AGENDA ITEM: 7

PLANNING COMMITTEE: 10 OCTOBER 2013

______Report of: Assistant Director Planning

Relevant Managing Director: Managing Director (Transformation)

Contact for further information: Mrs.C.Thomas (Extn. 5134) Planning Control Team Leader (E-mail:[email protected])

______SUBJECT: PLANNING APPLICATIONS ______

Background Papers

In accordance with Section 100D of the Local Government Act 1972 the background papers used in the compilation of reports relating to planning applications are listed within the text of each report and are available for inspection in the Planning Division, except for such documents as contain exempt or confidential information defined in Schedule 12A of the Act.

Equality Impact Assessment

There is no evidence from an initial assessment of an adverse impact on equality in relation to the equality target groups. CONTENT SHEET

Report Ward Application Site Location & Recommendation No No Proposal 1 Aughton And 2013/0556/FUL 36 Winifred Lane Planning Downholland Aughton Lancashire permission be L39 5DJ granted.

Construction of detached dwelling house and formation of new vehicular access.

2 Burscough 2013/0235/OUT Land Adjacent 10 Ivy The decision to East Close Burscough grant planning Lancashire L40 5BR permission be delegated to the Outline - Erection of Assistant Director approximately 40 Planning in dwellings. consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning Committee subject to a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 being entered into. Report Ward Application Site Location & Recommendation No No Proposal 3 Burscough 2013/0661/FUL 5 Moss Lane Burscough The decision to West Ormskirk Lancashire grant planning L40 4AL permission be delegated to the Demolition of existing Assistant Director buildings and erection Planning in of seven dwellings. New consultation with vehicular/pedestrian the Chairman and access road and Vice Chairman of provision of parking. the Planning Committee subject to a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 being entered into.

4 Knowsley 2012/1170/OUT Land Adjacent To 119 Outline Planning Southport Road permission be Ormskirk Lancashire granted.

Outline - Erection of two 3 bed properties (1 pair of semi-detached dwellings) with off road parking.

5 Scarisbrick 2012/1244/FUL Cop House Farm Planning Jacksmere Lane permission be Scarisbrick Lancashire refused. L40 9RS

Demolition of existing buildings and clearance of site and erection of 14 affordable dwellings. New vehicular/pedestrian access. Report Ward Application Site Location & Recommendation No No Proposal 6 Scarisbrick 2013/0572/FUL Copelands Farm Planning Drummersdale Lane permission be Scarisbrick Ormskirk granted. Lancashire L40 9RB

Two storey rear extension.

7 Scarisbrick 2013/0666/OUT 3663 Booker Food Outline Planning Service Park House permission be Black Moss Lane refused. Scarisbrick Ormskirk Lancashire L40 9RN

Outline - Demolition of warehouse and offices and erection of dwellings.

8 Tarleton 2013/0726/FUL Moss Side Farm Moss Planning Side Lane Tarleton permission be Preston Lancashire granted. PR4 6LD

Erection of agricultural storage and processing building. No.1 APPLICATION 2013/0556/FUL NO. LOCATION 36 Winifred Lane Aughton Lancashire L39 5DJ

PROPOSAL Construction of detached dwelling house and formation of new vehicular access. APPLICANT AIB Group (UK ) PLC WARD Aughton And Downholland PARISH Aughton TARGET DATE 12th August 2013

1.0 DEFFERAL

1.1 This application was deferred at the September meeting to enable Members to visit the site to consider the proposals on their merits, being clear of the planning history and comparison with the development presently on the site and to assess the impact of the development on the amenity of adjoining residents.

2.0 PREVIOUS RELEVANT DECISIONS

2.1 2011/0846/FUL REFUSED (11.10.2011) Retention and alteration of dwelling including formation of full roof hip to north-western half of the main roof; reduction in length and height of rear first floor wall to outrigger with new link roof over ground floor accommodation; formation of roof hip to rear outrigger; reduction in the rearward projection of dormer and roofslope of the lower north- western section of the building. Appeal DISMISSED.

2.2 E/2008/0195/UBW – Enforcement against unauthorised building works. Following identified discrepancies between the dwelling approved under planning permission ref. 2006/0530 and the dwelling presently on site, the Council served an enforcement notice on the applicant on 15 December 2008, seeking the demolition of the existing dwelling and removal of the resultant materials. This was considered at appeal and the notice upheld. A successful challenge to the High Court resulted in a reconsideration of the appeal which resulted in the enforcement notice being varied to require the building to be amended to comply with the 2006/0530 permission. The date for compliance with the notice expired on 21 August 2011.

2.3 2008/0058/FUL WITHDRAWN 04.2008 Erection of replacement detached dwelling with integral double garage including new vehicular access (amendment to planning permission 2006/0530).

2.4 E/2007/0286/TSN – Temporary Stop Notice (05.10.07) - Breach of conditions 7 and 8 on 2006/0530 (tree protection). 2.5 2006/0530 GRANTED (26.06.06) - Erection of replacement detached dwelling with integral double garage including new vehicular access. (The 2006 permission).

2.6 2006/0304 WITHDRAWN (May 2006) - Replacement dwelling with integral (basement) garage including new vehicular access.

2.7 2005/1218 REFUSED (21.12.05) - Erection of replacement dwelling with integral garage and creation of new vehicular/pedestrian access.

2.8 2005/0617 REFUSED (14.09.05) - Erection of a replacement dwelling with integral double garage and creation of new vehicular access. ALLOWED on Appeal.

2.9 2005/0337 WITHDRAWN (June 2005) - Erection of replacement dwelling house.

3.0 OBSERVATIONS OF CONSULTEES

3.1 Lancashire County Council (Highways) (01.08.13) – no objections in principle subject to conditions in relation to sight lines, parking and manoeuvring areas, hard surfacing and closure of existing access.

4.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 Aughton Parish Council (23.07.13) Members referred to the planning history of the site and considered that unless the proposal accords with Planning Permission 2006/0530 in totality, this planning application should be refused.

4.2 One letter from an adjacent neighbour objecting on the following grounds (summarised):

The ground floor level of the existing building is estimated at about 0.5 metres higher than the previous dwelling so direct height comparisons with the 2006/0530 permission don’t reflect the true impact of the development.

None of the works undertaken to date comply with the 2006/0530 planning permission referenced in the enforcement notice.

The proposed scheme does not alter the side outrigger which was identified as appearing so intrusive and dominant as to cause an unacceptable loss of outlook during the appeals – this harm has not been addressed. The proposed treatment of the front elevation through the addition of decorative canopies does not address the harm to the streetscene it merely masks the additional depth of brickwork between the lower and upper floors.

Planning matters surrounding this site have been ongoing for more than 8 years and the current proposals do not address the concerns that the building is too wide, too long and too high. The proposals remain bulky and overbearing and out of character for the location as identified through the course of the last appeal.

The problems start with the foundations therefore it would be more economic to demolish than to try to alter the house as-built.

5.0 RELEVANT POLICIES

5.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and the West Lancashire Local Plan Submission Document provide the policy framework against which the development proposals will be assessed.

5.2 The site is located within Main Settlement Area as designated in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan (WLRLP).

West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan Policies:

DS1 – Location of Development DE1 - Residential Development GD1 - Design of Development

5.3 The site is within a Key Service Area as designated in the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document (emerging plan)

West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document (emerging plan) Policies:

Policy GN1 – Settlement Boundaries Policy GN3 – Criteria for Sustainable Development Policy RS1 – Residential Development Policy EN4 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Built Environment

5.4 Additionally the following documents are relevant to the consideration of the application:

Supplementary Planning Document ‘Design Guide’ (Jan.2008). West Lancashire Interim Housing Policy (July 2010) 6.0 OBSERVATIONS OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR PLANNING

The Site

6.1 The application relates to a plot of approx. 16.5 x 60 metres to the north-eastern side of Winifred Lane, situated in a row of residential development on the edge but within the settlement boundary. An unfinished dwelling has been erected on the site. Land to the south-west is open pasture within the Green Belt, land to the north-east is part of a tennis club with mature trees close to the site boundary. The site is bounded by established hedging to the front and sides, with mature vegetation and lawn to the rear. Two-storey detached dwellings flank the plot to the north-west and south-east.

Background to the Proposed Development

6.2 The development on site is unauthorised and subject to an enforcement notice to require the development to accord with planning permission reference 2006/0530 which remains extant by virtue of the demolition of the bungalow formerly on this site. The application is submitted to seek planning permission for an alternative development to the 2006 permission that would override the requirements of the enforcement notice on implementation.

6.3 The reason that the notice was served was:

The development on site deviates from the planning approvals to the extent the Local Planning Authority considers it has no valid planning permission and comprises of a new unauthorised dwelling. It also conflicts with Policy GD1 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan in that, by virtue of the siting, scale and design of the building, it results in a significant loss of residential amenity for neighbouring occupiers through overshadowing, poor outlook and loss of light and privacy.

6.4 The notice was taken to appeal and challenged on grounds (a) – that planning permission should be granted for the development as built; and ground (f) – that the steps required to comply with the requirements of the enforcement notice were excessive and lesser steps would overcome the objections. The steps required included demolition of the existing dwelling and removal of the resultant materials from the site. The Inspectorate’s Decision Notice of 1 May 2009 dismissed the appeal on Ground (a) and (f) and upheld the Enforcement Notice without alteration (Inspector No.2). 6.5 The appellant challenged the decision of the Inspectorate in the High Court on the grounds that the Inspector had misdirected himself in respect of the Ground (f) assessment – the challenge was conceded by the Secretary of State on the ground that the Inspector had failed to consider the alternative of a variation to the enforcement notice requiring the alteration of the building so that it complied with planning permission ref. 2006/0530.

6.6 The ground (f) element of the appeal was subsequently reconsidered. On reconsideration, the Inspectorate (Inspector No.3) allowed the appeal in that the enforcement notice was amended to require the appellant to alter the as-built building to comply with the approved 2006/0530 plans. The appellant was given six months to comply with the requirements of the notice; this period expired on 22 August 2011.

6.7 An application in 2011 sought to retain the building as built on the site but with alterations to seek to address the concerns of the enforcement notice rather than revert to the onerous requirement to accord with the 2006 permission. The Committee resolved to refuse the proposals and a subsequent appeal was dismissed on the grounds of impact on neighbouring amenity through loss of outlook and sunlight. The Inspector (No.4) also commented that the proposed development would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area and conflicted with Policy GD1 and SPD Design Guide. Since the time of that decision works to reduce the overall height of the building and depth of the first floor elements have taken place.

6.8 The above planning history and determinations at appeal are material considerations to the determination of this application, although it should be noted that conclusions drawn to date relate only to aspects of development previously proposed or, then, existing.

6.9 On a final matter of clarity, the proposals under this application are described as the 'erection of a dwelling' i.e. not the development approved under the 2006/0530 permission or the development currently on site. That is not to say that the development would be started afresh should planning permission be granted as some of the existing unlawful development on the site could be incorporated into the scheme under consideration. The Proposal

6.10 The application proposes a two storey dwelling with maximum approx. dimensions of 14.18 (w) x 18.95 x 8.03 (h) metres. The footprint is located centrally in the plot with the front elevation in alignment with neighbouring properties. The design shows a projecting feature gable to the south-eastern side of the front elevation forward of the main body of the house with fully hipped roof over. To the north-western side is a subordinate 1½ storey element with front and rear projecting dormer windows to the pitched roof slopes. A rear- facing gable extends some 4.5 metres beyond the main rear elevation, with the first floor being cut back by approx. 0.85 metres. A first floor cut back on the main rear elevation line is about 0.63 metres. To the front the fenestration shows openings featuring narrow window panes with a vertical emphasis with the exception of a more standard proportioned dormer window. Two hipped projecting canopies to the front gable and above the main entrance are incorporated. Openings to the side and rear are of more common proportions and include sliding patio doors to three of the rear elevation elements. The building is proposed in the existing facing brick with concrete roof tiles to the roofs.

Principle of Development

6.11 The proposal constitutes a replacement dwelling in lieu of a bungalow previously sited on the plot. The 2006 planning permission is determined as remaining extant, and Policy DE1 and the West Lancashire Interim Housing Policy in addition to Policy RS1 in the emerging plan support the principle of a residential dwelling on this site. The development is therefore acceptable in principle.

Siting, Design and Appearance

6.12 The siting of the development centrally in the plot and in accordance with the general building line on this part of Winifred Lane is acceptable providing sufficient access to the rear of the site and ensuring an appropriate presence in the street frontage.

6.13 The design is clearly a consequence of a development that has deviated from the benefit of an original design concept, however, by virtue of the amended roof style – utilising a fully hipped roof design to the main body of the development and having an overall height and eaves level comparable with other development in this part of Winifred Lane is considered acceptable in form. 6.14 Design concerns expressed by the Inspector in consideration of the 2011 application related to the domination of the front elevation by brickwork, the overall height and an 'unduly bulky and obtrusive' appearance. I consider that the amendment of the roof in conjunction with the reduced overall ridge and eaves heights has served to reduce the perceived bulk - taking out the upper side walls whilst retaining more traditional proportioning. Additionally, the introduction of the projecting canopies gives relief to the wide ground floor elements of the front elevation and masks areas of brickwork between the first and second floor openings that were identified as emphasising the bulk of the frontage. Whilst the width of the development is generally greater than surrounding developments with a lower roof pitch than most the proposed plans illustrate a suitably consolidated form of development.

6.15 The individual windows to the front elevation appear under-proportioned in themselves, however, their appearance would not be so injurious as to warrant refusal of the application on design grounds. The mis-match of the dormer window styling is unfortunate and unwelcome in the overall appearance, I therefore propose to seek amendment of this element should planning permission be recommended. In design terms I consider the proposal is generally acceptable and in accordance with current Local Plan and emerging policy.

Impact on Neighbouring Land Uses

6.16 As referenced above, the reasons for serving the enforcement notice to rectify the harm stemming from a previous episode of the development on site substantially relate to the impact on the residential amenity of occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling at 38 Winifred Lane. This property is situated to the north- west of the application site. The distance between the dwellings is between about 1.8 – 2.0 metres with no. 38 sitting approx. 0.37 m higher in terms of finished floor levels. The boundary between these plots is delineated by panel fencing with established trees and hedging to the rear garden boundary.

6.17 The harm identified as justification for the notice was fully supported by the Planning Inspectorate describing it as ‘very substantial’ particularly in relation to the overshadowing, overbearing and loss of outlook aspects. The issue of privacy was not given weight by the Inspector subject to the erection of a two metre high fence to the common boundary with no.38. No harm was considered to occur to the dwelling at 34 Winifred Lane either by retention of the width of the building, its height or window placements. 6.18 The harm was primarily attributed to the overall increases in height and rearward projection above the limits of the 2006 permission and the subsequent massing of the building to the rear. As above, the extra width of the development does not lead to amenity harm and therefore is not a concern in terms of amenity impacts – indeed the as built and proposed location of the nearest wall to no.38 is some 0.2 metres further away than the approved scheme at the rear corner of no.38 as concluded by Inspector no.3. Similarly other aspects such as alterations at the front of the building are not considered to materially affect the amenity issue.

6.19 On previous schemes where the height of the building’s eaves and ridge have remained higher than those of the 2006 permission the Inspectors have consistently refused to grant planning permission or amend the enforcement notice. In comparing development proposals on this site with the 2006 permission Inspector No.3 stated that ‘Any further increase in overshadowing would be harmful and it is the height of the dwelling as [then] built, rather than its depth, that decreases the amount of sunlight reaching the patio area.’ Similarly, in terms of the outlook and overbearing nature of the development, the Inspector concluded ‘…it is not just the depth of the dwelling as built that is a determining factor, but also its height. The dwelling as built towers over the patio area and, given its height in particular, dominates the patio area and has resulted in a significant loss of outlook from this amenity area.’ In the absence of any material change to planning policy relating to residential amenity, this established that any position worse than the 2006 permission would be unacceptable.

