

Committee Date: 08 March 2011

SIDMOUTH RURAL 11/0069/FUL Target Date: (Sidmouth) 08.03.2011

Applicant: Mr C Plowden

Location: Hatway Sidbury

Proposal: Construction of 3 no. dormer windows to facilitate loft conversion.

CONSULTATIONS

Sidmouth Rural - Cllr A Reed 02/02/11 - These proposal to provide additional accommodation in the roof space is well designed, with dormers that cause no overlooking of the neighbour, his dwelling or curtilage.I fully support this enterprise.

Parish/Town Council 20/01/11 - Support

County Highway Authority 24/01/11 - Highway Authority considers there to be no highway implication

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

06/2409/FUL Single storey extension Approval - 01.11.2006 standard time limit

POLICIES

Devon Structure Plan Policies CO3 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) CO6 (Quality of New Development) H10 (Extensions to Dwellings in the Open Countryside)

East Devon Local Plan Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) EN1 (Developments Affecting Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) S5 (Countryside Protection)

11/0069/FUL

Site Location and Description

Hatway is a detached bungalow in a rural setting to the north east of Sidbury. It is in an elevated position part way up a hill overlooking the village. There is one neighbouring property, a two storey dwelling to the west of the site. The property has had a substantial extension in the last five years but the roofspace is presently not used for living accommodation. There are hedges and trees on the boundaries and the property enjoys extensive views across the countryside. The site is within the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Proposed Development

This application seeks approval for the construction of dormer windows on the north west and south east elevations by extending the existing ridgeline. A further dormer would be added to the north east elevation. These additions would facilitate the creation of two bedrooms in the roof space, bringing the total at the property to four. This application is brought before members because the applicant is a member of staff.

Considerations and Assessment

The main issues to consider in this case are:

- The design - The impact on the character and appearance of the AONB - The impact on the amenity of occupiers of adjoining residential properties

The dormer windows, particularly where they would extend the existing ridge, would add to the bulk and interrupt the simple shape of the roof. However, in the context of the dwelling as a whole, the additions would be fairly small and in the main views from the north west and north east of the building would not appear any more prominent in the landscape. Two of the dormers would extend beyond the existing roof hips and would themselves be half-hipped. Although the result would be somewhat inelegant, it is not considered harmful.

Policy H10 of the Local Plan permits extensions to dwellings in the countryside provided the resultant dwelling is not substantially larger than the original dwelling. It is noted that the property has been substantially extended in the past. However, the additions proposed in this application are relatively small and would not result in a dwelling which would be excessively large. Therefore it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with the policy.

The site can be seen from a number of distant vantage points but, due to its position on the side of the hill and adjacent to another dwelling, it is not a prominent or intrusive feature in the landscape. This proposal, although adding to the roof, would not increase the impact of the building by making it more prominent and therefore it is considered that there would be no harm to the AONB.

11/0069/FUL

None of the windows in the roof extensions would look towards the nearest neighbour, Sandlands, to the west of the site and therefore there would be no harm to the amenity of the occupiers of that property.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to the following conditions:

2. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture those of the existing building. (Reason - To ensure that the materials are sympathetic to the character and appearance of the existing building and in order to comply with policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan 1995 - 2011 and CO6 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan 2001 - 2016.)

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

1. IN GRANTING PLANNING PERMISSION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION:

The proposal complies with the following Devon Structure Plan 2001-2016 Policies and the adopted East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011 Policies:

Devon Structure Plan Policies CO3 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) CO6 (Quality of New Development) H10 (Extensions to Dwellings in the Open Countryside)

East Devon Local Plan Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) EN1 (Developments Affecting Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) S5 (Countryside Protection)

The proposal does not adversely affect the privacy or amenity of neighbouring properties.

The design and external appearance of the proposal does not harm the visual amenity of the site and surrounding area.

