DOVER DISTRICT COUNCIL

PLANNING COMMITTEE – 17 JANUARY 2013

REPORT OF THE REGENERATION AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER a) DOV/12/00045 – Residential development of site for the erection of 41 dwellings, construction of a vehicular access, associated car parking and landscaping. Site rear of Old Park Close,

Reason for report: Requested by Members b) Summary of Recommendation

Planning permission be granted. c) Planning Policy and Guidance

Dover District Local Plan (DDLP)

• ‘Saved’ Policy HS2 states that on unallocated sites within the urban confines housing development will be permitted provided housing is the most suitable use. • ‘Saved’ Policy OS2 states that proposals for new family housing comprising 15 units or more will not be permitted unless children’s play space is provided.

Core Strategy (CS)

• Core Strategy Policy (CS) CP5 requires all new residential properties to meet Code for Sustainable Homes level 3.

• CS Policy CP4 requires development for 10 dwellings or more to respond positively to the housing market need, design and density.

• CS Policy CP7 advises that the integrity of the existing green infrastructure network should be protected and enhanced. Planning permission for development that would harm the network will only be permitted if it can incorporate measures that avoid the harm arising or sufficiently mitigate its effects. Proposals that introduce greater pressures will only be permitted if they incorporate quantitative and qualitative measures as appropriate sufficient to address that pressure.

• CS Policy DM5 seeks to ensure that applications for residential developments of 15 or more dwellings to provide 30% of the total homes proposed as affordable homes. The exact amount of affordable housing, or financial contribution to be delivered from any specific scheme will be determined by economic viability having regard to individual site and market conditions.

• CS Policy DM13 states that provision for parking should be a design-led approach based upon the characteristics of the area, the nature of the development and design objectives

South East Plan (SEP)

• South East Plan (SEP) Policy CC1 states that the principal objective is to achieve and to maintain sustainable development.

• SEP Policy CC4 requires development to incorporate sustainable construction standards and techniques.

• SEP Policy CC6 states that decisions associated with the development and use of land should respect or enhance the character and distinctiveness of settlements and landscapes, and use innovative design processes to create a high quality built environment.

• SEP Policy NRM5 advises that local planning authorities and other bodies shall avoid a net loss of biodiversity and actively pursue opportunities to achieve a net gain.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

• The NPPF has 12 core principles which amongst other things requires developments to; always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings. • Paragraph 109 advises that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: ●protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils; ●recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services; ●minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures; • Paragraph 173 advises that pursuing sustainable development requires careful attention to viability and costs in decision-taking. Plans should be deliverable. Therefore, the sites and the scale of development identified in the plan should not be subject to such a scale of obligations and policy burdens that their ability to be developed viably is threatened. To ensure viability, the costs of any requirements likely to be applied to development, such as requirements for affordable housing, or other requirements should, when taking account of the normal cost of development and mitigation, provide competitive returns to a willing land owner and willing developer to enable the development to be deliverable.

The Design Guide • The Kent Design Guide provides criteria and advice on providing well designed development.

Affordable Housing – Supplementary Planning Document • Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document aims to alert developers and landowners as early as possible to the scale of local needs for affordable housing and the fact that planning obligations will be sought and conditions imposed on relevant planning permissions in order to achieve affordable housing as part of residential developments. The Council is keen that negotiations relating to affordable housing should be started early in the development process so that the cost of providing affordable housing can be readily anticipated within land purchase price and overall development costs.

