APP 02
Application Number: 17/00541/FUL
Description Residential development of 118 dwellings (35 affordable) together with associated works including landscaping and infrastructure
AT Land Off Tongwell Street, Atterbury, Broughton, Milton Keynes,
FOR Morris Homes Ltd
Target: 16 April 2018
Extension of Time: Yes
Ward: Broughton Parish: Broughton & Milton Keynes Parish Council
Report Author/Case Officer: Paul Keen Senior Planning Officer (Dev Control) Contact Details: 01908 253239 [email protected]
Team Manager: Sarah Hine – [email protected]
1.0 RECOMMENDATION (The decision that officers recommend to the Committee)
It is recommended that permission is granted subject to conditions set out in this report.
2.0 INTRODUCTION (A brief explanation of what the application is about)
2.1 The Site
The site is situated on the eastern flank of Milton Keynes less than 1km from Junction 14 on the M1 and 3km from Central Milton Keynes.
The site is located at the junction of 2 key grid roads in Milton Keynes, Childs Way (H6) and the V11 (Tongwell Street) and is adjacent to the established residential area of Broughton. The developable part of the site (excluding vehicular accesses into the site) extends to 3.75ha.
The entire site, including required vehicular access points is within the ownership of MKDP. All land immediately surrounding the site is owned by Milton Keynes and on a long lease to the Milton Keynes Parks Trust.
There is an existing redway and underpass under Childs Way that provides pedestrian access from the site to Northfield and beyond. A public right of way in the form of a paved footway/leisure route passes near the northern edge of the site.
The indicative route of the proposed Bedford to Milton Keynes Waterway Park is safeguarded in the Adopted Local Plan and Core Strategy and runs through the north westerly part of the site adjacent to the H6 (Child Way) and to the north of the application site.
The site is designated as an Employment Site as indicated on the Local Plan Proposals Map. It is however proposed for residential development within the draft Site Allocations Plan (SAP).
2.2 The Proposal
Full planning permission is sought for a residential development of 118 dwellings (35 affordable) together with associated works including landscaping and infrastructure.
Initially a Redway was proposed to run through the site. However, amended plans were received to show this removed (in place of an upgrade to the leisure route to the north), which has led to a greater provision of housing on the site from 111 units to 118 units, and 33 affordable housing units to 35 units.
The application has been also been amended during the process including:
Changes to the design and layout of some units, submission of updated house types, materials and, layout. Landscape and revisions to tree planting, response on landscape comments on other issues. Highway and parking amendments and tracking provided, omission of the Redway within the application site boundary and upgrade of the leisure route to the north of the site. Response to LLFA on drainage and submission of additional information. Updated ecology report
2.3 Reasons for determination at Committee
As the site is designated as an Employment Site, the proposed development would be a departure from the Local Plan.
3.0 RELEVANT POLICIES (The most important policy considerations relating to this application)
National Policy
National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) paragraphs:
12 Accordance with Development Plan 14 Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development 17 Core Planning Principles
32 Transport 39 Parking 47 Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes 56-66 Design 69 Creating healthy and inclusive communities 73-75 Access to open space 98 Sustainability 103 Flood Risk 109 and 118 Natural Environment 196-198 Determining Applications
Local Policy
Core Strategy (July 2013)
CSA Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development CS1 Milton Keynes Development Strategy CS2 Housing Land Supply CS3 Employment Land Supply CS5 Strategic Land Allocation CS8 Other Areas of Change CS10 Housing CS11 A Well Connected Milton Keynes CS12 Developing Successful Neighbourhoods CS13 Ensuring High Quality, Well Designed Places CS17 Improving Access to Local Services and Facilities CS18 Healthier and Safer Communities CS19 The Historic and Natural Environment CS21 Delivering Infrastructure
Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011 (December 2005), Saved Policies:
D1 Impact of Development Proposals on Locality D2 Design of Buildings D2A Urban Design Aspects of New Developments D4 Sustainable Construction NE2 Protected Species NE3 Biodiversity and Geological Enhancement T1, T2, T3, T5, T9, T10 and T15 Transport and Parking H1 Land allocated for Housing H4 Affordable Housing H8 Housing Density H9 Housing Mix L3 Open Space: Standards of Provision E1 Protection of existing employment land PO4 Percent for art
Supplementary Planning Documents
Parking Standards (January 2016)
Sustainable Construction (April 2007) Affordable Housing (March 2013) New Residential Development Design Guide (April 2012)
4.0 MAIN ISSUES (The issues which have the greatest bearing on the decision)
1. The principle of residential development on the site 2. Design, layout, appearance and scale 3. Landscaping & Public Realm 4. Access & Parking 5. Residential amenity 6. Drainage / ground conditions 7. Biodiversity and Ecology 8. Planning Obligations / Affordable Housing
5.0 CONSIDERATIONS (An explanation of the main issues that have led to the officer recommendation)
5.1 The principle of residential development on the site
Local Plan
Policy E1 of the Local Plan states:
‘Within the City of Milton Keynes and the three Key Settlements, planning permission will be refused for the change of use or redevelopment of any land identified for employment use on the Proposals Map to other purposes, unless there would be no conflict with existing or potential neighbouring uses, and:
The proposal would result in a significant reduction in the detrimental environmental impact of an existing use; or The proposed use is one that cannot be satisfactorily accommodated other than in an employment area; or The proposed use will not significantly reduce the provision of local employment opportunities.’
