COMMITTEE REPORT
Application 13/03166/OUT Reference
Site Address Land Off Sutton Lane, Lower Brailes
Erection of 18 dwellings, associated garages and public open space, Proposals with all matters reserved except access.
Case Officer Tony Horton
Presenting Officer Tony Horton
Applicant Feldon Homes Ltd, Feldon Housing Ass. and Spitfire Properties
Ward Member(s) Cllr P Seccombe
Parish Council Brailes
Reason for Referral Scale of Development to Committee
Recommendation Grant subject to completion of s.106 legal agreement
1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
Outline planning permission with all matters except access reserved for further approval. 18 dwellings on 0.9ha of land (density of 20 dwellings per ha) most of which is in agricultural crop cultivation and part of which relates to an existing access to the adjacent Millers Way development of 8 affordable housing units. The site edged red links to the public highway at Sutton Lane via Millers Way.
The proposed housing is in illustrative form with details to be agreed but is currently proposed as:
• 8 social rented units made up of 5 x 2 bed flat over garage, 1x 3 bed, 1x 4 bed and 1 x 5 bed • 6 shared ownership units made up of 2 x 2 bed, 3 x 3 bed, 1 x 4 bed • 4 local market units made up of 2 x 3 bed , 2 x 4 bed
This would provide a total of 18 residential units of which 14 (78%) would be affordable and 4 (23%) would be local market housing. Of the affordable housing, 8 (57%) would be Social Rent and 6 (43%) Shared Ownership. A number of the affordable units are proposed to be ‘provision in kind’ from a separate application (13/03160/OUT), a proposal for 7 dwellings at Attens Byre in Lower Brailes which is elsewhere on this agenda.
The illustrative submissions show that the proposed housing would be mostly 2- storey in scale with 2 units being 1.5 storey height and with single storey garaging. The proposed external materials would be approved at the reserved matters stage but are indicated as brick and stone with tiled roof.
The illustrative layout shows parking provision for 39 vehicles in garaging or surface spaces which equates to an average of just over 2 spaces per dwelling. The illustrative site layout shows a large area of Public Open Space on the southern part of the site.
Amendments to the scheme have been submitted following officer’s and consultee comments. The key changes include:- • Revisions to highway/footway to deal with WCC Highway comments • Swap of plots 17 & 18 (illustrative) • Landscape buffer to south and west boundaries (illustrative) • Reduced hardstanding (illustrative) • Screen planting for bins (illustrative) • Increase in some garden sizes (illustrative)
2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS (INCLUDING RELEVANT PLANNING CONSTRAINTS)
The site is farmland to the south of Lower Brailes on the edge of the settlement. Brailes is designated as a Local Centre Village within the Local Plan Review and a Local Service Village (category 2) within the Proposed Submission Core Strategy 2014. The site falls within the Cotswolds AONB and is mainly greenfield land except for the access arrangements. The Lower Brailes Conservation Area lies around 300m away to the north east and a listed building (Grove End) is around 200m away to the west. The site is part of a generally exposed ridge which rises to the south and with higher land also to the west at Grove End, part of Upper Brailes. Land to the north and east falls to the main part of Lower Brailes.
Affordable housing at Millers Way lies immediately to the east, part of a ribbon of development along Sutton Lane. Open undeveloped land surrounds the remainder of the site, and a pond with Great Crested Newts lies in an adjacent parcel of land to the north and a public footpath runs on an east-west alignment to the north.
Key facilities of the village lie within a reasonable distance of the site – 200m to bus stop; 300m to primary school; 300m to shops at The Feldon Centre; 500m to Village Hall and recreation fields.
3. HISTORY/BACKGROUND
Whilst the main application site has no planning history the adjacent development at Millers Way, through which the site is accessed has the following history:-
Reference Number Proposal Decision and date
10/02201/FUL 8 dwelling units comprising of 3 three Approved bedroomed houses and 5 two 21.01.2011 bedroomed houses and associated external works
4. RELEVANT POLICY CONTEXT
The Development Plan
Stratford–on-Avon District Local Plan Review 1996-2011
PR.1 Landscape and Settlement Character PR.7 Flood Defence EF.1 Cotswolds AONB EF.6 Nature Conservation and Geology EF.7 Nature Conservation and Geology EF.9 Trees, woodland and hedgerows EF.10 Trees, woodland and hedgerows EF.11 Archaeological sites EF.13 Conservation Areas DEV.1 Layout and Design DEV.2 Landscaping DEV.3 Amenity Space DEV.4 Access DEV.5 Car Parking DEV.6 Services DEV.7 Drainage DEV.8 Energy Conservation DEV.9 Access for people with disabilities DEV.10 Crime Prevention COM.1 Local Choice COM.4 Open Space COM.5 Open Space COM.9 Walking and Cycling COM.13 Affordable Housing COM.14 Mix of Dwelling Types COM.15 Accessible Housing CTY.1 Open Countryside IMP.1 Supporting Information IMP.2 Supplementary Planning Guidance IMP.4 Infrastructure Provision IMP.5 Infrastructure Provision
Other Material Considerations
Central Government Guidance
National Planning Policy Framework 2012 Planning Policy Guidance 2014
Supplementary Planning Guidance and Supplementary Planning Documents
Meeting Housing Needs 2008 Car and Cycle Parking Standards 2007 Sustainable Low Carbon Buildings 2007 Provision of Open Space 2005 Stratford on Avon District Design Guide 2002
Other Documents
High Court judgements on Shottery appeal and Tewkesbury appeal Recent appeal decisions Coventry & Warwickshire Joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (November 2013) Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines 1993 Brailes Village Design Statement (1998) Brailes Parish Plan (2005) Brailes & Winderton Parish Council Action Plan (May 2012) Brailes & Winderton Parish Council Action Plan Local Housing Needs Report (April 2013) Cotswolds AONB Management Plan (March 2013) Cotswolds Conservation Board Position Statement – Housing and Development (Revised 2013) Cotswolds Conservation Board Position Statement – Affordable Housing (Revised 2013)
District Council PPG17 Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment and Playing Pitch Strategy (Arup, April 2011) Corporate Strategy 2011-2015 Landscape Sensitivity Study (July 2011) Water Cycle Studies 2011 and 2012 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment Review & updates (SHLAA) 2012 Proposed Submission Core Strategy 2014 Extending Your Home: Planning Advice Note Planning and Community Safety - Design and Crime Reduction 2006: Planning Advice Note
Other Legislation Human Rights Act 1998 Equality Act 2010 Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 Community and Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Legislation Localism Act 2011 5. APPLICANT’S COMMENTS
The application is supported by the following documentation:
• Design and access statement; • Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment • Ecological Appraisal; • Energy statement;
The applicant’s agent has provided the following comments:-
The application is promoted under Policy COM.1 of the Local Plan Review to deliver 14 affordable houses (plots 1 to 14) and 4 Local Market Houses (plots 15 to 18). More specifically: • Plots 1 to 8 social rented; a mix of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom • Plots 9 to 14 shared ownership; a mix of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom • Plots 15 to 18 local market houses; a mix of 3 and 4 bedroom houses.
