Summons to Meeting

Friday 19 May 2017 Development Panel Tuesday 30 May 2017, 1.00 pm Hunday Manor Country House Hotel, Workington

Membership:

Councillor Peter Bales (Chair) Councillor Billy Miskelly (Vice-Chair) Councillor Carole Armstrong Councillor Nicky Cockburn Councillor Adrian Davis-Johnston Councillor Janet Farebrother Councillor Malcolm Grainger Councillor Mark Jenkinson Councillor Ron Munby Councillor Jim Osborn Councillor Bill Pegram Councillor David Wilson

Members of the public are welcome to attend the meeting. If you have any questions or queries contact Dean Devine on 01900 702556.

Site Visits The following site visits will take place:

2/2016/0751 - Land North of Broughton Park, Gt Broughton - Erection of up to 64 dwellings including landscaping, open space, access, highways and drainage

HOU/2017/0045 - 4,5,6,7,9 & 11 Cocktons Yard, Cockermouth - Retrospective application for replacement front and back doors with flood resilient doors

Members of the Development Panel will be picked up from Hunday Manor Country House Hotel, Workington. The bus will leave at 10.25 am Agenda

1. Minutes (Pages 1 - 70) To sign as a correct record the minutes of the meetings held on 7 February, 28 February, 21 March and 11 April 2017 2. Apologies for Absence 3. Declaration of Interests Councillors/Staff to give notice of any disclosable pecuniary interest, other registrable interest or any other interest and the nature of that interest relating to any item on the agenda in accordance with the adopted Code of Conduct. 4. Questions To answer questions from Councillors and members of the public – submitted in writing or by electronic mail no later than 5.00pm, 2 working days before the meeting. 5. 2/2016/0751 - Land North of Broughton Park, Gt Broughton - Erection of up to 64 dwellings including landscaping, open space, access, highways and drainage (Pages 71 - 124) http://planning.allerdale.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=1 51627 6. CON8/2011/0227 - Land at Moss Bay Road, Workington - Application for approval of details reserved by conditions 3, 6 and 16 to planning approval 2/2011/0227 including details relating to the play equipment and siting of the play area (Pages 125 - 132) http://planning.allerdale.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=1 54236 7. 2/2017/0110 - Land adjacent to Kirkbampton Village Hall - Outline application for proposed residential development of 9 dwellings (Pages 133 - 144) http://planning.allerdale.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=1 54072 8. HOU/2017/0045 - 4,5,6,7,9 & 11 Cocktons Yard, Cockermouth - Retrospective application for replacement front and back doors with flood resilient doors (Pages 145 - 150) http://planning.allerdale.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=1 54441 9. 2/2017/0181- Land at Hall Bank, Boltongate - Erection of a rural workers dwelling (Pages 151 - 160) http://planning.allerdale.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=1 56281

Deputy Monitoring Officer

Date of Next Meeting: Tuesday 27 June 2017, 1.00 pm Council Chamber, Allerdale House This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 1

At a meeting of the Development Panel held in Council Chamber, Allerdale House on Tuesday 7 February 2017 at 1.00 pm

Members

Councillor Peter Bales (Chair) Councillor Carole Armstrong (Vice-Chair) Councillor Nicky Cockburn Councillor Adrian Davis-Johnston Councillor Janet Farebrother Councillor Malcolm Grainger Councillor Mark Jenkinson Councillor Billy Miskelly Councillor Ron Munby Councillor Jim Osborn Councillor Bill Pegram Councillor David Wilson

Staff Present

S Brook, B Carlin, H Carruthers, D Devine, J Eaton, S Elsworth, K Kerrigan, S Long and R Wilkinson

350. Declaration of Interests

None declared.

351. Questions

None received.

352. 2/2016/0727 - Outline planning application for 5 no dwellings (with layout and scale to be considered at the outline stage) - Land at Blitterlees, Silloth, Wigton

Representations

Jeff Downham spoke in objection to the application.

John Graham spoke on behalf of Holme Low Parish Council.

The agent Rachel Lightfoot spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Principle of Development

Extends beyond the settlement limits of Blitterlees which is a Limited Growth Village where small scale development is permitted within the existing settlement limits in order to contribute towards the 6% of the 5,471 net additional dwellings identified by policy S3 as arising from Limited Growth and Rounding off Villages over the plan period. However,

Page 1 the settlement boundaries are subject to review and evidence to date suggests limited land availability within the existing settlement limit. Therefore justification exists to consider the proposal positively in this regard.

Scale of development, density and layout relates well to the settlement.

 Visual Impact

Insofar as this can be judged at the outline stage, the visual impacts of the development are considered to be acceptable

 Landscape Impact

Given the large scale and wide open nature of this landscape subtype (coastal Plain), this small scale encroachment is considered to be acceptable.

 Residential Amenity

An acceptable relationship with neighbouring properties is considered to be achieved.

 Ecology

A survey has been provided which demonstrates that Great Crested Newts are unlikely to be affected by the proposal.

 Drainage

Localised flooding issues with the beck have been highlighted by representations, however, subject to conditions, no concerns have been raised by the County Council or United Utilities.

 Trees/Hedgerows

No significant removal required.

 Affordable Housing

No provision required.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Members noted the list of consultations received since the preparation of the agenda. Additional letters of objection and representation from Silloth-on- Solway Town Council had been received.

Councillor A Davis-Johnston moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor B Pegram seconded.

Page 2 A vote was taken; 7 in favour of approval and 5 against.

The motion in favour of approval was carried.

Decision

Approved

Conditions

1. Before any works commence details of the appearance, access and landscaping of the site (hereinafter called 'reserved matters') shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The application has been submitted as an outline application, in accordance with the provisions of the details of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2015.

2. The submission of all reserved matters applications shall be made no later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this permission and the development shall begin no later than whichever is the later of the following dates: (a) The expiration of 3 years from the date of the grant of this permission, or (b) The expiration of 2 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.

Reason: In order to comply with Sections 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

3. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans: Drawing 701 Rev C - received 18th January 2017 Email dated 18th january 2017 confirming consideration of layout and scale at outline stage and that dwellings will be single storey only.

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non- material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

4. Any application for reserved matters shall include plans showing the following: (a) Details of existing and proposed ground levels; (b) Proposed finished floor levels of buildings; (c) Levels of any paths, drives, garages and parking areas; The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so approved.

Page 3 Reason: To ensure that the works are carried out to a suitable level in relation to the adjoining properties and highways and in the interests of visual amenity.

5. Construction Management Plan: No development shall take place until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The statement shall include the following: (a) Traffic Management Plan to include all traffic associated with the development, including site and staff traffic, off site parking, turning and compound areas; (b) Procedure to monitor and mitigate noise and vibration from the construction and demolition and to monitor any properties at risk of damage from vibration, as well as taking into account noise from vehicles, deliveries. All measurements should make reference to BS7445. (c) Mitigation measures to reduce adverse impacts on residential properties from construction compounds including visual impact, noise, and light pollution. (d) A written procedure for dealing with complaints regarding the construction or demolition; (e) Measures to control the emissions of dust and dirt during construction and demolition (including any wheel washing facilities); (f) Programme of work for Construction phase; (g) Hours of working and deliveries; (h) Details of lighting to be used on site; (i) Highway signage/ Haulage routes. The approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties during the construction works of the development hereby approved, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014 and in the interests of highway safety.

6. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed above ground floor level until details of all external and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Only the materials so approved shall be used in the development as approved.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development for the external appearance of the approved scheme which is compatible with the character of the surrounding area, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

7. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised within the landscaping details to be approved at the reserved matters stage shall be carried

Page 4 out in the first planting season following completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with other similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to enhance the appearance of the development and minimise the impact of the development in the locality.

8. Details of the siting, height and type of all means of enclosure/screen walls/fences/other means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority efore development commences. Any such walls/fences etc shall be constructed prior to the approved building being brought into use/occupied. All means of enclosure so constructed shall be retained and no part thereof shall be removed without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development which is compatible with the character of the surrounding area and protect the privacy of occupiers.

9. Detailed drawings of the means of access to the site submitted at the reserved matters stage shall include details of footways that link continuously and conveniently to the nearest existing footway, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be completed as approved before the development is occupied.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety, accessibility by sustainable transport modes and to minimise potential hazards, in accordance with policies S5, S22, and S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) 2014.

10.Ramps shall be provided on each side of every road junction to enable wheelchairs, prams and invalid carriages to be safely manoeuvred at kerb lines. Details of all such ramps shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval before any highway construction works. Any ramp details so approved shall be fully constructed as part of the development prior to the use of approved junctions.

Reason: To ensure that pedestrians can negotiate road junctions in relative safety.

11.Access and parking/turning requirements shall be substantially met before any building work commences on site so that constructional traffic can park and turn clear of the highway.

Reason: The carrying out of this development without the provision of these facilities during the construction work is likely to lead to inconvenience and danger to road users.

Page 5 12.The development shall not be brought into use until visibility splays providing clear visibility of 2.4 metres x 60 metres measured down the centre of the access road and the nearside channel line of the major road have been provided at the junction of the access road with the county highway. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) relating to permitted development, no structure, or object of any kind shall be erected or placed and no trees, bushes or other plants which exceed 1m in height shall be planted or be permitted to grow within the visibility splay which obstruct the visibility splays.

Reason: To ensure an acceptable standard of highway access during the construction and operational use of the site, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

13.Details of all measures to be taken by the applicant/developer to prevent surface water discharging onto or off the highway shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to the development being constructed above plinth level. Any approved works shall be implemented prior to the development being completed and shall be maintained operational at all times thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and environmental management.

14.Prior to the commencement of any development, a surface water drainage scheme (which includes details of attenuation and the restricted run-off rate), which is based on the hierarchy of drainage options in the National Planning Practice Guidance with evidence of an assessment of the site conditions shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no surface water shall discharge to the public combined sewerage system either directly or indirectly. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution in accordance with policies S29, S32, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan 2014.

15.Foul drainage shall be disposed of to the adopted Public Sewerage system.

Reason: To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of pollution in accordance with policies S32 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan 2014.

Page 6 16.Prior to the commencement of the development a sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan shall include as a minimum: a. The arrangements for adoption by an appropriate public body or statutory undertaker, or, management and maintenance by a Resident's Management Company; and b. Arrangements concerning appropriate funding mechanisms for its ongoing maintenance of all elements of the sustainable drainage system (including mechanical components) and will include elements such as ongoing inspections relating to performance and asset condition assessments, operation costs, regular maintenance, remedial woks and irregular maintenance caused by less sustainable limited life assets or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime. The development shall subsequently be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved plan.

Reason: To manage flooding and pollution and to ensure that a managing body is in place for the sustainable drainage system and there is funding and maintenance mechanism for the lifetime of the development, in accordance with policies S21, S29, S32 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan 2014.

353. 2/2016/0660 - Outline application considering access and layout for three residential dwellings - Garth Croft, Low Seaton, Seaton, Workington

Representations

Councillor Celia Tibble, Ward Councillor for Seaton spoke on the application.

The agent Stuart Woodall spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Planning Officer recommended refusal

The Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Principle of Development

The principle of residential development at this location is to be assessed with regard to current Local Plan policies, specifically the housing policies S3 and S5 that form the Council’s housing strategy and settlement hierarchy.

The three dwellings proposed are considered commensurate with the growth of Seaton and this windfall site is not considered to undermine the

Page 7 housing allocations pending under Part 2 of the Local Plan or the general housing land supply for the area.

However, despite the site being adjacent to the Settlement Limit the development is considered to have an adverse impact on settlement character and with impact on the open countryside. In that respect the principal of development is not acceptable and contrary to Polices S3 and S5 of the Local Plan.

The applicant has not offered any evidence of essential need for the dwellings in the open countryside to meet the exceptions of S3 that resists non-essential development. However, with the site being edge of settlement and generally sustainable given the services available within the village, this matter need not be a reason for refusal.

 Highway Matters and Residential Amenity

The Highway Authority does not object on highway safety grounds regarding their usual highway standards on an unclassified road of this type.

However the Highway Authority does recognise the Local Planning Authority’s view that the additional traffic resulting from the proposed development is likely to have an adverse impact upon the ease and safety of vehicle movements along the length of Low Seaton Road resulting in significant harm to highway safety and residential amenity.

 Landscape Impact

The proposed development by virtue of its encroachment into the open countryside beyond the Settlement Limit is considered to have an adverse landscape impact with no benefits that outweigh such harm.

 Settlement Character

The proposed site layout of is considered to be inappropriate resulting in an adverse impact upon settlement character.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Councillor A Davis-Johnston moved refusal as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor R Munby seconded.

A vote was taken; the vote in favour of refusal was unanimous.

The motion in favour of refusal was carried.

Decision

Refused

Page 8 Reasons for Refusal

1. The additional traffic resulting from the proposed development is likely to have an adverse impact upon the ease and safety of vehicle movements along the length of Low Seaton Road resulting in significant harm to highway safety and residential amenity contrary to Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan Part 1 Adopted July 2014.

2. The proposed development by virtue of its encroachment into the open countryside beyond the Settlement Limit is considered to have an adverse landscape impact contrary to Policies S5, S33 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan Part 1 Adopted July 2014.

3. The proposed site layout is considered to be inappropriate resulting in an adverse impact upon settlement character contrary to Policies S4, S5, S32 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan Part 1 Adopted July 2014.

354. 2/2014/0857 - Outline application for up to 290 dwellings - Proposed Housing Development, Ashfield Road South, Workington

Prior to Members’ questioning to the representatives of the Allerdale Investment Partnership the Chairman moved that under Section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the item on the grounds that it may involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of part 1 of Schedule 12 (a) of the Act.

Following Members’ questioning the public returned to the meeting.

Representations

Chris Bagshaw spoke on the application on behalf of Workington Town Council.

Sion Davies spoke on behalf of the applicant in support of the application.

Application

The Principal Planning Officer recommended approval (subject to S106)

The principle of the application had been approved by the Development Panel at its meeting on 20 October 2015, subject to conditions and a S106 agreement.

The main changes in the revised S106 were summarised as follows:

1. Reduced education contribution from £447,671 (16 pupils secondary and 13 primary pupils) to £60,255 (Five primary pupils) agreed by Cumbria County Council’s education department.

2. Reduction in affordable housing provision from 20% to 15%.

3. Phased approach with no public open space, affordable or education contributions within the first phase.

Page 9 4. The development will be implemented in a phased programme with the delivery of affordable housing at the back end.

Councillor M Grainger moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor R Munby seconded.

A vote was taken; 8 in favour of approval and 4 against.

The motion in favour of approval was carried.

Decision

Approved (subject to S106)

Conditions

1. Before any works commence, details of the layout, scale and appearance, and landscaping (hereinafter called 'reserved matters') shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in accordance with the phasing scheme as agreed under Condition 5 and the development shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to assess all the details of the development, in accordance with the provisions of the details of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1999.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans: Site location plan – Drawing no. 1100 Site Access arrangements – Drawing no. TPMA1159-100 . Newlands Lane / High Street Indicative Mitigation Scheme - TPMA1159 104

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory standard of development.

3. The submission of the first phase of reserved matter applications shall be made no later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this permission and the development shall begin no later than whichever is the later of the following dates: a) The expiration of three years from the date of the grant of this permission, or b) 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.

Reason: In order to comply with the requirements of Section 92 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

4. Any application for 'reserved matters' of layout shall include plans showing the following:

Page 10 a) Cross sections through the site; b) Details of existing and proposed ground levels; c) Proposed finished floor levels of buildings; d) Levels of any paths, drives, garages and parking areas; and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so approved.

Reason: To ensure that the works are carried out to a suitable level in relation to the adjoining properties and highways and in the interests of visual amenity.

5. Any application for reserved matters of the layout of the site shall include a phasing plan showing the sequencing of the development to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and the developer shall not proceed other than in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason. To serve in the public and visual interests a satisfactory correlated order of development, in accordance with Policies S5 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) Adopted July 2014.

6. No dwelling shall be occupied until any parking spaces, garages and turning areas associated with them have been provided in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the parking and turning areas provided shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles.

Reason: To ensure that proper access and parking provision is made and retained for use in relation to the development, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S22 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

7. The carriageway, footways and footpaths shall be designed, drained and lit to a standard suitable for adoption and in this respect further details, including longitudinal/cross sections, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval before any part of the development hereby permitted is commenced. No work shall be commenced until a full specification has been approved. These details shall be in accordance with the standards laid down in the current Cumbria Design Guide. Any works so approved shall be constructed before the development is completed.

Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of construction in the interests of highway safety.

8. Prior to occupation visibility splays providing clear visibility of 43 metres measured down the centre of the access road and the nearside channel line of the major road shall be provided at the junction of the access road with the county highway. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning

Page 11 (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) relating to permitted development, no structure or object of any kind shall be erected or placed and no trees, bushes or other plants shall be planted or be permitted to grow within the visibility splays which exceed 1 metre in height and obstruct the visibility splays. The visibility splays shall be constructed before general development of the site commences so that construction traffic is safeguarded.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory means of access for the development in the interests of highway safety.

9. No development hereby permitted shall be commenced until details and representative samples of the external stone/brick/roof materials for the development has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details

Reason: To ensure the use of appropriate materials in the interests of visual amenity, in compliance with policies S2, S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) Adopted July 2014.

10.No development shall take place until a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the buildings they enclose are first occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development which is compatible with the character of the surrounding area, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

11.The details submitted in pursuance of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by a scheme of hard and soft landscaping which shall include indications of all existing trees, hedgerows and shrubs on the site, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for the protection in the course of development. The scheme shall include : a) The treatment proposed for all ground surfaces, including hard areas; b) Full details of tree planting; c) Planting schedules, noting the species, sizes, numbers and densities of plants; d) Finished levels or contours; e) Any structures to be erected or constructed; f) Functional services above and below ground; and g) All existing trees, hedges and other landscape features, indicating clearly those to be removed.

Page 12 Reason: In order to enhance the appearance of the development and minimise the impact of the development in the locality, in compliance with Policies S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

12.Pursuant to Condition 11, all planting, seeding or turfing comprised within the scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season following completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with other similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to enhance the appearance of the development and minimise the impact of the development in the locality, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

13.No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a plan has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority to show all existing trees which are to be felled or retained, together with the positions and height of protective fences, the areas for the storage of materials and stationing of machines and huts, and the position and width of temporary site roads and accesses. The details so approved shall be implemented prior to the commencement of the development and maintained at all times during the construction period.

Reason: To ensure the retention of existing important trees on the site, in compliance with Policy DM17 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

14.The details submitted in pursuance of Condition 1 shall be accompanied by a landscape scheme for hedgerow and planting along the southern boundary, and replacement of any section of the hedgerow along the eastern boundary required to be removed as part of the formation of the access to the site. This scheme shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented thereafter in accordance with the approved details and prior to first occupation of the first dwelling. All planting shall be carried out in the first planting season following completion of the development and any which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with other similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to enhance the appearance of the development and minimise the impact of the development in the locality, in compliance with

Page 13 the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

15.No dwellings shall be occupied until full details of the layout of the Local Area of Play / Locally Equipped Area of Play have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall include a programme for its implementation. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved programme.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory provision of open space, in compliance with policies S2, S4, S24, S25, S26 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

16.No development shall take place until a Construction Environmental Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved Plan shall be adhered to through the construction period. The Plan shall include the following: a) Traffic Management Plan to include: - All traffic associated with the development, including site and staff traffic - The means of access for construction traffic - The loading and unloading of plant and materials - The storage of plan and materials used in constructing the development - Wheel washing facilities b) Procedure to monitor and mitigate noise and vibration from the construction and to monitor any properties at risk of damage from vibration, as well as taking into account noise from vehicles deliveries. All measurements should make reference to BS7445. c) Mitigation measures to reduce adverse impacts on residential properties from construction compounds including visual impact, noise, and light pollution. d) Mitigation measures to ensure that no harm is caused to protected species during construction. e) A written procedure for dealing with complaints regarding the construction or demolition. f) Measures to control the emissions of dust and dirt during construction. g) Programme of work for the Construction phase. h) Hours of working and deliveries. i) Details of lighting to be used on site. The approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties and to secure appropriate mitigation of ecology interests on the site, in compliance with Policies S32 and S35 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) Adopted July 2014.

Page 14 17.Pursuant to Condition 16 and prior to the commencement of development, a plan shall be submitted for the prior approval by the Local Planning Authority reserving adequate land for site offices/stores, secure compounds, including adequate land for the parking/turning of vehicles/plant, engaged in the construction operations associated with the development hereby approved. Such land, including the vehicular access thereto, shall be used for or be kept available for these purposes at all times until completion of the construction works.

Reason: To minimise inconvenience and danger to road users, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

18.The Interim Travel Plan shall be developed during the first phase of the development as the Development Travel Plan and shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval, in consultation with the local highways authority, prior to the occupation of 50 dwellings. This Plan shall be further developed during the Review process, which shall take place annually or when there have been 50 dwellings occupied since the last review. The Travel Plan shall provide for/include the following: a) The appointment of a Travel Plan Co-ordinator b) The collection and recording of baseline data on travel patterns c) Targets to be achieved for modal share d) Details of the specific measures to be implemented to promote the use of sustainable modes of transport and details of the way in which these will be implemented in order to meet the identified targets and the more specific site objectives are developed as part of the Full Travel Plan e) Details of the mechanism for monitoring the identified targets f) Details of the means by which the Travel Plan shall be reviewed and the corrective measures to be employed if the identified targets are not met.

Reason: To aid in the delivery of sustainable transport objectives and in support of Local Transport Plan Policies LD3 and LD4.

19.Cyclepaths shall be provided that link continuously across the site and to the existing bus stops. Pedestrian/cycle linkages to and from and within the site shall be provided that are convenient to use. Additional infrastructure (such as lay-bys, seats, timetable posts and crossing points on Ashfield Road south) shall be provided as may be identified through the Travel Plan process, by the Local Planning Authority, in conjunction with the Local Highways Authority.

Reason: To ensure there is adequate access to sustainable transport modes and minimise hazard to users thereof.

20.No development shall commence within the site until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological

Page 15 work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the Local Planning Authority. This written scheme shall include the following components: 1. An archaeological evaluation; 2. An archaeological recording programme the scope of which will be dependent upon the results of the evaluation; 3. Where significant archaeological remains are revealed by the programme of archaeological work, a post-excavation assessment and analysis, preparation of a site archive ready for deposition at a store approved by the Local Planning Authority, completion of an archive report, and submission of the results for publication in a suitable journal.

Reason: To afford reasonable opportunity for an examination to be made to determine the existence of any remains of archaeological interest within the site and for the preservation, examination or recording of such remains.

21.The development shall be implemented in accordance with the mitigation measures outlined in the preliminary Ecological Appraisal (Wardell Armstrong – August 2014).

Reason: To safeguard the habitat of wildlife in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S35 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) Adopted July 2014.

22.Prior to commencement of development, details of the foul drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a sustainable means of drainage from the site and minimise the risk of water pollution to the local water environment, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S2 and S29 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

23.Only foul drainage shall be connected to the public sewer.

Reason: To ensure a sustainable means of drainage from the site and minimise the risk of water pollution to the local water environment, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

24.Pursuant to condition 23, none of the dwellings shall be occupied until the sewage disposal works have been completed in accordance with the submitted plans.

Reason: To ensure a sustainable means of drainage from the site and minimise the risk of water pollution to the local water environment, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 16 25.Prior to the commencement of works, details of the surface water drainage works, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall: Confirm there will be no SuDS/bunding or land raising within Flood Zones 2/3. Indicate the maximum allowable discharge rate from the impermeable area of development site shall be restricted to the pre- development greenfield runoff rate (Qbar) rate of 7 litres per second per ha. Any flows from any areas of the site including permeable areas in excess of 7 litres/second will be attenuated on site in a detention basin/balancing pond for all events up to and including the 1 in 100 year event including a 30% allowance for climate change. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to the occupation of any of the dwellinghouses hereby approved.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of surface water drainage and minimise the risk of flooding, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies S2 and S29 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted 2014.

26.No development approved by this permission shall commence until all necessary site investigation works within the site boundary are carried out, as identified in the Interim Geo-Environmental Report (WYG, November 2014 & Phase 1 Desk Study Report, Wardell Armstrong, November 2014), to confirm the need for remedial works to treat the mine entries and areas of shallow mine workings and to establish the degree and nature of the contamination and its potential to pollute the environment or cause harm to human health.

Reason: To ensure the safety and stability of the proposed development and minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

27.Should land affected by mine working and / or contamination be identified under the site investigation works under condition 26 be found which poses unacceptable risks to human health, controlled waters or the wider environment, no development shall take place until a detailed remediation scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include an appraisal of remediation options, identification of the preferred option(s), the proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, and a description and programme of the works to be undertaken including the verification plan.

Reason: To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the

Page 17 National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

28.Should a remediation scheme be required under condition 27, the approved strategy shall be implemented and a verification report submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the development (or relevant phase of development) being brought into use.

Reason: To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

29.In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported immediately to the Local Planning Authority. Development on the part of the site affected must be halted and a risk assessment carried out and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Where unacceptable risks are found remediation and verification schemes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These shall be implemented prior to the development (or relevant phase of development) being brought into use. All works shall be undertaken in accordance with current UK guidance, particularly CLR11.

Reason: To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

30.Prior to occupation of the dwellings, full details of all noise mitigation measures, as identified in Section 5 of the Noise and Vibration Assessment (Wardell Armstrong, Report Number LE12021, Date : October 2014)l shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The mitigation measures approved shall be installed prior to occupation of the dwellings.

Reason: In the interests of amenity in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

The meeting closed at 4.00 pm

Page 18 At a meeting of the Development Panel held in Council Chamber, Allerdale House on Tuesday 28 February 2017 at 1.00 pm

Members

Councillor Peter Bales (Chair) Councillor Carole Armstrong (Vice-Chair) Councillor Nicky Cockburn Councillor Joseph Cowell Councillor Janet Farebrother Councillor Malcolm Grainger Councillor Anthony Markley Councillor Billy Miskelly Councillor Ron Munby Councillor Jim Osborn Councillor Bill Pegram Councillor David Wilson

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors A Davis-Johnston and M Jenkinson

Staff Present

B Carlin, C Chambers, D Devine, S Elsworth, C Fearon, K Kerrigan, S Long, A Seekings, S Sewell and R Wilkinson

384. Minutes

The minutes of the meetings held on 1 November, 29 November and 20 December 2016 were signed as a correct record.

385. Declaration of Interests

5. 2/2016/0668 - Demolition of disused barn and change of use of land to incorporate two holiday lodges (Resubmission of 2/2016/0364) - Ellen Hall, Gilcrux, Wigton

S Long, Principal Planning Officer – Other interest – Agent had been involved in development on property

7. 2/2016/0606 - Provide new tourist accommodation, this will be in the form of a touring caravan park and static camping pod area, with associated parking and sanitary facilities - Melbreak Hotel, Winscales Road, Little Clifton

S Long, Principal Planning Officer – Other interest – Agent had been involved in development on property

386. Questions

None received.

387. 2/2016/0668 - Demolition of disused barn and change of use of land to incorporate two holiday lodges (Resubmission of 2/2016/0364) - Ellen Hall, Gilcrux, Wigton

Page 19 Representations

Councillor Jacqueline Mounsey spoke on the application as Ward Councillor.

The agent Stuart Woodall, Day Cummins spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Senior Planning Officer recommended refusal.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Siting

Not considered acceptable due to flood risk

 Design and materials

Design and materials considered acceptable

 Residential amenity

No significant effects on residential amenity

 Access and parking

No highways objections subject to conditions

 Drainage

A suitable scheme can be achieved

 Flood risk

Unacceptable development within Flood Zone 3. Sequential test for alternative land at lower flood risk has been satisfied. Exception test in terms of safe access and egress has not been satisfied.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Members noted the list of consultations received since the preparation of the agenda. Further comments had been received from the Lead Local Flood Authority indicating that the development could improve issues in the area by using raised floor levels.

The Senior Planning Officer advised Members that a detailed letter of assessment had been submitted by Day Cummins Limited in response to the Exception Test, providing commentary from a Flood Risk Engineer advising that access and egress would be maintained throughout a flood and also that the development would reduce the flood risk for existing properties. The Senior

Page 20 Planning Officer did not consider the wider sustainability benefits to the community to outweigh the issues covered in the report and maintained the recommendation for refusal.

Councillor J Farebrother moved refusal as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor B Miskelly seconded.

A vote was taken; 3 in favour of refusal and 8 against.

The motion in favour of refusal was lost.

Councillor T Markley moved that the application be approved on the grounds that the additional information provided from the Lead Local Flood Authority, Flood Risk Engineer and from local residents provided evidence that the wider sustainability benefits would outweigh the issues covered in the Senior Planning Officer’s report and that it was not considered that the site was at a high risk of flooding, subject to appropriate conditions delegated to officers. Councillor M Grainger seconded.

A vote was taken; 8 in favour of approval and 3 against.

The motion in favour of approval subject to appropriate conditions delegated to officers was carried.

Decision

Approved

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: 4512 01 B - Location Plan 4512 02 C - Proposed Site Plan Pinelog 1- Elevations and Floor Plans Pinelog 2 - Elevations and Floor Plans Flood Risk Assessment – Dated October 2015 DS1251P - - BioFicient 2 Septic Tank Details

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non-material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

3. The lodge hereby approved shall be used for holiday let accommodation and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class C of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning [Use Classes] Order 2015), or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification.

Page 21 Reason: The Local Planning Authority would wish to examine the use of the building other than for holiday accommodation to assess whether it would be acceptable in terms of location, access and amenity, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S17 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

4. The lodge hereby approved shall not be used at any time as the sole or principal residence by any occupants.

Reason: The Local Planning Authority would wish to carefully examine the use of the building other than for holiday accommodation to assess whether it would be acceptable in terms of location, access and amenity, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S12 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

5. A register of all occupants of the holiday accommodation hereby approved shall be maintained at all times and shall be made available for inspection by the Local Planning Authority within 10 days of a request. The register shall contain the name and address of the principal occupier together with the dates of occupation.

Reason: The Local Planning Authority would wish to carefully examine the use of the building other than for holiday accommodation to assess whether it would be acceptable in terms of location, access and amenity, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S17 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

6. Prior to the commencement of works details of the surface water drainage works, including any attenuation measures to demonstrate that no greater run off rate than the existing greenfield site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to the occupation of any of the dwellinghouses hereby approved.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory means of surface water drainage and minimise the risk of flooding from the development in comparison to an assessment of its existing undeveloped state, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies S29 and S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

7. Details of the siting, height and type of all means of enclosure/screen walls/fences/other means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of any dwelling(s). Any such walls/fences etc shall be constructed prior to the approved building being brought into use/occupied. All means of enclosure so constructed shall be retained and no part thereof shall be removed without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development which is compatible with the character of the surrounding area and safeguard the amenity of neighbouring properties.