The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (CIL Regulations) These regulations came into force on 6 April 2010 and gave the Circular 05/05 tests legal force. Part of Regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations states that: "This regulation applies where a relevant determination is made which results in planning permission being granted for development. A planning obligation may only constitute a reason for granting planning permission for the development if the obligation is: a) Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; b) Directly related to the development; and c) Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

d) Relevant Planning History

DOV/11/0801 - Screening Opinion for residential development – Decided (not EIA development) DOV/11/0865 - Clearance of mature woody scrub/young trees from land north of the ‘rabbit bank’ to facilitate the creation of grassland habitat. Six trees to be retained; two Sycamore; two Ash; one Hawthorn and one Cherry – Granted. e) Consultee and Third Party Response

Tree Officer: On the whole the landscaping proposals are satisfactory, however the use of Carpinus Betulus Fastigate in some of the proposed locations is questioned. This tree has a pyramidal and compact form when young, but can attain widths of 10m in middle age and can be difficult to prune and manage. It is not considered suitable in some locations, particularly close to buildings.

Senior Ecology Officer: The ecologist report is competent, no objection subject to all recommendations being implemented. A condition to require a further badger survey to be carried out if development has not commenced within 1 year. A financial contribution of £50 per dwelling should be paid towards the Thanet Coast SPA Mitigation Strategy.

Kent Highway Services: No objection subject to conditions

Environmental Health (land contamination): Comments regarding the land contamination assessment are awaited.

Environmental Health (noise): The Environmental health officer has commented that a short-term noise survey was carried out on the 10 th February 2012 to see if the site is affected by traffic/rail noise as it overlooks large swathes of the town. It is confirmed that the site is unlikely to be effected by detrimental noise levels and therefore is considered to be acceptable.

Housing Officer: The outcome of the viability assessment will inform the level of affordable housing or the equivalent financial contribution. (No updated comment has been received).

Senior Infrastructure and Delivery Officer: Local and up to-date evidence indicates that there is an over supply of play areas in this part of the district and financing the maintenance is a burden. There is an equipped area of play in close proximity to this site at Colton Crescent; therefore the applicant should make a financial contribution towards the upgrade of this area rather than providing a new on site play area. The ‘Review of Play Area Provision 2012 – 16 October 2011’ identifies a contribution of £22,700.

Mouchel on behalf of KCC: Advise that this development would have an impact on libraries, community learning and adult social services and request a total financial contribution of £15,422.88.

Environment Agency: No objection subject to conditions.

KCC Public Rights of Way Officer: The public footpath ER72 runs adjacent to the site. The path is currently un-surfaced and becomes muddy in wet weather. This development would result in increase use of the footpath. The path would benefit from improvements to the surface to ensure that the footpath can maintain an acceptable standard with increased use and also to provide an all weather safe route to the local schools and the bus stop avoiding walking on the roads. A contribution of £33,400 is sought.

Kent Wildlife Trust: The site falls between two areas designated as a Local Wildlife Site (DO15). It is good to see that the applicant has considered biodiversity to be a material consideration.

Kent Fire and Rescue Services: The means of access is considered to be satisfactory.

Natural England: Advise that their standard advice should be considered

Affinity (formerly known as Veolia Water): Comments awaited.

Southern Water: There is capacity in the system for foul water disposal but not for surface water flows.

Whitfield Parish Council: Object to this application for the following summarised reasons; • The Parish Council were not involved in the scoping for this application; • The Parish Council were not included in the Community Involvement that has taken place; • It is contrary to the principles of the Localism Act; • The site is Greenfield land and has not been fully appraised in the Local Development Framework Site Allocations process; • The development is premature; • There is inadequate information relating to the access; • How will it provide for social and community infrastructure; • It will have an impact on the infrastructure which has been set aside for the Whitfield expansion; and • There is a lack of affordable housing and equivalent off-site financial contribution.

Resident’s Committee of Old Park Close : Object for the following reasons; • The site has an abundance of wildlife including Common Lizard, Slow Worms and Adders; • Disturbance to military families with parents serving in Afghanistan; • A number of the families are vulnerable who benefit from this secure and isolated location, this development will alter that; • An increase in vehicular and pedestrian traffic; and • The reptile relocation area is not comparable in size or vegetation cover to the existing meadow.