The proposal does not harm the natural beauty of the landscape designated as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

11/0069/FUL

Approved Plans

Location Plan 11.01.11

A Plan Proposed 11.01.11

B Proposed Elevation 11.01.11

C Proposed Elevation 11.01.11

D Plan Proposed 11.01.11

E Proposed Elevation 11.01.11

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

11/0069/FUL

Committee Date: 8 March 2011

SIDMOUTH SIDFORD 10/2522/OUT Target Date: (Sidmouth) 15.02.2011

Applicant: Mr & Mrs I Barlow

Location: Sidmouth Garden Centre Stowford

Proposal: Outline application proposing the construction of a veterinary centre with all matters reserved.

CONSULTATIONS

Parish/Town Council 20/01/11 - Support

County Highway Authority 26/01/11 - Recommendation:

1. No part of the development hereby approved shall be brought into its intended use until the parking facilities and turning area have been provided and maintained in accordance with details that shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority and retained for that purpose at all times

REASON: To ensure that adequate facilities are available for the traffic attracted to the site

Sidmouth Sidford - Cllr C Drew 07/02/11 - I realise that this is on AONB land, but there is already a retail outlet on this land/joining land. There is no other evidence of land that could accommodate the Vets Surgery with car parking facilities. I feel that it would not be detrimental to the area any more than what is already there.

Sidmouth Sidford - Cllr G Troman 05/01/11 - It concerns me, this site is becoming a business park or another Darts Farm. Let me know if this is permissible.

Environmental Health 11/02/11 - I have assessed the application and I have no comments to make.

East Devon AONB 11/02/11 - Background to comments and site description:

10/2522/OUT

This application site is sited to the north of the A3052 on the edge of Sidmouth. Despite impressions and on-going development to the south, the AONB boundary extends to the south of the A3052 below this site. The site is on rising ground bordered by a hedge line with standards.

Landscape Character Assessment details: LCT No : LCT 3A LCT UPPER FARMED AND WOODED SLOPES

Key Landscape Characteristics of the LCT(s) within which the site is located o Undulating upper valley slopes below the scarp slope o Well treed pastoral farmland, with arable cultivation on lower slopes o Small to medium size fields with irregular boundaries o Deciduous woods and copses, especially on hilltops and upper slopes o Very wide, usually low, species-rich hedges with many hedgerow trees o Dispersed settlement pattern of isolated farms and small villages o Very winding narrow lanes o An intimate and intricate landscape with views out confined by vegetation o Remote and with little 20th century development

Landscape Management Guidelines:

Boundaries: enhance by 1. Encouraging the conservation of hedgerow trees by planting or tagging selected saplings, to maintain and enhance the well-treed character of this type. Field pattern: enhance and restore by 2. Encouraging the retention and management of existing field boundaries to maintain the mixed pattern of small to medium fields. Semi-natural habitats: conserve and enhance by 3. Encouraging management via appropriate grazing regimes to control scrub and maintain unimproved grassland, flushes and wildflower meadows. Woodland: conserve and enhance by 4. Promoting management of small woods to encourage species and age diversity and a diverse ground flora. 5. Encouraging the planting of deciduous edges around conifer plantations and new hedges to link to existing ecological corridors. 6. Encouraging the reversion of conifer plantations to broadleaf woodland. Settlement and development: conserve and enhance by 7. Improving integration of 20th century development within the wider landscape, especially by replicating the distinctive treed earth banks and small woods of this Landscape Character Type.

Recommendations relevant to this site/application: From the brief details provided of the location and design it is recognised that these are for illustration only.

The Landscape Character Assessment for this location refers to a need to improve integration of existing development. It is accepted that the application falls within an existing hard- standing area and will include some landscaping. Screening additional

10/2522/OUT

development at this location, whilst helping to improve integration may not necessarily justify further development.

The viewpoints from which the site is visible although limited, are significant. The most direct view into the site is from a short stretch of the B3176 which is one of the main routes into/out of Sidmouth. Additional development will therefore impact on the location.