Policy E1 does not therefore necessarily preclude alternative uses on designated employment sites.
Policy CS3 of the Core Strategy also states:
‘Planning permission will be granted for employment uses in the areas listed in Table 5.4 'Employment Land Allocations in Milton Keynes', and shown on the Local Plan Proposals Map, subject to the following criteria:
1. The guidance on uses in Table 5.4 'Employment Land Allocations in Milton Keynes' 2. The physical and locational attributes of particular sites
3. The need for a variety of sites to meet the differing requirements of a wide range of employment uses 4. The inclusion of serviced accommodation (for meetings / short term lets) 5. Should the employment needs of the Borough change dramatically and undermine the assumptions behind the Core Strategy, then a partial review could be considered.’
Point 5 of Policy CS3 therefore provides flexibility in terms of possible alternative uses on employment sites.
Furthermore, Policy CS1 states that:
‘…development sites will be brought forward through the Site Allocations Plan to provide short term flexibility and contingency…’
Indeed the application site has been proposed for housing in the Site Allocations Plan as Site U4. Whilst a departure from the Local Plan in terms of its current designation, and that the Site Allocations Plan has not yet been adopted as policy, it is considered that the sites proposed allocation for housing which would contribute to the Council’s ability to provide a housing supply should be given significant weight. Furthermore, both Policies E1 of the Local Plan and Policy CS3 of the Core Strategy provide flexibility to alternative uses on employment sites with sufficient justification.
The indicative route of the proposed Bedford to Milton Keynes Waterway Park is safeguarded in the Adopted Local Plan and Core Strategy and runs partly through and to the north of the application site, although planning consent for the scheme has now lapsed.
Whilst the route is shown indicatively on the Local Plan Proposals Map as running through the north westerly part of the site adjacent to the H6 (Child Way), it is more likely that the route would take advantage of the existing underpass infrastructure, slightly further north, connecting the linear park (between the existing employment site and the application site) with Northfield. The safeguarded route then runs north of the application site, the other side of the already developed Pye Bridge End, before turning back to connect into the linear park, east of the application site. Very little of the application site itself fronts on to the safeguarded route.
Nonetheless, if the Waterway Park were to eventually be constructed adjacent to the application site (between the site and the development at Pye Bridge End), the residential units here are proposed to front on to the park setting and potentially the proposed cycle way could be utilised as part of the waterway ‘park’ corridor. The access road at this point is proposed to be a shared surface, and of a different material, softening its visual appearance appropriately in this park edge location.
5 year housing land supply
A recent appeal decision in Hanslope suggests that the Council cannot demonstrate a five year housing land supply (with approximately 4.5 years of supply).
Paragraph 14 and 49 of the National Planning Policy Framework are therefore engaged as the proposal is currently a departure from the Local Plan (designated as Employment Site). Less weight can be given to the Council’s housing planning policies within the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001 – 2011. Although the above policies do not relate to housing provision or supply, the fact the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply, means that the provision of housing to address this shortfall should be given substantial weight in any planning applications for housing.
Given the above and that paragraph 49 and 14 of the NPPF are engaged and therefore the titled balance for sustainable development, this report needs to address the social, environmental and economic impacts of the development.
Sustainable development
An assessment should be made as to whether the proposal could be considered to be sustainable development in terms of the economic, social and environmental roles as set out in the NPPF.
The site is located within an urban area and is considered to be a sustainable location.
In terms of economic issues, the construction activities associated with the development would potentially generate employment opportunities for the local community, and have associated benefits for local services and suppliers in the short term (longer term in relation to maintenance of the buildings). In the longer term the development would also support the local economy in terms of the use of local shops, services and facilities, and potentially result in new investment in the village. This also weighs in favour of the scheme.
Although the proposal would lead to the loss of an employment site, it is within the draft Site Allocations Plan, which will help the Council address any shortfall. This should be given significant weight in favour of the scheme.