8. The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) compiled by Rachel Gerrard dated October 2015 and the

Page 22 following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA: Lodges are to be constructed with a 1m clear gap between the existing concrete ground level and the underside of the structure. 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.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies S29 and S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

9. A Flood Emergency Plan, covering place of refuge, flood evacuation and safe/escape routes, shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of works at the site and shall be complied with for the lifetime of the development.

Reason: To ensure the safety of the occupiers and users of the development against the risk of flooding.

10. The whole of the access area bounded by the carriageway edge, entrance gates and the splays shall be constructed and drained to the specification of the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

11. Before the development is occupied the existing access to the highway which is to be stopped up shall be permanently closed and the highway crossing and boundary shall be reinstated in accordance with the details shown on Drawing No – 02 Rev C.

Reason: To minimise highway danger for construction or operational traffic and for the avoidance of doubt.

388. 2/2016/0747 - Outline application for residential development including access - Part Field 7800, Newton Arlosh, Wigton

Representations

Paul Minns spoke in objection to the application.

The agent Paul Boustead spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Principal Planning Officer recommended refusal.

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Principle of development

Page 23 The proposal is considered contrary to Policy S3 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

 Design principles

Officers consider the shape and depth of the site is not of appropriate scale to this part of the village of Newton Arlosh failing to respond positively to the character, history and distinctiveness of its location or integrate well with existing development contrary to Policy S2, S4, S32 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part1), Adopted July 2014.

 Affordable housing

The applicant is not agreeable to provide financial cash contribution for affordable housing and therefore the proposal is contrary to the Written Ministerial Statement published in November 2014.

 Amenity/odour

In the absence of an appropriate odour assessment the applicant has not been able to demonstrate the development can achieve an acceptable standard of amenity to future occupiers. The proposal is considered contrary to Policy S2, S4 and S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

 Highway issues

The proposed access as shown is acceptable and no objections are raised from the Highways Authority.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Members noted the list of consultations received since the preparation of the agenda. The applicant had submitted a noise and odour assessment on 22 February 2017. Due to the late submission of the reports, Planning Officers had not been able to fully assess the details and no comments from Environmental Health Officers had been received.

Councillor T Markley moved that the application be approved on the grounds that the development met the needs of the village and that it would keep in character with the surrounding area and that it was not considered that there were noises or odour issues, subject to appropriate conditions delegated to officers. Councillor M Grainger seconded.

A vote was taken; 3 in favour of approval and 8 against.

The motion in favour of approval was lost.

Councillor T Markley moved that the application be deferred until a site visit had taken place. Councillor J Cowell seconded.

Page 24 A vote was taken; 6 in favour of deferral and 5 against.

The motion in favour of deferral until a site visit had taken place was carried.

Decision

Deferred

389. 2/2016/0606 - Provide new tourist accommodation, this will be in the form of a touring caravan park and static camping pod area, with associated parking and sanitary facilities - Melbreak Hotel, Winscales Road, Little Clifton

Representations

The agent Stuart Woodall, Day Cummins spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Principal of caravan and lodge development

Policy S17 ALP states that new visitor accommodation will be supported in the Principal, Key and Local Service Centres. Tourism accommodation in the open countryside will only be supported where it forms part of a farm diversification scheme or constitutes an extension to, or upgrade of, an existing facility. The development is considered to form an ancillary extension to the tourist accommodation associated with the Melbreak Hotel.

 Design, layout and materials

Acceptable design, materials siting and layout for the caravan sites and the camping pods.

 Drainage

Surface water will be discharged via a sustainable urban drainage scheme (SUDS) to an attenuation tank. The outflow will be restricted to existing run off levels to a local water course. The detailed surface water drainage details can be secured by planning condition.

Foul drainage will be connected to the mains.

 Highways

No adverse impact from a highways point of view; subject to planning conditions.

Page 25  Contamination

Contamination remediation can be secured by planning condition

 Ecology

No adverse impact on local habitats or species.

 Landscape

Limited adverse impact on landscape character due to the modest scale of the development, the screening by topography of the locality and screening from existing and proposed hedgerows and trees.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Councillor B Miskelly moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor B Pegram seconded.

A vote was taken; the vote in favour of approval was unanimous.

The motion in favour of approval was carried.

Decision

Approved

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: 4445 01 Rev A - Location plan 4445 02 Rev D - Proposed site plan received 6 January 2017 4445 03 - Proposed elevations and floor plans for toilet block 4445 04 - Proposed camping pod elevations and floor plans 444506B - Proposed landscaping plan received 6 January 2017 Flood Risk Assessment received 6 January 2017 Topography details Email regarding external finishes of toilet block received 14 February 2017

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non-material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

3. Only foul drainage shall be connected to the public sewer.

Page 26 Reason: To ensure a sustainable means of drainage from the site and minimise the risk of water pollution to the local water environment, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

4. Details shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority of a surface water drainage scheme based on the principles of an on site attenuation tank with hydrobrake control as set out in the Flood Risk Assessment received 6 January 2017 and the Proposed Site Plan drawing number 444502D received 6 January 2017, to restrict the post development peak surface water run off rate to no more than 7.9 l/s. The approved surface water drainage scheme shall be implemented prior to the occupation or use of the approved development and retained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no surface water shall discharge to the public sewerage system either directly or indirectly. The development shall be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory means of surface water drainage and minimise the risk of flooding from the development in comparison to an assessment of its existing undeveloped state, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies S29 and S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

5. Prior to the commencement of the use of the site, details of the lighting scheme for the development (including siting and design), details of all lamps plus levels and hours of illumination shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting details should be solely implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby residential properties from the operational use, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

6. Landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with drawing number 4445 06B received 6 January 2017. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised within the scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season following completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with other similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of nearby residential properties from the operational use, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

7. The landscaping scheme shall be maintained at all times in accordance with the approved Landscape Management Plan drawing number 444506B received 6 January 2017.

Reason: To ensure the long term maintenance and management of public open space within the residential estate.

Page 27 8. No development shall take place until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The statement shall include the following: * Formation of the construction compound and access tracks and any areas of hard standing; * Cleaning of site entrances and the adjacent public highway; * The sheeting of all HGV's taking spoil to/ from the site to prevent spillage or deposit of any materials on the highway; * Post-construction restoration/ reinstatement of the working areas. * A Construction Traffic Management Plan to include: The construction of the site access and the creation, positioning and maintenance of the associated visibility splays; Access gates will be hung to open away from the public highway no less than 10m from the carriageway edge and shall incorporate appropriate visibility splays; Proposed accommodation works and where necessary a programme for their subsequent removal and reinstatement of street furniture and verges, where required along the route; The pre-construction road condition established by a detailed survey for accommodation works within the highways boundary conducted with a Highway Authority representative; Details of all road improvement, construction specification, strengthening, maintenance and repair commitments if necessary as a consequence of the development; Retained areas for vehicle parking, manoeuvring, loading and unloading for their specific purpose during the development; the management of junctions to and crossings of the public highway and other public rights of way/ footway. The approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties during the construction works of the development hereby approved, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014 and in the interests of highway safety.

9. No development approved by this permission shall commence until a desktop study has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Should the preliminary risk assessment identify any potential contamination which may affect human health, controlled waters or the wider environment, all necessary site investigation works commence within the controlled waters or the wider environment, all necessary site investigation works within the site boundary must be carried out to establish the degree and nature of the contamination and its potential to pollute the environment or cause harm to human health. The scope of works for the site investigations should be agreed with the Local Planning Authority prior to their commencement.

Reason: To minimise any risk during or post construction works arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

10. Should land affected by contamination be identified under the desktop study condition 9 following site investigations which poses unacceptable risks to human health, controlled waters or the wider

Page 28 environment, no development shall take place until a detailed remediation scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include an appraisal of remediation options, identification of the preferred option(s), the proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, and a description and programme of the works to be undertaken including the verification plan.

Reason: To minimise any risk during or post construction works arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

11. Should a remediation scheme be required under condition 10, the approved strategy shall be implemented and a verification report submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the development (or relevant phase of development) being brought into use.

Reason: To minimise any risk during or post construction works arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

12. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported immediately to the Local Planning Authority. Development on the part of the site affected must be halted and a risk assessment carried out and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Where unacceptable risks are found remediation and verification schemes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These shall be implemented prior to the development (or relevant phase of development) being brought into use. All works shall be undertaken in accordance with current UK guidance, particularly CLR11.

Reason: To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

13. The conversion/caravan hereby approved shall be used for holiday let accommodation and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class C of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning [Use Classes] Order 2015), or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification.

Reason: The Local Planning Authority would wish to examine the use of the building other than for holiday accommodation to assess whether it would be acceptable in terms of location, access and amenity, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S17 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 29 14. A bound register of all occupants of the holiday accommodation hereby approved shall be maintained at all times and shall be made available for inspection by the Local Planning Authority within 10 days of a request. The register shall comprise consecutively numbered pages which shall be kept in order, and each entry shall contain the name and address of the principal occupier together with the dates of occupation.

Reason: The Local Planning Authority would wish to carefully examine the use of the building other than for holiday accommodation to assess whether it would be acceptable in terms of location, access and amenity, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S17 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

390. 2/2016/0774 - Advertisement consent for a single hoarding sign and stone faced forecourt sign (Resubmission) - Premier Inn, Egremont Road, Cockermouth

Application

The Principal Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Highway safety

The proposed advertisements will not have a detrimental impact upon highway safety.

 Visual amenity

The site occupies a sensitive location on the urban fringe to the southern periphery of the town adjacent to the A66. The proposed signage around the building and along the site access is of an acceptable scale, design, siting and illumination for this location.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

The Principal Planning Officer recommended that the following condition be added if Members were minded to approve the application:

The advertisement F on the approved plan shall only be illuminated during the opening hours of the A3 land use at the application site.

Reason: To minimise the impact of the advertisement on the visual amenity of the site and surroundings.

Councillor M Grainger moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation subject to the added condition. Councillor D Wilson seconded.

A vote was taken; the vote in favour of approval was unanimous.

Page 30 The motion in favour of approval subject to the added condition was carried.

Decision

Approved

Conditions

1. The consent hereby given shall run for the term of 5 years from the inception of the display or from the date 28th February 2017 whichever is earlier subject to compliance with the following conditions.

Reason: This is the maximum period for which consent can be granted.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: AP10 - Location Plan Block Plan (as amended 14th February 2017) Sign Elevations (as amended 14th February 2017)

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non-material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

3. No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007.

4. No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to: (a) endanger persons using any highway, railway, waterway, dock, harbour or aerodrome (civil or military); (b) obscure, or hinder the ready interpretation of, any traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air; or (c) hinder the operation of any device used for the purpose of security or surveillance or for measuring the speed of any vehicle.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety.

5. Any advertisement displayed, and any site used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a condition that does not impair the visual amenity of the site.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety.

Page 31 6. Any structure or hoarding erected or used principally for the purpose of displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a condition that does not endanger the public.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety and visual amenity.

7. Where an advertisement is required under these regulations to be removed, the site shall be left in a condition that does not endanger the public or impair visual amenity.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety and visual amenity.

8. The signs permitted by this consent shall only be illuminated during the opening hours of the premises to which they relate.

Reason: To restrict the illumination to the opening hours to safeguard the amenity of other residential properties in the locality of the site, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

9. The means of illumination of the advertisements hereby granted advertisement consent shall be by fixed and constant lights and not by any means of illumination which is or appears to be intermittent, moving or flashing.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the site and its surroundings, and highway safety.

10. The means of illumination shown on the approved plan shall be hooded and angled to illuminate only the approved advertisements.

Reason: To prevent the obtrusive spread of light over a large area in the interests of visual amenity.

11. The maximum illumination of the approved signage shall not exceed 600 cd/square metre.

Reason: In the interests of road safety and the environmental amenities of the area.

12. The advertisement F on the approved plan shall only be illuminated during the opening hours of the A3 land use at the application site.

Reason: To minimise the impact of the advertisement on the visual amenity of the site and surroundings.

The meeting closed at 2.45 pm

Page 32 At a meeting of the Development Panel held in Council Chamber, Allerdale House on Tuesday 21 March 2017 at 1.00 pm

Members

Councillor Peter Bales (Chair) Councillor Carole Armstrong (Vice-Chair) Councillor Nicky Cockburn Councillor Adrian Davis-Johnston Councillor Janet Farebrother Councillor Malcolm Grainger Councillor Mark Jenkinson Councillor Billy Miskelly Councillor Ron Munby Councillor Jim Osborn Councillor Bill Pegram Councillor David Wilson

Staff Present

B Carlin, D Devine, A Gilbert, S Long, A Seekings and S Sewell

410. Declaration of Interests

6. 2/2017/0016 - Erection of a further 25 dwellings, extension to approved site 2/2012/0311 - Land off Moor Road, Stainburn, Workington

Councillor A Davis-Johnston – Other interest – Spouse worked at Cumbria Highways and had involvement with the S106 agreement as part of application 2/2012/0311

411. Questions

None received.

412. 2/2016/0747 - Outline application for residential development including access - Part Field 7800, Newton Arlosh, Wigton

Representations

Paul Minns spoke in objection and the Principal Planning Officer read out a letter on behalf of Christine Hodgson in objection to the application.

The agent, Paul Boustead spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Principal Planning Officer recommended refusal.

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Principle of development

The proposal is considered contrary to Policy S3 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 33  Design principles

Officers consider the shape and depth of the site is not of appropriate scale to this part of the village of Newton Arlosh failing to respond positively to the character, history and distinctiveness of its location or integrate well with existing development contrary to Policy S2, S4, S32 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part1), Adopted July 2014.

 Affordable housing

The applicant is not agreeable to provide financial cash contribution for affordable housing and therefore the proposal is contrary to the Planning Practice Guidance.

 Amenity/odour

The submitted odour assessment fails to demonstrate that the development can achieve an acceptable standard of amenity to future occupiers. The proposal is considered contrary to Policy S2, S4 and S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

 Highway issues

The proposed access as shown is acceptable and no objections are raised from the Highways Authority.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Councillor J Farebrother moved refusal as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor D Wilson seconded.

A vote was taken; 7 voted in favour of refusal and 5 voted against.

The motion in favour of refusal was carried.

Decision

Refused

Reasons for Refusal

1. The approval of additional dwellings outside the designated settlement limits within this Limited Growth Village will result in an imbalance of new dwellings across this tier undermining the aims of the spatial strategy set out in Policy S3 of the Allerdale Local Plan, (Part 1).

2. The Local Planning Authority consider the scale and size of the development site does not respond positively to the character, history and distinctiveness of the adjacent linear form of Newton Arlosh. The proposal is considered contrary to Policy S2, S4 and DM14 of the

Page 34 Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014 and National Planning Policy Framework (Paragraph 58 and 64).

3. In the absence of any affordable housing financial contribution, the proposed development by virtue of its location within the designated Solway Coast’s Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is in conflict with the requirements of the Planning Policy Guidance and paragraphs 47 and 50 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. The proposed residential development is considered in close proximity to buildings with a potential source of odour beyond the applicants' control. The Local Planning Authority considers the submitted odour assessment fails to demonstrate that the occupiers of the proposed development would not suffer a poor standard of residential amenity and living conditions contrary to Policy S2, S4 and S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014 and the National Planning Policy Framework, (paragraphs, 9, 12 and 17).

413. 2/2015/0670 - Erection of four single storey dwellings - Beaulands, 4 Ellerbeck Lane, Workington

Information had been received from Cumbria County Council highlighting a number of issues in relation to drainage.

Councillor D Wilson moved that the application be deferred to allow officers sufficient time to consider the information. Councillor M Grainger seconded.

A vote was taken in favour of deferring the application. 10 voted in favour of deferral and 2 abstained from voting.

The motion in favour of deferral was carried.

Decision

Deferred

414. 2/2017/0016 - Erection of a further 25 dwellings, extension to approved site 2/2012/0311 - Land off Moor Road, Stainburn, Workington

Representations

Dale Oliver spoke in objection to the application.

Councillor Mark Fryer spoke on the application as Ward Councillor.

The applicant, Adam McNally, Story Homes, spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Principal Planning Officer recommended approval.

Page 35 The Principal Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Principle of development

The scale of the development proposed for this site in the Principal centre of Workington is considered acceptable, forming a sustainable location and complies with the provisions of Policies S2, S3 and S5 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1).

 Design, layout and materials

The layout and appearance of the site is acceptable and in keeping the character of the surrounding area.

 Affordable homes

The applicant is agreeable to provide 20% affordable units in line with the requirements of Policy S8 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1).

 Highway issues

Taking into account the minor changes to the traffic flow this application will create, the already committed highway improvements and the potential impact of the additional traffic on existing highway network, it is considered that the impact of this development is acceptable.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Councillor A Davis-Johnston moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor D Wilson seconded.

Following discussion, Councillor A Davis-Johnston moved an amendment to his motion; that the application be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report plus an addition to the terms of the s106 agreement to include that if applicable under the criteria of the council’s draft developer contributions Supplementary Planning Document, the submission approval and implementation provision of additional pieces of play equipment be provided on the public open space area of the existing neighbouring residential estate prior to the occupation of any dwellinghouse on the site.

Councillor D Wilson seconded the amendment.

A vote was taken; 11 in favour of approval subject to the addition to the terms of the s106 agreement and 1 abstention.

The motion in favour of approval subject to the addition to the terms of the s106 agreement was carried.

Decision

Page 36 Approved subject to the conditions set out in the report plus an addition to the terms of the s106 agreement to include that if applicable under the criteria of the council’s draft developer contributions Supplementary Planning Document, the submission approval and implementation provision of additional pieces of play equipment be provided on the public open space area of the existing neighbouring residential estate prior to the occupation of any dwellinghouse on the site

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: SL123.90.9.LP Revision a – Location Plan (amendment received 24 February 2017) SL123.90.9.DL Revision b – Detail Layout (amendment received 24 February 2017) SL123.90.9.PL Revision b – Parking Layout (amendment received 24 February 2017) SL123.90.9.BTL Revision b – Boundary Treatments (amendment received 28 February 2017) SL123.90.9.ML Revision a – Management Layout (amendment received 24 February 2017) SL123.90.9.ETL Revision b – Elevation Treatments Layout (amendment received 24 February 2017) BD-02 – 1200mm High fence (amendment received 28 February 2017) BD-03 Revision A – 1800mm High Fence (amendment received 28 February 2017) BD-15 – High brick Wall (amendment received 28 February 2017) Email received 3 March 2017 – Wall materials BD-45 2000mm Acoustic Fencing (amendment received 28 February 2017) 11289_LO1 Revision P02 – General Arrangment (amendment received 24 February 2017) 11289_L03 Revision P02 – Soft landscape Plan (amendment received 24 February 2017) 11289_L02 Revision P02 – Hard Landscape Plan (amendment received 24 February 2017) 11289_L05 Revision Po1 – Landscape Supporting Notes 01 – Proposed Engineering Layout excluding land levels (amendment received 24 February 2017) WAR-PLE1/4 – The Warick v3 Elevations WAR-PLP1 – The Warick v3 Floor Plans WEL-PLE1/4 Revision A – The Wellington v3 Elevations WEL-PLP1 – The Wellington v3 Floor Plans DUR-PLE1/9 – The Durham v4 Elevations

Page 37 DUR-PLP1 – The Durham v4 Floor Plans MAY-PLE1/9 – The Mayfair v3 Elevations MAY-PLP1 – The Mayfair v3 Floor Plans GSF-PLE1/1 – The Gosforth v4 Elevations GSF-PLP1 – The Gosforth v4 Floor Plans OXF-PLP1/3 – The Oxford v4 Elevations OXF-PLP1 – The Oxford v4 Floor Plans HAW-PLE2/2 – The Hawthorn Elevations HAW-PLP2 – The Hawthorn Floor Plans YOR-PLE1/4 – The York v3 Elevations YOR-PLP1 – The York v3 Floor Plans HAS-PLE1/2 Revision A – The Hastings v3 Elevations HAS-PLP1-1 The Hastings v3 Floor Plans 12 Issue P2 – Road and Drainage Sections Sheet 2 of 2 21 Issue P1 – Proposed Surface Finishes and Kerb Layout 53 Issue P1 – Drainage Construction Details Sheet 3 of 3 31 Issue P1 – Manhole Schedules 11 Issue P2 – Road and Drainage Sections Sheet 1 of 2 51 Issue P1 – Drainage Construction Details Sheet 1 of 3 52 Issue P1 – Drainage Construction Details Sheet 2 of 3 41 Issue P1 – Highway Constuction Details Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Statement Ecological Appraisal Preliminary Arboricultural Appraisal (PPA) Arboricultural Impact Assessment & Method Statement Noise Assessment Report Investigation Report (Desk Study) Geoenvironmental Appraisal

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non- material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

3. Notwithstanding the proposed submitted levels prior to works commencing on site details of all proposed ground floor levels including finished floor levels of the building, levels of any paths, drives, garages, and parking areas and materails of any retaining walls shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved works.

Reason: To ensure that works are carried out to a suitable level in relation to the adjoining properties and highways and in the interest of visual amenity.

4. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported immediately to the Local Planning Authority. Development on the part of the site affected must be halted and a risk assessment carried out and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Where unacceptable risks are found remediation and verification schemes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These

Page 38 shall be implemented prior to the development (or relevant phase of development) being brought into use. All works shall be undertaken in accordance with current UK guidance, particularly CLR11.

Reason: To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

5. No development shall take place until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The statement shall include the following: (a) Traffic Management Plan to include all traffic associated with the development, including site and staff traffic, off site parking, turning and compound areas; (b) Procedure to monitor and mitigate noise and vibration from the construction and demolition and to monitor any properties at risk of damage from vibration, as well as taking into account noise from vehicles, deliveries. All measurements should make reference to BS7445. (c) Mitigation measures to reduce adverse impacts on residential properties from construction compounds including visual impact, noise, and light pollution. (d) A written procedure for dealing with complaints regarding the construction or demolition; (e) Measures to control the emissions of dust and dirt during construction and demolition (including any wheel washing facilities); (f) Programme of work for Demolition and Construction phase; (g) Hours of working and deliveries; (h) Details of lighting to be used on site. (i) Highway signage / Haulage routes The approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties during the construction works of the development hereby approved, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014 and in the interests of highway safety.

6. No dwellings shall be occupied until the estate road, including footways and cycleways to serve such dwellings, has been constructed in all respects to base course level and street lighting where it is to form part of the estate road has been provided and brought into full operational use.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety of the occupiers of residential units hereby approved.

Page 39 7. The use shall not be commenced until the access and parking requirements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. Any such access and or parking provision shall be retained and be capable of use when the development is completed and shall not be removed or altered without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that proper access and parking provision is made and retained for use in relation to the development.

8. The drainage for the development hereby approved, shall be carried out in accordance with principles set out in the submitted Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Statement, dated 16 December 2016, report number: 1669-01 Revision A which was prepared by Coast Consulting Engineers Ltd. For the avoidance of doubt and unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, surface water should drain to the surface water sewer at the restricted rate of predevelopment greenfield runoff rate. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development and to prevent an undue increase in surface water run-off and to reduce the risk of flooding.

9. Prior to the occupation of the development a sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan for the lifetown of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan shall include as a minimum:

(a) Arrangements for adoption by an appropriate public body or statutory undertaker, or, management and maintenance by a resident's management company; and

(b) Arrangements for inspection and ongoing maintenance of all elements of the sustainable drainage system to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime.

The development shall subsequently be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved plan.

Reason: To ensure that management arrangements are in place for the sustainable drainage system in order to manage the risk of flooding and pollution furing the lieftime of the development. This condition is imposed in light of policies within the NPPF and NPPG.

10.The approved means of enclosure dated 28 February 2017 shall be constructed prior to the approved building(s) being occupied. All means of enclosure so constructed shall be retained and no part thereof shall be removed without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Page 40 Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development which is compatible with the character of the surrounding area and safeguard the amenity of neighbouring properties.

11.The works shall be implemented solely in accordance with the mitigation/recommendations outlined in Section 7 of the Ecology Appraisal dated November 2016.

Reason: To safeguard the habitat of bats in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S35 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

The meeting closed at 3.35 pm

Page 41 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 42 At a meeting of the Development Panel held in Council Chamber, Allerdale House on Tuesday 11 April 2017 at 1.00 pm

Members

Councillor Peter Bales (Chair) Councillor Carole Armstrong (Vice-Chair) Councillor Nicky Cockburn Councillor Joan Ellis Councillor Janet Farebrother Councillor Malcolm Grainger Councillor Mark Jenkinson Councillor Jim Lister Councillor Ron Munby Councillor Jim Osborn Councillor Bill Pegram

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors A Davis-Johnston, B Miskelly and D Wilson

Staff Present

S Brook, B Carlin, H Carruthers, C Chambers, D Devine, S Elsworth, C Fearon, L Jefferson, K Kerrigan, A Robinson, A Seekings and R Wilkinson

437. Declaration of Interests

8. 2/2017/0011 - Erection of 17m high crane (retrospective) - Maryport Marina, Marine Road, Maryport

Councillor B Pegram – other interest – due being a member of the Harbour Board for Maryport Harbour and Marina of which MPM North West Ltd was a tenant

9. HOU/2017/0027 - Proposed extension and alterations to provide first floor - 43 Beech Lane, Cockermouth

Councillor J Farebrother – other interest – due to knowing one of the objectors of the application

438. Questions

None received.

439. 2/2016/0670 - Variation of condition 2 relating to approved plans on planning approval 2/2014/0381 - Land Off, Strawberry How Road, Cockermouth - Approve

Representations

James Hully, Martin West, Dr Jane Roy, Sara Field and Dr Jack Abernethy spoke in objection to the application.

Councillor Alan Smith spoke as Ward Councillor.

The applicant Adam McNally, Story Homes spoke in support of the application.

Page 43 Application

The Head of Development Services informed the Panel that the National Planning Casework Unit has advised that the Secretary of State has received a request to call-in the application and that if Members were minded to approve, a decision notice would not be issued until the Secretary of State had concluded his assessment.

The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Principle of Development

The principle of the residential development has previously been agreed by the approval of planning application 2/2014/0381.

The current proposal is to amend the plans that were approved Under Condition 2.

 Impact on the Highway Network

No objections are raised by the Local Highways Authority regarding the proposed alterations to the access arrangements,/ traffic calming measures and car parking spaces. The highway/ parking alterations are as follows:

 Minor alteration to visitor parking spaces north of plot 4;  Revised traffic calming, including footpath through the secondary access between plots 1 and 15;  Removal of traffic calming build outs and replacement with a new calming feature between plots 19 and 20;  Visitor parking bays on the main road increased in width  Minor adjustment to leisure cycle/pedestrian path alignments and SUDS pond 2 access through phase 1

 Landscape and Visual Impact

The original Environmental Statement has been updated with an addendum for this variation of conditional application

Furthermore, the proposed design and layout alterations are considered to be acceptable as the only design changes to the proposed dwellings and landscaping is as follows:  Substitution of house types at plots 68 and 69 (3 bedroom 2-storey Kingston in place of 3-bedroom 2- storey Rowan);  Removal of a sub-station;  Minor alterations to the layout of the pump station;  House types updated to Storey Homes version 3, including bi- fold rear doors (excluding Rowan and Hawthorn). Patio

Page 44 sizes updated and level access indicated. Revised plot boundaries clearly showing proposed rear garden retaining walls where indicated;  Landscaping minor amendments to suit the adjusted layout;  Revised material schedule incorporating tumbled buff natural sandstone with buff mortar,

The residential development has previously been approved planning permission and is of low density, reflecting that adjacent and the proposed design and materials generally reflect those found within the locality.

Officers conclude that the proposed alterations are minor and would not have an adverse impact on landscape character and visual amenity and are therefore compliant with Policies S32 and S33 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1).

 Flood Risk

The Environment Agency has no objections to the application. However they advise that any works in the area defined by the ‘blue corridor’ or the 1:1000 yr. modelled flood outline are likely to require and Environmental Permit from them. Tom Rudd Beck is designated ‘Main River’. Therefore, under the terms of The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2016 and the Flood risk activities set out in Paragraph 3 Part 1 of Schedule 23ZA the prior written consent of the Agency may be required for any works in, over, under or within 8m of the ‘Main River’.

The Lead Local Flood Authority (Cumbria County Council) comment that the change sought by the developer was for an escape route (cutting) across the existing old railway track for any exceedance from this area. This would prevent any flow travelling along the new pathway prior to spilling into the blue corridor area uncontrolled.

However it has recently been discovered that two culverts are currently blocked which can be used to carry water from the adjacent land through the railway embankment.

It has been discovered that the culvert under the disused railway l8ine that runs directly into Tom Rudd Beck is almost 40% blocked. This affects the ability of the water to get through the railway embankment, and therefore floods adjacent land. In addition, Storey Homes have discovered a blocked up culvert within their own site that can be used to carry water from the adjacent land through the railway embankment.

This will alleviate the need for a cutting, and amended plans have been submitted (C-GA-250 Rev P2, and SH126.90.9.SL.SWRR Revision a). These plans supersede the previous proposal for cutting through the embankment.

Page 45 To conclude, Cumbria County Council has confirmed that any flooding issue on Strawberry How Road will be addressed as part of the development. They also confirm that all of the water that exceeds from the nearby beck is accounted for in the model produced by the developer and checked by the Environmental Agency and will not increase flood risk downstream.

 Foul Drainage

The foul drainage proposals are unchanged from the original planning approval.

United Utilities agreed that the Cockermouth Wastewater Treatment Works has adequate capacity to deal with the additional foul flows from the proposed development. UU confirmed that the foul drainage from Phase 1 can be discharged at a peak rate of 5 l/s into the existing public foul sewer within Strawberry How Road.

 Affordable Housing

The proposed affordable housing for the development remains unchanged from the original planning application, and the S106 Agreement addresses this issue.

Therefore the proposed development would provide 40% affordable housing overall, with 30% being delivered during Phase 1 and 40% during Phase 2, with the supplemental 11 units to be provided in Phase 2 to accommodate the shortfall within Phase 1.

The Phase 1 site would yield a total of 28 units and the Phase 2 site approximately 100 units.