6.20 Since the time of those determinations works have been undertaken to the building on site to remove all brickwork to the rear of the first floor level and above to accord with the depth of the 2006 permission – this is shown on the proposed plans. Whilst the increased depth of the building is retained at ground floor level this, in itself, would not give rise to an overbearing form of development or any significant exacerbation of overshadowing. The implementation of these works will therefore address that part of the harm identified as arising from the increased depth of the dwelling. 6.21 The proposed heights of the building from finished floor level are set out in the table below alongside the corresponding heights from the 2006 permission:

Proposed Height (m) 2006 Approved Height above finished floor (m) above finished level floor level Main ridge 8.02 7.8 Rear gable ridge 7.3 7.65 Rear eaves (gable and 5.4 5.4 main) Front gable 6.95 6.75 Rear dormer ridge 5.35 5.55 Rear dormer eaves 5.05 5.1 Rear eaves on lower side 3.2 3.2 element Side eaves on hip to lower 4.9 5.05 side element (to no 38)

With the exception of the main ridge and front gable the measurements achieve or better the 2006 permission, most notably the rear projecting ridge. The front gable measurement is not relevant to the amenity issue leaving only the overall ridge height at an increase of about 0.22 m above the approved scheme in question. On this issue inspector No.3 determined that height of the [then as built] building contributed to its overshadowing of the neighbouring patio area both with reference to the rear projection and the main ridge (at a full length of 7.6 metres). Similarly, Inspector No.4 expressed concerns over the height of proposals under the 2011 application being greater than the 2006 approval with particular emphasis on morning sunlight arising from the orientation of the properties; in that proposal the ridge length was shown at a reduced length of about 3.5 metres and at a height of 8.6 metres.

6.22 In assessing the impacts of the proposals here against the 2006 permission it is noteworthy that the length of upper roof (reduced to a peak rather than a ridgeline) greater than the approved height would be only 10% of the 2006 ridge length whilst a betterment would exist on 90% of the upper roof. In addition, a significant benefit would arise from the lowering of the rear projecting ridge some 0.3 metres below the 2006 approved height to reduce the extent of overshadowing in morning hours below that of the 2006 permission. Furthermore, the use of a fully hipped main roof would remove a depth of about 1.9 metres of brickwork to the upper side elevations thereby removing visual bulk on approach from either direction on Winifred Lane but also improving aspect of outlook from No.38 beyond the 2006 permission – notably from the patio area and a first floor side bedroom window. 6.23 Concern is expressed by the neighbouring occupiers in respect of loss of privacy resulting from a doorway and ground floor window to the north-western side of the dwelling. Despite the recent erection of a fence to the boundary I consider views would be afforded across the rear of the property at No. 38. I therefore consider it necessary to impose a condition to erect a fence to a height of 2.0 metres measured from the existing ground level of no. 38 to that length of the boundary directly opposite the said door and window opening.

6.24 Given the above I consider less harm to the amenities of the adjacent property would result than the implementation of the 2006 permission and the proposed scheme is therefore acceptable under current planning policies and supplementary guidance.

6.25 For clarity it is worthy of note that both the Council and neighbouring occupier had concerns through the appeal process that measurements were being compared on the basis of reference to the internal finished floor level and that the floor level of the building constructed on site had been elevated above the floor level of the original bungalow thereby increasing the effective height measurements and associated impacts on the neighbouring property. In determining on the matter Inspector No.3 concluded that there was no conclusive evidence at the appeal except that gained on the site visit and that the finished floor level as built should be the reference datum. In the continued absence of evidence to the contrary, the above height assessments are based on that determination.

Parking and Access

6.26 As on the original (2006) scheme it is proposed to provide a driveway to the south-eastern side of the site frontage and close up the former vehicular access. The proposals are considered acceptable in this respect and demonstrate sufficient parking capacity within the site to accommodate an appropriate level of parking.

Summary

6.27 For the reasons set out above I consider the proposed development meets the requirements of Policies DE1 and GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3, RS1 and EN4 in the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submitted Document.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 Planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: Conditions

1. The development hereby approved shall be begun within 12 months of the date of this planning permission. 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with details shown on the following plans:

1306/04 Rev A; 1306/05 Rev B; 1306/06 Rev C; and, 1306/08 received by the Local Planning Authority on 17 June 2013.

3. All external brickwork and roofing materials shall be identical to those on the existing building in respect of shape, size, colour and texture. If the applicant or developer has any doubts as to whether the proposed materials do match they should check with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the building works. 4. The development shall be implemented in strict accordance with the details of levels, as indicated on the approved plans (1306/08 received by the Local Planning Authority on 17 June 2013 ). 5. The existing access to Winifred Lane shall be permanently and effectively closed for the duration of the development and prior to first occupation of the dwelling. 6. Any gate provided shall be set back not less than 5 metres from the carriageway of the highway and shall open away there from. 7. Notwithstanding the details on the application form the driveway and hardstanding areas between the dwelling and Winifred Lane shall be of entirely porous construction or shall drain to a soakaway area to be provided within the site boundaries for the duration of the development. 8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development and General Development Procedure) Orders 1995 or any subsequent Orders or statutory provision re-enacting the provisions of these Orders no window shall be added to the property until details of the positioning, size and design have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development (Amendment) (No.2) (England) Order 2008 or any subsequent Orders or statutory provision re-enacting the provisions of these Orders no garages, extensions (including roof extensions) or swimming pools shall be erected or undertaken without the express written permission of the Local Planning Authority. 10. Prior to occupation of the development hereby approved a screen fence measuring 2.0 metres high above the existing ground level of 38 Winifred Lane shall be erected on that part of the north-western boundary of the site alongside the closest north-western elevation of the development for a distance of 4.5 metres forward (south-west) from the rear corner (northern corner of the kitchen area) of the development. Such a fence shall be retained for the duration of the development. 11. The bathroom and en suite window(s) on the south-eastern elevation shall be fitted with obscure glass prior to commencement of use of the development hereby approved, and shall remain thus fitted at all times thereafter. 12. Notwithstanding the details on the approved plans details of the window treatment to the front facing dormer shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reasons

1. The site currently accommodates an unlawful development subject to a valid enforcement notice, therefore the Council requires the development to be implemented within a reasonable timescale to resolve identified planning harm and meet the requirements of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 and EN4 in the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012- 2027) Submitted Document. 2. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 3. To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory and that the development therefore complies with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 4. To safeguard the amenity of adjacent properties and the area generally and so comply with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 5. To safeguard the safety and interests of the users of the highway and to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policies GD1 & SC6 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN1 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 6. To allow for vehicles visiting the site to be parked clear of the highway and to assimilate the new car parking areas within the site and to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policies GD1 & SC6 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 & IF2 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 7. To prevent surface water run-off from the site and to meet the requirements of Policies GD1 and EN10 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 and EN4 in the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submitted Document. 8. To safeguard the amenity of adjacent properties and the area generally and so comply with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 9. To safeguard the amenity of adjacent properties and the area generally and so comply with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 10. To protect the privacy of adjacent residential properties and so comply with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012- 2027 Development Plan Document. 11. To protect the privacy of adjacent residential properties and so comply with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012- 2027 Development Plan Document. 12. To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory and that the development therefore complies with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document.

Reason for Approval 1. The Local Planning Authority has considered the proposed development in the context of the Development Plan including in particular the following Policies in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan & in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document:

West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan Policies: DS1 – Location of Development DE1 - Residential Development GD1 - Design of Development

West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document (emerging plan) Policies:

Policy GN1 – Settlement Boundaries Policy GN3 – Criteria for Sustainable Development Policy RS1 – Residential Development Policy EN4 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire's Built Environment together with Supplementary Planning Guidance and all relevant material considerations. The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposal complies with the relevant Policy criteria and is acceptable in the context of all relevant material considerations as set out in the Officer's Report. This report can be viewed or a copy provided on request to the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority have worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with a planning application and have implemented the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187.

No.2 APPLICATION 2013/0235/OUT NO. LOCATION Land Adjacent 10 Ivy Close Burscough Lancashire L40 5BR

PROPOSAL Outline - Erection of approximately 40 dwellings. APPLICANT Morris Homes (North ) Ltd Taylor Wimpey North West WARD Burscough East PARISH Burscough TARGET DATE 28th October 2013

1.0 PREVIOUS RELEVANT DECISIONS

1.1 2008/0959/FUL – REFUSED (29.04.09) - Erection of 50 bed care home including eight associated apartments and associated car parking.

1.2 2000/0097 – APPROVED (15.08.01) - Development involving 247 houses and apartments, day nursery, starter workshop units, shop units, offices, supermarket, public house, estate roads, parking areas and public open space.

2.0 OBSERVATIONS OF CONSULTEES

2.1 LCC HIGHWAYS (01/05/13) – No objections in principle. The proposal will have negligible impact on highway safety and capacity in the immediate vicinity of the site. As part of any detailed planning application, the applicant should consider the recommended Joint Structure Plan parking provision, size of internal garages and length of driveways.

2.2 LCC PLANNING CONTRIBUTIONS (25/03/13) – No contributions required.

2.3 CANAL AND RIVER TRUST (02/04/13) – No objection subject to the imposition of an informative requiring the developer to comply with the Canal and River Trust Code of Practice. 2.4 EXECUTIVE MANAGER COMMUNITY SERVICES (11/04/13) and (19.09.13) – No objection in principle. The noise assessment and report has been assessed and is considered satisfactory. The measured noise levels are relatively low and the consultant has taken a precautionary approach where a source of noise from the commercial operations has been identified. The existing noise is not at a level that would preclude the granting of outline planning permission for housing on this site or that there needs to be a buffer zone around the commercial site. The installation of an acoustic barrier is suitable to mitigate the existing plant noise and will assist in minimising noise from other sources that may arise in the future on this site. It would be necessary to assess the noise level of the vacuum pump prior to approval of the Reserved Matters. I am happy with the mitigation measures as detailed in this report. Therefore I would recommend the following condition be attached to the Outline planning permission, if granted:

Prior to the commencement of the development, a scheme detailing noise mitigation measures to minimise noise from the adjacent commercial operation shall be submitted to, and approved by, the local planning authority. All works that form part of the approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the dwellings and retained thereafter.

2.5 UNITED UTILITIES (23/09/13) - No objection to the proposal provided that the following conditions are met: -

This site must be drained on a separate system, with only foul drainage connected into the foul sewer. Surface water must communicate with the culverted water course crossing the site. Permission must be obtained from the riparian owner. For the avoidance of doubt surface water flows must not directly or indirect communicate with the public sewerage system.

2.6 EXECUTIVE MANAGER HOUSING AND REGENERATION (23/05/13) – There is a significant need for affordable housing in the Burscough area, with a particular emphasis of provision on the social rented tenure. I would therefore expect the site to provide an affordable housing contribution in line with planning policy and to the maximum percentage contribution allowed in our planning policy.

3.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 I have received objections from three neighbouring residents who raise the following concerns: - This application should not be approved until the issue of water drainage has been resolved, therefore enabling the previous roads built on the Heathfields estate to be adopted. - The estate has enough properties and the current space is used for children to play on. - It will completely change the look of Heathfields in a negative way. - The site is not designated for residential use. - Increase traffic leading to loss of safety. - Too many houses for the size of the site. - The development does not include any “green” and therefore there will be no areas for children to play on. - Overlooking - The developers have failed to get the existing development adopted for the last eight years and much of it has remained in darkness and suffers from sewerage problems which will be added to.

3.2 An objection has been received from the owner of the neighbouring commercial units who raises the following concerns:

- The current site facilitates three businesses employing a significant number of staff and operating at all times of the day with deliveries at night. The owner of the site is concerned at the impact the proposed residential development will have on the every day commercial activities that take place at the site. Whilst the site is currently managed in a responsible way, the nature of the commercial activity means that a housing development right next to these commercial units would potentially result in the residential amenity of prospective residents being at risk by way of noise and disturbance and complaints to Environmental Health. The occupiers of the commercial units would be unable to alter their working hours without detriment on the service offered to their customers. The owner does not wish to sterilise the site or stifle development but it is their concern that if the noise issues are not fully explored and a site layout approved which leads to many complaints from new residents, then it could seriously hamper their long standing commercial operations and, in doing so, result in a loss of jobs. - The recommended scheme of noise mitigation measures is considered unacceptable. Acoustic fencing of 2.2m and 2.5m is not common place in residential development and this suggests that the potential noise impact will be of a high level which means that residential development is not suitable on this site. Furthermore, the acoustic fence would be 3.7m high on the side of the commercial premises which is unacceptable. - Noise readings from the vacuum pump within a plant room on the commercial site should be measured because it is not good enough to just assume that the recommended acoustic fence would be sufficient and it means that it is possible that an even higher stretch of acoustic fence may be required. - The erection of an acoustic fence would necessitate the removal of a number of trees along the boundary. 4.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION

4.1 The application has been supported by the following documents:

- Planning Statement - Design and Access Statement - Statement of Community Involvement - Drainage Strategy - Noise Impact Assessment - Development Viability Appraisal

5.0 LOCAL PLAN ALLOCATION

5.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document provide the policy framework against which the development proposals will be assessed.

5.2 The site is located within the Main Settlement of Burscough and is designated as a “Development Opportunity Site” in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan where this site was expected to provide an opportunity for some local employment as well as local services. The site falls within the main settlement area in the emerging West Lancashire Local Plan Submission Document with no specific land allocation. The following policies are therefore relevant:

NPPF Delivering a wide choice of quality homes Requiring good design Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Conserving and enhancing the built environment

West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan DS1 – Location of Development GD1 – Design of Development GD2 – Developer Contributions to Infrastructure EN1 – Biodiversity EN9 – Protection of Trees and Woodlands DE1 – Residential Development DE3 – Affordable Housing DE14 – Development Opportunity Site SC6 – Roads SC10 –Infrastructure, Services and Utilities West Lancashire Local Plan Submission Document (emerging plan) SP1 – A Sustainable Development Framework for West Lancashire GN1 – Settlement Boundaries GN3 – Criteria for Sustainable Development GN4 – Demonstrating Viability RS1 – Residential Development RS2 – Affordable and Specialist Housing IF3 – Service Accessibility and Infrastructure IF4 – Developer Contributions EN2 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Natural Environment EN3 – Provision of Green Infrastructure and Open Recreational Space EN4 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Built Environment

5.3 In addition the following supplementary documents are material considerations:

SPD – Design Guide (Jan 2008) West Lancashire Interim Housing Policy (July 2010) SPD - Open Space/Recreational Provision in New Residential Developments (April 2009). Planning Obligations in Lancashire

6.0 OBSERVATIONS OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR PLANNING

The Site

6.1 The application site comprises of an “L” shaped grassed area to the south east of an existing residential estate known as Heathfields, approximately 1.4km from Burscough town centre. To the west and south lie residential properties and to the north are two residential properties before reaching the Leeds/Liverpool canal. Immediately adjoining the site to the east is the West Cumbrian Farmers Distribution Depot. The site extends to approximately 0.83ha and is generally flat and laid to grass and fronts Delph Drive, the main access road into the estate.

6.2. This area of land originally formed part of the wider development at Heathfields which gained planning permission in 2000 for development involving 247 houses and apartments, day nursery, starter workshop units, shop units, offices, supermarket, public house, estate roads, parking areas and public open space. All the dwellings, estate roads and public open space have been constructed and the commercial element of the proposal (nursery, workshop units, shop, offices, supermarket and public house) which was intended to be located upon the area of land subject to the current application, has never been implemented although the permission remains extant. This area was grassed over to ensure it was visually pleasing upon entry to the estate and has remained as such for at least the last ten years. The Proposal

6.3 The application is in outline form, with all matters reserved, to seek approval for the residential development of the site. An indicative site layout plan has been provided which would accommodate up to 40 no. units and indicates a layout of two storey detached, terraced and semi-detached properties, achieving a density of 48 dwellings per hectare. Access is shown directly from Delph Drive.

Principle of Development

6.4 The starting point for consideration of this application is the adopted West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan 2006 (WLRLP). In the WLRLP, the land is designated as a Development Opportunity Site (Policy DE14) and allows for development of a wide range of uses, excluding residential development.

6.5 However, the emerging West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 (WLLP) is an important consideration. In the WLLP, the site lies within the settlement area of Burscough rather than a Development Opportunity Site. Policy GN1 of the WLLP encourages development on such sites within the settlement boundaries and Policy RS1 further supports residential development on both brownfield and greenfield sites within the settlement area of Burscough. Given that Policy RS1 is in line with the NPPF and has not been subject to any objections throughout the preparation of the Local Plan, and given the WLLP has progressed beyond its examination hearings, Policy RS1 insofar as it relates to this site can be given substantial weight. As this site is a brownfield site in a reasonably sustainable location, its development for housing would be supported by the NPPF. Furthermore, the NPPF, at Paragraph 22, suggests that the long term protection of sites for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of the site being used for that purpose should be avoided.

6.6 Having regard to the above planning policy context and the supporting marketing information submitted by the applicant, it is considered that at this time, the principle development of this site for housing can supported.

