Agenda Document Pack

TO:- Planning Committee Councillor Terry Mason , Councillor Bob Cope , Councillor Jeff Ashley , Councillor Meg Barrow , Councillor Len Bates , Councillor Joyce Bolton , Councillor Barry Bond , Councillor Mary Bond , Councillor Anthony Bourke , Councillor Nigel Caine , Councillor Jo Chapman , Councillor Val Chapman , Councillor David Clifft J.P , Councillor Brian Cox , Councillor Brian Edwards MBE , Councillor Lisa Emery , Councillor Matt Ewart , Councillor Paul Fieldhouse , Councillor Isabel Ford , Councillor Rita Heseltine , Councillor Lin Hingley , Councillor Alan Hinton , Councillor Steve Hollis , Councillor Diane Holmes , Councillor Keith James , Councillor Janet Johnson , Councillor Michael Lawrence , Councillor Roger Lees J.P. , Councillor Peter Lever , Councillor Henryk Lobuczek , Councillor Dave Lockley , Councillor Robert McCardle , Councillor John Michell , Councillor Roy Moreton , Councillor Kath Perry , Councillor Ray Perry , Councillor Christine Raven , Councillor John Raven , Councillor Robert Reade , Councillor Robert Spencer , Councillor Wendy Sutton , Councillor Ken Upton , Councillor Bernard Williams , Councillor David Williams , Councillor Henry Williams , Councillor Kath Williams , Councillor Reg Williams , Councillor Roy Wright

Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Planning Committee will be held as detailed below for the purpose of transacting the business set out below.

Date: Tuesday, 17 July 2018 Time: 18:30 Venue: Council Chamber Council Offices, Wolverhampton Road, Codsall, South Staffordshire, WV8 1PX

D. Heywood Chief Executive

A G E N D A

Part I – Public Session

1 Minutes 3 - 8 To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on the 19 June 2018

2 Apologies

To receive any apologies for non-attendance.

3 Declarations of Interest

To receive any declarations of interest.

4 Determination of Planning Applications 9 - 210 Report of Chief Planning Officer

Page 1 of 210

RECORDING Please note that this meeting will be recorded.

PUBLIC SPEAKING Please note: Any members of the public wishing to speak must confirm their intention to speak in writing or e-mail to Development Management no later than 1 working day before the Committee i.e. before 12.00 p.m. on the preceding Monday.

E-mails to [email protected]

Please see Speaking at Planning Committee leaflet on the website for full details. Failure to notify the Council of your intention to speak may mean you will not be allowed to speak at Committee.

Page 2 of 210 25 June 2018

Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee South Staffordshire Council held in the Council Chamber Council Offices, Wolverhampton Road, Codsall, South Staffordshire, WV8 1PX on Tuesday, 19 June 2018 at 18:30

Present:- Councillor Jeff Ashley, Councillor Meg Barrow, Councillor Len Bates, Councillor Joyce Bolton, Councillor Barry Bond, Councillor Mary Bond, Councillor Anthony Bourke, Councillor Nigel Caine, Councillor Jo Chapman, Councillor Val Chapman, Councillor David Clifft, Councillor Bob Cope, Councillor Brian Edwards, Councillor Paul Fieldhouse, Councillor Isabel Ford, Councillor Rita Heseltine, Councillor Lin Hingley, Councillor Steve Hollis, Councillor Diane Holmes, Councillor Janet Johnson, Councillor Michael Lawrence, Councillor Roger Lees, Councillor Henryk Lobuczek, Councillor Dave Lockley, Councillor Terry Mason, Councillor Robert McCardle, Councillor Roy Moreton, Councillor Kath Perry, Councillor Ray Perry, Councillor Christine Raven, Councillor John Raven, Councillor Robert Reade, Councillor Robert Spencer, Councillor Wendy Sutton, Councillor Bernard Williams, Councillor David Williams, Councillor Kath Williams, Councillor Reg Williams, Councillor Roy Wright

6 OFFICERS IN ATTENDANCE Sue Frith, Lucy Duffy, Andrew Johnson, David Pattison and Phil Spruce (County Highways)

7 MINUTES RESOLVED: that the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on the 15 May 2018 be approved and signed by the Chairman

8 APOLOGIES Apologies for non attendance were submitted on behalf of the Councillors B Cox, M Ewart, A Hinton, P Lever and K Upton

9 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillors D Williams, B Cope, and Mrs V Chapman declared non-pecuniary interests in applications 18/00221/ADV and 18/00222/ADV and left the Chamber for consideration of these applications

Councillors R Heseltine and R Reade declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 18/00287/FUL and left the Chamber for consideration of this application

Councillor R Heseltine declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 18/00354/FUL and left the Chamber for consideration of this application

D Pattison, Corporate Director Governance, declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 18/00221/ADV and 18/00222/ADV and left the Chamber for consideration of these applications

10 DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS The Committee received the report of the Chief Planning Officer, together with information and details received after the agenda was prepared

16/00280/FUL – LOWER DRAYTON FARM, LOWER DRAYTON LANE,

Page 3 of 210 25 June 2018

PENKRIDGE, STAFFORD – ST19 5RE – APPLICANT – MR RAYMOND BOWER – PARISH – PENKRIDGE

Mr Richard Bower spoke for the application.

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended, subject to an amendment to conditions 3 and 4:

3. The premises shall only be open as follows:

 Between 10am-5pm Saturday and Sunday in school term time  Between 10am-5pm Monday to Sunday in school holidays  Between 10am -5pm on bank holidays  Between 6pm-8.30pm from June to August for scouting events only  Between 10am-2pm for school visits only 25 occasions per year.

4. within 2 years of the date of this approval the existing entertainment hub including all structures, buildings, sheds, vehicles, play equipment, animal enclosures and mobile buildings will be dismantled and removed from the site and the land restored to its original condition.

17/00633/FUL – 122 STREETS LANE, CHESLYN HAY, WALSALL, WS6 7AW – APPLICANT- MR BARRY BIRCH – PARISH – GREAT WYRLEY

RESOLVED:- that the application be deferred to enable advice to be taken from the British Horse Society regarding conditions ensuring horse welfare.

17/00703/FUL – THE LANE HOUSE, TOP ROAD, ACTON TRUSSELL, ST17 0RQ – APPLICANT – GRAINLINE LTD – PARISH – ACTON TRUSSELL, BEDNALL & TEDDESLEY HAY

Mr Gareth Jones spoke for the application.

Councillor L Bates motioned that the application be refused on the grounds that the development would adversely affect neighbouring properties and was in contravention of paragraphs EQ9 and EQ11 of the Councils adopted Core Strategy.

The motion was seconded by Councillor B Williams. The motion was lost.

Councillors B Williams, J Raven and Mrs C Raven and H Luboczek abstained.

Councillor N Caine motioned that an additional amendment should include a requirement for a traffic management plan. The motion was seconded by Councillor D Williams.

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended, subject to an amendment to the wording of the recommendation.

7. RECOMMENDATION – APPROVE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS…”

Together with an amendment to condition 4 to include the details of the recommendations set out in the Ecological Appraisal, namely:

4. Before the development commences a landscape scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. This scheme must include the recommendations set out in paragraphs 4.10-4.11 of the document titled 'Ecological Appraisal of the Lane House, Acton Trussell', dated 18 October 2017 (reference T1102.049), namely: It is recommended that all hedgerows are planted with a mix of native species of local provenance including hawthorn, hazel Corrylus avellana, blackthorn Prunus spinosa, wayfaring tree Viburnum lantana and guelder rose Viburnum opulus. Additional ecological enhancements could include new tree and shrub planting, green roofs on new dwellings/garages and a new pond, that could form part of attenuation and drainage requirements.

Page 4 of 210 25 June 2018

replaced within the next available planting season and the scheme shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

AND THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS:

14. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until the passing bays indicated on drawing No. 1822-01 C have been constructed and completed

Reason:

14. In the interest of highway safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

15. No windows shall be inserted in the side elevation of the dwelling on Plot 1, facing Shakan, for the lifetime of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the privacy of residents in a nearby dwelling in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

16. A further bat survey will be required to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, should the removal of any mature trees on the site be required.

Reason: In order to protect any protected species on the site in accordance with EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.

17. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until a traffic management scheme comprising of:

Measures to remove any mud or other deleterious material deposited on the public highway.

Vehicle parking facilities within the site for all staff and visitors.

Timetable for implementation. has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved traffic management scheme shall thereafter be implemented prior to any works commencing on site.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

18. The site shall only operate between the hours of 8.30am and 18.00pm Mondays to Fridays, 8.30am and 13.00pm on Saturdays and shall remain closed on Saturday afternoons, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Any deliveries to the site shall take place within the operating hours.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

18/00137/VAR – PILLATON HALL FARM, CANNOCK ROAD, PILLATON, ST19 5RZ – APPLICANT – MR D PEARCE – PARISH – PENKRIDGE

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended, subject to an additional condition 9:

9.The authorised pitches shall be identified on a plan and shall be removed within 6 months of the date of this permission.

Reason: In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

18/00141/FUL – THE BUNGALOW, CROFT LANE, GAILEY, STAFFORD, ST195PY – APPLICANT – MR CARTWRIGHT – PARISH – PENKRIDGE

Page 5 of 210 25 June 2018

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended

18/00221/ADV – SHOAL HILL TAVERN CANNOCK LTD, SHOAL HILL TAVERN, SANDY LANE, HATHERTON, CANNOCK, WS11 1RF – APPLICANT – MR JOHN BOOTH – PARISH – HATHERTON

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended, subject to an additional condition 7:

7. The chalkboard style sign, adjacent to the sign hereby approved , shall be removed from the site within 28 days from the date of the permission.

Reason: In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

18/00222/ADV - SHOAL HILL TAVERN CANNOCK LTD, SHOAL HILL TAVERN, SANDY LANE, HATHERTON, CANNOCK, WS11 1RF – APPLICANT – MR JOHN BOOTH – PARISH – HATHERTON

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended.

18/00237/FUL – OAK GATES, 2 ASPLEY LANE, SLADE HEATH, WOLVERHAMPTON, WV10 7PG – APPLICANT – MR AND MRS ANTHONY COOK – PARISH – BREWOOD AND COVEN

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended, subject to an amendment to condition 4:

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended) or any other subsequent equivalent order, no development within the following classes of development shall be carried out to the dwelling hereby approved OR TO THE EXISTING PROPERTY AT OAK GATES, 2 ASPLEY LANE, SLADE HEATH, without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority: a. Schedule 2, part1, Class A – enlargement, improvement or other alteration b. Schedule 2, part1, Class B – addition or alteration to the roof c. Schedule 2, part1, Class C – any other alteration to the roof d. Schedule 2, part1, Class D - porches e. Schedule 2, part1, Class E – garden buildings, enclosures, pool, oil or gas storage container

18/00287/FUL – 108 SPRINGHILL LANE, LOWER PENN, WOLVERHAMPTON, WV4 4TJ – APPLICANT – MR IAN STANTON – PARISH – LOWER PENN

Ms Sarah Bingham spoke against the application.

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended.

18/00354/FUL – SPRINGHILL COTTAGE, SPRINHILL HOUSE, SPRINGHILL LANE, LOWER PENN, WOLVERHAMPTON, WV4 4TJ – APPLICANT – SANDHILLS DAY NURSERY – PARISH – LOWER PENN

Dalbir Basra spoke for the application.

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended.

18/00363/VAR – THE BRACKENS, 12A HIMLEY LANE, DUDLEY, DY3 4LN – APPLICANT MR PHIL RANN – PARISH – HIMLEY

RESOLVED:- that the application be deferred for further consultation with Severn Trent and from the County Rights of Way Officer.

18/00365/FUL – THE BRACKENS, 12A HIMLEY LANE, DUDLEY, DY3 4LN – APPLICANT MR PHIL RANN – PARISH – HIMLEY

RESOLVED:- that the application be deferred for further consultation with Severn Trent and from the County Rights of Way Officer.

Page 6 of 210 25 June 2018

18/00385/FUL – VAR – 93A TINKERS LANE, BREWOOD, ST19 9DD – APPLICANT – MR K KELLY – PARISH – BREWOOD & COVEN

RESOLVED:- that the application be approved as recommended, subject to an amendment to condition 3:

3. Details to include species, numbers and sizes shall be submitted to the Council for approval for the new hedge shown on the approved plan. The details shall be submitted within 2 months from the date of this permission. The approved hedge planting details shall be implemented concurrently with the development and completed within 12 months of the completion of the development. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the scheme has been completed. The planting, hard landscaping (and any other introduced features shown on the approved plan(s) shall be retained and maintained for a minimum period of 10 years by the property owner form the notified completion date of the scheme. Any plant failures that occur during the first 5 yards of the notified completion date of the scheme shall be replaced with the same species within the next available planting season (after failure).

The Meeting ended at: 20:00

CHAIRMAN

Page 7 of 210

Page 8 of 210 SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE COUNCIL

PLANNING COMMITTEE – 17 JULY 2018

DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS

REPORT OF CHIEF PLANNING OFFICER

PART A – SUMMARY REPORT

1. SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS

To determine the planning applications as set out in the attached Appendix.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 That the planning applications be determined.

3. SUMMARY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Do these proposals contribute to specific Council Plan objectives? The reasons for the recommendation for each application Yes POLICY/COMMUNITY addresses issued pertaining to the Council’s Plan. IMPACT Has an Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) been completed? Determination of individual planning applications so not No applicable. SCRUTINY POWERS No APPLICABLE KEY DECISION No TARGET COMPLETION/ N/A DELIVERY DATE Unless otherwise stated in the Appendix, there are no direct financial implications arising from this report. FINANCIAL IMPACT No

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Planning (Consequential Provisions) Act 1990 LEGAL ISSUES Yes Planning (Hazardous Substances) Act 1990 Planning and Compensation Act 1991 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

Summary of Details OTHER IMPACTS, RISKS & Yes OPPORTUNITIES

IMPACT ON SPECIFIC As set out in Appendix Yes WARDS

Page 9 of 210 PART B – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

4. INFORMATION

All relevant information is contained within the Appendix.

Advice to Applicants and the Public

The recommendations and reports of the Director of Planning and Strategic Services contained in this schedule may, on occasions, be changed or updated as a result of any additional information received by the Local Planning Authority between the time of its preparation and the appropriate meeting of the Authority.

Where updates have been received before the Planning Committee’s meeting, a written summary of these is published generally by 5pm on the day before the Committee Meeting. Please note that verbal updates may still be made at the meeting itself.

With regard to the individual application reports set out in the Appendix then unless otherwise specifically stated in the individual report the following general statements will apply.

Unless otherwise stated any dimensions quoted in the reports on applications are scaled from the submitted plans or Ordnance Survey maps.

Consultations Undertaken

The results of consultations with interested parties, organisations, neighbours and Councillors are reported in each report in the Appendix.

CONSULTEES

CH – County Highways CLBO – Conservation Officer CPO – County Planning Officer CPRE – Campaign to Protect Rural England CPSO – County Property Services Officer CA – County Archaeologist CS – Civic Society EA – Environment Agency EHGS – Environmental Health Officer ENGS – Engineer FC – The Forestry Commission HA – Highways Agency LPM – Landscape Planning Manager HENGS – Engineer NE – Natural England PC – Parish Council OSS – Open Space Society STW – Severn Trent Water SWT – Staffordshire Wildlife Trust

5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

N/A

6. PREVIOUS MINUTES

Details if issue has been previously considered

Page 10 of 210 7. BACKGROUND PAPERS

Background papers used in compiling the schedule of applications consist of:-

(i) The individual planning application (which may include supplementary information supplied by or on behalf of the applicant) and representations received from persons or bodies consulted upon the application by the Local Planning Authority, and from members of the public and interested bodies, by the time of preparation of the schedule.

(ii) The Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended and related Acts, Orders and Regulations, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Planning Practice Guidance Notes, any Circulars, Ministerial Statements and Policy Guidance published by or on behalf of the Secretary of State for the Department for Communities and Local Government.

(iii) The Core Strategy for South Staffordshire adopted in December 2012 and Supplementary Planning Documents

(iv) Relevant decisions of the Secretary of State in relation to planning appeals and relevant decisions of the courts.

These documents are available for inspection by Members or any member of the public and will remain available for a period of up to 4 years from the date of the meeting, during the normal office hours. Requests to see them should be made to our Customer Services Officers on 01902 696000 and arrangements will be made to comply with the request as soon as practicable. The Core Strategy and the individual planning applications can be viewed on our web site www.sstaffs.gov.uk

Report prepared by: Andrew Johnson, Chief Planning Officer

Page 11 of 210

Page 12 of 210

App no Applicant/Address Parish Recommendation Page

Deferred items 16/01054/FUL Ms Latisha Dhir PENKRIDGE Approve 15 - 32 Persimmon Homes West Midlands Ltd Lyne Hill Industrial Estate Boscomoor Lane Penkridge South Staffordshire 17/00633/FUL Mr Barry Birch GREAT WYRLEY Approve 33 - 42 122 Streets Lane Cheslyn Hay Walsall South Staffordshire WS6 7AW Applications 17/00959/FUL Mr Mark Holt ACTON Approve 43 - 80 The Toft Farm TRUSSELL, Levedale Road BEDNALL & Levedale TEDDESLEY HAY Stafford South Staffordshire ST18 9LH 17/01022/OUT Bloor Homes Ltd PENKRIDGE Approve 81 - 140 Land North Of Penkridge Stafford Road Penkridge South Staffordshire 18/00107/FUL Mr Merrick Platts ESSINGTON Approve 141 - 160 Old Mitre Bursnips Road Essington Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV11 2RE 18/00200/FUL Dr S Taylor WOMBOURNE Approve 161 - 170 Mount Cottage Redcliffe Drive Wombourne Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV5 0JE 18/00269/ADV Mr Scott Gwinnett BREWOOD & Approve 171 - 178 The Four Ashes COVEN Station Drive Four Ashes

Page 13 of 210 Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV10 7BU 18/00270/FUL Mr Scott Gwinnett BREWOOD & Approve 179 - 188 The Four Ashes COVEN Station Drive Four Ashes Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV10 7BU 18/00338/FUL Ms Pamela Penny BREWOOD & Approve 189 - 198 1 Broomhall Cottages COVEN Horsebrook Farm Lane Brewood Stafford South Staffordshire ST19 9LD 18/00371/OUT Mr Stephen Collins ACTON Approve 199 - 210 South Staffordshire TRUSSELL, Housing Association BEDNALL & Acton Court TEDDESLEY HAY Acton Gate Stafford South Staffordshire ST18 9AP

Page 14 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

DEFERRED ITEM

16/01054/FUL Ms Latisha Dhir PENKRIDGE Councillor C Raven Councillor J Raven

Lyne Hill Industrial Estate Boscomoor Lane Penkridge South Staffordshire

15 residential units

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

See Appendix A

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

See Appendix A

3. POLICY CONTEXT

See Appendix A

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

See Appendix A

5. APPRAISAL

See Appendix A

5.8 S106 Agreement 5.8.4 The application was originally approved by Committee on 16 May 2017, subject to a Section 106 agreement being signed by 16 August 2017. Unfortunately, the S106 agreement has taken significantly longer to complete than originally anticipated, but it is now almost complete.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 Now that the S106 Agreement is almost completed, it is requested that Committee approve the application again, subject to the completion of a satisfactory S106 Agreement.

7. RECOMMENDATION - Delegate APPROVAL to the Assistant Team Manager (Localities 4 and 5) to issue the decision on completion of a satisfactory Section 106 Agreement

Page 15 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Appendix A

16/01054/FUL Ms Latisha Dhir Cllr John Raven Cllr Christine Raven

PENKRIDGE

Lyne Hill Industrial Estate Boscomoor Lane Penkridge South Staffordshire

15 residential units

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site Description

1.1.1 Lyne Hill Industrial Estate is within the Penkridge Development Boundary and lies on the south side of the village measuring 11.14ha. The site is bound by the A449 to the west, Boscomoor neighbourhood centre and Commerce Drive to the north, Boscomoor Lane to the east, with Lyne Hill Lane along the southeast boundary. The southern boundary abuts a dismantled railway line that runs from east to west towards its former junction with the West Coast Mainline railway over the A449. The northern edge of the site at Boscomoor includes the retail parade with a small supermarket, existing petrol station and retail units.

1.1.2 The Lyne Hill Industrial Estate is previously developed land that was dominated by warehousing (B8) providing 50,280sq metres of floor space. The majority of the site has been cleared, with some units remaining and houses have been constructed as part of the approved applications 13/00394/OUT and 15/00775/REM (refer to para 1.2). The topography of the site is such that the level falls from west to east. The existing building platform lies below the level of the A449 with the lowest part of the site being towards its centre.

1.1.3 There is a stream running through the site towards the eastern end which is partially screened by existing vegetation. The boundary with Lyne Hill Lane is well vegetated with trees as is the portion beside the disused railway line. The northern boundary meets existing commercial development and there are mature trees along the boundary. The network of roads around the site gives three existing accesses from the west, north and east.