On the basis that the scheme would provide 40% affordable housing across the entire site, Officers consider that the proposed development is compliant with the provisions of Policy S8 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 10).

 Community and social infrastructure

The S106 Agreement ensures that the issue regarding an education contribution of £265,122 applies.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Councillor M Grainger moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor R Munby seconded.

A vote was taken; 6 in favour of approval and 5 against.

The motion in favour of approval was carried.

Page 46 Decision

Approval (minded to)

Conditions

1. The development of the Phase 1 site shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans:

C-GA-001 Plot Works Sheet 1

C-GA-002 Plot Works Sheet 2

C-GA-003 Plot Works Sheet 3

C-GA-006 Surface Finishes Sheet 1

C-GA-007 Surface Finishes Sheet 2

C-GA-008 Kerb Layout Drawing Sheet 1

C-GA-100 Drainage Arrangement Sheet 1

SH126.90.9 Boundary Treatment

SH126.90.9 Deed Plan

SH126.90.9 Elevation Treatment

Sh126.90.9 General Arrangements Plan

Sh126.90.9 Rev H - Hard Surface Plan

SL045.WW01 Rev E - Landscape Plan Amended Plan C-GA-250 Rev P2 – Existing culvert beneath railway embankment.

Amended Plan SH126.90.9.SL.SWRR Rev a – Over Land SW Relief Route Sections.

Flood Risk Addendum 19/08/16 and associated plans 15025/C – GA – 200/P1

Environmental Statement Addendum

The Hastings House Type v3, HAS-PLP, HAS-PLE 1/3 Rev A, has – PLE1/16 Rev A,

The Warwick House Type v3, WAR-PLP1, WAR-PLE/4, WAR-PLE/7

The Kingston House Type v3, KIN-PLP1, KIN-PLP3, KIN-PLE/2, KIN- PLE1/4, KINCOE3/2.

Page 47 The Chester House Type v3, CHE-PLP1, CHEPLP2, CHE-PLE/11, CHE- PLE2/7

The Balmoral House Type v3, BAL-PLP1-1, BAL-PLE/1, BAL-PLE1/5, BAL-PLE1/7, BALPLE1/8

The Arundel House Type v3, ARU-PLP1, ARU-PLP2, ARU-PLE1/8, ARU-PLE2/3

The Richmond House Type v3, RIC-PLP1 Rev A, RIC-PLE1/6 Rev A

The Taunton House Type v3, TAU-PLP1, TAU-PLE1/1, TAU-PLE1-8

The Mayfair House Type v3, MAY-plp1, MAY-PLE1/6

The Boston House Type v3, BOS-PLP1, BOS-PLE1/5 Rev B, bos-ple1/6 Rev B

The Wellington House Type v3, WEL-PLP1, WEL-PLE1/2 Rev A. WEL- PLE1/4 Rev A

The Sailsbury House Type v3, SAL-PLP1, SAL-PLE1/4, SAL-PLE1/5, SAL-PLE1/10

The Hawthorn House Type, HAW- PLE2/3, HAW-PLE2/4 Rev A

The Rowan House Type, ROW-PLP1, ROW-PLE1/4, ROW-PLE1/5

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development and for the avoidance of doubt.

2. Insofar as this decision grants outline planning permission for the Phase 2 site details of the layout, scale, appearance, landscaping (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any development begins, in accordance with the phasing scheme as agreed under condition No. 5 and the development shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: Part of the application has been submitted as an outline application, in accordance with the provisions of the details of the town and country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.

3. The application(s) for approval of reserved matters for the Phase 2 site shall be made within three years of the date of the original permission (2/2014/0381 – 22nd May 2015) and the development shall be begun not later than two years from the final approval of the last of the reserved matters.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 51 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Page 48 4. Any application for reserved matters of layout for the Phase 2 site shall include plans showing the following: (a) Cross sections through the site; (b) Details of existing and proposed ground levels; (c) Proposed finished floor levels of buildings; (d) Levels of any paths, drives, garages and parking areas. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details so approved.

Reason: To ensure that the works are carried out to a suitable level in relation to the adjoining properties and highways and in the interests of visual amenity, in accordance with Policies S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

5. Any application for reserved matters of layout for the Phase 2 site shall include a programme showing the phasing of the development to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not proceed other than in accordance with the approved programme.

Reason: To serve in the public and visual interests a satisfactory correlated order of development, in accordance with Policies S5 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

6. The development hereby permitted for phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the approved hard surface plan SH126.90.9 Rev H, and approved soft landscaping plan SL045.WW01 Rev E.

Reason : In order to enhance the appearance of the development and minimise the impact of the development in the locality, in compliance with Policies S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

7. Pursuant to condition 6, all planting, seeding or turfing comprised within the scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season following completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with other similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to enhance the appearance of the development and minimise the impact of the development in the locality, in compliance with Policy DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

8. No dwellings within the Phase 1 development shall be occupied until full details of the layout of the Local Area of Play/locally equipped area of play have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Area of Play shall be fully implemented prior to the occupation of the forty eighth (48th) dwelling house on the site.

Page 49 Reason: To ensure the satisfactory provision of open space, in compliance with Policies S2, S4, S24, S25, S26 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

9. The development hereby permitted for Phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the details and representative samples of the external stone/brick/roof materials, including those to be used for boundary treatments, approved under CON2/2014/0381. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason : To ensure the use of appropriate materials in the interests of visual amenity, in compliance with Policies S2, S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

10.The development hereby permitted for Phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the details of the treatment and finishes of all surfaces within the site, approved under CON2/2014/0381. No dwelling shall be occupied until all surfacing is implemented for each respective dwelling in accordance with the approved details.

Reason : In order to ensure a satisfactory standard of development in relation to its surroundings, in compliance with Policies S2, S4 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

11.The development hereby permitted for Phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the Tree Protection details including the positions and height of protective fences, the areas for the storage of materials and stationing of machines and huts, and the position and width of temporary site roads and accesses, approved under CON2/2014/0381. The details shall be maintained at all times during the construction period.

Reason : To ensure the retention of existing important trees on the site, in compliance with Policy DM17 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

12.The development hereby permitted for Phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the programme of archaeological work and written scheme of investigation approved under CON2/2014/0381.

Reason: To afford reasonable opportunity for an examination to be made to determine the existence of any remains of archaeological interest within the site and for the examination and recording of such remains, in compliance with Policy S27 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

13.Pursuant to condition 12, where the results of the programme of archaeological work make it appropriate, there shall be carried out within one year of the completion of that programme on site, or within such timescale as otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority : an archaeological post-excavation assessment and analysis, the preparation of a site archive ready for deposition at a store, the

Page 50 completion of an archive report, and the preparation and submission of a report of the results for publication in a suitable specialist journal

Reason : To ensure that a permanent and accessible record by the public is made of the archaeological remains that have been disturbed by the development, in compliance with Policy S27 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

14.No part of the Phase 2 development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This written scheme of investigation will include the following components: (a) An archaeological evaluation; (b) An archaeological recording programme the scope of which will be dependent upon the results of the evaluation.

Reason: To afford reasonable opportunity for an examination to be made to determine the existence of any remains of archaeological interest within the site and for the examination and recording of such remains, in compliance with Policy S27 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

15.Pursuant to condition 14, where the results of the programme of archaeological work make it appropriate, there shall be carried out within one year of the completion of that programme on site, or within such timescale as otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority: an archaeological post-excavation assessment and analysis, the preparation of a site archive ready for deposition at a store, the completion of an archive report, and the preparation and submission of a report of the results for publication in a suitable specialist journal.

Reason: To ensure that a permanent and accessible record by the public is made of the archaeological remains that have been disturbed by the development, in compliance with Policy S27 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

16.The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), dated May 2014, (Ref: A081410) and the mitigation measures detailed within section 9, Plus the Flood Risk Addendum dated 19th August 2016 and associated plans no. 15025/C-GA-200/P1. 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.

Reasons: 1) To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage and disposal of surface water from the site.

Page 51 2) To prevent flooding elsewhere by ensuring that compensatory storage of flood water is provided. 3) To ensure safe access and egress from and to the site. 4) To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants. In compliance with Policy S29 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

17.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the detailed bridge design and management scheme ((approved under CON2/2014/0381) which has been designed as a minimum to accommodate the 1:100 plus allowance for freeboard and climate change. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details and prior to the commencement of the Phase 2 development.

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, both on and off site, in compliance with Policy S29 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014

18.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the Green Infrastructure Management Plan (approved under CON2/2014/0381) for the provision and management of the 'Blue Corridor' area alongside Tom Rudd Beck (as indicated on Figure 8.21 of the Environment Statement: Drawing number YOR.2.24.18 Rev A). Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Plan and any subsequent amendments shall be agreed in writing with the local planning authority. The Blue Corridor area shall be kept free from built development including lighting, domestic gardens and formal landscaping.

Reason: To protect the water quality of Tom Rudd Beck and River Cocker and Derwent SSSI and SAC, in compliance with Policies S2 and S35 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

19.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the Construction Environmental Management Plan (Revision C – March 2016) (approved under CON2/2014/0381). The approved Plan shall be adhered to throughout the construction period, and the approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the duration of the development.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties and to secure appropriate mitigation of ecology interests on the site, in compliance with Policies S32 and S35 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

20.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details outlined in the land contamination site investigation works approved under CON2/2014/0381, and in accordance with any remediation and verification schemes. These shall be implemented prior to the development of each relevant phase being brought into use. All

Page 52 works shall be undertaken in accordance with current UK guidance, particularly CLR11.

Reason : To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment, in compliance with Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

21.In the event that contamination is found no occupation of each phase of development shall take place until a verification report demonstrating completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plans (a ‘’long-term monitoring and maintenance plan’’) for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan. The long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be implemented as approved.

Reason : To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment, in compliance with Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

22.In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified during the site investigation works it must be reported immediately to the Local Planning Authority. Development on the part of the site affected must be halted and a risk assessment carried out and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Where unacceptable risks are found remediation and verification schemes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These shall be implemented prior to the development (or relevant phase of development) being brought into use. All works shall be undertaken in accordance with current UK guidance, particularly CLR11.

Reason: To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment, in compliance with Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

23.With regards to the Phase 1 development, the carriageways, footways and footpaths (with the exception of the pedestrian/cycle link to be created along the former railway line adjacent to the 'Blue Corridor') shall be designed, constructed, drained and lit to a standard suitable for adoption and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381. The works shall be constructed before the Phase 1 development is completed.

Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of construction in the interests of highway safety, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 53 24.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 for the pedestrian/cycle link to be created along the former railway line adjacent to the 'Blue Corridor' (as indicated on the site layout plan SH126.90.9.SL.DP Rev B) and the works shall be constructed before the Phase 1 development is completed and shall not be removed or altered without prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of construction in the interests of highway safety, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

25.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 regarding the details of the temporary ‘Safe Route to School’ for Phase 1 and the works so approved shall be constructed before the occupation of the first dwelling within Phase 1 and shall not be removed or altered without prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of construction in the interests of highway safety, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

26.The dwellings that front onto Strawberry How Road shall be provided with and maintain visibility splays providing clear visibility of 33metres, measured along the nearside channel lines of the carriageway from a position 2metres (3m if not provided with internal turning) inset from the carriageway edge, on the centre line of the access, at a height of 1.05metres. Additionally, pedestrian visibility splays of 2.4m along the back of footway, to points 2.4m inset along each side of the access at a height of 0.6m. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) relating to permitted development, no structure, or object of any kind shall be placed and no trees, bushes, or other plants permitted to grow, so as to obstruct these visibility splays.

Reason: To ensure an acceptable standard of highway access, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

27.Pursuant to condition 16, the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 reserving adequate land for site offices/stores, and secure compounds, including adequate land for the parking/turning of vehicles/plant, engaged in the construction operations associated with the development hereby approved. Such land, including the vehicular access thereto, shall be used for or be kept available for these purposes at all times until completion of the construction works.

Reason: To minimise inconvenience and danger to road users, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 54 28.Prior to the commencement of development details of a 2.0m wide footway along the highway frontage on Strawberry How Road (to an acceptable standard in accordance with the Cumbria Design Guide) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented prior to occupation of the dwelling houses hereby approved.

Reason : To ensure satisfactory facilities for pedestrians in the interests of highway safety, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

29.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 regarding ramps to be provided on each side of every road junction to enable wheelchairs, prams and invalid carriages to be safely manoeuvred at kerb lines. The ramp details shall be fully constructed as part of the development prior to the use of approved junctions.

Reason: To ensure that pedestrians can negotiate road junctions in relative safety, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

30.No dwelling shall be occupied until the estate road, including footways and cycleways to serve such dwellings, has been constructed in all respects to base course level and street lighting where it is to form part of the estate road has been provided and brought into full operational use.

Reason: To ensure that the access roads are defined and laid out at an early stage, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

31.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under Con2/2014/0381 regarding the measures to be taken by the applicant/developer to prevent surface water discharging onto or off the highway. The approved works shall be implemented prior to the development being completed and shall be maintained operational at all times thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and environmental management, in compliance with Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

32.The dwellings hereby approved shall not be occupied until its vehicular access; parking and turning requirements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan and have been brought into use. The vehicular access, parking and turning provisions shall be retained and capable of use at all times thereafter and shall not be removed or altered without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of access, parking and turning provision when the development is brought into use, in compliance with

Page 55 Policies S2, S5, S22 and DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

33.The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 regarding the Travel Plan for the development, and the approved Travel Plan shall be implemented within one month of the first occupation of the development and shall thereafter be maintained in perpetuity.

Reason: To aid in the delivery of sustainable transport objectives and ensure that the A66 trunk road continues to fulfil its purpose as part of the national system of routes for through traffic, in accordance with Section 10(2) of the Highways Act 1980.

34.Monitoring shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Travel Plan and the results of the monitoring shall be submitted to the local planning authority within one month at the end of each monitoring period. Where targets are not achieved the Travel Plan Co-ordinator will be notified in writing by the local planning authority and the Travel Plan shall then be reviewed and updated and submitted to the local planning authority for approval within one month of the receipt of the local planning authority's notification. The updated Travel Plan shall be implemented within one month of the date of the local planning authority's approval.

Reason: To aid in the delivery of sustainable transport objectives and ensure that the A66 trunk road continues to fulfil its purpose as part of the national system of routes for through traffic, in accordance with Section 10(2) of the Highways Act 1980.

35.Only foul drainage shall be connected to the public sewer.

Reason: To ensure a sustainable means of drainage from the site and minimise the risk of water pollution to the local water environment, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

36.The development hereby permitted for phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 regarding the Foul and Surface Water Drainage Strategy

Reason : To ensure a holistic approach to the construction of the detailed drainage infrastructure for the site so that the drainage infrastructure which is constructed is able to cope with the foul and surface water discharges from the entire development site, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

37.Prior to the commencement of development of Phase 2, a Foul and Surface Water Drainage Strategy shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval such strategy to include the following details as a minimum:

Page 56 (a) The strategy must be consistent with the principles of the flood risk assessment dated 28 May 2014 reference A081410; (b) The only point of connection for foul flows from Phase 2 North defined on drawing A081410/21/C/005/P1 dated 26 September 2014 (Foul Catchment Boundary Added) shall be the existing foul sewer in Windmill Lane at manhole reference no. NY12308304; (c) The only point of connection for foul flows from Phase 2 South defined on drawing A081410/21/C/005/P1 dated 26 September 2014 (Foul Catchment Boundary Added) shall be the existing foul sewer in Bellbrigg Lonning at manhole reference no. NY12309202; (d) Surface water shall drain separately from the foul and unless otherwise agreed in writing, no surface water, highway drainage or land drainage shall discharge directly or indirectly into the public foul, combined or surface water sewerage systems. (e) Any drainage infrastructure connections (foul and surface water) between the different phases of the development defined by conditions 37, 38, 39 and 40. Where drainage infrastructure connects development from different phases, it will be necessary to show how much development will be served by the connecting drainage infrastructure.

Reason: To ensure a holistic approach to the construction of the detailed drainage infrastructure for the site so that the drainage infrastructure which is constructed is able to cope with the foul and surface water discharges from the entire development site, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

38.At the same time as the submission of each subsequent Reserved Matters application for a phase or part of a phase, an updated Foul and Surface Water Drainage Strategy shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval, such Strategy to include as a minimum the details listed in condition 37.

Reason: To ensure a holistic approach to the construction of the detailed drainage infrastructure for the site so that the drainage infrastructure which is constructed is able to cope with the foul and surface water discharges from the entire development site, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

39.Unless otherwise agreed with the local planning authority, there shall be no foul and surface water connections between phases of development defined (and as may be amended from time to time) by conditions 37, 38, 39 and 40 other than in accordance with the connections identified and approved under item 37e. The detailed drainage schemes for each phase of development required by conditions 42 and 44 shall be submitted for approval in accordance with the foul and surface water drainage strategy approved under this condition.

Reason: To ensure a holistic approach to the construction of the detailed drainage infrastructure for the site so that the drainage infrastructure which is constructed is able to cope with the foul and surface water discharges from the entire development site, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 57 40.No development shall be commenced on phase 2 or part within phase 2 of the development hereby permitted unless and until the Foul and Surface Water Drainage Strategy has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a holistic approach to the construction of the detailed drainage infrastructure for the site so that the drainage infrastructure which is constructed is able to cope with the foul and surface water discharges from the entire development site, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

41.The development hereby permitted for phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 regarding sustainable drainage principles and assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development for that phase. No building shall be occupied until the approved foul drainage scheme for that building has been completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason : To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to reduce the risk of flooding and pollution, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

42.Prior to commencement of phase 2 or part of any phase of phase 2 of the development hereby permitted, full details of the foul drainage scheme for that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details for each phase or part of any phase must be consistent with the principles of the flood risk assessment dated 28 May 2014 reference A081410, plus the Flood Risk Addendum dated 19th August 2016, and the details approved pursuant to conditions 37, 38, 39 and 40 above. No building shall be occupied until the approved foul drainage scheme for that building has been completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to reduce the risk of flooding and pollution, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

43.The development hereby permitted for Phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 regarding a surface water regulation system and means of disposal. No building shall be occupied until the approved surface water drainage details for that building have been completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to reduce the risk of flooding and pollution in compliance with Policies S2,S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 58 44.Prior to the commencement of Phase 2 or part of any phase within phase 2 of the development hereby permitted, full details for a surface water regulation system and means of disposal for that phase or part phase, based wholly on sustainable drainage principles and evidence of an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development for that phase shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The drainage details shall demonstrate that the surface water run off to watercourse generated up to and including the 1 in 100 year critical storm plus climate change will not exceed the run-off to watercourse from the existing undeveloped site and following the corresponding rainfall event. In the 1 in 100 year critical storm plus climate change event the approved drainage scheme shall demonstrate any overland flow paths do not flood houses or their associated residential curtilages. The scheme shall also include: (a) Details of the treatment trains to be incorporated (b) Details to show the outflow from the site is limited to the maximum allowable rate, i.e. greenfield site run-off (c) Design details of the proposed balancing ponds, including cross- sections and plans. This includes all connections to any receiving watercourse. The details for each part or phase must be consistent with the principles of the flood risk assessment dated 28 May 2014 reference A081410 and the details approved pursuant to conditions 37, 38, 39 and 40 above. No building shall be occupied until the approved surface water drainage details for that building have been completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to reduce the risk of flooding and pollution, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

45.The development hereby permitted for Phase 1 shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved under CON2/2014/0381 regarding a sustainable drainage maintenance and management plan. The phase shall be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved details. Phase 1 shall be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason : To prevent flooding and pollution, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

46.Prior to the commencement of Phase 2 or part phase of phase 2, the development hereby permitted, a sustainable drainage maintenance and management plan for the lifetime of that phase or part phase of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include arrangements for permanent adoption by a SuDs approving body, Statutory Authority or other relevant party of any sustainable drainage features including any outfalls into local watercourses, structures, ponds and bridges. Each phase shall be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved details.

Page 59 Reason: To prevent flooding and pollution, in compliance with Policies S2, S35 and S36 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

440. 2/2017/0083 - Application for consent to display advertisements - Strawberry Grange, Cockermouth - Approve

Representations

Councillor Alan Smith spoke as Ward Councillor.

The applicant Adam McNally, Story Homes spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Planning Assistant recommended approval.

The Planning Assistant outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Scale and Design

The scale and design of the proposed signage is considered to be appropriate.

 Highways

It is considered that the proposal will not adversely affect the highway.

 Other issues

Concerns were raised regarding the proposed flag signage. The flag signage has been omitted from the proposal.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Councillor J Farebrother moved that consent be given to display the 2 sales board signs (for a 3 year period) and that consent not be given to display the single open A–board, visitor parking sign, show home/marketing suite signage and 3 hoarding signs on the grounds that the signs refused – would have an unacceptable visual impact in a sensitive location on the approach to Cockermouth - Councillor C Armstrong seconded.

A vote was taken; 6 in favour of the split decision and 5 against.

The motion was carried.

Decision

That consent be given to display the 2 sales board signs; and

Page 60 That consent not be given to display the single open A–board, visitor parking sign, show home/marketing suite signage and 3 hoarding signs.

Conditions:

1. The consent hereby given shall run for the term of 3 years from the inception of the display or from the date 24/03/2017 whichever is earlier subject to compliance with the following conditions

Reason: This is the maximum period for which consent can be granted.

2. No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007.

3. No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to: (a) endanger persons using any highway, railway, waterway, dock, harbour or aerodrome (civil or military); (b) obscure, or hinder the ready interpretation of, any traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air; or (c) hinder the operation of any device used for the purpose of security or surveillance or for measuring the speed of any vehicle.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety.

4. Any advertisement displayed, and any site used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a condition that does not impair the visual amenity of the site.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety.

5. Any structure or hoarding erected or used principally for the purpose of displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a condition that does not endanger the public.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety.

6. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: Additional Information Omitting the Flag Signage - Email Received 14/03/2017

Page 61 SH126.90.90.SHS Rev A - Proposed Signage Layout (Amended Plan Received 14/03/2017)

SAD-001 - Proposed signage

SAD-002 - Proposed Signage

SAD-003 - Proposed Signage

SAD-004 - Proposed Signage

STR-SHS-LOC - Site Location Plan

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non- material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

Reason for Refusal

The signs would have an unacceptable visual impact in a sensitive location on the approach to Cockermouth.

441. HOU/2017/0015 - Proposed application for the erection of a garden and log cabin - 40, The Beeches, Maryport - Approve

Representations

Marilyn Gale and Peter Kendall spoke in objection to the application.

The applicant Darren Sewell spoke in support of the application.

Application

The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Residential Amenity

It is considered the proposal would not materially harm the occupants of neighbouring or adjacent properties

 Scale, Siting and Design

The proposals are considered appropriate in scale, siting and design and would not adversely alter the appearance of the existing dwelling

 Highways

No objections

Page 62 Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Councillor M Jenkinson moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor M Grainger seconded.

A vote was taken; 5 in favour of approval and 6 against.

The motion in favour of approval was lost.

Councillor C Armstrong moved that the application be refused on the grounds that it was considered that the height of the garden shed and log cabin would have an unacceptable overbearing impact on the residential amenity of occupiers of 47 and 48 The Beeches, contrary to policies S32 and DM15 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part) 2014. Councillor J Ellis seconded.

Councillor N Cockburn moved an amendment to the motion as follows:

That the application be refused on the grounds that the proposed garden shed (hatched yellow on the Proposed site plan) by reason of its height, would have an unacceptable overbearing impact on the residential amenity of occupiers of 47 and 48 The Beeches, contrary to policies S32 and DM15 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) 2014. Councillor C Armstrong seconded the amendment.

A vote was taken on the amendment; 8 in favour of refusal, 1 against and 1 abstention.

The motion in favour of refusal was carried.

Decision

Refused

Reasons for Refusal

The proposed garden shed (hatched yellow on the Proposed site plan) by reason of its height, would have an unacceptable overbearing impact on the residential amenity of occupiers of 47 and 48 The Beeches, contrary to policies S32 and DM15 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) 2014.

442. 2/2017/0115 - Outline application with all matters reserved for a single dwelling - Land Adjacent to Mill Barn, Wiggonby - Refuse

Councillor R Munby left the meeting.

Representations

Councillor Patricia Macdonald spoke as Ward Councillor.

The Agent Anthea Jones spoke in support of the application.

Application

Page 63 The Senior Planning Officer recommended refusal.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Principle of Development

The application site is located in the village of Wiggonby in an open countryside location outside any defined settlement limit. The proposed dwelling represents an inappropriate and non-essential form of development in the open countryside contrary to the provisions of Policy S3 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1).

 Layout, Scale and Appearance

It is considered that a suitable layout of the site of design of dwelling can be achieved on the site whilst safeguarding the amenity of adjoining properties.

 Access

It is considered an acceptable access and egress can be achieved for the site.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Members noted the list of consultations received since the preparation of the agenda which confirmed that Cumbria Highways raised no highway objections to the proposal subject to conditions and set out an objection from a neighbouring property.

Councillor J Farebrother moved refusal as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor C Armstrong seconded.

A vote was taken; 6 in favour of refusal, 3 against and 1 abstention.

The motion in favour of refusal was carried.

Decision

Refused

Reasons for Refusal

The Local Planning Authority considers the proposed dwelling constitutes an inappropriate non-essential form of residential development in the open countryside and would therefore be contrary to the provisions of Policy S3 and S5 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) Adopted July 2014 and paragraph 17 the principles and paragraph 55 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 64 443. 2/2017/0011 - Erection of 17m high crane (retrospective) - Maryport Marina, Marine Road, Maryport - Approve

Councillors J Lister, M Jenkinson and B Pegram left the meeting.

Application

The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Design and Siting

The siting of the crane within an industrial development is considered acceptable, with the design not significantly impacting on the appearance of the area.

 Heritage Issues

Due to the separation distance between the site and the Conservation Area officers do not consider the proposal will impact on the character or setting of the Conservation Area

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Councillor C Armstrong moved approval subject to the removal of condition 3. Councillor J Farebrother seconded.

A vote was taken; 7 in favour and 0 against.

The motion in favour of approval was carried.

Decision

Approved

Conditions

1. This permission is limited to the period expiring on [10 years from date on which planning approval is issued]. Immediately on the expiry of that period the plant machinery hereby permitted shall cease and the land reinstated in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the use commencing.

Reason: In the interests of preserving the visual amenity of the locality the Council wishes to re-evaluate a need for the development after this timescale, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies S4 and S33 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 65 2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: Plan Ref 1 - Site Location Plan Crane Details

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non- material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

444. HOU/2017/0027 - Proposed extension and alterations to provide first floor - 43 Beech Lane, Cockermouth - Approve

Councillor B Pegram returned to the meeting.

Councillor J Farebrother left the meeting.

Representations

Lin Gavins spoke in objection to the application.

The applicant Paul Holliday spoke in support of the application

Application

The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Residential Amenity

It is considered that the proposal would not have a significant adverse effect on neighbouring residents sufficient to warrant refusal

 Scale, Siting and Design

Due to its modern appearance, the proposal will look physically different to existing development, but given the mix styles locally, this is not considered to be inappropriate.

 Highways

No objections raised by Cumbria Highways.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Members noted the list of consultations received since the preparation of the agenda which confirmed that Cockermouth Town Council recommended approval on the application.

Councillor N Cockburn moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor M Grainger seconded.

Page 66 A vote was taken; 5 in favour of approval, 1 against and 1 abstention.

The motion in favour of approval was carried.

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: PL-01 - Location plan DS/PH/P/1/17 - Proposed floor plans and elevations DS/PH/P/2/17 - Proposed cross section and block plan

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non-material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

445. 2/2017/0092 - Application for advertisement consent for the placement of vinyl letters onto the existing board - 1 Castlegate, Cockermouth - Approve

Councillor J Farebrother returned to the meeting.

Application

The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Scale and Design

The signage is of an appropriate scale and design for the premises and area

 Heritage Assets

The proposal conserves the historic features of the property and area in a manner appropriate to the character of the building

 Highways

No highway objections.

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Page 67 Members noted the list of consultations received since the preparation of the agenda which confirmed that the Cockermouth Civic Trust did not object to the application if the sign was either stand-off or individually applied vinyl letters.

Councillor C Armstrong moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor B Pegram seconded.

A vote was taken; 7 voted in favour of approval, 1 against.

The motion in favour of approval was carried.

Decision

Approved

Conditions

1. The consent hereby given shall run for the term of 5 years from the inception of the display or from the date 11 April 2017 whichever is earlier subject to compliance with the following conditions.

Reason: This is the maximum period for which consent can be granted.

2. No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007.

3. No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to: (a) endanger persons using any highway, railway, waterway, dock, harbour or aerodrome (civil or military); (b) obscure, or hinder the ready interpretation of, any traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air; or (c) hinder the operation of any device used for the purpose of security or surveillance or for measuring the speed of any vehicle.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety.

4. Any advertisement displayed, and any site used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a condition that does not impair the visual amenity of the site.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety.

Page 68 5. Any structure or hoarding erected or used principally for the purpose of displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a condition that does not endanger the public.

Reason: In order to comply with the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and in the interests of public safety.

6. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: PL-01 - Site Location Plan Email received 09/03/2017 – Signage details removing motifs Drawing Number 1 - (Amended 30/03/2017)

Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non- material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

446. 2/2017/0093 - Listed building consent for the placement of vinyl lettering onto existing board - 1, Castlegate, Cockermouth - Approve

Application

The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the application and detailed the main issues within the report as follows:

 Scale and Design

The signage is of an appropriate scale and design for the premises and area

 Heritage Assets

The proposal conserves the historic features of the property and area in a manner appropriate to the character of the building

 Highways

No objections

Members noted the representations received in respect of the application, the main grounds of which were set out in the report.

Members noted the list of consultations received since the preparation of the agenda which confirmed that the Cockermouth Civic Trust did not object to the application if the sign was either stand-off or individually applied vinyl letters.

Councillor C Armstrong moved approval as per the officer’s recommendation. Councillor B Pegram seconded.

Page 69 A vote was taken; 8 in favour of approval and 0 against.

Decision

Approved

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans: PL-01 Site location plan Email received 09/03/2017 – Signage details removing motifs Drawing Number 1 - (Amended 30/03/2017)

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory standard of development

The meeting closed at 5.00 pm

Page 70 Agenda Item 5

Allerdale Borough Council

Planning Application 2/2016/0751

Proposed Erection of up to 64 dwellings including landscaping, open space, Development: access, highways and drainage Location: Land North of Broughton Park Great Broughton Cockermouth Applicant: Mr Adam McNally Story Homes

A full list of plans is attached at Annex 2.

