APPLICATION REFERENCE NO 09/01753/FUL

Site Address Land at Curlieu Lane, Norton Lindsey,

Development of 12 new affordable dwellings with associated Proposals highway and landscape works

Presenting Case Officer Tamasine Swan Liz Nicholson Officer

Type of Full planning Committee Date 24 February 2010 Application

Warwickshire Rural Applicant Housing Association

Parish Ward Member(s) Councillor Horner Council Referral to Planning and No Previous 25 November 2009 Regulation Committee Committee

 Erection of 12 affordable dwellings on an exception site on the edge of Norton Lindsey village - Norton Lindsey is within District Council’s area though the site is within Claverdon Parish  Development to consist of the following;  4 x 2 bed semi-detached bungalows  4 x 2 bed semi-detached houses Description of  4 x 3 bed semi-detached houses Proposals  Dwellings to be of principally brick construction with the use of render on some of the units. All units would have plain clay tiles on the roof. Chimneys form part of the design of the 2 storey units and all properties have timber casement windows.  Two parking spaces for each dwelling  Warwickshire Rural Housing Association to manage the development  Density equivalent to approx 37 dwellings per hectare Reason for Referral  Scale of Development to Committee  Green Belt  Edge of village location Planning  Public footpath skirts the northern edge of the site Constraints  Mature trees along the eastern roadside boundary  Change in levels  Principle of development  Green Belt  Layout & Design  Highway safety & parking Key Issues  Impact on neighbours’ amenities  Landscaping & ecology  Occupancy Controls and property tenure  Planning Obligations  Other issues

Recommendation  GRANT subject to legal agreement

SUMMARY OF POLICY AND BACKGROUND PAPERS

POLICY

The Development Plan

The West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy

CF2 Housing Beyond the Major Urban Areas CF3 Levels and Distribution of Housing Development CF5 Affordable Housing and Mixed Communities CF6 Managing Housing Land Provision RR2 The Rural Regeneration Zone QE1 Conserving and enhancing the environment QE3 Creating a high quality built environment for all

Warwickshire Structure Plan 1996 - 2011 (Saved Policies)

None relevant to this application.

Stratford-on-Avon District Local Plan Review 1996-2011 (Saved Policies)

STR.1 Settlement Hierarchy STR.2 New Housing Provision STR.2B Density STR.4 Previously developed land COM.1 Local Choice COM.4 Open Space COM.5 Open Space COM.13 Affordable Housing COM.14 Mix of Dwelling Types COM.15 Accessible Housing PR.1 Landscape and Settlement Character PR.2 Green Belt EF.6 Nature Conservation and Geology EF.7A Protected Species DEV.1 Layout and Design DEV.2 Landscaping DEV.3 Amenity Space DEV.4 Access DEV.5 Car Parking DEV.7 Drainage DEV.8 Energy Conservation DEV.9 Access for People with Disabilities DEV.10 Crime Prevention CTY.1 Control over Development CTY.5 Housing Exception Schemes IMP.1 Supporting Information IMP.2 Supplementary Planning Guidance IMP.4 Infrastructure Provision

Other Material Considerations

Central Government Guidance

PPS1 Creating Sustainable Communities PPG2 Green Belts PPS3 Housing PPS7 Sustainable Development in Rural Areas PPS9 Nature Conservation PPG13 Transport Circular 11/95 Conditions Circular 5/05 Planning Obligations

Supplementary Planning Guidance and Supplementary Planning Documents

Stratford on Avon District Design Guide Car and Cycle Parking Standards for Stratford on Avon District (April 2007) Provision of Open Space (March 2005) & Open Space Audit (March 2005) Sustainable Low Carbon Buildings (October 2007) Meeting Housing Needs (July 2008) Managing Housing Supply (November 2006)

Other Documents

A Detailed Investigation into the Housing Need of Claverdon (December 2002 Wolverton Housing Needs Survey (July 2005) A Detailed Investigation into the Housing Needs of Norton Lindsey (April 2005) Claverdon Village Design Statement (September 1998) Local Choice ‘Meeting Housing Needs of Rural Communities’ (April 2007) Stratford on Avon District Council - Planning Obligations (September 2005) Stratford on Avon District Council – Corporate Strategy 2009-2012 Stratford on Avon District Council – Sustainable Community Strategy

Other Legislation

Human Rights Act 1998 Disability Discrimination Act 1995

REPRESENTATIONS

Claverdon Parish Council

Support for the following planning reasons:

• It is sited adjacent to an earlier 10 house affordable housing development, is something of a natural extension of that facility and blends well with the surroundings. • Surveys have shown a need for further affordable housing in Claverdon, Wolverton and Norton Lindsey. • Some concerns have been expressed regarding speed and volume of traffic along Curlieu Lane but the County Highway Authority has not raised objection. • The Parish Council considers the development to be of a style well suited to the area which matches well with the existing development. • Some concern has been expressed that since the time of the previous withdrawn Planning Application there has been a change introduced, in that all of the houses are now nominated for rental occupation only, with none on the basis of shared ownership. This limits the ability of a growing family, in an existing shared ownership house, to move up to a larger unit, if there are to be none of a similar arrangement available. Whilst it is felt that this should not be used as a reason to prevent approval of the application, it is an issue which ought to be addressed, with a view to including a proportion of shared ownership units in the scheme. (11.10.2009)