1.1.4 This application forms ‘phase 5’ of the overall development of the industrial estate. The application site relates to a small parcel of land that measures 0.3ha towards the top half of the eastern end of the overall site. This area of land is within ‘phase 3’ of the previously approved application 15/01091/REM that links to the outline consent 12/00497/OUT. 1.2 Relevant Planning History

Page 16 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2011 - Outline planning application for the erection of up to 150 residential dwellings (use class C3), supermarket (4181 sq m) (use class A1), non-food retail or light industrial /office units (2787 sq m) (use class A1 / B1), 70-bed hotel (use class D1), 60-bed nursing home (use class C2), assisted living accommodation for the elderly (use class C3), petrol filling station and associated parking and infrastructure including public open space - Refused – appeal withdrawn (11/00223/OUT).

2012 - Outline application for a Supermarket (2,650 sq m, use class A1), petrol filling station, non-food retail or light industrial/offices (2,787 sq m, use class A1 or B1), 70 bed hotel (use class C1) with associated infrastructure, car parking and new vehicle access onto the A449 – Refused - appeal withdrawn (12/00496/OUT).

2012 - Residential development for up to 165 units (class C3) including assisted living accommodation (C3), 60 bed nursing home (Class C2), associated infrastructure, public open space, new access onto Boscomoor Lane and the construction of a pedestrian/cycleway along former rail line (Major application), Approved (12/00497/OUT).

2013 - Residential development of up to 170 dwellings and demolition of industrial units, Approved (13/00394/OUT).

2014 - Geo environmental conditions on the application site have been investigated and we request that the conditions are discharged, Approved (12/00497/COND).

2014 - Geo-environmental investigations have been completed which demonstrate that the site has been de- contaminated with environmental betterment. We request that the planning conditions are discharged, Approved (13/00394/COND).

2015 - Discharge conditions 21a, 21b and 21c, Approved (12/00497/COND2).

2015 - Reserved matters application for phase 1 of development for 50 dwellings, Approved (15/00775/REM).

2015 – Discharge conditions 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, Approved (13/00394/COND2).

2016 - Discharge Conditions 6, 7, 8, Approved (15/00775/COND).

2016 - Discharge of Condition 3, Pending consideration (15/00775/COND2).

2016 – Discharge Cond 16, Approved (13/00394/COND3).

2016 – Discharge of condition 23, Pending consideration (13/00394/COND4)

Page 17 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2016 - Revision of the application for the approval of reserved matters for 120 dwellings (reduced from 127) comprising phase 2 of the site with outline planning permission. The outline planning permission was NOT an EIA application, Approved (15/01089/REM).

2016 - Revision of application for the approval of reserved matters to outline permission 12/00497/OUT. The application is for 154 units (increased from 144) comprising phase 3 of the site with outline planning permission. The outline planning permission was NOT an EIA application, Approved (15/01091/REM).

2016 - Full planning application for the erection of 65 new 1 and 2 bedroom apartments for the over 55s with associated landscaping and car parking, Approved (15/01124/FUL)

2016 - Remove condition 8 of planning permission 12/00497/OUT: The development hereby approved shall provide a nursing care home for up to 60 residents and a minimum of 10 assisted living units within the red line boundary, Approved (16/00296/VAR)

2016 - 9 residential units, Approved (16/00387/FUL)

2016 - Variation of condition 9 of planning permission 13/00394/OUT for alterations to the level of affordable housing sought to be changed to reflect the level of provision included within the Reserved Matters applications. A minimum of 37% of the maximum 170 dwellings shall be secured as affordable housing with a minimum of 30 of the units being social rented and 33 of the units being intermediate housing tenure types, Approved (16/00460/VAR)

2016 - Variation of condition 7 of planning permission 12/00497/OUT for alterations to the level of affordable housing sought to be changed to reflect the level of provision included within the Reserved Matters applications. A minimum of 24% of the maximum 165 dwellings shall be secured as affordable housing with a minimum of 20 of the units being social rented and 17 of the units being intermediate housing tenure types, Approved (16/00462/VAR)

1.3 Pre-application Discussions

1.3.1 None.

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 It should be noted that this application does not follow on from the outline permission 12/00497/OUT or the reserved matters consent 15/01091/REM; but is a new planning application in its own right even though it falls within ‘phase 3’ and links into the overall development.

Page 18 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2.1.1 The application forms part of ‘phase 5’ of the overall development of the industrial estate. This application is for 15 houses comprising two terraces of six houses, three pairs of semis and three detached houses. The mix would be:

Dwelling Type Open Market Affordable 2 bed house 5 5 3 bed house 3 4 bed house 2 Total 15

2.1.2 All the properties would be two storeys in height with two of the properties having incorporated garages. The respective road access points forming the primary road through the estate (as part of 15/01089/REM and 15/01091/REM) would serve five of the houses with the remaining properties being served by two cul-de-sacs through the general road arrangement of the overall development.

2.1.3 Pedestrian links would be provided to the disused railway line which will be converted into a footpath/cycle route as part of the outline consent 12/00497/OUT. An area of public open space, under ‘phase 2’, would also be provided towards the centre of the overall site that would have an area of 400sqm.

2.2 Agent Submission

2.2.1 Design and Access Addendum External Finishes Schedule

3. POLICY CONTEXT

3.1 The application site is within the Penkridge Development Boundary.

3.2 Core Strategy Development Plan Document, December 2012:

EQ2 – Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation EQ4 – Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape EQ5 – Sustainable Resources and Energy Efficiency EQ7 – Water Quality EQ8 - Waste EQ9 – Protecting Residential Amenity EQ11 – Wider Design Considerations EQ12 - Landscaping EQ13 – Development Contributions H1 – Achieving a Balanced Housing Market H2 – Provision of Affordable Housing

Page 19 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

EV11 - Sustainable Travel EV12 – Parking Provision 3.3 Housing Market Assessment (2012)

3.4 National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG), 2013

This online planning practice guidance created by Government was set-up with the aim of making planning guidance more accessible and to provide assistance in the decision making process.

Para 008 (Reference ID: 56-008-20160519) What accessibility standards can local planning authorities require from new development?

3.5 Deregulation Act 2015

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Penkridge Parish Council (received 16/03/17): no comments.

Cllrs C. Raven and J. Raven (no comments received: expired 15/03/17)

Regeneration and Housing (received 30/03/17):

The revised layout for Phase 5 confirms the split of affordable homes now is as follows: 3 x social rent and 2 x shared ownership.

The affordable housing for this phase therefore now complies with Policy H2 of the core strategy, which confirms affordable housing should be split 50:50 between social rent and intermediate tenure. It also accords with the Affordable Housing and Housing Mix SPD which states that where an odd number of affordable units are proposed, the split should be in favour of social rent.

The revised layout is therefore supported by housing strategy.

Local Plan (received 10/03/17):

This is a full application amending the site layout of phase 3 of the existing development scheme to introduce an additional 15 dwellings which will now constitute a fifth phase of site development. The proposal comprises 10 market houses and 5 intermediate dwellings.

Policy Context

The principle policy considerations relating to this proposal include:

o Principle of Development

Page 20 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

o Other Issues

Principle of Development

The principle of accommodating residential development on this site was the subject of an outline application which was approved in 2013. Policy CP1 supports main service villages such as Penkridge as a main focus for development. Support is also given to the efficient use of land and to prioritising the use of previously developed land. Subject to the case officer being satisfied that the design, layout and density is appropriate; the additional units to the housing supply for South Staffordshire, as well as smaller houses, is welcomed.

Other Issues

The proposed development is within the 0-8km Cannock Chase SAC Zone of Influence where mitigation measures are required to offset the potential impact of new development upon the designated Cannock Chase SAC. A charge of £232 per dwelling is required (plus £100 per UU admin charge) towards mitigation measures.

Conclusion

The principle of accommodating residential development on this site was agreed as part of a previous outline permission. That permission supported the contribution which this site could make towards meeting the requirements for housing in Penkridge and reducing the pressure for the release of greenfield sites. Local plans has no objections to this application.

Environmental Health (received 15/03/07): no comments.

Arboricultural Officer (no comments received: expired 15/03/17)

County Planning (received 17/03/17):

Having regard to the observations above, it is reasonable to conclude that the proposal would not lead to any significant adverse impacts on underlying mineral resources or waste management facilities.

Therefore, in accordance with the powers contained in the 'Scheme of Delegation to Officers', this letter confirms that Staffordshire County Council, acting as the Minerals and Waste Planning Authority, has NO OBJECTION to the development of 15 residential units at Lyne Hill Industrial Estate, Boscomoor Lane, Penkridge, Staffordshire.

County Highways (received 24/02/17): no objections subject to condition:

Page 21 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

1. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access, parking, servicing and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans.

School Organisation Team (received 15/03/17):

This development falls within the catchments of St. Michael's CE(VA) First School, Penkridge, Penkridge Middle School and Wolgarston High School - Specialist Technology College.

The development is scheduled to provide 15 dwellings. A development of this size could add 2 First School aged pupils, 2 Middle School aged pupils and 1 High School aged pupil.

Wolgarston High School is projected to have sufficient space to accommodate the likely demand from pupils generated by the development.

However, St. Michael's CE(VA) First School and Penkridge Middle School are projected to be full for the foreseeable future.

We will therefore be requesting a contribution towards First School provision and Middle School provision only.

We would seek an Education Contribution for 2 First School places (2 x £11,031 = £22,062), 2 Middle School places (2 x £13,827 = £27,654). This gives a total request of £49,716

The above contribution is based on the 2008/09 cost multipliers which are subject to change.

The above is based on current demographics which can change over time and therefore we would wish to be consulted on any further applications for this site.

County Flood Risk Team (received 28/04/17):

The email you forwarded from the agent confirms that the current phase will be accommodated within the overall system with the limited discharge as above. Given that we are on Phase 3 I assume the overall Drainage Strategy has already been approved?

Provided that this phase complies with the overall scheme it should be acceptable. The current application doesn't include details for the overall scheme, so you may wish to condition details to confirm that the scheme will be carried out in accordance with the approved details above.

Police (received 10/03/17): standing advice given.

Page 22 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Staffordshire Badger Conservation Group (received 25/02/17):

We recommend that the site is resurveyed in order that if badgers are found to be present, they will be mitigated for.

Further comments received on 02/03/17: Further to my comments of 25 February 2017 (copied below) for clarification I should like to add that the survey requested could be carried out immediately before any works commence to ensure that badgers have not moved onto the site.

Highways England (received 08/03/17): no objection.

Environment Agency (received 27/04/17): no objection.

Natural England (received 07/03/17):

No objection – subject to appropriate mitigation being secured

A suitable developer contribution should be secured, consistent with adopted local plan policy EQ2 Cannock Chase SAC and the Council's supporting document 'Cannock Chase SAC - Guidance to mitigate the impact of residential development'.

Network Rail (24/02/17) no comments.

Staffordshire Wildlife Trust (no comments received: expires 15/03/17)

4.2 Representations

No letters of objection received.

Site notice posted (expired 15/03/17) and newspaper advert published (expired 28/03/17).

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 The application has been presented to Planning Committee because it is contrary to policies EQ5 and H1.

5.2 Key Issues

- Principle of development - Design and layout - Housing mix - Landscape - Impact on the SAC

Page 23 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

- S106 Agreement - Drainage - Amenity of future occupiers - Impact on neighbouring dwellings - Representations

5.3 Principle of development

5.3.1 The principle of redeveloping the site to provide housing has already been established through the outline planning permission 12/00497/OUT and there is a current extant reserved matters consent 15/01091/REM. Even though this application is independent from the previous consents because it covers part of the same area, the principle of development for housing has already been agreed.

5.4 Design and layout

5.4.1 Policy EQ11 seeks high quality design for all new developments that take into account local character and distinctiveness; and Policy EQ12 emphasises that the landscaping of new development should be an integral part of the overall design.

5.4.2 Fifteen houses are proposed in a combination of terrace, semi and detached properties ranging from 2 to 4 beds. All the houses would be two storeys in height and the scale of the properties are of typical sizes for residential developments and is considered acceptable.

5.4.3 The dwellings would have access off the primary road that goes through the estate (as part of 15/01089/REM and 15/01091/REM), as well as being served by two cul-de-sacs through the general road arrangement of the overall development. The layout is considered acceptable and provides the legibility commonly associated with residential developments. County Highways and Highways England raised no concerns over the proposal.

5.4.4 The properties are characterised by gabled roofs with brick detailing under the eaves, canopies over the front doors and soldier course headers and cills over and below the fenestrations. The submitted External Finishes Schedule details that the materials used would be a mix of traditional red brick and dark orange with some elevations rendered, using slate grey roof tiles.

5.4.5 The appearance of the proposed development is considered acceptable and provides good detailing that avoids an insipid appearance. The quality of the design adds to local character and distinctiveness providing a higher quality development amongst its recent commercial setting; complying with EQ11.

5.4.6 Full landscaping details have not been submitted with the application, but the general arrangement of the proposal would sit comfortably amongst the

Page 24 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

overall development where the approved landscaping could be continued into this development. However, further details are required to specify the type of planting proposed therefore a landscape condition has been imposed in order to comply with EQ12.

5.4.7 Policy EV11 seeks sustainable forms of transport to service developments and Policy EV12 seeks appropriate off-road parking in-line with the maximum parking provision as set in Appendix 5: Parking Standards.

5.4.8 The site is part of the Penkridge Development Boundary and is served by existing public transport. All the dwellings have off-road parking provision and meet the maximum parking standards set in Appendix 5; complying with EV11 and EV12.

5.4.9 Policy EQ5 encourages new residential developments to achieve minimum carbon standards. Subsection (1)(c) of the Planning and Energy Act 2008 allowed local authorities to set their own energy efficiency standards that exceeded energy requirements of building regulations. However, the Deregulation Act 2015 has brought in the following change:

Subsection (1)(c) does not apply to development in England that consists of the construction or adaptation of buildings to provide dwellings or the carrying out of any work on dwellings.

5.4.10 Therefore, as this application relates to residential buildings, standards set within building regulations are considered sufficient for energy efficiency requirements.

5.5 Housing mix

5.5.1 Policy H1 aims to deliver a wide choice of high quality homes and to create a more sustainable and balanced housing market by encouraging the provision of more 2 and 3 bed homes in all housing market areas. An appropriate mix of market and affordable housing should be delivered that is informed by the Housing Market Assessment (HMA). The Council would also expect new housing to be built to meet Lifetime Homes Standards.

5.5.2 Policy H2 seeks 30% affordable housing provision on previously developed land where 10 or more dwellings are being provided. As the proposal is to deliver 15 dwellings on a former commercial site, 30% equates to 4.5 dwellings, and where the figure is not a whole number it is rounded up; therefore 5 dwellings need to be provided. The tenure of the affordable housing provision should meet the initial target of a 50/50 split between social rent and shared ownership.

5.5.3 The HMA recognises a significant demand for 2 bed properties within Penkridge for market and affordable housing. Out of the 15 dwellings (refer to para 2.1.1) 10 would be two bed at five each for market and affordable,

Page 25 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

which equates to 67%. This will deliver a healthy proportion of market and affordable two bed dwellings.

5.5.4 Of the remaining dwellings, which would all be market, 20% would be three bed and 13% four bed. The overall market and affordable mix of dwellings is considered acceptable complying with policy H1.

5.5.5 Out of the proposed 15 dwellings five would be affordable which equates to 33.3% which complies with the minimum 30% requirement of policy H2. Out of these five dwellings, two would be shared ownership and three social rent, which is close to the 50/50 split; complying with this policy.

5.5.6 With relation to new dwellings expected to be built to meet Lifetime Homes Standards, this requirement will not be sought for because the NPPG states:

“Where a local planning authority adopts a policy to provide enhanced accessibility or adaptability they should do so only by reference to Requirement M4(2) and/or M4(3) of the optional requirements in the Building Regulations and should not impose any additional information requirements (for instance provision of furnished layouts) or seek to determine compliance with these requirements, which is the role of the Building Control Body.”

5.6 Landscape

5.6.1 Policy EQ4 seeks to protect the rural character and local distinctiveness of the landscape that should be maintained and enhanced where possible.

5.6.2 The application site, and the site as a whole, is within a development boundary on the end of an urbanised locale; it does not form part of a rural landscape. The site is primarily hardstanded that was dominated by warehousing. It is considered that the proposed housing development would not have a further detrimental impact upon the wider landscape.

5.7 Impact on the SAC

5.7.1 Policy EQ2 only permits development that is not likely to lead to direct or indirect adverse impacts upon the integrity of the Cannock Chase SAC. The application site is within the 0-8km SAC Zone of Influence where mitigation measures are required to offset the potential impact upon the SAC.

5.7.2 Guidance has been implemented by the SAC Partnership, which looks at providing suitable mitigation through the delivery of a Strategic Access Management and Mitigation (SAMM) plan. It is required that £232 is paid for each net increase in dwellings within the 0-8km zone. For this scheme the total amount would be £3,480 and the payment will be secured via a S106 Agreement; complying with EQ2.

5.8 S106 Agreement

Page 26 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.8.1 Regulation 122 of The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 states that a planning obligation may only constitute a reason for granting planning permission for a development if the obligation is:

(a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

5.8.2 The planning obligations sought for would be:

- £3,480 as a Cannock Chase SAC payment; - £49,716 as an education contribution with £22,062 for St. Michael’s CE(VA) First School and £27,654 for Penkridge Middle School; and - Plots 195 and 203 to be delivered as shared ownership and plots 204, 347 and 348 to be delivered as social rent.

5.8.3 Policy EQ13 seeks contributions from developers, where necessary, to ensure sustainable development and the planning obligations sought for are directly related to the development.

5.8.4 It is therefore concluded that Regulation 122 of the CIL regulations has been complied with and a legal instruction will be sent to the Council’s Solicitor to get the S106 Agreement started. A period of three months will be given from the committee date (16/08/17) to complete this otherwise the application will be refused.

5.9 Drainage

5.9.1 Policy EQ7 will permit developments which do not have a negative impact upon water quality and that suitable drainage solutions should be in place.

5.9.2 The Environment Agency raised no objections and the County Flood Risk Team are comfortable with the proposal, in light of the previous applications made on the site, subject to a condition.

5.10 Amenity of future occupiers

5.10.1 Appendix 6: Space About Dwellings Standards of the Core Strategy provides general guidance on privacy and outlook standards as well as garden spaces.

5.10.2 The privacy and outlook standards recommend a minimum distance of 21m between facing windows to habitable rooms over private space, and where properties face a flank wall there should be a minimum 13m distance.

5.10.3 The rear of the plots 182-184 face the rear properties of plots 189-191 (which are part of phase 3) at a minimum distance of 18.9m. the rear wall of plots 195 and 203 face the flank wall of plot 191 at a distance of 10.3m, and the rear of plot 193 faces the flank wall of 189 at a distance of 11m.

Page 27 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.10.4 Several of the properties do not meet the recommended privacy and outlook standards. However, these standards are general guidance and need to be considered in the context of each planning application. This development is for residential on previously developed land and forms part of the wider redevelopment of the Lyne Hill Industrial Estate. Modern housing estates tend to have more density of units in order to maximise land efficiency. None of the properties at this part of the site have been constructed therefore no exiting occupiers will be affected; and once constructed potential buyers will be able to see the arrangement of properties and can decide whether they are comfortable in making the purchase or not.

5.10.5 In terms of the recommended garden standards, only two of the units meet the recommended minimum length and area. However, again these standards are general guidance and potential buyers can decide whether the garden spaces meet their needs. It should also be noted that the disused railway line will be converted into a footpath/cycle route as part of the outline consent 12/00497/OUT and an area of open space of 400sqm is being delivered as part of ‘phase 2’. Therefore, sufficient recreational space will be delivered for future occupiers of the estate.

5.10.6 The properties will have side access to rear gardens to allow for refuse and recycling storage, and ease of collection, complying with Policy EQ8.

5.11 Impact on neighbouring dwellings

5.11.1 Policy EQ9 seeks to protect the amenity of nearby residents. There are no existing residential dwellings within 50m of the application site. It is therefore considered that there would be no detrimental harm caused upon the amenity of neighbours.

5.12 Representations

5.12.1 None.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 The principle of development has already been established to bring the site forward for housing. This application is part of the fifth phase and the proposed dwellings are of good design with the layout of the scheme being acceptable. The proposal would not have any further detrimental impact upon the wider landscape and there would be no material harm caused upon the amenity of neighbouring properties. The amenity of future occupiers has been accounted for and planning obligations for the Cannock Chase SAC, education contribution and affordable housing will be secured via a S106 Agreement. The application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to a S106 Agreement, complying with policies EQ2, EQ4, EQ7, EQ8, EQ9, EQ11, EQ12, EQ13, H2, EV11 and EV12 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Page 28 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

7. RECOMMENDATION

Delegate APPROVAL to the Team Leader of Major Applications and Appeals to issue the decision on completion of a satisfactory Section 106 Agreement by the 16/08/17.

Subject to the following condition(s):

1) The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

2) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings and schedule:

05 C 07 C 08 B 11 C 11-1 B 14 C LYN-PH5.02 B LYN PL-01 M External Finishes Schedule

3) Before the development commences a landscape scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The approved scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and completed within 12 months of the completion of the development. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the scheme has been completed. Any failures shall be replaced within the next available planting season and the scheme shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

4) Before the development commences the existing trees, shrubs and hedges on the site shall be protected by fencing constructed in accordance with BS5837:2012 in positions to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority which shall be retained throughout the development of the site in the approved positions.