The Proposed Submission Core Strategy identifies Brailes as a Category 2 Local Service Village, which is capable of accommodating approximately 51 to 75 homes.
The Brailes & Winderton Parish Plan (June 2012) reports a need for 11 x 4- bedroom dwellings, 21 x 3-bedroom dwellings, 24 x 2-bedroom dwellings and 17 x bungalows – all of which are catered for on the application site.
The Brailes & Winderton Parish Council Action Plan Local Housing Needs (April 2013) specifically identifies the application site at chapter 7. It states “It is also recommended that the Parish Council invites Mr Graham Warmington, the owner of land at the rear of Millers Way, Brailes, to present detailed proposals for mixed tenure ‘Local Choice’ housing scheme for local people.” The report concludes that a ‘realistic housing need’ for the parish would be: • Rented from a Housing Association (24) • Shared Ownership (10) • Local Market Ownership (27)
The application is thus supported by the Parish Plan, Housing Needs Survey, Parish Council and Warwickshire Rural Community Council. The locally-based Feldon Housing Association Ltd will be the registered social landlord for the affordable units. FHA Ltd does not attract government support but nevertheless is able to acquire and manage the affordable houses without recourse to the taxpayer or local authority ratepayer.
The site includes a large public open space at its centre, whereby plots 1 to 18 are laid out in a “U” shape to face each other. Plots 15 to 18 are orientated with rear gardens facing the farmland to the west. The linear buildings lines reflect the theme established by the existing Millers Way houses. All the houses will be 1.5 or 2 storeys tall. The application site is adjacent to Lower Brailes and is within walking distance of many of its services and facilities.
The Drainage Strategy consists of a treatment plant located in the Public Open Space for the foul drainage and a pumped arrangement to an existing pond south of the site for treated foul and surface water, all subject to Environment Agency consent to discharge.
6. PARISH COUNCIL
Brailes Parish Council:
Support the application. Highlight that the village is within the Cotswolds AONB and development should enhance and conserve the environment. Acknowledge that the plans include a community area and state that they will have minimal visual impact from the majority of the village, although the development will be viewed from Grove End. Consider that the site is an extension of an existing development which has access to Sutton Lane. Wish for high quality housing using locally sourced materials to blend with the village.
Highlight that the village has suffered from flooding in the past and seek reassurance that the proposed drainage and sewerage plans would not place additional pressures on the village or other settlements. Concerns raised regarding a pond to the north which contains Great Crested Newts.
Raise little concern about additional traffic on and off the development and have a desire to see any money collected by the Highway Authority to provide traffic calming on the entry to the village from Sutton under Brailes.
Support the application with the above reservations as it feels there is a genuine need for additional housing within the village and since all the properties will be built under a Local Choice scheme and offered to applicants with a local connection it will benefit those who missed out on the previous development at Millers Way and provide an opportunity to those wishing to remain in the village. (8.2.14)
7. WARD MEMBERS
Councillor P Seccombe
No representation. This application has aroused considerable attention in the Village of Brailes, and, due to its controversial nature, I would request that the application is put before the East Area Planning Committee for determination, if the officers are inclined to grant consent under delegated powers.