Design, Layout and Scale

6.7 As this is an outline application, only an illustrative layout has been provided. The planning application has effectively been submitted to test the principle of the residential development only and not for the individual layout or design of the dwellings. However, the indicative layout shows a mixture of detached, semi- detached and small terraced block house types, all of which appear to be two stories in height. The orientation of the properties changes throughout the site and some of the proposed properties are accompanied by garages and all have individual areas of private amenity space. Whilst the proposals are indicative only and can therefore be attributed limited weight, it should be noted that I do have some reservations regarding the suitability of the proposed layout in respect of the relationships between the proposed dwellings, parking and the WCF distribution depot to the south. However, the proposed layout is not definitive and I am satisfied that these concerns could be addressed at the reserved mattes stage when revisions to the site layout will be discussed in more detail. Whilst the required revisions may impact on the final number of dwellings, they do not prejudice the use of the site for residential development and consequently I consider that, at this stage, the proposed development is in accordance with Policy GD1 in the WLRLP and Policy GN3 in the emerging local plan.

Highways

6.8 The proposed development, being an outline application with all matters reserved, does not include a specific access or accesses to the site; however, the illustrative layout does suggest that the site could be accessed from a number of locations off Delph Drive and Ivy Close. I am satisfied that the location of access points and level of parking provision can be addressed at reserved matters stage. Policies GD1 and SC6 in the WLRLP and Policies GN3 and IF2 in the emerging local plan require that development does not prejudice road safety and the convenient movement of all highway users including cyclists, pedestrians and public transport operations. There have been a number of concerns raised by local residents over the potential impact of the development on highway safety in the immediate area. However the Highway Authority has confirmed that the proposed development will result in a minimal increase in vehicular movements during rush hour. On balance therefore, I am satisfied that the proposed development will not result in highway safety concerns or impact upon the free flow of traffic in the immediate locality.

Impact of Development upon Adjacent Land Uses

6.9 In terms of the impact upon neighbouring land uses, sufficient interface distances are possible to achieve between any proposed dwellings and those fronting onto the site along Delph Drive and Ivy Close and in this respect, I am satisfied that the proposed development is in accordance with Policy GD1 of the WLLRLP, Policies GN3 and EN4 of the WLLPSD and the Council’s SPD ‘Design Guide’.

6.10 The main concern in respect of land use conflict results from the proposed siting of dwellings in close proximity to the WCF distribution depot to the east of the site. 6.11 A noise assessment has been carried out by the applicant. The indicative layout shows gardens and gable elevations of dwellings backing onto WCF. To alleviate any noise from this, the noise assessment proposes an acoustic fence along this boundary. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer considers that there does not need to be a buffer zone around the commercial site but that the installation of an acoustic barrier is suitable to mitigate the existing plant noise and will assist in minimising noise from other sources that may arise in the future on this site. However, it would be necessary to assess the noise level of the vacuum pump on the site prior to approval of the Reserved Matters. A noise mitigation scheme and full details of an acoustic fence will therefore be required by condition in order to adequately protect the future occupants from unacceptable noise levels.

6.12 The occupiers of the WCF distribution depot understandably have concerns that dwellings in such close proximity to their unrestricted business may result in complaints from future occupiers of the dwellings which may require that restrictions are placed on future operations. It is considered that the current operations result in measured noise levels which are relatively low and the applicant’s noise consultant has taken a precautionary approach where a source of noise from the commercial operations has been identified. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer considers this a reasonable approach to take and is satisfied that the proposed acoustic fence would mitigate the existing plant noise.

6.13 The occupiers also consider that an acoustic fence would appear visually unacceptable – it would be between 2.2m and 2.5m high along the edge of the site on the proposed housing side, but in parts this would result, due to differing land levels, in a fence up to 3.7m high outside the plant room and concerned that it may result in the loss of trees along this boundary. Whilst I accept that a fence 3.7m high would normally be highly visible, in this location, positioned behind a small section of the commercial site only and screened by the commercial building itself, I consider that it would not be clearly visible outside the site. Due to differing land levels, the effect of the fence on the application site would effectively result in rear or side garden boundary fencing up to 2.5m high, which is not uncommon nor visually unacceptable. Tree cover along the boundary with WCF is sporadic and the trees are solely within the WCF boundary. The erection of an acoustic fence along this boundary would merely replace an existing security fence and would not necessarily require removal of any trees.

6.14 A concern has been expressed by neighbouring residents regarding the loss of the site as a play area facility. Whilst these concerns are acknowledged, this area of land is not designated as public open space but has been grassed by the owner to retain an open aspect to existing residents of the Heathfields estate whilst the site has been marketed for alternative uses as a development site. The land has never been allocated or granted permission as a play area and has an extant planning permission for commercial uses. Drainage

6.15 It is well documented that drainage within the Burscough area is at capacity. The drainage system for the Heathfields estate has been a particular concern. The foul system has been adopted by UU and is presently directed to an on-site pumping station. Surface water is presently culverted to a watercourse but this has not been adopted. UU require that surface water from this development goes into this existing culvert. Full details of drainage will be required by condition prior to commencement of development, and at this stage will be fully assessed.

Biodiversity

6.16 The site is mown grass and is not considered to support significant populations of Protected or Priority Species and as such is not of high ecological significance and I consider that the proposed development complies with the provisions of Policy EN1 of the Local Plan and Policy EN2 of the emerging Plan.

Developer Contributions

6.17 A development of this size will be expected to deliver associated infrastructure and service improvements such as affordable housing provision and public open space. These are discussed below.

Public Open Space

6.18 Under Policy GD2 in the WLRLP and Policy IF4 in the emerging plan, residential developments of the scale proposed attracts a requirement for the provision of a commuted sum for the enhancement and/or improvement of other types of open space in the vicinity of the site. There is an existing central area of public open space serving the Heathfields estate and any additional commuted sum sought as a result of the current proposal should be used to enhance the facilities on this area of open space.

Affordable Housing

6.19 Policy DE3 relating to affordable housing in the WLRLP requires the provision of a minimum of 30% affordable units on developments in excess of 10 units. This is updated in Policy RS2 in the emerging plan where developments over 15 units require a 35% provision of affordable housing. Approximately 14 units should be affordable in a development of this size. 6.20 An initial viability statement has been undertaken by the applicants which indicated that no affordable social rented units could be provided on the site whilst retaining an acceptable development profit. This assessment has been independently scrutinised and subsequently up dated. The applicant now indicates that 4 affordable social rented units could be provided. However, the Council’s independent consultant concludes that the scheme can support 7 affordable social rented units or 6 social rented and 2 shared ownership units on the site and the scheme would still prove viable. Given this position, under normal circumstances it would be usual to carry out negotiations to agree the extent and tenure of any affordable provision to be incorporated within the scheme. However, in this instance, as only the principle of the development is sought the indicative scheme and the resulting number of dwellings may alter, it is considered that the best practicable approach will be to review the viability issue at reserved matters stage.

Summary

6.21 The principle of residential development is acceptable given the emerging Local Plan allocation within the main settlement of Burscough and its advanced stage towards formal adoption. There are a number of constraints in developing the site such that it is not possible to fully determine the amount and type of development to be delivered nor the degree of affordable housing. Such matters will be determined at the reserved matters stage.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 That the decision to grant planning permission be delegated to the Assistant Director Planning in consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning Committee subject to the applicant entering into an obligation under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the provision of:

- A viable level of affordable housing;

- A financial contribution towards the enhancement of existing and/or the creation of new areas of public open space within the locality.

7.2 That any planning permission granted by the Assistant Director Planning pursuant to recommendation 7.1 above be subject to the following conditions: Conditions

1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with details shown on the following plan:- Location Plan Ref: OS-002 received by the Local Planning Authority on 7th March 2013. 3. No development shall take place on the site until approval of reserved matters namely the access, layout, scale and appearance of the buildings and landscaping of the site. 4. Prior to commencement of the development full details of the finished levels of all parts of the site, including the floor levels of all buildings, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with those details. 5. No development shall take place until details of the foul drainage scheme including any necessary infrastructure has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The foul and surface water drainage schemes shall be drained on separate systems. No housing shall be occupied until the approved foul drainage scheme has been completed in accordance with the approved details. 6. No development shall take place until details of a scheme for surface water drainage and means of disposal (inclusive of how the scheme shall be maintained and managed after completion and any necessary infrastructure) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall be based on: - evidence of an assessment of site conditions; and - sustainable drainage principles For the avoidance of doubt; - no surface water shall connect into the public sewerage system, directly or indirectly, in accordance with the submitted planning application forms & flood risk assessment, and - the surface water strategy will demonstrate the surface water run-off generated up to and including the 100 years critical storm event will not exceed the run-off from the undeveloped site following the corresponding rainfall event and include an allowance for climate change. The scheme shall be implemented, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved details prior to completion of the first dwelling and adhered to at all times thereafter. 7. Prior to commencement of any part of the development hereby approved, including site clearance, ground preparation, or drainage works, a facility shall be provided by which the wheels of all vehicles leaving the site can be cleaned. The wheels of all vehicles leaving the site during all stages of implementation shall be cleaned so that they do not carry any mud, soil, grit or other such materials onto the public highway. 8. No development shall take place until a scheme for protecting the proposed dwellings from noise from the adjoining WCF Distribution Depot has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority; and all works which form part of the scheme shall be completed before any of the permitted dwellings are occupied and retained thereafter. 9. No development shall take place until a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include a high proportion of locally appropriate native species. The scheme shall also demonstrate that habitat connectivity for small mammals and amphibians will be maintained through the development. The landscaping scheme shall show the location, branch spread, and species of all existing trees and hedges; the location, species and number of all proposed trees, shrubs and hedges; and the location of all existing and proposed grassed and hard surfaced areas. Trees and shrubs planted shall comply with BS. 3936 (Specification of Nursery Stock) and shall be planted in accordance with BS. 4428 (General Landscape Operations). Within a period of 9 months from the date when any part of the development is brought into use the approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out. All planting shall be maintained and dead or dying material shall be replaced for a period of seven years from the agreed date of planting. 10. No development shall commence until full details and samples of all external materials on the dwellings, garages and parking areas have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reasons 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 3. The application is in outline and the matters referred to in the Condition are reserved for subsequent approval by the Local Planning Authority. 4. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 5. To ensure that the site is properly drained in the interest of local amenity and that the development, therefore, complies with the provisions of Policies GD1, EN10, EN11 and SC10 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 & IF3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 6. To ensure that the site is properly drained in the interest of local amenity and that the development, therefore, complies with the provisions of Policies GD1, EN10, EN11 and SC10 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 & IF3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 7. To avoid the possibility of the public highway being affected by the deposit of mud and/or loose materials thus creating a potential hazard for road users and to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policies GD1 & SC6 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 8. To safeguard the occupiers of the development from excessive noise intrusion and so ensure compliance with the provisions of Policies DS1 & GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 9. To assimilate the proposed development into its surroundings and to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy EN4 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 10. To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory and that the development therefore complies with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document.

Reason for Approval 1. The Local Planning Authority has considered the proposed development in the context of the Development Plan including in particular the following Policy/Policies in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan & in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document:

West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan DS1 – Location of Development GD1 – Design of Development GD2 – Developer Contributions to Infrastructure EN1 – Biodiversity EN9 – Protection of Trees and Woodlands DE1 – Residential Development DE3 – Affordable Housing DE14 – Development Opportunity Site SC6 – Roads SC10 –Infrastructure, Services and Utilities

West Lancashire Local Plan Submission Document (emerging plan) SP1 – A Sustainable Development Framework for West Lancashire GN1 – Settlement Boundaries GN3 – Criteria for Sustainable Development GN4 – Demonstrating Viability RS1 – Residential Development RS2 – Affordable and Specialist Housing IF3 – Service Accessibility and Infrastructure IF4 – Developer Contributions EN2 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Natural Environment EN3 – Provision of Green Infrastructure and Open Recreational Space EN4 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Built Environment together with Supplementary Planning Guidance and all relevant material considerations. The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposal complies with the relevant Policy criteria and is acceptable in the context of all relevant material considerations as set out in the Officer's Report. This report can be viewed or a copy provided on request to the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority have worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with a planning application and have implemented the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187. No.3 APPLICATION 2013/0661/FUL NO. LOCATION 5 Moss Lane Burscough Ormskirk Lancashire L40 4AL

PROPOSAL Demolition of existing buildings and erection of seven dwellings. New vehicular/pedestrian access road and provision of parking. APPLICANT Henry Alty Ltd WARD Burscough West PARISH Burscough TARGET DATE 17th October 2013

1.0 REFERRAL

1.1 The application was to be determined under the Council’s delegation scheme; however, Councillor Pope has requested it be referred to Committee to consider potential overdevelopment of the site and its impact upon neighbouring properties.

2.0 PREVIOUS RELEVANT DECISIONS

2.1 None.

3.0 OBSERVATIONS OF CONSULTEES

3.1 LCC HIGHWAYS (2/9/13) – No objections. Will have a negligible impact upon highway safety within the vicinity.

3.2 UNITED UTILITIES (12/9/13) – No objections.

3.3 ASSISTANT DIRECTOR COMMUNITY SERVICES (11/7/13) – No objections in principle. Conditions required for a contaminated land report and noise protection scheme for future residents.

4.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 BURSCOUGH PARISH COUNCIL (16/7/13) – Concerns regarding demolition of building and removal of asbestos – Health and Safety should be adhered to.

4.2 I have received 2 neighbour representations objecting to the development on the following grounds: - Plans do not show trees on my boundary; - Car parking will be an issue and cars may overflow onto Thistle Court where there are insufficient car parking spaces; - Removal of asbestos roof should be undertaken correctly and safely;

4.3 I have received one neighbour representation in support of the planning application stating that residential is an appropriate and more suitable use on this site.

5.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION

5.1 The application has been supported by the following documents:

- Design and Access Statement; - Planning Statement - Viability Information - Bat and Bird Survey - Preliminary Contamination Assessment Report

6.0 LOCAL PLAN ALLOCATION

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document provide the policy framework against which the development proposals will be assessed.

6.2 The site is located within the main settlement area of Burscough. The site has until recently been used as a builder’s yard with a small retail element. The following policies are therefore relevant:

West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan (WLRLP) GD1 – Design of Development GD2 – Developer Contributions to Infrastructure DS2 – Protecting the Green Belt DE1 – Residential Development DE5 - Employment Development EN1 – Biodiversity

Supplementary Planning Document - Design Guide (Jan 2008) Supplementary Planning Guidance – Open Space and Recreation Provision in New Residential Developments (Nov 2009)

West Lancashire Local Plan Submission Document 2012-2027 (WLLPSD) GN1 - Settlement Boundaries GN3 - Criteria for Sustainable Development GN4 – Demonstrating Viability RS1 – Residential Development IF2 - Enhancing Sustainable Transport Choice IF4 – Developer Contributions EN1 – Low Carbon Development and Energy Infrastructure EN2 - Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Natural Environment EN4 - Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Built Environment

7.0 OBSERVATIONS OF ASSISTANT DIRECTOR PLANNING

The Site

7.1 The site comprises of ‘Alty’s’ - a former builder’s yard located on the western side of Moss Lane, Burscough. There are a number of former workshop buildings remaining on the site along with a small retail unit and dwelling along the frontage of Moss Lane. Residential development surrounds the site on all of its boundaries.

The Proposal

7.2 This planning application seeks full approval for the demolition of the existing buildings and the erection of 7 no. dwellings along with a new vehicular and pedestrian access off Moss Lane. The units will comprise of two pairs of semi’s (plots 1 and 2 and plots 6 and 7) and a 3 unit mews terrace (plots 3, 4 and 5). The existing house along the site frontage will be retained. The proposed layout has been reduced from 9 units to 7 units since the original submission.

Principle of Development

7.3 Being located within the Main Settlement Area of Burscough, the principle of residential development on this site is acceptable under the Council’s Interim Housing Policy and the emerging local plan. However, the site is also an employment site falling under Policy DE5 wherein this states that the conversion or re-use of employment sites not identified on the Proposals Map within urban and rural settlements for alternative uses will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that the proposals will provide significant job opportunities. In addition, Policy EC1 of the emerging plan also seeks to protect existing employment uses unless a viability case can be put forward in line with Policy GN4 of the WLLP. Therefore, unless it can be adequately demonstrated that the site is no longer required/viable for employment purposes the proposal is considered to be contrary to the aforementioned policies. Loss of Employment Facility

7.4 Until February 2012 the site operated as a builder’s merchant/depot for over 50 years and employed two people. The viability information states that due to its small size, narrow shape and the close proximity of housing, it has not been possible to store sufficient materials on site necessary to continue to run a viable building supply business from it. As a result, the applicant made the decision to relocate this business onto one of the other Alty’s sites at Hoole.