5) The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access, parking, servicing and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans.

6) The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use.

Page 29 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Reasons

1) The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2) In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

3) To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

4) To protect the existing trees on the site during construction work in accordance with policy EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5) In the interest of highway safety.

6) To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to reduce the risk of creating or exacerbating a flooding problem and to minimise the risk of pollution.

7) Proactive Statement

In dealing with the planning application the Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner in accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

INFORMATIVE

Environment Agency

We would not support the erection of any type of fencing along the watercourse that may restrict our future maintenance access. Any works or structures in, under, over or within 8m of the top of the river bank may require an Environmental Permit from the Environment Agency. Further details and guidance are available on the GOV.UK website - www.gov.uk/guidance/flood-risk-activities-environmental-permits.

Page 30 of 210 Sue Frith: Team Manager – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

16/01054/FUL - Lyne Hill Industrial Estate Boscomoor Lane Penkridge

Page 31 of 210

Page 32 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

DEFERRED ITEM

17/00633/FUL Mr Barry Birch GREAT WYRLEY Councillor R Perry Councillor K Williams

122 Streets Lane Cheslyn Hay Walsall South Staffordshire WS6 7AW

Erection of stable block on open field

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

See Appendix B

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

See Appendix B

3. POLICY CONTEXT

See Appendix B

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Additional comments received

The British Horse Society agreed to the following 2 conditions being added to any permission granted (received 26/06/18):

Additional conditions [8] and [9]

Condition 8 Before the development commences, full details of a suitable boundary treatment to enclose the entire paddock area shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The approved boundary treatment shall be built/erected/provided concurrently with the development and shall thereafter be retained in the approved form and position throughout the life of the development.

Reason To ensure that horse welfare standards are satisfactorily maintained.

Condition 9 The paddock shall be maintained using a strip grazing management system for the pasture involving the use of electric fences, and supplementary feeding for the horses shall be provided during winter.

Page 33 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Reason To ensure that horse welfare standards are satisfactorily maintained.

County Highways (Re: Amended plans 30/04/18): There are no objections on Highway grounds to this proposal (received 15/06/18).

See Appendix B for all other consultation responses.

5. APPRAISAL

See Appendix B

7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to conditions AS AMENDED

Amendments to Condition [4]

Condition 4 The stables hereby approved are for the personal use of the occupiers of 122 Streets Lane, Cheslyn Hay and shall only be used for the stabling of horses. The building shall not be used for any other purpose, unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

Additional Conditions [8] and [9]

Reason To ensure that horse welfare standards are satisfactorily maintained.

Amendment to Informative

Informative

Page 34 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

PLEASE NOTE that the development/works listed under Condition 7 (i)(ii)(iii) of this consent are currently unauthorised and require a separate application for Planning Permission.

Appendix B

17/00633/FUL Mr Barry Birch GREAT WYRLEY Councillor Ray Perry Councillor Kath Williams

122 Streets Lane Cheslyn Hay Walsall South Staffordshire WS6 7AW

Erection of stable block on open field

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site description

1.1.1 The application site comprises a bungalow, which is one of a number of sporadic dwellings on the west side of Streets Lane, located within a reasonably generous curtilage and immediately adjacent to a paddock of less than half an acre, also owned by the Applicant. The bungalow is currently being extended, following the approval of a Certificate of Lawfulness for extensions last year (17/00450/LUP).

1.1.2 The domestic curtilage and paddock jointly have a frontage of approximately 35m along Streets Lane and jointly measure approximately 100m in length to its rear boundary. There is a small flat roofed outbuilding, measuring approximately 5m x 3m, located 7m to the rear of the bungalow.

1.1.3 There are fields to the rear (west) and side (south) of the site and residential properties to the front (east) and side (north).

1.1.4 Retrospective permission for the use of part of the land as a caravan site has recently been refused (17/00572/COU).

1.2 Planning History

2017: Change of use of the land for use as a caravans site for the applicants family, Refused, 17/00572/COU 2017: Rear extension, side extension and loft conversion, Certificate of Lawfulness Approved, 17/00450/LUP.

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Proposal

Page 35 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2.1.1 This application proposes the erection of a stable block immediately behind the above-mentioned outbuilding, approximately 12m rear of the main house. The stables would be for the Applicant's own personal use for keeping two horses.

2.1.2 The building would contain two individual stables divided by a small central tack room. The building would be constructed with a lower course of brickwork, timber clad walls above and a tiled dual-pitched roof. The proposal would measure 7.2m wide x 5m deep x 3.8m high.

2.2 Amended plans

05/12/17: Additional details on facing materials were provided.

26/01/18 & 30/04/18: Various unauthorised development/works were shown on an amended site plan for clarity but at the same time, excluded from this application.

2.3 Agent Submission

Not applicable.

3. POLICY CONTEXT

3.1 Within the West Midlands Green Belt.

3.2 Core Strategy Core Policy 1 - The Spatial Strategy GB1 - Development in the Green Belt Core Policy 2 - Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment EQ4 - Protecting the Character and Appearance of the Landscape Core Policy 4 - Promoting High Quality Design EQ11 - Wider Design Considerations Core Policy 9 - Rural Diversification EV7 - Equine Related Development

3.3 National Planning Policy Framework 7. Requiring good design 9. Protecting the Green Belt

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

4.1 Comments received

Councillor Kath Perry has called the application to Planning Committee, in light of all the issues surrounding this application (05.06.2018)

Great Wyrley Parish Council (received 20/11/17):

Page 36 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

The Parish Council recognises the fact that a stable block would be acceptable in this location from a Green Belt aspect, however, Members are extremely concerned that this may simply be a precursor to an entirely different type of development should be the stables become suddenly redundant. This view stems from the number of unauthorised activities already taking place on this site since its change of ownership.

The number of caravans which have been sited on the land without the benefit of planning permission is of great concern. The alternative access which has also been reopened directly onto the land is also cause for concern. So as you can imagine the sudden appearance of caravans in the garden and another incidence of the siting of three residential caravans on the land has raised public awareness to the site's possible future use.

The Parish Council is also aware that there may be a further application in the offing to site even more caravans on this land in the future; unfortunately, it has to be said that there is a great deal of opposition to any such proposal from the residents of Streets Lane. There are already a number of problems associated with the alleged use of the land for business purposes and the extremely inconsiderate parking of large commercial vehicles. So much so that public meetings have been held with officers of the District Council in order to attempt to find a way forward.

The Parish Council would take this opportunity to support the views of nearby residents and request that even though the foregoing does not constitute cast iron planning reasons for refusal it would request that these views are borne in mind when determining this application.

British Horse Society (received 04/06/18): The area is smaller than we would recommend for two ponies. However, the owner has confirmed they are 12-12.2hh and of cob breeding so are likely to require restricted grazing for weight management during the summer. I discussed options with the owner and recommended that the entire area should be enclosed and then electric fencing used to strip graze the area. The ponies will require stables for the winter as the land is likely to become poached and to have supplementary hay. If these measures are provided the environment should be suitable.

Environmental Health Officer (received 14/08/17): I would recommend a no burning condition on any permission given to this application.

County Highways (received 11/08/17): There are no objections on Highway grounds to this proposal.

Members should refer to the Committee update list for County Highways’ comments on the amended site plan of 30/04/18 (which are expected by 15/06/18).

Neighbours (expired 15/08/17): No comments received.

Page 37 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Site Notice (expired 21/11/17): No comments received.

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 This application has been called into Planning Committee by Councillor Kath Perry.

5.2 Key Issues

- Principle of development - Impact on openness of the Green Belt / Visual intrusion - Impact on neighbouring amenity - Highways/access - Representations

5.3 Principle of development

5.3.1 The application site is located within the Green Belt where there is a presumption against inappropriate development. However, Policy GB1 of the Core Strategy outlines exceptions to inappropriate development and these include the provision of appropriate small-scale facilities for outdoor sport and recreation, and for other uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do not conflict with its purposes. Policy EV7 of the Core Strategy outlines the principles where proposals for equine related development would be supported.

5.3.2 It is considered that a proposal for two stables and one tack room does fall within the acceptable criteria for a small-scale outdoor recreational facility. The British Horse Society have concluded that the paddock area amounting to just 0.6 acres will be acceptable for keeping the Applicant's "Cob" breed ponies, provided that certain measures including fencing, supplementary feeding and a stable (i.e the proposal) for winter months are included. The principle of the development is therefore considered acceptable.

5.4 Impact on openness of the Green Belt / Visual intrusion

5.4.1 The proposed stable block has a footprint of just 43 sq.m representing less than 2% of the overall site area. The proposal would be of a modest in size and height, and would be sited close enough to the main dwelling so as not to be appear visually intrusive within the landscape. The proposed facing materials are considered acceptable. It is therefore considered that there would be no material impact on the openness of the Green Belt, or harm to the surrounding landscape character.

5.5 Impact on neighbouring amenity

5.5.1 The proposal raises no neighbouring residential amenity concerns as the stables would be positioned more than 50m from the nearest neighbouring residential properties on the opposite side of Street Lane (No.3 and 10 Somerford

Page 38 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Close). The proposed development raises no objection from the Environmental Health Officer subject to a condition to prevent on-site burning.

5.6 Highways/access

5.6.1 The proposal for a stable block raises no car parking or highway related implications. The stables would be accessed via the existing domestic access and driveway for 122 Streets Lane.

5.6.2 The Parish Council’s comments regarding the recent unauthorised “alternative” access off Streets Lane are noted, however such works are under separate investigation and are otherwise excluded from this application.

5.6.3 Members should refer to the Committee update list for County Highways’ comments on the amended site plan of 30/04/18 (which are expected by 15/06/18).

5.7 Representations

5.7.1 The Parish Council's concerns are duly noted, however the various unauthorised development/works which has been carried out on the site during the course of this application are under separate investigation. For the avoidance of doubt, the Applicant's Agent has updated a proposed site plan to show the unauthorised development (alongside the proposed stable block), stating that such works are excluded from the current application. I shall attach an appropriately worded condition and informative for this point to be clarified.

5.7.2 There is no information in the application to suggest that the proposed stable block will be used for business purposes. Restricting the use of the stables for the Applicant’s personal use only shall be secured by condition.

6. CONCLUSIONS

6.1.1 I consider the proposal to constitute an acceptable form of development in the Green Belt in accordance with Local Plan policies GB1 and EV7. There are no adverse impacts on the Green Belt or the landscape character of the area.

6.1.2 There are no residential amenity concerns or highway/parking implications under the proposal. I therefore recommend the application for approval subject to conditions.

7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

Page 39 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the amended plans listed below:-

1. 'Reinstating Stable', drawing No. 2113-04A (received 05/12/17) 2. 'Site Plan 1:500' (received 30/04/18)

3. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved facing materials listed below, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.:-

1. Walls (upper): Rose Wood Brown PVC Cladding 2. Walls (lower): Brickwork rendered or painted brown 3. Roof: Marley Smooth Brown roof tiles

4. The stables hereby approved are for the personal use of the occupiers of 122 Streets Lane, Cheslyn Hay only and shall not be used for commercial purposes at any time.

5. There shall be no open burning of materials arising from the keeping and grazing of horses on the land.

6. No other stables, containers, caravans, shelters or other ancillary building or structures, temporary or otherwise, shall be sited on the land without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority.

7. This permission relates to a stable block only, and does not grant or imply consent for any of the development/works listed below and edged GREEN on the attached plan, which are excluded from this permission:-

(i) "Caravan's area" (including all caravans) (ii) "Road way for caravans" hardstanding area and associated vehicular access off Streets Lane. (iii) Timber dog kennels and structures

Reasons

1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

3. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

4. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

5. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Page 40 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

6. The site is within the Green Belt within which, in accordance with the planning policies in the adopted Core Strategy, there is a presumption against inappropriate development

7. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt. Proactive Statement In dealing with the application, the Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems in relation to dealing with the planning application, in accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2012.

Informative PLEASE NOTE that the development/works listed under Condition 4 (i)(ii)(iii) of this consent are currently unauthorised and require a separate application for Planning Permission.

Page 41 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

17/00633/FUL - 122 Streets Lane Cheslyn Hay Walsall South Staffordshire WS6 7AW

Page 42 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

17/00959/FUL Mr Mark Holt ACTON TRUSSELL, BEDNALL & TEDDESLEY HAY Councillor L Bates Councillor I Ford

The Toft Farm Levedale Road Levedale Stafford South Staffordshire ST18 9LH

Erection of 4 No. agricultural buildings for turkey rearing, and associated infrastructure.

1.SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site description

1.1.1 The site is in a rural location and there are fields, agricultural buildings and residential properties in the wider surrounding area.

1.1.2 To the west is the highway between The Toft and Little Heath known as Levedale Road, which provides access to Coppenhall further to the north and Levedale and then Penkridge to the South.

1.1.3 The site is the south west corner of an existing field, bounded by a hedge to the west, south and east and an open boundary the remainder of the field to the north.

1.1.4 There are residential properties located in converted and farmstead buildings at Toft Farm, approximately 250 metres to the north.

1.2 Relevant Planning History

None

1.3 Pre-application Discussion

Pre-application engagement has taken place.

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Proposal

2.1.1 The application proposes

-the erection of four poultry buildings, each measuring approximately 97.5 metres by 20 metres, with an eaves height of approximately 3 metres and a ridge height of 5.6 metres. The buildings would be connected by two 6m by 6m link control rooms and served by four feed bins. -2 feed blending rooms measuring 3m by 3m with an eaves height of approximately 2.4m and a ridge height of 2.8m;

Page 43 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

-a gate house measuring 12.3m by 7m with an eaves height of 2.6m and ridge of 3.2m; -a dead bird store measuring 4m by 4m with an eaves height of 2.4m and a ridge of 2.9m; -a circular water tank measuring 6m diameter; -four bulk gas tanks; -a new highway access, hardstandings and turning areas; -an attenuation pond

The proposed poultry buildings would house a total of 20,000 birds with 5,000 in each building.

2.1.2 The buildings would be purpose built poultry units, with steel portal frames and block work, finished with polyester powder coated profile sheeting for the walls and roof in olive green. The poultry buildings would be fitted with high velocity ridge mounted ventilation fans and side inlet vents with internal gas heating systems, chain feeders and non-drip hippie feeders.

2.1.3 The application states there will be 3 flock cycles a year. The turkeys would be reared from 40 days old up to finished table weight. Each flock cycle would take 114 days, on an all in all out system. For around 100 days the turkeys would be reared at the proposed development site, then during the following 14 days the buildings would be cleaned out, left empty and prepared for the next batch.

2.2 Agents Submission

The following documents have been submitted as part of the application: - Design Access and Planning statement - Noise Impact Assessment - Odour Impact Assessment - Preliminary Ecological Appraisal- including updates - Specialist Appraisal and Reasonable Avoidance Measures - Calculation of Ammonia Impact using SCAIL - Ammonia Modelling Report - Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Management Plan - Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment -Transport Statement - A 15 minute video showing a lorry travelling the route from the A449 to the site

3. POLICY CONTEXT

3.1. The application site is within the Open Countryside and is within the 8km buffer zone for the Cannock Chase SAC and the impact risk zone for Mottey Meadows and Cannock Chase SAC, with both areas also designated nationally as SSSIs. The proposals are also within the impact risk zone for the Allimore Green SSSI. As a competent authority under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations the Council should have regard for any potential impacts that a plan or project may have on the relevant European site interest.

Page 44 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Core Strategy Development Plan Document, December 2012:

OC1 - Development in the Open Countryside beyond the West Midlands Green Belt EQ1 - Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets EQ2 - Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation EQ4 - Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape EQ5 - Sustainable Resources and Energy Efficiency EQ7 - Water Quality EQ9 - Protecting Residential Amenity EQ10 - Hazardous and Environmentally Sensitive Development EQ11 - Wider Design Considerations EQ12 - Landscaping EV8 - Agriculture EV12 - Parking Provision

3.1.2 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), March 2012:

Para 28: Supporting a Prosperous Rural Economy Para 32: Transport Statement and Assessment Para 56-68: Requiring Good Design Para 79-92: Protecting Green Belt Land Para 109-125: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Councillor Bates has called the application to Committee

Dunston & Coppenhall Parish Council -Replies received: 11th January 2018 and 6th November 2017

In view of the concerns expressed by residents the Parish Council held a public meeting on 29th November 2017 to discuss the above application. The meeting was attended by approximately 75 residents.

The concerns raised were as follows; 1; Transport access via School Lane from the A449. The road is narrow, has limited passing places and is frequently congested especially by St Leonards School and as such is considered unsuitable for frequent HGV movements. Proposed limited vehicle movements at school opening and closing times is not sufficient as the school often has functions during term time which generates extra traffic. If School Lane is congested any vehicles turning in from the A449 have difficulty in accessing the road and can block the A449 leading to potential hazards on a busy arterial highway. The traffic survey was conducted by the applicant's agent on a single unspecified day, which the meeting considered inadequate. The meeting considered that Highways should have conducted an independent survey covering several days and at different times of the day to obtain a complete picture of the usage of the roads.

Page 45 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2; Storage of manure; possible issues about smell and insect infestation on neighbouring houses. Waste will need to be stored within closed buildings and monitored closely. 3; Runoff water drainage; will need careful managing to prevent flooding from increased water flow off hard standing and the additional buildings. 4; Bore Holes; neighbouring dwellings are not on mains water so rely on bore holes for their fresh water. The neighbours expressed concerns about contamination from liquid waste being discharged from the site.

Conclusion; Items 2/3/4 are covered by various DEFRA and Environment regulations which should be covered if the application is approved by conditions applied and enforced. Item 1 is the main problem and the Parish Council agree with the residents that the proposed routing of HGV vehicles servicing this enterprise should not be via School Lane from the A449. As emphasised at the meeting the road is narrow, has few reasonable passing places, is frequently congested by the school and heavier traffic movements could cause accidents especially to children. There are 2 bridges along this stretch of road, one over a small stream and the other over the railway line which will need assessing to confirm that they will be able to support the weight of additional heavy vehicles.

The Parish council also advised all those who attended the meeting to enter their comments onto the Planning Portal.

The above application was sent to Acton Trussell parish council in error, we fortunately learnt of it via our District Councillor Len Bates.

The application was discussed by the council who made the following comments; The council have no objections to the development in principle, but object strongly to the proposed access route via School Lane, Dunston. This would mean a large number of HGV vehicles servicing the turkey farm using a road which is narrow, has limited passing places and passes the village school and village hall. This road is often congested by parents at certain times of the day reducing carriageway width and the volume of HGV movements proposed would provide a significant danger to the children and other pedestrians. We propose that an alternative route from the A449 at Penkridge via Levedale Road to the farm would be safer and more acceptable to the residents of Dunston.

With reference to the above application, the parish council would like the following note of explanation added to our comments sent previously.

Please note that the comments originally made on 6th November 2017 were decided by the Parish Council at a scheduled Parish Council meeting on the 2 November 2017. The Council only heard about this application at this meeting when they were officially advised by the District Councillor. The notification from Planning had been sent in error to the wrong Parish Council. In view of this an Extraordinary meeting of the Parish Council has been arranged at 7.30 pm 29 November 2017 at Dunston Village Hall at which the residents will be able to put forward their views on this

Page 46 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 application and in light of these the Parish Council will be able to amend or review their comments.

The Planning Department have now issued a notification to us which gives us until 1 December 2017 to submit comments.

Mr Jeremy Lefroy MP -Updated Reply received: 29th January 2018

Further to my letter of 31st December 2017, in which I forwarded matters raised by my constituents and raised concerns over the scale of the development, I have now visited the site of the proposed farm. I have also visited a site in East Shropshire, accompanied by the applicant, where the buildings are of the same type and number as the proposed farm.

I wish to make the following observations additional to those in my earlier letter: Highways Given the narrowness of roads which access the site, and the location of the First School on the main access, if the application is permitted, there must be specified conditions over the timing of the movement of HGVs so as not to conflict with school traffic. I understand that the farm was until recently a dairy farm and serviced by HGVs collecting milk and delivering feed.

Environment From my visit to the site which is in use in East Shropshire, I made the following observations: a) The odour level was low and diminished the further away from the units one walked such that at 20- 30m it was hardly detectable. Of course, this was an observation at one particular time. b) The noise level was, at 10m from the units, a low humming from the ventilation system. There was a residential building approximately 100-120m from the units. c) As I visited the units during daylight hours, I was unable to judge the impact of lighting. All the fixtures I saw were angled downwards. d) As the topography and other characteristics of the site in East Shropshire were different from the proposed site in Dunston Heath, I cannot make any comment on flooding or drainage. e) The unit in East Shropshire was set in a hollow which resulted in less visual impact than I had anticipated. The proposed site in Dunston Heath is low lying compared with the surrounding land. One side is shielded by woodland. The nearest residential dwellings are c300m away and are the property of the applicant. f) The design of the units in East Shropshire was somewhat similar to other agricultural buildings - with lower eaves height than most barns but of greater length. The colour used (a dark green) seemed to me appropriate.

Having seen the operational unit in E Shropshire, my concerns, expressed in my letter of 31st December 2017, about the scale of the proposed unit were alleviated, provided that there is no possibility for it to be expanded beyond the size proposed in the application.