I would ask that the following are considered :- • The Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty • The effect on watercourses and flooding in the Village • Size and layout of the scheme • Effect of views from Highways and footpaths in the Parish (05.02.14)
8. THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
As at 16 June 2014, 53 letters of objection, with some persons having written more than once following a re-consultation exercise, have been received raising the following material planning considerations:- • Lack of information about foul and surface drainage • Will unbalance the village socio economic level • Harm to character of landscape and visual amenity of the Cotswolds AONB • Harm to key views into and out of the village (see VDS p8 & p4) • Loss of agricultural land • Dangerous road not safe for children • Insufficient infrastructure to cope with increased demands especially foul drainage capacity problems • Premature pending the outcome of the Neighbourhood Plan and Core Strategy • Harm to the Conservation Area [Officer Note – site is not within the Conservation Area the boundary of which lies approximately 300m to the NE] • Impact of Great Crested Newts protected species and other wildlife, including from sewage outfall • Will create urban sprawl on the edge of the village (see VDS p4) • Will harm the community feel of the village • Will lead to flooding problems in Sutton Brook and for the Orchard Close, Jeffs Close, Sutton Lane, Henbrook Lane, High Street and Stourton and Cherrington • Additional traffic in the village, harm to highway safety including near to the school • Landscape Sensitivity Study does not support development of the site • Land is part of the natural barrier of farmland between Upper and Lower Brailes (see VDS p5) • The housing is not needed, enough housing has been built in recent years (143 between 1991-2011) or is in the pipe line for the village • Development is too large scale and there should be a phased provision of small scale developments for the village • Layout fails to follow existing settlement pattern and is suburban (see VDS p5) • Design of dwellings is not appropriate for the village • Will be harmful to the silhouette of the village as set on a ridge (see VDS p4) • Pollution from additional vehicle movements • Not in accordance with the Cotswolds AONB Management Plan or Position Statement on Housing and Development • There are no local jobs to support the additional residents • High level of local objection to the proposals • Concerned that the ‘link’ to Attens Byre application may result in a loss of affordable housing if either site fails • Will harm tourism and associated revenue from this • Will harm the well being of the village • Too remote from village services, particularly for older people • Access is unsafe due to limited visibility • Harm from construction vehicles • Potential archaeological harm • Contrary to Local Plan policies • Core Strategy allocates between 51-75 new houses for the village up to 2031, the scheme could represent 24% (or 5 years worth) of such provision which is too much in one site and at one time and the constraints of the context of the site mean this will be a lower number. • Providing for current housing needs now may be at the expense of future unknown housing needs
3 letters of support received raising the following material planning considerations:- • Need for this housing in the village for young people to be able to remain • Need for these affordable properties in the village, the waiting list is long
9. CONSULTATIONS
WCC Archaeology
Site lies within an area of archaeological potential, therefore recommend a programme of archaeological investigative work prior to any reserved matters submissions to be secured via planning condition. (11.3.14)
Warwickshire Wildlife Trust
From the photographs you provided, I can confirm that the species is a Great Crested Newt and the pond is suitable breeding habitat for this species. As the pond is within 500m of the development, this could have implications on the local population and should be considered before development is approved. (17.01.14)
WCC Ecology
Satisfied with the preliminary ecological appraisal. Most of the site is species poor improved grassland of low ecological value and low habitat distinctiveness. Recommend a Great Crested Newt survey is undertaken in relation to the nearby pond but accept the proposed mitigation/compensation strategy that has already been submitted. Therefore conclude that final survey work can be conditioned to be completed in due course. Recommend an ecological and landscape management scheme to be secured by condition. (31.1.14)
WCC Highways
Original scheme - Objection including the following grounds:- - Applicant must demonstrate that a minimum overall corridor width of 8 metres can be provided. The extent proposed for adoption is unclear. - A minimum service strip of 1 metre should be provided fronting the existing parking area. The Highway Authority does not accept the proposal to have parking bays extending to the carriageway limit. - If the proposed development is to be adopted, the applicant must provide tracking drawings to demonstrate a vehicle turning left into the remodelled access. - A bell mouth access must be provided rather than a dropped kerb access. - The proposed footpath extension should extent further into the site before terminating. (27.01.14)
Following submission of amended plans - No objection – whilst the proposals do not currently meet adoptable standards this can be addressed at the reserved matters phase if the scheme is to be adopted. Recommend conditions to secure the access and footways to be in general accordance with submitted plans and to not affect public highway drains or ditches. Request a £75 contribution per house for Sustainability Packs and to deliver road safety education in the area. (29.5.14)
South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust
We have calculated that the additional burden on Acute and Community healthcare facilities of proposed population growth in both Warwick and Stratford on Avon Districts will require infrastructure costing c. £33m - equivalent to £1,678 per new dwelling. Therefore the contribution requested for this proposed development of 18 dwellings is £30,204. (27.01.14)
WCC Rights of Way
State that Public footpath SS60 passes close to the north west corner of the application site, but does not appear to be directly affected by the proposed development therefore have no objection. Do however request a contribution of £5,420 towards improvements to public rights of way within a 1.5 mile radius of the development site. (29.01.14)
Education
Request a financial contribution of £36,848 towards secondary education provision within the area. (04.02.14)
Cotswolds Conservation Board
Consider that the proposal constitutes a ‘major’ development in the AONB, particularly in the context of the scale of Lower Brailes. Consider that Paragraph 116 of the Framework is relevant and that an ‘exceptional circumstances’ test should be undertaken. Consider that the site has a current agricultural character which accords with the AONB landscape and that the loss of the open fields to housing will be a detrimental impact that cannot be moderated and thus the ‘exception test’ is failed. Consider that Paragraph 115 of the Framework applies and that great weight should be given to conserving the landscape of the AONB and that the proposals fail to do this. Highlight paragraph 47 of the Framework states that meeting the needs of housing in an area should be consistent with other Framework policies and whilst they are supportive of small scale schemes for affordable housing they consider that the harm to the landscape outweighs this benefit. (4.2.14)
Maintain objections following amendments to scheme. (13.5.14)
Warwickshire Rural Community Council
Support the application as the scheme is based on, and appears fully compliant with, Stratford DC's COM.1 policy. The scheme delivers part of the local affordable housing need and local market housing need identified in the Brailes & Winderton Parish Council Action Plan Local Housing Needs Report dated January 2013 prepared by WRCC. (20.02.14)
WCC Libraries
Request a contribution of £2,730 towards library services. (10.3.14)
Severn Trent
No objection subject to condition requiring approval of drainage plans for the disposal of surface water and foul sewerage. (28.02.14)
Building Control
No representation (06.01.14)
Crime Prevention Design Adviser
No objection. No objection. Notes for applicant relating to crime prevention and reduction measures for consideration. (06.01.14)
10. ASSESSMENT OF THE KEY ISSUES
Principle of Development
When determining a planning application the Council is required to make the determination in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise (Section 38(6) PCPA 2004 and Section 70(2) TCPA 1990). The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is a key material planning consideration.
The Development Plan and Housing Supply
At the time of writing this report, the formal development plan comprises only the saved policies of the Stratford on Avon District Local Plan Review. Paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advises that “due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with this framework”.