It is recognised that this site is adjacent to a developing urban edge of the AONB and the previous appeal cited in the application papers referred to this affecting its „relative impact'. Whilst this may be true, the gradual erosion of the character and natural beauty of the AONB in this location may have long term implications for maintaining the landscape character of the AONB on this northern edge of the town.

I refer to previous comments made with respect to adjacent land to the south at Woolbrook Road.

It should be reinforced that this site forms part of the East Devon AONB and is therefore subject to the planning policies afforded to this national landscape designation. It is sited adjacent to a built/urban environment that has been established within the East Devon AONB as a result of development approved subsequent to the designation of the AONB in 1963.

There is increasing development pressure on the boundaries and locations in and at the edges of the East Devon AONB and the Blackdown Hills AONB. As these challenges arise, careful consideration needs to be given to the duty of all relevant authorities under Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 to have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of this nationally important landscape, whilst seeking to encourage the laudable targets for improved affordable housing allocations and economic development in the District".

The AONB supports socio-economic development which serves to conserve and enhance the landscape character and natural beauty of the area.

East Devon AONB Management Strategy Policy Reference(s) P2. - provide advice and support on planning policy and development to enable the special qualities of the historic and landscape character of the AONB to be protected, conserved and enhanced.

Further Information 1. Landscape Character Assessment & Management Guidelines - eMap, http://emap/general/viewer.htm and open-countryside and then "landscape character" 2. East Devon AONB Management Strategy www.eastdevonaonb.org.uk/publications.asp

Other Representations

2 letters of representation have been received raising the following observations and which object to the proposed development

10/2522/OUT

It appears that the development would in part take place on an unauthorised car park area As an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty the local environment should be preserved Further commercialisation is not required in this location Development would bring further traffic and activity through a difficult junction on the A3052 Other places could accommodate a new practice elsewhere in Sidmouth

A further letter of support from the agent has been received which emphasises the lack of alternative sites for such development in Sidmouth and the mitigation that can be provided in terms of landscape impact.

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

10/0017/VAR Variation of condition no. 2 on Approved 12.02.10 planning permission reference 09/1769/FUL 09/1769/FUL Proposed extension to Approved 27.11.09 existing building 07/2239/FUL Proposed extension, revised Approved 04.10.07 design for existing permission ref 02/P2301 06/2161/FUL Retention of car park and Appeal 25.04.07 storage area (revised Allowed application) 06/0722/FUL Extension of garden centre Appeal 25.04.07 Dismissed

02/P2301 Replacement Shop Approved 18.11.02

01/P2570 New Vehicular Entrance Approved 11.03.02

POLICIES

Devon Structure Plan Policies ST5 (Development Priority 2001 to 2016) ST16 (Local Centres and Rural Areas) CO3 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) CO1 (Landscape Character and Local Distinctiveness)

East Devon Local Plan Policies S5 (Countryside Protection) EN1 (Developments Affecting Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) TA7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness)

10/2522/OUT

Planning Policy Statement PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) PPS7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) PPS4 (Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth)

Site Location and Description

Sidmouth Garden Centre is an existing business located north of the A3052 on the northern fringe of Sidmouth. Positioned on rising land the garden centre currently includes a complex of buildings and structures to the south of the site and a large car park located on the eastern side.

The site has previously been the subject of a number of applications and appeal proceedings which will form a material consideration to this application. These concerned the extension of the car park and the use of rising land to the north of both the car park and the existing garden centre.

Proposed Development

The current application proposes the construction of a new single storey building to be used as a veterinary centre. Although in outline with all matters reserved the submitted parameters indicate a pitched roof building measuring 23.5m wide with a depth of approximately 10m. Cross sections submitted with the application show the building being set into the landscape. Car parking and access would utilise existing facilities currently identified for garden centre use. The red development line currently straddles the hedge bank at the north of the existing car park which defines the boundary between the car park and agricultural land to the rear

Considerations and Assessment

The main issues with the application concern the principle of development, its impact on the character and appearance of the area and the suitability of the highway access.