7.5 Alty’s consulted local property agents and directly approached several retailers, car sales, plant hire and a hot food takeaway. Some initial interest was received, however following further investigation all parties withdrew their interest for a number of reasons including:

- The close proximity of the town centre and competition from existing more accessible retail outlets; - The narrowness of the site and its size; - Potential for complaints from neighbouring dwellings.

7.6 Based upon the above information, the site being surrounded by residential development and the site now being vacant for over 18 months, I am satisfied that it has been demonstrated that the site is no longer viable as an employment use and the applicant has met with the requirements of Policy DE5 of the WLRLP and emerging polices EC1 and GN4.

Design and Layout

7.7 The Council’s SPD Design Guide states that ‘new development should always add to the local distinctiveness of an area and proposals should show clearly how the general character, scale, mass and layout of the site and/or buildings fits in with the grain of the surrounding area’. The proposed development incorporates a mix of semi’s and a small mews terrace. Plots 1 and 2 will comprise a pair of semi’s and will be located along the frontage of Moss Lane, following a similar building line to the modern residential development to the south. The new access will be positioned between the gable of plot 2 and the existing dwelling on the site. The access will lead to the mews terrace (plots 3-5) and to the second pair of semis (plots 6 and 7). The design approach draws on the vernacular architecture of this area of Burscough and is therefore suitable within this street scene and the wider area. The site layout incorporates adequate outdoor amenity space for each plot. In this context I consider that the design and layout are acceptable and in accordance with Policy GD1 of the WLRLP and the SPD Design Guide. Highway Safety and Car Parking

7.8 Access to the site will be off Moss Lane via a slightly repositioned access to the south of the existing access. This will provide sufficient visibility splays of 2.4 x 59m in both directions. To improve pedestrian safety a footpath is incorporated along either side of the vehicular access. Sufficient car parking has been provided within the site layout along with adequate turning space. The proposal is supported by the County Highways Officer who has stated that the development will have a negligible impact upon highway safety.

Biodiversity

7.9 A bat and bird survey has been submitted in support of the application. This states that all the buildings on the site that will be demolished have a low potential to support roosting bats due to the nature of their construction and in particular their roofing – corrugated cement. Furthermore, no evidence of bat activity was recorded. Likewise, no evidence of breeding birds was found within the buildings which are all unsuitable to support breeding birds apart from one of the buildings located along the southern boundary. The recommendations of the survey advise that if demolition works are to commence during the bird breeding season then an internal survey of this building for breeding birds should be undertaken – this will be required by condition. On this basis therefore I am satisfied that the proposed development is in accordance with Policy EN1 of the WLRLP and Policy EN2 of the emerging plan.

Drainage

7.10 The submitted application form states that the existing drainage system on the site will be adapted to accommodate the proposed development. Given the brownfield status of the site and the large area of hardsurfacing across the site, United Utilities have stated that the proposed development of the site for 7 no. dwellings would result in betterment and would not create any additional pressure upon the drainage network within this locality.

Residential Amenity

7.11 Given the site is surrounded by residential development it is important that the proposed housing does not detrimentally impact upon the amenity of these existing properties. Sufficient interface distances have been provided between the new development and the surrounding dwellings so to maintain adequate amenity levels for the existing residents when in their homes and garden areas. In addition, I consider that the proposed residential use will result in an improved neighbour to the existing residential development than that of the former builder’s yard in terms of noise, disturbance and proximity of buildings to boundaries. Overall therefore, I consider that the proposal meets with the advice contained in the Council’s SPD to maintain adequate amenity levels.

Developer Contributions

7.12 The development falls below the threshold for providing public open space within the site but attracts a financial obligation for the provision or enhancement of public open space in the vicinity of the site under the terms of the updated SPD - Open Space/Recreational Provision in New Residential Developments. The amount of £15,463 is due in this instance which will be secured through a S.106 obligation.

Summary

7.13 I am satisfied that the principle of redeveloping this former employment site for residential use is acceptable and will not have a detrimental impact upon highway safety, the surrounding street scene or neighbouring residential amenity and thereby complies with the relevant policies in the WLRLP and the emerging WLLPSD.

8.0 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 That the decision to grant planning permission be delegated to the Assistant Director Planning in consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning Committee subject to the applicant entering into a planning obligation under S.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure a financial contribution towards the enhancement of existing and/or the creation of new areas of public open space within the locality.

8.2 That any planning permission granted by the Assistant Director Planning pursuant to recommendation 8.1 above be subject to the following conditions:

Condition(s) 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with details shown on the following plans:-

Plan reference 1854-101 received by the Local Planning Authority on 14th June 2013.

Plan reference 1854-110 Rev G received by the Local Planning Authority on 17th September 2013. Plan reference 1854-111 Rev E, 1854-200 Rev B, 1854-201 Rev A, 1854-202 Rev A and 1854-203 Rev A received by the Local Planning Authority on 22nd August September 2013.

3. No development shall take place until full details and samples of the external brickwork, render, timber boarding and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 4. Prior to commencement of the development full details of the finished levels of all parts of the site, including the floor levels of all buildings, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with those details. 5. The development shall not be commenced until a scheme for the foul and surface water drainage of the development, including any necessary attenuation measures, has been fully agreed with the relevant statutory body/bodies, and until written evidence of that agreement has been provided to and acknowledged in writing as acceptable by the Local Planning Authority. 6. Prior to commencement of the development a contaminated land investigation shall be carried out in respect of the proposed development site. The purpose of the investigation is to identify the presence of substances in, on or under the land with potential to cause harm to human, ecological, environmental, structural or groundwater receptors and to assess the degree of risk posed by those substances to each relevant receptor. The investigation (Phase 1) shall begin with a desktop study that produces a characterisation of the site which shall then lead to a conceptual site model based on the proposed end use of the site. All potential pollutant linkages relevant to the site shall be identified. If potential pollutant linkages are identified on the site, an intrusive site survey shall be carried out in accordance with BS 10175:2001 (Phase 2). Where soil or groundwater contamination is identified that presents a risk to relevant receptors, a remediation scheme shall be devised that will render the site suitable for its intended end use.

The results of the desktop study and site survey, and details of the proposed remediation shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority in a written report. The report shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development hereby approved. Any remediation scheme so approved shall be implemented as part of the development of the site and shall be followed by a completion report containing appropriate validation certification, also to be approved by the Local Planning Authority. 7. Prior to commencement of any part of the development hereby approved, including site clearance, ground preparation, or drainage works, a facility shall be provided by which the wheels of all vehicles leaving the site can be cleaned. The wheels of all vehicles leaving the site during all stages of implementation shall be cleaned so that they do not carry any mud, soil, grit or other such materials onto the public highway. 8. Before the access is used for vehicular purposes the visibility splays measuring 2.4 metres by 59 metres in both directions to be provided, measured along the centre line of the proposed new road from the continuation of the nearer edge of the existing carriageway of Moss Lane, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. The land within these splays shall be maintained thereafter, free from obstructions such as walls, fences, trees, hedges, shrubs, ground growth or other structures within the splays in excess of 1.0 metre in height above the height at the centre line of the adjacent carriageway. 9. The car parking spaces and manoeuvring areas shall be surfaced or paved and marked out in accordance with the approved plan before the dwellings are first occupied. 10. The recommendations contained with section 5 of the Bat and Bird Survey by Sensible Ecological Survey Solutions dated May 2013 shall be adhered to in full. 11. Tree felling, vegetation clearance works, site preparation and development works that may affect nesting birds shall not be carried out between March and August inclusive, unless the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed by further surveys or inspections.

12. No development shall take place until a scheme for protecting the proposed dwellings from noise from road traffic on Moss Lane has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority; and all works which form part of the scheme shall be completed before any of the permitted dwellings are occupied and retained thereafter.

Reasons 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 3. To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory and that the development therefore complies with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 4. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 5. To ensure that the site is properly drained in the interest of local amenity and that the development, therefore, complies with the provisions of Policies GD1, EN10, EN11 and SC10 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 & IF3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 6. To ensure that the development is adequately protected against potentially contaminated land and so complies with the provisions of Policy GD3 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document 7. To avoid the possibility of the public highway being affected by the deposit of mud and/or loose materials thus creating a potential hazard for road users and to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policies GD1 & SC6 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 8. To ensure adequate visibility for the drivers of vehicles entering and leaving the site and to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policies GD1 & SC6 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 9. To allow for the effective use of parking areas and to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policies GD1 & SC6 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 & IF2 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 10. To safeguard a protected species and so ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policy EN1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy EN2 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 11. To safeguard a protected species and so ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policy EN1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy EN2 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 12. To safeguard the future occupants from excessive noise intrusion and so ensure compliance with the provisions of Policies DS1 & GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document.

Reason for Approval 1. The Local Planning Authority has considered the proposed development in the context of the Development Plan including in particular the following Policy/Policies in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan & in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document: GD1 - Design of Development GD2 - Developer Contributions to Infrastructure DS2 - Protecting the Green Belt DE1 - Residential Development DE5 - Employment Development EN1 - Biodiversity

GN1 - Settlement Boundaries GN3 - Criteria for Sustainable Development GN4 - Demonstrating Viability RS1 - Residential Development IF2 - Enhancing Sustainable Transport Choice IF4 - Developer Contributions EN1 -Low Carbon Development and Energy Infrastructure EN2 - Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Natural Environment EN4 - Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Built Environment together with Supplementary Planning Guidance and all relevant material considerations. The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposal complies with the relevant Policy criteria and is acceptable in the context of all relevant material considerations as set out in the Officer's Report. This report can be viewed or a copy provided on request to the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority have worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with a planning application and have implemented the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187. No.4 APPLICATION 2012/1170/OUT NO. LOCATION Land Adjacent To 119 Southport Road Ormskirk Lancashire

PROPOSAL Outline - Erection of two 3 bed properties (1 pair of semi- detached dwellings) with off road parking. APPLICANT Mr Brian Harrison WARD Knowsley PARISH Unparished - Ormskirk TARGET DATE 15th October 2013

1.0 REFERRAL

1.1 This application was to be determined under the Councils delegation scheme; however, Councillor Hopley has requested it be referred to the Committee to review concerns in relation to flooding.

2.0 PREVIOUS RELEVANT DECISIONS

2.1 NONE

3.0 CONSULTEE RESPONSES

3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER (17/5/2013) – No objection in principle. Road noise should be taken into account and conditions imposed to ensure adequate noise protection for future residents.

3.2 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY (6/9/2013) – The proposed development will meet the requirements of the NPPF if the measures submitted in the FRA are implemented. Conditions recommended

3.3 UNITED UTILITIES (25/4/2013) – No objection. Site must be drained on a separate system

3.4 HIGHWAY AUTHORITY (28/5/2013) – No objections in principle. Development should have a negligible impact on highway safety and highway capacity in the area.

4.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 A neighbour has objected on the grounds that there is a history of flooding in the area and this issue is of significant concern as surface water will drain to Hurlston Brook. 5.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION

5.1 Design & Access Statement Flood Risk Assessment.

6.0 LOCAL PLAN ALLOCATION

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document provide the policy framework against which the development proposals will be assessed.

6.2 The site is located within the main settlement of Ormskirk as designated in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan Proposals Map.

West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan Policies Policy DS1 Location of Development Policy GD1 Design of Development Policy DE1 Residential development Policy EN10 Flood Risk

Supplementary Planning Document Design Guide (Jan 2008) West Lancashire Interim Housing Policy

Submission Document West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) SP1 A sustainable framework for West Lancashire GN1 Settlement boundaries RS1 Residential development EN2 Preserving and enhancing West Lancashire’s natural environment EN4 Preserving and enhancing West Lancashire’s built environment

7.0 OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR PLANNING

Site Description

7.1 The application site is a small parcel of land located to the south of Southport Road adjacent to 119 Southport Road, Ormskirk. The site is bounded by residential properties to the east and south and Hurlston Brook to the west. To the front of the site adjacent to the footway the boundary is demarcated by a stone wall. Proposal

7.2 This application seeks outline planning permission for the erection of 2 semi detached houses. All matters are reserved although the indicative layout includes access from Southport Road.

Assessment

Principle of development

7.3 Policy DE1 – Residential development is relevant to this proposal. In July 2010, the Council’s Interim Housing Policy was adopted which lifted restrictions on Policy DE1 relating to housing land and allowed residential development on brownfield and greenfield sites within the settlement boundary of Ormskirk. This site is a greenfield site, within the main settlement area.

7.4 Policy RS1 of the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document states that within key service centres, residential development will be permitted on brownfield sites and greenfield sites not protected by other policies.

7.5 On this basis, I consider the principle of two dwellings on this site is acceptable and in accordance with Policy DE1 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and the West Lancashire Interim Housing Policy, and Policy RS1 of the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document, providing that the proposal is in accordance with other relevant policies

7.6 The main considerations for this application are

i) Impact on highway safety/access issues ii) Impact upon neighbouring properties iii) Impact on Flooding

Impact on highway/access issues

7.7 Policy GD1 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 of the Submission version West Lancashire Local Plan DPD 2012-2027 state that suitable and safe access, road layout, design and adequate parking provision are required.

7.8 Southport Road is classified as a strategic route and has a speed limit of 40mph at the location of the site therefore visibility splays of 2m x 120m are required in both directions. Any access and driveway to each property should be laid out to include an area in which vehicles can turn to enable them to enter and exit the highway in a forward gear. 7.9 The Joint Lancashire Structure Plan recommends the following individual parking provisions:

- One bedroom properties to have 1 car parking space - Two to Three bedroom properties to have 2 car parking spaces - Four to Five bedroom properties to have 3 car parking spaces

7.10 This application is in outline with all matters reserved. An illustrative layout indicates that access can be provided from Southport Road. I consider the proposal is in accordance with Policy GD1 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and GN3 of the Submission version West Lancashire Local Plan DPD 2012-2027.

Impact on neighbouring properties/Residential Amenity

7.11 Whilst the application is in outline with all matters reserved, the illustrative layout is a material consideration as established by case law.

7.12 Policy GD1 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 and EN4 of the Submission version West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Document relate to the design of development. The policies state that reasonable levels of privacy, amenity and sufficient outdoor garden/outdoor space should be provided for occupiers of neighbouring and proposed properties. The Council’s SPD Design Guide provides the detailed guidance.

7.13 The illustrative layout identifies that sufficient amenity space for the proposed dwellings and satisfactory separation distances to surrounding residential properties can be achieved. Whilst the proposed dwellings may have shorter rear gardens than the required 10 metres, this is typical of other dwellings in the vicinity which are characterised by long front gardens providing external amenity space.

7.14 Insofar as the limited information available, I consider that the development will not have a detrimental impact on the amenity, privacy or outlook of any neighbouring dwellings and that a satisfactory level of residential amenity can be provided for future residents on the site.

Impact on Flooding

7.15 Policy EN10 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan states that in areas of high flood risk developers will be required to submit a flood risk assessment and mitigation measures where appropriate. Policy GN3 (3) of the submission version West Lancashire Local Plan DPD (2012-2027) is also relevant. 7.16 A flood risk assessment has been provided and assessed by the Environment Agency, who are satisfied that development will meet the requirements of the NPPF provided that the measures detailed in the flood risk assessment are implemented.

7.17 It is proposed that foul drainage generated by the development is discharged to the public sewer network which serves the adjacent dwellings. The surface water flows generated by the site are proposed to be discharged into the adjacent Hurlston Brook. Consent will be required from the Environment Agency for the discharge of the surface water run-off and outfall structure into the brook. In principle the Environment Agency consider this development to be acceptable.

7.18 A neighbour has concerns in relation to further surface water being drained into Hurlston Brook, due to flooding occurring recently. The Environment Agency is satisfied that limited surface water discharge into the brook will not increase the risk of flooding. The proposed development will also have raised finish floor levels to minimise any risk of flooding to future applicants

7.19 I consider the proposed development to be acceptable in terms of drainage and in accordance with the NPPF, Policy EN10 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 of the Submission version West Lancashire Local Plan DPD 2012-2027.