Spokes: Object; it has not been demonstrated that sufficient bicycle storage can be provided within the site. f) 1. The Site and the Proposal

1.1 The application site is located within the urban confines of Dover and was originally owned by the Ministry of Defence. The site has an overall area of approximately 2.8ha. It is currently undeveloped, grassed with mature trees surrounding the perimeter of the site. A belt of mature Sycamore woodland cuts across the area in an east-west direction just north of the central part of the site. This woodland is on a raised bund thought to have been an ancient rabbit warren. The area is referred to in this report (and the applicant’s reports) as the ‘rabbit bank’. The topography within the site varies significantly, increasing steeply from south to north. All trees within the site are protected by a blanket Tree Preservation Order (TPO).

1.2 The site is an irregular shape, with the widest length in the northern part narrowing to a point at the southern end. To the north and north west the site is abutted by some large detached and semi-detached dwellings which are situated within spacious plots. These dwellings are owned by the MoD and are occupied by servicemen and their families. Woodland to the west and north east of the site comprises the Whitfield Down and Buckland Down Local Wildlife Site (LWS).

1.3 Running the full length of the east boundary there is a public footpath, this footpath divides the application site from a local school to the east.

1.4 There would be only one point of access to and into the site which would be from a narrow road to the south. The MoD own the road further to the north, this is gated and is not for public use.

1.5 Planning permission is being sought for the erection of 41 dwellings, there would be a mixture of semi-detached and detached two storey buildings providing 10 x 2 bedroom, 22 x 3 bedroom and 9 x 4 bedroom houses. All dwellings would be provided with off-street car parking and with private external amenity space. Four of the dwellings will be built to the north of the rabbit bank, access to these dwellings will be via a private drive.

1.6 Plans will be on display .

2. Main Issues

2.1 Members will recall considering this application at their meeting on the 22 nd November 2012 (agenda item no.8). Members resolved to defer the application for the following reason: ‘That, notwithstanding the Officer's recommendation, Application No DOV/12/0045 be deferred for a further report to provide more evidence on sustainability including clarification of KCC Highways' views on access and the impact on traffic and the wider road network, viability (in relation to affordable housing provision) and infrastructure (including water supply and foul sewerage)’.

2.2 The main issues to consider are therefore;

• Impact on the highway network; • Economical viability; and • Infrastructure

3. Assessment

Impact on the highway network

3.1 Old Park Hill measures between 3m and 6m wide with 5 passing bays at reasonably regular intervals between the Weavers Way junction and the entrance into the site. The highway engineer confirms that the number of passing bays is acceptable and that there is adequate space for a vehicle to pass if the passing bay is in use. The applicant’s consultant has demonstrated this point by using a Honda Accord and providing photographic evidence.

3.2 A footway runs along the eastern side of Old Park Hill, although in the vicinity of the Weavers Way junction there is a short section which is missing, the applicant has agreed to reinstate this part of the footpath, which will result in the felling of one tree. The reinstatement of the footpath will be secured by a legal agreement.

3.3 A public footpath (no.ER72) runs along the eastern boundary of the site. This runs between Old Park Hill in a north-south direction linking with Melbourne Avenue. KCC (Public Rights of Way) consider that this development will lead to an increase in the use of this footpath and therefore have requested a financial contribution towards upgrading the path and re-surfacing it. The applicant has agreed to make a financial contribution which will be secured in a legal agreement. These combined changes to the footpath network will improve pedestrian access to the site and encourage non-car journeys.

3.4 It is advised that at peak periods the site would generate up to 23 one- way vehicle trips per hour maximum (8 arrivals and 15 departures- weekday morning peak). In the context of the local road network including Old Park Hill and its junctions, this would not be expected to result in any adverse impacts in terms of traffic safety and capacity.