As already alluded to, the area where the development is proposed is located to the north of the existing garden centre and car park area straddling the boundary between the car park and agricultural land beyond – these elements were clarified through the appeals process in 2007. The only allowances that were made by the Inspector was in granting permission for an area of storage to the immediate north of the centre itself and allowing an extension to the car park. While the car park for the proposed veterinary centre would utilise part of the approved car park area there is conflict between the submitted site plan and the indicative layout and landscaping plan submitted. These indicate that the building would sit towards the front of the red line area with storage or parking to the rear. However this area is outside the boundary of the existing and permitted car park. As the application is in outline with all matters reserved, the applicant would have the ability at reserved matters stage to resite the building anywhere within the red line – that is further to the north than shown on the indicative layout plan and protruding into the small field area to the north.

10/2522/OUT

Notwithstanding the position of the proposed development partly within the existing car park area, development in the countryside, irrespective of any landscape designation is strictly controlled. Unless alternative policies in the Local Plan expressly permit new development or there are material considerations to arrive at a contrary recommendation, development should be resisted. In this instance there is no specific policy that would permit this addition. In terms of other material considerations however the applicant has identified a local need for an alternative location/facility for a veterinary practice owing to accessibility difficulties for the existing set up in the town centre. The applicant has submitted details of three different practices that have shown an interest in taking occupation of the proposed building. While this element is acknowledged and it would be an attractive offer to provide a new practice with easier access, this in itself is not considered sufficient to overcome the policy objection. This is because insufficient evidence has been submitted in respect of both need and to justify the location proposed.

While in principle the proposed development is not considered appropriate, the setting and impact on the character of the area is also important. In this instance the site is within a designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty which needs to be afforded the highest level of landscape protection. This aspect was of significant importance in the assessment of the previous applications by the Inspector. In determining those applications he stated:

“The expanded garden centre incorporating the appeal site has grown into an element which is out of scale with the surrounding grain of the field pattern. Also the development has encroached onto land which is upslope from the existing garden centre. This is seen by the AONB manager to render it more visually conspicuous and I agree”.

“Merely screening a development which would otherwise be unacceptable does not render it acceptable. I consider that the development has resulted in harm to the appearance and essential character of the landscape which is of acknowledged quality and importance”.

Although it is proposed to cut the proposed building into the landscape it is clear from the above statements that while this may reduce the visual impact it does not make it acceptable. The appearance of a physical structure which would have a greater impact than the parking of cars (on part of the site), would be readily apparent both from footpaths to the north of the site (on land higher than the site) but also from the B3176 linking the A3052 (the Bowd) with Bulverton. From this elevated road and with the hedgerows regularly kept low, the view of the site is open and largely unfettered. As such the gradual creep of the garden centre and its associated paraphernalia up the slope on the opposite side of the valley is visually apparent and by reason of its urban appearance within a green and attractive landscape setting considered to significantly harm the area‟s character. Under guidance contained in the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 the sensitivity of such a landscape is recognised and through section 85 a duty is placed on Local Authorities in exercising their functions, to have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the Natural Beauty of the landscape. It is not considered that the proposed development either enhances or preserves the AONB and without other

10/2522/OUT

material planning considerations to support the application, it remains contrary to policy.

Economic benefits associated with the development are noted and the importance of the garden centre to the economy of Sidmouth is recognised. However it is not considered that the objections to this additional facility would prejudice the existing garden centre. There has been no claim or assertion that jobs associated with the current veterinary practice are under threat and as such, it is not considered that the benefits that would be derived outweigh the landscape visual harm already identified.

Access and highway safety have been assessed by the Local Highway Authority. While objections were previously raised under applications considered in 2006/7 this was before the car park was allowed to be expanded by the Inspector‟s decision. The current application does not seek a further expansion of the car park at this time and the number of vehicles that would be generated by the development should be sufficiently limited to not make a material increase when considered against the existing situation. In addition the criteria against which visibility should be assessed have also changed in the intervening time period and resulted in the change in approach over the highway response provided.