Norton Lindsey Parish Council (adjoining Parish)

Norton Lindsey Parish Council object to the current application because:

• The proposals now do not make provision for any shared ownership properties, in spite of there being a requirement. The numbers of shared ownership properties has successively been reduced during the consultation phase from 50% to four, then two and finally none at all. Opportunities should be capable of being made available if people can obtain the necessary mortgage. This Council is aware of one case that desperately needs a three bedroom property for shared ownership. The Council has been given to understand that when houses are designated as rented properties, they cannot be subsequently upgraded to Shared Ownership. Can you please confirm what the policy is? • The Council are concerned that the Section 106 agreement has not yet been signed in the format as agreed with the WRHA. This leaves the Council concerned that the final agreement will not restrict the proposed development to meet local needs as was the declared intention. This Council has bitter experience where so called affordable housing for local needs was not eventually used for that purpose. • During the planning of this site, the houses have been moved nearest to Curlieu Lane. If the bungalows were located adjacent to the hedge, this would reduce the impact and scale of the development on the overall landscape of the village. (21.10.2009)

Further comments received from Norton Lindsey Parish Council as follows: • The Parish Council have established that five Building Societies have confirmed that they are prepared to provide funding for shared ownership - typically deposits of 10-15% of the mortgage element are required. (13.11.2009).

Wolverton Parish Council (adjoining Parish)

Comment as follows: • Accept the layout presented in this application • Support the Deed of Agreement (106 notice) with respect to the Stratford Local Connection and Stratford Order of Preference • Note in the S106 the Warwick Connection and Order of Preference for Warwick remain unresolved as of 07.10.09 – these should be resolved before permission is granted. • A mix of rented and shared ownership should be provided – agree that any move to full equity would remove properties from this scheme, however we believe that over the past four years the developers have incrementally moved the goal posts to a point where this development has no likelihood of any shared ownership properties. We have been led to believe this is due to the current funding arrangements and the lack of mortgages for this kind or tenure. • Request that the Committee Members question the applicants on short and long term tenure flexibility. In particular why some properties could not be shared ownership if a demand presented itself. • Support a flexible mix of tenure as a condition of granting planning approval. (14.10.2009)

Ward Members

Councillor Horner

No response received.

Third Party Representations

16 letters have been received from third parties raising the following points of concern regarding the development: • Concern about loss of historic brick kiln within the field. • Not a sustainable location – village has no shop or employment opportunities and a very poor bus service and occupants will be reliant on cars. • Tenure split should include primarily shared ownership units with fewer rented units. • Scale of development inappropriate in a small village. • Further traffic from 12 dwellings inappropriate on a small country lane outside speed limit where vehicles already speed. • Design and layout will create detached community. • Development should not be accessed via a new road from Curlieu Lane. • Greenfield land should not be used for building. • Parish Council survey showed no interest in having housing on this site. • Development will harm character and appearance of the countryside and this rural village. • Concern re impact on wildlife, flora and fauna. • Houses should be built in Claverdon village if they are to meet the needs of that Parish. No demand in Norton Lindsey. • Does this comply with planning policy? • Proposal does not have the support of the local community. • Norton Lindsey Parish Council is not representing the views of the local community in supporting the scheme. • Concern re: visibility at junction of new access road. • Access and footpath design out of keeping with rural character. • Need updated housing needs assessments. • Presence of ransom strip at end of Morgan Close cul de sac should not justify creation of a further road further up the lane.

A further letter has been received expressing strong support for the development on the following grounds:

• Additional affordable housing in this area is long overdue though more shared ownership units should be provided. • Don’t agree with others that scale of development would materially increase traffic – provision of pavement and extension of speed limit should make road safer.

A general comment contained in a letter was that, in the event of permission being granted, it should be ensured that occupants have a local connection.

Applicant’s Comments

The applicant has submitted a Design and Access Statement which is summarised as follows: • The scheme is for 12 affordable houses and is submitted under policy CTY.5 of the Local Plan to meet an identified local need. • A need for 11 units in Claverdon Parish, 3 in Norton Lindsey and 1 in Wolverton has been identified – the development will provide 12 of the 15 units identified as being required. • The site sits comfortably within the bounds of Norton Lindsey and would appear as a natural extension of Morgan Close which was developed in a similar way. • The village contains a mix of housing styles though traditional architectural features recur. The development is arranged in a small Close, similar to others in the village, and the footpath is to be extended into the new development to ensure the residents make good use of the facilities available. The 30mph speed limit would also be extended to beyond the new site access. • Access to the site direct from Morgan Close is not possible as the land beyond the boundary is all in private ownership – a separate access to the site from Curlieu Lane has therefore had to be utilised. • There have been problems with potential buyers obtaining shared ownership mortgages in the current climate and the tenure of the properties is therefore not fixed at this time. • The units would be allocated to people on the Council’s Housing Register as per SDC’s Local Connections Criteria and controlled via a S106 Agreement. • 9 units would meet the needs of Claverdon and Wolverton and would be allocated via Stratford District Council, the remaining 3 units would meet the needs of Norton Lindsey and would be controlled by (the site straddles the District boundary). • All units accord with the Lifetime Homes Standards and the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3. An air source heat pump will also be installed for each property, together with a heat recovery system from the electrically-powered ventilation system linked to the domestic hot water system. The dwellings also meet the Secure by Design accreditation. • 10 of the units would have 2 car parking spaces each and the remaining 2 bungalows would have a single space. 2 visitor parking spaces would also be provided. • The significant step in levels across the site will be regarded to avoid some buildings sitting significantly higher than their neighbours. This will also allow a more level access to the site to be provided. No trees or hedges will be affected by the regarding. • Key landscape features; the hedgerows to the western and eastern boundaries, mature trees and the open sloping land to the north, will be retained. Some pruning back will be required but the development has been planned so as to avoid tree roots and a Management Plan has been drawn up to ensure ongoing management of the undeveloped land to the north. • The houses would be of brick and render construction under a 45 degree pitch tile roof. Eaves, verge and window head and cill details have also been included as have chimneys. Porches are included as a requirement of Lifetime Homes. • A density of 37 units per hectare is achieved. • The existing dilapidated brick kiln in the centre of the site has been photographed as required by Warwickshire Museum so that a formal record of this building is retained. • Extensive public consultation exercises have been held with Claverdon, Wolverton and Norton Lindsey Parishes over the past 2 years.