Under National Policy, the provisions of the NPPF have the greatest weight in determining the principle of housing in this planning application, while the Council is deemed to currently have an unmet housing need (see Appendix 1). Under paragraph 215 of the NPPF, the saved polices of the District Council's local plan need to be considered, but have little weight when compared to the policy provisions within the NPPF itself, if they are not consistent with the NPPF.
Policy COM.1 of the Local Plan Review provides an opportunity for communities 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. In addition to this one of the core principles of the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 17) states that planning should (final paragraph) take account of and support local strategies to improve health, social and cultural well being for all, and deliver sufficient community and cultural facilities and services to meet local needs.
nd In addition paragraph 50 (2 bullet point) of the NPPF states, that to deliver a wide choice of high quality homes, widen opportunities for home ownership and create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities local planning authorities should, amongst others, identify the size, type, tenure and local and range of housing that is required in particular locations, reflecting local demand. Further to this paragraph 54 of the NPPF states that, amongst others, the local planning authorities should be responsive to local circumstances and plan housing development to meet local needs, particularly for affordable housing, including through rural exception sites where appropriate. Particular reference is made in paragraph 54 to local planning authorities considering whether allowing some market housing would facilitate the provision of significant additional affordable housing to meet local needs. In light of this I consider that policy COM.1 of the saved local plan is consistent with the NPPF in this respect.
Material considerations
The National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states ‘inter alia’ that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development and that planning permission should be granted where development accords with the development plan.
Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, planning permission should be granted unless:
- any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies of the Framework taken as a whole; or - specific policies in the Framework indicate development should be restricted (which includes policies relating to Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty).
The NPPF sets out at paragraph 17 twelve core principles that planning should underpin. Of these 12 core principles, a number apply in relation to this application. These include:
Bullet point 3 seeks to proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs. This is developed further under section 6 ‘Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes’ in particular seeking to boost housing supply (paragraphs 47 and 49).
Bullet point 5 seeks ‘inter-alia’ to recognise the intrinsic beauty and character of the countryside. This is developed further under section 11 ‘conserving and enhancing the natural environment’.
Bullet point 7 seeks to contribute and enhance the natural environment which is again developed under section 11 of the framework.
Bullet point 8 encourages the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed, provided that it is not of high environmental value. Paragraph 111 of the NPPF also seeks to encourage the effective use of previously developed land. However, the NPPF is clear in that it does not preclude the use of ‘greenfield’ sites for development.
Bullet point 11 seeks to actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable. This is developed further under section 4 ‘Promoting sustainable transport’ of the Framework.
Bullet point 12 seeks to take account of and support local strategies to improve health, social and cultural wellbeing for all, and deliver sufficient community and cultural facilities and services to meet local needs. This is developed further under section 7 ‘Requiring Good Design’ and section 8 ‘Promoting Healthy Communities’ of the Framework.
Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)
The PPG runs alongside the NPPF and provides a web based streamlined guide which has replaced the majority of former guidance documents. It is therefore a material consideration to be taken into account in the determination of planning applications.
Emerging core strategy
The Council has published its Proposed Submission Core Strategy June 2014. This sets out the strategic planning policies and strategy for development across the District until 2031.
Policy CS15 ‘Distribution of Development’ will be based on a pattern of balanced dispersal, in accordance with the distinctive character and function of the wide range of settlements across the District, as reflected in the following hierarchy:
• Stratford Main Town; • Main rural centres; • A new settlement at Lighthorne Heath; • Local Service villages; • Large Brownfield Sites; and • Other Rural Locations.
Policy CS15 states that in all settlements development may include small-scale community–led schemes brought forward to meet a need identified by that community.
Policy CS16 ‘Housing Development’ gives a breakdown on new housing requirements (approx figures) by settlement. Brailes has been identified as a Local Service Village (category 2) where new residential development would be sustainable for approximately 51-75 homes in the plan period.
Paragraph 216 of the NPPF allows for weight to be given to relevant policies in emerging plans, unless other material considerations indicate otherwise, and only subject to the stage of preparation of the plan, the extent of unresolved objections and the degree of consistency of the relevant emerging policies to the NPPF policies.
The Proposed Submission Core Strategy June 2014 is still at an early stage and therefore, in officer opinion, carries limited weight at this time.
Prematurity
The National Planning Policy Guidance states that Annex 1 of the National Planning Policy Framework explains how weight may be given to policies in emerging plans.
Notwithstanding the size, scale and location of this scheme in relation to Brailes, taking into account the current stage of the core strategy, as well as recent high court judgements and the advice set out in the NPPF, it is officers’ opinion that no objection can be raised on grounds of prematurity.
New Homes Bonus
The New Homes Bonus is a grant paid to all Local Authorities by central government in recognition of net additions to effective housing stock. This includes new dwellings, conversions to residential and bringing empty homes back into use. Payments are paid for 6 years. Basing a calculation on previous cases the proposed development would potentially provide an estimated grant of up to £135,000 to Stratford upon Avon District Council over a 6 year period. The New Homes Bonus is a material consideration and one that gives some support to the consideration of the application.
The 2012 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) review
The application site was included in the 2012 SHLAA review under reference BRA.102 which stated that as the site had been identified in the Landscape Sensitivity Study as being of medium/high sensitivity, the site was not therefore suitable for residential development.
The Principle of Development in the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
The site lies within the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Saved Policy EF.1 of the Local Plan Review states that the special qualities of the AONB will be protected and where opportunities arise enhanced. Development needs to be founded on a high degree of sensitivity to the character of the area and proposals which have a detrimental impact will not be allowed, although the impact on the economic and social well being of the area will also be taken into account. Policy EF.1 is considered to be generally consistent with the Framework albeit that the Framework has a greater degree of flexibility to weigh matters in the balance. Paragraph 115 of the Framework states that great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in AONBs. Paragraph 116 states that planning permission should be refused for ‘major developments’ in such designated areas except in exceptional circumstances in the public interest, and lists criteria to make an assessment of such applications.