CONCLUSION

Despite an understanding that a new veterinary facility is a service that would be appreciated by some in Sidmouth, it is not considered that the need is so great as to set aside strong principle and landscape character polices. In particular development within an AONB should preserve or enhance the areas character and the current scheme being located on a more elevated position above the garden centre fails to do this.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development by reason of its position on an elevated parcel of land which is recognised as both open countryside and an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and which is afforded the highest level of landscape protection, represents sprawling and unjustified development which would harm the natural beauty of the area. In failing to conserve or enhance the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the proposed development is considered contrary to Regulations in the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000; guidance in PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS4 (Planning for Sustainable Economic Development) and PPS7 (Sustainable development in Rural Areas), Policies C01 (Landscape Character and Local Distinctiveness) C03 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty), and C06 (Quality of New Development) of the Devon Structure Plan and Policies S5 (Countryside Protection), EN1 (Development affecting Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) and D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

10/2522/OUT Committee Date: 08 March 2011 TALE VALE No. 10/F0334 Date complaint received: (Broadhembury) (Enforcement) 30.07.10

Land Owner: Mr M Cottrell and Miss M Andrews

Land Occupiers: Mr M Cottrell and Miss M Andrews

Location: James Barn, And Land To The Northeast Kerswell

Alleged Breaches of Erection of feed silos by new chicken houses Planning Control:

SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

Members will be familiar with the location of this site, which is subject of an application on this agenda. The site has been the subject of several recent applications for chicken houses. The site has previously been described as follows:-

The application site is located to the north east of the village of Kerswell, approximately 500 metres from the village centre. The site includes a relatively large, green Dutch barn served by an access track. The land slopes gently downwards towards the village to the southwest. From surrounding roads views into the field where the chicken houses are proposed are limited due to the existing hedge-banks, which are reasonably high on the northern boundary with the road. A view of the field is also available through an existing access onto the road (east). Longer views of the application site field can be achieved from properties, footpaths and bridle ways, distant views beyond the village to the south west as the land levels rise. This is addressed further in the landscape assessment. The field nearest the barn is grassed and in use with horses.

The site is visible from the playground on the edge of the field and to the south. The roof tops of the recently constructed chicken houses are visible beyond James Barn. It is considered the poultry houses to which these application relate will be more visible as the field land levels rise to the east.

BACKGROUND

Attention has been drawn to the development of feed silos alongside the recently erected chicken houses on land northeast of James Barn which did not form part of the planning permission for the associated chicken houses. The locations of the feed silos are marked on the attached site plan.

The matter was discussed with the developers following a site meeting, and a letter was sent to the developers in October 2010, confirming that the feed silos were unauthorised in planning terms and setting out the options of applying retrospectively for planning permission or removing the unauthorised structures. As no response was received from the developers, a second letter was sent from the Enforcement Officer in December 2010.

The developer rang the Enforcement Officer in response to the letter, stating that details of the silos were included in original plans and will send them in with drawings. No such drawings have been received to date.

Having re-checked the submitted drawings, design and access statement, decision notices and associated reports for the recently approved planning applications 10/0951/FUL and 09/0137/FUL, although feed silos were mentioned in both of these applications, and indeed featured on the plan for application 10/0951/FUL, it is clear that the approvals did not include the feed silos and no details of the elevations of the silos were submitted.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

There has been significant planning and enforcement history on this site. The feed silos subject of this report have been erected in conjunction with the three new chicken houses, which were approved under the following planning applications:

App.No: Year Proposal Decision Date

09/0137/FUL 2009 Erection of two free range Approved 05.06.2009 chicken houses and subject to construction of new vehicular conditions (Agricultural) access

10/0951/FUL 2010 Erection of one free-range Approved 29.10.2010 chicken house (House 2) subject to conditions

With regards to planning enforcement investigations still pending: the mobile home to the south of the agricultural building is subject of an enforcement notice but also a current application under consideration (case reference 08/F0253) monitoring of replacement hedgerows (Condition 3 of 09/0137/FUL, case reference 10/F0149) will be checked for compliance in March 2011

CONSULTATIONS

The following parties were asked for their comments relating to the feed silos and whether they would support formal enforcement action. Their responses are detailed below.