Phase 1 Habitat Surveys of bats, badgers and reptiles have all been submitted and considered by the County Ecologist. An arboricultural survey and report has also been provided.

Further correspondence from the applicant has been received in response to comments made by Norton Lindsey Parish Council. This is summarised as follows:

The S106 imposes a restriction that the homes would have to be affordable for local people in perpetuity, i.e the purchaser of a shared ownership property would not be permitted to own more than an 80% stake in the property and the homes would have to be ring fenced to local people in the first instance. The risks associated with these restrictions has resulted in virtually all restricted shared ownership mortgages being withdrawn.

I contacted 6 mortgage lenders - none were prepared to lend on the basis of the S106 restriction that the properties must be ring fenced to purchasers demonstrating local connection criteria as set out in the S106. Nationwide do currently lend but it is understood that this too could be withdrawn. It may be that the lenders Norton Lindsey PC have highlighted will only lend on non- restricted shared ownership homes without restrictions imposed by a S106. If mortgage lending for restricted staircase shared ownership finance recovered we would not hesitate to provide shared ownership units. Costs are very tight for rural affordable housing schemes and we therefore have to mitigate risks. If we are unable to realise the capital from disposing shared ownership property the financial position of the Housing Association could be compromised. We would not want to risk leaving the community with homes that we could not occupy. The likely additional costs of providing an access via Morgan Close would be £60,000 which would make the scheme unviable. There would also be potential objections from residents associated with additional vehicle movements.

A further piece of correspondence has been received from the applicant as follows: I can confirm that Warwickshire Rural Housing Association is willing to pay S106 contributions via our development agent, Jephson Housing Association as follows:

£43,690 (libraries & Education) and £15,000 highways (material to our development). I can confirm that the payments will be made as under option a) in full prior to the occupation of 50% of the dwellings, as outlined by Warwickshire County Council . (23.02.2010).

CONSULTATIONS

Development and Enabling Officer

The proposed development represents a rural ‘exception’ scheme and falls to be considered against the provisions of Policy CTY.5. All the proposed dwellings would be built for social rent and it therefore represents a 100% affordable housing scheme. I am satisfied with the tenure profile currently proposed. The draft S.106 Agreement does allow scope for the provision of Shared Ownership accommodation, should this be considered appropriate and variable at a later date.

Following withdrawal of the previous application, I understand further consultations with the three Parish Councils concerned have taken place. Taking into account these further consultations and the submissions in the Supporting Statement, and subject to any further comments from the Parish Councils concerned, I am now broadly satisfied that the requirements of criterion (c) of Policy CTY.5 are met.

I am fully satisfied that the proposal represents a bona fide rural ‘exception’ scheme, satisfies relevant planning policy requirements in this respect, and enjoys the support of the local community.

The proposal should make a valuable contribution to meeting identified local housing needs. Subject to completion of a S.106 Agreement to ensure that the housing is occupied only be households with a housing need and local connections I am satisfied that all relevant requirements of Policies CTY.5 and COM.13 are capable of being met.

It follows from my consideration of the justification for the proposal within the framework of the rural ‘exception’ initiative that I am also satisfied with the range and mix of dwelling types proposed.

I am also satisfied with the strategic housing-related aspects of the proposal in terms of its accessibility, versatility and sustainability, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions where necessary.

Therefore, subject to the completion of the necessary S.106 Agreement, I strongly support this application. (25.09.2009).

Further comments (summarised) in response to concerns from Norton Lindsey Parish Council regarding the tenure profile proposed:

The tenure profile of the proposed scheme is clearly material to this Authority's consideration of the application, because it affects the ability of the scheme to satisfy criteria (b) and (d) of Policy CTY.5. However the reasons for proposing a 100% social rented tenure profile are explained in the Supporting Statement. The reality is that current housing market conditions are such that inclusion of a requirement to provide a proportion of Shared Ownership accommodation is likely to present an unacceptable risk to the viability of the scheme such as to prevent its delivery as a whole. However, a draft S.106 Agreement has been tabled which could provide flexibility to allow for an alternative tenure profile, should housing market conditions (and, in particular, the availability of mortgage finance on reasonable terms) significantly change. I must leave WRHA to comment directly on the legal scope for subsequently changing social rented properties to Shared Ownership accommodation.