Page 47 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

I would respectfully suggest that site visits, if possible, to the existing unit as well as the proposed site would be of assistance to those making the decision as they could help in understanding the impact of a similar unit on the proposed site in Dunston Heath and whether it is appropriate or not.

Original Reply received: 16th January 2018

Several constituents have written to me objecting to the above application for the following reasons:

Highways The country lanes serving the unit are already used by large farm traffic There are HGVs from the Bradley dairy as well as tractors, HGVs and buses relating to soft fruit growers — which are some of the largest such growers in the UK.

These lanes are not designed to take the traffic which they currently bear, let alone increased volumes.

It is also proposed that the site would be accessed from School Lane, Dunston, where the children, staff and parents would First School, St Leonard's, would be affected by the increased heavy traffic.

These rural lanes are also used by cyclists, walkers and horse riders.

Environment a) Odours My constituents are concerned about harm to neighbours from the odours which may be emitted from the proposed development from the units themselves and the storage of manure in the open. b) Flooding/drainage-my constituents point out that the proposed area has a number of ponds and that the road itself is prone to flooding. There would need to be consideration given to the likelihood of pollution of groundwater and water bodies in the area. c) Noise and light pollution-my constituents have concerns about the level of noise from the turkeys being bred and from the ventilation. They are also concerned about the impact of the lighting which is required.

Visual impact The size of the proposed unit is out of keeping with the rural nature of the area. While the area already sees large numbers of polytunnels, these are temporary structures which require periodic planning permission. The proposed substantial unit is permanent.

Notification My constituents state that a number of affected or interested parties have not been officially informed of the Planning Application. It is vital that all those affected should

Page 48 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 be able to respond. I would ask the Council to ensure that all those who are required to be informed have been contacted.

From the above, it is clear to me that the proposed scale of the development is inappropriate for the area of Dunston Heath and its infrastructure. I wish to encourage agricultural and rural development in my constituency but it needs to be appropriate to the surroundings.

County Councillor Mark Sutton - Update Reply received: 5th March 2018

Two major concerns about this development,

- that a development that requires HGV's and other large vehicles is being considered 2 miles from a A road, and

- that all traffic movements to and from have to pass a first school/nursery that has limited off road parking and like every other school in the country has issues at collection and drop off times.

I would like the opportunity to discuss the possibility of getting 106 money to reduce the impact of this development on the area, mainly around traffic.

Possible mitigation would be but not exclusively

1. Parking restrictions in School Road and the A449 junction. 2. Speed calming measures such as a 'give and take' system on the railway bridge and adjacent to the nearby houses. 3. Widening and improvement at the junctions of School lane/Long Lane, Long Lane/Levedale Road, Levedale Road/Whittamore Lane and Whittamore Lane/School Lane. This to include the construction of kerbs and verge protection and ensure drainage is sufficient. 4. Sections of Long Lane and Whittamore lane are only just wide enough for one vehicle and high hedges, HGV's and other road users will undoubtedly come into conflict, to try and alleviate this the building of kerbed, strongly constructed passing places long enough and wide enough to accommodate HGV's.

I also think that the conditions suggested by Highways around the school are not sufficient they don't take into account the nursery provision at the school so need to be extended. I think we should also consider conditions around no operation of the development between 2100 and 0700 and not on Sundays and weekends.

There should also be a condition that the developer produces a legally en-forceable memorandum of understanding on movement times, number of vehicles, size of vehicles, and all the other reassurances that the developer gives in their application.

This should also commit to independent on-going traffic monitoring funded by the applicant but commissioned by SSDC, with a condition that breaches would result in enforcement.

Page 49 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Original Reply Received: 9th January 2018

These are my views and not the views of Staffordshire County Council. My objections are on the basis of the location of the development being so distant from main roads and the impact on the minor road network. The access to and from the development is 2 miles from the A449 and the plant's operations requires regular visits from heavy goods vehicles. From the A449 along School Lane past St Leonards School and Nursery. Traffic accessing the school already causes congestion. If the committee is minded to approve the application, the proposed conditions are essential but it is my view that the committee will need to be satisfied that the time restrictions are sufficient to resolve the safety issues. This should be ascertained at the applicant's expense by an independent onsite review. If the development is approved then ongoing assessments at the applicant's expense need to be put in place to ensure that the conditions are being consistently observed. The access route continues along School Lane over the railway bridge, a right-hand bend and passed a small housing development where there is limited vision and a number of the houses are close to the road. The return journey is along the same route in the opposite direction and this raises the likelihood that two HGV's will meet at a location where there will be considerable difficulty in passing. It is my view that the applicant should provide a traffic survey specifically aimed at a solution to this problem and if a suitable solution can be found then this should be subject of a 106 contribution to fund it. If a solution cannot be found then the development should not be allowed. The remainder of the route is along narrow roads, which would require suitable passing places being constructed to and junctions widened and kerbed, in order to prevent vehicles not being able to pass and damaging the verges particularly at junctions. This should be at the applicant's expense by way of 106 monies.

Environmental Health Protection - Reply received : 13th December 2017

Reviewed the documents submitted with this application, as with all poultry units there will be occasions that neighbouring properties will be able to smell the proposed turkey units, particularly when the units are being cleaned out. However, the applicant has submitted a compressive odour assessment with the application that demonstrated that the impact on neighbouring properties will be minimal and within the guidelines set by the Environment Agency. As a result, no objections to the proposed application.

Arboricultural Officer - Received : 1st February 2018

Detailed comments on species mix for the proposed landscaping and hedge details to reflect local hedge species.

County Ecology Officer -Updated Reply received : 25th June 2018

I have been commissioned by South Staffordshire Council to review further documentation for the above application in respect of potential effects on designated

Page 50 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

European sites (Special Areas of Conservation / Special Protection Areas, also referred to as "Natura 2000 sites". Documents and plans reviewed: A Report on the Modelling of the Dispersion and Deposition of Ammonia from the Proposed Turkey Rearing Houses at Toft Farm, near Dunston Heath in Staffordshire (AS Modelling & Data Ltd, June 2018) Response from Natural England (13 June 2018) Assessment of Submitted Documents and Plans The detailed modelling report identified three receptor sites: Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Mottey Meadows SAC and Allimore Green Common Site of Special Scientific Interest. The report concluded that detailed modelling demonstrates no likely significant effect on the three receptor sites. I am satisfied with the conclusion of this report. Natural England has been formally consulted and has responded. I note that NE concludes that scope exists for landscaping and biodiversity enhancements to be secured. This has already been met during the planning process.

HRA Screening Opinion This application must be considered under the Habitat Regulation Assessment process in order to satisfy the Local Authority duty to adhere to the Conservation of Species & Habitats Regulations 2010 (known as the Habitats Regulations). The modelling report concludes that the proposed development will not have significant adverse effects. This is satisfactory and is confirmed by the response of Natural England. No further action is necessary. The application will not have any likely significant effects on the integrity of any European or Nationally Designated sites.

Updated Reply received: 25th May 2018

Previous comments by my colleague on ecology are noted below with comments on current application documents.

Previous comment - A minor amendment to the landscape proposals would bring them into accordance with the ecological appraisal recommendations Updated Comment - Landscape proposals now amended accordingly. No further action needed.

Previous Comment - the possible effect of development on neighbouring Biodiversity Alert Site Updated Comment - This is now addressed in the Addendum to Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Report (April 2018). No further action required.

Previous Comment - Management of SUDS should take account of Great Crested Newts Updated Comment - The Amended Surface Water Management Plan now specifically references GCN. No further action needed.

Page 51 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Previous Comment - For Habitats Regulations Assessment screening a consultation with Natural England is recommended regarding the assessment of impacts of ammonium on Special Areas of Conservation and Sites of Special Scientific Interest Updated Comment - Covered by separate comments /documents.

Updated Reply Received: 20th December 2017

1. Introduction

Amended plans and an amended ecology report have now been received.

1.2 Documents and plans reviewed: o Preliminary Ecological Appraisal November 2017 o Amended Landscape Proposals drawing IPA21272-11C Rev C o Amended Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Management Plan Nov 2017 o Soft Landscape Specification Rev A 23/11/17

1.3 I have not visited the site but have viewed aerial photographs and application photographs.

2.0 Policy and Legislative context in relation to this application

2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework s.109 states: The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment ….by minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible. s.118 states that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principle: if significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.

2.2 In accordance with this, the South Staffordshire adopted Local Plan Core Strategy policy EQ1: Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets states that permission will be granted for development that would not cause significant harm to species that are protected or under threat and that wherever possible, development proposals should build in biodiversity by incorporating ecologically sensitive design and features for biodiversity within the development scheme.

2.3 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended); along with the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, provide the main legislative framework for protection of species. In addition to planning policy requirements, the LPA needs to be assured that this legislation will not be contravened due to planning consent. In addition to these provisions, section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 places a duty on all public authorities in England and Wales to have regard, in the exercise of their functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. Section 41 refers to a list of habitats and species of principal importance to which this duty applies.

Page 52 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2.4 Natural England Standing Advice which has the same status as a statutory planning response states that survey reports and mitigation plans are required for development projects that could affect protected species, as part of obtaining planning permission.

3.0 Assessment of Submitted Documents and Plans 3.1 The amended ecological appraisal dated November 2017 includes assessment of hedgerow loss and advice on mitigation. This recommends that the replacement hedgerow planting is comprised of ash, pedunculate oak, hawthorn, blackthorn, hazel, elder, holly and dog rose. Ash cannot be planted due to movement restrictions associated with Chalara disease. The Amended Landscape Proposals drawing IPA21272-11C Rev C specifies field maple, hazel, hawthorn, elder and guelder rose. It is recommended that this be amended to match Amended Preliminary Ecological Appraisal recommendations with the exception of ash. It would be desirable for oak to be specified for planting and management to become hedgerow trees. Otherwise amendments to the Landscape Proposals drawing are appropriate.

3.2 Amendments made to the Soft Landscape Specification are appropriate for great crested newt protection. Rev A can be approved.

3.3 Amendments to the Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Management Plan now indicate a pond with permanent water. It is recommended that a condition be applied attenuation basin/pond design to be in accordance with section 7b and Fig- ure 12 of the amended Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Management Plan November 2017. Maintenance should take account of great crested newts. It is recommended that a condition be applied requiring a SuDS maintenance plan that takes account of great crested newts.

3.4 In accordance with comments made on Nov 17th a condition is recommended requiring submission of a tree and hedgerow protection plan for all retained hedgerows and trees on site boundaries to apply to the site preparation and construction period or, alternatively, this could be covered by a condition requiring development to take place in accordance with s.7.1 Reasonable Avoidance Measures of the Great Crested Newt Appraisal & Mitigation Strategy & Enhancement Measures report.

3.5 In accordance with comments made on Nov 17th a condition is recommended requiring development to take place in accordance with section 7.1 Reasonable Avoidance Measures of the Great Crested Newt Appraisal & Mitigation Strategy & Enhancement Measures report. 3.6 In accordance with comments made on Nov 17th a standard condition for protection of breeding birds is recommended to include all vegetation removal as ground nesting birds may use field margins or crop areas or alternatively this could be covered by a condition requiring development to take place in accordance s.7.1

Page 53 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 Reasonable Avoidance Measures of the Great Crested Newt Appraisal & Mitigation Strategy & Enhancement Measures report.

3.7 In accordance with comments made on Nov 17th a condition or planning agreement is recommended requiring that four bird nesting boxes of mixed designs, including at least one kestrel box, and four bat roosting boxes of mixed designs should be erected on suitable trees within the curtilage of the farm holding, supervised by an ecologist, within six months of consent.

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

4.1 Issues raised in my comments of Nov 17th 2017 have been addressed.

4.2 A minor amendment to the landscape proposals would bring them into accordance with the ecological appraisal recommendations.

4.3 The amended SuDS proposals are in accordance with measures for benefit of great crested newts. It is recommended that a condition be applied requiring a SuDS maintenance plan that takes account of great crested newts.

4.4 In order to ensure protection of European protected species a condition is required requiring development to take place in accordance with section 7.1 Reasonable Avoidance Measures of the Great Crested Newt Appraisal & Mitigation Strategy & Enhancement Measures report. This will also provide protection of adjacent hedgerows and habitats and of breeding birds.

4.5 A condition or planning agreement is recommended requiring installation of bird and bat boxes in accordance with the Preliminary Ecological Assessment recommendations. 4.6 Should external lighting be proposed a condition is recommended requiring a lighting plan to be submitted for approval.

4.7 For Habitats Regulations Assessment screening a consultation with Natural England is recommended regarding the assessment of impacts of ammonium on Special Areas of Conservation and Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

Original Reply Received : 17th November 2017 4.0 Recommendations 4.1 Assessment of the impact of the access road on the roadside hedgerow is required and mitigation needs to be included in the scheme. Revised landscape plans are required that include the mitigation proposed which should involve either hedgerow translocation or compensatory planting with appropriate native species. Some other amendments are recommended to improve biodiversity value.

4.2 The conflict between the Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Management Plan and the Great Crested Newt Appraisal & Mitigation Strategy & Enhancement Measures report regarding the attenuation pond/basin need to be resolved prior to consent. If the attenuation feature will not meet the great crested newt report

Page 54 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 specifications consideration is required of other measures to enhance great crested newt habitat should be considered and landscape planting may need to be re- designed.

4.3 In order to ensure protection of European protected species a condition is required requiring development to take place in accordance with section 7.1 Reasonable Avoidance Measures of the Great Crested Newt Appraisal & Mitigation Strategy & Enhancement Measures report. This will also provide protection of adjacent hedgerows and habitats and of breeding birds.

4.4 A condition or planning agreement is recommended requiring installation of bird and bat boxes in accordance with the Preliminary Ecological Assessment recommendations.

4.5 Should external lighting be proposed a condition is recommended requiring a lighting plan to be submitted for approval.

4.6 For Habitats Regulations Assessment screening a consultation with Natural Eng- land is recommended regarding the assessment of impacts of ammonium on Special Areas of Conservation and Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

Staffordshire County Council Flood Risk Management Team - Updated Reply Received: 14th February 2018

(Based on additional information)

This clarifies that the attenuation will discharge to an existing ditch that would form the natural flow route for runoff for this area, so that would be acceptable.

Commenting on the surface water system only. Any manure / effluent storage would be a separate system, but we would not comment on a manure management plan.

Original Reply Received: 19th December 2017

I have no additional comments based on the amended surface water management plan. However the revised document still does not appear to identify a suitable point of discharge from the attenuation basin.

As per my previous comments, the basin needs a formal discharge to an existing ditch.

County Planning -Reply Received: 30th October 2017

The County Council as the Mineral and Waste Planning Authority has no comments on this application as the site is:

Not within or near to any permitted waste management facility; and

Page 55 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Exempt from the requirements of Policy 3 - Mineral Safeguarding in the Minerals Local Plan for Staffordshire 2015 - 2030.

County Highways -Updated Reply Received: 30th January 2018

There are no objections on Highway grounds to the proposed development subject to the following conditions being included on any approval:-

1. The development shall not commence until the access to the site within the limits of the public highway has been completed. 2. Any gates shall be located a minimum of 15.0m rear of the carriageway boundary and shall open away from the highway. 3. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive rear of the public highway has been surfaced and thereafter maintained in a bound and porous material for a minimum distance of 15.0m rear of the carriageway boundary. 4. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive, parking, servicing and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. 5. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until the visibility splays shown on drawing No. IP/HF/02 have been provided. The visibility splays shall thereafter be kept free of all obstructions to visibility over a height of 600 mm above the adjacent carriageway level. 6. No HGV's associated with the proposed development shall arrive or depart between the hours of 07:30 - 09:00 and 15:00 - 16:30 Monday to Friday during school term. 7. All HGV's associated with the proposed development shall access and egress the site via the route indicated on the submitted Transport Statement from the Hurlestone Partnership dated December 2017.

Reasons.

In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Staffordshire County Council requirement for vehicular access crossings. In the interest of highway safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Informative for Decision Notice.

The construction of the new vehicular access will require a Minor Works Agreement with Staffordshire County Council and the applicant is therefore requested to contact Staffordshire County Council in respect of securing the Agreement. The link below provides a further link to a Minor Works Information Pack and an application Form for the Minor Works Agreement. Please complete and send to the address indicated on the application Form which is Staffordshire County Council, Network Management Unit, Staffordshire Place 2, Tipping Street, Stafford. ST16 2DH. (or email to [email protected]) http://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/transport/staffshighways/licences/

Page 56 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Note to Planning Officer. This Form X is issued on the basis of the information provided within the submitted Transport Statement.

Original Reply Received: 14th November 2017

There are no objections on Highway grounds to the proposed development subject to the following conditions being included on any approval:-

1. The development shall not commence until the access to the site within the limits of the public highway has been completed. 2. Any gates shall be located a minimum of 15.0m rear of the carriageway boundary and shall open away from the highway. 3. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive rear of the public highway has been surfaced and thereafter maintained in a bound and porous material for a minimum distance of 15.0m rear of the carriageway boundary. 4. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive, parking, servicing and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. 5. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until the visibility splays shown on drawing No.IP/HF/02 have been provided. The visibility splays shall thereafter be kept free of all obstructions to visibility over a height of 600 mm above the adjacent carriageway level. 6. No HGV's associated with the proposed development shall arrive or depart between the hours of 08:00 -09:15 and 15:00 - 16:00 Monday to Friday during school term. 7. All HGV's associated with the proposed development shall access and egress the site via the route indicated on the submitted Transport Statement from the Hurlestone Partnership dated October 2017. 1. In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Staffordshire County Council requirement for vehicular access crossings. 2 - 7. In the interest of highway safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Informative for Decision Notice. The construction of the new vehicular access will require a Minor Works Agreement with Staffordshire County Council and the applicant is therefore requested to contact Staffordshire County Council in respect of securing the Agreement. The link below provides a further link to a Minor Works Information Pack and an application Form for the Minor Works Agreement. Please complete and send to the address indicated on the application Form which is Staffordshire County Council, Network Management Unit, Staffordshire Place 2, Tip-ping Street, Stafford. ST16 2DH. (or email to [email protected]) http://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/transport/staffshighways/licences/ Note to Planning Officer.

Page 57 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

This Form X is issued on the basis of the information provided within the submitted Transport Statement.

Crime Prevention Design Advisor - Reply Received: 2nd November 2017

Entrance I recommend that the entrance to the turkey farm road has a staffed gatehouse and barrier or gate to prevent unauthorised access, reference should be made to DHF Technical specification TS 0011:2016, Code of Practice for the design, manufacturer, installation and maintenance of powered gates and traffic barriers.

Lighting The site lighting layout should be carefully designed to cover all areas and not create shadows, it is important that the lighting plan works in conjunction with any CCTV system installed. High-pressure sodium (SON) units or LED's should be used where possible, as low-pressure units (SOX) emit poor quality light and consequentlpoor colour definition that in turn makes it difficult to see intruders. Unit illumination The buildings should have all elevations and recesses illuminated with a series of vandal resistant, high pressure sodium lamps, operated by photoelectric sensors, mounted at the highest inaccessible point. Climbing aids Waste disposal should be sited away from buildings as they can be a target for arson, wheeled bins should be fastened to a ground anchor to prevent them being pushed against a wall to facilitate climbing access or the spread of fire. Unit walls Composite panels and profiled metal cladding are vulnerable to forced entry. The first 2m height of all walls, internally or externally, should be brickwork or materials of similar strength. All grilles should use security screws or bolts. Windows The minimum Association of British Insurers (ABI) and Police security standard for ground floor windows and those easily accessible above ground floor, is that the window shall be successfully tested and Certificated (BSI Kite mark or similar) to; LPS 1175: Issue 6, Security Rating 2 or higher STS 202 Burglary Rating 2 or higher (Note 62.3.1) (Note 62.3.1; STS 202 is the equivalent standard to LPS 1175 and is published by Warrington Certification Laboratories) Windows must also be fit for purpose and must be certificated to the relevant material standard i.e.: BS 6510:2010 (Steel) BS 7412:2007 (PVCu) BS 644:2012 (Timber) BS 8529:2010 (Composite) BS 4873:2009 (Aluminium) Perimeter doors The minimum Association of British Insurers (ABI) and Police security standard for perimeter doors is that they should comply with PAS 24;2012, STS 202 BR2, LPS 2081SRB or LPS 1175 SR2, the opening leaf of perimeter double doors must be fitted

Page 58 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 top and bottom with key operated rack mortise bolts and the meeting styles should be rebated.