Summary

7.20 I consider that the principle of residential development at this site is acceptable under Policy DE1, EN10 and GD1 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy RS1, GN3, EN2 and EN4 of the submission version West Lancashire Local Plan DPD (2012-2027)

8.0 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions

Conditions

1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with details shown on the following plans:- Plan reference Location plan received by the Local Planning Authority on 30th October 2012. Plan reference Existing and proposed site plan 2012-097-002-Outline received by the Local Planning Authority on 20th August 2013. 3. No development shall take place on the site until approval of reserved matters namely the means of access, layout scale and appearance of the buildings and landscaping of the site has been granted by the local planning authority. 4. No development shall take place until a scheme for the foul and surface water drainage of the development, including any necessary attenuation measures, has been fully agreed with the relevant statutory body/bodies, and until written evidence of that agreement has been provided to and acknowledged in writing as acceptable by the Local Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt it is United Utilities preference for surface water not to discharge into the mains. 5. The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) FRA202 rev 2.1 and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA:

- Finished floor levels are set no lower than 37.88 m above Ordnance Datum (AOD).

The mitigation measures shall be fully implemented prior to occupation and subsequently in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. 6. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development (Amendment) (No.2) (England) Order 2008 or any subsequent Orders or statutory provision re-enacting the provisions of these Orders no garages, extensions, alterations, porches, garden sheds, out buildings, greenhouses, swimming pools, hardstandings or means of enclosure shall be erected or undertaken without the express written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons

1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 3. The application is in outline and the matters referred to in the Condition are reserved for subsequent approval by the Local Planning Authority. 4. To ensure that the site is properly drained in the interest of local amenity and that the development, therefore, complies with the provisions of Policies GD1, EN10, EN11 and SC10 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policies GN3 & IF3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 5. To ensure the development is full in accordance with the NPPF and EN10 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 of the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 6. The character and location of the property are such that the Local Planning Authority wish to exercise maximum control over future development in order to comply with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document.

Reason for Approval 1. The Local Planning Authority has considered the proposed development in the context of the Development Plan including in particular the following Policy/Policies in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan & in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document:

West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan Policies Policy DS1 Location of Development Policy GD1 Design of Development Policy DE1 Residential development

Submission Document West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) SP1 A sustainable framework for West Lancashire GN1 Settlement boundaries RS1 Residential development EN2 Preserving and enhancing West Lancashire's natural environment EN4 Preserving and enhancing West Lancashire's built environment

together with Supplementary Planning Guidance and all relevant material considerations. The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposal complies with the relevant Policy criteria and is acceptable in the context of all relevant material considerations as set out in the Officer's Report. This report can be viewed or a copy provided on request to the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority have worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with a planning application and have implemented the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187. No.5 APPLICATION 2012/1244/FUL NO. LOCATION Cop House Farm Jacksmere Lane Scarisbrick Lancashire L40 9RS

PROPOSAL Demolition of existing buildings and clearance of site and erection of 14 affordable dwellings. New vehicular/pedestrian access. APPLICANT MCI Developments, Mr & Mrs Cropper & Regenda Housing WARD Scarisbrick PARISH Scarisbrick TARGET DATE 23rd September 2013

1.0 PREVIOUS RELEVANT DECISIONS

1.1 None

2.0 OBSERVATIONS OF CONSULTEES

2.1 UNITED UTILITIES (1/3/2013) – No objection subject to the site being drained on a total separate system with only foul flows connecting into the public sewerage system. Surface water should discharge to soakaway or watercourse. No surface water will be allowed to discharge into the public sewerage system and it is noted that the proposed drainage strategy confirms that there is no intention to do so. It is recommended that a condition is imposed requiring further details of this connection before any development takes place.

2.2 LANCASHIRE CONSTABULARY (23/1/2013) – Recommendations made in respect to crime prevention.

2.3 HIGHWAY AUTHORITY (4/7/2013) – No objections in principle to the proposed housing development. The site will be accessed via a new access onto Jacksmere Lane. The planning application is for less than 50 new dwellings and as such the applicant does not need to provide a transport assessment. Using TRICS, this development will generate an estimated 100 vehicular movements a day with an estimated peak flow of 10 vehicles between 1700 and 1800. The traffic generated by the new development will increase the amount of traffic accessing the site, but this equates to less than 1 additional vehicle every seven and half minutes during rush hour. While the total number of vehicular trips will increase the number of light good vehicles, vans and HGVs visiting the site will be reduced. The HA are of the opinion that proposed housing development should have a negligible impact on highway capacity in the immediate vicinity of the site. As the development will not generate significantly more traffic than the existing use of the site and the number of light goods vehicles, vans and HGVs visiting the site will be reduced, a planning obligation charge for highway contributions is not required. The applicant has now shown that the recommended sight lines can be achieved but the sight lines to the west of plot 4 should be contained within the red site boundary (amended plans now received). The location of the main access is acceptable and the geometry of the proposed main site access is now to prescribed standards. The internal highway layout is also to an adoptable layout. The applicant has provided adequate off road parking provision for this type and size of development.

2.4 LCC ECOLOGY (28/3/2013) – Concerns raised with respect to the impact of the proposed drainage of surface water into an existing watercourse and the potential impact on water vole (protected species). The applicant has submitted a method statement addressing this concern.

2.5 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY (16/5/2013) – No comments

2.6 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH (27/2/2013) – No overall objections to the proposed development but the site is located in close proximity to a large area of glasshouses. Air blowers are used within these buildings and there is potential for these to impact upon future residents particularly during the summer months. Steps should be taken to protect residents from any tonal noises which may occur.

3.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 Scarisbrick Parish Council (6/8/2013) – No objection to the proposed development in principle. The need for affordable housing is recognised and acknowledged. However it is important that this fulfils local needs as a priority and the Council would like to see written commitment that the people of Scarisbrick would be prioritized when assigning new affordable accommodation.

3.2 A total of 19 representations have been received, of these 17 object to the proposed development and 2 offer support to the proposal. A summary of the issues raised is as follows:

- The scale is too large and not in keeping with the area - Impact on traffic safety – cars travel very fast on this road - Insufficient parking - Impact on pedestrian safety - The reduction in the development from 19 to 14 dwellings is merely a token gesture - There will be a large affordable development available in the near future less than a mile away (Southport) - The area is already overdeveloped - Stretch on local services such as schools and the police force - Out of character with local area – this is an agricultural area - Impact on Green Belt - Visual impact is unacceptable - The development will increase the amount of houses along the lane by 50% - Result in loss of rural status - There are unsold properties in the local area - Set precedent for other unacceptable development - Loss of amenity for neighbouring residents by reason of (amongst other factors) noise, disturbance, overlooking and loss of privacy - Disturbance cause by construction work - It is a good idea to provide local housing in Scarisbrick - Existing use is more suitable in purpose built premises - Existing site is unsightly and noise associated with it causes problems for local residents. This development will solve these problems

4.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION

4.1 The following documents have been submitted in support of the application:-

- Planning and Affordable Housing Statement - Ecological Assessment - Energy and Sustainability Statement - Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment - Design and Access Statement - Utilities Statement - Ground stability assessment

5.0 RELEVANT POLICIES

5.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan (WLRLP) and the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012- 2027) – Submission Document (emerging plan) provide the policy framework against which the development will be assessed.

5.2 The main site is allocated as Green Belt in both the adopted and emerging local plans.

5.3 Relevant West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan (WLRLP) policies: DS1 – Location of Development DS2 – Protecting the Green Belt DE1 – Residential Development DE3 – Affordable Housing DE5 – Employment Development DE6 – The Rural Economy EN1 – Biodiversity EN9 – Protecting Trees and Woodlands GD 1 – Design of Development GD2 – Developer Contributions to Infrastructure

5.4 Relevant West Lancashire Local Plan Submission document policies: SP1 – A Sustainable Development Framework for West Lancashire RS1 – Residential Development RS2 – Affordable and Specialist Housing IF2 – Enhancing Sustainable Transport Choice IF3 – Service Accessibility and Infrastructure for Growth IF4 – Developer Contributions EC1 – The Economy and Employment Land EC2 – The Rural Economy EN2 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Natural Environment GN3 – Design of Development GN4 – Demonstrating Viability GN5 – Sequential Tests

5.5 In addition the following supplementary documents are material considerations:

The Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework SPD – Design Guide (Jan 2008) West Lancashire Interim Housing Policy (July 2010) SPD - Open Space/Recreational Provision in New Residential Developments (April 2009). Planning Obligations in Lancashire

6.0 OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR PLANNING

The Site

6.1 The site is located to the south of Jacksmere Lane to the west of the settlement boundary of Scarisbrick. The whole of the site lies within the Green Belt but can be described in two parts. To the southern part of the site lies an untidy area of approx. 34.1m x 68m of open storage of materials and machinery, there is no planning history attributable to this area and it is unclear how long any specific use/s have taken place on the site; its status is therefore also unclear. To the forward part of the site an area of about 41 x 50 metres accommodates an established business taking in root crops (mainly carrots) from local producers to top and pack the product mainly for foods producers. The site includes agricultural type sheds and hardstanding areas. I have been advised that this area had been used for this purpose in excess of ten years and has never processed produce from the ‘holding’ on which it sits. This description and extent of use fits with the Council’s knowledge of the site. This defines the operation as outside the definition of agriculture and attributes brownfield status to that part of the site.

The Proposal

6.2 Planning consent is sought for demolition of the existing buildings and clearance of the site and the erection of 14 affordable dwellings with new vehicular/pedestrian access.

6.3 Four dwellings are proposed within the rear part of the site to reflect the Council’s view that this part of the land remains as Greenfield land within the Green Belt. These four dwellings (two pairs of semi-detached properties) face towards Jacksmere Lane with 12m deep rear garden areas. A landscape buffer zone is proposed on either side of these properties.

6.4 On the forward part of the site, which is recognised as having a brownfield status, 10 dwellings are proposed, a mixture of 1 x detached, 3 x pairs of semi detached and 1 x row of three terraced dwellings. The proposed layout within this part of the site shows two pairs of semi-detached dwellings facing onto Jacksmere Lane, with the other properties facing into the site.

6.5 All properties are two stories in height and are a mixture of 2 bed and three bed properties. Each dwelling benefits from two parking spaces. One of the parking spaces for each plot 6 to 8 is located away from the dwellings in order to provide small front garden areas.

Principle of Development – Green Belt

6.6 Paragraph 79 of the NPPF retains the government’s view that great importance is attached to Green Belts. It states that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; essential characteristics of Green Belt are their openness and their permanence.

6.7 Section 9 of the NPPF ‘Protecting the Green Belt’ states that as with previous Green Belt policy, inappropriate development is, by definition harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

6.8 Paragraph 89, Section 9 of the NPPF states that Local Planning Authorities should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in the Green Belt. Exceptions to this include: - Limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings) which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it, than the existing development. - Limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan

6.9 Policies RS1 and RS2 in the emerging local plan identify ‘limited affordable housing’ as being up to 4 units. The current and emerging local plan is considered to be consistent with the wording of the NPPF in respect of development in the Green Belt.

6.10 The proposed development, in terms of the layout and number of dwellings, has been influenced by the status of the land as outlined in Section 6.1 above. With respect to the rear of the site the applicant has included four units to respect the ‘very limited’ amount of affordable housing considered appropriate within the Green Belt (greenfield sites). The applicant has submitted a sequential test to demonstrate that there are no suitable alternative sites in non-Green Belt areas in accordance with Policy GN5 in the emerging local plan. On this basis, with reference to the development within the rear of the site only, I am satisfied that the principle of four affordable units in this area is acceptable.

6.11 With respect to the brownfield part of the site, given the wording of NPPF paragraph 89, the key question is whether the proposed development would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development. If there is found to be a greater impact, the proposals are inappropriate development, if there is no greater impact then the proposals are not inappropriate development.

6.12 The combined footprint of the proposed development is approximately 150m2 greater than the footprint of the existing built development within the accepted brownfield area of the site (a total of 10 dwellings is proposed in this area). The proposed development is spread across the whole of the site and within areas which are currently free from development (for example along the road frontage). I have taken account of the applicant’s view that residential development has a lesser impact than commercial buildings due to the general differences in mass, scale and bulk. Whilst the applicant considers the re-development of the land currently occupied by taller commercial buildings with two storey dwellings as proposed would be likely to have a lesser impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development, I do not share this view as the proposed development relates to a significantly greater area than the land which has been previously developed. The submitted plans show proposed dwellings located across the whole of the site whilst at present a considerable part of the site is not covered by existing buildings. The proposal is therefore considered to be inappropriate development which is by definition harmful to the Green Belt and which should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

Very Special Circumstances

6.13 The applicant maintains that very special circumstances exist which outweigh the harm caused by reason of inappropriateness. These essentially amount to the provision of affordable housing, which has the support of a Registered Provider (Regenda Group) and for which there are no alternative sites available. In addition the proposal contributes to the Council’s housing supply and the Council are at present unable to demonstrate a 5 year housing supply.

6.14 Whilst I acknowledge the importance of providing affordable housing, neither national nor local policy advocates the provision of affordable homes at the expense of compromising the essential characteristics of Green Belts. Given the identified impact of the proposed development I am unable to conclude that the provision of affordable housing outweighs the harm to the Green Belt caused by reason of inappropriateness.

6.15 With respect to the Council’s 5 year housing supply, the Council are in the final stages of adopting a new local plan (WLLP 2012-2027). The housing trajectory accompanying the Modified WLLP, which has been agreed by the Local Plan Inspector and which is due for full adoption in October, shows that West Lancashire has demonstrated a 5 year housing supply. I therefore do not consider the proposed development’s contribution to the Council’s housing supply represents a very special circumstance which would outweigh the identified harm to the Green Belt.

Impact on Green Belt

6.16 The application site is located within an area which is characterised by a mixture of both residential dwellings and established agricultural developments. I am mindful that the existing commercial use is not common within the surrounding area. However the existing buildings are not dissimilar to agricultural buildings and therefore the site as a whole does not appear incongruous within its surroundings. Given the nature of the surroundings, I accept that residential development would not appear out of place. However and in line with a recent appeal decision from St Helens (Sherdley Remec Ltd) it is important to consider the proposed ‘spread’ of development on the brownfield land. The definition of Previously Developed Land (brownfield land) in the NPPF makes it clear that it should not be assumed that the whole curtilage of the brownfield site should be developed. In this case, the proposed development spreads up to and beyond the boundaries of the part of the land which is currently occupied by buildings. This ‘spread’ of development, even though the overall massing of the proposed two storey dwellings is less than the existing buildings, results in a more intrusive form of development which would be harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area and the openness and visual amenity of the Green Belt.

Principle of Development – Employment Land

6.17 The current use of the site, for commercial purposes, leads to a designation of employment use. Therefore the principle of the development must also be assessed against Policy DE5 ‘Employment Development’ of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan. Part 4 states that “the conversion or re-use of employment sites not identified on the proposals map within the urban and rural settlements for alternative uses will not be permitted, unless it can be demonstrated that such alternative uses, for example tourism or leisure, provide significant job creation opportunities”.

6.18 Policy EC1 ‘The Economy and Employment Land’ of the West Lancashire Local Plan (Submitted Version) is also a material consideration in assessing the principle of this development and states that “the re-development of existing individual employment sites for other uses will be considered where a viability case can be put forward (in line with Policy GN4) and where the provisions of Policy EC2 and EC3 are met, where relevant”.

6.19 Policy EC2, ‘The Rural Economy’, states that the Council will protect the continued employment use of existing employment sites in rural areas. This includes any type of employment use, including agriculture and farming, and is not merely restricted to B1, B2 and B8 land uses. Where it can be robustly demonstrated that the site is unsuitable for an ongoing viable employment use (in accordance with the requirements of Policy GN4), the Council will consider alternative uses where this is in accordance with other policies in the Local Plan.

6.20 The proposed development would involve the loss of an active premises involving the processing of vegetables for the food industry, therefore a viability case needs to be demonstrated based on Policy GN4 of the emerging Local Plan.

6.21 Policy GN4 ‘Demonstrating Viability’ states that the Council will seek to retain existing commercial/industrial and retail premises, together with agricultural/horticultural workers’ dwellings, unless it can be demonstrated that one of the following tests can be met a) the continued use of the site/premises for its existing use is no longer viable in terms of its operation of the existing use, building age and format and that it is not commercially viable to redevelop the land or refurbish the premises for its existing use. In these circumstances, and where appropriate, it will also need to be demonstrated that there is no realistic prospect of a mixed-use scheme for the existing use and a compatible use; or

b) the land/premises is no longer suitable for the existing use when taking into account access/highways issues (including public transport), site location and infrastructure, physical constraints, environmental considerations and amenity issues. The compatibility of the existing use with adjacent uses may also be a consideration; or

c) marketing of the land/property indicates that there is no demand for the land/property in its existing use.