I remain satisfied that the proposed S106 Agreement would regulate the occupancy of the proposed homes in such a way as to effectively meet the local needs which have been identified.

I continue to support the application. (16.10.2009).

Landscape Officer

I have responded to earlier development proposals both formally and informally since 4 February 2009. The current application addresses those concerns raised. I raise no objection to this proposal subject to the imposition of conditions. (20.10.2009).

Severn Trent Water

No objection subject to condition (12.10.2009)

Urban Designer

The applicant has taken on board the majority of the issues raised as part of the assessment of the withdrawn application 08/03298/FUL. I have the following comments:

• I note that the Forestry and Landscape Officer raises no objection to the proposal in its current form. A significant amount of the previous concerns were landscape related and have been addressed. • As mentioned in my previous comments regarding the design of the house units, the principle of a porch to the frontage may be acceptable however the design of porches within the District should be approached with caution (see Stratford-on-Avon District Design Guide, 9.2.28). In my opinion, the linked porches with small square windows to the frontage serve to detract from the appearance of these rural cottages and I would advise that a porch can be included but should fit in with the guidelines of the District Design Guide. • Should further floor space be needed following on from a flat- fronted approach, a projecting wing to the rear would be the preferred solution. • As raised during discussions regarding the development of this site, boundary treatments will need to be carefully considered in order to protect the rural character of the site. • Series of conditions recommended. (22.10.2009)

WCC - Environment and Economy

Request for contributions of £1,566 for libraries and £42,124 for primary and secondary education provision. (18.11.09).

"Appropriate and Affordable Housing" is a priority within Warwickshire's new Sustainable Community Strategy, which we as a council are committed to supporting. The County Council is required to maintain an adequate number of school places, including a margin of surplus places. The County Council considers the need for additional school places from all new developments and submits requests for contributions where there are insufficient places available. Contributions are, if required, requested from all residential development proposals that include 11 or more dwellings of two or more bedrooms (excluding two bedroom dwellings that are designed and built specifically for use by the elderly) and indeed there is some evidence to show that in cases of two bedrooms or more there are higher "child yields" from social housing than market homes. Planning contributions are spent on capital investment for providing additional school capacity in the County. The Housing Corporation advice regarding planning and planning contribution states that; "Planning authorities may make a planning consent conditional upon entering into an agreement under S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Planning contributions may for example consist of... provision of community facilities and commuted sums. Items resulting from s106 planning contributions are eligible for SHG to the extent to which they offset the S106 fettered land value ... " Therefore, it appears that contributions towards schools and libraries can be included as an legitimate part of costs for a scheme and included in funding applications to the Housing Corporation. Therefore, the County Council applies planning contributions in the same way to Affordable Housing as to Market Housing. (24.11.2009).

Further comments regarding the timing of developer contributions have also been received as follows:

Warwickshire Rural Housing Association has agreed to our requested contributions for the above sites but has asked if payment can be made after the final occupation.

I can confirm that we anticipate that additional places for pupils from these developments could be necessary following the occupation of the first unit and therefore we normally seek to obtain Education Contributions as early as possible. Having said this the latest that we currently consider accepting the payment of contributions is either:- a) Payment in full prior to the occupation of 50% of the dwellings, or b) Payment of 50% prior to the occupation of one-third of the dwellings and payment of the final 50% prior to the occupation of two-thirds of the dwellings.

In this instance I would be prepared to accept either of these arrangements. (22.02.2010).

WCC – Highways

No objection subject to conditions and notes. (09.10.2009)

WCC Archaeology

No representations (13.11.09)

WCC Museum (Ecology)

No objection subject to conditions and notes. (12.10.2009)

Warwickshire Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor

No objection (02.10.2009)

Warwick District Council

No objection. Confirm that a linked application for the first part of the site access and the pavement has been supported by the Planning Committee subject to the completion of a Legal Agreement. (22.10.2009).

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

08/03298/FUL Development of 12 new affordable Withdrawn dwellings with associated highway and 10.02.2009 landscape works

ASSESSMENT OF THE KEY ISSUES

Principle of development

The main thrust of strategic policies in the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) and the Local Plan Review is to direct most new development to the largest settlements in the District, as the most sustainable locations. Policy COM.1 of the Local Plan Review does, however, provide an opportunity for Local Centre Villages to meet local needs for small-scale development. It is expected that such needs would normally be identified through the development and adoption of a Parish Plan. Policy CTY.5 allows for the possibility of affordable dwellings on ‘exception’ sites in smaller villages which would normally be resisted for residential development.

The application site lies within the Parish of Claverdon which, by virtue of having a community shop, school and regular public transport, is categorised as a Local Centre Village in the settlement hierarchy detailed in Policy STR.1 of the Local Plan. The site is, however, several miles from Claverdon village and is instead located on the edge of Norton Lindsey, a settlement within Warwick District Council’s jurisdiction. The boundary of Wolverton Parish is also close by.