Doors should be secured with the relevant lock type: BS 3621: 2011 thief resistant mortise lock. BS 8621:2011 thief resistant mortise lock with keyless egress BS 10621:2011 as above but with keyless external deadlock BS EN 1303:2005 Minimum standard for cylinder locks LPS 1242 Issue 1.2 2005 Cylinder lock requirements DHFTS 621:2011 Electro-mechanical lock. Emergency Doors Door-sets designated as 'emergency' or 'panic' exits must be fitted with the hard- ware appropriate to the specific use: BS EN 179: 2008 Emergency exit devices BS EN 1125: 2008 Panic exit devices Perimeter emergency/escape doors should be steel with a steel frame compliant with EN179 (Emergency exit) or EN125 (Emergency escape) without visible ironmongery, a pair of hinge bolts should be installed along the hinge closure with an anti-jemmy strip installed along the closing face. Fire doors may be locked when the premises are not in use. Interior doors Interior office doors should be 44mm solid core and fitted with a BS3621 5/7 lever mortise deadlock. W.C Facilities Consider installing stainless steel sanitary ware in toilets. All service pipes and fittings should be fully enclosed to prevent vandalism. Anti-vandal light fittings should be fitted, together with non-return screws and hidden fixings. The use of an anti-graffiti coating will aid the removal any drawing or lettering. Alarm system A perimeter intruder alarm system should be installed in each building compliant with BS EN 50131-1:1997 Grade 3, and BS 8418. The management of the system should be to ISO 9001:2000. A unique reference number for the installation will be required for a Police response. CCTV System A full operational requirement should be written to identify vulnerable areas prior to installing a detector activated, recording CCTV system. The following link provides access to H.M. Government's Surveillance Camera Commissioner's Passport To Compliance, following the passport to compliance will help organisations meet the 12 guiding principles in the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice and, whilst not a guarantee, other relevant legislation such as the Data Protection Act and Human Rights Act.

More at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/surveillance-camera-commissioner-launches- a-passport-for-compliance Further information on accredited security products can be found at www.securedbydesign.com

Page 59 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Badger Conservation Group - Reply Received: 30th October 2017

Thank you providing us with the ecological survey for this application. We are happy with the findings and recommendations and have no further comments to make.

Campaign To Protect Rural England Staffordshire Reply Received: 23rd November 2017

Comments We regret the proposal for the turkey sheds but also recognise that the current planning system is not the appropriate vehicle for the reform of agriculture.

We acknowledge that work has been done to mitigate the adverse impact of the proposal on the general environment (Design and Access Statement)

We consider that these sheds and associated development units will be an alien feature which will do nothing to enhance the countryside.

There will be little economic benefit to local people with very limited new employment opportunities - two people.

The road infrastructure does not lend itself to an increase in heavy lorries along nearby country lanes.

The proposed development in no way enhances the countryside vitality or character and brings no evident community benefits.

Environment Agency -Reply Received: 16th November 2017

The proposal is below the permitting threshold of 40,000 places and would not require a permit under the Environmental Permitting Regulations.

The Environment Agency has no objections to the proposed development but recommends that the following advice is attached to any planning permission that may be issued:

- The site is within an Nitrate Vulnerable Zone ( NVZ) and is subject to the storage and spreading requirements of these Regulations. Manures and bedding/manure mixtures must be stored and spread appropriately and in accordance with the NVZ Regulations.

- Any wash waters created must also be collected and disposed of appropriately and must not be allowed to contaminate surface or groundwaters.

Natural England -Updated Reply Received: 14th June 2018

SUMMARY OF ADVICE

Page 60 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

NO OBJECTION - Record of Habitats Regulations Assessment to be drawn up by Council.

Based on the plans submitted, Natural England considers that the proposed development will not have significant adverse impacts on designated sites and has no objection. We advise the Council to draw up a Habitats Regulations Assessment ( HRA) to record its reasoning for the conclusion that this development will not have a significant effect on European Sites. Scope exists for landscaping and biodiversity enhancements to be secured (if approved).

Natural England's advice on other natural environment issues is set out below.

European sites - 'Cannock Chase' and 'Mottey Meadows' Special Area of Conservation

Based on the plans submitted, Natural England considers that the proposed development will not have likely significant effects on the Cannock Chase and Mottey Meadows Special Area of Conservation and has no objection to the proposed development.

To meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations, we advise you to record your decision that a likely significant effect can be ruled out. The following may provide a suitable justification for that decision:

Cannock Chase SAC and Mottey Meadows SAC both lie within 10 km of the application site. The submitted detailed modelling report assesses the impacts of ammonia emissions on designated sites (European Sites and Sites of Special Scientific Interest). The modelling shows that in terms of current thresholds for the assessment of aerial emissions the proposal will not have significant effects on the Cannock Chase and Mottey Meadows SACs.

In order to acknowledge the elevated levels of nitrogen deposition impacting these European Sites we set out advice below regarding potential landscaping and biodiversity enhancements that should be included in the final scheme if approved, consistent with the Council's biodiversity duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act.

Allimore Green Common, Cannock Chase and Mottey Meadows Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Based on the plans submitted, Natural England considers that the proposed development will not damage or destroy the interest features for which these sites have been notified and has no objection.

Original Reply Received: 17th November 2017

Thank you for your consultation on the above dated 27 October 2017 Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that

Page 61 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.

Internationally and nationally designated sites The application site is within or in close proximity to a number of Internationally designated sites (also commonly referred to as Natura 2000 sites), and therefore has the potential to affect their interest features. European sites are afforded protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the 'Habitats Regulations'). The application site is within the impact risk zones of Mottey Meadows and Cannock Chase Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) which are European sites and also notified at a national level as Mottey Meadows and Cannock Chase Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The development proposal also triggers the impact risk zone for Allimore Green Common SSSI.

In considering the European site interest, Natural England advises that you, as a competent authority under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations, should have regard for any potential impacts that a plan or project may have1. The Conservation objectives for each European site explain how the site should be restored and/or maintained and may be helpful in assessing what, if any, potential impacts a plan or project may have.

Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) required The consultation documents provided by your authority do not include information to demonstrate that the requirements of Regulations 61 and 62 of the Habitats Regulations have been considered by your authority, i.e. the consultation does not include a Habitats Regulations Assessment. In advising your authority on the requirements relating to Habitats Regulations Assessment, it is Natural England's advice that the proposal is not necessary for the management of the European site. Your authority should therefore determine whether the proposal is likely to have a significant effect on any European site, proceeding to the

Appropriate Assessment stage where significant effects cannot be ruled out. Natural England advises that the environmental pathways to be considered in your HRA are largely through air and water. We note that an ammonia assessment and a manure management plan have been submitted in support of the application and you may wish to use these to inform your HRA.

Please note that we are not seeking further information on other aspects of the natural environment, although we may make comments on other issues in our final response.

Staffordshire Wildlife Trust - Updated Reply received : 14th June 2018 I hope that the County Ecologist will be able to assist further.

Original Reply Received : 29th January 2018

Page 62 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

SUMMARY Staffordshire Wildlife Trust submits a holding objection to the proposals, due to insufficient information and details on surface water management, habitat and species impacts, and habitat creation. We advise the following are sought:

Information: A. Manure Management Plan updated to show surface water flooding areas and manure storage sites marked on the risk maps. B. Clarification as to whether cumulative impacts have been considered regarding ammonia deposition on designated sites. C. Assessment of the western hedgerow ('Hedgerow 3') against the Staffordshire LWS criteria for hedgerows, and confirmation of potential impacts from the access road. D. Re-assessment of GCN impacts in light of missing information.

Changes: E. Amended and additional landscaping details for hedgerow, woodland, pond and grassland creation. F. Flood channels, raised access track and culvert to be shown on plans. Relocate SuDS basin and dead bird store from areas of surface flood risk. Secured through conditions should permission be given in future - G. Mitigation measures as laid out in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and GCN Appraisal. Add barn owl box if appropriate location available. H. Ecological Management Plan to include measures to protect, replace, enhance, manage and monitor important habitats and species.

Staffordshire Wildlife Trust would like to be kept informed of progress with this application, and receive details of the final permission/ refusal. The Trust would be pleased to assist in formulating any conditions or biodiversity advice on site.

Severn Trent Water - Reply Received: 7th November 2017

As the proposal has minimal impact on the public sewerage system we have no objections to the proposals and do not require a drainage condition to be applied.

Network Rail - Reply Received: 27th November 2017

Network Rail has reviewed the documentation submitted by the applicant and this proposal will not impact the railway infrastructure.

76 letters of objection have been received in response to local consultation together with a petition contains the names and addresses of 6,699 names and addresses.

Letters of objection referred to the following:

- Visual and landscape impact and industrialisation of the countryside. - Pollution infestation from flies and disease from the birds. - Light pollution. - Noise pollution from traffic and operation of the site.

Page 63 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

- Odours impacting upon local amenity. - Air Pollutants causing health issues for local people and staff. - Traffic and highway dangers and suitability of access route with single lane roads and a school, nursery, village hall and wood yard all of which have known parking issues at various times of the day, multiple users with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, lack of suitable passing places. -The level of usage on the Levedale Road is unprecedented. There may be a reduction in the volume of traffic generated by Dunston Dairy Farm. However, that reduction is more than offset by the significant increase in traffic generated by other farms and local road users. -Increased heavy traffic as a result of the proposals. -Further highways information should be provided such as survey of road conditions and tracking plans as a video does not provide sufficient evidence of the impact. -The South Staffordshire Draft District Integrated Transport Strategy clearly references problems that again are not picked up in the submitted highways report. -highways and applicant appear to accept that the impact will be severe at certain times of the day when the school is in operation. -highways team have suggested restricted times, but these times are completely arbitrary and if a survey had been completed would demonstrate their inaccuracy with throughout the school year numerous times that the school would be used for various activities that would result in School Lane being heavily used. The proposed restrictions do not appear to take into account any use of the nursery or village hall or church. -the restrictions cannot be enforced unless done so by the public as the council do not have resources. -development is replacing the Dairy Farm operation as well as providing replacement jobs. This existing dairy farm site is not being used at the moment and would make a more sensible choice as location for the proposed industrial units as it already has sheds in place as well as great transport links. -If granting permission, support for the HGV route shown on Figure 1 of the Traffic Management Plan dated December 2017 and that appropriate conditions and/legal agreement should be in place. -All HGV traffic should be prevented by condition from accessing the minor country lane between Little Heath and Levedale/ Willow Farm -Animal Welfare - immense suffering of animals from intensive farming with birds denied opportunity to do anything that comes naturally to them, such as foraging, roosting, or moving freely. -large number of the public are vehemently against this type of farming. Accept this is not a planning issue but it is a local public opinion that should be considered, the feeling is reflected in the comments on the petition. -no benefits to the local community and no-one has come out to support the application, but there are many reasons why this application should be rejected. -adverse impact on wildlife and biodiversity -adverse effects on leisure and recreation with the degradation of landscape character and increased traffic levels. -dangerous precedent for the granting of industrial developments in the local and wider area

Page 64 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

-manure would be produced and transported off the immediate site for field storage and spreading with risk of leak/run off and contaminated surrounding land, waterways, and wildlife habitats. -As a 24 hour operation potential for significant disturbance during the night, particularly from traffic. -brown field sites could be utilised to make concrete based sheds to house these birds. -the small bridge over Pothooks Brook in School Lane is not strong enough to take any more heavy vehicles. The bridge is already cracked and in state of repair. As well as the railway bridge also being a blind spot and hazard for large vehicles to drive over. -possibility of residential boreholes may become contaminated. -several areas on the route are prone to flooding and this will be made worse when the foundations of the buildings are in place and the surface run-off has even less ground into which to sink. -there will be very few jobs created for this project and so the area will not benefit economically. -Existing road and land flooding and ability of the proposed drainage not to make this worse. Possible to condition for drainage system to be improved or an additional safeguard to the attenuation pond. -Erosion of highway verges and impact on drainage -Development is on green belt land and this proposal is contrary to green belt policy -Development next to large pond frequented by birds and wildlife, the proximity would market it higher risk of transferring diseases, such as avian influenza. -Odour produced and lorry loads of waste which will pass the school will have an impact on children's enjoyment of the school grounds. Child safety and odour issues raise strong objections.

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 The application has been called to Committee by Councillor Bates

- Principle of Development - Highway and Access - Welfare/Legislation - Biodiversity - Landscape and Visual - Design and Layout - Neighbouring Amenity - Drainage - Representations

5.2 Principle of development

5.2.1 The site is within the Open Countryside where development is restricted, however certain types of development can be considered to be acceptable, provided they do not have an adverse impact on the character of the open countryside. This

Page 65 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 application proposes the erection of 4 no. turkey rearing buildings and associated infrastructure which would house a total of 20,000 birds with 5,000 in each building.

5.2.2 The development of buildings in connection with agriculture is considered to be an acceptable form of development within the Open Countryside.

5.2.3 For clarification Section 336 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 defines agriculture as;

'"agriculture" includes horticulture, fruit growing, seed growing, dairy farming, the breeding and keeping of livestock (including any creature kept for the production of food, wool, skins or fur, or for the purpose of its use in the farming of land), the use of land as grazing land, meadow land, osier land, market gardens and nursery grounds, and the use of land for woodlands where that use is ancillary to the farming of land for other agricultural purposes, and "agricultural" shall be construed accordingly'

5.2.4 Additionally, the NPPF supports economic growth in rural areas and promotes the development and diversification of agricultural and other land-based rural businesses. This is reflected within Core Strategy policy EV8 which supports proposals for agricultural development and recognises their importance as part of the rural economy. This policy further states that applications for large scale poultry units will have to be subject to the Habitats Regulations Assessment to ensure no significant effects on internationally important wildlife sites occur.

5.2.5 The principle of development is acceptable in accordance with Policy OC1 of the adopted Core Strategy subject to further detail consideration of other planning issues which is set out below.

5.3 Highway and Access

5.3.1 The proposed application would bring with it several vehicle movements, such are required to bring food, collect turkeys and generally support the proposed turkey business. These vehicles would take an agreed access and egress route (illustrated in Figure 1 of the submitted Transport Management Plan) to and from the site, operating on a one-way basis through contractual arrangements with its suppliers/hauliers. A 15 minute video showing a lorry travelling the route from the A449 to the site was submitted with the application.

5.3.2 The route would comprise of a round trip of about 4.6miles from/to the A449 at Dunston, of which the 0.9miles of the journey nearest the A449 would be used by site traffic travelling in both directions. The proposed haul route to serve the site would lead from the A449 via School Lane at Dunston, heading west past St. Leonards First School and crossing over the railway line on a bridge incorporating a slight right-left double bend. School Lane then passes several properties as it continues in a generally westerly direction before heading southwest to Dunston Heath, towards its junction with Long Lane on the right hand side, which is approximately 1.5 km (0.9 miles) from the A449.

Page 66 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.3.3 The proposed haul route then has right turn and heads in a generally northwest direction along Long Lane for approximately 1.7 km (1.06 miles) to a priority T junction. At the T junction, vehicles travelling to the site would turn left and head southwest, passing the existing access to Toft Farm en-route to the site approximately 172.5m to the south of the Toft Farm access way.

5.3.4 Leaving the site HGVs would turn left and continue south before reaching a crossroads where vehicles heading back towards the A449 would turn left to head southeast for approximately 1.3 km along Whittamoor Lane. After approximately 1.3km, vehicles would then turn left again, back into School Lane and continue back towards the A449 in the reverse direction. At the end of each flock cycle the turkeys would be taken to a plant at Scropton in Derbyshire.

5.3.5 It is noted that the planned transport route would involve application related vehicles passing a school. To ensure peak school drop off and collection times are not interrupted, the applicant has agreed to some suggested travel restrictions. These restrictions will be imposed as a condition on any consent and will prevent HGV movements to/from the site between 07:30 - 09:15 and 15:00 - 16:30 Monday to Friday during school term. Such suppliers/hauliers will be made aware of the restrictions imposed in terms of routes to be used and the restrictions during certain times of the day.

5.3.6 On a day to day basis, during the normal operation of the unit, traffic generation would be limited to a feed delivery every 3 days (2 movements on any day) and a dead bird collection every week (2 movements on any day). There would also be staff trips plus occasional visits by Inspectors etc. The site manager would be resident at Toft Farm which is within walking distance of the site.

5.3.7 However, outside of general day to day movements, each flock cycle (of which there are 3 per year) would generate a total of 96 vehicles (192 movements). These movements would occur over a short number of days, 3 separate times a year (with a break of around 114 days).

5.3.8 Flock cycle peak vehicle movements would be over a short number of days, these being:

Chick delivery - 4 lorries (8 movements) in a single day Bird removal - 25 lorries (50 movements) over a 4 day period, giving 7 lorries (14 movements) per day. During manure removal - 30 loads (60 movements) using tractors and trailers over a 2 day period at the end of each flock, giving 15 loads (30 movements per day).

5.3.9 Over a year, 3 flock cycles would therefore comprise of 288 vehicles (576 movements).

5.3.10 Below is a more detailed vehicle description in terms of numbers and size.

HGVs

Page 67 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Shavings Delivery 2 x 16.5m articulated lorries (4 movements) Gas delivery 2 x tanker (4 movements) Chick Delivery 4 x 16.5 articulated lorries (8 movements) Feed Delivery 32 x 16.5m articulated lorries (64 movements) Bird Removal 25 x 16.5m articulated lorries (50 movements)

Other Commercial Traffic Dead Bird removal 1 x box van per week (2 movements) Manure Removal 30 x tractor and trailers (60 movements)

5.3.11 In addition there will be a 'catchers' minibus on each day of bird removal and a washing gang minibus for 2 days for washing of the site after the manure has been removed.

5.3.12 Concerns have been raised by members of the public regarding the condition of existing roads, lack of passing places, traffic, capacity of the highway network and that the roads are and would be dangerous. In reference to these concerns the County Highways Officer has been consulted and has raised no objections subject to appropriate planning conditions. In light of County highways having no objection further letters of concern were received together with an independent highways assessment.

5.3.13 The site was visited by another highways officer and the assessment reviewed and no further comments made. The highways officer has considered the proposed development and confirmed no objections subject to conditions. Whilst local consultation comments have sought the need for additional passing places, additional signage and general improvements, no condition to reflect such has been recommended.

5.3.14 Notwithstanding this, the applicant has volunteered to construct a number of passing places along the transport route proposed. Whilst the applicant has volunteered to provide such, no details of exact locations have been provided. However, these additional facilities or improvements are not deemed necessary by the highway authority, and although a gesture of good will from the applicant, I consider it be unreasonable to impose a condition requesting further details or for such passing places to be constructed prior to development or use of the application site. Should the applicant seek to construct additional passing places along the route in the future this can be done via a separate application with County Highways.

5.3.15 Having carefully considered the highway implications of the proposals, as well as the significant local concern that has been expressed through submitted representations, it is considered that the proposal would not result in a development that would have a severe residual cumulative effect on the transport network and the development can be provided with safe access subject to the imposition of appropriate and reasonable planning conditions. The proposals would therefore accord with paragraph 32 of the NPPF.

5.4 Welfare/Legislation

Page 68 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.4.1 For clarification this application is for a floor rearing system and not a battery cage system. A floor rearing system is where the birds are free to roam around the inside of the building. This system conforms to all UK Welfare Standards. Battery cage systems were banned in the United Kingdom in 2012.

5.4.2 Additionally, there are no slaughtering plans on this site. Slaughtering is required to take place within a licensed facility and is a matter separate to this application.

5.4.3 Although various concerns have been expressed in representations regarding the ethics and animal welfare implications of the proposals, these are dealt with under other legislation and are not an issue that cause any planning concerns in the determination of this planning application.

5.5 Biodiversity

5.5.1 Policies EQ4 and EQ12 state that the local distinctiveness of the landscape should be maintained and where possible enhanced; and that the landscaping of new development must be an integral part of the overall design. This point is also emphasised within the NPPF, which states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment.

5.5.2 Policy EQ1 states that permission will be granted for development that would not cause significant harm to the ecological value of sites, together with species that are protected or under threat. The NPPF seeks to minimise the impacts on biodiversity and provide net gains in biodiversity where possible.

5.5.3 Natural England have said that the application site is within the impact risk zones of Mottey Meadows and Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation, which are European sites and also notified at a national level and Mottey Meadows and Cannock Chase Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The development proposal also triggers the impact risk zone for Allimore Green Common SSSI.

5.5.4 In considering the European site interest, Natural England advises the LPA, under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations, to have regard for any potential impacts that a plan or project may have. The LPA are therefore required to determine whether the proposal is likely to have a significant effect on any European site and to carry out an Appropriate Assessment. They too advise that the environmental pathways to be considered in the HRA are largely through air and water. They note that an ammonia assessment and a manure management plan has been submitted in support of the application and that the LPA may wish to use these to inform our HRA.

5.5.5 Therefore in accordance with the above the LPA have sought additional comments from the County Ecologist and from Natural England as the statutory consultee. The submitted ammonia modelling report concluded that detailed modelling demonstrates no likely significant effect on the three receptor sites. The County Ecologist is satisfied with the conclusion of this report.

Page 69 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.5.6 Natural England has been formally consulted and has also responded and concludes that scope exists for landscaping and biodiversity enhancements to be secured. This has already been met during the submitted amendments through the planning application process.

5.5.7 The application has been considered under the Habitat Regulation Assessment (HRA) process to satisfy the duty to adhere to the Conservation of Species & Habitats Regulations 2010 (known as the Habitats Regulations). The submitted modelling report concludes that the proposed development will not have significant adverse effects. This is satisfactory and is confirmed by the response of both the County Ecologist and Natural England. No further action is therefore necessary with regard to the HRA. The application will not have any likely significant effects on the integrity of any European or Nationally Designated sites.