Blackdown Hills AONB Partnership

It was clear at the application stage that the development would include feed silos and that in principle they are a necessary element of a chicken farm. In terms of impact on the AONB, the main consideration is the introduction of industrial type structures within views across the site towards and from the AONB. I would suggest that the visual impact of these structures would be greatly reduced if their colour was dark with a matt, non-reflective finish.

EDDC Environment Health

This is an aspect of this planning application which does not need to involve me.

TOWN/PARISH COUNCIL

We suggest the applicant applies for retrospective planning and we are concerned at the continuing use of retrospective planning on this site, but as permitted development we suggest silos are allowed for the three houses he has been granted, and that no further development be allowed on this site until a business case is proved on this development.

WARD MEMBER

Discussed but no comments received.

CURRENT SITUATION

The three chicken houses granted planning permission have been erected, alongside each two feed silos/bins have been erected. These are attached (bolted) to concrete bases. The silos themselves are dark green in colour and are approximately 5 - 6 metres in height.

Photographs are attached that show the silos in context.

PLANNING VIEWPOINT

Structures such as feed silos generally benefit from permitted development rights subject to prior approval for their siting and design. As no such prior approval application was received by this authority, and cannot be submitted respectively, a retrospective full planning application is required to gain authorisation for these structures. Should such an application have been submitted, the main planning considerations are the principle of development and the visual impact/AONB.

- Principle of development Development in the countryside is strictly controlled by planning policies and should be resisted unless there is a proven agricultural need, if it is in accordance with a specific planning policy or other over-riding material planning considerations. In this case, there is an agricultural need, insofar as to be practicable, some form of food storage in relation to the chicken houses is required. The size and design of such storage is considered below.

- Visual impact/nearby AONB The feed silos are significantly higher than the adjacent chicken houses, meaning they are more prominent from distant views. The dark green colour helps to soften the impact of the silos, but the materials (metal) have the ability to reflect light in certain weather conditions, causing a glare that can sometimes be seen from public vantage points from the Blackdown Hills AONB which bounds the site to the east. See attached photographs.

It is noted that the Committee report on applications 10/0948/FUL, 10/0951/FUL and 10/0952/FUL considered that the landscape impact of the cumulative development is not so significant that the Local Planning Authority could reasonably recommend refusal on these grounds. The two chicken houses refused permission had no refusal reason relating to their visual amenity.

Conclusion The consultation comments received have been taken into consideration, and should an application for planning permission for the feed silos have been received, it is likely that they would have been recommended for approval subject to them being painted dark green with a matt finish. As can be seen from the attached photographs, this is already the case. In the circumstances, it is not expedient to take further enforcement action in respect of the feed silos.

HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights confirms that everyone has the right to respect for the private life and their home. Interference with this right by a Council is only authorised where the law allows and where the Council considers that action is necessary in a democratic society for, inter alia, the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Furthermore, any action taken by the Council has to be proportionate in the sense that the Council does not require more than is reasonable or necessary to address the harm caused by the issue.

This issue is not considered to raise any human rights issues.

RECOMMENDATION

That no formal enforcement action be taken in respect of this breach.

List of Background Papers Application files, enforcement investigations, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

Committee Date: 8 March 2011

TALE VALE 10/2383/FUL Target Date: (Broadhembury) 31.01.2011

Applicant: Mr M Cottrell

Location: James Barn Kerswell

Proposal: The retention of existing mobile home for person or persons employed in agriculture

CONSULTATIONS

Blackdown Hills AONB Project Partnership 05/01/11 - Thank you for informing the Blackdown Hills AONB Partnership of the above application. The Blackdown Hills AONB Partnership supports its local planning authorities in the application of their development plan policy framework in order to ensure that development in or affecting the AONB conserves and enhances natural beauty, reserving responses to consultations to cases that will have a significant impact on the purposes of AONB designation. Having looked at the application documentation online, I can confirm that we do not wish to submit any detailed comments on this occasion.