Norton Lindsey does not have a village shop so would not fall within Stratford’s definition of a Local Centre Village if it fell within the Stratford District Council area. I do not therefore feel it is appropriate for this application to be assessed under policy COM.1 of the Local Plan. The provisions of policy CTY.5 should, I believe, apply instead.

Claverdon, Norton Lindsey and Wolverton have all carried out Housing Needs Surveys (in December 2002, April 2005 and July 2005 respectively). The results have been accepted by the District Council as valid. These surveys indicated a local housing need for 11 dwellings within Claverdon, 3 dwellings within Norton Lindsey and 1 dwelling to meet the needs of Wolverton. The application proposes to erect 12 new affordable housing units to be split between the 3 Parishes based on their respective needs. 8 units would be allocated to people with a Claverdon connection, 3 to those with a link to Norton Lindsey and 1 to a family/individual with a Wolverton connection. A mix of dwelling sizes and styles is proposed, again based on the requirements set out in the surveys. The Development and Enabling Officer has confirmed that the proposed dwellings would meet an identified local housing need.

The Managing Housing Supply SPD on the Housing Moratorium states at paragraph 4.1 that housing proposals put forward under Policy CTY.5 ‘Housing Exception Schemes’ are exempt from the moratorium.

It should also be noted that the provision of affordable housing is a key aim of both the Corporate Strategy and sustainable Community Strategy.

I consider that in light of this evidence, the applicant has submitted a comprehensive and robust justification for this proposal in the context of Policy CTY.5 and that it is acceptable in principle.

Green Belt

The site is located within the West Midlands Green Belt. Small-scale housing schemes are listed in policy PR.2 of the Local Plan Review as being appropriate development within the Green Belt where they are within or adjacent to an existing settlement and are specifically intended to meet an identified local need in accordance with policy COM.1 or CTY.5 of the Plan. The application is on the edge of Norton Lindsey village and has been submitted as a development under policy CTY.5. I am therefore satisfied that criterion (c) of policy PR.2 is met and that the development is appropriate in Green Belt terms.

Layout & Design

Policy DEV.1 of the Local Plan Review states that development should be appropriate and sympathetic in scale, design, materials, layout and siting, both in itself and in relation to adjoining buildings, trees and important open spaces and views.

The layout and design have evolved following extensive pre-application discussions. The layout of an L-shaped cul de sac has sought to retain key landscape features of the site and thus minimise the visual impact of the development on its surroundings. The roadside hedge and trees, together with the hedge along the western field boundary, have been largely retained as has a large sloping area of land on the northern side of the site close to a public footpath. The houses would generally align with those in Morgan Close to the south which I consider is visually appropriate.

A number of local residents have objected to the formation of a new access junction onto Curlieu Lane, instead favouring the extension of Morgan Close into the application site. Morgan Close was originally built as a Housing Association development though several of the properties, and significantly the strip of land between Morgan Close and the current application site, are now in private ownership. The owners are not apparently willing to make this land available to enable the construction of an access through to the application site. I am satisfied that the creation of an access via Morgan Close is not a feasible option in this case and that the formation of a separate access as proposed is acceptable in layout terms.

The site currently includes a significant change in levels with the central section of the land lying significantly lower than the land to both the north and south. It is proposed to re-grade the site to provide a more gentle gradient from south to north which should help to reduce the visual impact of the dwellings closest to Morgan Close (currently the highest part of the site) and enable a more level gradient along the site access. I am satisfied that this is an appropriate and necessary part of the proposed development.

A mixture of two storey dwellings and bungalows is proposed. The properties are all shown as being of brick and tile construction with some small areas of render on the houses. Traditional eaves, verge and chimney details have been incorporated, as has brick detailing above and below window openings. Whilst the Urban Design Officer has expressed some concern regarding the design of the proposed porches on the front elevation of the two storey dwellings, I do not feel that this is sufficiently harmful to justify a formal objection on design grounds. The porches enable the ground floor of the dwellings to accord with the Lifetime Homes Standards, notably by providing a downstairs WC with provision for the installation of a shower in the future if required.

The ridge heights of the dwellings vary from 5.7m (bungalow units) to 8.2m (two storey dwellings). The bungalows would be the most visible dwellings from the proposed access road junction and their lower height should help to reduce the physical impact of the development from this key public viewpoint. I consider this variation in the building height acceptable particularly as it allows for a mix of dwellings types to be provided.

Overall I consider that the design and layout of the proposed development and the resultant density of approximately 37 dwellings per hectare is acceptable and will integrate well with the surrounding streetscene.

Highway safety & parking

The new access road is designed to be 5.5m wide with a new pavement linking through to the existing pavement at the junction of Morgan Close. Visibility splays of 2.4 x 120m are to be provided in both directions. The access road will be adoptable for the majority of its length with the end element being a private roadway. Ten of the units would have 2 parking spaces per dwelling with 2 of the bungalows having a single parking space. Two cycle parking spaces are also proposed per dwelling. Two further visitor car parking spaces are also proposed. The design of the carriageway, visibility standards and level of parking provision are all in accordance with adopted standards. The existing 30mph speed limit, which currently ends just to the north of Morgan Close, is proposed to be moved further to the north to bring the new site access within the speed limited area. A contribution of £15,000 to fund consultation on and potential implementation of a scheme for the repositioning of the speed limit has been requested by the Highway Authority. This can be secured by way of a S106 Agreement.