In terms of social issues, it is noted that the development would provide additional dwellings and affordable housing which weighs significantly in favour of the application.
In relation to environmental issues, subject to an assessment on relevant material planning consideration on the matter, the proposal should not lead to such harm to be unacceptable in planning terms.
Given the above, it is considered that the principle of residential development on the site to be acceptable, subject to all necessary assessment against all other material planning considerations.
5.2 Design, layout, appearance and scale
The Urban Design Officer initially commented that whilst the layout on the whole was acceptable, the architecture did not reflect the existing character of neighbouring dwellings and fails to provide a choice of contemporary, innovative, architecture that reflects Milton Keynes as an ambitious, forward thinking, and innovative 21st Century City. In particular
alterations should be made to the building façades of the proposed dwellings in visible locations such as the edges and entrances to the proposed development.
Amendments have since been made to address this issue which the Urban Design officer and Case Officer now consider to be acceptable.
Concerns were also raised by the Urban Design Officer in terms of the orientation of some of the plots which should address the street as opposed to the access to a parking area. However following the submission of amended plans this issue has been addressed.
Initial concerns were also raised by the Council’s Urban Design Officer in terms of the ease of access from the parking area to some of the dwellings (namely plots 11, 12, 17- 20), and that ideally parking should be provided to these dwellings at the front or side of the property. However, whilst the case officer acknowledges that this arrangement may be preferable, due to the close proximity of this parking area to the dwellings and subsequent good surveillance, demonstrable harm would not be created in this case. Furthermore, the rear parking area would be on level ground levels to the dwelling and connected via a shared surface drive onto the footpath, therefore providing adequate access.
The Urban Design officer also identifies that it is not ideal to have the garage for plot 60 at the end of a cul-du-sac as this is a prominent location, although also acknowledges that could not easily be adjusted. The case officer agrees, although when weighing up the improvements made and the wider benefits of the proposal against the relatively limited impact this element would have on the overall character of the development as a whole, it is considered this does not warrant withholding planning permission in this case. Particularly given the limited scale of the garage to other buildings.
The materials schedule submitted with the application is considered to be acceptable and would complement the character and appearance of the area. These can be secured by way of any approved plans condition.
5.3 Landscaping & Public Realm
The Council’s Landscape Architect has raised a number of issues during the application process, namely relating to additional / amendments for landscape provision and details, clarification on drainage strategy and landscape strategy compatibility, and open space / leisure / play area provision, and boundary treatment amendments.
Removal of the Redway originally proposed running through the site (leisure route north of the site now proposed to be upgraded to a Redway) which has provided more space within the site to provide more landscaping. The amended plans and information (such as tree pit details) address the general landscape issues raised. A detailed landscape scheme can be secured by way of condition.
In terms of the drainage strategy and landscape strategy compatibility, amended plans have been received showing that no trees will now be located within the attenuation drainage tanks exclusion zones, and therefore those proposed all have a realistic prospect of growing to maturity, and without pressure to remove them in future.
The Landscape Architect acknowledged and suggests that any remaining boundary treatment issues can be resolved by way of condition. The case officer agrees. Any approved plans condition would secure this.
In terms of open space / leisure / play area provision, Policy L3 applies to all new housing developments and requires new or improved recreational facilities in accordance with the Council’s adopted standards in Appendix L3. The site does not fall within the catchment area of any existing play area as outlined in Policy L3, but is in relative close proximity to existing facilities. The applicant has agreed to planning obligations which would provide maintenance and upgrades to existing play areas and leisure facilities within the locality. On balance it is considered that this is an acceptable response and would mitigate against the impact of the development, whilst ensuring that existing facilities meet the needs of the existing local population as well as the future occupants of the proposed development.
Given this assessment, and subject to conditions, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in landscape terms and complies with both local and national policy of the matter.
5.3 Access & Parking
The main access as assessed by the Council’s Highway Engineer is considered to be acceptable and is compliant with the Councils standards.
However, significant issues were initially identified by the Council’s Highway Engineer in relation to the originally proposed Redway running through the site and its impacts on individual access / pedestrian conflict. However the Redway has been removed from the layout of the scheme and an alternative upgrade to the existing leisure route north of the site is proposed instead. This provides a better and safer access for cyclists and is secured within the s106 agreement. It would also provide better access for the existing population and is therefore a public benefit of the scheme.
Other issues raised related to visibility splays, parking space locations and a below required amount of parking for plots 77, and 78, tracking for waste vehicles, traffic calming, width of the carridgeway and layout issues.
Parking
As mentioned there have been various amendments during the application process, which have largely addressed the Council’s Highways Engineer concerns.