In addition to the above Policy GN4 states that details of the current occupation of the buildings, and where this function would be relocated, will also be required.

6.22 It should be noted that Policy GN4 has been modified since its original submission for Examination by the Local Plan Inspector. The above represents the modified version of this particular policy which has been accepted by the Inspector and will go forward for full adoption in the near future.

6.23 The applicant has submitted a case supporting the loss of the current employment use. This case centres on the existing condition of the site and associated buildings, the land owners needs in terms of ensuring the continued success and expansion of the business and the capital costs associated with this. I accept that the options available to the land owner are limited in terms of modernising the existing site from a cost point of view. In addition, the site lies within a landscape which is defined by residential and agricultural developments and the relocation of this commercial venture, given the limited options of its use due to its current condition, is accepted as being the optimal choice for the landowner. The site is further constrained by its close proximity to neighbouring residential dwellings. Given the relatively small size of the site (in commercial terms), a mixed use scheme would not appear to be a viable option. 6.24 Given the specific set of circumstances attributable to this case in respect of the loss of the current employment use and the case put forward by the applicant, I consider that this case accords with Policy GN4 (a) in the emerging local plan in that the continued use of the site is no longer viable due to the building age and format and it is not commercially viable to redevelop the land or refurbish the premises for its existing use. In addition there is no realistic prospect of a mixed use scheme for the existing use and a compatible use given the realistic site limitations outlined by the applicant.

Design/Layout

6.25 Notwithstanding my earlier comments regarding the impact of the proposed development on the openness of the Green Belt, I accept that the proposed layout of the scheme is comprehensive and legible. It provides suitable interface distances between the proposed buildings and suitable separation distances between them and surrounding properties. The proposed use of a pair of semi- detached dwellings along the frontage of Jacksmere Lane responds well to the existing pattern of development in the area. Whilst the proposed dwellings and their associated plots are somewhat smaller than the surrounding properties, they reflect the nature of the development and would result in the creation of a development which provides a suitable degree of variation to its surroundings whilst respecting the residential character of the locality.

6.26 All of the dwellings would be provided with rear garden amenity spaces, while ten of the dwellings would also benefit from front amenity spaces. Parking is generally provided to the front and side of each dwelling ensuring easy access and security. One of the two spaces allocated to plots 6 to 8 is located on the opposing side of the central manoeuvring area. This has however allowed garden frontages to these plots which is considered to be a benefit to the scheme as a whole.

Impact on Neighbouring Land Uses

6.27 In terms of the impact upon neighbouring land uses, sufficient interface distances would be provided between the proposed dwellings fronting onto Jacksmere Lane and those on the opposing side of the highway, i.e. 21m. There are no neighbouring properties to the west or south. In terms of the neighbouring property to the east, plot 14 would be located in close proximity to the eastern boundary. However the dwelling on this plot has been designed to ensure that it would not result in any overlooking or loss of privacy of the neighbouring site by directing all outlook away from the first floor rear elevation. 6.28 The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has raised some concerns over the potential impact on future residents from the nearby glasshouses and their associated air blowers. However this is a rural area with established agricultural uses which lie in close proximity to existing residential properties and I am satisfied that these concerns are not so significant as to warrant the imposition of a condition to address this matter.

6.29 I am satisfied that the proposed development is in accordance with Policy GD1 of the WLLRLP, Policies GN3 and EN4 of the WLLPSD and the Council’s SPD ‘Design Guide’ and would cause no significant harm to the residential amenities of neighbouring properties.

Highways

6.30 The proposed development would include a new main access off Jacksmere Lane along with further vehicular access points to plots 3 and 4. The positioning of these is considered acceptable and all offer acceptable levels of visibility. Parking provision throughout the development is considered acceptable with each dwelling benefiting from two parking spaces which is in accordance with current and emerging local policy. Policies GD1 and SC6 in the WLRLP and Policies GN3 and IF2 in the emerging local plan require that development would not prejudice road safety and the convenient movement of all highway users including cyclists, pedestrians and public transport operations. There have been a number of concerns raised by local residents over the potential impact of the development on highway safety in the immediate area. However the Highway Authority have confirmed that the proposed development will result in a minimal increase in vehicular movements during rush hour and while the total number of vehicular trips will increase, the number of light goods vehicles, vans and HGVs visiting the site will be reduced. On balance therefore, I am satisfied that the proposed development will not result in highway safety concerns or impact upon the free flow of traffic in the immediate locality. The inclusion of the footpath to the front of the site is considered beneficial to pedestrian safety along this section of the highway. The Highway Authority has confirmed that the geometry of the main site access is to prescribed design standards and the internal layout is also to an adoptable standard.

Landscaping/Ecology

6.31 The proposed development will result in the loss of an existing hedge along the frontage of the site. However additional landscaping is proposed along the site boundaries. Landscape buffer zones are proposed to the rear of the site. I am therefore satisfied that the loss of the front hedge is adequately compensated for by the proposed landscaping scheme, further details of which could be secured by way of a planning condition. 6.32 The initial ecological survey concluded that the site was of limited ecological value. There was no evidence that the existing buildings were suitable for bat habitation but a precautionary approach to their removal is recommended and this could be secured by way of a planning condition. Whilst the site was identified as being located within a Sensitive Bird Area, there is very limited foraging habitat on site. The presence of Himalayan Balsam has been identified on site and a condition could be imposed to deal with controlling this. The County Ecologist has identified that the proposed surface water drainage into an existing watercourse may have an impact on water vole in this area. However the applicant has submitted a detailed water vole survey which does identify water vole activity in the drainage ditch which is located approximately 120m to the south of the development site, but concludes that this issue can be adequately addressed through suitable mitigation measures. The development itself is located a significant distance from this ditch and I am therefore satisfied, through the use of appropriate conditions, that the development would be compliant with Policy EN1 in the WLRLP and Policy EN2 in the emerging local plan. Neither the County Ecologist nor the Environment Agency (governing body for the protection of water voles) has raised any objection to the proposed development.

Drainage

6.33 The applicant proposes to connect foul flows to an existing 150mm adopted foul sewer present in Jacksmere Lane. This is considered acceptable and has been agreed as such by United Utilities. In respect of surface water drainage, it is proposed to direct outfall to the existing water course located approximately 120m south of the application site. The flow to the existing water course would be attenuated to greenfield run off. This arrangement has been agreed as acceptable by United Utilities subject to the imposition of a condition to agree the specific details of these connections before any development takes place.

6.34 As the applicant has provided details of a suitable separate drainage system, the proposal is considered to comply with Policy EN10 of the WLRLP and Policy IF3 of the emerging local plan.

Planning Contributions

6.35 Under the adopted Supplementary Planning Document, Open Space/Recreation Provision, on developments of between 3 and 39 dwellings financial contributions in the form of a commuted sum are required from developers for the provision of and/or upgrade of public open space in the vicinity of the site. As the development is for a 100% affordable scheme, this amount is reduced by 50%. Therefore in this instance the appropriate amount is calculated at £11,783. 6.36 With respect to the affordable housing, the details of this could be agreed by way of a planning condition. I am satisfied that a suitable scheme can be agreed to ensure that the local needs of the area are taken into account.

Summary

6.37 The proposed scheme, as a whole, represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The NPPF makes it clears that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. The circumstances put forward by the appellant are not accepted as being sufficient to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness. Whilst I accept that there are matters in favour of the scheme, such as the provision of affordable housing, this is not accepted as being sufficient to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and therefore does not justify the development on the basis of very special circumstances. The proposed development would fail to accord with the advice of the Framework as well as WLRLP Policy DS2 and emerging local plan policy GN1.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 That planning permission is REFUSED for the following reason:

Reasons for Refusal 1. The proposed scheme constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt as it would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt by resulting in the further sprawl of built development on the site outside of the footprint of the existing buildings. No very special circumstances, which clearly outweigh the harm by reason of inappropriateness, have been demonstrated. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the NPPF, Policy DS2 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN1 in the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Submission Document. No.6 APPLICATION 2013/0572/FUL NO. LOCATION Copelands Farm Drummersdale Lane Scarisbrick Ormskirk Lancashire L40 9RB

PROPOSAL Two storey rear extension. APPLICANT Mr Peter Sutter WARD Scarisbrick PARISH Scarisbrick TARGET DATE 15th October 2013

1.0 REFERRAL

1.1 This application was to be determined under the Councils delegation scheme, however, Councillor Fowler has requested it be referred to the Committee to assess the impact on the openness of the green belt; the over development of the site; the loss of amenity to other residents and that the design which is thought not to be in keeping with the rest of the immediate surroundings.

2.0 PREVIOUS RELEVANT DECISIONS

E/2010/0374/UAU Without planning permission the change of use of land from agriculture to residential/domestic purposes ancillary to the residential use of the adjacent property, Copelands Farm, Drummersdale Lane, Scarisbrick. APPEAL IN PROGRESS

2002/0478 Conservatory and detached double garage. GRANTED 02.07.2002

2001/0939 Erection of detached double garage. WITHDRAWN 14.01.2002

2001/0524 Conservatory and detached double garage REFUSED 26.07.2001

3.0 CONSULTEE RESPONSES

SCARISBRICK PARISH COUNCIL - No Objections (03.09.2013) 4.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

None received

5.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION

5.1 A justification statement has been submitted with the application in support of the proposal and can be summarised as follows:

- The footprint of the proposal is 10m2, and that of the existing building is 123m2. The eaves are consistent with the existing dwelling, and the ridge of the roof is below the height of the main roof. - There is no increase in residential curtilage - The extension has been designed to infill a corner of the building, and its size has been limited in order to minimise the impact on the Green Belt.

6.0 LOCAL PLAN ALLOCATION

6.1 The site is within the Green Belt as designated in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan.

6.2 National Planning Policy Framework Requiring good design Protecting Green Belt land

6.3 Relevant West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan Policies Policy GD 1 – Design of Development Policy DS2 – Protecting the Green Belt

6.4 Supplementary Planning Document, Design Guide (Jan 2008)

6.5 Supplementary Planning Guidance, Domestic extensions and outbuildings and replacement dwellings in the Green Belt (March 2007)

6.6 West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document Policy GN1 – Settlement Boundaries Policy GN3 – Criteria for Sustainable Development Policy EN4 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Built Environment 7.0 SUMMARY OF ISSUES

7.1 The Site

7.2 The application site comprises of a detached farmhouse located at the end of a track south of Drummersdale Lane about 500m from the junction with Bescar Lane. The property lies within a grouping of converted barn dwellings but forms the outer dwelling to the south of the grouping. The site lies within the Green Belt.

7.3 The property has been previously extended and there is currently an appeal in progress for an extension to the curtilage. For note the red edge plan that has been submitted as part of this application is not the agreed lawful curtilage.

7.4 The Proposal

7.5 Planning permission is sought for a two storey rear extension. It would be sited over the footprint of the existing conservatory and would measure 2.95m in width by 3.50m in length and would have a pitched roof which would measure 6.34m to the ridge and 4.95m to the eaves.

7.6 Assessment

7.7 The main considerations for the determination of this application are;

i) Principle of development/Impact upon the Green Belt ii) Visual appearance/design iii) Impact upon neighbouring properties

7.8 Principle of development/Impact upon the Green Belt

7.9 The NPPF and Policy DS2 of the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan advises permission will not be given except in very special circumstance for the erection of new buildings other than for a limited range of purposes. One such purpose is the extensions or alteration of a dwelling – but only where, amongst other things, the extensions do not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original dwelling. The SPG suggests that once the volume of all extensions exceed about 50% of the volume of the original building, or the area of their footprint exceeds that of the original building by two thirds, then it is more likely that the development would have an adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt. 7.10 The original dwelling has been extended in the form of a conservatory however the proposed extension would be sited over this footprint. The proposed development involves a squaring off of the North West corner of the building by the introduction of a two storey extension however overall the extension would amount to only 9% volume increase and 8% footprint increase. Clearly the volume and footprint additions would not exceed the recommended guidelines. It is considered that the design of the roof results in a massing of roof space that appears more prominent than the existing and does form a certain bulk especially when viewed from south west and coupled with the existing two storey front outrigger. However it is not consider that it would be so significant to result in substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt.

7.11 Therefore it is considered that the proposed development would be appropriate development and would accord with the aim of the NPPF and DS2 of the WLRLP to preserve the openness of the Green Belt.

7.12 Visual appearance/design

7.13 Policy GD 1, of the WLRLP, Policy GN3 of the submission version of the local plan and advice contained in the SPD, Design Guide state that extensions should be subservient in size, scale and mass and should relate well in terms of design to the original dwelling. Extensions should have a built form which relates to the character and appearance of the existing property and should not detract from the character of the street scene.

7.14 The extension would form an infilling towards the South West corner and would sit comfortably within the parameters of the existing building. It would not mask the character of the host building and would appear subordinate. Whilst the roof detailing would be different from the host building as it features the introduction of a gable I consider that this would be acceptable on practicality grounds as the extension would be sited to the rear of the dwelling.

7.15 Overall the proposed size, scale and form of the extension would be acceptable and in compliance with Policy GD1 of the WLRLP and Policy GN3 of the submission version of the local plan.

7.16 Impact upon neighbouring properties

7.17 Policy GD 1, criterion xiii of the West Lancashire Replacement Local plan and Policy GN 3, criterion iii of the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document states that any development should retain reasonable levels of privacy, amenity and sufficient garden/outdoor space for occupiers of the neighbouring and proposed properties 7.18 Due to the location of the extension on the building and the relatively isolated nature of the property there would be no impact on the amenity of any neighbours through overshadowing or overlooking.

8.0 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with details shown on the following plans:- Plan reference E627/13 version B received by the Local Planning Authority on 18th September 2013. 3. All external brickwork and roofing materials shall be identical to those on the existing building in respect of shape, size, colour and texture. If the applicant or developer has any doubts as to whether the proposed materials do match they should check with the Local Planning Authority before commencement of the building works. 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development (Amendment) (No.2) (England) Order 2008 or any subsequent Orders or statutory provision re-enacting the provisions of these Orders no garages or other extensions to a dwelling shall be erected until details of the siting and design have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons

1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 3. To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory and that the development therefore complies with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 4. In order to avoid conflict with the Local Planning Authority's policy of strict control of development in the Green Belt and to ensure compliance with Policy DS2 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan. Notes 1. The red edge plan that has been submitted as part of the application is not the agreed lawful curtilage.

Reason for Approval 1. The Local Planning Authority has considered the proposed development in the context of the Development Plan including in particular the following Policy/Policies in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan & in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document:

West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan Policies Policy GD 1 – Design of Development Policy DS2 – Protecting the Green Belt

West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submission Document Policy GN1 – Settlement Boundaries Policy GN3 – Criteria for Sustainable Development Policy EN4 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Built Environment

together with Supplementary Planning Guidance and all relevant material considerations. The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposal complies with the relevant Policy criteria and is acceptable in the context of all relevant material considerations as set out in the Officer's Report. This report can be viewed or a copy provided on request to the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority have worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with a planning application and have implemented the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187. No.7 APPLICATION 2013/0666/OUT NO. LOCATION 3663 Booker Food Service Park House Black Moss Lane Scarisbrick Ormskirk Lancashire L40 9RN PROPOSAL Outline - Demolition of warehouse and offices and erection of dwellings. APPLICANT 3663 WARD Scarisbrick PARISH Scarisbrick TARGET DATE 29th October 2013

1.0 RECENT RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 2006/1002 GRANTED (23.05.2007) Certificate of Lawfulness - Use of two portacabins for office use and one portacabin as smoking room.

1.2 2001/0793 GRANTED (08.11.2001) - Erection of chill store.

2.0 CONSULTEE RESPONSES

2.1 Environment Agency (23.08.13) – objects due to lack of flood risk assessment. Flood Risk Assessment now received. Further comments from EA awaited.

2.2 Scarisbrick Parish Council (06.08.13) - does not object in principle to the redevelopment of this site for housing. However, the Council is concerned with regard to the potential for over-intensification and consider that site layouts in the region of fourteen dwellings would be more appropriate for the location rather than the proposed higher density of thirty three dwellings. The Council consider that the access via Blackmoss Lane would not support high density development and the number of extra vehicle journeys this would generate. Southport Road is particularly busy and egress from Blackmoss Lane can be difficult. It is also clear that Blackmoss Lane could not support extra traffic travelling in the direction of its junction with Jacksmere Lane. The Council also notes with some disappointment that there is no provision for any affordable housing on the proposed development. The proposal would be more acceptable in planning terms if this need could be addressed.