Part of the access and the roadside footpath are within the administrative boundary of Warwick District Council and a separate planning application for the highway works within their area was submitted to Warwick District Council. Warwick District Council’s Planning Committee resolved on 28 October to grant planning permission for these works subject to the completion of a S106 Agreement requiring, amongst other things, payment of the monies referred to above to fund the relocation of the speed limit. A joint S106 involving both District Councils is currently being drafted.

The County Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposed development and I therefore consider this element of the application to be acceptable subject to appropriate conditions and the completion of the S106 Agreement.

Impact on neighbours’ amenities

There would be a gap of 8 – 9 metres between the side of the two dwellings at the end of the proposed cul de sac and the 2 properties at the northern end of Morgan Close. There would be a side-to-side relationship between these adjacent dwellings though the houses on the western side of the application site would stand slightly further forward than the adjacent house in Morgan Close. I am satisfied that the position of the proposed dwellings would not cause overlooking or an overbearing impact on neighbouring dwellings in Morgan Close.

Other properties along Curlieu Lane are significantly further away and would be separated from the development by existing mature landscaping that is proposed to be retained. There should not, therefore, be any harm to the amenity of residents of these properties.

Landscaping & Ecology

As referred to in the Design and Layout section above, existing mature trees and hedgerows form a key characteristic of the site, particularly those along the roadside boundary. Detailed discussions between Planning Officers and the applicant have ensured that the majority of this mature landscape screen is proposed to be retained. The new dwellings and the routes of services avoid encroachment into the root protection zones of the roadside trees and the trees and hedge along the road are to be excluded from the private gardens of the new properties to prevent ad hoc removal of landscape planting. The maintenance of the landscape features is to form part of a wider Landscape Management Plan (LMP) that can be secured as part of a S106 Agreement.

The LMP will also cover the ongoing maintenance of the sloping land on the northern side of the site which is to remain undeveloped. This adjoins a public footpath which runs along the northern edge of the site and from where clear views of the whole site can be obtained. The slope of the land makes it unsuitable for a formal area of outdoor amenity space and it is therefore proposed as an informal recreational / wildlife area. It is proposed to erect a post and rail fence between this amenity area and the new site access road with a new hedgerow also proposed along this southern boundary. This is an acceptable treatment of this boundary in my view. In addition, I consider a new fence should be erected between the amenity area and the public footpath. There is currently an old electric fence in this location which presumably dates from the time when the field was used for the grazing of animals. This is not appropriate in close proximity to a well used public footpath and needs to be replaced with post and rail fencing or other sympathetic means of enclosure. This can be dealt with as part of the landscaping scheme for the site.

Several ecological surveys have been submitted and considered by the County Ecologist. No objections are raised subject to appropriate conditions.

Occupancy Controls and Property Tenure

The development seeks to meet the affordable housing needs of three separate Parishes located within two separate Local Authority areas. Lengthy negotiations have taken place to ensure that the proportional split of units between the three Parishes is retained in the long term. The S106 Agreement has been drafted to include the following nomination formula for future occupants of the properties:

• Stratford District Council shall be entitled to nominate tenants for 9 of the 12 units in respect of first occupation of such a unit whether as a Social rented or an Intermediate (Shared Ownership) property. • Warwick District Council shall be entitled to nominate tenants for the remaining 3 units. • In relation to second and subsequent purchasers / occupiers Stratford District Council shall be entitled to nominate tenants or occupiers for the first three vacancies and Warwick District Council the fourth vacancy and this three to one nomination entitlement shall repeat perpetually. • Where either District Council is unable to nominate an individual for a vacancy, such vacancy shall then be offered to the other Council for nomination purposes.

This should ensure that 3 out of every 4 properties are first made available to individuals with a Claverdon or Wolverton connection.

I am satisfied that this formula represents an appropriate split between Stratford and Warwick Districts based on the local needs data supplied as part of the application.

A number of letters have been received from third parties concerning the proposed tenure of the new dwellings. The withdrawn application in 2008 proposed that the majority of units would be shared ownership properties whereas the current expectation is that primarily social rented dwellings are now likely to be provided. The applicants have submitted a detailed explanation for this change based upon the current problems with mortgage lending which has made shared ownership mortgages difficult to obtain.

The current application proposes that the scheme is for an open tenure mix with the S106 agreement enabling the properties to be occupied by individuals on either a shared ownership or a rental basis. Both forms of tenure fall within the definition of affordable housing and are therefore covered by the terms of policy CTY.5 of the Local Plan Review. I can therefore see no grounds for opposing the current application on this basis as it means that, in planning terms, the dwellings can be made available to those with a local need for accommodation whose preference is for either form of tenure.

Planning Obligations

The Draft Section 106 agreement secures the dwellings as affordable units, specifies the split of units between Warwick and Stratford District and provides the criteria against which applications to occupy the properties will be assessed – those with a connection to Claverdon or Wolverton will be considered ahead of those with links to neighbouring Parishes and then the wider District.

With regard to other planning obligations, Warwickshire County Council has made a request for a contribution of £15,000 towards the cost of relocating the 30mph speed limit as described in the Highways Section of this report above.