3.5 Traffic will leave the site by travelling south on Old Park Hill. From Old Park Hill there is a range of choices to access the wider highway network, the A256 being accessed by either Pilgrims Way, Knights Way, Pioneer Road or Buckland Avenue, and the A2 and Whitfield being accessible via Roosevelt Road and Melbourne Avenue. The highway engineer confirms that due to these different options traffic will disperse quickly and can be accommodated on the roads. It is unlikely that the traffic associated with this development would cause a detrimental impact on the highway.

3.6 The close proximity of this site to an existing heavily populated residential area means that the site location is very close to existing bus services serving this part of Dover. The site is in close proximity to bus service 62, running along Friars Way, Monks Way and Weavers Way at the southern end of the site. To the north of the site are services 61 and 61A, 88/88a and 89a, as well as service 541 which run less frequently. The nearest bus stop to the site is located on Weavers Way approximately 350m from the south east corner of the application site. To the north of the site bus service 89 and 61 can be accessed at Fulbert Road, approximately 385 metres from the north east corner of the site. The future occupiers of this site could therefore realistically use public transport to access local services and amenities.

3.7 The proposal site is immediately adjacent to Green Park Primary school to the east, accessible on foot via Old Park Hill and Chaucer Crescent. To the north via the public footpath is located the Dover Christchurch Academy which provides secondary education for 11 to 18 year olds. Further to the north is the Whitfield business and retail estate, whereby employment and retail facilities can be reached within an acceptable walking distance. A good number of facilities and amenities are located throughout the London Road/Buckland Avenue corridor that runs through to Dover town centre. These are located just over 1km from the application site.

3.8 The highway engineer advises that the site is in a sustainable location as it is afforded a good level of access to walking and public transport facilities and is well located in terms of access to everyday facilities and amenities such as primary and secondary schools located within easy walking distance. Furthermore, access to employment is good with major employers located at Whitfield Business Park and Dover Port which is accessible by bus within a very short walking distance of the site.

3.9 The highway engineer has worked closely with the applicant to design a site layout which complies with the Kent Design standards. Due to the nature of the surrounding topography, the site and the surrounding land are relatively steep and therefore a separate footpath at a flatter gradient is proposed within the site, it will connect to Old Park Hill and Melbourne Avenue. Adequate car parking has been proposed to serve the development and is in accordance with policy DM13, bicycle storage will also be provided as this is required by the Code for Sustainable Homes level 3.

3.10 The highway engineer confirms no objection to this development subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report being imposed on the planning permission.

Economic Viability

3.11 Due consideration has been given to the requirements of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (the CIL Regs). As such a number of financial contributions are being sought from the applicant in order to make this development acceptable.

3.12 The applicant has agreed to the following financial contributions; £33,400 towards the re-surfacing of public footpath ER72; £22,700 towards the upgrade of the play equipment at Coulton Crescent; £2050 towards the Thanet Coast Special Protection Area Mitigation Strategy; and £15,422.88 towards Affordable Housing (instead of towards other community facilities, see paragraph 3.24 of the previous report to the Planning Committee).

3.13 The Affordable Housing policy advises that the starting point is that; 30% of the dwellings should be affordable, and the preferred approach is generally to seek a ratio of social rented to immediate housing of 70:30. The Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) advises ‘a developer should take affordable housing and other known requirements and constraints into account when negotiating the purchase of land’. It is expected that abnormal site costs associated with the development be demonstrated by an independent viability appraisal encompassing both costs and values. The Council’s SPD states that such abnormal costs may occasionally justify a reduction in the level of affordable housing provision.

3.14 The addendum to the SPD advises that ‘when an applicant wishes to put forward a case of economic viability in support of proposals that involve less affordable housing contributions than envisaged in Core Strategy Policy DM5, the applicant may choose to provide an independent economic viability assessment’.

3.15 Turner Morum (TM) were appointed by the applicant in June 2012 to undertake a viability assessment. The Dictrict Valuers Service (DVS) were appointed in July 2012 by your officers to review the Turner Morum submission. Strutt and Parker were appointed in October 2012 to consider all viability submissions and to consider to main areas of disagreement. Strutt and Parker gave an expert opinion on the general viability and the level of affordable housing that the scheme could support.