A remaining concern is in relation to Plots 93, 94, 95 and 59, and 60 in that they are shown as garages rather than car ports, meaning that the garages cannot be considered as parking spaces as set out in the Parking Standards 2016 . This means that currently these plots are short of their allocated parking. However, the applicant has amended the planning layout to illustrate car port provision for these plots.
The Highway Engineer has raised concern that Plots 77 and 78 each have an allocated car parking space within the road that and excluded from being adopted. The case officer agrees that in reality these spaces should be considered visitor spaces. For the purpose
of calculating the car parking requirements, these spaces are included as unallocated in the table below:
With plots 93, 94, 95 and 59, and 60 changed to have car ports instead of garages, then the parking assessment is:
Dwellings Req. Allocated (A) Req. Unallocated (U) Provided (A) Provided (U) 1 bed dwellings 8 8 2.64 2 bed flat 23 23 17.25 2 bed dwellings 16 32 4 3/4 bed dwellings 71 142 35.5 Tandem parking 28 14
Total 205 73.39 203 73
The layout meets the unallocated requirement although is 2 spaces short for allocated parking considering the shortfall for plots 77 and 78 (if not including the proposed on street allocated parking spaces for those properties). However, in the context of the development as a whole, this shortfall is considered to be an insignificant number across a site that is providing 276 parking spaces, and when weighed against the public benefits of the scheme which include the provision of housing, affordable housing, and highway and Redway upgrades.
Subject to conditions for details of the estate roads/footways, and removal of permitted development rights (to prevent conversion of car ports to garages), the Council’s Highway Engineer does not object to the application on parking grounds. For the reasons given above, the case officer agrees.
Other issues
A series of amended plans have been received during the application process to address the concerns raised by the Council’s Highway Engineer, to ensure that the scheme would be safe for future occupants of the development and highway / pedestrian users. This includes revisions to visibility splays, removal of the Redway from the internal layout of the proposal, and waste vehicle tracking. The Council’s Highway Engineer has confirmed that the scheme as amended has addressed all concerns raised. The case officer has no reason to disagree with the advice given.
In addition to the leisure route upgrade north of the site to a Redway, it should be noted that the scheme also includes planning contributions for a formal pedestrian link to the east of the site to ensure occupant of the development (and existing residents) have better connectivity to bus stops within the locality.
The scheme is therefore considered acceptable and compliant with both local and national planning policies, subject to conditions.
5.4 Residential amenity
Standard of living environment
Whilst there is not an unacceptable visual intrusion or loss of privacy, sunlight and
daylight, there are a number of areas where the side to back and back to back distances are below the recommended 22m distances in the Residential Design Code (2012). However when weighed against the need for new housing, it is considered that the proposal would not lead to such detrimental standards of living environment for future occupants to warrant refusal. Any future occupier would be aware of the situation before they took up residence in any case, and no existing residents would be affected by the proposal in this regard. It is important to note that all affordable housing units would meet or exceed the recommended distances, as well as garden depths of 10m or more. On balance, there would be no harmful overlooking in these cases.
In terms of amenity space, the majority of plots either conform or are slightly below the 10m deep rear garden requirement as set out in the New Residential Design Guide. Where the distances are below the recommended allowances, it is minimal and/or the properties in question are generally smaller in size. Overall, the standard of living environment for the future occupants of the development is acceptable, including levels of privacy, daylight and outlook.
Subject to conditions, the proposal is therefore acceptable in terms of residential amenity (physical layout) and complies with the relevant policies within the Milton Keynes Local Plan and the aims of the NPPF in this regard.
Noise
Concern has been raised by the Council’s Environmental Health officer that the Noise Assessment submitted with the application shows that Noise levels across the site are impacted by road traffic, in particular from Tongwell Street, and from a lesser extent, from Childs Way.
Noise levels inside the dwellings can meet National Guidance levels, as produced by both British Standards and the World Health Organisation, by implementing a scheme of acoustic glazing and acoustic ventilation for habitable rooms.
The main concern relates to noise levels for outside amenity space (gardens). However, it should be noted that the proximity of the proposed housing is similar (and no closer) than other residential development within the locality which has been considered to be acceptable. With increased fencing and landscaping which can be secured by way of conditions, the case officer does not consider that the harm caused would be sufficient to warrant refusal in this case, particularly given its stance on similar situations within the immediate locality.
I would therefore recommend a revised site layout to the southern boundary of the site.
Ground conditions
The site is part of the former Broughton Quarry that was subsequently landfilled. This does not appear to have been addressed in the documentation submitted with the application.
Therefore in accordance with NPPF, as the proposed use is particularly vulnerable to the presence of contamination I recommend that the following condition be applied to any
grant of planning permission for this site. The case officer agrees and has suggested a suitably worded condition to deal with the issue and to request further information on the matter.