The County Footpaths Officer has made a request for a financial contribution towards the resurfacing of the initial section of the public footpath (close to Curlieu Lane) which is extremely muddy after periods of rain. Whilst the majority of the footpath is within the Stratford District Council boundary, the wide verge crossing is within Warwick District. It is not clear whether any of the resurfacing works would extend onto the Warwick side of the boundary line. In my view this issue should have been raised with Warwick District Council at the time the planning application for the site access crossover and pavement was submitted. No such request to the Warwick Planning Authority was made as part of the consultation process on the access application, nor was it raised at the time the original application 08/03298/FUL for development on the Curlieu Lane site (subsequently withdrawn) was under consideration by this Authority in January/February 2009. In my view there would need to be a joint view taken by both Authorities in order for this contribution to be included within the S106 Agreement, particularly if some of the land involved is on the Warwick side of the Council boundary. A clear justification based upon the size of the development and its specific impact on the footpath would also need to be provided. I feel it is unreasonable for this issue to be raised at this late stage and for Stratford alone to seek to include such a contribution as part of the S106 Agreement.

When this application was reported to the Committee of 25 November, the Committee was advised in the published report, the updates sheet and in the verbal advice from officers during the meeting that independent advice had been sought from consultants as to whether, in principle, contributions for education and libraries provision should be required for affordable housing schemes. As part of the recommendation on the application, officers advised the Committee that, in light of the consultants’ response, these contributions should not be sought on affordable housing schemes, as a matter of policy and principle.

Counsel’s opinion has been sought on this matter and it is now clear that officers had asked the Committee to apply this “policy” as though it had the full weight of an adopted policy, which it could not have, as it had not undergone the thorough scrutiny of the LDF process, used also to adopt any supplementary planning document. The “policy” was subsequently wrongly adopted by the Planning & Regulation Committee, a decision that was rescinded by a resolution of the Cabinet at its meeting on 8 February. The Consultant’s Report on this matter remains a material planning consideration. However this report should be treated as an opinion which has not gone through consultation procedures and therefore the weight given to it should be limited. The advice given by officers to the Committee cannot therefore stand and the matter of contributions must be re- considered.

The applicants have confirmed that, given the serious time pressures to commence development by 31 March, they intend to pay the full contributions requested by the County with regards to education and libraries facilities.

Other Issues

The site and buildings will be designed to achieve the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3. In terms of energy efficiency there will be at least a 25% improvement over Part L of the Building Regulations. I am satisfied that the energy efficiency and sustainable drainage measures are acceptable and will accord with Policy DEV.8 of the Local Plan Review.

Conclusion

All the other matters in the report now before you have been checked and updated as appropriate (the previous updates provided in the updates sheet have been incorporated into this report) and all the other matters have been properly assessed with due regard to the current Development Plan and relevant national guidance and were before the Committee when this application was considered on the 25 November 2009. It is therefore the one matter of the contributions towards education and libraries that is before you for re-consideration.

RECOMMENDATION

That, subject to the signing of a legal agreement to secure the following:

• The provision of 12 affordable housing units in accordance with the standard Section 106 clauses for CTY.5 ‘Housing Exception Schemes’, as identified in the ‘Local Choice - Meeting Housing needs of Rural Communities’ SPD with a specified nomination formula to ensure that the first 3 out of every 4 units will be allocated by Stratford District Council with Warwick District Council having nomination rights over the fourth vacancy • A contribution of £15,000 towards the cost of consultation and potential implementation of a scheme for the relocation of the 30mph speed limit on Curlieu Lane • A contribution of £42,124 for primary and secondary education provision and £1566 towards libraries • The submission of a Landscape Management Plan for the management of the open land to the north of the development and for the retained trees and hedges along the roadside boundary of the site

The Planning Manager be authorised to GRANT planning permission, subject to the following conditions and notes, the detailed wording of which is delegated to officers;

1. Standard 3 year time limit 2. Material samples and render colour detail 3. Foul and surface water drainage details 4. Soft landscape details 5. Hard landscape details, to include a replacement for the electric fence along the south side of the public footpath to the north of the site and to include bin storage provision 6. Tree and hedgerow protection details 7. Landscaping maintenance standard condition 8. Large scale details (eaves, verges, heads and cills of windows, porches & chimneys) 9. Water butts 10. PD restrictions on extensions, outbuildings and boundary treatments 11. Levels details to be as per submitted plans 12. The development shall be laid out in general accordance with received plan 4627: 1. 13. The development shall not be occupied until visibility splays have been provided to the vehicular access to the site passing through the limits of the site fronting the public highway with an 'x' distance of 2.4 metres and 'y' distances of 120.0 metres to the near edge of the public highway carriageway. No structure, tree or shrub shall be erected, planted or retained within the splays exceeding, or likely to exceed at maturity, a height of 0.6 metres above the level of the public highway carriageway. 14. The development shall not be commenced until an access for vehicles has been provided to the site not less than 5.0 metres in width at any point, as measured from the near edge of the public highway carriageway. 15. The access to the site for vehicles shall not be used until it has been provided with not less than 6.0 metre kerbed radius turnouts on each side. 16. The access to the site for vehicles shall not be used unless a bellmouth has been laid out and constructed within the public highway in accordance with the standard specification of the Highway Authority. 17. The development shall not be occupied until all parts of the existing access within the public highway not included in the permitted means of access have been closed and the kerbline and verge/footway has been reinstated in accordance with the standard specification of the Highway Authority. 18. The gradient of the access for vehicles to the site shall not be steeper than 1 in 36 at any point, as measured from the near edge of the public highway. 19. The access to the site shall not be constructed in such a manner as to reduce the effective capacity of any drain or ditch within the limits of the public highway. 20. The layout of the estate road serving the development including footways, verges, private drives and means of accessing individual plots shall not be designed other than in accordance with the principles and guidance as set out in 'Transport and Roads for Developments: The Warwickshire Guide 2001'. 21. The construction of the estate road serving the development including footways and verges shall not be other than in accordance with the standard specification of the Highway Authority. 22. No dwelling shall be occupied until the estate roads including footways serving it have been laid out and substantially constructed to the satisfaction of the Highway Authority in accordance with the details approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 23. Before the development is commenced, the further written approval of the Local Planning Authority shall be obtained for the design of the estate roads layout serving the development including footways, verges and private drives. These details shall include large scale plans and sections showing the layout, vertical alignment, and surface water drainage details including the outfalls. 24. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a scheme for the provision of a bat boxes has been submitted to and approved in writing by the District Planning Authority. Thereafter, the roost boxes shall be installed and maintained in perpetuity. 25. Energy efficiency measures specified to be implemented.