The Cotswolds Conservation Board also sets out policies within their Management Plan and in Position Statements, including statements on Housing and Affordable Housing. A key issue of the Management Plan recognises the importance of providing affordable housing and the lack of opportunities to provide this via large scale mixed housing schemes. The Position Statement on Affordable Housing states that the allocation of sites solely for affordable housing is encouraged as is the protection and enhancement of the landscape through appropriate design. The Position Statement on Housing recognises the possible need to approve exception sites for affordable housing that might not normally be acceptable but raises serious concerns about allowing new market housing within the AONB. The Statement also highlights that development in villages should respect the historic pattern of the settlement, its architectural style and be sustainable.
I must therefore first consider whether the proposals can be classed as a ‘major development’. I note that the Cotswolds Conservation Board considers that the proposals do constitute ‘major development’. There has been recent case law regarding what constitutes ‘major development’ in the case of R(Trevone Objectors Group) v Cornwall Council [2013] EWHC 4091 (admin) (judgement given 23 December 2013). The case involved 15 affordable dwellings in the village of Trevone (population approx 537). The judgement was that what constituted a ‘major development’ was a matter of planning judgement for the decision maker on a case by case basis.
Saved Policy EF.1 of the Local Plan does not set out a numerical value as to what is a ‘major development’ and neither does Policy CS.11 of the Proposed Submission version of the Core Strategy. The consideration as to whether the application proposals constitute a ‘major development’ is therefore a matter of planning judgement.
The proposals involve 18 dwellings. According to the Council’s Methodology for Identifying Local Service Villages, the existing number of dwellings within Brailes (Upper and Lower) is around 445. The proposals therefore represent a 4% increase in the settlement’s housing stock.
In light of this, and taking into account the number of units, the size of the site, the location of the proposals and their context within a village of this size and character, I have concluded that the scale of the proposals should not be considered as a ‘major development’. This therefore leads me to conclude that the proposals do not need to prove exceptional circumstances in the public interest to overcome an otherwise ‘automatic’ refusal. The public benefits of the proposals do however remain as a key element to be weighed in the balance when assessing the benefits and harm of the scheme, including impacts on the character and special qualities of the AONB.
Impacts on Landscape and Settlement Character, Special Qualities and Visual Amenity
The site was identified within the Landscape Sensitivity Study, as part of a larger parcel of land (Br01), as being of high/medium landscape sensitivity to residential development. The study concludes that there may be opportunities to accommodate housing to the east of Millers Way i.e. on the opposite side of the road but does not identify the application site for possible development. The study highlights that the general area is an important part of the rural setting and hinterland of the settlement. This document provides the latest evidence base and is therefore afforded some weight by officers in the determination of this application.
The submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) identifies that the most sensitive viewpoints to the development will be from the nearby public footpath to the north and a public footpath to the west, where it concludes the significance of the effects will be ‘moderate adverse’. In addition, I consider that views when approaching the site from the south along Sutton Lane, near to Tommy Turn’s Lane will be of key importance.
The layout, siting and appearance of the dwellings proposed are reserved for further approval. A detailed illustrative layout has however been submitted and has been amended during the course of the application. I consider it reasonable to place some weight on this plan for assessment purposes as, if generally acceptable, such a layout may be conditioned to be adhered to.
The amended proposals seek to minimise and mitigate the impact of the scheme in several ways. The sensitive southern edge has been left largely undeveloped by siting the large area of POS in this location. The two units that are nearest to the southern boundary are set some distance away and are gable end on to this view to reduce their observed massing. Plots 17 & 18 in the SW section of the site are proposed as 1.5 storey, with a single storey garage nearest the boundary. In addition, along the length of the southern boundary a buffer planting zone is proposed.
A buffer planting zone is also proposed along the western boundary and, coupled with the large rear gardens and use of some 1.5 storey units and single storey garaging between units, will assist in reducing the visual impact. Views from the north will be partially mitigated by boundary planting and from the east the existing dwellings on Millers Way will screen views of most of the development.
I have considered whether the proposals will cause harm to the historic settlement pattern of the village. In this respect I note that Brailes is largely a linear form of settlement with long ribbons of development along the main street with some areas of open space and with side offshoot roads also containing ribbon development. The main exceptions to this are the infilled area of Jeffs Close and Orchard Close which lie nearby to the east and the New Park Cottages development further east. I also note that Brailes has an Upper and Lower element that are separated around the area where Henbrook Lane leads to Grove End. The application site forms part of this undeveloped gap between the settlements.
Having considered the impacts on the settlement character, I conclude that in this particular location the development of the site will not close the gap between Upper and Lower Brailes to such an extent that it will materially alter the distinction between the various parts of the village. I do however have concerns that the development of land to the rear of Millers Way does not sit comfortably with the historic pattern of streets and development of the settlement, although the nearby Jeffs Close and Orchard Close developments also are at odds with this. I also have concerns regarding the visual impact of the development on the landscape character and setting of the village, although amendments to the scheme, which may be conditioned to be adhered with, have gone a long way to mitigate many of the impacts. The proposals also fail to fully accord with the Brailes VDS.
On the whole I conclude that the proposals will lead to negative impacts on the character and appearance of the AONB and on the historic pattern of the settlement. These adverse impacts will therefore need to be weighed against the public benefits of the scheme in the overall consideration of the scheme.
Local Choice/Affordable Housing - Public Benefits and Sustainability Assessment
Saved Local Plan Policy COM.1 states that in Local Centre Villages, such as Brailes, small scale schemes which meet housing needs (particularly affordable housing) will be encouraged, subject to appropriate justification; maximisation of the use of previously developed land; and other policies not being undermined due to the development location or design.