Subject to conditions, it is considered that the application is acceptable in terms residential amenity and complies with local and national planning policies on the matter.
5.5 Drainage / ground conditions
The Environment Agency does not object to the application.
However the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) initially raised concerns in that the discharge rate was not in compliance with Milton Keynes Council guidance for developers. In addition, the methodology used to apply long term storage is not in compliance with the Council’s local standards. The proposed discharge rate may increase the risk of downstream flooding for events smaller than the 1:100 year event. The LLFA did however suggest that if Anglian Water were satisfied that the discharge rates were acceptable and there was capacity in existing drainage systems, the LLFA would remove this concern.
The applicant has since confirmed that all the discharge rates (with evidence of correspondence between them and Anglian Water) and figures used to calculate the storage volumes were agreed with Anglian Water prior to the commencing the drainage design. Anglian Water has not raised objection to the application subject to a condition requiring a drainage strategy to be approved. The LLFA has subsequently removed their objection.
As such, there is no objection to the application in terms of drainage issues subject to further details of the drainage strategy.
5.6 Biodiversity and Ecology
The application is accompanied by an Ecological Report which sets out a number of recommendations and mitigation strategies, including the transportation and protection of Great Crested Newts.
Natural England does not raise objection to the application subject to a condition for and to secure an Ecological Management Plan. The report has subsequently been revised and incorporates such a plan. This can be secured by compliance condition.
The same document also includes a Biological Enhancement Scheme which can also be secured by condition.
Subject to the imposition of a condition to secure the Ecological Management (and mitigation) Plan, the application is considered to be acceptable, and compliers with relevant local and national planning policies on the matter.
5.7 Planning Obligations / Affordable Housing
Obligations
As previously mentioned, the application has been amended during the application process such that the number of dwellings has increased from 111 to 118. This is mainly as a result of removing a previously proposed Redway from the internal layout of the scheme, and a proposed upgrade to an existing leisure route directly north of the site. This has led to subsequent changes to the total of obligation being sought which amount to a total of £2,637,916.11. The full schedule of planning contributions can be found at paragraph A3.24 of this report, and are considered to be CIL regulations compliant.
The applicant has agreed to enter into a S106 agreement to secure these funds. Whilst this is still to be finalised and completed, members may resolve to grant planning permission subject to completion of the S106 agreement.
Subject to the agreement being completed, these obligations would mitigate against the impact of the development, and the application is therefore considered to be acceptable in this regard.
Affordable Housing
The Council’s Housing has no objection to this application.
The Affordable Housing Statement proposes at least 30% Affordable Housing with at least 25% Affordable Rent and 5% Shared Ownership in line with the Affordable Housing SPD 2013.
The revised plans (to include 118 homes in total) provide 35 affordable homes and a house type mix includes 22 houses and 13 apartments. This would equate to 30 rented units & 5 shared ownership units.
Whilst not objecting to the scheme, the Council’s Housing officer states that it would have been preferable to have a greater proportion of houses to flats in line with current identified Affordable Housing mix need in the SHMA 2017.
However, the scheme proposes 17 x 2 bedroom units, 8 x 1 bedroom units and 10 x 3 bedroom units. This equates to 77% of the scheme as 2 and 3 bedroom homes which are the size of properties most in need as outlined in the SHMA 2017. As such the mix of affordable housing is considered to be acceptable and will contribute to affordable housing needs in Milton Keynes. This can be given substantial weight in favour of the scheme.
Furthermore, the amount of affordable housing has increased due to revisions to the plans, from a total of 33 to 35 homes.
Based on the above assessment, the case officer considers that the amount, mix and tenure of proposed affordable housing provision is acceptable.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion the application is considered to be acceptable subject to the conditions set out below.
7.0 CONDITIONS (The conditions that need to be imposed on any planning permission for this development to ensure that the development is satisfactory. To meet legal requirements all conditions must be Necessary, Relevant, Enforceable, Precise and Reasonable)
1. The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To prevent the accumulation of planning permissions; to enable the Local Planning Authority to review the suitability of the development in the light of altered circumstances; and to comply with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, the allocated car parking and cycle parking areas shown on the approved drawings shall be constructed, surfaced and permanently marked out for that relevant plot, and the unallocated parking shall be provide before completion of the development. The car parking areas shall be used for no other purpose thereafter.
Reason: To ensure adequate parking provision at all times so that the development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or safety on the neighbouring highway.
3. Prior to first occupation of any part of the development, a street lighting scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local planning Authority, carried out in accordance with the approved details, and shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of any dwelling and maintained thereafter.