3.16 On 21 st November 2012 Strutt and Parker issued their independent report and concluded; a) The DVS land value should be reduced due to inadequate allowance for profit; b) The TM land value should be increased due to over allowance for certain scheduled abnormal and section 106 costs; c) utilising the remainder of DVS/TM base information, it was concluded that the land value of the development scheme is between £400,000 - £450,000; d) the benchmark land value is in a similar region of £400,000 - £450,000; e) the benchmark land value and application value are at a similar level which means that the scheme cannot ‘afford’ provision of affordable housing.

3.17 The expert advice concludes that the scheme cannot support any affordable housing. Any requirement for the applicant to provide affordable housing would make the scheme unviable and place doubt on it taking place at all. Members are advised to accept the contribution of £15,422.88 towards affordable housing.

Infrastructure

3.18 Veolia Water originally advised that there may be inadequate capacity to provide a water supply and that additional off-site mains, or improvements to existing mains, may be required to provide sufficient capacity to service the development. It is clear that even if there is not current capacity then works can be carried out (such as providing additional mains) to ensure that the development can be served. The applicant is in direct discussion with Affinity Water (formerly Veolia) to resolve the situation. At the time of writing the report written confirmation had not been received from Affinity Water. Members should note that this is a matter for the developers to resolve and should not constitute a reason for refusal.

3.19 Southern Water originally advised that there inadequate capacity in the system to provide foul sewerage disposal and requested that a condition should be imposed requiring details to be submitted for approval. The applicant has since been in discussion with Southern Water and they advise that, following initial investigations there is adequate capacity in the local sewerage network to accommodate a foul flow of 1.9l/s, however no surface water flows (existing or proposed) can be accommodated within the existing foul sewerage system. All surface water would therefore have to be discharged to soak aways or other sustainable urban drainage system; a condition should be imposed requiring details of the surface water to be submitted.

Other Matters

3.20 A further issue raised at the last planning committee related to the loss of trees. There are 386 trees within the site boundary which consists mostly of young to early mature trees with some mature trees. There are also 10 groups of trees which contain young to middle aged trees. The groups are located mainly towards the periphery of the site.

3.21 The existing area proposed for the grassland habitat creation consists of woody scrub. There are a few trees which have been retained such as two young ash trees and cherry tree in the western area. The Hawthorn and Sycamore in the north west of the area have also been retained to provide continuity in the tree-line along the northern boundary of the site. The Council’s tree officer did not raise any objection, to carry out these works to TPO trees and a separate application has already been approved under reference DOV/11/0865. The grassland habitat creation works have now been completed and are becoming well established.

3.22 A total of 186 trees are being proposed for removal, 83% of which are classified by the aboricultrist as being poor quality, dead, dying or severely damaged and with a low life expectancy. The remaining trees which are being felled will improve the growth and development of neighbouring trees which are of a higher value. In addition these will be replaced by advanced nursery stock trees and with a species which has a higher ecological value than the existing.

3.23 There are 58 new trees being planted which will be advanced nursery stock size at the time of the planting, which is a size in excess of usual new development planting. This will have the benefit of creating a development which sits in a more mature landscape setting thus retaining and enhancing the character of the site which prevails at present. Tree species will be native and semi-native which will increase biodiversity as well as provide all year round visual interest.

3.24 The Council’s tree officer has confirmed that the proposal is acceptable subject to the use of Carpinus Betulus Fastigate in some locations, this species can be omitted and replaced with a more suitable one and secured by way of a condition. Detailed landscaping conditions have been recommended, they should include precise details of species and sizes to be planted, time scale of planting and future management of the landscape and a requirement to replace any trees which die within the first 5 years of permission being granted.