County Highway Authority Highways Standing Advice

Clerk To Broadhembury Parish Council Support It is Broadhembury Parish Council practice to support agricultural employment in the parish. We recommend temporary permission with an agricultural tie until EDDC is satisfied that the business case is made for its permanent retention

Other Representations 3 Letters of representation have been received which object to the current proposal and raise the following comments

Location is inappropriate in terms of siting The mobile home has been in breach of an enforcement notice and should be removed Each application should be taken on its own merits Concern that the addition of only one further unit does not provide sufficient justification to change the decision on the mobile home Proposal fails tests contained within PPS7 Annex A Additional unjustified and unauthorised development has taken place Information submitted from a Veterinary practice is irrelevant

3 Letters of representation have been received which support the current proposal and raise the following comments

10/2383/FUL

A mobile home has been on this site for a number of years Mobile home is out of view of the village and does not cause harm The home is necessary for security reasons and animal welfare issues A three year temporary permission is appropriate to allow the chicken enterprise to run smoothly

PLANNING HISTORY

App.No: Proposal Decision Date

10/0953/FUL Permanent location of portacabin for Approved 12.10.2010 agricultural purposes

10/0952/FUL Erection of one free-range chicken house Refused 12.10.2010 (House 6 ) together with construction of access track

10/0951/FUL Erection of one free-range chicken house Approved 29.10.2010 (House 2 )

10/0948/FUL Erection of one free-range chicken house Refused 12.10.2010 (House 5)

10/0944/FUL Erection of one free-range chicken house Withdrawn 22.06.2010 (House 3 )

10/0315/FUL Retention of horse menage area Approved 18.05.2010

09/1576/FUL Alterations to existing and new access Approved 12.11.2009

09/0137/FUL Erection of two free range chicken houses Approved 05.06.2009 and construction of new vehicular (Agricultural) access and formation of internal access tracks.

06/1227/FUL Retention of extension to agricultural building Approved 03.07.2006

05/2658/FUL Erection of 5 stables and attached hay store Approved 14.03.2006

POLICIES

Devon Structure Plan Policies ST5 (Development Priority 2001 to 2016) CO6 (Quality of New Development)

East Devon Local Plan Policies S5 (Countryside Protection) H8 (Dwellings for Persons Employed in Agriculture or Forestry)

10/2383/FUL

Planning Policy Statement PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) PPS7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas)

Site Location and Description

The application site is located to the north east of the village of Kerswell, approximately 500 metres from the village centre. The site includes a relatively large, green Dutch barn served by an access track and a field to the north east where previously permitted chicken houses have been constructed. The land slopes gently downwards towards the village to the southwest. From surrounding roads there are limited views into higher field where the chicken houses are sited and the lower field where the existing barn is positioned. Longer views of the application site can be achieved from properties, footpaths and bridle ways, and there are distant views beyond the village to the south west as the land levels rise. The field nearest the barn is grassed and in use with horses.

There is a neighbouring residential property adjoining the south easterly corner of the farm enterprise known as Windwhistle Barton.

Proposed Development This application seeks to obtain temporary permission for the retention of a mobile home used for agricultural purposes in conjunction with the permitted poultry rearing business. The mobile home has already been brought onto site and occupied for between 2 to 4 years (there is dispute over the date of the commencement of use) but either way there is no lawful permission currently in place for its siting or use.

The mobile home is located to the south west of the existing barn and accessed from a driveway and turning area forming part of the yard associated with some permitted stables. The yard is connected with the main access track which is taken from the east and links to the track serving the poultry houses.

Considerations and Assessment

The siting and visual impact of the mobile home is acceptable. It is located within a well screened location that is tucked behind the barn. While limited views are obtained across the adjacent BMX track area the structure is read in the context of existing development and is not harmful. There are no distant views that cause harm to the landscape or character and appearance of the area.