With regard to the justification of the scale of development the Brailes and Winderton Parish Plan (2012) has been approved by the Council and identifies that in the last 5 years 45 people had had to move away due to the lack of affordable housing and 49 parishioners are in housing need, including 29 to rent and 32 to buy. The Plan identifies provision of affordable and low cost housing for retaining youngsters in the village and supporting the local school as key factors. The Plan finds that there is a need for dwellings as follows (with the proposed dwellings as per the illustrative layout in brackets):-
17 bungalows (2/3 plots could potentially meet this) 24 x 2 bed (7 plots) 21 x 3 bed (4-6 plots could potentially meet this) 11 x 4 bed (4-5 plots could potentially meet this)
The Brailes and Winderton Parish Action Plan for Local Housing Needs was published in April 2013. This identifies the application site as a potential site to meet a mixed tenure of local choice housing for local people. The Plan concludes that a realistic housing need for the Parish is (with the proposed dwellings as per the illustrative layout in brackets):-
24 x Housing Association Rent (the 8 proposed would meet 33% of the identified need) 10 x Shared Ownership (the 6 proposed would meet 60% of the identified need) 27 x Local market Ownership (the 4 proposed would meet 15% of the identified need)
It should be noted that the applicants have proposed that the entire 18 dwellings being proposed should be restricted via S106 Agreement to either be affordable housing with local people in need having first opportunity to occupy, or, in the case of the 4 Local Market units, provided for suitably qualifying local people.
The policy seeks to encourage the use of previously developed land over greenfield land. The applicants have assessed the deliverability of other sites in Brailes that might be capable of yielding dwellings to meet the identified need. I am in general agreement that the settlement has limited opportunities to develop on previously developed land and note that in the SHLAA Review 2012 the only site identified for housing development (Sunnyside Nurseries at Castle Hill Lane x 7) now has planning permission for 4 open market dwellings (12/02575/FUL).
Conclusions on the Principle of Development I consider that there is an identified need for a significant number of affordable and local market housing units for the parish. The application has been submitted with Heads of Terms of a S106 Agreement to secure such housing for the local population in need. This is a very significant public benefit to weigh in the balance in terms of social sustainability. I would also highlight that in my opinion a development of market housing on this site would be afforded less weight as a public benefit in terms of social sustainability. Other benefits to take account of relate to economic, such as the employment created during construction, the new homes bonus and the spending power of new occupants to aid the local economy. With regard to environmental impacts, there are no key positive aspects that can be readily identified other than the site is within walking distance of key village services and thus use of the private car may be reduced to an extent. This is set against the environmental harm identified earlier in the report to the character and appearance of the AONB and on the historic pattern of the settlement. There are however some additional key matters to take account of before concluding on the principle and sustainability of the proposals.
Highways Matters
Paragraph 32 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people. Saved policy DEV. 4 of the Local Plan Review remains consistent with this approach.
The proposals seek to utilise an existing access from Millers Way to Sutton Lane, where the speed limit is 30mph and appropriate visibility splays can be achieved (2.4m x 70m). The Highway Authority raise no objection to the proposals and appear likely to adopt the internal access roads subject to final approval of the details.
Paragraph 39 of the NPPF states that if setting local parking standards, authorities should take into account the accessibility of the development, the type, mix and use of the development, availability of public transport; local car ownership levels and the overall need to reduce the use of high emission vehicles. Saved policy DEV.5 of the Local Plan and the car and cycle parking SPD use maximum standards and are not consistent with the framework and are therefore afforded less weight.
The illustrative layout demonstrates that the site has capacity to accommodate parking provision for on average a little over 2 spaces per dwelling, which I consider would be acceptable at the reserved matters stage, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 39 of the NPPF.
Layout, Scale and Appearance
The layout, scale and appearance of the proposals are reserved for later approval and have only been submitted in illustrative form. Nevertheless, the detailed illustrative layout clearly shows that 18 units can potentially be secured on the site in an appropriate manner, without unacceptable impacts on neighbouring properties and at a relatively low density in this edge of settlement location.
Provision of Public Open Space
The NPPF, at paragraphs 58 and 73, encourages access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation. Saved policies COM.4 and COM.5 also seek to secure appropriate standards of open space provision and therefore remain broadly consistent with the provisions of the NPPF. Having regard to this, where there is a deficiency in public open space, new development proposals should seek to make new provision available.
The illustrative layout incorporates a large area of POS, around 2,560 sq.m in area. This is far in excess of normal standards for the minimum requirement of POS for a site of this size. The detail of the POS would be secured at the reserved matters phase but can be seen to be a positive benefit for the settlement.
Drainage and Flood Risk
Paragraph 103 of the Framework indicates that, when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should ensure flood risk is not increased elsewhere. Saved Policy PR.7 is consistent with this policy insofar as seeking to ensure development proposals do not increase flood risk.
The site is located within Flood Zone 1 (lowest risk of flooding) where residential development is considered acceptable in principle by the NPPF in relation to flood risk. The size of the site does not trigger the need for a Flood Risk Assessment. The issue of flooding problems in the village and for other settlement lower down the catchment, and the issue of foul drainage capacity have however been raised by many objectors.
The application has been submitted with an illustrative drainage strategy plan. The plan highlights that as the ground is clay, soakaways are unlikely to be feasible. Surface water is therefore proposed to be stored on site to cater for the 1 in 100 year flood event + 30% to take account of climate change. The storage system will be beneath the area of POS and flows from this will be restricted to that of a normal ‘green field’ run off rate. The foul drainage will be taken to a treatment plant beneath the area of POS and thereafter discharged to an existing pond to the south of the site, subject to Environment Agency consent to discharge.
Severn Trent Water raise no objection to the proposals and the drainage strategy would be reserved for further approval of details. The drainage proposals therefore appear to be in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 93-108 of the NPPF and saved policies PR.7 and DEV.7 of the Local Plan Review, which remain broadly consistent with the NPPF.