3.25 The applicant has submitted a legal agreement so that the financial contributions and the off-site highway improvements can be secured. The agreement is currently under consideration by the legal department. Planning permission should only be granted subject to the legal agreement being acceptable.

Conclusion

3.26 The principle of the use of the site is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with the objectives of the NPPF and Policy HS2. Compensatory and mitigation measures will be secured to ensure that there will be no detrimental effect on ecology and protected species. Highways and access requirements are considered to be acceptable, and there would be improvements to the footpath network to improve accessibility and permeability. The design of the development is considered to be acceptable and would not result in harm to immediate and wider visual amenity. Developer contributions will also be secured.

3.27 In respect of the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act, the recommendation is not considered to disproportionately affect any particular group. g) Recommendation

PERMISSION BE GIVEN subject to an agreement under S106 relating to financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing, footpath resurfacing, play space up-grade, SPA monitoring and management and the following conditions; 1) standard time limit; 2) approved plans; 3) material samples; 4) soft (inc. details of species, numbers, sizes, timing of planting) and hard landscaping; 5) replacement of soft landscaping, trees within 5 years; 6) management plan to be submitted for areas other than private gardens; 7) cross- sections of existing and proposed levels and finished threshold levels; 8) tree protection measure(s); 9) Land contamination measure(s); 10) Details of foul and surface water disposal; 11) Tree removal shall only take place outside of the nesting bird season (between September and February), unless otherwise agreed in writing; 12) Details of bird and bat boxes to be submitted (p.49 and 52 of the Ecological Assessment and Mitigation report);13) Prior to the commencement of development details of reptile fencing shall be submitted for approval; 14) Compensatory grassland area to be provided prior to commencement of development; 15) Relocation of reptiles prior to commencement of development; 16) Details of monitoring and management plan for the compensatory grassland area and reptile habitat; 17) No development shall take place until details of the external lighting has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; 18) If the development has not commenced within one year of the date of this permission a further badger survey shall be carried out and details of mitigation measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; 19) Removal of permitted development rights; 20) Code for Sustainable Homes level 3; 21) details of boundary treatments; 22) Provision of construction vehicle loading/unloading and turning facilities prior to commencement of work on site and for the duration of construction; 23) Provision of parking facilities for site personnel and visitors prior to commencement of work on site and for the duration of construction; 24) Provision and implementation of a Construction Management Plan in accordance with details to be submitted; 25) Provision of measures to prevent the discharge of surface water onto the highway; 26) Provision and permanent retention of the vehicle parking spaces shown on the submitted plans prior to the use of the site commencing; 27) Provision and permanent retention of the vehicle turning facilities shown on the submitted plans prior to the use of the site commencing; 28) Use of a bound surface for the first 5 metres of all accesses from the edge of the highway; 29) Provision and permanent retention of secure, covered cycle parking facilities prior to the use of the site commencing in accordance with details to be submitted; 30) Gradient of all accesses to be no steeper than 1 in 10 for the first 1.5 metres from the highway boundary and no steeper than 1 in 8 thereafter; 31) Completion of the following works between a dwelling and the adopted highway prior to first occupation of the dwelling: (a) Footways and/or footpaths, with the exception of the wearing course; (b) Carriageways, with the exception of the wearing course but including a turning facility, highway drainage, visibility splays, street lighting, street nameplates and highway structures (if any); 32) Provision and maintenance of the visibility splays shown on the submitted plans with no obstructions over 1.05 metres above carriageway level within the splays, prior to the use of the site commencing; 33) Provision and maintenance of 2 metres x 2 metres pedestrian visibility splays behind the footway on both sides of each access with no obstructions over 0.6m above footway level, prior to the use of the site commencing; and 34) Construction of the missing section of footway opposite Weavers Way on the east side of Old Park Hill prior to first occupation in accordance with details to be submitted.

II Powers be delegated to the Regeneration and Development Manager to add, vary or remove conditions.

Case Officer Rachel Humber