Recommendation: Approve, subject to the attached conditions and the signing of a s106 agreement to secure the following:

 Upgrade to Winder Lonning footpath link to an adoptable standard of surface, with lighting details to be secured by condition.  A commuted sum towards existing off site play equipment at Kirklea of £17,454 to cover the SPD contribution of £12,454 and £5000 for future maintenance.  An education commuted sum £223,791 for a new classroom at Broughton Academy (infant and juniors), and £71,250 for secondary school transport.  25% provision of affordable housing, 11 units for social rent and 5 units for discounted sale.

Should the s106 agreement not be satisfactorily completed in a timely manner, then it is requested that the powers to refuse the proposal be delegated to the Head of Service, on the basis that those measures necessary to make the development acceptable in policy terms have not been secured through the necessary legal agreement.(This is to be applied to all future s106 agreement planning decisions)

Summary/Key Issues

Issue Conclusion

Principle Notwithstanding the fact that the site lies outside of the saved settlement limit for Broughton officers consider the principle of residential development at this location to be acceptable. The site lies directly adjacent to the saved settlement limit and therefore,

Page 71 can be considered both well related and sustainable. The scale of development proposed is not considered to be disproportionate to the size of the settlement nor its role as a Local Service Centre.

The council can demonstrate a 5-year supply of housing and therefore the policies for supply of housing contained within the adopted Local Plan are to be considered up-to-date. In accounting for the number of existing housing approvals in Broughton (Great and Little Broughton), the proposed development would result in the draft housing supply target for Broughton being exceeded by 9 units. This is not considered to be a significant overprovision, sufficient to compromise the overall strategy for growth within the settlement hierarchy in adopted ALPP1. Highways The concerns of local residents and the Parish are noted and Implications understood in relation to impacts on the surrounding road network which is often substandard. However, the advice of the Highways Authority is that with the inclusion of the Winder Lonning footpath link (providing an alternative to Craggs Road/Harris Brow) and with the junction improvements at Little Brow, the impacts of the proposal on the highway network would not be severe, which is the test outlined at paragraph 32 of the NPPF. Based on this advice from the Highways Authority and Highways England, the impacts of the proposal on the local highway network are not considered to be so severe to warrant refusal of the application.

With regards to additional traffic movements along Main Street, the accident record has been considered and the Highways Authority has advised that the narrowness on the streets helps traffic calming and whilst there is congestion at peak times, the statistics suggest it remains safe. As such, any additional impacts on existing congestion through Main Street of Great Broughton are not considered to be so severe as to warrant refusal of the application. Parking The Highways Authority is satisfied that the level of parking provision proposed meets current standards. Sustainability/ A pedestrian link is proposed to be provided from the site to Permeability Winder Lonning on the northern boundary (to the western end) which would provide a pedestrian access to Little Broughton at the top of Meeting House Lane. This link would be approx 260m in length from the edge of the site. From this point, a bus stop is in close proximity and it is understood that the bus service provides for Service 68B Workington to Cockermouth (4 services Mon – Fri, 3 services on Sat, no service on Sunday). The bus stop is also served by school bus 47. Also within close proximity is the village hall, public house and Kirklea play area.

From this footpath, Broughton Academy would be an additional

Page 72 600m along the existing footpath running to the rear of Kirklea play area. The facilities and services available in Great Broughton (bakery post office public houses etc.) would be a further 420m minimum from the end of Winder Lonning. Those facilities in Little Broughton would be closer. National Route 71 of the National Cycle Network passes along Papcastle Road, Harris Brow and Main Street and within 400m of the proposed site access. National Route 71 makes up the western third of the Coast to Coast route.

Given the proximity to the local bus stop, the proximity to national cycle routes and the proposed footpath upgrade proposed, it is considered that the site is accessible by modes of transport other than the car. It is considered that the proposal is sufficiently well related and connected to the facilities and amenities of Broughton (Great and Little Broughton), in accordance with policy S22 of the ALPP1. Landscape and From wider range viewpoints to the south, north and east, it is not Visual Impacts considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on the wider landscape or rural character and Officers concur with the findings of the LVIA in this regard. From closer range viewpoints however, particularly from the north and west when leaving the village by the network of footpaths within this locality, the proposal will be much more apparent and will result in a much greater change to the rural character and visual amenities of the locality.

Overall, the relatively dense and suburban form of the estate will change the character of this area locally from a rural and open setting to an urban one, within an area where there is a general sense that the built up village form has already dissipated to a more rural setting with some low density development, when viewed from the immediate north and west. The proposal raises some concerns with Officers, when considering the village setting and rural character of the immediate locality, particularly when viewed from the network of footpaths to the north.

However, it is acknowledged that the proposal will incorporate a significant level of tree planting along the northern and eastern boundaries of the site, along with additional hedge planting where gaps exist, and the retention of the band of mature trees to the western boundary. Whilst this planting cannot mitigate all adverse landscape and visual effects of the proposal, over time, this planting would soften the built form of the development within the landscape and as viewed by nearby receptors. Design/ Whilst the degree to which the proposal responds to the character, Appearance history and distinctiveness of the area has been questioned, given that it will largely be seen as an extension of the existing housing estate at Broughton Park, then it is considered that the proposal has had sufficient regard to its context and policies S4 and DM14.

Page 73 Further, it is noted that relatively large modern housing estates of uniform design are common to the villages of Great and Little Broughton, e.g. Church Meadows and Kirklea. Residential Subsequent to the change in levels and house types, and the Amenity removal of retaining walls along the southern boundary, whilst the the outlook for existing residents on Broughton Park will change, it is considered that the resulting impact would not be significantly harmful in terms of overlooking, overshadowing, over-dominance or loss of privacy. The proposal is considered to be acceptable in accordance with policies S32 of the ALPP1. Affordable Level of provision and type/tenure split acceptable in relation to Housing Policy S8. Officers consider that a greater level of dispersal could have been achieved with smaller clusters, but the proposed affordable housing units will share a similar design and materials to open market housing throughout the development. As such, this will assist in the affordable housing provision being less distinguishable from the open market housing and as such, this aspect of policy S8 is considered to be adequately addressed. Flood Risk and On the advice of the Local Lead Flood Authority, the drainage Drainage details for the proposal, which include attenuation, are considered acceptable. Archaeology On the advice of the County Archaeologist and Heritage England, the heritage implications of the proposal are considered to be acceptable. Ecology An appropriate level of survey work and corresponding mitigation measures have been put forward to conclude that the proposal is unlikely to result in significant effects on ecological interests. Education A commuted sum proposed for education of £223,791 for a new classroom at Broughton Academy (infant and juniors), and £71,250 for secondary school transport would meet the requirements specified by the County Council. Benefits of the The provision of 64 additional dwellings at Broughton (Great and Proposal Little Broughton villages) would provide for additional housing at a scale that the draft Allerdale local Plan part 2 (ALPP2) considers reasonable for this Local Service Centre and would contribute particularly to one of the key objectives of the NPPF to boost significantly the supply of housing in order to contribute to the economic and particularly the social dimension of sustainable development. Similarly, the proposal would contribute to strategic objective SO2c of the ALPP2, which seeks to ensure a deliverable supply of housing land that meets the needs of the community and local economy.

The proposal would provide for 16 additional affordable houses for social rent and discounted sale, increasing access to affordable housing, in accordance with strategic objective SO2d of the ALPP1

Page 74 and the Council Plans priority of tackling inequality through the provision of more affordable housing.

The proposed education contribution would allow for the construction of an additional classroom at the adjacent Broughton Academy.

The proposed contribution to upgrade existing play provision at Kirklea would benefit the community as a whole.

Proposal

The proposal seeks detailed planning permission for the erection of 64 dwellings, including landscaping, open space, access, highways and drainage.

The proposal would be accessed from an existing cul de sac within Broughton Park, a 1970’s housing estate directly to the south. This would form the single vehicular access point to the development, although a second pedestrian access point is proposed to the north west of the site adjoining Winder Lonning. The proposal includes a looped road layout, with a number of smaller spurs. Given the sloping nature of the site, the proposal would include earthworks, regrading and retaining walls in part to address this.

The proposed housing consists of:

Size: 6 x 2 bed terraced houses 22 x 3 bed houses (3 detached, 16 semi-detached and 3 terraced) (includes two bungalows) 32 x 4 bed houses (detached) 4 x 5 bed houses (detached)

Tenure: 48 open market houses, mix of 3, 4 and 5 bedrooms. 11 social rented houses (at no more than 80% open market rental value), 6 x 2 bedroom houses and 5 x 3 bedroom houses 5 Intermediate houses (at no more than 80% open market value), all 3 bedroom units, (one of which would be a bungalow).

The density of the development based on the gross site area would be approx. 21 dwellings per hectare.

Two areas of open space are proposed within the site, one located to the north eastern section of the site and one adjacent to the site entrance off Broughton Park.

Materials proposed are a combination of stone, two lighter buff bricks and render to external elevations and natural slate to the roof of more prominently positioned units, with grey tiles to others.

Page 75 A total of 172 parking spaces are proposed, which are provided through a combination of in curtilage spaces, parking courts, parking bays and on street. Only one space is counted for double garages, single garages are not included as a parking space.

The details of the application include the following:

 Upgrade to Winder Lonning footpath link to Cumbria County Council specification, with lighting, details of lighting to be provided by condition if proposal is approved)  A commuted sum towards existing off site play equipment at Kirklea of £17,454 to cover the SPD contribution of £12,454 and £5000 for future maintenance.  A commuted sum of £6600 for Travel Plan monitoring.  A commuted sum proposed for education of £223,791 for new classroom at Broughton Academy (infant and juniors), and £71,250 for secondary school transport.  25% provision of affordable housing, 11 units for social rent and 5 units for discounted sale.

Proposals would involve the re-alignment of the existing 11,000volt overhead and underground electricity apparatus, to follow the estate road, including new substation.

The proposal involves a connection from the south west corner of the site to the existing public sewer and the laying of a new surface water sewer within the access road of the Broughton Park estate, down to an existing culvert at Harris Brow, connecting ultimately to the river Derwent.

Amendments

Amended plans/supporting information has been provided during the consideration of the application, summarised as:

 layout changes including plot re-positioning and parking revisions at the north west corner of the site  Removal of red brick and increased use of render, lighter coloured bricks and stone  Various changes have been made to house type fenestration details  Revised ground levels to plots adjoining the southern boundary of the site - the revised levels have precluded the need for a boundary retaining wall at the existing Broughton Park boundary  Finished Floor Levels have been reduced - plot 1 has been reduced by 1.2m, plot 10 reduced by 0.9, plot 11 reduced by 0.85 and plot 13 reduced by 0.7m  Photomontages of the latest proposals at 0 years, 10 years and 20 years winter scenario from 8 x agreed key locations  New details in respect to Engineering Improvement plans, Executive Drainage Summary and Construction Environmental Management Plan in attempt to demonstrate suitable mitigation against reasonable foreseen consequences impacting upon River Derwent SSSI/SAC  Amended Boundary Treatments and Furniture Plan - incorporates 1.2m post and rail fence at the more sensitive and rurally exposed north and east boundaries. (where applicable set behind existing hedgerow) and new strategic landscaping

Page 76  revised Ecological Assessment which demonstrates mitigation measures against impacts upon red squirrels  Transport Statement Addendum dated January 2017, re-alignment of the lines at the junction of the Papcastle Road, Little Brow and Harris Brow junction  Revised house types at plots 1 and 11 and 15.

Site

The application site relates to a single grazing field. It extends to approx 3 ha. Land levels across the site slope significantly from the north east down to the south west (approx. 61 – 77m AOD). The site holds an elevated hillside position along the Derwent valley. The eastern boundary of the site is formed by a wire fence and borders further grazing land. To the north, the boundary is a hedgerow adjoining part of bridleway 218020 and a footpath (Winder Lonning) that connects this bridleway to public footpath 218013, which runs along the western boundary along with a band of mature trees. Land to the north consists partly of housing and partly open land. The southern boundary consists of a range of fencing to the rear of the dwellings on Broughton Park estate.

Access to the field is currently gained from a spur off the adjacent housing estate at Broughton Park. This estate contains a mix of single and two storey rendered housing of a relatively consistent design off an estate road from Craggs Road.

The site lies to the east of Great Broughton and Little Broughton and to the north of the Broughton Park estate. This existing estate is somewhat detached from the main villages of Great and Little Broughton, the estate entrance is approx. 400m from the start of Main Street in Great Broughton. The adjacent villages combined offer a range of services including post office, bakery, primary school, pubs and places of worship. These villages provide a mix of traditional housing and estates constructed during the latter part of the 20th century, such as Kirklea, Moorfield Bank, Church Meadows, often of a non-traditional and unsympathetic design to the traditional historic parts of the village.

Relevant Policies

National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012)

Chapter 4: Promoting sustainable transport Chapter 6: Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Chapter 7: Requiring good design Chapter 8: Promoting healthy communities Chapter 10: Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change Chapter 11: Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Chapter 12: Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) Adopted July 2014

Policy S1 - Presumption in favour of sustainable development Policy S2 – Sustainable development principles Policy S3 – Spatial Strategy and Growth

Page 77 Policy S4 - Design principles Policy S5 - Development principles Policy S6 – Area Based Policy S7 – A Mixed and Balanced Housing Market Policy S8 – Affordable housing Policy S10 –Elderly needs housing Policy S21 – Developer Contributions Policy S22 - Transport principles Policy S25 – Sports, leisure and open space Policy S27 - Heritage Assets Policy S29 – Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage Policy S30 – Reuse of Land Policy S32 - Safeguarding amenity Policy S33 – Landscape Policy S35 - Protecting and enhancing biodiversity and geodiversity Policy S36 - Air, water and soil quality Policy DM12 – Sustainable construction Policy DM14 – Standard of Good Design Policy DM16 – Sequential Test for Previously Developed Land Policy DM17 - Trees, hedgerows and woodland

Relevant Planning History

None relevant

Representations

Representations received from consultees are summarised as follows:

Broughton Parish Council – Objection: 1) Highways, Access & Egress Issues - There are no appropriate routes for the additional 130-180 cars that would be associated with this estate. Access to the A594 via Priests Bridge is a very dangerous junction, and additional traffic driving via Little Broughton Main Street to the A594 is a road safety risk due to the lack of pavements. There are serious concerns regarding any additional traffic accessing the village from the A66 over Broughton Bridge. Any additional pressure on this junction will only further exacerbate the problems and accident risks. 2) Pavements- There is no viable safe pedestrian access from this proposed site to the village services e.g. shop/post-office etc. Significant improvements would be required along Craggs Road & Harris Brow. 3) The site proposed is outside of the current settlement boundary as part of the Local Development Plan. 4) Broughton Parish Council has serious concerns regarding the impact of this development on Broughton Academy which is already running close to capacity. Serious investment would need to be provided as part of a S.106 agreement to the school for expansion to enable the extra capacity to be accommodated. The premise of a development of houses reliant on transporting children to school out of the area is not acceptable.

Page 78 5) Sewage & Surface Water Run-off. The sewage system is already known to be at full capacity in this location, and no proposals have been identified for a new mains sewer/upgrade of the mains sewer system. In addition the increase of tarmac in this area would only expedite the surface drainage issues in this area that are regularly reported to the Better Highways Team (lack of drainage on Cragg’s Road). 6) The mix of houses proposed as part of this development doesn’t satisfy local needs as per the most recent local needs housing survey. 7) The proposed development alters the balance of housing in the village towards larger ‘executive’ style houses, which are prohibitively expensive for local residents, resulting in likely further outward migration of local young people. This development appears to be a profit led development rather than a local needs one. 8) The same developer already has outline permission elsewhere within Broughton Parish that is not active. This pre-existing permission should be fulfilled and completed before any new developments are started. This proposed new development would exceed the current development requirement for Broughton Parish and is seen as an over-domination of large scale new development by local residents. In addition smaller brownfield/infill sites should be considered before development on greenfield/agricultural sites are considered. 9) This proposed site boundary is encroaching on a local historical site and concern is raised over the probably detrimental impacts this would have on the Quaker Graveyard. 10) This proposed development would have a significant negative visual amenity impact on neighbouring parishes and adversely affect the character of these settlements north of the Derwent.

A further response is provided stating that the archaeological survey of the site has missed the standing stone and that a more appropriate survey should be sought to address this. The Council confirm that they are submitting an application to register this feature to Historic England. Advice is also sought as to whether the appropriate species surveys have been undertaken.

Bridekirk Parish Council – Objection, the proposal would result in the joining up of Great and Little Broughton. There is not the infrastructure to support it. Deemed without justification.

Papcastle Parish Council - 1. The development of 64 dwellings would impact significantly on the roads and visibility of the junctions of Little Brow and Harris Brow, Craggs Road and Harris Brow and Crags Road and Dearham Road. There are already egress problems on all departure routes from the village. 2. The development would change the character of the village by conjoining Great and Little Broughton. At present they are two distinct and separate villages with separate Identities. 3. The visual impact of the development 4. The impact on the existing school - the development would bring pressure on school numbers and the capacity of Broughton school site and the impact on the pupil numbers at Cockermouth Secondary School. 5. The site in question is outside the Local Development Plan.

Brigham Parish Council – Objection  Proposal is adding further housing to the east of Allerdale rather than in the west

Page 79 which would be more sustainable. The Inspector for the Local Plan noted that the dispersal of development around the Borough was unfortunately weighted recently on eastern settlements.  Precedent to refuse this on prematurity grounds following appeal at School Brow, Brigham.  Reduces the identity of Great and Little Broughton.  Loss of good agricultural land.  64 houses is out of character and too large.  Development should be small scale and on brownfield land which remains in the Borough.  Plans have been altered since community consultation.  Doubt that infrastructure will support the proposal. Missing play area and no obvious proposal to support the school.  Labyrinthine design and road connectivity leaves us cold. Road network is simply a bad place to add more traffic.  The design of the estate is poor, a very long cul de sac unconnected with the settlement it is supposed to be part of. Refer to appeal at Ellerbeck, Brigham, where one highway entrance was considered to be unacceptable.

A further response states that the same developer has outline permission elsewhere within Broughton parish and the Council would like to see this brought forward properly first.

A further response states refers to an appeal decision at Brigham - The view at Ellerbeck, on a 30 mph road, was that 49 m had to be achieved (and we disputed that given the slope should make the requirement greater) and yet at Great Broughton you’re asking for only 30 m. That seems very short considering what’s written in MfS and MfS2 and needs checking. The people of Great and Little Broughton must not have a poor-quality junction pushed on them – better to find somewhere else to build – it’s about safe-walking and cycling as well as driving.

Environmental Health –No objections to the Geo-environmental Appraisal subject to conditions for Materials Management Plan and Construction Management Plan.

The second response states that the submitted Construction management Plan is acceptable with the exception that working hours should commence at 8:00am and not 7:30am.

Highways England – no objection.

County Council: CCC Highways Confirm that the additional information relating to trip generation, distribution and the assumptions on the capacity of the existing local road network is accepted. The proposed changes to the Little Brow/Harris Brow/Papcastle Road junction are welcomed. This junction should be improved prior to construction starting on site to assist with the visibility of construction vehicles. Applicant has provided plan showing accident locations in Broughton over the past 15 years. In light of this, it would be impossible for us to recommend refusal due to the increased use of the current substandard junctions.

Page 80 Therefore, confirm that there is no severe impact from this application onto the local highway network. This being dependant on the mitigation/improvement measures proposed by the applicant. (Footway link and junction improvements as mentioned above). In light of the aforementioned comments, we have no objections to this application.

A second response on the amended plans was received. The details of the Environmental Construction Management Plan are welcomed. They also withdraw their former requirement of a £6600 contribution associated with the travel plan as it is below their threshold for this scale of development

CCC Drainage - It is comforting that the surface water system proposed is completely separate to the system in place serving Broughton Park, this should allay the fears of neighbouring residents who alluded to the current system serving them being at capacity. The attenuation, storage and discharge measures are acceptable to this authority and will ensure that any flood risk downstream is not exacerbated. It is however disappointing that there are minimal sustainable drainage measures being proposed, the adequacy of which is for the planning authority to consider.

Conditions recommended for the construction of carriageways and footways, junction improvements to Little Brow/Harris Brow/Papcastle Road junction and the footpath link on the north western corner, access and parking provision for construction traffic, maintenance of the drainage system ongoing.

CCC Education – Broughton Academy cannot accommodate the estimated yield of 16 pupils from the development. Only space for 5 of the 16 required. St. Bridget’s and Bridekirk have insufficient spaces. For this development to be sustainable, a further classroom at the school is required at a cost of £223,791.00. County Council does not have the capacity to deliver this and requests the developer enables delivery. Subject to this provision, this school is within walking distance with no route safety issues recorded and therefore no school transport contribution would be required.

Cockermouth School has insufficient space to accommodate the pupil yield of 11 spaces. Using the DfE multiplier, an education contribution of £200,068 would be required. However, priority for CCC is the primary age provision. Whilst there is a need for secondary provision, CCC is willing to be flexible in relation to the requested sum, to ensure the primary provision is delivered. It is anticipated that there will be sufficient places at Netherhall School which is over the 3 mile statutory walking distance from the development. A transport contribution of £71,250 would be required.

We would require that the applicant enters into a suitable legal agreement to secure the education funding.

CCC Archaeology Archaeological geophysical survey and a rapid desk-based assessment of the site indicate that there is a low likelihood of significant archaeological assets being disturbed by the construction of the proposed development.

Page 81 Note presence of a large prominent stone on the site and that it has been suggested it may be of archaeological interest. We lack any evidence to support the view that this stone is of archaeological interest. It would normally be expected that such a conspicuous stone of archaeological interest would be referred to in historical documents and shown on historic maps, but it is not mentioned in readily available documents and it is not shown on historic maps. Occasionally, new archaeological features come to light, or existing features are re-assessed to have greater archaeological interest, but the low occurrence of prehistoric remains and finds in the Broughton area does not lend support to the stone having a prehistoric origin.

Heritage England The first response of Heritage England was that consultation was not necessary as it did not fall under the relevant statutory provisions. The second response of Heritage England was that they are not aware of being approached by any local group regarding possible new designations at the site. Consequently, as there is no nationally designated historic asset at the proposed development site our first response stands.

ABC Housing Services First response: 2016 Housing Study shows that the need for affordable housing in Broughton and its adjoining Parishes is mostly for three bed properties followed by one bed properties. CBL data shows 9 bids per property for 2 bed properties, 7 bids for 2 bed bungalows and 3 bed houses, with 2 bed flats receiving 5 bids and one bed flats receiving 2 bids.

The discounted sale provision meets the need evidenced by the 2016 housing study (42% of the need is for 3 bed properties), and two bed houses received the highest average number of bids on Cumbria Choice.

However, three bed houses received the same average number of bids on Cumbria Choice as two bed bungalows. Given that there are more three bed houses available to rent from a RP in Broughton than two bed bungalows and in light of the evidence of an ageing population, it may be appropriate to seek some provision of bungalows.

Second Response: In view of the viability of the site being affected by the provision of additional affordable bungalows, Housing services confirm that the provision of affordable units specified is acceptable.

United Utilities – No objections subject to conditions requiring surface water drainage to be taken to a watercourse in accordance with the principles set out within the supporting drainage documents and plans and unless otherwise agreed by the LPA, no surface water shall be allowed to discharge to the public sewer an, plus management and maintenance of drainage systems.

Natural England First response: Requests additional information to rule out any significant effects on the River Derwent SAC/SSSI, which lies approx. 360m from the proposal. The additional information relates to surface water drainage, construction management and pollution prevention measures

Page 82 to the tributary of the River Derwent.

Second Response: Natural England confirm that the additional Drainage Strategy dated March 2017 and the submitted CEMP address all their previous concerns relating to possible impacts on the river Derwent SAC and they have no further comments.

Police Liaison Officer – Generally, the layout follows the requirements of policy DM14. Some recommendations re; landscaping and physical measures for protecting dwellings.

Electricity North West – The proposal has the potential to impact on electricity assets/operational land. Advisory notes provided, along with full costs for diversion to be borne by the developer.

Environment Agency – No consultation necessary.

Public Rights of Way – Public footpath 218013 runs to the western boundary of the site and bridleway 218020 runs adjacent to the north eastern boundary. These rights of way shall not be obstructed or altered before or after the development has been completed.

The application has been publicised by press advert, site notice and neighbour letter.

A letter has been received from Broughton Academy, which is summarised as follows:

Broughton Academy – 10 spaces at present, although these are not evenly distributed over the school years. Schools nominal role has increased significantly in 2013/14 as a result of Persimmons Church Meadows (54 dwellings that has actually generated 24 new pupils for the school). View is that the Story proposal will generate a greater number of pupils than the CCC generated figure of 16. Other developments generating demand. Before School and After School clubs may be stretched beyond capacity by an influx of new families. No option, other than to physically increase capacity through a new building. No capital funding. Should a new classroom be developable from a contribution from the developer, then the funding should be made available up front, given timescales for appointing architects, getting approval, tendering and finally building. Concern remains relating to poor provision for safe walking routes, inevitably lead to increased vehicles attempting to enter school grounds or parking on the very constricted roads close to the school (not a problem with the Church Meadows development given its proximity to the school.

A second letter has re-iterated these points.

71 letters of objection have been received for the proposal (up to 24th Feb 2016). The grounds of objection are summarised as follows:

Principle of the development

 Should be a strong presumption against development outside of the settlement

Page 83 limit.  If there is to be further expansion to the east of this site, then all impacts of the development would need to be re-considered.  Derwent Forest – a brownfield site should be built on, rather than agricultural land.  Proposal is outside the settlement limit and on greenfield land.  Illogical to build on greenbelt land  Story Homes have permission at Derwent Forest for eco housing but none yet built. Why destroy a greenfield site when brownfield sites remain vacant?  Previous sites in the locality were discarded in the SHLAA due to landscape impact and increases in traffic on same routes.  Housing need met at Church Meadows extension.  Site should not be put forward in advance of site allocation by the Council.  Are an additional 64 houses needed, especially for larger units? Shortage is for starter homes.

Visual/ Landscape impact

 Very large development, totally inappropriate and out of scale to the village  The proposal, by virtue of its site, layout, design, scale of development is not sympathetic to the built form, layout and village character and distinctiveness of Great and Little Broughton, contrary to policies S2, S3, S4 and S33.  The proposal is outside the settlement boundary and in a field with high visual impact.  Cramming in of 64 houses does not relate well to the existing layout of Broughton Park’s 29 houses. Land area is small in comparison.  Development on crest of hill will have much greater visual impact.  Entrance to the site should be more sensitive to existing development in Broughton Park. Existing housing adjacent to the new entrance are bungalows. New housing adjacent to the entrance will have ground floor levels equivalent in height to the rooves of existing housing, dominating the street scene and highly visible from the surrounding area. Will allow overlooking to Hillrigg from their patios. These houses should be replaced with bungalows.  Very significant impact on skyline.  Appeal decisions such as at Papcastle show that the distinctiveness of villages and landscapes should be preserved and enhanced. The proposal will result in the adverse coalescence of Great and Little Broughton, two separate and historically distinct villages.

Highways

 The roads into the village are small and narrow and were never designed to take the volume of traffic from Great and Little Broughton. This should be a limiting factor on future development.  Inadequate visibility at junctions of Little Brow, Papcastle Road, Harris Brow even with suggested improvement.  Trips to shops, post office not factored in.  Lack of public transport and safe walking routes  Transport Statement is inadequate.

Page 84  Assumptions used within the Transport Statement as to direction of travel at junctions is not credible.  Road junctions are dangerous, there are virtually no visibility splays at the junctions leading to workplaces and amenities, bottom of Little Brow in particular where the National Speed Limit applies and stopping distances exceed the visibility splay, particularly in winter. Rural junctions serving fields designed for small amounts of traffic. Harris Brow junction, due to steepness and acute angle makes visibility impossible.  Pedestrians are not going to walk up hill to take a longer and different route.  The nearest bus stop is actually on the busy and dangerous hairpin bend at the bottom of Harris Brow at the field entrance. Cockermouth School children are picked up/dropped off here on a hairpin bend, the proposal would make this even more dangerous as there are no footpaths. Council should take steps to ensure the safety of schoolchildren or oppose building on the site.  Concerns relating to construction traffic using the inadequate roads, blind bends and narrow bridge.  Hazard of junction made worse by crossing of C2C cycle route.  A footpath link to the north west will not improve pedestrian facilities to the south – bus service, school bus and facilities in Great Broughton.  Cycle times to railway stations are for dedicated cyclists, not the average person. Similarly, walking times are not likely to apply to small children. Misleading to say that Great Broughton is well connected. Very difficult to live here without a car.  Insufficient parking provision in the scheme.  Transport Statement relies on comparison of traffic flows from Broughton Park residents, but two thirds of the estate are retired and will not compare to trips generated from family housing.  24 car journeys in the AM peak is not credible. 40-50 journeys is much more likely based on 64 houses, 2 cars, 2 jobs, school runs etc.  A Transport Assessment should have been provided on the basis that this is an extension to an existing estate exceeding 80 units. Otherwise, incremental development avoids proper scrutiny.  Harris Brow is narrow, high banked sides, a blind bend and is unlit with the 30mph limit terminating before Little Brow.  A major improvement to the access roads to Broughton villages is long overdue. As a minimum, the 30mph limit should be extended, across to the A66, the section of Craggs Road between Harris Brow and Meeting House Lane should be made one way west to east, Intersection of Papcastle Road and Little Brow should be re- aligned to enable drivers to emerge safely from Little Brow – a roundabout may be the best solution.  Increased use of the lonning by pedestrians would conflict with vehicles who use this to access housing (ten properties).  The shortest pedestrian route from Broughton Park to Main Street, Great Broughton is via Craggs Rd and Harris Brow, the safer but longer route is via Meeting House Lane. Craggs Rd (between Meeting House Lane and Harris Brow) is narrow and has a blind bend. There is no footpath, it is unlit and there is a spring on the northern side. Verge can be muddy and rutted in winter. Prone to flooding from blockage of drains.  Security concerns arising from increased pedestrian use on the lonning.  Collision risk on the access roads will be significantly increased because the

Page 85 proposal is likely to be occupied by families rather than retired people.  References appeal at Brigham where one access and poor connectivity to the village was part of reason for dismissing an appeal at Ellerbeck Brow. This scheme would have only a single vehicular access and a much longer walk to school.