Reason: In the interests of safety and amenity and in accordance with saved Policy D2 (vi) of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001 - 2011 and CS18 of the Core Strategy.
4. Notwithstanding the provision of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no external or internal alterations shall take place to any carports hereby approved without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that alterations are not carried out which would make the carports unavailable for parking purposes, thereby eroding the parking facilities on the development in accordance with saved Policy T15 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan.
5. Prior to first occupation of the any part of the development, a hard and soft landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and then implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of the development. Any trees or shrubs removed, dying, severely damaged or diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced in the next planting season with trees or shrubs of such size and species as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities in the locality in accordance with saved Policy D2 (v) of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001 - 2011.
6. Prior to the commencement of works of the estate roads and footways, details of the estate roads and footways shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling shall be occupied until the estate roads and footways which provide access to it from the existing highway have been laid out and constructed in accordance with the approved details. The estate road and footways so laid out shall be retained thereafter.
Reason: In order to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway and of the development.
7. a) Prior to any development taking place, the developer shall carry out an assessment of ground conditions to determine the likelihood of any ground, groundwater or gas contamination of the site.
The results of this survey detailing the nature and extent of any contamination, together with a strategy for any remedial action deemed necessary to bring the site to a condition suitable for its intended use, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before construction works commence.
b) Any remedial works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved strategy and validated by submission of an appropriate verification report prior to first occupation of the development.
c) Should any unforeseen contamination be encountered the Local Planning Authority shall be informed immediately. Any additional site investigation and remedial work that is required as a result of unforeseen contamination will also be carried out to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the site is fit for its proposed purposed and any potential risks to human health, property, and the natural and historical environment, are appropriately investigated and minimised.
8. Prior to commencement of work above slab level, details of sound proofing for the site and individual plots/dwellings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of the development.
Reason: In the interest of the residential amenity for the future occupants of the development.
9. The Ecological Mitigation and Management Plan and Biodiversity Enhancement Scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations and conclusions of the Ecological Appraisal & Protected Species Surveys, Rev C, dated January 2018. The development shall be carried out and implemented in accordance with the approved report in full.
Reason: To minimise the impact of the development on the biodiversity of the area and to secure enhancements to the local ecological network in accordance with Paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
10. Prior to the erection of any boundary treatments within the site, details showing the provision of hedgehog passes and access through the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To secure enhancements to the local ecological network in accordance with Paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
11. The bicycle parking scheme shown on the approved drawings shall be provided before first occupation of any relevant plot of the development hereby approved and be retained thereafter.
Reason: To ensure that adequate parking facilities are provided to serve the development.
12. No drainage works shall commence until a surface water management strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the surface water strategy so approved.
Reason: To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site in accordance with Policy D1 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011.
13. No development shall take place above ground floor slab level until details of the proposed finished floor levels of all buildings and the finished ground levels of the site, in relation to existing site levels of surrounding property and root protection areas of existing trees and woodland (where relevant) to be retained, has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved levels.
Reason: To ensure that construction is carried out at suitable levels having regard to drainage, access, the appearance of the development and the amenities of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy CS13 of the Milton Keynes Core Strategy 2013 and Saved Policies D1 of the Milton Keynes Local plan 2001-2011.
14. The bin storage shown on the approved plans shall be provided before first occupation of any relevant plot of the development hereby approved.
Reason: To ensure that adequate parking facilities are provided to serve the development.
15. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the Project Environmental Plan for the Mitigation of Environmental Impact During Construction Activities report, dated 20th February 2017.
Reason: The limit inconvenience to residents and in the interest of highways safety.
Site Location Plan
Proposed Site Layout Plan
Landscape Structure Plan
Street Scene Plans
A Sample of Elevation Plans
Proposed Garage Plans
Appendix to 17/00541/FUL
A1.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (A brief outline of previous planning decisions affecting the site – this may not include every planning application relating to this site, only those that have a bearing on this particular case)
None
A2.0 ADDITIONAL MATTERS (Matters which were also considered in producing the Recommendation)
None
A3.0 CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS (Who has been consulted on the application and the responses received. The following are a brief description of the comments made. The full comments can be read via the Council’s web site)
A3.1 Cranfield Airport
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.2 British Waterways
This site is adjacent to the proposed route of the Bedford & Milton Keynes waterway, but the route is not shown within the site. It is not clear however if the applicants own the land on which the route may run. The site boundary will run very close to the route and the council should satisfy themselves, taking advice from the Bedford & Milton Keynes Waterway Trust if necessary, that adequate land will be available to provide the route in the future, due to the position of existing buildings to the north. We also suggest that the council consider whether the site boundary should / can incorporate the site. Regardless of this issue the housing layout pays little attention to the proposed route by placing a main access road and cycle route adjacent to.