Archaeology
As the site lies within an area of archaeological potential, WCC Archaeology recommend a programme of archaeological investigative work prior to any reserved matters submissions to be secured via planning condition. Subject to this, I consider that the proposed development would be acceptable having regard to the provisions of the NPPF (Section 12). Saved policy EF.11 of the Local Plan is not considered consistent with the NPPF, as it is a more restrictive policy than the NPPF and therefore afforded limited weight.
Ecology
One of the core planning principles of the NPPF is to conserve and enhance the natural environment, as expanded upon by paragraph 118. Saved policies EF.6 and EF.7 of the Local Plan Review generally accord with the NPPF as they relate to the retention, protection, management and, where appropriate, creation of wildlife habitats, albeit, the NPPF is less restrictive.
WCC Ecology are satisfied with the preliminary ecological appraisal. Most of the site is species poor improved grassland of low ecological value and low habitat distinctiveness. WCC Ecology had recommended that a Great Crested Newt survey is undertaken in relation to the nearby pond to the north but accept the proposed mitigation/compensation strategy that has already been submitted. I therefore conclude that final survey work can be conditioned to be completed in due course and that an ecological and landscape management scheme can be secured by condition.
The County Council Ecologist raises no objection to the proposals subject to advisory notes being placed on any permission. The provision of the open space, the balancing pond, new hedgerows and planting within the site, would ensure opportunities for bio-diversity are retained in the long term.
For these reasons, I consider that the development would have an acceptable ecological impact in accordance with paragraph 118 of the NPPF, saved policies EF.6 and EF.6 of the Local Plan Review and the provisions of the NERC Act.
Energy Conservation
Paragraphs 95 and 98 of the NPPF require schemes to incorporate renewable saving measures. Saved policy DEV.8 and the Council’s Low Carbon Buildings SPD remain generally consistent with the NPPF, as they also seek to improve energy conservation and promote use of renewable technologies.
The core strategy, albeit of limited weight, is moving away from a reliance on renewable technology to a fabric first approach i.e. increased insulation and thermal efficiency above that required by Building Control legislation and thereby reducing energy usage in the first instance.
This application is supported by an energy statement that states that on site renewable energy generation to secure a minimum 10% reduction in CO2 levels will be achieved via photovoltaic panels on roofs. The details of this will be approved at the reserved matters stage. I consider that the proposal is in accordance with the Council’s Low Carbon Buildings SPD, and the NPPF and is therefore acceptable.
Planning Obligations
The below requested contributions are considered by officers to be compliant with the CIL Regulations at the time of writing this report. If any contribution is considered by officers not to be CIL compliant during the drafting of the S106 then the contribution request will be dropped. The sums below are based on the provision of a maximum of 18 units on the site but any fewer would see the contribution lowered pr-rata.
Affordable Housing
The 14 Affordable Housing units will be secured. A proportion of these (likely to be 3) will be secured as the Affordable Housing ‘in kind’ from a separate application for 7 units at Attens Byre, Brailes, which is elsewhere on this agenda. The S106 will require the provision of the Affordable Housing prior to the completion of any units at Attens Byre.
Local Choice Market Housing
The proposed 4 units will be secured to be for persons with a local connection and thereafter on a cascade mechanism to other occupiers.
Education
Request a financial contribution of £36,848 towards secondary education provision within the area.
Highways
WCC Request a £75 contribution per house for Sustainability Packs and to deliver road safety education in the area. In previous cases a contribution of £50 per dwelling has been requested. In the absence of a current justification for the increase in costs I consider that the £75 may not yet be justified and until this time I recommend that £50 per unit is collected.
Libraries
WCC Request a contribution of £2,730 towards library services. The applicants have raised concerns about the justification for this, particularly in light of a recent Inspector’s decision at the Stratford Cattle Market appeal. Further justification has been sought from WCC and the matter will be resolved at the drafting of the S106.
Healthcare
SWFT have calculated that the additional burden on Acute and Community healthcare facilities of proposed population growth in both Warwick and Stratford on Avon Districts will require infrastructure costing c. £33m - equivalent to £1,678 per new dwelling. Therefore the contribution requested for this proposed development of 18 dwellings is £30,204.
In the recent Cattle Market appeal decision however the Inspector found that a request for the Acute and Community Healthcare contribution did not pass the tests of the CIL Regulations and had not been justified. In light of this and in the absence of any further justifications from SWFT I consider that it would not currently be lawful to request such a contribution.
POS Maintenance
In the event that the Council is requested to take on maintenance responsibilities for any area of POS then an appropriate contribution will be sought for the future maintenance of this.
Public Rights of Way
WCC request a contribution of £5,420 towards improvements to public rights of way within a 1.5 mile radius of the development site. This is to mitigate the increase in the Highway Authority's maintenance liability resulting from the increase in use of local public rights of way by new residents from this development. These improvements would include upgrading stiles to gates and path surface improvements. The amount requested has been calculated based on the estimated cost of improvements to the local network, the estimated cost per resident based on residency figures for local wards, and the estimated number of future residents for this development. I consider that the contribution is ‘CIL compliant’ and should be secured.
Conclusion
The ‘golden thread’ running through the NPPF is the presumption in favour of sustainable development (para.14). The NPPF states that there are three dimensions to sustainable development: social, economic and environmental.
I consider that in relation to social sustainability there are very significant public benefits to weigh in the balance from the provision of affordable and local choice housing to meet identified needs and that such public benefits would be of less weight if the scheme was for market housing. The large area of POS, well above the minimum standards required may also be seen as a social benefit. Other benefits to take account of relate to economic, such as the employment created during construction, the new homes bonus and the spending power of new occupants to aid the local economy. With regard to environmental impacts, there are no key positive aspects that can be readily identified other than the site is within walking distance of key village services and thus use of the private car may be reduced to an extent. This is set against the environmental harm identified earlier in the report to the character and appearance of the AONB and on the historic pattern of the settlement.