Schools/village services

 The number of children from the Church Meadows development was double that modelled by Cumbria County Council.  Cockermouth School is at capacity and Story Homes are making no provision for investment in the school. Re-schooling children at Maryport/Workington will greatly increase travel times.  Proposal will add congestion to an already overburdened and congested village centre at school times. Parents will need to drive children to the school through the centre of the village. Existing residents wear high visibility jackets when walking to the village.  The 16 modelled children will result in an additional 4 vehicle trips per day as children are not likely to walk nearly 1 mile in poor weather. With four road crossings, it isn’t safe for unaccompanied young children and it would be a 25/30 minute return walk for parents. Teachers indicate parents drop off children on way to work. This will greatly exacerbate problems in Main Street of Great Broughton by traffic flow increase.  Lack of available primary school places and in-catchment secondary school places.  Capital money for new classrooms does not address the permanent cost of staffing extra classes.  Concerns with access to GP’s and dentists.

Ecology

 Destroys flora and fauna for no good reason.  Bat roost potential and activity surveys should have been carried out. Without this, the LPA cannot be satisfied that diverting lighting away from such features is adequate to not adversely affect their conservation status.

Drainage

 Allerdale should re-visit redevelopment of The Terraces, part of the Broughton Armaments Depot, to meet housing need not skyline sites on the Derwent Valley.  The development of the field and the asphalting of Winder Lonning would make flooding issues far worse. These lonnings are already like streams.  Localised flooding already affects routes in from the A66 and the A594.  Damp area to south west corner of site, leading to water flowing down Meeting House Lane. Lack of detailed drainage plans and how this will link to existing drainage.  The proposal would connect to culvert and ditch before joining to the river Derwent. The ditch is unmaintained and overgrown. The culvert under Broughton Bridge is frequently overtopped with water flowing across the road. Need

Page 86 adequate maintenance of the ditch. Dormers are proposed adjacent to Broughton Park, not bungalows. Steeper pitches will result in something much higher than a bungalow and the change in levels will result in new ground floor windows at the same level as bedroom windows on Broughton Park.  Drains within Broughton Park road are already inadequate. Drainage proposals need clarified. Sewage and drainage facilities insufficient.  The site contains natural springs, during heavy rain; water rises from under the ground and creates extra surface water.  Concerns as to suitability of upgrade to lonning and environmental impact. Impact on drainage. Who will maintain it?  Debris has to be regularly cleared from the drains in Meeting House Lane by residents.

Impact on neighbours

 Change from public consultation; houses to rear of Broughton Park were originally bungalows.  2.8m high boundary to Broughton Park (1m retaining wall and 1.8m fence) as well as the high roofline of the properties would dominate the existing properties.  Proximity of side elevation of large 4 bed property to rear of Loen, Eyrie and Talardy in Broughton Park, this property would nearly be in our gardens and completely overlook.  Housing will be much closer to Broom Knoll and Hillrigg, but no bungalows are proposed to the rear of these properties, unlike at plots 11-13.  Sales Office/parking to Plot 1 will disturb the roots of an existing Silver Birch at Hillrigg.

Other

 Insufficient evidence as to whether the proposal will impact on good agricultural land.  The layout does not allow for south facing roof on all homes, thus not allowing for the full utilisation of solar power.  Documents are inconsistent and in some cases wrong.

Further consultation was undertaken on the main set of amendments received at the end of March. Nine further letters were received up to the time of preparing this report (10th may 2017). Where new issues were raised as part of this further consultation, they are summarised as follows:

 Concern that section provided relates to property Eyrie, when in fact the property Loen is in closer proximity.  Been told that a fish eye lens used suggesting that Broughton Park road is wider than it actually is. Also been told that traffic flows monitored at non busy times.  Largest and highest house type has been positioned to the rear of properties Loen, Eyrie, and Talardy, almost in back gardens.  Inaccurate naming of properties within Broughton Park.  Query what will be in the space between stone wall and post and rail fence adjacent Broughton Craggs Hotel.

Page 87  Why do plans indicate NOT TO SCALE? Surely they need to be to scale.  Reference to Tendring appeal, para 15, "In my judgement, the future occupiers of the proposed properties would be heavily reliant upon the need to travel outside of the village for almost all services and facilities, and for access to employment. I find that it is highly probable that the preferred means of travel would be by private motor car. Accordingly, I find that the appeal site cannot be said to be in a particularly sustainable location on that basis. “Bus service is similar to Broughton villages.  The houses are denser in number than the existing estate and the proposed houses are uphill, close, overbearing and overlook the existing homes next to the field on Broughton Park, contrary to policy.  Drainage to culverts that already flood.  Junctions: The proposed egress routes even with alterations suggested still lack satisfactory visibility splays to the detriment of highway safety contrary to DM14, and S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan part 1. Note: There is in effect a 60mph zone at the bottom of Little Brow where the max visibility splay is 19m when the grass has been cut. Other developments for smaller housing numbers, recently Blitterlees 2/2016/0727, for 5 houses, not 64 houses as proposed here required splays of 60m in a 30mphzone by CCC. The proposed painting on the road will not solve the visibility problem as it only increase the visibility splay to 30m and will undoubtedly endanger C2C cyclists who have right of way coming down Harris Brow.  The Draft Annual Monitoring Report for 2015/2016 demonstrates Allerdale has a 5.7 year supply of housing which includes a 20% buffer allowance…ie There is no hurry to exceed the 55 homes required in the Allerdale combined villages of “Broughton” in one lump with one large developer and immediately when the local plan life is to 2029.  Highways consultant has advised that the Transport Addendum measurement for the visibility improvement at bottom of Little Brow does not accord with Manual for Streets, not measured correctly. Therefore 30m visibility not actually achieved.  When the impact of the enormous new house behind the bungalow is combined with the height of the existing neighbouring property, Hillrigg will be completely overwhelmed.  The Comparative Offset Distances fails to take into account the height differences between the new and existing properties, and while the distances between the properties on the north and south sides of Broughton Park can be made to look similar to the proposed distances between the new development and existing properties, the properties on the south side of Broughton Park are built into the hillside unlike the properties on the north side. There is a difference between looking across a road from the front of a property to the front of another and having a large overbearing property placed behind what has previously been a private garden and conservatory.  Plots 52, 53 & 54 are directly facing Hillrigg; they and their access road are built on top of an embankment raising their floor levels to heights between 67.85m and 68.5m, levels higher than the eaves of Hillrigg 67.31m (Geoenvironmental Appraisal Appendix A), this will give them a direct line of sight into our bedroom and kitchen and a grandstand view of an area we currently consider to be part of our back garden this will create a serious loss of privacy for us. There is insufficient screening planned to offset this intrusion, especially in winter when

Page 88 there will be no leaves on the trees.  The planned access road, created by opening up the existing dead end is just 3 metres from our kitchen extension; this will result in a serious loss of privacy. This extension is not shown on the land registry plans though it was built in 1995.  In the absence of any field drains, the garden of plot 1 must drain into the gardens of Hillrigg and Broom Knoll. The surface water from all the gardens on the Southern and Western sides of the development will continue to run into the neighbouring properties and footpath. This will be exacerbated if the occupiers of the new properties install large areas of hard landscaping.  There do not seem to be any plans to enlarge the inadequate culvert at the bottom of Harris Brow, nor do there seem to be any permission in place to discharge the surface water into an existing beck on third party land.  The parking is still insufficient and has not been amended since the original application, in spite of the single garages no longer counting as off road parking.  If garage spaces and driveway spaces blocked by other cars are discounted, there are still only 2 parking spaces per house. Every resident who is old enough to drive will require a car in order to access local services other than the post office, therefore there will be many more than 129 cars kept on the development. As the development matures, the number of cars kept by the occupants will increase and there is the potential for up to 200 cars to be kept there. Of these, 70 will, of necessity, be parked on the road. The roads on the new development are too narrow to accommodate most of these vehicles so they will be abandoned on the existing roads. 70 parked cars will have an impact well beyond Broughton Park.  Customer parking will extend all the way down Broughton Park, creating disturbance and access problems for the existing community.  Hijacking the present highway, with plans to place a plethora of street furniture on the boundary of Hillrigg.  When and how did Story Homes obtain title to the strip of land between the adopted highway (which according to my records terminates at the end of the surfaced road) and the field boundary (which the land registry shows as the existing fence line) I cannot find that this strip of land has been registered. If there is no good title to this land, it would be highly irresponsible for this to be the only access to 64 houses. If, however, Allerdale BC or Cumbria CC have good title to this land it is to be hoped that they have not just given this land to Story Homes.

A second letter from Broughton Academy raises similar points to those initially made.

Main Issues:

Principle of the Development

(a) Geographical location

The villages of Great and Little Broughton combined are designated as a Local Service Centre within the Allerdale Local Plan Part 1 (ALPP1) and Policy S5 states that new development will be concentrated within the physical limits of Local Service Centres. The proposed development site lies outside of, but directly adjacent to, the defined settlement limit for Broughton (Great and Little Broughton) along its southern boundary, as the

Page 89 Broughton Park estate to the south is within the defined settlement . Notwithstanding the recent adoption of the ALPP1 and the spatial strategy contained therein, the defined limits for individual settlements continue to be derived from the Allerdale Local Plan 1999. The LPA is currently in the process of reviewing settlement limits as part of the site allocations process but this development plan document, Allerdale Local Plan Part 2, is some way from adoption.

The draft Allerdale Local Plan Part 2 identifies the site for inclusion within the revised settlement boundary for Broughton (Great and Little Broughton), on the basis that this site is also put forward in the same document as the preferred option housing allocation. The site is selected for a number of reasons, including; it would have less landscape and visual impact than alternatives put forward; no potential for significant effects for protected sites or species, no significant environmental or physical constraints identified, low flood risk, achievable access, minimise impact on Great Broughton Main Street. The alternative discarded site is Rose Farm, to the north of Little Broughton. Given that the ALPP2 has only just completed its first public consultation, these documents cannot be given any weight at this stage in the determination process.

Taking into account the age of the current defined settlement limits and also principles of sustainable development set out within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), officers considered that an element of flexibility must be applied when considering proposals for development that lie outside of settlement boundaries derived from the ALP 1999. Taking into account the proximity and relationship of the site to the current defined settlement, officers consider the principle of residential development to be acceptable at this location.

(b) Scale of development

As a larger village within the Borough, with a range of facilities, Broughton (Great and Little Broughton) is identified as a Local Service Centre (LSC) in the ALPP1. Policy S3 states that in combination, LSC’s will provide up to 20% of the 5,471 net additional dwellings up to 2029, equating to 1094 net additional dwellings. Policy S5 requires that the scale of new development should be commensurate to the size of the settlement and reflect its position within the hierarchy. It also requires the prioritising and effective re-use of previously developed land.

The proposal is for 64 residential units. This scale of development is considered to be appropriate to the size of the settlement and the role it has been allocated as a Local Service Centre within the adopted ALPP1. Drawing on the evidence base for the draft ALPP2, Officers are not aware of any previously developed sites within Broughton (Great and Little Broughton) that would be of a scale sufficient to accommodate the level of development apportioned to the villages as a Local Service Centre, (Rose Farm as a working farm would not be considered Previously Developed Land under the NPPF definition). The proposal is therefore also considered to be acceptable in relation to policies S5 and S30 in this respect.

A number of representations refer to the availability of brownfield land at the former Armaments depot – Derwent Forest. However, policy S18 of the ALPP1 only supports residential development at this location sufficient to achieve the viability of the project and

Page 90 secure site restoration.

(c) Housing supply

The Council published its most recent five housing land supply statement in August 2014, following the adoption of the ALPP1. An update from Policy colleagues to this confirms that the Local Planning Authority has a total supply of 5.6 years (as of July 2016) based on its annual supply target. This includes 20% increase due to a record of persistent under delivery and shortfalls in delivery since 2011.

As the LPA are able to demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites the policies for the supply of housing contained within the ALPP1 are to be considered up-to- date, in accordance with paragraph 49 of NPPF. The policy framework for the supply of housing within the plan area is set out in the spatial strategy, contained within Policy S3. This policy identifies that Broughton, along with the other LCS’s will provide for 1094 residential over the plan period 2011-2029, as discussed above.

Pertinent to this application, Policy S3 states that completions and commitments since 2011 should be accounted for when considering future proposals for housing growth. In the context of Broughton, the total number of completions/commitments since 2011 stands at 70 units.

Documentation forming part of draft ALPP2, indicate a supply target for Broughton (Great and Little Broughton) of 125 net additional dwellings. In allocating targets to all Local Service Centres, regard has been had the size of the villages, the services and facilities available, capacity issues, constraints and so on. Noting completions/commitments, 55 residential units remain outstanding. Again, whilst draft ALPP2 carries no weight at this stage, the evidence base and analysis underlying the allocations process is indicative that Broughton (Great and Little Broughton) can accommodate further housing development.

In seeking approval for up to 64 residential dwellings, the proposed development would exceed the draft residual requirement by nine units. However, as indicated above the scale of the development is considered to be commensurate to the size of the settlement. Furthermore, the NPPF indicates that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Officers interpret that as meaning that the presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in the NPPF is not solely reliant on the lack of a 5 year supply of housing land. Given the role identified for Broughton (Great and Little Broughton), the level of housing proposed is considered to be proportionate, therefore, it would not be reasonable to dismiss the proposed development solely on the basis of the local planning authority being able to demonstrate a robust five year housing land supply.

(d) Conclusion on the principle of development

Notwithstanding the fact that the site lies outside of the settlement limit for Broughton officers consider the principle of residential development at this location to be acceptable. The site lies directly adjacent to the saved settlement limit and therefore, can be considered both well related and sustainable. The scale of development proposed is not

Page 91 considered to be disproportionate to the size of the settlement nor its role as a LSC.

Allerdale Borough Council are able to demonstrate a 5-year supply of housing and therefore the policies for supply of housing contained within the recently adopted ALPP1 are to be considered up-to-date. Taking into account the number of existing housing approvals in Broughton (Great and Little Broughton), the proposed development would result in the draft housing supply target for Broughton being exceeded by 9 units. This is not considered to be a significant overprovision, sufficient to compromise the overall strategy for growth within the settlement hierarchy in adopted ALPP1.

Officers conclude that the proposed development is acceptable in principle.

Impact of the proposed development on adjacent highway network

Policy S5 of the ALPP1 requires that new development shall not exceed the capacity of local infrastructure and Policies S22 and S32 provide further detailed requirements for safe access, connectivity and so forth. However, the NPPF sets a clear test at paragraph 32 that ‘Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe’.

The proposal provides for the main vehicular and pedestrian access off the adjacent Broughton Park. The estate road for Broughton park joins Craggs Road which extends to the east and west and serves 29 existing houses as well as providing access to the application site, currently in agricultural use. To the west, Little Brow heads south to the A66 and Craggs Road joins Harris Brow, leading into Great Broughton village. The applicant acknowledges the lack of existing footpath provision on these routes to the south of the site and deems that improved footpath provision would be prevented by the restricted width of these roads. As such, a second pedestrian route is proposed to be provided (upgraded to the County Council’s specification) from the north west corner of the site along Winder Lonning, which leads into Little Broughton at the top of Meeting House Lane.

A significant number of representations from the public, including the Parish Council, raise concerns with the intensified use of the surrounding road network by vehicles and pedestrians, which they consider to be substandard, resulting in safety concerns for future occupiers and existing users of the highway network.

Good visibility for vehicles is achievable from Broughton Park itself and this section of Craggs road has a footpath to Meeting House Lane. Beyond this point however, to the south and west, there are no further footpaths along Craggs Road/Harris brow directly into the village or south to the A66. Craggs Road. The existing footpath does link to Meeting House Lane which has bollards to the south, but this would not provide a particularly direct route to the services and amenities of the villages, which mainly lie in Great Broughton to the west. Harris Brow and Little Brow are narrow for much of their length, and visibility from a number of junctions is poor, particularly the Harris Brow/Craggs road junction when turning both left and right, and the Little Brow/Harris Brow/Papcastle Road junction when turning right. There is a sharp bend at the bottom of Craggs Road at the junction with Little Brow and Papcastle Road.

Page 92 Specific concerns also relate to the picking up and the dropping off of school children by the School Bus in the vicinity of the Little Brow/Harris Brow/Papcastle Road junction, and the increased safety risk to these children from the vehicles associated with the development and the resulting intensified use of the local roads.

Other specific concerns relate to an intensification of traffic on Main Street, through Great Broughton village as a result of future residents picking up and dropping off children at the Academy on the basis that the walking distance would be too great. Main Street varies in width and lacks designated pedestrian footpaths. Two way traffic can be restricted by on street parking, causing congestion at busy times.

Operational/capacity issues are acknowledged at the Broughton villages/Brigham junctions onto the A66. Highways England has revealed initial plans for a 4 arm roundabout to replace the existing arrangement. It is unclear how far these plans have progressed.

The application has been supported by a Transport Statement, an Addendum to the Transport Statement and a Travel Plan. The findings of the Transport Statement and Addendum are summarised as follows:

 The TS includes assessment of the Craggs Road/Broughton park T-junction, Little Brow/Papcastle Road/Great Broughton/Harris Brow crossroads junction, A66/Great Broughton/Brigham Ghost Island Staggered Crossroads Junction  Baseline traffic conditions on the road network, classified turning count surveys were undertaken at Junctions 1, 2, and 3 during both the AM (07:30-10:00) and PM (15:00-18:30) peak periods.  Trip generation rates for the proposed residential units have been derived from the TRICS database and show a total of 33 trips (IN and OUT) within the AM (08:00 – 09:00) and PM (17:00 – 18:00) peaks. Actual trips recoded from the existing residents of Broughton Park were much lower at a total of 14 trips (IN and OUT) within the AM (08:00 – 09:00) and PM (17:00 – 18:00) peaks  Trip distribution is based on - At the Craggs Road/Broughton Park junction it is assumed that 10% of the development will route to the east and 90% to the west. It is then assumed that 20% will remain in Little Broughton and Great Broughton or travel on local roads to the north, whilst 70% will route to the A66.  There has been 1 Personal Injury Collision (PIC) on the road network within the vicinity of the site. The PIC occurred on Harris Brow, approximately 30m to the west of its junction with Little Brow and Papcastle Road, on the 3rd August 2012 at 11:00. The incident involved a single car and resulted in a slight injury to the male driver. The TS states that the number of PICs that have occurred in the vicinity of the site and in Little Broughton itself is very low and demonstrates no inherent road safety issues on the local road network.  The data at Appendix D also shows that there have been a total of 6 PICs at the A66/Great Broughton/Brigham staggered crossroads junction since 2012. Of these incidents 4 resulted in a slight injury, 1 in a serious injury and 1 in a fatal injury. 3 of the incidents occurred at the Great Broughton arm of the junction and 3 occurred at the Brigham arm of the junction, which included the serious and fatal injury incidents.  It is evident that the number and severity of PICs that have occurred at the A66

Page 93 staggered crossroads junction indicates an existing road safety issue at the junction. This view has been supported by the recent announcement that Highways England has revealed initial plans to provide a 4 armed roundabout at the junction.  It is considered that the increase in traffic at the junction as a result of the proposed development is minimal at less than 1% of the total flows through the junction. This is considered to be well within the day to day variation in flows and therefore the impact of the proposed development at the junction will not be severe.  The increase in traffic on the local road junctions as a result of the proposed development is low at less than 1 additional trip every 2 minutes and it is therefore considered that the local road junctions would continue to operate well within capacity with the proposed development traffic included.  It is acknowledged that visibility from the Little Brow arm of the junction is sub- standard and therefore it is proposed to amend the white lining at the junction to improve the visibility that can be achieved from the Little Brow arm. Drawings showing the current white lining and the proposed amendments are included at Appendix C to the Addendum and show that the visibility for vehicles exiting from Little Brow to vehicles approaching on Harris Brow will be improved, by over 50%, and will therefore be beneficial to all users at the junction.

The Highways Authority has confirmed that the methodology and assumptions within the TS and Addendum relating to trip generation, distribution and the capacity of the local road network are acceptable. The proposed changes to the Little Brow/Harris Brow/Papcastle Road junction are welcomed. The Highways Authority has also provided data on accident locations in Broughton over the past 15 years. In light of this, the Highways Authority confirms that it would be impossible to recommend refusal due to the increased use of the current substandard junctions and that the impacts of the proposal on the local highway network are not considered to be ‘severe’. This being dependant on the mitigation/improvement measures proposed by the applicant, (footway link along Winder Lonning and junction improvements, which could be secured by condition, should planning permission be granted).

Highways England has raised no objection to the proposal in relation to the operation of the A66 trunk road.

The concerns of local residents and the Parish are noted and understood. However, the advice of the Highways Authority is that with the inclusion of the Winder Lonning footpath link (providing an alternative to Craggs Road/Harris brow) and with the junction improvements at Little Brow, the impacts of the proposal on the highway network would not be severe, which is the test outlined at paragraph 32 of the NPPF. Based on this advice from the Highways Authority and Highways England, the impacts of the proposal on the local highway network are not considered to be so severe to warrant refusal of the application.

Further, with regards to concerns relating to an intensification of traffic movements on Main Street, through Great Broughton village, similar concerns were raised for a housing development at Brigham, with the main road through Brigham sharing similar constraints to Main Street in terms of a narrow width, lack of pedestrian facilities and on street

Page 94 parking. In that appeal decision (APP/G0908/A/13/2193690), the Inspector noted that it was inevitable that additional housing would bring additional traffic through the village. However, no recorded accidents suggested that this route was not inherently unsafe and indeed the constraints of the route would in themselves act as a means of traffic calming. The resulting impact of that proposal at Brigham was not considered to unacceptably interrupt the free flow of traffic or significantly increase safety of pedestrians.

For the main route through Great Broughton, the accident report has been obtained for the last 20 years. This indicates three slight incidents in 1996, 2000 and 2009, and a serious incident in 1997. The latter involved a youth on a skateboard coming out of Broughton Hall on a skateboard into a car. The slight incidents involved vehicles reversing into pedestrians and one was a bicycle swerving to avoid a car. The Highways Authority has advised that the narrowness on the streets help with traffic calming and whilst there is congestion at peak times, the statistics suggest it remains a safe route. As such, any additional impacts on existing congestion through the main street of Great Broughton are not considered to be so severe as to warrant refusal of the application.

Subject to the conditioning of a Construction Traffic Management Plan and the implementation of the junction improvement at Little Brow, the Highways Authority has not raised any concerns as to the traffic implications of the construction phase on the surrounding road network.

To conclude based on the advice of the Highways Authority and Highways England, the highways implications of the proposal are not considered to be severe, the test of acceptability contained within the NPPF.

Vehicular/pedestrian provision, and parking provision within the site

The proposed site access will be from the end of the cul-de sac of Broughton Park at the north eastern corner of the estate. The road will be extended into the site with its carriageway width reduced to 5.5m, which is considered satisfactory to serve the proposed development. The existing footway on the western side of the road will also continue into the site. This will provide both vehicle and pedestrian access to the site and will connect to Craggs Road via the existing infrastructure on the Broughton Park estate.

The TS indicates that suitable provision has been made within the proposal for refuse turning/collection.

Parking standards of CCC require 159 for residents and 13 spaces for visitors. The scheme proposes 172 spaces, with garages only included where complaint with CCC standard of 21m2. The parking is provided by:

 133 in curtilage spaces  27 combination of on street/visitor bays  12 within parking courts with designated spaces

The Highways Authority has raised no objection with the layout of the site overall, nor with the layout and level of parking provision and confirm that the on street parking is

Page 95 reasonable compared to the within curtilage parking. They have also clarified that they do not foresee any access issues for emergency vehicles. Based on the advice of the Highways Authority, the internal vehicular and pedestrian provision and the parking provision are considered to be acceptable.

Sustainability/Alternative Modes of Transport/Permeability

Acknowledging the lack of pedestrian facilities along Craggs Road/Harris Brow, a pedestrian link is proposed to be provided from the site to Winder Lonning on the northern boundary (to the western end) which would provide access to Little Broughton at the top of Meeting House Lane. This link would be approx. 260m in length from the edge of the site. From this point, a bus stop is in close proximity and it is understood that the bus service provides for Service 68B Workington to Cockermouth (4 services Mon – Fri, 3 services on Sat, no service on Sunday). The bus stop is also served by school bus 47. Also within close proximity is the village hall, public house and Kirklea play area.

From this footpath, Broughton Academy would be an additional 600m along the existing footpath running to the rear of Kirklea play area. The services available in Great Broughton (bakery post office public houses etc.) would be a further 420m minimum from the end of Winder Lonning. Those facilities in Little Broughton would be closer.

National Route 71 of the National Cycle Network passes along Papcastle Road, Harris Brow and Main Street and within 400m of the proposed site access. National Route 71 makes up the western third of the Coast to Coast route.

Given the proximity to the local bus stop, the proximity to national cycle routes and the proposed footpath upgrade proposed, it is considered that the site is accessible by modes of transport other than the car.

As the proposal lies beyond the existing housing estate of Broughton Park, which in itself is somewhat detached from the villages of Great and Little Broughton, the proposal site is isolated to an extent from the built form of the village, albeit well related to Broughton Park itself. However, the upgrade to Winder Lonning footpath would improve the connectivity/permeability of the site to the villages for future residents and potentially for residents of Broughton Park, albeit for the latter, this would not be a direct route to all services and the gradients of the site may discourage some users. The distances indicated above are not considered prohibitive for people to access village services by foot and the County Council has indicated that Broughton Academy is within the statutory walking distance and that there is no route safety issues recorded for this locality.

Within representations, comparisons have been drawn with this proposal and a proposal for housing at Brigham, which was dismissed on appeal (APP/G0908/A/13/2193690). The scheme at Brigham had only one access for both pedestrians and vehicles, along a relatively long and winding access road/cul-de sac. The Inspector noted within that appeal that ‘with only a single point of access, the development would be poorly connected to the rest of the village, particularly for pedestrians. Those living at the western end of the scheme …would have a walk of 200 metres or more just to get to Ellerbeck Brow, at a point on the scheme which would be furthest from the centre of the village and its facilities, and the primary school at the far end of the village’.

Page 96 In comparing the two schemes, the scheme under consideration benefits from a second pedestrian access point onto Winder Lonning and the Inspector for the Brigham appeal specifically emphasized the disadvantage of one access points for pedestrians, over drivers. Access to amenities within Little Broughton (village hall, public house and play area) and bus services would be in close proximity to the end of this Lonning which is approx. 260m in length, with other facilities at a distance ranging from 400 – 600m beyond this point, including the school. In comparison, beyond the entrance to the Brigham site on Ellerbeck brow, village facilities ranged in distance from approx. 330m to 1.3 km (330m to church, 490m to shop, 580m to village hall,1.3km to school). As such, it is considered that the connectivity of the current proposal is greater than the scheme dismissed on appeal at Brigham.

A Travel Plan has been provided for the proposal which the Highways Authority has confirmed is acceptable. This provides for the appointment of a Travel Plan co-ordinator and in the main, a number of promotional measures to encourage walking, cycling, car sharing and the use of public transport.

For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is sufficiently well related and connected to the facilities and amenities of Broughton (Great and Little Broughton), in accordance with policy S22 of the ALPP1.

Landscape and Visual Effects

Policy S33 of the ALPP1 seeks to protect, conserve and enhance the landscape character and local distinctiveness of the Plan Area and supports the NPPF aim to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. Policies S4 and DM14 of the ALPP1, seek to ensure amongst other things that new development responds positively to the character and distinctiveness of the location and integrates effectively.

The applicant has provided a Landscape and Visual Assessment of the site, along with viewpoints and photomontages, the results of which can be summarised as follows:

Landscape Effects:  Sensitivity of the landscape character (as a receptor) is considered to be Medium. This considers the Site features which exhibit some value (such as intact hedgerows along its boundaries and established landscape pattern), but also the detracting elements which have influenced the landscape (such as its edge of town location and a variety of non-original boundary treatments) creating a capacity for this landscape to accept change.  The assessment Site is not critical to maintaining the overall landscape character of the area, as the character would continue to be obtained in the surrounding area  The magnitude of the effects on landscape character is therefore considered to be Low. This takes into account that the site has been assessed as having capacity to accept change.  The extent of the local landscape change would be predominantly localised and generally confined to the immediate setting due to the existing built form to the south and the well vegetated boundary which currently exists along the western boundary.

Page 97  The landscape effect of the proposed development on the overall landscape character would therefore be Slight.  Slight change to landscape features and vegetation.  Whilst there would be, to varying degrees, elements of change to each of these receptors, the nature and extent of that change would be generally confined to the immediate area and would not change the fundamental character of the landscape setting and in no way would change the overall character of the wider area.

Visual Effects:  The proposed development would change the nature of the outlook available from  Properties adjoining or close to the development, in that the existing views to and over the undeveloped assessment site would be affected. The susceptibility and sensitivity of these residential visual receptors is considered to be High. Residents further afield would be of medium sensitivity.  The overall visual effect on residential properties would be Major to Major/Moderate at closer proximity and Slight at longer distances.  Any Moderate and Major/Moderate visual effects on these adjoining properties will be mitigated through the implementation of a Landscape Strategy and planting plan.  The susceptibility and sensitivity of roads as visual receptors is considered to be Medium. The value of these passing and transient views is therefore considered to be Low. This is because the observation of passing road users and commuters is brief and momentary. The magnitude of the visual effect of the development on public roads is therefore considered to be Small.  The principle visual effect on public rights of way (PRoW) will be Major/Moderate. There are two PRoWs which run immediately adjacent to the site boundaries; 218020 and 218103, to the north east and west, respectively. There is also a third PRoW (218011) located to the immediate north of the Site boundary close to Crags Farm, however upon visiting Site, this footpath is not present/ in use.  Public rights of way generally as visual receptors are considered to be of High sensitivity and susceptibility. Given that the views from public rights of way within close proximity of the Site are relatively open and uninterrupted, and comprise views towards the Lake District National Park, their value is assessed as High. For other footpaths at longer distances, their value is considered to be Medium.  In terms of magnitude of effect, the visual effect of the proposed development on PRoW would be large from those views closest to the development, and Small for views at longer distances along these footpaths.  The proposed development would entail a Major/Moderate change to the existing view from footpaths at closer distances, and Moderate to Slight change from those views at greater distances. However, given the small component of the view which will change as a result of the proposed development, and the existing built form in close proximity, it is considered that a more appropriate rating of significance would be Slight.  Impacts would be mitigated through supplementary planting in order to assist in screening the development from view.  The relatively small scale development of the assessment site would only give rise to a few Major/Moderate visual effects for receptors on the immediate boundaries of the Site. The most significant would be on adjoining residential properties at Broughton Park and Crags Farm, road users along Broughton Park and Great

Page 98 Broughton Road, users of footpaths 218020 and 218103. Beyond the immediate vicinity of the Site, visual effects are limited to Moderate or less, as a result of the screening and filtering effects of intervening built form, vegetation and topography.