5.5.8 An Ecology Report was originally submitted as part of the application that was presented to the County Ecologist. The Ecologist reviewed the report and sought amendments relating to hedgerow loss, soft landscaping and flood risk and surface water management. An amended ecological appraisal has been submitted and found to be acceptable subject to a number of conditions around landscaping and Great Crested Newts avoidance measures, bird and bat boxes and a Habitats Regulations Assessment screening consultation with Natural England, regarding the assessment of impacts of ammonium on Special Areas of Conservation and Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

5.5.9 In regards to the final comment made this has been addressed in the comments above.

5.5.10 The updated ecological information has also taken account of the implications of the proposals for the Biological Alert Site (BAS) immediately to the south of the application area. The County Ecologist has confirmed that the updated information does not raise any concerns with regard to this site in terms of ecology and biodiversity impacts.

5.5.11 It is considered that the proposal would not detrimentally impact upon the ecology of the site or upon protected species and sites more widely subject to appropriate conditions being attached to any permission. The proposed development therefore complies with Policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy and the relevant provisions of the NPPF.

5.6 Landscape and visual impacts

5.6.1 The application is accompanied by a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment that confirms the landscape national and local designation for the landscape character of the site.

5.6.2 The application buildings will be set in a corner of an existing arable field and will be surrounded by existing hedge and tree planting borders to the west south and

Page 70 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 east. The site generally slopes away from the adjacent highway boundary from west to east.

5.6.3 Whilst there will be some visibility of the proposals, particularly from the highway to the west and from the lane providing access to Toft Farm, the building will generally sit down in the landscape and result in the development not having a significant impact in the local landscape. There are some detailed planting, species mix issues raised by the submitted landscape proposals and picked out by relevant technical consultees. These can be addressed through the imposition of an appropriate landscaping condition.

5.6.4 Agricultural buildings are a common feature in these types of landscapes and some visibility of agricultural developments in the countryside is not unusual. Therefore views of the proposed development would not be considered significantly harmful to the landscape character or visual amenity in this rural setting. It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with policies EQ2, EQ4, EQ12 and the relevant provisions of the NPPF.

5.7 Design and layout

5.7.1 Policy EQ11 of the Core Strategy and section 7 of the NPPF seek to ensure that all new developments are of the highest quality design and they should take account of local character and distinctiveness, and make a positive contribution.

5.7.2 The design of the proposed buildings are of standard appearance and are designed more so with functionality in mind. Although the size and scale of the proposed agricultural buildings would be significant, they would be in keeping with the rural character of the area and not be out of place amongst its agricultural and rural setting.

5.7.3 The buildings would be finished with polyester coated steel sheeting in olive green and a materials condition will be imposed to ensure all buildings match this specification to minimise impacts on visual amenity by securing an appropriate design. An external lighting condition will also be imposed to ensure any future lighting proposals are controlled to minimise impacts on visual amenity. It is therefore considered that the development would accord with the provisions of a policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5.8 Neighbouring amenity

5.8.1 Policy EQ9 seeks to protect the amenity of nearby residents and Policy EQ10 states that the public will be protected from activities likely to be detrimental to public health.

5.8.2 The nearest residential properties to the site are within the control of the applicant at Toft Farm. These are approximately 250-300 metres from the proposed

Page 71 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 buildings. The nearest residential receptors outside the control of the applicant are at The Toft and at Little Heath at approximately 375 to 450 metres from the application site.

5.8.3 Environmental Heath have reviewed the documents submitted with this application, and state that as with all poultry units there will be occasions that neighbouring properties will be able to smell the proposed turkey units, particularly when the units are being cleaned out. However, the applicant has submitted a comprehensive odour assessment with the application that demonstrates through modelling that the impact on neighbouring properties will generally be minimal and within the guidelines set by the Environment Agency. The odour assessment report does show that the odour levels at location 1, which is in close proximity to several barn conversion dwelling at Toft Farm, will be 4.58 OUE/m3, which indicates the odour at this level will usually be recognisable in terms of the Environment Agency guidelines and could have a detrimental effect on the amenity of these properties and lead to nuisance complaints. It is therefore considered that additional abatement should be considered on the units to assist in the reduction in the odour predicted at location 1. The applicant has requested that once operational, odour levels can be monitored to determine whether any odour issues arise and that this is a small scale development in poultry terms and odour issues are not foreseen. The cost of filter systems is a significant sum and a monitoring condition would mean the investment is only made if necessary. The applicant has also confirmed that they manage 9 rental properties at the Toft Farm and that they would not have embarked on this project if it was going to create noise / smell issues at the Toft Farm. The site would be monitored by the applicant who proposes to base their office there.

5.8.4 Following discussions with Environmental Health, it is proposed to add a condition, requiring the submission and approval of details of an odour filtration system, which would have to be installed if odours are produced by the facility which constitute a statutory nuisance.

5.8.5 Although local representations refer to noise from ventilation fans and traffic and operations at the site, Environmental Health Officers have reviewed the submitted documents and have no concerns with regard to the suggested noise impact resulting from the development.

5.8.6 Concerns have been raised in local representations regarding vermin and flies. The proposed units will be operated on an enclosed system and there is no external storage of feed or manure proposed at the site. This can be confirmed by condition. Therefore flies and vermin are unlikely to result from the proposals.

5.8.7 Dust has also been raised as a potential problem but relevant research from DEFRA shows that dust particle residue is normally at background levels at distances greater than 100 metres from the poultry building and that the only area where dust levels can be considered hazardous is within the building itself.

5.8.8 There have been concerns raised regarding the deposition of manure on local land and the presence of local private water boreholes. The development is within a

Page 72 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) and the deposition location and the quantity of manure will be subject to NVZ regulations. It is not considered that the presence of local boreholes will create a planning issue for the proposed development given other regulatory regimes that are in place. Manure management and drainage plans will be secured through the imposition of conditions to control the on-site operations.

5.8.9 No objections have been received from either the Environment Agency or Environmental Health with regard to the proposal. Therefore it is considered that the proposed scheme complies with Policies EQ9 and EQ10 of the Core Strategy and that should there be any environmental nuisance resulting from the proposals in the future this can be adequately controlled by other legislation, such as the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

5.9 Drainage

5.9.1 Policy EQ7 seeks to protect the local environment through the appropriate consideration of drainage proposals.

5.9.2 The information submitted with the application has been revised and the Environment Agency, Severn Trent Water and the County Flood Team raised no objections to the proposals.

5.9.3 There have been several comments in local representations with regard to flooding of adjacent land and roads. The submitted application documents also highlight that there are surface water flows that will need to be managed, particularly to the north of the proposed application site. Appropriate channelling and retention of surface water flows are anticipated through the development of SUDs features. Given this local context, it is appropriate to ensure the detail of a drainage scheme is brought forward before the development is commenced. This can be addressed by the imposition of an appropriate planning condition.

5.9.4 Having taken all representations and application submissions into account, it is considered that the development will not have any significant impacts on drainage in the area and accords with Policy EQ7 if the adopted Core Strategy.

5.10 Representations

5.10 The issues raised by representation have been covered in the paragraphs above.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 The proposal facility would constitute an agricultural use which is considered to be an appropriate form of development within the Open Countryside. Access and parking arrangements are acceptable and there are no concerns arising in respect of neighbour amenity or adverse impacts upon the natural environment subject to appropriate conditions being imposed on any permission.

Page 73 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

6.2 Furthermore the proposed buildings would be of an appropriate design for the agricultural and rural setting of the application site.

6.3 The proposal would make a modest contribution to the rural economy of the District and will create employment in the form of 2 new full time jobs on the site. The proposal will not result in any significant detrimental impact on the setting of the wider landscape or on biodiversity. There would be no severe residual cumulative highway concerns and there would be no detrimental significant detrimental impact upon the amenity of nearby residents or the wider area in general subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions.

6.4 I therefore consider the proposal to be in compliance with the relevant policies of the Core Strategy and approval is recommended subject to conditions as it complies with policies OC1, EQ1, EQ2, EQ4, EQ5, EQ7, EQ9, EQ10, EQ11, EQ12, EV8 and EV12 of the adopted Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. RECOMMENDATION – APPROVE Subject to Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun before the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings: Location Plan IP/HF/01 Site Layout Plan IP/HF/02 Proposed Elevations IP/HF/03 Turkey Unit Floor Plans IP/HF/04 Gate House Elevations IP/HF/05 Gas Tank and Water Tank Elevations and Plans IP/HF/06 Sections IP/HF/08 Dead Bird Store IP/HF/09 Landscape Proposals IPA21272-11C

3. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until: a) the access to the site within the limits of the public highway has been completed. b) the access drive rear of the public highway has been surfaced and thereafter maintained in a bound and porous material for a minimum distance of 15.0m rear of the carriageway boundary. c) the access drive, parking, servicing and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. d) any gates have been located a minimum of 15.0m rear of the carriageway boundary and shall open away from the highway and be retained at or beyond that minimum distance for the lifetime of the development.

Page 74 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

e) the visibility splays shown on drawing No. IP/HF/02 have been provided. The visibility splays shall thereafter be kept free of all obstructions to visibility over a height of 600 mm above the adjacent carriageway level.

4. No HGV's associated with the proposed development shall arrive or depart between the hours of 07:30 - 09:00 and 15:00 - 16:30 Monday to Friday during school term times.

5. All HGV's associated with the proposed development shall access and egress the site via the route indicated on the submitted Transport Statement from the Hurlestone Partnership dated December 2017.

6. Before the development commences the existing trees, shrubs and hedges on the site shall be protected by fencing constructed in accordance with BS5837:2012 in positions to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority which shall be retained through the development of the site in the approved positions.

7. No development shall take place until an odour and waste management plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved plan shall be adhered to through the operation of the any of the poultry farm buildings permitted under this permission.

8. No development shall take place until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The surface water proposals shall include amongst other things a maintenance plan for the SUDs feature(s). The approved plans shall thereafter be implemented in full and retained for the lifetime of the development.

9. Within 6 months of the date of this permission a lighting scheme and landscape management plan shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. The approved scheme and plan shall thereafter be implemented and adhered to in accordance with the approved details.

10. Any tree, shrubs and ground vegetation to be removed should be cleared and any herbicide applied for vegetation control outside of the bird nesting season or be preceded by a survey by an ecologist to confirm no active nests are present. If nesting birds are found works will need to stop within the area and a buffer zone established until the young have fledged.

11. There shall be no external or outside storage of feed on the application site.

12. Notwithstanding the submitted landscape proposals, before the proposal is brought into use, a landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The approved landscaping scheme shall be completed within 12 months of the completion of the development. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the scheme has been

Page 75 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

completed. The planting, hard landscaping and any other introduced features shown on the approved plan(s) shall be retained and maintained for a minimum period of 10 years by the property owner from the notified completion date of the scheme. Any plant failures that occur during the first 5 years of the notified completion date of the scheme shall be replaced with the same species within the next available planting season (after failure).

13. The development shall be carried in accordance with section 7.1 Reasonable Avoidance Measures of the Great Crested Newt Appraisal & Mitigation Strategy & Enhancement Measures report dated June 2017 . This will also provide protection of adjacent hedgerows and habitats and of breeding birds.

14. Prior to first use of the development hereby permitted, bird and bat boxes shall be installed in accordance with the submitted Preliminary Ecological Assessment recommendations and details that have been submitted to the local planning authority for prior approval.

15. Before the proposal is brought into use, details of an odour filtration system shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. If odours are subsequently produced by the facility, which the Local Authority consider are a statutory nuisance, the odour filtration system shall be installed within 3 months of the date the Local Authority advises the operator that a statutory nuisance has occurred.

Reasons

1. To define the permission

2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt

3. In the interest of highway safety.

4. In the interest of highway safety and to comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework

5. In the interest of highway safety and to comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework

6. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy

7. To ensure that the use of the premises does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

8. To avoid pollution of the water environment and take account of biodiversity in accordance with policies EQ1 and EQ7 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Page 76 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

9. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy

10. In order to protect nesting birds on the site in accordance with policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.

11. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy

12. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy

13. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

14. To safeguard the biodiversity of the local area in accordance with Policy EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.

15. To ensure that the use of the premises does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Proactive Statement

In dealing with the planning application the Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner by agreeing amendments to the application and in accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

Informatives for Decision Notice.

(or email to [email protected]) http://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/transport/staffshighways/licences/ Note to Planning Officer. This Form X is issued on the basis of the information provided within the submitted Transport Statement.

Page 77 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

- Any wash waters created must also be collected and disposed of appropriately and must not be allowed to contaminate surface or groundwaters.

Page 78 of 210 Jeff Upton: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

17/00959/FUL - The Toft Farm Levedale Road Levedale Stafford South Staffordshire ST18 9LH

Page 79 of 210

Page 80 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

17/01022/OUT Bloor Homes Ltd PENKRIDGE Councillor J Chapman

Land North Of Penkridge Stafford Road Penkridge South Staffordshire

Development of up to 200 dwellings (Use Class C3) together with an access roundabout on Stafford Road, public open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure.

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site Description

1.1.1 This application site is located off Stafford Road/A449, Penkridge. The site measures approximately 9.78ha and is a grassed field sub divided by hedgerows. It is situated towards the north western end of Penkridge, north of a residential estate and south of an open field/hedgerow boundaries.

1.1.2 The field is an irregular shape and is bound along the Stafford Road/A449 by a mixture of hedges, trees and an access gate. Through the southern part of the site runs an existing public footpath (Penkridge 31) that connects to the A449. The site is generally level and its surrounding landscape is broadly undulating in nature.

1.1.3 To the west is located the railway line and to the east the A449 and open fields. The application site is separated from the majority of these dwellings by buffer planting; however the most southern part of the site is separated by a larger gap due to land ownership.

1.1.4 The residential properties are accessed via Goods Station Lane, Nursery Drive, Cooke Close and Grocott Close.

1.2 No Planning History

1.3 Pre-applications have taken place

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Proposal

2.1.1 Outline planning permission is sought for the development of an open countryside site for residential development for up to 200 dwellings (Use Class C3) together with an access roundabout on Stafford Road, public open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure.

Page 81 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2.1.2. Permission is not sought for matters of appearance, landscaping, layout or scale as part of this application. This application includes an indicative site plan, with approval sought for the access (Sketch Masterplan DE.236_SK01 Rev C). 2.1.3 Whilst indicative the layout envisages the following market housing mix and affordable housing mix:

Market housing mix:

35% 2 beds 40% 3 beds 25% 4 beds

10% of the total market housing is to be provided as bungalows.

Affordable housing mix:

Social Rent:

22.5% 1 bed apartments 10% 2 bed bungalows 37.5% 2 bed houses 25% 3 bed houses 5% 4 bed houses

Intermediate Housing (i.e. shared ownership):

5% 2 bed bungalows 55% 2 bed houses 40% 3 bed houses

2.4 These housing mixes can be secured through planning condition, whilst affordable housing provision can be secured through Section 106. The agent and our legal officer have agreed to this approach.

2.2 Agents submission:

Arboricultural Assessment Archaeological Assessment Design and Access Statement Ecological Assessment - Confidential Flood Risk Assessment - Updated 16 April 2018 Hedgerow Mitigation Plan Landscape and Visual Appraisal Noise and Vibration Assessment Outline Planning Application Cover Letter Owner Notice Planning Statement Residential Travel Plan

Page 82 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Socio Economic Impact Report Soils and Agricultural Quality Report Statement of Community Involvement Tenant Notice Transport Assessment

3. POLICY CONTEXT

The application site is within the Open Countryside and on the edge of the Main Service Village of Penkridge.

The local and national planning policies relevant to the determination of this application are as follows:

Core Strategy Development Plan Document, December 2012:

National Policy 1 - The Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Core Policy 1 - The Spatial Strategy for South Staffordshire Core Policy 2 - Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment Core Policy 3 - Sustainable Development and Climate Change Core Policy 5 - Infrastructure Delivery Core Policy 6 - Housing Delivery

OC1 - Development in the Open Countryside Beyond the West Midlands Green Belt EQ1 - Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets EQ2 - Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation EQ3 - Conservation, Preservation and Protection of Heritage Assets EQ4 - Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape EQ5 - Sustainable Resources and Energy Efficiency EQ7 - Water Quality EQ8 - Waste EQ9 - Protecting Residential Amenity EQ11 - Wider Design Considerations EQ12 - Landscaping EQ13 - Development Contributions H1 - Achieving a Balanced Housing Market H2 - Provision of Affordable Housing H4 - Delivering Affordable Housing EV11 - Sustainable Travel EV12 - Parking Provision Housing Market Assessment (2017) Longer Term Balancing Market Housing Report

The Council has received a sound Inspector's Report in respect of the emerging Site Allocations Document (SAD). The SAD is a tier 2 plan and seeks to deliver the adopted Core Strategy (the tier 1 plan). Taken together, the 2 documents will comprise the development plan for South Staffordshire. It is anticipated that Council will be invited to adopt the SAD in Summer 2018.

Page 83 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

South Staffordshire Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and the Sustainable Development SPD adopted by Council on 26 June 2018. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), March 2012

Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise (NPPF Paragraph 196).

The NPPF is a material consideration in planning decisions (NPPF Paragraph 196) and sets out the national overarching aims for planning with a presumption in favour of sustainable development. Development that is sustainable should be favoured, without delay, and should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan- making and decision-taking.

Para 6-10: Achieving Sustainable Development Para 11-16: The Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Para 17: Core planning principles Para 47-55: Delivering a Wide Choice of High Quality Homes Para 79-92: Protecting Green Belt Land Para 109-125: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment Para 126 - 128 Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

Para 186-187: Decision-taking

National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG), 2013

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

No Councillor comments (expired 11.12.2017)

Penkridge Parish Council

Further to the above Planning Application placed before Council of their meeting of 14th December, Council write to object to the application on the grounds of:

1. Penkridge has already met its development targets up until 2028 and the proposed new site is not designated within the South Staffordshire core strategy.

2. lnfrastructure Amenities, especially the Medical Centre, are already overstretched with residents regularly experiencing difficulty obtaining appointments. The impact of the Lyne Hill development will further dilute services.

3. Design & Density The proposed development is a very ill-considered site it is not adding on to an existing housing estate or revamping an old industrial site, but on natural green/country side fields. There is not an existing settlement there already. The application is for a large housing estate with small open spaces and a small play

Page 84 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 area. This green site at present has a Public Right of Way though and is used by many villagers for recreational and dog walking throughout the year. 4. Traffic The traffic noise and pollution again of all times of the day and night with an extra 200 families would have a detrimental effect on the surrounding properties. On the basis of on average of 3 cars per property would result in an additional 600 cars entering the Stafford Road each morning. The Stafford Road/A449 is already a heavily congested busy road and is often used as a bypass when there are issues on the motorway. This site would cause further traffic problems and create a safety hazard for other motorists regardless of the implementation of a traffic island. The proposed traffic island would cause more noise from traffic as lorries releasing air brakes and cars accelerating from off the roundabout.

5. Wildlife and Environment The proposed development would have a detrimental effect on the wildlife and environment with some of the wildlife being a protected species. The trees and hedges surrounding currently in the fields act as natural sound boundaries to the railway and main road, but they also more importantly give a natural habitat to the wildlife. Protection of the countryside and wildlife must be paramount. The loss of natural open country side would have a detrimental effect. Councillors asked that a letter be sent to SSC Planning supporting the residents' comments.

Local Plans

Development Plan Policies

The site lies within an area of Open Countryside adjacent to the northern edge of the Penkridge development boundary, in an area covered by Policy OC1 of the Core Strategy. Policy OC1 indicates that the Open Countryside will be protected for its own sake, particularly for its landscapes, areas of ecological, historic, archaeological, agricultural and recreational value. It also identifies a list of appropriate types of development which will normally be approved within the Open Countryside, which this proposal would not fall within. Therefore, the proposed development would conflict with this policy within the Core Strategy, by developing an area of Open Countryside that the policy indicates should be protected for its own sake. In the view of Local Plans there is also a limited degree of conflict with Policies EQ4 and EQ11 C (e) of the Core Strategy.

Consequentially, the starting point is that the proposal is in principle contrary to these development plan policies.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

The NPPF is an important material consideration to be considered alongside the development plan. Paragraph 47 of the NPPF encourages local authorities to significantly boost the supply as housing, and this therefore supports the housing

Page 85 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 provision provided by the application. Furthermore, as acknowledged in previous applications, the Council cannot demonstrate a five year supply, and therefore paragraphs 49 and the relevant sections of paragraph 14 of the NPPF are engaged. These are as follows; where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless: any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted (NPPF paragraph 14)

At the present point in time, the Council can demonstrate a 4.39 year supply against its objectively assessed need [NB. this figure has reduced to 3.42 years following publication of new figure in May 2018], as set out in its recently published Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA). This affects a 'tilted balance' in favour of granting approval, that may be restricted by specific policies in the NPPF, or by development plan policies to which the NPPF refers. Paragraph 17 bullet point 5 of the NPPF requires planning to take account of the different roles and character of different areas, recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving rural communities within it. Therefore, there is still a requirement for development to take account of the character of different areas and to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, or else run contrary to the core planning principles of the NPPF. Furthermore, paragraph 58 requires schemes to, amongst other matters, respond to local character, be visually attractive and function well and add to the overall quality of the area. Therefore, Core Strategy policies which, in part, reflect these principles (such as EQ4, EQ11 and OC1) still gain weight from conformity to these elements of the NPPF. In judging the proposals merits against the NPPF, it is therefore important to consider whether any adverse impacts of granting the proposal, including those arising from effects on the character of the area, significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the NPPF as a whole. Benefits of the scheme against which adverse impacts need to be considered include the schemes contribution to significantly boosting the supply of housing within the District, assisting in addressing unmet housing needs and the general economic benefits associated with such development. It will also be important to consider the scheme's ability to provide a range of property sizes and tenures which reflect local housing demand and the needs of specific housing groups, such as older people and those in need of affordable housing (NPPF para 50).