We would suggest that this is a missed opportunity, as if the waterway is constructed in the future it will be bounded by a road and parked cars rather than landscaping. In addition, if the housing is brought closer to the northern edge of the site occupiers would benefit from overlooking the canal, and enjoy increased property values as a result.
We suggest that the scheme should be re-designed to consider the future impact of the site on the canal corridor and to take advantage of the future benefits that the canal would bring to the site.
A3.3 Environmental Health Manager
Noise
The noise Assessment carried out by the Consultants shows that Noise levels across the site are dominated by road traffic, in particular from Tongwell Street, and from a lesser extent, from Childs Way. A site noise survey has demonstrated that noise is a planning consideration.
Noise levels for both inside and outside dwellings should meet National Guidance levels, as produced by both British Standards and the World Health Organisation. For this site, those guidance levels can be met inside dwellings by implementing a scheme of acoustic glazing and acoustic ventilation for habitable rooms. Noise levels for outside amenity space (gardens) cannot be met for the worst affected properties, even with increased fencing.
I would therefore recommend a revised site layout to the southern boundary of the site.
The site is part of the former Broughton Quarry that was subsequently landfilled. This does not appear to have been addressed in the documentation submitted with the application.
Therefore in accordance with NPPF, as the proposed use is particularly vulnerable to the presence of contamination I recommend that the following condition be applied to any grant of planning permission for this site.
Contamination / remediation condition suggested.
A3.4 Parish - Broughton & Milton Keynes
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.5 Ward - Broughton - Cllr Crooks
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.6 Ward - Broughton - Cllr Bint
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.7 Ward - Broughton - Cllr Morris
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.8 Councils Archaeologist
The site appears to have been largely quarried in the recent past. As such the proposal is unlikely to be of significant archaeological impact.
A3.9 Anglian Water
Suggests the following condition:
No drainage works shall commence until a surface water management strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No hard-standing areas to be constructed until the works have been carried out in accordance with the surface water strategy so approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON To prevent environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding.
A3.10 Internal Drainage Board
Please note the Board has no comments to make regarding the above planning application.
A3.11 Development Plans
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.12 Environment Agency
We have no objection to this application.
A3.13 Councils Countryside Officer
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.14 Footpath Officer
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.15 Highways Development Control
Initial concerns regarding individual access to plots, car port construction, location of unallocated parking, issues with Redway through the site and its layout, visibility splays, lack of cycle parking, lack of tracking drawings, amongst other things.
Revised plans and additional information have been submitted to address these concerns.
A3.16 Housing Strategy (Affordable Housing)
Housing has no objection to this application.
The Affordable Housing Statement below proposes at least 30% Affordable Housing with at least 25% Affordable Rent and 5% Shared Ownership in line with the Affordable Housing SPD 2013.
"To confirm we are able to deliver the following in response to the brief: o Affordable Housing based on a total of 35 affordable homes o House type mix includes 22 houses and 13 apartments o 30 rented units & 5 shared ownership units o Affordable homes are pepper potted through out the development. o Tenure blind development in terms of design, quality, location on the site, phasing and access to services and amenities and constructed to the same exacting standards as private dwellings o The affordable homes will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Morris Homes standard affordable housing specification and as required by MKDC will achieve Life Time Homes standards"
My only comment is that would prefer a greater proportion of houses to flats in line with current identified Affordable Housing mix need in the SHMA 2017 - see developer's proposal below in the Affordable Housing Statement:
"We are proposing 17 x 2 bedroom units, 8 x 1 bedroom units and 10 x 3 bedroom. We are in the process of detailed discussions with local Registered Providers, with whom we will deliver the affordable housing in partnership with on the site."
A3.17 Landscape Architect
In summary:
Policy L3 standards will require on-site provision of a LEAP and local park for the development shown on the Planning Layout.
Policy NE3 applies and the advice of the Countryside officer is needed prior to determination.
The layouts for the landscape structure plans (black-white and colour) are different in at least one area of the site, for example around plot 27 which is correct
A detailed landscape scheme will need to be secured by a landscape condition if consent is granted.
Boundary treatments will need to be conditioned to include further details and to agree amendments.
The following condition should be applied if outline consent is granted All tree and shrub planting shall be maintained in accordance with good horticultural practice for five years and any trees-shrubs removed, dying, being damaged or becoming diseased within that period shall be replaced one for one in the next planting season with trees/plants of the same size and species as those originally required to be planted unless the council gives written consent to any variation.