The site lies within landscape character type ‘5a – Ridge and Valley. Broughton (Great and Little Broughton) occupies an elevated position on the side of the Derwent Valley when viewed from the south and east and west along the A66. From the north, whilst still undulating, there is more of a plateau when viewed across from the A594, with only the higher parts of the villages visible before levels fall towards the river. Other villages, such as Papcastle and Brigham similarly occupy elevated positions within the landscape along the Derwent valley.

The application site presently is part of a network of fields comprising the countryside that surrounds Broughton (Great and Little Broughton). It contributes to the rural ambience and character of the village surroundings, most notably from the footpath network to the north of the site and offers a vista of the wider landscape, including towards the Lake District National Park.

Land levels across the site slope significantly upwards from the south west to the north east, (approx. 61 – 77m AOD). Land levels continue to rise to the north east beyond the site, approaching the ridgeline. Therefore the site also holds an elevated position along the Derwent valley. As a result, the housing development would clearly be seen lying above Broughton Park when viewed from the south, east and west. From the south, the proposal would be seen largely as an expansion of the built form of Broughton Park. From this direction, whilst the proposal would look somewhat detached from the villages, this is similar to the somewhat detached nature of Broughton Park at present, and therefore it is considered that the proposal would not look overly incongruous in the landscape from this direction. It is demonstrated by photomontage 6 that the proposal would sit on rising land, approaching and potentially exceeding the ridgeline in part, but that this would be in a similar form to the existing Great and Little Broughton villages, which also break the ridgeline to the west. The proposal provides for landscaped buffers to the northern boundary and eastern boundary, where the proposal will adjoin open land. Over time, this planting will soften the landscape impact of the proposal. As such, from the south, where open views of the proposal will be possible along the river valley, the landscape and visual impacts of the proposal are considered to be acceptable.

From wider range viewpoints to the east, the site will generally be viewed with the backdrop of the village and therefore the landscape and visual impacts from this direction are generally considered to be acceptable.

From wider viewpoints to the north, land levels are undulating and finally rise up to the ridge line before falling to the river valley. From the A594 and other roads to the north, viewpoints provided indicate that the proposal will be screened by the landform.

As such, from wider range viewpoints to the south, north and east, it is not considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on the wider landscape or rural character and Officers concur with the findings of the LVIA in this regard.

From closer range viewpoints however, particularly from the north and west when leaving the village by the network of footpaths within this locality, the proposal will be much more

Page 99 apparent and will result in a much greater change to the rural character and visual amenities of the locality.

Presently, this network of footpaths generally extends beyond the built form of the village into a more open and undeveloped landscape (albeit with some dispersed development to the north at Broughton Manor and Crags Farm) and the area has a rural and open character of fields interspersed with hedges and pockets of trees, with open views across to the Lake District National Park.

Whilst the proposal forms an extension to Broughton Park, presently this estate sits lower in the landscape than this network of footpaths and is separated by the application site. The proposal would introduce a relatively dense form of development, abutting part of this network of footpaths to the north. The majority of the line of properties along the northern boundary whilst detached and having generous gardens sit very closely together, removing any potential to retain views or a sense of openness through the site. Development to the north west corner consists of terraces and semi-detached housing with small gardens and shared car parking (provided to address concerns of car dominance within the scheme). The applicant indicates that this denser form of development to the north west corner closest to the villages is intended to reflect the dense historic pattern of development of the Broughton villages. However, at this point, the site is some distance from the historic village. Overall, the relatively dense and suburban form of the estate will change the character of this area from a rural and open setting to an urban one, within an area where there is a general sense that the built up village form has already dissipated to a more rural setting with some low density development.

The LVIA acknowledges that the local landscape character would change and acknowledges the proposal would result in a Major/Moderate change to the existing view from footpaths at closer distances. However, in considering the landscape impact of the proposal in the wider sense, the LVIA concludes these impacts will not be significant and further considers that the small component of the view which will change as a result of the proposed development from the surrounding footpath network, and the existing built form in close proximity, it is considered that the significance of any adverse visual effects will be slight.

Having regard to the estate form and density of the development within the local landscape context and the proximity of public footpaths and the sensitivity of those using this footpath network particularly, it is considered that the likely adverse effects of the proposal on the local landscape/rural character and the visual amenities of the local area would be adverse and in Officers opinion, are likely to be greater than that concluded within the submitted LVIA. Therefore the proposal raises some concerns with Officers, when considering the village setting and rural character of the immediate locality, particularly when viewed from the network of footpaths to the north.

However, it is acknowledged that the proposal will incorporate a significant level of tree planting along the northern and eastern boundaries of the site, along with additional hedge planting where gaps exist, and the retention of the band of mature trees to the western boundary. Whilst this planting cannot mitigate all adverse landscape and visual effects of the proposal, over time, this planting would soften the built form of the development within the landscape and as viewed by nearby receptors. Any outstanding

Page 100 landscape and visual effects fall to be balanced against the benefits of the proposal.

Other concerns expressed by the public relate to the proposal joining the villages of Great and Little Broughton, adversely impacting on the distinct historic identities and character of these two villages. The proposal would extend north from Broughton Park, within Great Broughton, adjoining relatively low density development at Craggs Farm on the eastern edge of Little Broughton.

The physical form of these two villages has already been conjoined to a large extent by post WW2 housing development that encroached on then agricultural fields that separated the villages historically. This included development at Ghyll Bank, Grange Avenue and later Kirklea. The built form now extends from Great Broughton into Little Broughton with little to physically distinguish the two, other than signage. The proposal will extend from Broughton Park, Great Broughton, to existing development at the eastern edge of Little Broughton. However, the lack of a vehicular through route to the site will limit the physical connectivity. Given the extent to which the physical forms of the two villages are already conjoined it is not considered that the proposal would result in significant harm in this respect.

Design/Appearance

Policies S4 and DM14 of the ALPP1 seek to ensure a high quality of design in new development and incorporate criteria addressing a number of design issues, including responding positively to the character and distinctiveness of an area, integration, connectivity, appropriate scale, and so on.

The proposal provides for a relatively standard housing estate layout, the approach being dictated to some extent by the singular access point from the neighbouring estate and level changes across the site. The layout generally follows a looped round that extends from and returns to the one access point. The proposal provides for a mix of standard house types and sizes, generally with in-curtilage parking to the front or side, integral garaging, front driveways and private rear gardens. The proposal provides for two areas of Public Open Space, one to the north-eastern section of the site intersected by the access road and one adjacent to the site entrance at the south east corner, which will also serve as an area for underground water storage/retention. The proposal incorporates significant tree planting along the northern and eastern boundaries, to provide landscaping buffers to the open countryside beyond. Further tree planting is provided internally to the site along the access roads. Materials include slate roofs and stone facades to prominent or focal units within the site, light buff brick and render to external elevations on other dwellings, with grey tiles and composite doors.

A number of design approaches of the scheme are considered to be positive, such as the landscaping buffers to the north and east, the quality of the internal landscaping scheme and the level of tree planting overall, the choice of light coloured render and buff brick to complement the approach to materials taken at Broughton Park (mainly white render), the use of solid walls and landscaping to boundaries that abut the public domain, the use of timber post and rail fencing to the open countryside elevations. Taken in isolation, the proposal provides for a good standard of housing environment, providing adequate separation distances, external amenity space, in curtilage parking and public open space for future residents, similar in style to recent developments at Clifton, High Harrington,

Page 101 Stainburn and Thursby.

Concerns were raised with the applicant as to the extent to which the proposal responds positively to the character, history and distinctiveness of its location, namely the villages of Great and Little Broughton. As a result, a number of small changes have been made to standard house types to simplify their form to better reflect the simple and unfussy form of housing within the village, but otherwise, the scheme remains largely as originally submitted. The D & A Statement indicates that the housing to the north west corner is at a higher density to maximise congruence with the village core and then the density of the development reduces to east and south to reflect the lower density of development at the periphery of the village.

The north eastern corner has been amended to reduce the degree of car dominance within this section and this is considered to provide some improvement. Notwithstanding this, the approach of having higher density development to the north west corner is somewhat questionable given the distance from the higher density development of the village centre at this point. Some landscaping will soften the edge of the development (partial native hedging and some tree planting), but otherwise, views will remain into this area of relatively dense development, with parking courts and driveways, providing a hard and urban edge within an otherwise rural context. The density of the development overall is somewhat higher than surrounding development given this edge of village location and the implications of this have been discussed in the section above in terms of the resulting visual impact and impact on rural character.

Otherwise, the proposal will largely be seen in the context of the adjacent Broughton Park housing estate. Whilst the degree to which the proposal responds to the character, history and distinctiveness of the area has been questioned, given that it will largely be seen as an extension of the existing housing estate at Broughton Park, then it is considered that the proposal has had sufficient regard to its context and policies S4 and DM14. Further, it is noted that relatively large housing estates of uniform design are common to the villages of Great and Little Broughton, seen at Church Meadows and Kirklea for example.

Impact on residential amenity

A number of policies of the ALPP1 and principally Policy S32 seek to protect residential amenity to an acceptable standard.

The proposal has the potential to impact principally on those residential properties to the southern boundary of the site within Broughton Park, predominantly properties extending from Dryfesdale to Talardy, which includes eight properties.

Amended plans have been provided which reduce the finished floor level of plot 1 (reduced by 1.2m), plot 10 (reduced by 0.9m), plot 11 (reduced by 0.85m) and plot 13 (reduced by 0.7m).

Proposed plot 15 would have a side elevation facing towards properties Loen, Talardy and Eryri and a distance of approx. 20.6m at the closest point (to Loen). Amended plans have been provided to change this house type to a Warwick which would be handed so

Page 102 that the side elevation facing towards properties at Talardy, Loen and Eryri would be blank and would incorporate a part catslide roof, with dormer to front, with the ridgeline set lower than the main part of the house (7.5m to ridge, 5.0m and 2.5m to eaves of catslide roof).

As, the side elevation is blank, the proposed house type would not result in any significant level of overlooking for existing residents at Talardy, Loen and Eryri. The proposed development is to the north and therefore no direct overshadowing would result from the proposal. However, there remains a need to assess any over-dominance or overbearing impact, particularly given the level changes. At the south west corner of the site, the level changes are less significant but a difference in finished floor levels (FFL) between existing properties and plot 15 would be 1.3m (approx. 63.79m to 65.1). The amended plans that reduced floor levels across this area now demonstrate that no retaining walls would be required along this southern boundary, only standard fencing. Therefore, whilst the outlook from these properties will change, the separation distance of 20.6m minimum is considered sufficient to retain an appropriate level of amenity, including as a result of the change in levels, particularly following the change in house type which presents a reduced bulk and mass of building to the southern elevation closest to these existing properties.

Proposed plots 12 to 14 would be dormer bungalows at a distance of approx. 30.9m minimum from Howick House and Sandwood. Only roof lights would be proposed at first floor level and as such, no significant level of overlooking is anticipated for existing residents at Howick House and Sandwood. Proposed plots 12 to 14 would have a FFL approx. 2.5m above Howick House and Sandwood but section drawings show no retaining wall would be required along the southern boundary. As such, whilst the FFL would be higher, the combination of a dormer bungalow and the separation distance are considered sufficient not to result in an overbearing impact.

Proposed plot 11 would be a dormer bungalow approx. 26.3m back to back from Broomknoll, with a difference in FFL of 64.5 at Broomknoll to 67.0 at Plot 11, a difference of approx. 2.5m. Section drawings show no retaining wall would be required along the southern boundary. This house type is an amendment from the originally submitted scheme, which provided for a full two storey property. The change to a dormer bungalow is supported at this plot as officers had expressed concerns regarding the impact of a full two storey dwelling on the amenity of existing neighbours, particularly at Broom Knoll. Whilst the separation distance is not as great as that for adjacent properties, a dormer bungalow, with a separation distance of 26.3m is considered sufficient to retain an appropriate level of amenity for the occupiers of Broom Knoll.

The relationship of proposed plot 1 and Hillrigg demonstrates the most notable change in levels at the boundaries of the site, with the proposed two storey unit at plot 1 having a FFL of 66.65, whereas Hillrigg has a FFL of approx. 64.3, a difference of 2.35m. Hillrigg is a single storey bungalow and proposed plot 1 would be a two storey unit. A separation distance between these two properties would be 17.5m at the closest point (to the garage adjoining Hillrigg) and 21m to the house, extending to 25.4m from the rear habitable room window at Hillrigg direct to the side of the proposed unit. To assist with the acceptability of this residential impact and the visual relationship, the applicant has provided site sections and a visual representation.

Page 103 At the request of officer’s a revised house type has been put forward for Plot 1. This introduces a Taunton house type that would be handed so that rather than a full height side wall presented to the elevation facing Hillrigg (5.0m to eaves, 8.4m to ridge), the gable end of the Taunton would incorporate a part catslide roof, with dormer to front, with the ridgeline set lower than the main part of the house (7.3m to ridge, 5.0m and 2.5m to eaves of catslide roof). This change in house type, along with the separation distance and existing and proposed landscaping, it is considered that proposed plot 1 would not have a significantly harmful impact on the residential amenity of occupiers at Hillrigg.

Dryfesdale is a detached single storey dwelling to the east of the new access. This property will be set lower that the proposal site but would be separated from plots 52 to 54 by a distance exceeding 35m. The intervening area will be a landscaped public open space. Therefore the impacts on the residential amenity of this property are considered to be acceptable.

Subsequent to the change in levels and house types, and the removal of retaining walls along the southern boundary, whilst it is accepted that the proposal will change the outlook for existing residents on Broughton Park, it is considered that the resulting impact of the amended details would not be significantly harmful in terms of overlooking, overshadowing, over-dominance or loss of prospect. In this respect, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in accordance with policies S32 of the ALPP1.

Housing Mix

The proposal is considered to provide an acceptable range of house types and tenure in accordance with policy S7 of the ALPP1.

Affordable Housing Provision

Policy S8 of the ALPP1 requires that for LCS’s, developments of this scale will be required to provide 25% affordable housing provision, with a tenure mix of 75% social rented and 25% intermediate housing.

The proposal provides for 11 social rented houses (at no more than 80% open market rental value), consisting of 6 x 2 bedroom houses and 5 x 3 bedroom houses (terraced houses) and five intermediate houses (at no more than 80% open market value), all 3 bedroom units (1 dormer bungalow, 4 semi-detached houses). This equates to the required 25% provision under policy S8 at a 70/30 split. Whilst this is marginally below the policy requirement, it is considered to be acceptable on the basis that the evidence base provided by the Allerdale Housing Study 2016, suggests that this tenure split is likely to change following the changes proposed under draft ALPP2 to a 60/40 split.

Based on the advice from Housing Services, the provision of three bedroom properties for discounted sale is acceptable as this the need evidenced by the 2016 Housing Study (42% of the need is for 3 bed properties). In relation to the provision for social rent, a mix of three and two bedroom properties reflects Choice Based Lettings dated that these unit types are receiving the highest number of bids and therefore this housing mix is also considered to be acceptable. Housing Services have queried whether a greater provision of bungalows for social rent could be provided on the basis that these receive the equivalent no. of bids/property ratio a three bedroom houses. However, Story Homes

Page 104 have indicated that incorporating further bungalows and the required land take would jeopardise the overall quantum of affordable housing provision and in providing two and three bedroom housing, the highest identified needs are being met. Story Homes re- iterate that three bungalows have been incorporated into the scheme (1 discounted sale and 2 open market). Housing Services has accepted this explanation and overall, it is considered that the social rented mix does meet the identified need and therefore the proposal is considered to be acceptable in relation to Policy S8 in this respect.

Policy S8 also requires that affordable housing be provided in clusters throughout the development so as to be indistinguishable from open market dwellings. The detailed layout indicates that the affordable housing provision will be in two main clusters, one to the north west of the site (five social rent and two open market at plots 29 – 35) and one towards the south west (six social rent and three open market). No affordable housing will be positioned to the central and eastern section of the site. Whilst Officers consider that a greater level of dispersal could have been achieved with smaller clusters, the proposed affordable housing units will share a similar design and materials to open market housing throughout the development. As such, this will assist in the affordable housing provision being less distinguishable from the open market housing and as such, this aspect of policy S8 is considered to be adequately addressed.

Overall, the proposal is considered to be in accordance with policy S8 of the ALPP1.

Trees

Policy DM17 of the Allerdale Local Plan seeks to protect trees where they are important to a community, have a positive impact on the character of the area or have nature conservation value. Proposals that involve felling, will be resisted unless acceptable mitigation or compensation measures can be secured.

The application has been supported by an Arboricultural Report and Impact Assessment, and an Arboricultural Method Statement.

The site is currently used for agricultural purposes and therefore most trees are located to the site boundaries. Subject to appropriate management during the construction phase, the majority of peripheral trees should not be impacted by the proposal and the submitted method statement sets out a range of measures to this effect.

Some removal of trees is proposed, predominantly to the north west corner of the site:

 Partial removal of Group 12, category B, mixed group adjacent to plot 29.  Removal of Groups 7 and 8, category C, mixed group adjacent to plots 30, 31 and 32 and the proposed footpath link.  Removal of T27, category C Hawthorn within proposed plot 38.

The number of trees requiring removal is considered to be small and as most are category C, they have not been assessed as being of the highest quality. The proposal would provide for a significant level of tree planting internally and to the north and eastern boundaries of the site over and above the 2:1 ratio specified by Policy DM17 and therefore the proposal is considered to be acceptable, in accordance with DM17.

Page 105 Ecology

Policy S35 of the ALPP1 seeks to maintain and improve conditions for biodiversity and the protection of sites and species according to their level of importance.

The application has been supported by an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey. The Ecological Survey has subsequently been updated to include mitigation measures for red squirrels.

The findings of the Ecological Survey are summarised as follows:

 No wildlife sites are recorded within the site.  The river Derwent and Tributaries SSI and River Derwent and Bassenthwaite Lake SAC lies within 450m and 320m of the site respectively.  Records of Red squirrels 200m from the site, Bats 500m from the site, Hedgehogs 800m from the site, 1504 records of birds, a number of which are UK BAP species.

The Impact Assessment is summarised as follows:  Subject to control through construction best practice measures, no off site notable habitats would be adversely affected.  Loss of a small area of tall ruderal vegetation is not considered to have a significant effect on local biodiversity.  New planting to north and east will provide a net biodiversity gain.  Impacts on bats limited to lighting during the construction and operational phase. Likely to be minor negative effects on any bats using the hedgerow and trees immediately adjacent the site.  Minor benefit to bats through the additional tree planting and creation of gardens.  Negligible impacts on birds as no habitat on site suitable for nesting birds.  The hedgerows and trees on site boundaries are suitable for use by nesting birds, recommendations regarding this group of species is provided to ensure construction phase impacts on this species are negligible  The construction phase of the development has the potential to have a negative impact on red squirrels without appropriate mitigation. Mitigation is therefore outlined to ensure impacts are minimised. No evidence of red squirrels was noted during the site visit however broadleaved trees on the site boundaries do provide suitable habitat for this species. It is understood the majority of trees will be retained as part of the development and so there will be no impact on habitats for red squirrels.  A number of mitigation measures proposed relating to CEMP, tree root protection, lighting to be directed away from trees and hedgerows.

The applicant’s submission concludes that the proposal would have negligible biodiversity impacts and a net overall gain in ecological value.

Given the current use of the field for agriculture/grazing and the fact that existing trees/hedgerows to the boundaries of the site are to be largely retained, the level of ecological assessment undertaken is considered to be acceptable. Subject to conditions

Page 106 securing the range of mitigation measures put forward within the Ecological Survey, the development is considered to be acceptable in relation to Policy S35. Any proposal that involves the development of open undeveloped land will have some ecological impacts, however, the proposal would not have any significant direct impacts and indirect impacts are considered to be mitigated/compensated to an acceptable level.

Representations have provided information relating to Great Crested Newts being found within the adjacent Broughton Park estate (approx. 2 years previously). However, the submitted Phase 1 Ecological Survey has considered this species and indicates that the site itself lacks the habitats associated with these species, and is poorly connected to suitable off-site habitat. No ponds are present within 500m of the site and no formal records of this species were noted. The standing advice of Natural England in regards to this species, states:

Survey for great crested newts if:

 distribution and historical records suggest newts may be present  there’s a pond within 500 metres of the development, even if it only holds water some of the year  the development site includes refuges (e.g. log piles or rubble), grassland, scrub, woodland or hedgerows

On the basis of this and the ecological survey provided, no species specific survey for Great Crested Newts is considered to be necessary. The submitted report does provide for mitigation measures, should any protected species be found during the construction phase.

Water Quality/Protection of River Derwent SAC and SSSI

At the request of Natural England, more detailed drainage plans and a Construction Environmental Management Plan has been provided to address mitigation for possible pollution to the designated River Derwent. Following re-consultation on the additional information (Drainage Strategy and CEMP), Natural England has confirmed that they are satisfied that their previous concerns have been addressed. Subject to appropriate conditions securing the drainage strategy and CEMP, it is considered unlikely that the proposal would have any significant adverse effects on water quality and particularly the designated river Derwent.

Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage

Policy S29 of the ALPP1 directs development away from areas at risk from flooding, and seeks to ensure flood risk is not increased elsewhere, requiring full consideration of the surface water drainage hierarchy.

The site lies within Flood Zone 1, which is land at the lowest probability to flooding. The River Derwent lies 375m to the south, 46m below site level.

The proposal indicates that foul drainage will connect to the main sewer and United Utilities has raised no objection to this.

Page 107 The application has been accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy, which has been amended as of the 30th March 2017 and an Executive Summary provided.

The site currently has no positive drainage, therefore greenfield run-off rates apply. The submission indicates that soakaways are considered unlikely to be suitable due to sloping nature of site and because local trial pits suggest that the area in underlain with clay.

The drainage strategy for the proposal involves a gravity piped sewer system of 150- 450mm diameter connecting to a series of large diameter concrete pipes Located within the south east POS area) with a capacity to cater for a volume of water of 583 cubic meters for a peak storm event of 1 in 100 + 40% climate change. The storage facility would be fitted with a hydro brake fitted to control surface water discharge from site to 29.4 litres/second so as to mimic the greenfield run-off rate. From the hydro brake flow control manhole, a 300mm surface water sewer is proposed through the existing housing development onto Crags Road and into an existing part culvert/part dry ditch which ultimately discharges to the River Derwent.

The submitted documents indicate that attenuated flows to the greenfield run-off would not increase flood risk up to a 1 in 100 year storm event plus climate change as the attenuated system would be designed to restrict off site flows up to this event.

Representations have been received relating to existing localised flooding issues. However, in providing for attenuation of a 1 in 100 year event plus 40% allowance for climate change, the proposal is considered to take an appropriate and reasonable approach to addressing flood risk and no concerns/objections have been raised by the Environment Agency or the Local Lead Flood Authority. As such, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in relation to policy S29 of the ALPP1.

Archaeology

Policy S27 of the ALPP1 seeks to protect heritage assets to a level appropriate to their significance. The applicant has provided a Geophysical Survey report which included a desk top study and geomagnetic survey of the site (use of hand‐held gradiometers, which measure variations in the vertical component of the earth’s magnetic field. These variations can be due to the presence of subsurface archaeological features).

The report concludes that, ‘a number of the geophysical anomalies detected at the site are believed to be agricultural in origin, including evidence for former ridge and furrow cultivation, and possible land drains. A curvilinear anomaly on the west side of the site may be an associated soil‐filled ditch or field boundary, and matches one shown on the map of the Township of Little Broughton of 1852. The fact that this is an unusual shape, and quite close to Broughton Grange, may indicate early origins. No other anomalies were detected that are of likely archaeological origin’.

Following representations relating to the potential importance of a standing stone on site, which the application details indicate would be relocated to the north eastern area of public open space, the applicant’s archaeologist has confirmed:

Page 108  The idea that the stone at Little Broughton is potentially a prehistoric standing stone raises a number of concerns  There is no tradition of a prehistoric site in the field in question  The site is not on the historic environment record.  None of the 18th and 19th century antiquarians refer to a prehistoric site in this field  It is not highlighted on any historic mapping I have reviewed  No flint scatters or stray finds of any kind in the immediate vicinity of the stone that could indicate a hot spot of prehistoric activity  I have looked at the standing stone in question and I am happy to view it as a rubbing post for cattle. Traditionally large stones sometimes of unusual shape are put in fields and are not an uncommon feature in England and Scotland and are still being erected on modern working dairy farms. I cannot tell you when the stone was erected, but that in my professional opinion would state that the standing stone in question is unlikely to represent an in situ prehistoric monument.

Both Heritage England and the County Council Archaeologist have been consulted on the application. The County Archaeologist has confirmed that from the available evidence, there is a low likelihood of significant archaeological assets being disturbed by the construction of the proposed development. Similarly that there is a lack of any evidence to support the view that the standing stone is of archaeological interest and as such, no objections are raised. Historic England has confirmed that they are not a statutory consultee for this proposal.

Based on the information available, the heritage implications of the proposal are considered to be acceptable, including the re-location of the standing stone presently on site, in accordance with Policy S27 of the Allerdale Local Plan.

Ground Investigation

The application has been supported by a Geo-environmental Appraisal that includes both desk based assessment and site investigation. The only recommendations relate to foundation design for the proposed housing. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer is satisfied with the findings of this report and does not recommend conditions requiring any further works. As such, the ground conditions for the proposal are considered to be acceptable, in accordance with relevant policies of the ALPP1 and the advice contained within the NPPF.

Education Provision

Cumbria County Council (CCC) has indicated that using a dwelling led model for 6 No. 2 bedroomed, 22 No. 3 bedroomed and 36 No. 4+ bedroomed dwellings, the 64 houses will produce a pupil yield of 27 children (16 primary and 11 secondary). The site would be in the catchment areas of Broughton Academy (0.8 miles) and Cockermouth School (3.7 miles); other nearby schools are St Bridget’s CE School at Brigham (1.3 miles) and Bridekirk/Dovenby CE School (2.2 miles). Broughton Academy is both the catchment and the closest primary school. Cockermouth School is both the catchment and the closest secondary school.

Page 109 The information available to CCC is that there is only space for 5 of the required 16 places and so there are insufficient places in Broughton Academy to accommodate the theoretical pupil yield from the development. The next nearest school is St Bridget's CE at Brigham, which also has insufficient places for all the children. There are insufficient spaces in the next nearest school at Bridekirk/Dovenby CE which is situated a distance of 2.2 miles from the development. For this development to be sustainable, CCC indicate that it will be necessary for additional school places to be accommodated at Broughton Academy. The only way to do this is to build an additional classroom. The County Council has made an initial calculation of a new class room to accommodate the additional pupils to be approximately £223,791. The County Council does not have the capital to deliver this improvement and is therefore requesting that the developer enables delivery of the additional classroom. Without this, CCC indicates that it would not be possible to consider this development to be sustainable.

The information available to CCC is that Cockermouth School has insufficient places to accommodate the pupil yield of 11 places. The next nearest secondary is Netherhall School which is 5.4 miles, and Workington Academy at 5.6 miles from the development, both of these has sufficient places. All these schools are situated more than 3 miles by road from the development.

Using the DfE multiplier an education contribution of £200,068 (£18,188 x 11) would be sought for Cockermouth School, however, the priority for the County Council is the primary school contribution as there is a deliverable solution identified at the school. Whilst there is a need for a secondary contribution, the County Council is willing to consider some flexibility in relation to the requested secondary contribution in order to ensure that the identified solution is fully delivered in relation to primary provision. Instead, it is anticipated that there will be sufficient spaces for the 10 secondary aged children at Netherhall School. This is over the 3 mile statutory walking distance from the development, transport would therefore be required. We have priced based on 1 x 9-20 seat vehicle @ £75 per day (the mid-point of the cost procurement matrix). For secondary school transport, a five year contribution is required. Based on a 190 day school year, the calculation is therefore £71,250.

The agent has confirmed that they would be willing to make the education contribution sought by Cumbria County Council in respect to providing a new classroom at Broughton Academy and the transport contribution to Netherhall Secondary School.

As the requirements of the County Council have been agreed, then subject to the signing of a legal agreement to this effect, the proposal is considered to deliver the educational services necessary to make the development acceptable, in accordance with Policy S21 of the ALPP1.

Broughton Academy has indicated that given the timescales involved in commissioning and building out a new classroom, that any education contribution should be made available up front. Initial views are that this approach does not seem unreasonable but agreement on timescales would be secured through any subsequent s106 agreement, should Members support the proposal.

Page 110 Open Space Provision

Policy S25 of the ALPP1 requires that new residential development makes provision for well-designed public open space, either through on site provision of new open space or by financial contribution to enhance or create off site provision of public open space. The Council has a draft Supplementary Planning Document that sets out requirements for open space provision, differentiating between amenity greenspace and provision for children and young people. For residential developments of over 60 units, the draft SPD indicates that provision for both should be on site.

For amenity greenspace, the draft SPD specifies 15sqm per dwelling, equating to a requirement here of 960sqm. There are two main usable areas of amenity greenspace on site, one to the north east section of the site and one to the south east section of the site. In total, these two areas provide for approx. 1400sqm of amenity greenspace, meeting the requirements of the draft SPD.

For the provision for children and young people, the application proposes a financial contribution to upgrade existing facilities, with the play area at Kirklea having been identified as the closest facility at approx. 425m from the site. Whilst the draft SPD indicates that for proposals over 60 dwellings, provision for children and young people should be on site, this document remains in draft and adopted Policy S25 allows for provision either on or off site. As such, the upgrading of existing facilities off site at a distance of 422m from the proposal is considered to be reasonable in terms of accessibility along the proposed upgraded Winder Lonning. The contribution proposed of £17,454 would allow for the £12,454 required by the calculation within the draft SPD, with an additional £5000 proposed towards maintenance of those additional facilities.

Based on the above, the requirements of Policy S25 are considered to be met.

Loss of Agricultural Land

Policy S36 of the ALPP1 seeks to use poorer land in preference to the best and most versatile land as defined by classes 1, 2 and 3a of the Agricultural Land Classification. The Natural England regional maps indicate that the site subject of the application is Grade 3 Agricultural Land, which is of moderate to good quality. The majority of land within the Borough outside of the National Park shares this classification. Available records online do not break down the classification further to Grades (a) and (b) for this site. The site is currently used for grazing rather than crops.