Affordable Housing

Policy H2 requires that sites of 10 or more units in Penkridge, a main service village, are required to make an affordable housing contribution. On greenfield sites, the

Page 86 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 requirement is 40% affordable housing, and the applicant has confirmed that this will be provided. In addition, Policy H2 also requires that the affordable housing be split

50:50 between social rent and shared ownership. All of these requirements will need to be secured via a S106 agreement.

Housing Mix

Policy H1 confirms that proposals for new housing development should provide a mixture of housing sizes, types and tenures. It particularly encourages the provision of more 2 and 3 bedroom homes across all market areas of the district in order to better balance the housing market. Mix should also be informed by local need as identified in the housing market assessment. The 2017 HMA indicates that in this area, in terms of market housing, there is a large need for both 2 and 3 bedroom homes in particular. In relation to affordable housing, there is a need for all property sizes. This proposal is in outline, therefore a detailed housing mix has not been submitted at this stage with the application. However, discussions have taken place with the applicant in relation to the specific mix of property sizes for the market housing on the site. Agreement has been reached on the following market housing mix to be provided, and this should be secured via condition:

10% 2 bed bungalows 25% 2 bed houses 40% 3 bed houses 25% 4 bed houses

This mix complies with Policy H1 and accurately reflects the housing need identified in the SHMA. The provision of 10% bungalows within this mix is also welcomed, and strongly supported by Policy H1, which requires new housing developments to make a contribution to meeting the needs of the district's rapidly ageing population.

Landscape

The site itself lies within an area of grassed agricultural fields to the north of Penkridge. part of a wider area of piecemeal enclosure to the north of Penkridge between the A449 and West Coast Mainline. The site is bounded to the south-west by dwellings along Nursery Drive and Cooke Close, from which the site is clearly visible. To the south-east the site is separated from the residential area by a small landholding adjacent the A449. A Public Right of Way (PRoW) and two minor watercourses run through the site and the site is bounded by significant boundary vegetation, particularly at the north-eastern end of the site and along the A449. The wider landscape slopes uphill to the north towards an area of structurally intact irregular agricultural fields, which also contain another PRoW running between the A449, Levedale Road and a country lane to the west.

Views from PRoW on higher ground to the north of the site would not be significantly impacted by the proposal. The existing views are of a mixture of tree planting and

Page 87 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 glimpses of residential development marking the northern edge of Penkridge. The Grade I listed church is also prominent on the skyline from this point. The proposed scheme, whilst moving the settlement edge further north, would retain these key characteristics, subject to satisfactory mitigation relating to building design, height and buffer planting. This would also ensure that the site could be satisfactorily screened from medium/long distance views along the A449 as the settlement is entered from the north, with the development only appearing prominent in immediate views along the site's frontage. It is also significant that the site avoids encroachment onto higher ground to the northwest, which sits more prominently in views from the surrounding area and where the piecemeal enclosure typical of the wider rural character of land outside of Penkridge appears in better condition.

There will inevitably be some harm to the landscape character of the site itself, given the nature of the application. However, land within the site boundary is not as typical of structural integrity of the field pattern which defines much of the agricultural landscape to the north of Penkridge, and existing tree and hedgerow planting can be retained within the site layout indicated on the applicant's Sketch Masterplan. Harm to the character of the area would also arise from the disjointed built frontage along the western side of the A449 and the removal of hedgerow planting along the site frontage to allow for the necessary transport works, although this effect can be partially mitigated over time with a satisfactory landscaping scheme. Views from within the site as experienced by users of the PRoW would also be affected, although these are largely localised to views experienced from within the site. Furthermore, impacts of the development on the recreational function of the PRoW will be reduced by its retention within the open space proposals indicated on the Sketch Masterplan. Therefore, the proposed scheme would inevitably result in a degree of localised harm to the existing landscape character of the site and short distance views experienced by users of the A449 immediately adjacent to the site frontage and from the PRoW running through the site's extent. To this extent, the proposal conflicts the Core Strategy, and in particular Policies OC1 and EQ4, to the extent that it would cause a detrimental effect to views experienced within the immediate environment of the site and would result in a loss of rural character from the application site itself. However, subject to appropriate mitigation being provided in any reserved matters application, it is important to note that the site's conflict with these policies and general effect on the intrinsic character of the area are predominantly localised to the immediate surrounds of the site. This is in part due to the adjacent transport corridors and the site's topography helping to contain any urbanising effects from the wider environment to the north, east and west. If the application is approved, mitigation should be secured through the provision of a landscaping scheme which addresses the matters set out in section 6.4 of the applicant's Landscape and Visual Appraisal.

Other matters

The site lies within the 0-15km zone of influence of the Cannock Chase SAC, and is also within the 0-8km zone around the SAC. Existing evidence suggests that development within these areas will have a significant effect on the SAC, and as such mitigation should be provided in accordance with the Council's Cannock Chase SAC -

Page 88 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Guidance to Mitigate the Impact of New Residential Development. As this is a windfall site which is not identified in levels of growth planned for in the Council's adopted Core Strategy, Natural England should be consulted to determine whether the standard contribution of £232 per net dwelling is appropriate in this instance. The submitted Sketch Masterplan sets out how formal play provision and public open space could be delivered on site. This indicates that the proposed development could deliver a level of open space which meets the requirements of emerging Policy SAD7, including the provision of a children's play area. If the application is approved, the Parish Council should be engaged to ensure an appropriate level of allotment provision is provided. To ensure any future open space provided can be maintained in future, a contribution towards the maintenance of open spaces provided would be expected at the rate of £65,190 per ha of open space provided, and this should be secured as part of any s106 agreement.

Conclusion

The proposal conflicts with Policy OC1 and there are also limited degrees of conflict with Policies EQ4 and EQ11 C (e) of the Core Strategy due to the localised impacts on the character of the surrounding area that would result from the granting of permission. However, the Council's lack of a five year housing land supply triggers paragraph 14 of the NPPF. Therefore, the proposal should be approved unless the adverse impacts of doing so clearly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when considered against specific provisions in the NPPF, or the provisions of the NPPF as a whole. This requires the localised impacts on character and conflict with the associated Core Strategy policies to be weighed against the benefits of the scheme. These benefits include the significant boost to affordable and market housing supply that would result from the proposal, its role in addressing a significant portion of the Council's five year supply shortfall and its role in providing a diverse range of property types to meet the District's identified needs for 2 and 3 bed properties and elderly persons accommodation. These benefits are given significant support by paragraphs 47, 49 and 50 of the NPPF. Consequentially, unless the case officer considers these benefits are significantly and demonstrably outweighed by the localised impact on the character of the surrounding area, the application should be approved.

Environmental Health Protection

I have no objections to this planning application, however I draw your attention to the noise and vibration report submitted with the application; should a full application be submitted the recommendations in this report would need to be conditioned in order to safeguard the amenity of the residents of the proposed dwellings. Please note, not all the mitigation measures required for the development have been detailed in the report as a full site design and layout has not been provided.

Arboricultural Officer

Page 89 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

No objections subject to appropriate conditions to protect trees and hedgerows and to ensure that suitable landscaping conditions are imposed in order to mitigate the impact of the development and secure appropriate ecological habitats for wildlife and suitable local environment for SUDs.

County Ecology Officer

The following species would be appropriate:

Hedgerow trees - oak Quercus robur, crab apple Malus sylvestris Hedgerow shrubs - hawthorn Crataegus monogyna 50% with the remainder made up of hazel Corylus avellana, holly Ilex aquifolium, field maple Acer campestre, blackthorn Prunus spinosa, and dog rose Rosa canina

1.0 Introduction

1.1 I have been commissioned by South Staffordshire Council to review the planning application documentation for 17/01022/OUT Development of up to 200 dwellings (Use Class C3) together with an access roundabout on Stafford Road, public open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure Land North Of Penkridge Stafford Road Penkridge. I have previously commented on a smaller application opposite this site (17/00317/OUT).

1.2 Documents and plans reviewed: o Ecological Assessment o Sketch Masterplan o Design & Access Statement o Flood Risk Assessment o Arboricultural Assessment

1.3 I have not visited the site but have viewed aerial photographs and application photographs.

2.0 Policy and Legislative context in relation to this application

2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework s.109 states: "The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment ….by minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible. s.118 states that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principle: if significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.

Page 90 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 proposals should build in biodiversity by incorporating ecologically sensitive design and features for biodiversity within the development scheme. 2.3 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended); along with the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, provide the main legislative framework for protection of species. In addition to planning policy requirements, the LPA needs to be assured that this legislation will not be contravened due to planning consent. In addition to these provisions, section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 places a duty on all public authorities in England and Wales to have regard, in the exercise of their functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. Section 41 refers to a list of habitats and species of principal importance to which this duty applies.

3.0 Assessment of Submitted Documents and Plans

3.1 The Ecological Appraisal and the surveys carried out are in general appropriate. The Sketch Masterplan indicates retention of most of the most valuable habitats on the site. It is recommended that a condition be applied requiring Reserved Matters applications to be in accordance with this plan. Should a different layout be proposed at Reserved Matters a re-assessment of ecological impacts would be required. Depending on the time elapsed this may need to be informed by re- surveys.

3.2 Judging from the Sketch Masterplan here will be hedgerow loss due to the development, mainly due to access arrangements, not a reserved matter. The hedgerows to be lost, in relation to the Sketch Masterplan, are not classified as Important (other hedgerows on site are). All hedgerows are classified as habitat of principal importance; however, therefore replacement planting is desirable to compensate for the losses. The Ecological Appraisal does not quantify hedgerow loss but this may be up to or over 300 metres. Some provision is shown on the Sketch Masterplan for hedgerow replacement planting though this would represent only partial compensation. The Ecological Appraisal s.6.4.1 notes that replacement hedgerow planting would be required for Local Plan policy compliance. It is recommended that detail of replacement planting be required prior to outline consent so that compensation can be assessed.

3.3 Detailed design should ensure that Important hedgerows do not become domestic property boundaries as this removes protection. In accordance with Ecological Appraisal s.5.2.29 recommendations a condition should be applied requiring submission and implementation of a tree and hedgerow protection plan in accordance with BS5837:2012.

3.4 The report indicates that hedgerows and some of the trees on site are of value for bats. Most, including all trees with potential to support bat roosts, are proposed

Page 91 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 for retention in the Sketch Masterplan. Should this change reassessment will be required. I note that the Arboricultural Assessment recommends removal of some of the trees identified as likely to support bats. Survey of these trees will be required prior to felling and it is possible that a Natural England licence will be required and appropriate mitigation. It is recommended that a condition be applied requiring survey of any tree identified by the Ecological Appraisal as being of potential for bats prior to felling. It is also recommended that a condition requires submission of a lighting scheme that takes bats into account and avoids unnecessary lighting of trees and hedgerows.

3.5 Conditions are recommended for protection of species. The Ecological Appraisal may underestimate badger activity in the area as there have been numerous reports of badger road casualties on this stretch of the A449 in the last two decades. It is recommended that a condition be applied requiring re-survey for badgers prior to commencement of any phase of development. A standard condition for protection of breeding birds is recommended. I agree with the Ecological Appraisal that impacts on great crested newts and reptiles are unlikely.

3.6 The Ecological Appraisal suggests open space landscaping measures that would compensate for habitat loss. s.5.6 of the Design and Access Statement sets out Landscape Principles that include biodiversity protection and benefit. It is recommended that a condition be applied requiring submission of a landscape scheme that includes planting to compensate for hedgerow loss and for measures for biodiversity benefit, as recommended in s.5.0 of the Ecological Appraisal and s.5.6 of the Design and Access Statement, and detail of SuDS planting as well as long-term management arrangements.

3.7 The Flood Risk Assessment indicates that SuDs features that include permanent wetlands are proposed. This gives potential for ecological enhancement. It is recommended that these drainage features be planted with native aquatic and marginal vegetation (where wet) and sown with a native, species-rich grassland seed mixture (such as Emorsgate's Meadow Mixture for Wetland EM8 or other locally sourced seed) that is tolerant of wet or damp conditions (where dry).

3.8 Given the location of the site the policy regarding mitigation of impacts on Cannock Chase SAC will apply as the report states. A standard contribution to the Cannock Chase SAMMM would be appropriate for this site. There is no potential for on-site mitigation of impacts.

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

4.1 The application site is not of high ecological value; hedgerows and trees and the main features that have importance, intrinsically and for bats and breeding birds. A requirement for detail of mitigation of hedgerow loss to access is recommended prior to consent.

4.2 Conditions are recommended for: o Compliance with the Sketch Masterplan

Page 92 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 o Re-survey after 12 months have elapsed since the ecological report (after November 2018) o Re-survey for badgers prior to commencement of any phase o Survey of any tree identified by the Ecological Appraisal as being of potential for bats prior to felling o Submission and implementation of a tree and hedgerow protection plan o Submission and implementation of a lighting scheme that takes bats into account and avoids unnecessary lighting of trees and hedgerows o Protection of breeding birds o Submission and implementation of a landscape scheme that includes planting to compensate for hedgerow loss and for measures for biodiversity benefit, as recommended in s.5.0 of the Ecological Appraisal and s.5.6 of the Design and Access Statement, and detail of SuDS planting as well as long-term management arrangements.

4.3 A standard mitigation contribution would be required for Cannock Chase SAC.

Staffordshire County Council Flood Risk Management Team (28.06.2018)

Following my previous response a revised Flood Risk Assessment (Project No: 16124, Rev B, 16 April 2018) incorporating a hydraulic modelling report by Waterco (Ref: w3321-180412-HMR, April 2018) has been submitted to include assessment of the flood risk from the ordinary watercourses crossing the site.

The FRA (5.4.11) states that 'blockage scenarios were simulated at the Stafford Road culvert to assess the impact to the proposed development. It was concluded that at the unlikely event of the culvert blocking, the properties within the development will not be flood risk as a result.'

However the Hydraulic Modelling Report states that in this blockage scenario 'simulation results show that flood depths on site gradually increase with time until the water levels are high enough to overtop the Stafford Road embankment.' The Maximum Flood Depth Blockage Scenario (Plot: w3321-Q100CC1_Dev2_BL2-95_D) shows significant maximum flood depths (>1.2m) within some areas of the residential blocks.

Further correspondence confirmed that "blockage scenarios for the Stafford Road culvert have been assessed for the pre-development model (EXG BL2-95) and the post development model (DEV2 BL2-95.) The crest level for the existing road is 83.68m AOD. During the EXG BL2-95 model, the water levels exceed the crest at approximately 8.5 hours into the model, 4.0 hours after the peak flood arrives. During the DEV2 BL2-95 model, the water levels exceed the crest at approximately 7.25 hours into the model, 2.75 hours after the peak flood arrives." "Measures will be taken to minimise the risk of a blocked culvert. These will include the provision of trash screens to prevent large debris entering and potentially causing a blockage. An on-going maintenance schedule will be implemented to ensure the culvert of cleared of debris and inspected to ensure it is in an acceptable condition."

Page 93 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

With only 2.75 hours from the peak flood arrival to water levels exceeding the crest of the Stafford Road embankment, I would be concerned about any homes located within the maximum flood extent and with floor levels not exceeding the crest level plus adequate freeboard. Even with ongoing maintenance it would be possible for this culvert to become blocked quite rapidly by debris blown / washed into the watercourse during a storm, and with water levels rapidly rising and little warning time it is likely to be difficult and dangerous to unblock in the predicted timescales The engineering consultant has confirmed that in order to mitigate the residual risk of culvert blockage coupled with an extreme storm, they would be prepared to accept a suitably worded condition that ensured that no dwelling is set below 83.70mAOD to ensure that flood flows would spill onto Stafford before any new properties are affected.

I would recommend that finished floor levels are set no lower than 83.830mAOD, which is 150mm above the crest level for the existing road.

Staffordshire County Council Flood Risk Management position The proposed development will only be acceptable if the following measures are secured by way of planning conditions on any planning permission.

Condition All finished floor levels must be set no lower than 83.830mAOD, which is 150mm above the crest level for the existing road.

Reason To reduce the flood risk to properties in the event of culvert blockage.

Condition No phase of development shall begin until a detailed surface water drainage design for that phase has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Lead Local Flood Authority. The design must be in accordance with the overall strategy and key design parameters set out in the Flood Risk Assessment (Project No: 16124, Rev B, 16 April 2018).

The design must demonstrate: o Surface water drainage system(s) designed in accordance with national and local standards, including the Non-statutory technical standards for sustainable drainage systems (DEFRA, March 2015). o SuDS design to provide adequate water quality treatment, which can be demonstrated using the Simple Index Approach (CIRIA SuDS Manual 2015). o Limiting the discharge rate generated by all rainfall events up to the 100 year plus climate change critical rain storm to 43.0l/s to ensure that there will be no increase in flood risk downstream. o Detailed design (plans, network details and calculations) in support of any surface water drainage scheme, including details on any attenuation system, and the outfall arrangements. Calculations should demonstrate the performance of the

Page 94 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 designed system for a range of return periods and storm durations inclusive of the 1 in 1 year, 1 in 30 year, 1 in 100 year and 1 in 100 year plus climate change return periods. o Plans illustrating flooded areas and flow paths in the event of exceedance of the drainage system. Site layout and levels should provide safe exceedance routes and adequate access for maintenance. o Provision of an acceptable management and maintenance plan for surface water drainage to ensure continued performance of the system for the lifetime of the development. This should include a schedule of required maintenance activities and frequencies, and contact details for the organisation responsible for carrying out these duties. Reason To reduce risk of surface water flooding to the development and properties downstream for the lifetime of the development.

Further Comments (21.05. 2018)

Thank you for consulting us on the amended Flood Risk Assessment for the application above. Could I ask for some clarification / additional information regarding the blockage scenario for the Stafford Road Culvert and the proposed residual risk mitigation?

Could you confirm the time-scales for levels to reach the crest of the Stafford Road embankment as shown in the blockage scenario results?

What is the crest height of the embankment?

Can you confirm the measures that will be taken to prevent blockage of the culvert, for example construction of a suitable screen at the inlet, arrangements for ongoing maintenance, inspection and clearance of the watercourse and culvert inlet. Can you confirm measures to mitigate the residual risk from blockage, for example is it possible to set floor levels above the crest level of the Stafford Road embankment, or locate all properties outside the maximum flood extent? Thank you for consulting us on this planning application, our response is as follows:

Initial Response 06.12. 2017

Page 95 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

The Flood Risk Assessment (Project No: 16124, Rev A, 26 October 2017) submitted does not provide sufficient information to fully assess the flood risk to the proposed development. We would recommend that planning permission should not be granted until this has been adequately addressed.

The Flood Risk Assessment identifies two ordinary watercourses crossing the site but concludes that the fluvial risk to the site is very low without sufficient evidence or analysis. The site lies within Flood Zone 1, however flood zones 2 and 3 have only been modelled for catchments greater than 3km2. The fluvial flood risk at this site is therefore not accurately represented by the fluvial flood zones. The surface water flood map indicates significant flow accumulations associated with the watercourses crossing the site, as well as potential ponding in the lowest areas of the site. This mapping does not precisely represent the fluvial flood risk and will not accurately take into account the culvert under Stafford Road. However it does indicate the need for a more detailed analysis that should be undertaken as part of the Flood Risk Assessment. The FRA should include: o Assessment of the catchments (area, potential flows for full range of return periods) of both watercourses o Survey of the culvert crossing Stafford Road to establish conveyance capacity, condition, and any improvement works required o Survey of watercourse channels to establish conveyance capacity o Assessment of flood risk based on the above, for a full range of return periods and potential blockage scenarios.

Any areas at risk from these sources of flooding will need to be clearly identified, with any mitigation or areas of exclusion clearly set out.

Regarding Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS): The FRA includes an outline drainage strategy that demonstrates that adequate attenuation storage can be provided on site. This will need to be reviewed in light of the additional flood risk assessment set out above. The drainage strategy would need to be developed in conjunction with the detailed site design, to include a suitable SuDS management train which can be assessed using the Simple Index Approach (CIRIA SuDS Manual).

School Organisation Team (Revised Response received 14/6/18)

Whilst drafting the S106 agreement for Stafford Road, Penkridge - 17/01022/OUT it has been discovered that there is a different number of RSL dwellings then originally advised on the application form that we responded to. I have attached both for ease. It states that there would be 80 RSL dwellings on the application form but there is only 40 (50%) on the S106 and 40 (50%) Intermediate dwellings on the S106.

Page 96 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

As it states in our original response if the number of RSL dwellings reduce we will revise our education request. It means that the Middle School education request has changed. Can you please refer this to the Planning Officer so that they are aware. Our legal team will be amending the education request in accordance with the new RSL amount.

For your official use please see below the revised request in full: Planning Application for a Residential Development at Stafford Road, Land North of Penkridge (17/01022/OUT)

In response to the above planning application the School Organisation team has the following comments:

This development falls within the catchments of Marshbrook First School, Penkridge Middle School and Wolgarston High School.