It must also be recognised that the District’s relevant housing policies are out of date, with the District’s emerging core strategy and any neighbourhood plan afforded limited weight at this stage, and the Council having a deficiency in its housing land supply. Despite a large number of objections, the proposals still have the qualified support of the Parish Council and of Warwickshire Rural Community Council. I consider that the applicant has submitted adequate justification for this ‘Local Choice’ proposal in the context of Policy COM.1 and that it is acceptable in principle and consistent with the NPPF in this respect.
There are significant social benefits to be secured by the development, together with economic benefits and I consider that such public benefits outweigh the identified environmental harm to the AONB landscape character and historic settlement pattern.
I have not identified any other significant or demonstrable harm that would either singularly or cumulatively outweigh the benefits of the scheme in relation to matters such as highway safety, traffic congestion, residential amenity, heritage impact, ecology, archaeology, energy conservation, drainage, landscaping, open space provision, crime and local infrastructure.
For these reasons, I consider that the development constitutes sustainable development and is acceptable in principle. It will however be for the committee as decision taker to weigh up the positive and negative aspects of the scheme and to ascribe weight to these matters in coming to its decision.
11. RECOMMENDATION
That subject to the satisfactory completion of a S.106 agreement to provide:
Affordable Housing Provision Local Choice Market Housing Link to Atten’s Byre planning proposals, provision of affordable housing ‘in kind’ Management/maintenance of on-site POS Education £36,848 towards secondary education Libraries £2,730 Sustainable Travel Packs (£50 or £75 per dwelling depending on justification) Public Rights of Way £5,420
(NB. If any contribution is considered by officers not to be CIL compliant during the drafting of the S106 then the contribution request will not be secured in the s.106 legal agreement); the Planning Manager be authorised to GRANT outline planning permission, subject to the following conditions and notes, the detailed wording of which is delegated to officers:
1. Submission and approval of all Reserved Matters prior to commencement.
2. Submission of all Reserved Matters within 3 years
3. Development to be commenced within 2 years of final reserved Matters approval
4. Restriction to a maximum of 18 dwellings of which no more than 14 shall be Affordable Housing and no more than 4 shall be Local Choice Market Housing
5. Any dwelling erected as part of the development hereby permitted shall be a maximum of 9m to ridge height from finished ground floor level, with the exception of plots 17 and 18 which shall be a maximum of 7.5m to the ridge.
6. Programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation before any works commence
7. Detailed Soft Landscaping and maintenance including creation of structural boundary buffer planting to the south and west.
8. Hard Landscape including boundary treatments and minor structures (including any drainage/pumping station facility)
9. 10% Renewable energy scheme
10. Samples of external materials
11. The access to the development and footways shall be laid out in general accordance with approved drawing no. AR_100_002_O.
12. No dwelling shall be occupied until the estate roads have been laid out and substantially constructed
13. Detailed plans and sections showing existing and proposed site ground levels and finished floor levels.
14. Submission of a surface water drainage scheme and a scheme for the disposal of foul sewage
15. Minimum rating of Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes
16. Not less than 50% of all Dwellings ‘Lifetime Homes’ standards
17. Great Crested Newt Survey.
18. Combined ecological and landscaping management scheme
19. Removal of PD rights for buildings, compounds, structures or enclosures which are required temporarily in connection with the construction.
20. Water butts
21. Provision of 3 bins per dwelling
22. Construction Method Statement to be approved providing for:-
- the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors - loading and unloading of plant and materials - storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development - the erection and maintenance of security hoarding - wheel washing facilities - measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction - a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works
23. Land Contamination and remediation strategy 24. Approved Drawings.
Notes
1. Ecology Licence notes 2. S.106 note. 3. Para 187/188 Note. 4. Hours of construction 5. Highway note S278 works 6. Highway note mud/debris on road 7. Highway note water flows 8. Highway note S38 works
ROBERT WEEKS HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING
Appendix 1 - Considerations arising from the deficit in housing land supply
When determining a planning application the Council is required to make the determination in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise (Section 38(6) PCPA 2004 and Section 70(2) TCPA 1990). The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is a material consideration in planning decisions (paragraph 196).
NPPF paragraph 14 sets out the presumption in favour of sustainable development. This is described as the golden thread running through both plan- making and decision taking. For decision taking, this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay. Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, permission should be granted unless ‘any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole’ or ‘specific policies in this Framework (such as Green Belt, or AONB) indicate that development should be restricted’.
The NPPF conveys a strong imperative in favour of housing delivery. To that end, in order ‘to boost significantly the supply of housing’ (paragraph 47), local planning authorities should identify a supply of "specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirements with an additional buffer of 5% (moved forward from the later in the plan period)."
Like many districts, Stratford-on-Avon is currently in a transitional period as it seeks to replace the Local Plan Review (2006) with an up-to-date Core Strategy. Submission of the Core Strategy to the Secretary of State for independent examination is expected for September 2014.
The Proposed Submission Core Strategy (May 2014) seeks to deliver 10,800 homes for the period 2011 to 2031. This figure is based on an up-to-date objective assessment of housing need as required by the NPPF. Using this approach, the Council considers that the housing land supply available in the District as at 31 March 2014 equates to 4.8 years. The Council is therefore not able to demonstrate a five year housing land supply as required by the NPPF. It follows that the relevant housing supply policies in the development plan are not to be considered up-to-date (paragraph 49 of the Framework) and, in considering applications for housing development, decision makers should be guided by the presumption in favour of sustainable development as set out in paragraph 14 of the NPPF.
Whilst the Council may appear near to achieving the equivalent of a 5 year supply, it must be stressed that the objective is not just to achieve a 5 year supply of housing, but to maintain 5 year’s worth of housing supply on an on- going basis. Thus, Stratford-on-Avon District needs to continually deliver some 540 homes on average every year over the plan period.