The proposal will not result in the loss of Grade 1 or 2 agricultural land which is very good to excellent. Whilst the grading of the site between Class a and b is not available, given the availability of agricultural land within the locality, and that Great and Little Broughton has been identified for a some growth likely to result in the loss of greenfield land, then the proposal is considered to be acceptable in relation to policy S36.

Benefits of the Proposal

The provision of 64 additional dwellings at Broughton (Great and Little Broughton villages) would provide for additional housing at a scale that the draft ALPP2 considers reasonable for this Local Service Centre and would contribute particularly to one of the

Page 111 key objectives of the NPPF to boost significantly the supply of housing in order to contribute to the economic and particularly the social dimension of sustainable development – supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations. Similarly, the proposal would contribute to strategic objective SO2c of the ALPP2, which seeks to ensure a deliverable supply of housing land that meets the needs of the community and local economy.

The proposal would provide for 16 additional affordable houses for social rent and discounted sale, increasing access to affordable housing, in accordance with strategic objective SO2d of the ALPP1 and the Council Plans priority of tackling inequality through the provision of more affordable housing.

The proposed education contribution would allow for the construction of an additional classroom at the adjacent Broughton Academy.

The proposed contribution to upgrade existing play provision at Kirklea would benefit the community as a whole.

Other Issues:

None

Local Financial Considerations

Having regard to S70 (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act, the proposal would have financial implications relating to New Homes Bonus, Council Tax Revenue and the Section 106 payments outlined above. It is considered that whilst this is a material planning consideration it has not been given significant weight in assessing the planning merits of the application.

Conclusion

The villages of Great and Little Broughton combined are designated as a Local Service Centre within the Allerdale Local Plan Part 1 (ALPP1) and whilst the proposal lies outside the existing settlement boundary, it is acknowledged that these boundaries are out of date and pending review. As the proposal adjoins the existing settlement boundary to the south, it is considered that the proposal is sufficiently well related to the adjoining settlement.

As a larger village within the Borough, with a range of facilities, Broughton (Great and Little Broughton) is identified as a Local Service Centre (LSC) in the ALPP1. Policy S3 states that in combination, LSC’s will provide up to 20% of the 5,471 net additional dwellings up to 2029, equating to 1094 net additional dwellings. Policy S5 requires that the scale of new development should be commensurate to the size of the settlement and reflect its position within the hierarchy. It also requires the prioritising and effective re-use of previously developed land. The proposal is for 64 residential units. This scale of

Page 112 development is considered to be appropriate to the size of the settlement and the role it has been allocated as a Local Service Centre within the adopted ALPP1.

Whilst representations have been received raising a number of highways related concerns, the advice from both the Highways Authority and Cumbria County Council and Highways England is that the highways implications would not be severe, the test applied by the NPPF.

The proposal is not considered to have significant landscape and visual impacts from within the wider area, but concerns have been expressed as to the impact of development on the rural character of the locality, particularly when viewed from the footpath network to the north and west. This rural character and open views would be altered significantly given the layout and density of the development, and that views through the site would be limited. However, it is accepted that this would be a localised impact, and that mitigation would be provided to some extent by the proposed landscaping buffers that would help to soften the physical form of the development.

A sufficient level of supporting information is considered to have been provided to address ecological and heritage issues, flood risk and drainage, arboricultural implications, ground conditions and so forth. No statutory consultees have raised objection to the proposal, subject to conditions.

The proposal will provide for additional infrastructure necessary to make the development acceptable (education contributions and play provision). The benefits of the scheme include the provision of 16 affordable houses and a re- alignment of the Little Brow/Harris Brow/Papcastle Road junction to improve visibility.

Following revisions to the proposal, the impact on the residential amenity of neighbours is considered to be acceptable.

On balance, it is recommended that the proposal be approved subject to the attached conditions and the signing of the s106 agreement. Should the s106 agreement not be satisfactorily completed in a timely manner, then it is requested that the powers to refuse the proposal be delegated to the Head of Service.

Page 113 Annex 1

Conditions/Reasons

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: Detail Layout drawing no. SL167.90.9.DL rev E Elevations Treatment drawing no. SL167.90.9.ETL rev b Hard Surfaces Treatment drawing no.SL167.90.9.HST rev A Management Layout drawing no. SL167.90.9.ML rev A Parking Layout drawing no. SL167.90.9.PL rev b Development plot schedule rev date 27.03.2017 Site Sections drawing number SL167.90.9.SS rev C Materials schedule amendment received 30th March 2017 Proposed Engineering Improvement Site Layout, Sheet 1of 2 drawing no. SH/BP- C/60-01A Proposed Engineering Improvement Site Layout, Sheet 2 of 2 drawing no. SH/BP- C/60-02A Proposed Engineering Detailed Site Layout, Sheet 1 of 2 drawing no. SHIBP-C/ 10- 01C Proposed Engineering Detailed Site Layout,Sheet 2 of 2 - drawing no.SH/BP- C/10- 02C Proposed Private Drainage Detailed Layout, Sheet 1of 4 -drawing no. SH/.BP- C/11 -01B Proposed Private Drainage Detailed Layout, Sheet 2 of 4 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/11- 02C Proposed Private Drainage Detailed Layout, Sheet 3 of 4 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/11-03B Proposed Private Drainage Detailed Layout Sheet 4 of 4 -drawing no. SH/BP- C/11- 04B Proposed External Works Detailed Layout, Sheet 1 of 4 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/12- 01B Proposed External Works Detailed Layout, Sheet 2 of 4 -drawing no. SH/8P- C/12-02C Proposed External Works Detailed Layout, Sheet 3 of 4 -drawing no. SH/BP- C/12-03B Proposed External Works Detailed Layout, Sheet 4 of 4 -drawing no. SH/BP- C/12-04B Proposed Longitudinal Sections -drawing no. SH/BP-C/1-01 B Proposed Foul Water Manhole Schedules Sheet 1of 2 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/16- 01B Proposed Foul Water Manhole Schedules Sheet 2 of 2 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/16- 02B Proposed Surface Water Manhole Schedules Sheet 1of 3 -drawing no. SH/BP- C/16-03B

Page 114 Proposed Surface Water Manhole Schedules Sheet 2 of 3 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/16-04B Proposed Manhole Setting Out Details Sheet 1 of 3 - drawing no. SH/BP-C/18- 01B Proposed Manhole Setting Out Details Sheet 2 of 3 - drawing no. SH/BP-C/18- 02A Proposed Manhole Setting Out Details Sheet 3 of 3 - drawing no. SH/BP-C/18- 03A Proposed Road Setting Out Details - drawing no.SH/BP-C/19-018 Proposed Plot Setting Out Details Sheet 1 of 2 - drawing no. SH/BP-C/20-01 B Proposed Plot Setting Out Details Sheet 2 of 2 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/20-028 Proposed Engineering Foundation Zoning Plan - drawing no. SH/BP-C/40-01C Proposed Foundation Schedule - drawing no.SH/BP-C/40-02C Hastings v3, HAS-PLP1,HAS-PLE1/2A, HAS-PLE1/22A, Warwick v4, WAR-PLP1 , WAR-PLE1/1, WAR-PLE1/2, WAR-PLE1/4 Banbury v3, BAN-PLP1, BAN-PLE1/2 Taunton v4 , TAU-SCHA, TAU-PLP1, TAU-PLE1/6 Mayfair v3, MAY-PLP1,MAY-PLE1/9 Boston v4, BOS-PLP1A, BOS-PLE1/19, BOS-PLE1/20 Wellington v3, WEL-PLP1, WEL-PLE1/48, WEL-PLE1/5A Salisbury v3, SAL-PLP1,SAL-PLE1/12,SAL-PLE1/13 York v3, YOR-PLP1, YOR-PLE1/5 Hawthorn, HAW-PLP2A, HAW-PLE2/9 Rowan, ROW-PLP1 , ROW-PLP3, ROW-PLE1/8A, ROW-PLE3/4 Landscape General Arrangement plan, drawing no. 11189_L01_P03 Soft Landscape Area 1, drawing no. 11189_L04_P03 Soft Landscape Area 2, drawing no. 11189_L05_P03 Hard Landscape plan -drawing no. 11189_L02_P03 Boundary Treatments and Furniture Plan - drawing no. 11189_L03_ P03 Boundary Details - BD-03A, BD-15, BD-18, BD-32, BD-49 New/Revised Comparative offset Distances Drawing SL167.90.9.COD Warwick v4, WAR-PLP1 Plot 15 specific Taunton v4 TAU PLP1-11 Plot 1 specific Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non-material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

3. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised within the scheme and shown on the landscaping plans approved under condition 2 shall be carried out in the first planting season following completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with other similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to enhance the appearance of the development and minimise the impact of the development in the locality, in compliance with Policy DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

4. A landscaping management plan including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape

Page 115 areas including public open space and landscaped buffers shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of any dwellinghouse hereby approved. The development shall thereafter be maintained at all times in accordance with the approved management plan. Reason: To ensure the long term maintenance and management of public open space and landscaped buffers within the residential estate.

5. No hedgerows or tree planting to the northern and eastern boundaries of the site as shown as 'landscape buffers' on the Detail Layout drawing SL167.90.9.DL Rev E and as shown in detail on Drawings Soft Landscape Area 1 11189_L04 P03 and Drawings Soft Landscape Area 2 11189_L05 P03, shall be removed unless alternative planting has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to enhance the appearance of the development and minimise the impact of the development in the locality, in compliance with Policy DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

6. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or in any Statutory Instrument revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the 1.2m high timber post and rail fence to the northern and eastern boundaries of the site shall be retained and shall not be replaced or altered, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority upon an application submitted to it. Reason: The Local Planning Authority wishes to retain control over any proposed alterations to these boundaries in the interests of the appearance of the site and the amenities of the locality/open countryside location.

7. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations and mitigation measures contained within the submitted Arboricultural Report and Arboricultural Method Statement Rev 2 prepared by Urban Green and dated November 2016, updated 30th March 2017. Reason: To ensure that existing trees and hedgerows are protected to an appropriate standard during the construction phase of the development in accordance with policy DM17 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

8. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations and mitigation measures contained within the ecological measures of the submitted Ecological Assessment revision 5 prepared by Urban Green and dated June 2016, updated 30th March 2017. Reason: To minimise the impacts of the development on the ecological interests of the site in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework, and Policy S35 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

9. The construction phase of the development (excluding working hours) shall be undertaken in accordance with the submitted Construction and Environmental Management Plan prepared by Story Homes and dated March 2017. The hours of operation for construction shall solely be undertaken

Page 116 between 8am -6m Mon –Friday, 8am -1pm saturays and no working on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties during the construction works of the development hereby approved, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014, and in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy S22 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014, and to prevent pollution of the natural environment, in accordance with Policies S32 and S35 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

10. No development shall commence until a Materials Management Plan as recommended within the submitted Geoenvironmental Appraisal (ID GeoEnvironmental Consulting Engineers, Report Number: 4548-G-R002, Dated September 2016) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction phase of the development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To minimise any risk during or post construction works arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

11. No development shall commence until a scheme for construction phase and operational phase lighting has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken/completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To minimise the impacts of the development on the ecological interests of the site and surroundings in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework, and Policy S35 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

12. No dwellinghouses hereby approved shall be occupied until the footpath link to Winder Lonning has been provided from the site and the footpath itself has been upgraded to a specification that has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to any dwelling being constructed above plinth level (including details of lighting positions and lighting levels to the footpath). The footpath shall be upgraded from the point where it adjoins the site for its full length to Meeting House Lane unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a safe access and egress from the site to Great and Little Broughton villages for pedestrians, in accordance with policy S22 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

13. No development shall commence until the junction improvement works at Little Brow/Harris Brow/Papcastle Road junction as set out in the Transport Statement Addendum dated January 2107 prepared by S·A·J Transport Consultants have been completed and in this respect further details, including longitudinal/cross sections, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before work commences on site. These details shall be in accordance with the standards laid down in the Cumbria Design Guide.

Page 117 Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of construction in the interests of highway safety.

14. The carriageway, footways and footpaths shall be designed, drained and lit to a standard suitable for adoption and in this respect further details, including longitudinal/cross sections, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval before any part of the development hereby permitted is commenced. No work shall be commenced until a full specification has been approved. These details shall be in accordance with the standards laid down in the current Cumbria Design Guide. Any works so approved shall be constructed before the development is fully occupied. Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of construction within the approved development in the interests of highway safety.

15. No dwelling shall be occupied until the estate road, including footways and cycleways and private road where necessary to serve that dwelling, has been constructed in all respects to base course level and street lighting where it is to form part of the estate road has been provided and brought into full operational use. Reason: In the interests of highway safety of the occupiers of residential units hereby approved.

16. Before any development takes place, a plan shall be submitted for the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority reserving adequate land for the parking of vehicles engaged in the construction operations associated with the development hereby approved, and that land, including vehicular access thereto, shall be used for or be kept available for these purposes at all times until the completion of the construction works. Reason: The carrying out of this development without the provision of these facilities during the construction work is likely to lead to inconvenience and danger to road users.

17. The use of any dwellinghouse hereby approved shall not commence until the access and parking requirements for that dwellinghouse have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. Any such access and or parking provision as shown on Parking layout Plan SL167.90.9.PL shall be retained and be capable of use when the development is completed and shall not be removed or altered without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that proper access and parking provision is made and retained for use in relation to the development.

18. A management plan, including management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all private roads, parking courts and parking bays that will not form part of the adopted highway, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of any dwellinghouse hereby approved. The development shall thereafter be maintained at all times in accordance with the approved management plan. Reason: To ensure the long term maintenance and management of unadopted roads and parking areas within the residential estate.

Page 118 19. Foul drainage from the development shall be connected to the public sewer.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory means of foul drainage and to minimise the risk of water pollution to the local water environment, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

20. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local planning authority, the surface water drainage for the development hereby approved, shall be carried out in accordance with principles set out in the Drainage Strategy Executive Summary dated 28th March 2017 prepared by JLES, received on the 30th March 2017, the Stage 1 Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy Statement Rev 2, by AVIE Consulting Ltd, received on the 30th March 2017, and the drainage/engineering drawings as approved under condition 2. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall be operational before occupation of the development. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory means of surface water drainage and minimise the risk of flooding from the development in comparison to an assessment of its existing undeveloped state, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies S29 and S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

21. Prior to occupation of the development a sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan shall include as a minimum: a. Arrangements for adoption by an appropriate public body or statutory undertaker, or, management and maintenance by a resident's management company; and b. Arrangements for inspection and ongoing maintenance of all elements of the sustainable drainage system to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime. The development shall subsequently be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved plan. Reason: To ensure that management arrangements are in place for the sustainable drainage system in order to manage the risk of flooding and pollution during the lifetime of the development.

22. An annual report reviewing the effectiveness of the Travel Plan up to a period of 5 years and including any necessary amendments or measures shall be prepared by the developer/occupier and submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. Reason: To aid in the delivery of sustainable transport objectives.

Page 119 Proactive Statement

Application Approved Following Revisions

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying planning policies, constraints, stakeholder representations and matters of concern within the application (as originally submitted) and where appropriate negotiating, with the Applicant, acceptable amendments and solutions to the proposal to address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal, in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant:

CCC - The applicant should be made aware that the highways and drainage works will need the approval from the LHA , be that a sec 278 agreement for the works external to the site and subsequent sec 38 for the adoption of the internal roads.

UU - Please note that these properties will be at the highest part of the local Network and low pressure fittings / boilers should be considered.

UU - There is an easement on an adjacent piece of land and I would therefore advise that the developer adheres to the standard conditions for works adjacent to pipeline. It is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the exact relationship between any United Utilities' assets and the proposed development. United Utilities offers a fully supported mapping service and we recommend the applicant contact our Property Searches Team on 03707 510101 to obtain maps of the site.

Due to the public sewer transfer, not all sewers are currently shown on the statutory sewer records, if a sewer is discovered during construction; please contact a Building Control Body to discuss the matter further.

Police Liaison Officer – Your attention is drawn to the recommendations of the Police Liaison officer relating to crime prevention measures, dated 23/12/2016.

Electricity North West – Your attention is drawn to the advice contained within the ENW response dated 29th December 2016 regarding possible impacts on ENW assets.

CCC – If any public right of way is to be temporarily obstructed, a formal closure will be required, please contact [email protected] . There is a 14 week lead in time for this process.

Page 120 Annex 2

Detail Layout drawing no. SL167.90.9.DL rev E Elevations Treatment drawing no. SL167.90.9.ETL rev b Hard Surfaces Treatment drawing no.SL167.90.9.HST rev A Management Layout drawing no. SL167.90.9.ML rev A Parking Layout drawing no. SL167.90.9.PL rev b Development plot schedule rev date 27.03.2017 Site Sections drawing number SL167.90.9.SS rev C Materials schedule amendment received 30th March 2017 Proposed Engineering Improvement Site Layout, Sheet 1of 2 drawing no. SH/BP- C/60-01A Proposed Engineering Improvement Site Layout, Sheet 2 of 2 drawing no. SH/BP- C/60-02A Proposed Engineering Detailed Site Layout, Sheet 1 of 2 drawing no. SHIBP-C/ 10- 01C Proposed Engineering Detailed Site Layout,Sheet 2 of 2 - drawing no.SH/BP- C/10- 02C Proposed Private Drainage Detailed Layout, Sheet 1of 4 -drawing no. SH/.BP- C/11 -01B Proposed Private Drainage Detailed Layout, Sheet 2 of 4 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/11- 02C Proposed Private Drainage Detailed Layout, Sheet 3 of 4 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/11-03B Proposed Private Drainage Detailed Layout Sheet 4 of 4 -drawing no. SH/BP- C/11- 04B Proposed External Works Detailed Layout, Sheet 1 of 4 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/12- 01B Proposed External Works Detailed Layout, Sheet 2 of 4 -drawing no. SH/8P- C/12-02C Proposed External Works Detailed Layout, Sheet 3 of 4 -drawing no. SH/BP- C/12-03B Proposed External Works Detailed Layout, Sheet 4 of 4 -drawing no. SH/BP- C/12-04B Proposed Longitudinal Sections -drawing no. SH/BP-C/1-01 B Proposed Foul Water Manhole Schedules Sheet 1of 2 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/16- 01B Proposed Foul Water Manhole Schedules Sheet 2 of 2 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/16- 02B Proposed Surface Water Manhole Schedules Sheet 1of 3 -drawing no. SH/BP- C/16-03B Proposed Surface Water Manhole Schedules Sheet 2 of 3 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/16-04B Proposed Manhole Setting Out Details Sheet 1 of 3 - drawing no. SH/BP-C/18- 01B Proposed Manhole Setting Out Details Sheet 2 of 3 - drawing no. SH/BP-C/18- 02A Proposed Manhole Setting Out Details Sheet 3 of 3 - drawing no. SH/BP-C/18- 03A Proposed Road Setting Out Details - drawing no.SH/BP-C/19-018

Page 121 Proposed Plot Setting Out Details Sheet 1 of 2 - drawing no. SH/BP-C/20-01 B Proposed Plot Setting Out Details Sheet 2 of 2 - drawing no. SH/BP- C/20-028 Proposed Engineering Foundation Zoning Plan - drawing no. SH/BP-C/40-01C Proposed Foundation Schedule - drawing no.SH/BP-C/40-02C Hastings v3, HAS-PLP1,HAS-PLE1/2A, HAS-PLE1/22A, Warwick v4, WAR-PLP1 , WAR-PLE1/1, WAR-PLE1/2, WAR-PLE1/4 Banbury v3, BAN-PLP1, BAN-PLE1/2 Taunton v4 , TAU-SCHA, TAU-PLP1, TAU-PLE1/6 Mayfair v3, MAY-PLP1,MAY-PLE1/9 Boston v4, BOS-PLP1A, BOS-PLE1/19, BOS-PLE1/20 Wellington v3, WEL-PLP1, WEL-PLE1/48, WEL-PLE1/5A Salisbury v3, SAL-PLP1,SAL-PLE1/12,SAL-PLE1/13 York v3, YOR-PLP1, YOR-PLE1/5 Hawthorn, HAW-PLP2A, HAW-PLE2/9 Rowan, ROW-PLP1 , ROW-PLP3, ROW-PLE1/8A, ROW-PLE3/4 Landscape General Arrangement plan, drawing no. 11189_L01_P03 Soft Landscape Area 1, drawing no. 11189_L04_P03 Soft Landscape Area 2, drawing no. 11189_L05_P03 Hard Landscape plan -drawing no. 11189_L02_P03 Boundary Treatments and Furniture Plan - drawing no. 11189_L03_ P03 Boundary Details - BD-03A, BD-15, BD-18, BD-32, BD-49 New/Revised Comparative offset Distances Drawing SL167.90.9.COD Warwick v4, WAR-PLP1 Plot 15 specific Taunton v4 TAU PLP1-11 Plot 1 specifi

Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Agenda Item 6

Allerdale Borough Council Planning Application CON8/2011/0227

Proposed Application for approval of details reserved by conditions 3, 6 and Development: 16 to planning approval 2/2011/0227 including details relating to the play equipment and siting of the play area. Location: Land at Moss Bay Road Workington Applicant: Mr Chris Gowlett

Recommendation: APPROVE

Summary/Key Issues

Issue Conclusion

Revised Location The proposed revised position of the play area is considered a of Play Area suitable location for the play equipment. Revised Play The revised play equipment is an improvement to that approved Equipment under CON1/2011/0227 and is accepted as suitable for the site.

The application seeks approval of details reserved by conditions 3, 6 and 16 of planning approval 2/2011/0227.

The planning approval under 2/2011/0227 granted permission for 92 dwellings on land at Moss Bay Road, Workington.

Conditions 3 and 16 require the submission of details of a landscaping scheme for the site. Condition 6 requires the submission of details of the play equipment for the site.

Information relating to the approval of conditions 3, 6 and 16 of planning approval 2/2011/0227 has already been previously submitted under CON1/2011/0227, which were approved on 28/03/12.

Since then, the layout of the site has been amended under 2/2014/0552 which now means the former approved details agreed under CON1/2011/0227 are constrained and may be difficult to be implemented.

An earlier discharge of condition application solely to resolve Condition 6 was withdrawn following officers concerns on the type of play equipment proposed. A later application to vary the condition to enable an alternative off site contribution was also withdrawn.

Consequently the applicant has now submitted a more comprehensive scheme with details of a revised play area position and play area equipment, in line with the amended layout. Conditions 3, 6 and 16 are affected by the revised proposals and are therefore

Page 125 subject to the current application.

Representations Received

Town Council – A discussion was held on the various spaces on the site and the suitability of each for play equipment. The play area detailed in the application provides limited access for users and poses health and safety issues. On this basis councillors recommend refusal and suggest access to the play area be improved, including additional gates. It was noted that the development phases of the site had reduced the capacity for play provisions on the site and it was suggested that long term requirements for a development be reinforced throughout the application process.

Highways – Originally raised objections to the proposal due to the access gate opening out onto the highway. No objections following submission of an amended layout with revised access position.

Thirty one letters of objection have been received raising the following points:  There is no path for parents to safely access the play area.  The access road is used for overspill visitors’ car parking which is a health and safety issue as cars enter and exit this area at speed.  Questions why the play area can’t be positioned in the original position.  The bin location next to the play area is unhygienic.  Residents purchased their properties based on the location of the play area.  The location would put children in danger from people using the footpath adjacent and railway beyond.  The proposed access is on residents deeds upon which they are currently seeking legal advice.  The proposal does not comply with Allerdale Local Plans, Allerdale Play Strategy, Allerdale Open Spaces Strategy or minimum national children’s playing space standards.  The two pieces of play equipment proposed are inadequate and would not constitute a play park.  The play area does not meet the needs of all the children on the estate and would not be suitable for anyone older than a toddler.  The play area is too small.  The access arrangements being straight onto a road are unsafe.  There should be two entrances/exits for safety reason.  The proposal should be made to meet disability access requirements and the 1995 disability Discrimination Act.

Two letters of support have been received with the following points:  Although small, it would be something for young children.  The proposed location is the best available on the site but the gate should be moved.  The area is currently used for play with no recorded accidents.  The bin area adjacent is not used for bins despite the markings suggesting this is its use.  The adjacent car park is used by residents and is generally quiet.

Page 126  There is street lighting in place enabling the proposed play area to be well lit and reduce/prevent anti-social behaviour when dark.  The proposed site for the play area would have the least impact on neighbouring dwellings.  Access is available to the site via public routes rather than private.  The proposed play equipment is an improvement to what was stipulated on previous plans.

Background

The residential estate at this site was approved with an on–site play area in accordance with the councils former adopted Local plan policies. Under these policy criteria the developer was to normally provide an area with five pieces of play equipment which was considered to be reasonable and proportional to the scale of the residential development. The details and delivery of these items were secured under planning conditions. The estate was modified under additional housing applications during the course of its construction but retained the principle of securing a play area as part of the overall development.

The siting of the play area had been approved under the former approval of the landscaping condition. An application to discharge play equipment on the site was withdrawn.

The developer subsequently requested consideration of an application for alternative off site financial contribution to enhance an existing playground area in the locality with more play equipment. Officers rejected this option as the other play areas in the locality were a significant distance from the site and also involved crossing a busy highway. Other off site alternatives was dismissed on access grounds or distance. This application was also withdrawn.

In the absence of any play area or equipment there is currently a breach of planning control relating to these works.

It is understood that a local meeting was undertaken to discuss this matter. After revisiting all options (both on and off site) including the development of the neighbouring site the applicant submitted this revised application to endeavour to resolve this issue..

Each aspect of the separate conditions can be examined separately.

Play Area Location (conditions 3 and 16)

Under previous application CON1/2011/0227, the play area was to be located to the north of the site, adjacent to 54 Railbank Drive on the estate. Alterations to the site layout have resulted in challenges as to whether this earlier approved area can continue to be readily accessed by the public. The applicant has now revised the location of the play area to be positioned to an alternative triangular grassed area north west of the site, adjacent to the site boundary. The play area would be accessible via Railbank Drive.

The location plan provided with the application highlights other areas of public open

Page 127 space examined within the estate. Of those identified (outside the area subject to the current application), each has constraints in terms of the feasibility of housing play equipment. They are either situated on sloping land which does not readily lend the sites to creating usable play areas, have public access issues or are too small to accommodate any play equipment.

The proposed site, albeit small in size is a level area with lighting and space to accommodate the proposed equipment. Access is available via the highway. The proposed location would not create any significant amenity issues for neighbouring dwellings. With this in mind, of those sites available within the site, the site proposed for the play area and equipment within this application is considered a suitable location. Indeed the site is overlooked by existing dwellings which is an aspect encouraged by secure by design to provide safe environments for children. Although adjacent to a parking court it is to be enclosed by railings.

Objections have been received from the Town Council and residents relating to the revised location of the play area. Objectors refer to the poor position of the proposed play area, being located in an area adjacent to an area marked for bins and used as a vehicular access route to a parking area. The standard of pavement towards the proposed play area is also referred to by objectors.

It is noted that the area is adjacent to a car park and that this would result in vehicles passing the proposed play area, however, the road is not a through road such that the volume of vehicles passing would not be considered excessive. There are other areas of public open space within the residential estate and other examples of play areas in residential estates which are also subject to passing vehicles such that this is not considered an uncommon occurrence.

Play Equipment

Under previous application CON1/2011/0227, the applicant proposed to install a spring bird, rubber mushroom, timber bench and litter bin. The applicant has amended this schedule to now install a bandrake seat, slatted litter bin, toddler swing and Little hamlets Plus Tottlebank Plus (incorporating slide and climbing areas). The area would be enclosed by a 1m high close board fence.

The play equipment proposed under the current application is considered an improved specification to that of the previous application. Concerns were raised by the Highways Department that the original access gate, opening onto the road, would be dangerous to the users of the park. The applicant has since amended the position of the gate to the north of the proposed play area. The revised layout has met with no objections from the Highways Department and is considered a suitable play area layout.

Officers accept that the amount of equipment is lower than that normally required but this is considered proportional to the size of the site and incorporates larger pieces of play equipment. Objections have been made in relation to the size of the play area, the equipment to be provided and the suitability of the equipment for older children on the site.

Page 128 It is acknowledged that the proposed play area would be more appropriate for younger children on the site. However, the play area proposed within the previous application was also aimed at younger children such that the current proposal does not amend the target user. Given that the specification of the play equipment has been improved and the proposal achieves a suitable layout, the proposed play equipment is considered acceptable.

It is understood that the town council are currently negotiating the feasibility of possibly delivering a more detailed play area for older children on the neighbouring area of scrubland to the neighbouring land on the northern boundary of the site. However this is at its early stages of negotiation and is a separate matter especially any larger scale development would be non-essential disproportionate to that required by the planning policy and would comprise of a more long term vision for the wider community.

Summary

Officers acknowledge that there have been significant delays in resolving this breach of planning control through exploring the different options and the withdrawal of the earlier proposals which were considered inadequate. The applicant seeks to resolve and regularise this issue through the current application.

The current application seeks approval for a revised play area location with an improved specification to that previously agreed under CON1/2011/0227. The play area would serve the residential estate. Currently, there are areas of public open space but without play equipment. The site is recognised as the being suitable to accommodate the play equipment for the site. Access would be available via a public highway.

The proposed revised play area to that approved under CON1/2011/0227 is considered acceptable for the site. It is recommended that the details submitted for approval of conditions 3, 6 and 16 of planning approval 2/2011/0227 be approved.

Page 129 Proactive Statement

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying planning policies, constraints, stakeholder representations and matters of concern within the application (as originally submitted) and where appropriate negotiating, with the Applicant, acceptable amendments and solutions to the proposal to address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to approve the application, in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant:

Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Agenda Item 7

Allerdale Borough Council Planning Application 2/2017/0110

Proposed Outline application for proposed residential development of 9 Development: dwellings Location: Land adjacent Kirkbampton Village Hall Kirkbampton Carlisle Applicant: Mr Graham

Recommendation: APPROVE (subject to s106 agreement) Memebrs ar requested to authorise the Head of Service with delegated authority to refuse the application in the event that the terms of any approved s106 are not processed in a reasonable and timely manner. Summary/Key Issues

Issue Conclusion

Principle of The scale of development proposed for this site in the Limited development Growth Village of Kirkbampton is considered acceptable and complies with the provisions of Policies S1, S2, S3, S5 and DM16 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1).