Note for planning - Consideration should be given to how leisure, recreation and play provision will be achieved strategically for future housing across the whole development area shown on the Planning Layout to achieve required standards of leisure provision to ensure sustainable development is achieved. A condition requiring approval of a design and access statement that demonstrates policy L3 standards can be met is recommended.
Concerns in relation to attenuation tanks and whether tree planting is possible – agrees that this can be dealt with by condition. The agent has acknowledged this and confirms this is possible subject to detail.
A3.18 Landscape Services Manager – Trees
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.19 Lead Local Flood Authority
Initially raised concerns in that the discharge rate was not in compliance with Milton Keynes Council guidance for developers. In addition, the methodology used to apply long
term storage is not in compliance with the Council’s local standards. The proposed discharge rate may increase the risk of downstream flooding for events smaller than the 1:100 year event. The LLFA did however suggest that if Anglian Water were satisfied that the discharge rates were acceptable and there was capacity in existing drainage systems, the LLFA would remove this concern.
Following submission of additional information the LLFA has removed its objection.
A3.20 MKC Urban Design
In summary:
Whilst the layout on the whole is acceptable with the exception of a few areas that need attention the exterior design of the dwellings is generic and fails to reflect the context. o The architecture does not reflect the existing character of neighbouring dwellings and fails to provide a choice of contemporary, innovative, architecture that reflects Milton Keynes as an ambitious, forward thinking, and innovative 21st Century City. In particular alterations should be made to the building façades of the proposed dwellings in visible locations such as the edges and entrances to the proposed development. o The orientation of plots15 and 16 should address the street as opposed to the access to a parking area. The design of this area (including plots 11-14) should be revised; the layout is not ideal as it confuses public and private space and dwellings are side on to the street.
All corner plots where appropriate should turn the corner of the street. By providing an active frontage to the street such as plot 16,19,31,80,81,57,40,41,38
Following a post consultation meeting and amended plans, the Urban Design officer is satisfied that the amendments largely address these concerns, although concern remain regarding the access to houses from the central parking court and this ideally would be more direct.
A3.21 MK Parks Trust
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.22 Natural England
NO OBJECTION - SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATE MITIGATION BEING SECURED As submitted the application could:
Have an adverse effect on European Protected Species, Greater Crested Newts.
In order to mitigate these adverse effects and make the development acceptable, the following mitigation measures are required:
Ecological Management Plan
We advise that an appropriate planning condition or obligation is attached to any planning permission to secure these measures.
A3.23 National Grid
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
A3.24 Planning Obligations/S106
Contribution Heading Draft s106 Revised (based on 111 units) (based on 118 units)
£ £
Allotments 11,343.00 11,831.25 Burial Grounds / Crematorium 12,099.20 12,620.00 Carbon Offset tbd Community Hall 28,091.92 29,301.12 District Parks 59,286.08 61,838.00 Early Years 72,970.82 77,930.01 Emergency Services 6,654.56 6,941.00 Health 207,198.80 216,117.50 Highways 207,307.76 207,307.76 Inward Investment and Skills 58,983.60 61,522.50 Library 44,162.08 46,063.00 Local Play 163,063.72 170,054.50 Local Park 29,643.04 30,919.00 Museum and Archives 21,173.60 22,085.00 Neighbourhood Play 206,896.32 215,802.00 Playing Fields 118,103.32 123,186.98 Primary Pupils 360,561.72 385,065.91 Public Art 102,170.00 106,640.00 Public Transport 220,000.00 220,000.00 Secondary and Post 16 Pupils 472,244.70 504,339.00 Sports Hall 14,103.24 14,710.30 Swimming Pool 38,352.43 40,003.28 Voluntary Sector 25,105.84 26,186.50 Waste Management 34,180.24 35,651.50 Waste Receptacles 11,100.00 11,800.00
2,524,795.99 2,637,916.11 22,745.91 22,355.22
A3.25 Passenger Transport Officer
No representations received at the time of writing this report.
Third Party Representations
A4.1 Representation received from the occupants at no. 73 Pye Bridge End neither objecting to or supporting the application:
On the original plans in 2014 there was a 'canal conservation' preservation area marked out. This was on the eastern boundary of the site within the now designated site but alongside the fence that separates the site from the public footpath and the existing resident accommodation in Pye Bridge End. It was my understanding that this was approximately 30' in width and would be part of the canal plan as is a similar area alongside Lealholm. Is the canal no longer part of any long term plan? Will the planting beside the existing fence mentioned above continue and/or be extended to the tranche area?
Will the planting beside the existing fence mentioned above continue and/or be extended to the tranche area?
I'm uncertain whether observations to the planning committee receive a response, but I would be grateful for your comments in due course.