Notes

1. In view of the composition of the surrounding habitat, care should be taken when clearing the ground prior to development. If any evidence of specially protected species such as Adder, Grass snake, Slow worm or Common lizard is found, work should stop while Warwickshire Museum Ecology Unit (01926 418 060) or Natural England is contacted. Section 9 (part 1) of the Wildlife and Countryside act 1981, makes it is an offence to intentionally or recklessly kill or injure any of the species listed above. 2. Standard nesting birds note 3. Condition numbers 13-24 require that the estate roads including footways and verges are designed and laid out in accordance with the principles set out in 'Transport and Roads for Developments: The Warwickshire Guide 2001' and constructed in accordance with the Highway Authority's standard specification. The applicants/developers are advised that they should enter into a Highway Works Agreement with the Highway Authority made under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 for the adoption of the roads. The approval of plans for the purposes of the planning permission hereby granted does not constitute an approval of the plans under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980. An application to enter into a Section 38 Highway Works Agreement should be made to the Development Group, Warwickshire County Council, Environment and Economy Directorate, Shire Hall, Warwick, CV34 4SX. In accordance with Traffic Management Act 2004 it is necessary for all works in the Highway to be noticed and carried out in accordance with the requirements of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 and all relevant Codes of Practice. Before commencing any Highway works the applicants/developer must familiarise themselves with the notice requirements, failure to do so could lead to prosecution. Application should be made to the Street Works Manager, Depot, Old Budbrooke Road, Warwick, CV35 7DP. For works lasting ten days or less, ten days notice will be required. For works lasting longer than 10 days, three months notice will be required. 4. Before preparing detailed plans of the estate roads for the purposes of adoption under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980, the applicants/developers should contact, where appropriate, the Street Lighting Group, Warwickshire County Council, Planning and Transport Department, Shire Hall, Warwick, CV34 4SX. Unless the applicants/developers have entered into an agreement under Section 104 of the Water Industry Act 1991 with the appropriate water supply and sewerage treatment company for the adoption of all sewers contained or passing within the limits of a highway, the Highway Authority may not be prepared to complete a Highway Works Agreement under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 to adopt the highway. Section 163 of the Highways Act 1980 requires that water will not be permitted to fall from the roof or any other part of premises adjoining the public highway upon persons using the highway, or surface water to flow - so far as is reasonably practicable - from premises onto or over the highway footway. The developer should, therefore, take all steps as may be reasonable to prevent water so falling or flowing. Unauthorised signs are not permitted within the limits of any public highway. To secure the provision of signs giving directions to a new housing development, the applicants/developers must apply in writing to the Traffic Group, Warwickshire County Council, Planning and Transport Department, Shire Hall, Warwick, CV344SX. The applicants/developers will be required to defray all the County Council's administration, legal, design, technical approval, safety audit, inspection of works costs etc., whenever applicable in respect of any applications to enter into a Highway Works Agreements, the issue of a licence or similar action. The County Council will not be held liable for any delays in the execution of any works carried out under the provisions of any Highway Works Agreement, issue of any Licence, or similar action which may be incurred as a result of the applicant's/developer's failure to make an application for such an agreement / licence sufficiently in advance of the works requiring to be executed or for any delays which may be incurred as a result of service or plant alterations required by the public utility companies. 5. This permission should be read in conjunction with the associated legal agreement. 6. PD rights removed 7. Control over construction site noise

The Reasons for Recommending Granting Planning Permission

The development proposals will assist in meeting an identified need for affordable housing within three Parishes. The layout and design of the development is considered to be acceptable and key landscape features of the site will be retained. Acceptable highway standards can be achieved and the proposed extension of the highway pavement and the 30mph speed limit up to the new access road is considered to be beneficial to levels of highway safety in the vicinity. The proposals therefore comply with the policies and proposals of the Development Plan. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals as set out in the policy section above. There are no material considerations that are sufficient to justify overriding these policies.