Design The site is considered well related to the existing settlement pattern. The issues of amenity can be addressed as part of any future reserved matter applications. The applicant has agreed to restrict the scale of the development to bungalows. Affordable housing The applicant is agreeable to provide 25% affordable units in line with the requirements of Policy S8 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1). Ecology Ecology impacts would not be significant and could be mitigated. A hedgerow removal statement has been submitted in support of the application. Impact on Satisfactory separation distance and visual impact is reduced as neighbours/ bungalow development. landscape

Proposal

Outline planning permission with all matters reserved is sought for the development of 9 dwellings on a greenfield site on the eastern periphery of the village. The enhanced outline application includes the reserved matters of layout and means of access and is

Page 133 supported by a hedgerow assessment. The applicant has also agreed during the course of the application to restrict the application to single storey units

Site

The site comprises of an agricultural grazing field on the southern boundary of the village hall on the eastern outskirts of the village. The site levels are slightly elevated with a hedgerow fronting its western highway verge with a few scattered trees around its boundary. Open agricultural fields are sited on the eastern and southern boundaries as well as the opposite side of the highway.

The nearest property is at the end of a line of detached bungalows on the opposite side of the road. The village hall and school are also sited in the immediate locality.

Buildings in the vicinity of the site are modern in their design and the proposed site is located outside the villages Conservation Area.

Relevant Policies

Policy S1 - Presumption in favour of sustainable development Policy S2 –Sustainable development principles Policy S3 - Spatial Strategy and Growth Policy S4 - Design principles Policy S8 - Affordable Housing Policy S33 – Landscape Policy S35 - Protecting and enhancing biodiversity and geodiversity Policy DM17 - Trees, hedgerows and woodland

Relevant Planning History

No former applications on the site. Albeit the site is located outside the saved limits of the saved local plan, the site has been included wihtin the settlement limits in the new Part 2 consultation document

2/2017/0055- A telecommunication mast was recently approved in the neighbouring field on the south eastern corner of the site.

Representations

Kirkbampton Parish Council request that ' the access/exit to the site has sufficient visibility splay to ensure the safety of all road users'.

Highways CCC – advise that the submitted design is largely acceptable including, visibility from the new access, junction spacing and widening of the carriageway. In order for the street to be adopted a turning head commensurate to our standards should be provided within the estate that is able to facilitate a refuse vehicle.

Page 134 The parking provision is acceptable provided each garage is at least 7m x 3m and remains as such however we would prefer if 4-5 parking spaces were made available collectively as visitor parking.

The new footway provision must include tactile paving at appropriate points and the end of the footway leading into the new estate should ‘transition’ effectively allowing wheelchairs, pushchairs and visually impaired safe access. The footway directly connected to the new estate should be 1.8m wide.

Therefore raise no objections to the proposed development subject to highway conditions

United Utilities will have no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions

Environmental Health No objections subject to a condition re submission and approval of a Construction and Demolition Method Statement

The application was advertised on site and in the press

13 letters of objection were received on the grounds of;

- The proposal is poorly related to the existing settlement pattern and the character of the surrounding area, conflicting with the landscape character sub type 5b of the Cumbria Landscape Assessment Guidelines which emphasises the need to respect the historical form and scale of the village. As such the proposal is contrary to policies S5, S33, DM14 and S4 of the Local Plan - No need for more housing -existing properties are for sale within the village - Lack of amenities within the village including the reduction of the bus service - Precedent for further housing development - The proposal is premature to the recent consultation on the revised boundaries for the village.

- Approved neighbouring mobile phone mast

- Inaccurate block plan relating to Greensykes access with highway implication for other nearby uses of the village hall and school. - Loss of privacy/amenity to the opposite property “Greensyke” contrary to policy S32 - Two storey dwellings would be out of scale with the adjacent properties contrary to policies S4, S5, S32, S33 AND DM14

- Lack of paveway in front of the village hall would result in a highway hazard. The highway is too narrow for cars to pass comfortably which is busy due to the attraction of Watch Tree, with soft verges which is not gritted in the winter. Should this be a 20mph zone due to the proximity of the school?

- Houses too close to village hall –impact of noise

- Lack of details on levels and surface water drainage and its pipe run and maintenance (flooding of the highway) - The site is 1m above road level increasing road run off

Page 135 - Has the school capacity for additional pupils-recommend a site visit be undertaken at school delivery/pickup times to assess traffic congestion.

- Lack of details in the ecological report re bats/frogs

One additional letter raised no objections subject to the sensitivity of neighbours and should if possible include facilities for children e.g. play area etc.

Main Issues:

Principle of development

The Council published a Five Year Housing Land Supply Statement in July 2016. This statement demonstrates the Local Planning Authority has a 5.6 years supply including a 20% buffer allowance due to a record of under-delivery and shortfalls .Demonstration of a five year supply of deliverable housing sites means the policies for the supply of housing contained within the Local Plan are considered to be up-to-date, in accordance with paragraph 49 of National Planning Policy Framework. The policy framework for the supply of housing within the plan area is set out in Policy S3 - Spatial Strategy.

Policy S3 establishes that provision will be made for at least 5471 new dwellings in Allerdale in the period ending in 2029. This amounts to an annual average of 304 dwellings. Policy S3 also seeks to concentrate the necessary new development in identified towns and villages in a settlement hierarchy. Kirkbampton, along with a number of other villages, is identified as a Limited Growth Village in tier 4 of the hierarchy. Tier 4 villages together with those in tier 5 are expected, in accordance with Policy S3, to accommodate sites for 6% of the new dwellings required in the period up to 2029.

The council recently undertook a public consultation on its preferred option for settlement limits and Site Allocations Development Plan Document which will be Part 2 of the Local Plan. This will identify allocations within the top three tiers of the settlement hierarchy and where necessary revise development boundaries for the top four tiers, which include Kirkbampton, a tier four Limited Growth Village.

Albeit this site was located outside the saved settlement limits for the village in the last local plan, it was included as part of the Preferred options document which extended the settlement limit around the perimeter of the site.

Kirkbampton is linear in its village character and form with little opportunity is remaining for infill plots. Therefore in delivering the growth agenda outlined within the local plan it is inevitable that it will expand outside these limits. i.e. the saved settlement limits from the former plan are out of date.

Whilst the Part 2 document can be only given limited weight at this early stage in its process, the site does appear to represent a suitable location for expansion of the village avoiding the more constrained traditional areas of the Conservation Area or the important green wedge between Kirkbampton and Thurstonfield. This site will retain the character of the village and provide a sustainable location for village growth which will also assist in sustaining its remaining services including the village school, public transport. The site

Page 136 physically abuts the edge of the village and therefore is considered to be well related.

Policy S2 and the Allerdale Local Plan, (Part 1) focus on the promotion of sustainable development and have accepted the village as a suitable settlement for such growth in these circumstances the site is considered to be sustainable and in accordance with Policies S2 and S3 of the Allerdale Local Plan.

With all this in mind it is considered that the proposed development complies with Policies S2, S3, S5 and DM16 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Affordable Housing

Policy S8 requires 25% affordable housing outside of Key Service Centres. The recent Ministerial statement seeks the provision of affordable housing on sites of more than 10 dwellings or more than 1000sq m. As the development is bungalows with a larger footprint the applicant acknowledges that the floorspace threshold will be exceeded and consequently has volunteered two dwellinghouses to be local affordable units under the provisions of a s106 legal agreement.

Highways

The site is served by a singular vehicular access off the road frontage, although some objections have highlighted the physical constraints of the site it is important to note that the County highway authority raise no objections subject to highway conditions. The issue of the footway fronting the village hall (which also acts as a drop off car park for the school) has been forwarded to the highway authority for further comment.

Flood Risk and Drainage

The application includes a Drainage constraint assessment which evaluates the potential for flood risk either affecting the proposed development or existing land and buildings. The Assessment confirms the site as Flood Zone 1 and is therefore at the lowest risk of flooding.

The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of drainage for the site with the developer submitting detailed surface water design including fully detailed pipe runs and attenuation facilities with the detailed planning application

United Utilities have considered the proposal and do not object to the development of the site with the drainage controlled through the imposition of planning conditions.

Design/Landscape

All matters are reserved and therefore detailed issues relating to access, layout, mix, design, amenity and other issues could be left for consideration at the reserved matters stage. The combination of both the layout and bungalow house types would be sympathetic with other single storey buildings in the immediate locality and would limit any loss of amenity plus restrict its visual impact on the landscape fringe of the village. (Officers highlight the large scale of the neighbouring village hall building) The site does

Page 137 not fall within any landscape designation and it perimeters can be enhanced through additional planting on its boundaries.

Noise

The site is located adjacent to the village hall. It is considered mitigation measures can be applied to mitigate any impact from the village hall as part of any future reserved matter application.

Ecology

The applicants submitted hedgerow assessment also accounted for an ecological assessment which identified no habitats for protected mammals or birds, nor fauna on the pasture land. It also indicated that the hedgerow did not have any archaeological significance. It therefore concluded that it was not important in the context of the hedgerow regulations

The submitted report also indicates there would be no significant adverse ecological impacts and recommends mitigation for hedge removal and impacts on birds and mammals. Although it was accepted that the hedgerow may have the potential to act as a foraging corridor for bats given its length its loss would only have a minor impact. These can be secured via condition.

Other Issues:

Telecommunication Mast

Should the mast be developed after the implementation of the dwellings then the onus is with the telecommunication operator to ensure compliance with Health and safety regulations. Alternatively the applicant has also been requested to secure this evidence to address any development of the dwellings after the mast is constructed.

Local Financial Considerations

Having regard to S70 (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) the proposal could attract ‘New Homes Bonus’, plus council tax.

The local community will benefit from the two local affordable dwellings which will assist the local housing market.

These are considered of little weight in the determination of the application.

Conclusion

Officers consider the amended details of the proposal results in an acceptable scale of development for this Limited Growth Village and its contribution to the Borough’s overall housing supply. The location of the site reflects the linear character of the village without any significant harm to the visual amenity of its surroundings. Furthermore the scheme will contribute local affordable housing to the benefit of the community. Therefore it is

Page 138 recommended the application be approved subject to conditions and the signing of a Planning Obligation to secure the local affordable dwellings.

Annex 1

Conditions/Reasons

1. Before any works commence details of the, scale and appearance, and landscaping (hereinafter called 'reserved matters') shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The application has been submitted as an outline application, in accordance with the provisions of the details of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2015.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: Application Form D.01 - A1 - Site Plan D.02 - A3 - Location Plan Design and Access Statement Drainage Report Envirotech Hedgerow Assessment (amended 15th May) Topo Amended e-mail dated 5th May (bungalow development) Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non-material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

3. The submission of all reserved matters applications shall be made no later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date of this permission and the development shall begin no later than whichever is the later of the following dates: a) The expiration of three years from the date of the grant of this permission, or b) 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. Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

4. The details required by the reserved matters details shall relate to the development of single storey dwellings. Reason: It is considered this is the most appropriate in this location taking into account the site conditions / character of the surrounding area, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy DM14 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 139 5. The carriageway, footways and footpaths shall be designed, drained and lit to a standard suitable for adoption and in this respect further details, including longitudinal/cross sections, shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval before any part of the development hereby permitted is commenced. No work shall be commenced until a full specification has been approved. These details shall be in accordance with the standards laid down in the current Cumbria Design Guide. Any works so approved shall be constructed before the development is fully occupied. Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of construction within the approved development in the interests of highway safety.

6. The development shall not be brought into use until visibility splays providing clear visibility of 90 metres x 2.4 metres measured down the centre of the access road and the nearside channel line of the major road have been provided at the junction of the access road with the county highway. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) relating to permitted development, no structure, or object of any kind shall be erected or placed and no trees, bushes or other plants which exceed 1m in height shall be planted or be permitted to grow within the visibility splay which obstruct the visibility splays. Reason: To ensure an acceptable standard of highway access during the construction and operational use of the site, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

7. No dwellings shall be occupied until the estate road, including footways and cycleways to serve such dwellings, has been constructed in all respects to base course level and street lighting where it is to form part of the estate road has been provided and brought into full operational use. Reason: In the interests of highway safety of the occupiers of residential units hereby approved.

8. The use shall not be commenced until the access and parking requirements have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. Any such access and or parking provision shall be retained and be capable of use when the development is completed and shall not be removed or altered without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a minimum standard of access provision when the development is brought into use.

9. Prior to the commencement of any development, a surface water drainage scheme, based on the hierarchy of drainage options in the National Planning Practice Guidance with evidence of an assessment of the site conditions (inclusive of how the scheme shall be managed after completion) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution. This condition is imposed in light of policies within the NPPF and NPPG.

Page 140 10. Only foul drainage shall be connected to the public sewer. Reason: To ensure a sustainable means of drainage from the site and minimise the risk of water pollution to the local water environment, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

11. Prior to the commencement of any development, a surface water drainage scheme, based on the hierarchy of drainage options in the National Planning Practice Guidance with evidence of an assessment of the site conditions (inclusive of how the scheme shall be managed after completion) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The surface water drainage scheme must be in accordance with the Non- Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015) or any subsequent replacement national standards.

The drainage scheme submitted for approval shall be in accordance with the principles set out in the planning statement proposing surface water discharging into sustainable drainage system/watercourse.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no surface water shall discharge to the public sewerage system either directly or indirectly. The development shall be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To promote sustainable development, secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution. This condition is imposed in light of policies within the NPPF and NPPG.

12. No development shall take place until a Construction and Demolition Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The statement shall include the following: (a) Traffic Management Plan to include all traffic associated with the development, including site and staff traffic, off-site parking, turning and compound areas; (b) Procedure to monitor and mitigate noise and vibration from the construction and demolition and to monitor any properties at risk of damage from vibration, as well as taking into account noise from vehicles, deliveries. All measurements should make reference to BS7445. (c) Mitigation measures to reduce adverse impacts on residential properties from construction compounds including visual impact, noise, and light pollution. (d) A written procedure for dealing with complaints regarding the construction or demolition; (e) Measures to control the emissions of dust and dirt during construction and demolition (including any wheel washing facilities); (f) Programme of work for Demolition and Construction phase; (g) Hours of working and deliveries; (h) Details of lighting to be used on site;

Page 141 (i) Highway signage/ Haulage routes. The approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the duration of the development. Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties during the construction works of the development hereby approved, in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S32 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014 and in the interests of highway safety.

Proactive Statement

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying planning policies, constraints, stakeholder representations and matters of concern within the application (as originally submitted) and where appropriate negotiating, with the Applicant, acceptable amendments and solutions to the proposal to address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal, in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant:

Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Agenda Item 8

Allerdale Borough Council Planning Application HOU/2017/0045

Proposed Retrospective application for replacement front and back doors Development: with flood resilient doors Location: 4,5,6,7,9 & 11 Cocktons Yard Cockermouth Applicant: Cocktons Yard Management Company

Recommendation: APPROVE

Summary/Key Issues

Issue Conclusion

Proposal The doors are considered an appropriate form of flood protection development given the location and traditional materials used.

Site

The development site comprises a number of two storey terraced dwellings within a terraced block. The dwellings are situated within Cockermouth’s Conservation Area and are accessible via lanes from Main Street and Waterloo Street.

Proposal

The proposal involves the replacement of the existing timber external front and rear doors with timber flood resilient doors. The application is retrospective and relates to 6 of the properties within the block.

Relevant Policies

National Planning Policy Framework Chapter 7 - Requiring good design Chapter 12 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

Allerdale Local Plan (part 1) July 2014 Policy DM15 - Extensions and alterations to existing buildings and properties Policy S2 - Sustainable development principles Policy S4 – Design Principles Policy S27 - Heritage Assets Policy S32 - Safeguarding amenity

Page 145 Relevant Planning History

None

Representations

Town Council – Recommend approval

Highways – No objections

Cockermouth Civic Trust – Whilst being supportive of flood protection measures in the area, they do not consider these doors to be sympathetic to the heritage of the properties in Cockton’s Yard. They also express disappointment that Allerdale Borough council have provided grant aid for modifications that they consider do not comply with the Council’s Local Plan policies (S4 and S27).

The application has been advertised on site and in the press. Neighbouring properties have been notified. No resulting representations have been received to date.

Assessment

Cockton’s Yard is a particularly notable area of Cockermouth and Cockermouth’s Conservation Area due to its cobbled courtyard, stone fronted buildings and historic features. The yard is accessible to pedestrians via Main Street and Waterloo Street, forming a linkage between the two. The dwellings front onto this pedestrian access.

The rear of the application dwellings are not visible from a thoroughfare and thus have less prominence than the front elevations and offer little contribution to the setting of the Conservation Area. The main consideration of the application is therefore the impact of the replacement doors to the front elevation.

Planning policies S2, S4, S27, S32 and DM15 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1) July 2014 are applicable to the application. These policies all support development which makes a positive contribution to the local area and which enhances historic assets and distinctive character. Planning Policy S27 is particularly relevant in indicating that ‘only proposals which do not harm any positive qualities of the heritage asset(s) will be approved, unless there is clear and convincing public benefit to the proposal that will outweigh the harm caused to the asset(s)’.

In assessing planning applications the Council also has a duty under the provisions of S72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving and enhancing the conservation area.

The applicant indicates that the replacement doors are flood resilient doors. The site is situated within Flood zone 3 and has been subject to flooding in the past.

The proposed replacement timber doors are of a 4 or 6 panelled design, generally in keeping with the Conservation Area. However, the proportions and depth of the panels, alongside the shape of the mouldings, large prominent frames and door furniture are

Page 146 highlighted by the Council’s Conservation Officer as discrepancies in the design. Cockermouth Civic Trust has also raised concerns relating to the doors subject to the application, whilst acknowledging the benefit of flood protection measures to the long term survival of heritage buildings within Cockermouth.

The doors themselves are of a timber finish and therefore do not conflict with the historic palette of materials commonly in evidence throughout the Conservation Area. Whilst there are some features incorporated within the door design which do not replicate features of original timber doors, it is accepted that the flood resilience the doors contribute towards protection of the dwellings/ heritage assets and help secure a sustainable future for the buildings, which goes some way to compensate for these design features.

It is noted that the front elevation of Cockton’s Yard is visible to passing pedestrians; however, Cockton’s Yard does not form a main route through the town centre or Conservation Area. The route would be more commonly used by visitors or occupiers of the properties on Waterloo Street and Cocktons Yard as it provides pedestrian access onto the A5086 and Main Street. Given the limited usage of this route, its contribution to the setting of the Conservation Area is considered less significant than other main vehicular and pedestrian routes through the historic centre.

Planning Officers acknowledge the concerns of the Civic Trust and the Conservation Officer in relation to proportions and features of the door design. Despite these concerns, it should be acknowledged that the front doors are finished with a traditional material which is readily accepted and in evidence in this part of the Conservation Area. The wider public benefits of the enhanced flood protection the doors offer these dwellings are also considered significant factors in offsetting some of the door features which do not replicate those of the original doors. On balance, it is considered that whilst there is some limited harm to the appearance of the Conservation Area this is outweighed by the wider public benefit arising from the enhanced floor protection and overall the doors are considered an acceptable form of development in this less prominent pedestrian route within the Conservation Area. Taking into account relevant planning policy and the statutory duty under S72, the application is recommended for approval.

With reference to the comments of the Civic Trust in relation to the provision of grant aid for the modifications it is noted that the properties did benefit from a flood resilience grant however the criteria for the award of these grants relate primarily to the provision of an appropriate level of flood resilience protection. When grants are awarded for flood resilience works the applicants are advised to make their own enquiries as to whether planning or building control approval is required and it is regrettable that this did not happen in this case however the primary consideration for the local planning authority is to assess the planning merits of the proposal as detailed above.

Local Financial Considerations

Having regard to S70 (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act the proposal would not result in any local financial benefits.

Page 147 Annex 1

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: 001 Location Plan 752/1 No 4 Front Door Photograph of no 4 753/Back No 5 Back Door 753/Front No 5 Front Door Photograph no 5 back door Photograph of no 5 front door 754/Back No 6 Back Door 754/Front No 6 Front Door Photograph of no 6 back door Photograph of no 6 front door 755/D2 No 7 Back Door 755/D1 No 7 Front Door Photograph of no 7 back door Photograph of no 7 front door 756/Back No 9 Back Door 756/Front No 9 Front Door Photograph of no 9 back door Photograph of no 9 Front Door 757/D2 No 11 Back Door 757/Front No 11 Front Door Photograph of no 11 back door Photograph of no 11 front door Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non-material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

Proactive Statement

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing the proposal against all material considerations, including planning policies and any stakeholder representations that may have been received and subsequently determining to grant planning permission in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant:

Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 Agenda Item 9

Allerdale Borough Council Planning Application 2/2017/0181

Proposed Erection of a rural workers dwelling Development: Location: Land at Hall Bank Boltongate Wigton Applicant: Mr David Hudson

Recommendation: APPROVE

Summary/Key Issues

Issue Conclusion

Principle of The applicant has submitted supporting information to justify that Development the dwelling will support an established agricultural contractor’s business in line with Policy S3 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1). Layout, Scale and The siting of the dwelling adjacent to the building associated with Appearance the business is considered acceptable with the appearance compatible with the character of the surrounding area. Highways The existing access will be utilised with adequate parking provided.

Proposal

This detailed application is for the erection of a single dwelling on Land at Hall Bank, Boltongate. The dwelling is two storey in scale and will provide a 3 bed dwelling.

Site

The application site is located in the open countryside and forms a courtyard development of residential housing. To the east of the courtyard is an existing modern agricultural building, from which the agricultural contracting business is run.

The site itself forms an area of land measuring approx. 0.12 hectares in size, which includes the area on which the building is erected. The site is accessed from the main highway via an existing access, with the land flat.

To the west of the site are the residential units with a detached dwelling to the north east and agricultural fields to the east and south of the proposal site.

Page 151 Relevant Policies

National Planning Policy Framework Building a strong, competitive economy Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Requiring good design

Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014 Policy S1 - Presumption in favour of sustainable development Policy S2 - Sustainable development principles Policy S3 - Spatial Strategy and Growth Policy S4 - Design principles Policy S29 - Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage Policy S32 - Safeguarding amenity Policy DM2 - Rural workers dwellings Policy DM14 - Standards of Good Design

Relevant Planning History

2/2013/0133 Demolition of part of existing barn and rebuild to form 1 dwelling and amended access and curtilage arrangements – Approved at Development Panel.

2/2008/0239 Change of use and conversion of barns to 4 no. dwellings and erection of implement and garage – Approved.

Representations

Councillor Call In – Cllr Grainger – Proposal for the construction of rural workers dwellings outside defined settlement will be supported provided it can be demonstrated that there is an essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near to their place of work.

Parish Council – Support.

Environmental Health – No objections. There is cement, lime and plaster activity within 60m of the proposed application, and conditions in relation to contamination are recommended.

Cumbria Highways – The slight increase in vehicular use of the existing access is unlikely to have a significant material effect on the existing highway conditions. I can therefore confirm that the Highway Authority has no objection to the proposal.

Fire Officer – No reply to date.

The application has been advertised on site and adjoining owners have been notified. No representations have been received to date.

Page 152 Main Issues:

Background

The Hudson family have lived at Hallbank since 1939 operating a working farm that included an agricultural contracting business. Following the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001, the farm began operating again on a smaller scale, but ceased being a working farm in 2005 and since that time work has concentrated around the contracting business, except for a small number of sheep, which are for lambing and on the land holding retained.

The applicant upon getting married moved to Wigton, where he has rented for the last 12 years, not being able to purchase a property in the immediate area, although the applicants ageing parents still live at Hallbank with the business now run by the applicant.

Principle of Development

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires that local planning authorities identify sufficient deliverable sites to provide five year supply of housing against their housing requirements. The Annual Monitoring Report for 2015/2016 demonstrates the Local Planning Authority has a 5.7 year supply of housing which includes a 20% buffer allowance due to a record of under-delivery and shortfalls from 2011. Demonstration of a five year supply of deliverable housing sites means the policies for the supply of housing contained within the Local Plan are considered to be up-to-date, in accordance with paragraph 49 of National Planning Policy Framework. The policy framework for the supply of housing within the plan area is set out in Policy S3 - Spatial Strategy.

Policy S3 establishes that provision will be made for at least 5471 new dwellings in Allerdale in the period ending in 2029. This amounts to an annual average of 304 dwellings. Policy S3 also seeks to concentrate the necessary new development in identified towns and villages in a settlement hierarchy.

The application site lies within the open countryside and therefore does not form part of the identified settlement hierarchy to accommodate additional new build dwellings. Figure 5 of Policy S3 highlights that proposals outside defined settlements will be limited to:

a. Housing essential for rural workers in the operation of a rural based enterprise; b. Housing following the rural exceptions policy; c. An appropriate diversification of an existing agricultural or land based activity; d. The optimal viable use of a heritage asset or appropriate enabling development to secure the future of heritage assets; e. A recreation or tourism proposal requiring a countryside location; f. Facilities essential to social and community needs; g. The replacement of an existing dwelling; h. A suitably scaled extension to an existing building; i. The conversion or reuse of a suitable existing building; j. Other development requiring a countryside location for technical or operational reasons.

Page 153 From the information submitted with the application it has been established that an existing agricultural contractors business is operating from the site with planning permission granted in 2008 for the implement store that is currently erected adjacent to the proposed dwelling. There are no dwellings available in close proximity to the site that could accommodate the applicant and within their price range.

The business provides specialist services to the farming community and to keep his plant and equipment up to date, regularly invests in purchasing new equipment to take account of modern farming techniques.

Members may recollect that they have accepted agricultural contractors as an essential need in open countryside in recent individual house proposals at Bridekirk and Newton Arlosh, especially in the context of the criteria of Policy S3 in the Local Plan.

Officers are satisfied that sufficient evidence has been provided with the application to demonstrate the need for a rural worker in the operation of a rural based enterprise in line with point a of Policy S3.

The proposed dwelling and the contents in the planning statement satisfactorily demonstrate compliance with the above criteria and therefore on this occasion it is considered the principle of supporting a dwelling in connection with an existing rural business can be supported and in line with policy S3 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1).

Layout, Scale and Appearance

When an established needs has been demonstrated Policy DM2 requires that the proposed dwelling should be of a size, cost and construction commensurate with the established functional requirement.

The proposal seeks consent for a two storey 3 bed dwelling. The dwelling will have an external floor space of 192 square metres. The dwelling will be sited to the east of the existing contractors implement building, to the southwest of the existing access. The siting of the dwelling is considered acceptable and will not hinder the workings of the business.

The dwelling will be finished in white K Rend polymer render system with a scrapped finish, with a dark grey smooth sand cement plinth under a natural blue grey welsh slate with matching ridge section. The windows are which pvcu casement double glazed units with composite front and rear doors in a white pvcu frame.

The barn conversions are two storey in scale and therefore the scale of the proposed dwelling is appropriate to its location. Officers consider the design, size and materials of the proposed dwelling to be acceptable and will not detract for the character of the area in line with Policy S4, DM2 and DM14.

Highways

The site is currently served by an existing access to the north east corner of the site, which provides access to the agricultural contactors operations base and the dwelling occupied by the applicant’s parents. This access will serve the proposed dwelling. The

Page 154 applicant has submitted a block plan that demonstrates that the dwelling will not hinder the vehicle movements of the business with parking for the dwelling to the north east of the dwelling.

The Highway Authority has confirmed that the slight increase in vehicle use of the existing access is unlikely to have a significant material effect on existing highway conditions. Planning and highway officers raise no objections and access and parking grounds.

Other Issues:

Drainage

The foul drainage will connect into an existing package treatment plant located to the west of the implement shed, with surface water connecting to the watercourse located to the front of the site. Officers consider the proposed form of drainage is acceptable.

Local Financial Considerations

Having regard to S70 (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act the proposal could attract New Homes Bonus and future Council Tax.

Conclusion

Officers consider the applicant has demonstrated the need for a dwelling in this location to support an existing rural based enterprise in line with Policy S3 of the Allerdale Local Plan. The design, siting and scale of the dwelling is considered appropriate and in line with national and local policy.

Page 155 Annex 1

Conditions/Reasons

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: In order to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out solely in accordance with the following plans: DH/KT/16/01A Site Location Plan, Block Plan, Elevations and Floor plans received 4 May 2017 Proposed Block Plan DH/KT/16/05 Surface Water Drainage Assessment BIO Disc Specification Reason: In order to ensure that the development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans and any material and non-material alterations to the scheme are properly considered.

3. The occupation of the dwelling house hereby approved shall be limited to persons solely or mainly employed or last employed in the locality in agriculture as defined in Section 336 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or in forestry, or in the approved on-site agricultural contractor business or dependents of such persons residing with him or her, or a widow or widower of such persons. Reason: The unrestricted use of the dwellinghouse would be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies S5 and DM2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014 which seeks to prevent additional sporadic development in the open countryside unless demonstrated to be essential in the interests of agriculture or forestry.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 or any order revoking or re-enacting that order relating to permitted development, no development falling within Schedule 2 Part 1 of the said Order shall be carried out without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the site of the approved dwelling or outbuilding remains commensurate within the established functional requirements of the holding, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies S5 and DM2 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

5. No development approved by this permission shall commence until a desktop study has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Should the preliminary risk assessment identify any potential contamination which may affect human health, controlled waters or the wider environment, all necessary site investigation works commence within the controlled waters or the wider environment, all necessary site investigation works within the site boundary must be carried out to establish the degree and nature of the contamination and its potential to pollute the environment or cause harm to

Page 156 human health. The scope of works for the site investigations should be agreed with the Local Planning Authority prior to their commencement. Reason: To minimise any risk during or post construction works arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

6. Should land affected by contamination be identified under the desktop study condition 5 following site investigations which poses unacceptable risks to human health, controlled waters or the wider environment, no development shall take place until a detailed remediation scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include an appraisal of remediation options, identification of the preferred option(s), the proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, and a description and programme of the works to be undertaken including the verification plan. Reason: To minimise any risk during or post construction works arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

7. Should a remediation scheme be required under condition 6, the approved strategy shall be implemented and a verification report submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the development (or relevant phase of development) being brought into use. Reason: To minimise any risk during or post construction works arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

8. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported immediately to the Local Planning Authority. Development on the part of the site affected must be halted and a risk assessment carried out and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Where unacceptable risks are found remediation and verification schemes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These shall be implemented prior to the development (or relevant phase of development) being brought into use. All works shall be undertaken in accordance with current UK guidance, particularly CLR11. Reason: To minimise any risk arising from any possible contamination from the development to the local environment in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy S30 of the Allerdale Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted July 2014.

Page 157 Proactive Statement

Application Approved Following Revisions

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying planning policies, constraints, stakeholder representations and matters of concern within the application (as originally submitted) and where appropriate negotiating, with the Applicant, acceptable amendments and solutions to the proposal to address those concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal, in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant:

Page 158 Page 159 Page 160