2.3 Deputy Assistant Director Housing & Regeneration (28/08/13) – no objection subject to relocation of existing employment in locality. 2.4 Lancashire Constabulary (07.08.13) – advocate the Secured By Design approach and provide design suggestions to consider at the design/reserved matters stage.

2.5 LCC (Highways) (11.09.13) – no objections in principle. Estimates that the traffic generated by the new housing development will increase over the existing use of the site but the number of HGV movements to the site will be removed. Development should have a negligible impact on highway capacity in the immediate vicinity of the site.

The location of the existing modified junction onto Black Moss Lane is acceptable providing the minimum sight lines of 2.4 x 152m in both directions can be provided.

Recommends a 2.0m wide footpath is provided for the full extent of the site fronting Black Moss Lane. The footpath would promote social inclusion, especially for residents fronting Black Moss Lane.

A highway contribution of £26,000 is requested to support sustainable transport measures and improve social inclusion, and £6,000 to formalise the existing weighting restriction order by extending the existing order up to the junction with Southport Road.

2.6 Assistant Director Community Services (13.09.13) – no objections in principle subject to a noise assessment being carried out prior to submission of reserved matters to inform any necessary attenuation measures required to ameliorate traffic noise from the A570 Southport Road.

3.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

3.1 2 representations from nearby residents have been received expressing no objection to the principle of the proposed development but expressing the following concerns:

Lower density of dwellings preferable Highway problems exist in the vicinity of the site Highway limitations on Blackmoss Lane Alternative developments suggested in the supporting documentation (hotel/entertainment) less desirable. Development encroaches into protected tree areas Frontage development with direct access to Blackmoss Lane would be inappropriate and unsafe Limited parking may result in unacceptable parking on Blackmoss Lane Light pollution and noise from 33 dwellings will destroy an existing quiet rural area 4.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION

4.1 The applicant has submitted the following supporting information:

Design and Access Statement Phase 1 Habitat Survey Arboricultural Report

5.0 LOCAL PLAN ALLOCATION

5.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan (WLRLP) and the submission version West Lancashire Local Plan DPD (2012-2027) (emerging plan) provide the policy framework against which the development proposals will be assessed.

5.2 The site is designated as Green Belt in both the WLRLP and emerging plans.

5.3 Relevant West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan Policies

DS1 Location of development DS2 Green Belt GD1 Design of development GD2 Developer Contributions to Infrastructure DE1 Residential Development DE3 Affordable Housing DE5 Employment Development DE6 The Rural Economy EN1 Biodiversity EN4 Conservation Areas EN7 Protection of Historic Parks and Gardens EN9 Protecting Trees and Woodlands EN10 Flood Risk

5.4 Relevant Submission version West Lancashire Local Plan DPD (2012-2027) Policies GN1 Settlement boundaries GN3 Criteria for sustainable development GN4 Demonstrating Viability EC1 The Economy and Employment Land EC2 The Rural Economy RS1 Residential Development RS2 Affordable and Specialist Housing IF3 Service Accessibility and Infrastructure for Growth IF4 Developer Contributions EN2 Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Natural Environment EN3 Provision of Green Infrastructure and Open recreation Space EN4 Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Built Environment

Other material considerations:

West Lancashire Interim Housing Policy (June 2010) SPD Design Guide (January 2008) Open Space/Recreation Provision in New Residential Development SPD (April 2009)

6.0 SUMMARY OF ISSUES

Site Description

6.1 The roughly triangular site of about 1.2 Ha. lies north of the junction of Black Moss Lane with Southport Road (A570). The level site accommodates a range of industrial stores and offices (converted former dwellings) covering a substantial part of the site. The site benefits from a mature tree belt to the Southport Road frontage, the remaining boundaries having linear tree and hedge lines. The site is currently used for the area distribution of frozen foods with office facilities including call centre and accounts department associated with the national food distribution company. The non-treed areas are substantially hard surfaced.

6.2 The site is bordered by a small row of residential properties to the southern side of the junction; two further residential properties lie approx. 60 metres to the west surrounded by agricultural fields; open agricultural fields to the north; and, Scarisbrick Park to the east.

Proposal

6.3 This application seeks outline permission for the demolition of the existing buildings on the site and redevelopment for residential dwellings including affordable housing units.

Principle of Development – Green Belt

6.4 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advocates that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, by performing an economic, social and environmental role. The Framework re-iterates the fact that planning law requires that planning applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development and that 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 in the Framework taken as a whole, or, unless specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted.

6.5 Within Paragraph 89 of the NPPF relating to Green Belt development, bullet point 6 states that local planning authorities should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate. One exception to this is:

limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

6.6 Further the NPPF states that due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF. The adopted West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan does not contain any policy akin to NPPF paragraph 89 point 6 quoted above whilst the emerging plan refers to the approach contained in the NPPF; therefore in this case the NPPF is the primary consideration.

6.7 Given the wording of the NPPF paragraph 89, the key question is whether the proposed re-development would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development or conflict with the reasons of including land within it. If there is a greater impact or conflict with the purposes of the Green Belt, the proposals are inappropriate development; if there is no greater impact the proposals are not inappropriate.

6.8 In terms of the proposed amount of built development, whilst it is acknowledged that the submitted scheme is in outline and therefore indicative, the plans demonstrate that footprint and volume offsetting are capable of being achieved on this site – subject to imposing maximum limitations to ensure no additional impact on the openness of the Green Belt. In terms of resulting areas of hard surfacing on the site it is likely that the proposals will result in some benefit through the overall reduction from the existing amount.

6.9 In terms of conflicting with the reasons for including land within the Green Belt, given the spread of development across this site and the constraints to the re- developable area (constrained by existing trees on the site – see below) built form will substantially lie within the existing limits of built form i.e. not encroaching into previously undeveloped or naturalized areas of the site; therefore, the degree of urbanization or perceived encroachment will remain comparable with the existing situation. 6.10 In summary, I consider the principle of development acceptable in terms of the prevailing NPPF policy and therefore emerging Policy GN1.

Principle of Development – Employment Land 6.11 NPPF paragraph 51 states that local planning authorities should normally approve planning applications for change of use from B-class to residential uses, provided there are not strong economic reasons why such development is inappropriate. The local interpretation of this is reflected in emerging policies EC1(c) and EC2. Policy EC1 in relation to this site states:

On other employment sites the Council will permit industrial, business, storage and distribution uses (B1, B2 and B8). The redevelopment of existing individual employment sites for other uses will be considered where a viability case can be put forward (in line with Policy GN4) and where the provisions of Policy EC2 and EC3 are met, where relevant.

Policy EC2 in relation to this site states:

Employment opportunities in the rural areas of the Borough are limited, and therefore the Council will protect the continued employment use of existing employment sites. This could include any type of employment use, including agriculture and farming, and may not be merely restricted to B1, B2 and B8 land uses. Where it can be robustly demonstrated that the site is unsuitable for an ongoing viable employment use (in accordance with the requirements of Policy GN4), the Council will consider alternative uses where this is in accordance with other policies in the Local Plan.

Policy EC3 is not relevant to this site. Employment opportunities in the rural areas of the Borough are limited, and 6.12 The test required by the above policies is set out in amended, emerging Policy GN4 which states:

The Council will seek to retain existing commercial/industrial (B1, B2 or B8) and retail (A1) land/premises, together with agricultural/horticultural workers' dwellings, unless it can be demonstrated that one of the following tests has been met: a) the continued use of the site/premises for its existing use is no longer viable in terms of its operation of the existing use, building age and format and that it is not commercially viable to redevelop the land or refurbish the premises for its existing use. In these circumstances, and where appropriate, it will also need to be demonstrated that there is no realistic prospect of a mixed-use scheme for the existing use and a compatible use; or b) the land/premises is no longer suitable for the existing use when taking into account access/highways issues (including public transport), site location and infrastructure, physical constraints, environmental considerations and amenity issues. The compatibility of the existing use with adjacent uses may also be a consideration; or c) marketing of the land/property indicates that there is no demand for the land property in its existing use.

Details of the current occupation of the buildings, and where this function would be relocated, will also be required.

Where the existing use is no longer considered viable and a mixed-use scheme is also not viable or appropriate, the Council will preferentially seek the following alternative uses prior to consideration of a market housing-led scheme: For existing retail uses, an alternative use that helps create or maintain the vitality of a town, village or local centre; and For existing agricultural/horticultural workers' dwellings, an alternative use for affordable housing.

6.13 The NPPF states that the weight that can be attributed to policies in emerging plans will depend on the stage of preparation of the emerging plan, the number of outstanding objections to the policy, and the consistency of the policy with the NPPF. Subject to the amendment of Policy GN4 the applicable policies have been submitted and found sound and are therefore consistent with the aims of the NPPF; subsequently, these policies can be given significant weight. The approach of the above policies and the NPPF is not fully consistent with the provisions of policies DE5 and DE6 in the WLRLP which are therefore considered out of date for the purposes of the assessment of this application.

6.14 The applicant contends that there are several issues relating to the site which render it unviable. The applicant has not undertaken any marketing of the site and thereby relies on the first two tests. The applicant indicates that the re-use of the site for the existing use would be inappropriate and that the existing buildings are unsuitable for re-use. 6.15 The submissions relate to the ongoing unsuitability of the existing buildings on site to meet the business' ongoing storage and distribution needs due to the constrained and inefficient scale of the coldstore buildings and the dated refrigeration units that will soon require replacement due to incoming controls in respect of HCFC refrigerants. It is also noted that the site suffers several restrictions – relatively poor access and limited internal waiting and loading areas resulting in operational inefficiency and outspill of HGVs onto the surrounding road network. The applicant also suggests that the visual aspect of the site is detrimental to its surroundings and the adjacent Scarisbrick Park Conservation Area, and that its unrestricted operation can lead to late and early HGV movements in the locality often resulting in complaints from nearby residents. It is also submitted that the office building on site is in poor condition and the bungalow building (formerly used for offices) has been condemned.

6.16 In terms of test a), whilst it is accepted that there are concerns over the efficiency of the existing buildings and systems no detailed or robust viability information has been provided to back up that case. It is noteworthy that the submissions state that the company's forward strategy is to centralise distribution from facilities lying outside the Borough whilst seeking to retain the office based employment within it. The arguments put forward to support a non-viable position for the continued use or re-use of the site are on the basis of constraints relating primarily to the B8 element, however, the larger employment generator is the B1 element of the site for which there only exists a concern over the condition of the Park House building. No case relating to the viability of a mixed use scheme either retaining or redeveloping for the larger employment generating use has been made or, indeed, any other form of mixed use development.

6.17 In terms of test b), it is again acknowledged that the site does suffer some constraints and during periods in the past has given rise to amenity and highway concerns primarily relating to visiting/waiting traffic rather than operations within the site, however, it has operated for a considerable time without major concerns. That said, the site is not constrained in terms of working hours and is otherwise only subject to operating limitations outside of planning controls. Again, the limitations only relate to the lower employment generating B8 uses on the site and are not applicable to the ongoing B1 uses. The further test of considering a mixed use viability has not been addressed in the submissions. The applicant's suggestion that the office development will be located within the Borough is not substantiated. 6.18 It is my view that there are strong economic reasons why the Council should seek to retain employment uses, particularly in rural areas, given a shortage of employment land across the Borough and given the need to protect and stimulate the local economy. I consider the applicant has failed to sufficiently and robustly demonstrate that there is no viability to the retention (in whole or part), or redevelopment to retain some employment use on the site in association with a mixed use scheme and therefore has not met the requirements of Policy GN4 and subsequently Policies EC1 and EC2 in the emerging plan. 6.19 Finally, the applicant further relies on the NPPF's presumption in favour of sustainable development based on the Council's lack of 5-year housing supply. NPPF paragraph 49 states that if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites then relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date. In that case a presumption in favour of sustainable development exists. Since the application was received, the Council's emerging plan has been confirmed as sound including provision of sufficient housing land to meet the five year supply (plus contingency). It is therefore concluded that the argument relating to a lack of 5- year supply is not applicable in this instance and the presumption in favour of sustainable development is reflected in the emerging policies applicable to the site.

Demolition

6.20 The principle of demolition of the industrial buildings and the bungalow building are considered acceptable subject to meeting ecological policy requirements and ensuring works do not adversely impact on the health of surrounding trees. The Park House villa and associated former agricultural brick outbuildings to the front of the site have some limited historical interest as the building retains its original character and features. The retention of the building as part of an overall redevelopment scheme would be welcome and more likely to best preserve the setting of the historic park and adjacent Conservation Area. However, due to limited maintenance, the building appears in a poor condition and is not considered worthy of local listing status. The building does provide a focus for views from the A570 Southport Road to the otherwise well assimilated site, however, in the absence of any direct historical link its loss as part of the redevelopment of the site is balanced against the removal of the industrial buildings which will lead to an overall improvement of the setting of the adjacent conservation area and historic park particularly from more distant views from the north and west, and is therefore not resisted. Ecology

6.21 The application is supported by an ecological survey. The report concludes that Park House and the bungalow to the north-west corner of the site have high potential to support bat roosts and nesting birds. It is known that in 2009/10 roosts were present within these buildings and subsequently the report recommends further surveys be undertaken to assess the status of the roosts.

6.22 In every case involving a European protected species, (Bats or Great Crested Newts) regard should be had of the provisions of the Habitats Directive. The EC Habitats Directive 1992 requires the UK to maintain a system of strict protection for protected species and their habitats. The Directive only allows disturbance, or deterioration or destruction of breeding sites or resting places – in the interests of public health and public safety or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment; and providing that there is no satisfactory alternative and no detriment to the maintenance of the species population at favourable conservation status in their natural range. In this instance as further investigations have not been carried out to ascertain if bats are present on site or the extent the site is used by bats as foraging habitat, in accordance with The EC Habitats Directive 1992, a condition cannot be attached to request further work and a favourable decision cannot be made by the Local Planning Authority. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy EN1 in the WLRLP and Policy EN2 in the emerging plan.

6.23 The existing site benefits from established tree and hedge planting to the boundaries of the site with additional individual trees and a deeper belt to the eastern boundary. The majority of these trees are subject to a Tree Preservation Order and retain an amenity value. As part of any proposal it is anticipated that the majority of the trees will be retained to maintain the visual amenity of the site, retain the ability to assimilate the proposed development within the wider landscape and provide a suitable buffer with the adjacent Conservation Area. The indicative plans show some inappropriate siting and potential removal of some boundary trees that would conflict with Policy EN9 in the WLRLP and EN2 in the emerging plan, however, as the proposal is in outline only I do not consider this to be prohibitive to accepting the principle of development.

Setting of the Scarisbrick Park Conservation Area, Listed Building and Park

6.24 Subject to the retention and possible enhancement of the site boundary treatments I do not consider the proposals will have any significant adverse impact on the setting of the conservation area, listed building or listed park. Indeed, longer views of those assets are likely to be improved – particularly in winter months when the predominantly deciduous trees are naked of leaf cover. Flood Risk and Drainage

6.25 The standing objection from the Environment Agency pre-dates the submission of a Flood Risk Assessment that is subject to further consideration by the EA. The site lies within Flood Zone 1 and therefore outside any areas of escalated risk and no local surface water flooding issues are known to directly affect the site. Drainage details for the site will need to demonstrate non-mains drainage for surface water or a minimum reduction of 30% of any existing surface water flow to mains as the site lies in the catchment area of the New Lane waste water treatment works and to comply with Policy GN3 in the emerging plan. Affordable Housing

6.26 Under the terms of Policy DE3 in the WLRLP and RS2 of the emerging plan it would be anticipated that the amount of development that could be accommodated on the site would trigger a requirement to deliver affordable housing units within the development. The applicant has indicated that this would be achievable on the site. Additionally, Policy RS2 seeks a minimum of 20% housing to be specifically designed as accommodation for the elderly and I see no obvious barrier to the delivery of this aspect of the policy requirement. The terms of any affordable housing provision would be secured through s.106 agreement.

Highways and Access

6.27 The detail of access is not sought at this stage however the indicative plans suggest there are options and opportunities for safely accessing the site – this would be subject to formal approval at the reserved matters stage. The highway Authority have assessed the principle of development on this site and consider it can be accommodated without significant detriment to highway capacity or safety in the vicinity of the site.

Impact on Surrounding Land Uses

6.28 It is not anticipated that the proposed use of the land would have any significant adverse impact on neighbouring land uses.