However the siting of a mobile home in the countryside and its use for residential occupation needs to be carefully controlled and assessed. Policy is clear in that only where there is a functional justification for residential accommodation and where the business is planned on a sound financial basis and has the likelihood to generate sufficient income for at least one full time worker should such accommodation be considered. In light of the policy issue and the lack of harm on the character of the area, this therefore constitutes the main issue that needs to be considered.

As referenced in the proposal description the mobile home element was initially considered under a previous application (09/0137/FUL) before being withdrawn by

10/2383/FUL

the applicant prior to determination. At that time an independent agricultural appraisal was sought by the Council of both the financial and functional information submitted by the applicant. That recognised that the business was planned on a sound financial basis but owing to the scale of the enterprise, the sophistication of the alarm and monitoring equipment within the houses and the potential availability of existing accommodation within the vicinity of the site, there was no need for a mobile home to be located on site itself. At that time the business was based on two poultry houses but with the intention of increasing to six. The report concluded that only in the event that all six poultry houses were permitted, constructed and stocked would the functional need be met and a mobile home be justified.

Since that time applications for the additional four poultry houses have been received and determined. The Council gave permission for one further unit bringing the total to three. This has now been constructed and stocked and the new accounts submitted with this application demonstrate the additional income that will be generated. While one of the units was withdrawn by the applicants prior to determination, the remaining two units were both refused. This was on the basis of the potential environmental nuisance through pollution issues affecting nearby residential properties – most particularly Windwhistle Barton which borders the field containing the poultry units. Under the assessment of those applications the Environmental Health Team were very clear that development of such units within 400m of a protected dwelling could cause nuisance but be mitigated by practices and procedures, while those within 200m were unacceptable. In this instance the remaining three units would all be within the 200m radius of the protected property and therefore have the potential to cause an unacceptable degree of harm. This is evidenced in the respective reasons for refusal which have been issued in respect of the various applications.

The land holding is limited and the only remaining land within the applicants control lies to the west of the main field and closer to the existing barn. This smaller field which is currently used for horses lies on lower ground and closer to the village of Kerswell. The siting of poultry houses on this land would bring more residential units within the 400m radii and is unlikely to be acceptable. It is therefore unlikely that this site could ever be expanded to the 6 poultry houses originally envisaged by the applicants.

Within the current application the applicants have placed significant weight on the additional stocking numbers that the third unit has resulted in and the importance of being on site and in sight and sound of the units. Sophisticated alarms and closed circuit television do indeed assist the applicants in their welfare standards and ability to monitor the birds in all three units that are currently constructed and stocked and help to reduce incidence of smothering and temperature control failure which can lead to substantial losses amongst the birds. While it is acknowledged that regular checking is required and that alarms and calls can occur at any time during the day or night (particularly in the early stages when the birds are at their youngest and most vulnerable - they arrive at 1 day old) the degree of risk and the level of inconvenience in responding is not so great that it has to be undertaken from on-site.

In the absence of any likelihood of additional poultry units coming forward despite the business model to show that this remains the intention of the applicant, it is not

10/2383/FUL

therefore considered that the mobile home is reasonably required for the purposes of agriculture. As such the current siting which is in the open countryside is considered contrary to policy, and divorced from suitable services and alternative means of public transport.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE for the following reasons:

1. The mobile home the subject of this application represents unjustified development in the countryside where there is insufficient agricultural need to meet the functional tests set out within national planning guidance PPS7. As such the mobile and home the use associated with it are considered contrary to Policy S5 (Countryside Protection) of the East Devon Local Plan.

Further Recommendation

An enforcement Notice has already been served and the applicants are currently in breach of this notice.

The Head of Legal Licensing and Democratic services be authorised to take such legal action as necessary to secure compliance with the enforcement notice and hereby ensure the cessation of the use associated with the mobile home and its removal from the site.

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

10/2383/FUL