Planning Obligations

6.29 The development will attract infrastructure contributions in respect of the provision or enhancement of on-site or nearby local amenity space and to enhance sustainable modes of transport. These requirements will be secured through s.106 agreement. Summary

6.30 The proposed development of the site is considered to be contrary to the requirements of Policies EC1, EC2 and GN4 in the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submitted Document due to insufficient demonstration that the site cannot be viably re-used for employment or mixed use development purposes resulting in a loss of rural employment opportunities in the Borough. Additionally, the applicant has failed to provide sufficient information to enable the Council to appropriately assess the impact of development on European protected species; the proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policy EN1 in the WLRLP and EN2 in the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submitted Document.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 Planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

Reasons for Refusal 1. The proposed development is contrary to the requirements of Policies EC1, EC2 and GN4 in the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Adoption Version as the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the site cannot be viably re-used for employment or mixed use development purposes thereby resulting in a loss of rural employment opportunities in the Borough. 2. The applicant has failed to provide sufficient information to enable the Council to appropriately assess the impact of development on European protected species on the site, the proposal is therefore contrary to Policy EN1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and EN2 in the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012-2027) Submitted Document. No.8 APPLICATION 2013/0726/FUL NO. LOCATION Moss Side Farm Moss Side Lane Tarleton Preston Lancashire PR4 6LD

PROPOSAL Erection of agricultural storage and processing building. APPLICANT J & D Rimmer & Sons Ltd WARD Tarleton PARISH Tarleton TARGET DATE 29th August 2013

1.0 REFERRAL

1.1 This application was to be dealt with under delegated powers but Councillor Evans requested that it be referred to the Planning Committee to consider the impact of the possible increase in HGV movements along Moss Side Lane on local residents.

2.0 PREVIOUS RELEVANT DECISIONS

2.1 2010/0487/PNP - Consideration of Details for Prior Approval - erection of lean-to extension to existing agricultural store and cold room. DETAILS APPROVED 12.12.2011

2.2 2008/0896/FUL - Erection of agricultural storage and processing building. WITHDRAWN

2.3 2007/0536/FUL – Erection of agricultural storage building. WITHDRAWN

2.4 2001/0428 – Agricultural storage building. GRANTED 03.07.2001

2.5 1995/0155 – Agricultural storage building. GRANTED 29.03.1995

3.0 OBSERVATIONS OF CONSULTEES

3.1 HIGHWAY AUTHORITY (25/9/2013) - No objection. The proposed development will not have a detrimental impact on highway safety and amenity in the immediate vicinity of the site. The Highway Authority carried out its own traffic survey on 25th September 2013. This generally agrees with the applicant’s traffic study and therefore finds that the applicant’s highway consultants have produced an acceptable Transport Statement. It is acknowledged that farming can have seasonal peaks but the Highway Authority are of the opinion that the current highway infrastructure has adequate provision to cater for this size of development and agrees with the principle of the applicant’s intention to reduce the number of vehicle movements to and from the site. The Highway Authority is of the opinion that the recently constructed passing places have improved highway safety and reduced vehicle conflict along Moss Side Lane.

3.2 COUNTY LAND AGENT (13/9/2013) – The proposed use is for storage of potatoes and undertaking crop processing. I note from the appraisal undertaken for application 2007/0536 that the advice provided confirmed that there was an agricultural justification for that building and the size and design was appropriate. With reference to the proposed development it is evident that there has been loss of potato storage facilities owing to changes in how the buildings are utilized and as such, there is no longer a purpose design storage for potatoes on the unit. The application building has a reduced footprint to the earlier application although the eaves height has increase by 2.2m. I feel the use of boxes to store potatoes enables boxes to be stored high and as such, feel the proposed height is appropriate. I also feel that it is likely that the use of the building will be for storage and not processing at least in the short term in view of the recent investment made is processing and cold storage facilities on the unit. I feel its design more akin to that of a potato store. Whilst I understand that the applicant’s only process their own potatoes you may wish to consider conditioning the sourcing of produce which are processed on the unit.

4.0 OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

4.1 Two representations have been received from one local resident. A summary of the concerns raised is as follows:

- No objection to the erection of the proposed building, its siting or usage - Objects strongly if the application would or could lead to any increase in traffic on Moss Side Lane. - The previous application (2008/0896/FUL) was withdrawn on highway grounds - The applicant has since erected a smaller building under permitted development rights - The submitted Transport Statement seriously underestimates the traffic that will be generated in Moss Side Lane. - The assessment was carried out ‘out of season’ and is therefore meaningless - A planning decision should be deferred until accurate traffic figures are obtained from an independent source. - The Council will be failing in its duties if it makes a decision which is not based on its own findings, rather than unproven projections, supplied by the applicant’s agent - Highways should reconsider the weight and speed of vehicles permitted. A new sign ‘unsuitable for lorries’ has been installed at entrance to Hunters Lane (at junction with Moss Hey Lane) - During the last 10 years, we have noticed the agricultural traffic increase enormously in size, weight and volume - Impact on neighbouring amenity - due to the proximity of neighbouring dwellings to Moss Side Lane, passing agricultural traffic already causes harm and will be made worse by the proposed development. - The applicant’s could use the track over their own land which runs to Taylor’s Meanygate and which unlike Moss Side Lane, has the benefit of being straight and has unimpeded vision. - As a compromise, agricultural traffic could enter via Moss Side Lane and exit via the applicant’s own track, thereby halving the traffic movements along Moss Side Lane.

5.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION

5.1 The applicant has submitted a Planning Statement and a Transport Statement in support of the application

6.0 RELEVANT POLICIES

6.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan (WLRLP) and the West Lancashire Local Plan (2012- 2027) – Submission Document (emerging plan) provide the policy framework against which the development will be assessed.

6.2 The site is allocated as Green Belt as designated in both WLRLP and the emerging plan.

NPPF

Requiring good design Protecting Green Belt land

6.3 Relevant West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan (WLRLP) policies:

DS1 – Location of Development DS2 – Protecting the Green Belt GD 1 – Design of Development EN1 – Biodiversity EN9 – Protecting Trees and Woodlands SC6 - Road 6.4 Relevant West Lancashire Local Plan Submission document policies:

GN1 – Settlement Boundaries GN3 – Design of Development EC2 – The Rural Economy IF2 – Enhancing Sustainable Transport Choice EN2 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Natural Environment

7.0 OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSITANT DIRECTOR PLANNING

The Site

7.1 The application relates to an operational farmyard located at the head of Moss Side Lane, within the Green Belt. The site comprises a dwelling and numerous agricultural buildings of various ages and a large hardstanding area. The farmstead is located centrally to the main land holding farmed, the majority being to the north and west of the yard, although other satellite areas are cropped including land at Banks, Sollom, Holmeswood and Croston. The farmstead has a total land area of approximately 478 acres of which they own the freehold of 125.10 acres and farm the remainder under a long term tenancy agreement. Moss Side Lane is a single track no-through route for vehicular traffic, approximately 1.1 km in length which has a number of designated and informal passing points at various points along its length. In addition to this carriageway the yard area is served by an unmade track which meets Boundary Meanygate some 1.1 km to the north. The land surrounding the yard is generally flat and open with only isolated buildings and small woodlands breaking up the skyline. A public footpath runs through the yard.

The Proposal

7.2 The application proposes the erection of a 6 bay portal framed building with box profile plastic coated sheeting to sides and roof. The building would have one roller shutter door within the south elevation and will measure 36.8m x 24.4m x 8.4m (7m to eaves). The purpose of the building is for the processing and storage of potatoes. The building will be located within the northern part of the site, immediately north of an existing 7 bay steel portal building which was extended under 2010/0487/PNP. Principle of Development

7.3 Under Policy DS2 of the WLRLP and paragraph 89 of the NPPF, the construction of new buildings within the Green Belt for agricultural purposes is considered to be appropriate development. There is no requirement under these polices for the applicant to justify an agricultural need, however as the NPPF places ‘great importance’ on Green Belts (para 79) and considers the essential characteristics of the Green Belt are their openness and permanence – it would be perverse not to carry out a test required under permitted development rights for equivalent development requiring planning permission.

Whether the development is necessary for purposes of agriculture

7.4 The applicant submits that the existing buildings on the site are no longer sufficient to meet the higher standards required by the modern food market. In addition the applicant has sought to add value to their produce by washing, packaging and storing the produce in a chilled environment. As a consequence, the use of the existing agricultural buildings has changed and has resulted in a reduction in storage facilities for potatoes as they are harvested from the field prior to being processed. A further need for potato storage has arisen because the applicant’s operation up to present has relied upon harvesting potatoes through the autumn period, but the applicant’s have experienced wet conditions which adversely affect the ability to harvest. As a result it is their intention to harvest the potatoes earlier in the autumn and store the potatoes in a building. Thirdly the applicant wishes to provide a controlled environment for potato storage. The nature of the applicant’s business is to sell potatoes throughout the year. The applicant has submitted evidence that the existing buildings on site would be unable to facilitate these demands.

7.5 On the basis of the information provided and having taken account of the acceptance of an agricultural need under previous applications, namely 2008/0896/FUL and 2007/0536/FUL I consider that the proposed building is reasonably necessary for the purposes of agriculture on the holding. I find the development is therefore acceptable in principle under WLRLP Policy DS2, Policy GN1 in the emerging local plan and the NPPF. Design, Siting and Impact on Green Belt

7.6 The positioning of the building is contained within the visual limits of the site in that there are existing buildings located immediately to the west and south of the proposed location of the building. The existing access to the site from Moss Side Lane extends up to and in front of the siting of the proposed building thereby limiting the need to add to the existing hardstanding within the site limitations. The siting of the building lies adjacent to the existing yard and forms a group with the existing buildings thereby minimising the spread of development on the site. I am satisfied that the proposed building will be seen in the context of the aforementioned grouping from surrounding viewpoints limiting the impact on the openness and visual amenity of the Green Belt.

7.7 Policy GD1 in WLRLP and Policy GN3 in the emerging local plan in respect of the design of development seeks to ensure development is of an appropriate scale, siting and design for the purpose intended. As stated above, I am satisfied with the proposed development is appropriately located. In addition the scale and design of the proposed building is considered to be sympathetic to the character and appearance of the existing farm buildings and the general use and appearance of the site. The colour treatment of the building will be conditioned so that it does not appear conspicuous within the landscape and matches the existing buildings on the site. A tree line to the eastern side of the site terminates at the end of the existing building; in order to soften the appearance of the building in the landscape planting details to the northern and eastern fringes of the building will be sought by planning condition.

Highways

7.8 Policies GD1 and SC6 in the WLRLP and Policies GN3 and IF2 in the emerging local plan in respect of access and roads seek to protect the safety and efficiency of the road network. The proposal does not include any alteration to the existing road and shows sufficient manoeuvring space about the building. The Highway Authority has considered the proposed development and has raised no objection stating that they consider the proposal will not have a detrimental impact on highway safety in the immediate vicinity of the site.

7.9 I note that concerns have been raised by a local resident in respect of the potential for additional traffic arising from the proposed development and the subsequent impact on the amenities of local residents caused by an increased amount of vehicular traffic, particularly HGVs, passing close to the front of nearby residential properties. I am aware that similar concerns were raised during the course of the previous application (2008/0896/FUL). 7.10 Under the previous application, concern was raised about traffic conflict on this single track highway. Since that time however I note that a total of six designated passing places have been created along the lower section of Moss Side Lane allowing meeting traffic to pass each other. This appears to have alleviated some of the previous concerns raised and I am satisfied that these provisions ensure that generally traffic conflict on the roadway is minimised.

7.11 In terms of the impact of the vehicular movements in association with the proposed building on the amenities of local residents, it is important to consider whether or not the proposed development will result in any increase in the amount of traffic using Moss Side Lane. It is the applicant’s claim and the conclusion of the submitted traffic study that it will not result in an increase in vehicular movements as the objective of the proposed development is not to increase overall production but to introduce a more effective way of managing the existing enterprise and also to provide a purpose built building to enable the business to store produce from their holding on site all year round. The case put forward by the applicant states that this will in fact reduce the number of HGV movements to and from the site as the proposed building will allow the operations to be better managed with improved co-ordination and will ensure that goods are ready for collection instead of some vehicles having to make return journeys as the goods have not been ready due to weather conditions and because there has been insufficient and inadequate storage facilities on site.

7.12 The case put forward by the applicant is supported by the County Land Agent’s comments and I am satisfied that it provides a reasonable account of the purpose of the proposed building. For these reasons I conclude that the proposed development will not result in an increase in vehicular traffic which would in turn adversely affect the amenities of local residents.

7.13 Public footpath No. 27, running through the yard area, remains unaffected by the proposed development.

7.14 On balance and given the case put forward by the applicant and the conclusions of the County Land Agent, I am satisfied that the proposed development will not result in any increase in traffic and will not cause harm to highway safety, the free flow of traffic in the locality or the amenities of local residents in this regard. Impact on Residential Amenity

7.15 I do not consider that the proposed development will have any direct impact on the amenities of local residents. The building itself is located a significant distance from neighbouring residents, the nearest being Moss Side Cottages located approximately 310m to the south of the proposed building. This property is within the freehold ownership of the applicant. There are however a further six dwellings located along Moss Side Lane. The main issue with respect to neighbouring amenity arises as a result of traffic on the Moss Side Lane. However given the assessment of the transport issues outlined above, I do not anticipate any undue detrimental impact on residential or other amenity on the lane would result from the proposal. On this basis I am satisfied that the proposed development is in accordance with Policy GD1 in the WLRLP and Policy GN3 in the emerging local plan.

Summary

7.16 I consider that the development is acceptable in principle and should not unduly detract from the openness of the Green Belt or the surrounding landscape. The proposal is considered to be in line with the NPPF which actively encourages Local Planning Authorities to support the rural economy and agricultural rural businesses. No harm to highway safety, the free flow of traffic or neighbouring amenity has been identified. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies GD1, DS2 and SC6 in the WLRLP and Policies GN1, GN3 and IF2 in the emerging local plan along with the provisions of the NPPF.

8.0 RECOMMENDATION

8.1 That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with details shown on the following plans:- Location Plan - Landscape Appraisal (rev 1), Location Plan, drawing number X158/157/001/001 received by the Local Planning Authority on 4th July 2013 3. No development shall take place until a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The landscaping scheme shall show the location, branch spread, and species of all existing trees and hedges; the location, species and number of all proposed trees, shrubs and hedges; and the location of all existing and proposed grassed and hard surfaced areas. Trees and shrubs planted shall comply with BS. 3936(Specification of Nursery Stock) and shall be planted in accordance with BS. 4428 (General Landscape Operations). Within a period of 9 months from the date when any part of the development is brought into use the approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out. All planting shall be maintained and dead or dying material shall be replaced for a period of seven years from the agreed date of planting. 4. The external materials and colour finishes shall be as detailed on the planning application form (walls - box profile plastic coated metal sheeting in a forest green colour, roof - box profile coated metal sheeting in a forest green colour) received by the Local Planning Authority on 4th July 2013. 5. No machinery shall be operated within the premises hereby approved between the hours of 23.00 and 07.00 on any day unless all doors to the premises are closed, except during use for access and egress. 6. No development shall take place until a car parking and manoeuvring scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be laid out before the use of the building hereby approved becomes operative and maintained thereafter. 7. The building hereby approved shall be used for the storage and processing of produce from the agricultural holding only and for no other use.

Reasons

1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 3. To assimilate the proposed development into its surroundings and to ensure that the development complies with the provisions of Policy GD1, DS2, EN9 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN1, GN3, EN2 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 4. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Submission Document 5. To safeguard the amenity of adjacent properties and the area generally and so comply with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document. 6. To allow for the effective use of the parking areas 7. For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure compliance with the provisions of Policy GD1 in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan and Policy GN3 in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document.

Reason for Approval 1. The Local Planning Authority has considered the proposed development in the context of the Development Plan including in particular the following Policy/Policies in the West Lancashire Replacement Local Plan & in the Submission version of the West Lancashire Local Plan 2012-2027 Development Plan Document:

DS1 – Location of Development DS2 – Protecting the Green Belt GD 1 – Design of Development EN1 – Biodiversity EN9 – Protecting Trees and Woodlands SC6 - Road

and

GN1 – Settlement Boundaries GN3 – Design of Development EC2 – The Rural Economy IF2 – Enhancing Sustainable Transport Choice EN2 – Preserving and Enhancing West Lancashire’s Natural Environment

together with Supplementary Planning Guidance and all relevant material considerations. The Local Planning Authority considers that the proposal complies with the relevant Policy criteria and is acceptable in the context of all relevant material considerations as set out in the Officer's Report. This report can be viewed or a copy provided on request to the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority have worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with a planning application and have implemented the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 187.