The development is scheduled to provide 200 dwellings. Excluding the 40 RSL dwellings from years 7 & 8 at Middle and High Schools, a development of 200 houses including 40 RSLs could add 30 First School, 22 Middle School, 14 High School and 5 Post 16 aged pupils.

The First schools in Penkridge Town and Penkridge Middle School are projected to be full for the foreseeable future. There are plans to increase the capacity within one of the first schools in Penkridge and increase capacity at Penkridge Middle School in order for this development and other approved developments to be mitigated; options are currently being explored and considered

Wolgarston High School is projected to have sufficient space to accommodate the likely demand from pupils generated by the development and therefore no request will be made towards High School provision.

The education contribution for a development of this size would be as follows;

30 First School places (30 x £11,031 = £330,930) and 22 Middle School places (22 x £13,827 = £304,194). This gives a total request of £635,124 for up to 200 dwellings.

The above comments are based on a development providing 200 dwellings including 120 houses and 40 RSL houses. If the number of houses or total dwellings increases, or the number of RSL properties reduces, a revised contribution will be necessary.

The above contribution is based on the 2008/09 cost multipliers which are subject to change.

The above is based on current demographics; we would wish to be consulted on any further applications for this site.

Initial Response

Page 97 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

This development falls within the catchments of Marshbrook First School, Penkridge Middle School and Wolgarston High School.

The development is scheduled to provide 200 dwellings. Excluding the 80 RSL dwellings from years 7 & 8 at Middle and High Schools, a development of 200 houses including 80 RSLs could add 30 First School, 19 Middle School, 11 High School and 4 Post 16 aged pupils.

The First Schools, within Penkridge Town Cluster, are expected to be full for the foreseeable future. Penkridge Middle School is also expected to be full for the foreseeable future.

The education contribution for a development of this size would be as follows;

30 First School places (30 x £11,031 = £330,930) and 19 Middle School places (19 x £13,827 = £262,713). This gives a total request of £593,643 for up to 200 dwellings.

The above comments are based on a development providing 200 dwellings including 120 houses and 80 RSL houses. If the number of houses or total dwellings increases, or the number of RSL properties reduces, a revised contribution will be necessary.

The above contribution is based on the 2008/09 cost multipliers which are subject to change.

The above is based on current demographics; we would wish to be consulted on any further applications for this site.

Please find attached the revised response to the above planning application to reflect the plans for additional education infrastructure in Penkridge.

The education contribution for a development of this size would be as follows;

30 First School places (30 x £11,031 = £330,930) and 19 Middle School places (19 x £13,827 = £262,713). This gives a total request of £593,643 for up to 200 dwellings.

Page 98 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

The above contribution is based on the 2008/09 cost multipliers which are subject to change.

The above is based on current demographics; we would wish to be consulted on any further applications for this site.

County Planning

I refer to your consultation letter dated 14 November 2017, and write to confirm the observations of Staffordshire County Council, acting as the Mineral and Waste Planning Authority.

Background The proposal is for outline permission for up to 200 dwellings, with associated access works, public open space, landscaping and other infrastructure on a 9.8 ha site between the A449 and the railway, on the northern edge of Penkridge.

Observations The proposal site adjoins the northern edge of Penkridge, and straddles the edge of the Minerals Safeguarding Area (MSA) for superficial sand and gravel, with approximately half of the site falling within the MSA. There are no permitted or allocated mineral sites in the vicinity of the application site. Paragraph 144, of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and Policy 3 of the newly adopted Minerals Local Plan for Staffordshire (2015 - 2030), both aim to protect mineral resources from sterilisation by other forms of development. Policy 3.2 of the new Minerals Local Plan states that: Within a Mineral Safeguarding Area, non-mineral development except for those types of development set out in Appendix 6, should not be permitted until the prospective developer has produced evidence prior to determination of the planning application to demonstrate: a) the existence, the quantity, the quality and the value of the underlying or adjacent mineral resource; and b) that proposals for non-mineral development in the vicinity of permitted mineral sites or mineral site allocations would not unduly restrict the mineral operations.

The Planning Statement which accompanies the application correctly identifies the MSA and the relevant policies from the Minerals Local Plan. It also recognises that the part of the proposal site which falls within the MSA lies towards the western and, to an extent, the southern edges of the site where any attempt to recover the mineral would be constrained by other development in the form of the A449 and the northernmost houses in Penkridge. It would, therefore, be unlikely that any underlying mineral resource could be extracted in a manner that

Page 99 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 was environmentally acceptable and/or economically viable. As a result, it is reasonable to conclude that the proposed development would not lead to the sterilisation of significant and otherwise recoverable, mineral resources.

Conclusions Therefore, under the powers contained in the 'Scheme of Delegation to Officers', this letter confirms that Staffordshire County Council, acting as Minerals and Waste Planning Authority has NO OBJECTION to the outline planning application for development of up to 200 dwellings (use class C3) together with an access roundabout on Stafford Road, public open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure on land north of Penkridge Stafford Road, Penkridge, Staffordshire.

I trust that Staffordshire County Council's observations will be taken into account in reaching a decision on the application.

Finally, I wish to take this opportunity to remind you of the policy requirement (as detailed in Policy 1.2 of the Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Joint Waste Local Plan, and as supported by paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy for Waste) to make better use of waste associated with non-waste related development. In accordance with Policy 1.2, all 'major development' proposals (as defined in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, or any subsequent changes/revisions) should: i. Use / Address waste as a resource; ii. Minimise waste as far as possible; iii. Demonstrate the use of sustainable design and construction techniques, i.e.: resourceefficiency in terms of sourcing of materials, construction methods, and demolition; iv. Enable the building to be easily decommissioned or reused for a new purpose; and enable the future recycling of the building fabric to be used for its constituent material; v. Maximise on-site management of construction, demolition and excavation waste arising during construction; vi. Make provision for waste collection to facilitate, where practicable, separated waste collection systems; and, vii. Be supported by a site waste management plan.

County Highways (08.02.2018)

There are no objections on Highway grounds to the proposed development subject to the following conditions being included on any approval:-

This proposal is for a residential development of up to 200 dwellings on lands located on the western side of the A449 on the northern outskirts of Penkridge. The proposal is accompanied by a Transport Assessment (TA) which reports in detail on transport issues and the site's proposed access; a roundabout junction on the A449.

Page 100 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

The TA considers the site's compliance with Transport policies and address whether the site is accessible via sustainable modes of travel. With the provision of a footway over the site frontage the site would be accessible on foot to facilities within the village which is important when trying to reduce car usage and further lessen the impact from the development. I would expect to see any subsequent detailed planning application to provide direct pedestrian access through the sites frontage on the A449.

The site would be accessed via the provision of a new roundabout junction of the A449. This proposal would not only provide access to the site it would also provide a 'gateway feature' to the village of Penkridge which would help to reduce vehicle speeds when entering the residential area.

The proposed roundabout junction would also require the relocation of the 30mph speed limit further north along the A449 with the speed limit enforced by this junction. Any relocation of the speed limit would need to replicate the current reductions which are stepped from 60mph to 40mph to 30mph. This will need to be covered in the condition for off-site highway works. The TA has also modelled the traffic impact generated by the proposed development. Whilst the development does generate traffic through the local junctions the level of impact would be negligible with queues and delays increasing slightly. I am in general agreement the conclusions of the TA and that information submitted demonstrates that the proposal would be acceptable in highway terms. Therefore I have no objection in principle to the proposal subject to the following conditions being attached;-

Prior to the commencement of any construction, including demolition, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved management plan shall include details relating to construction access, hours of construction, routing of HGV's, delivery times and the location of the contractors compounds, cabins, material storage areas and contractors parking and a scheme for the management and suppression of dust from construction activities including the provision of a vehicle wheel wash. It shall also include a method of demolition and restoration of the site. All site operations shall then be undertaken strictly in accordance with the approved CEMP for the duration of the construction programme.

No occupation of any dwelling shall take place until such time as the associated driveway has been surfaced in a bound material and sustainably drained, in accordance with details to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

No building shall be occupied until the vehicular access onto Stafford Road has been fully constructed in accordance with approved plans drawing SK13 REV A

Reasons:

Page 101 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

To comply with the aims and objectives of the NPPF, the Local Plan and highway safety.

Note to Planning Officer The travel plan is to be secured via a legal agreement which will require a monitoring fee of £6,430 This consent will require approval under Section 7 of the Staffordshire Act 1983 and will require a Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980. Please contact Staffordshire County Council to ensure that approvals and agreements are secured before commencement of works. Any future development of the site will require to be designed in accordance with guidance in MfS 1 and 2 and Staffordshire County Design Guide, where appropriate. So the highways should all link through where there are opportunities to do so. Notwithstanding the submitted plans appropriate surface treatments will be decided through the adoption process and small element paving will not be acceptable in certain areas where there are likely to be turning movements. Any use of block paving and trees in the highway boundary will require a commuted sum. The conditions requiring off-site highway works shall require a Highway Works Agreement with Staffordshire County Council. The applicant is requested to contact Staffordshire County Council in order to secure the Agreement. The link below is to the Highway Works Information Pack including an application form. Please complete and send to the address indicated on the application form or email to ([email protected]). The applicant is advised to begin this process well in advance of any works taking place in order to meet any potential timescales.

Historic Environment Officer Archaeology

Thank you for your consultation regarding the above outline application for development of up to 200 dwellings (Use Class C3) together with an access roundabout on Stafford Road, public open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure on land north of Penkridge.

The application is supported by a robust Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment (ADBA) which has appropriately assessed the known and potential archaeological resource utilising information held by the Staffordshire Historic Environment Record (HER) and other appropriate documents. I concur with the conclusions of the ADBA that there is moderate to low potential for significant archaeological remains to be present within the development site. However, in order to appropriately assess the unknown archaeological potential, particularly relating to prehistoric activity which is currently poorly understood within the wider landscape, it is advised that further archaeological investigation is undertaken.

The archaeological investigation should take the form of a staged evaluation comprising geophysical survey followed by trial trenching which will aim to establish the survival, nature, extent, character and significance of archaeological remains within the application site. The evaluation should be undertaken sufficiently in advance of works commencing in order to allow the results of this work to inform the

Page 102 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 need for and extent of any further archaeological mitigation. This approach is in line with NPPF paragraph 128, which requires applicants to describe the significance of any heritage assets and the potential impact of any proposed development upon them. It is also supported by NPPF paragraph 141 which states that '…they [Local Planning Authorities] should also require developers to record and advance understanding of significance of any heritage asset to be lost (wholly or in part) in a manner proportionate to their importance and the impact, and to make this evidence (and any archive generated) publically accessible'. The evaluation should be undertaken by a suitably experienced archaeologist(s) working to the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 'Code of Conduct' and the relevant standards and guidance (2014).

This work would most appropriately be secured via a condition attached to any planning permission for the scheme stating:

'Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a written scheme of archaeological investigation ('the Scheme') shall be submitted for the written approval of the District Planning Authority. The Scheme shall provide details of the programme of archaeological works to be carried out within the site, including post- excavation reporting and appropriate publication. The Scheme shall thereafter be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details'.

The Sketch Masterplan which supports the application proposes to retain all of the significant extant hedgerows. The wider field pattern within which the proposal site is located has been defined by the Staffordshire Historic Landscape Character (HLC) as comprising 'Reorganised Piecemeal Enclosure' which suggests a degree of field boundary loss within the wider landscape during the 20th century. The field pattern originated in the post medieval period and is associated with the incremental enclosure of the medieval open fields associated with the historic town of Penkridge to the south. The ADBA identifies that the majority of the field boundaries within and encircling the development area were present by 1754 with some removal and relaying of boundaries occurring between this date and the mid to late 19th century. In contrast to what is suggested by the HLC within the wider landscape there has been very little change to the development site's field pattern in the period since the mid to late 19th century. Consequently the intention to retain these clearly historic field boundaries and the framework of the field pattern is to be welcomed.

County Countryside and Rights Of Way Officer

The application recognises Public Footpath No. 31 Penkridge Parish which crosses the development site from east to west. The plans within the Design and Access Statement show the route of the right of way on its correct alignment however the Masterplan changes the alignment of the footpath near its eastern end by putting a left and right hand bend in the route. The Residential Travel Plan also mentions the right of way in the Introduction (1.2.4) and elsewhere and comments that right of way would be incorporated into a proposed emergency access and be enhanced to provide an all-weather route.

Page 103 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

The attention of the developer should be drawn to the requirement that any planning permission given does not construe the right to divert, extinguish or obstruct any part of the public path network. If the path will needs diverting as part of these proposals the developer will need to apply to South Staffordshire District Council under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to divert the rights of way to allow the development to commence. The County Council will need to be formally consulted on any proposal to divert the rights of way.

It is important that users of the path network are still able to exercise their public rights safely and that the paths are reinstated if any damage to the surface occurs as a result of the proposed development.

The applicants should be reminded that the granting of planning permission does not constitute authority for interference with the rights of way or their closure or diversion. For further information the applicant should be advised to read section 7 of DEFRA's Rights of Way Circular (1/09), in particular the recommendation that:

"In considering potential revisions to an existing right of way that are necessary to accommodate planned development, but which are acceptable to the public, any alternative alignment should avoid the use of estate roads for the purpose wherever possible and preference should be given to the use of made up estate paths through landscaped or open space areas away from vehicular traffic".

We would ask that trees are not planted within 3 metres of the public rights of way unless the developer and any subsequent landowners are informed that the maintenance of the trees is their responsibility. It is also unlikely that any of the new "linking" footways created through this development will be included on the Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way. Alternative arrangements will need to be made to ensure their maintenance in the future either by the developer or subsequent landowners. It may be possible for these footways to be adopted under Section 38 Highways Act 1980 but this will be the responsibility of the developer.

The County Council has not received any application under Section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to add or modify the Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way, which affects the land in question. It should be noted, however, that this does not preclude the possibility of the existence of a right of way at common law, or by virtue of a presumed dedication under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980. It may, therefore, be necessary to make further local enquiries and seek legal advice in respect of any physically evident route affecting the land, or the apparent exercise of a right of way by members of the public

Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA)

In order to prevent crime and reduce the fear of crime I recommend that should this proposal go ahead that it attains Police Secured by Design (SBD) accreditation. There is no charge for my advice or for the Secured by Design award, and once awarded the Police SBD logo can be used on advertising material.

Page 104 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Research shows that adopting SBD can reduce burglary by 50%, car crime and criminal damage by 25%, therefore the carbon costs of replacing door-sets and windows on SBD developments as a result of criminal activity is more than 50% less than on non SBD developments, the cost of installing SBD approved products equals 0.2% of the total build cost.

One of the most revealing elements of research into SBD is how much 'safer' residents feel if they occupy a dwelling on an accredited development, even if they are not aware of the award status. There are few other initiatives which can deliver a measurable reduction in fear like this.

SBD supports one of the Government's key planning objectives - the creation of safe, secure, quality places where people wish to live and work. SBD applies quality standards to a range of security measures and should be seen as a positive marketing opportunity.

SBD can contribute towards BREEAM assessments.

Staffordshire Police request that should this proposal be granted that they are consulted further when "reserved matters" are being decided.

Entrance to the Development I recommend that a rumble strip, change of road surface or brick pillars be incorporated at the road entrance of the site in order to create a symbolic barrier; this gives the impression that the area beyond the 'barrier' is private to the community. Wherever possible, footpaths into the development should be wide, clear of hiding places, well lit, and should follow a direct route.

Landscaping All shrubs and hedges specified adjacent buildings should have a maximum growth height of 1 metre, whilst all tree branches should be pruned up to a minimum height of 2.5metres, thereby maintaining a clear field of vision around the site.

Trees when mature shouldn't mask lighting columns or become climbing aids to scale boundary treatments.

Lighting External areas should offer Uniformity Values between 0.25 and 0.40, using lamps with a rating of at least 60 on the colour rendering index, and meet the relevant levels as recommended by BS5489:2013, this standard should include all communal parking areas and the bin and cycle store. It should be noted that 'bollard lighting is not compliant with BS5489:2013 because it does not project sufficient light at the right height and distorts the available light due to the 'up-lighting' effect; making it difficult to recognise facial features and as a result causes an increase in the fear of crime' Secured by Design Homes 2016 version 1; February 2016 pp 24, Para 18.3.

For internal areas such as the communal entrance, landings and stairwells of HMO's, 24 hour lighting (switched using a photoelectric cell) is recommended. To reduce

Page 105 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 energy consumption, lighting systems that reduce light levels during quieter periods may be utilised. The implementation of low wattage lamps such as LED's, dusk to dawn lighting, vandal resistant luminaires, appropriate lighting values (5-10 Lux), mounting to a minimum height of 2.4 metres, and a good maintenance regime, is considered good practice when considering lighting design specification and values, good lighting design promotes the feeling safety in the environment and reduce the fear of crime. Lighting schemes should work together with landscaping to mitigate the effects of seasonal variations, both lighting and landscaping schemes should be well maintained as part of a maintenance schedule.

POS/LEAP It is important that the proposed play area should be located in full view of adjacent dwellings and the PROW, i.e. not hidden behind landscaping and that any landscaping is maintained at a low level to enhance natural surveillance and increase child safety in order to reduce crime and the fear of crime including abduction of a child and anti-social behaviour.

Play areas are vulnerable to crime and being damaged, the result of this abuse is that the investment in a play area, its use, and contribution to the quality of life in the community can be seriously eroded.

An evaluation of the needs of the community should be addressed prior to implementation of this area and it is important when carrying out a post implementation evaluation of crime or anti-social behaviour (ASB) of this facility to separate incidents around the play area i.e. roads, parking areas, drinking in the street, dwelling frontages, etc. from those which actually occur within it, part of any ASB evaluation should include how many perceived ASB incidents are attributed to estate families and incidents attributed to non-resident families.

I use the word "perceived" because when a play area is being used to play or otherwise engage a young person this usually generates a certain amount of noise, this by itself is not anti-social - its noise.

The following recommendations highlight design and management features which need to be included in the planning of the proposed play area, its design and construction which will help to block the opportunity for crime and anti-social behaviour.

Community Planning; o Be able to show clear intended use related to age group, this should be considered relative to other local play facilities or youth clubs for other age groups within the community - it is important in avoiding potential abuse that all age groups are recognised with appropriate facilities included in a positive way. o Provide adequate space for the proposed activity within the play area complete with a buffer zone between the activity and adjacent dwellings or other occupied buildings.

Page 106 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 o Relate intended playing area use to immediate infrastructure e.g. allow adequate road, cycle/footpath access and secure parking or cycle storage nearby. o Locate the play area for young and very young children within the protection of the built community to ensure good natural surveillance and supervision. o Ensure that ownership and management of the proposed facility is in place with adequate resource available for maintenance and any improvements should they be required.

Play Area Design; o Boundaries should be clearly defined with features to prevent unauthorised motor vehicle/cycle access. o Boundary fences and landscaping should allow natural surveillance across the play area from public areas, roads and footpaths. o Lighting should be appropriate to facilitate natural surveillance at night and reduce fear of crime. o Public rights of way through the play area should be discouraged. o There should be controlled informal access to the play area to prevent dog fouling and littering from public areas. o Gable ends of houses overlooking grassed areas = football goal! Consider planting thorny plants in front of the wall in such cases. o No structure or landscape features should compromise boundary security providing points to climb over the perimeter fence. o Areas used for "adventure play" should have clear natural surveillance without potential "hiding" places or places for litter to collect. o Additional security measures necessary to address particular crime problems in the surrounding area. o Consider the design of a youth shelter to avoid gathering in adjacent streets rear parking courts etc.

Management o Regular maintenance routines should be "designed in" to prevent the facility becoming un-usable. o The facility should be regularly monitored and the community involved in any potential expansion. o Crime and anti-social behaviour patterns recorded and any appropriate action considered. o Any improvements or changes to prevent crime and encourage use should involve community consultation.

Car Parking

If communal parking areas are essential they must be in small groups, close and adjacent to the owners which they serve, should be well lit, open to natural surveillance and from regularly habitable rooms and have obvious pedestrian routes. BFL 12 recommends avoidance of;

Page 107 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Relying on a single parking treatment - a combination of car parking treatments nearly always creates more capacity, visual interest and a more successful place. Large rear parking courts. When parking courts are less private, they offer greater opportunity for thieves, vandals and those who should not be parking there - local experience shows they also provide the opportunity to generate anti-social behaviour and space for fly tipping and are hardly ever used for parking vehicles. Parking that is not well overlooked - local experience shows that if hidden from view these bays will generate crime and anti-social behaviour Not providing a clear and direct route between front doors and on-street parking or not balancing the amount of parking in front of plots with soft relief - local experience shows that residents want to see their cars from their home and park as close to the front door as possible to unload shopping and infants

Further information on Secured by Design and accredited security products can be found at www.securedbydesign.com

Staffordshire Fire and Rescue

FIRE MAINS, HYDRANTS AND VEHICLE ACCESS Appropriate supplies of water for firefighting and vehicle access should be provided at the site, as indicated in approved document B requirement B5, section 15 and 16. I would remind you that the roads and drives upon which appliances would have to travel in order to proceed to within 45 metres of any point within the property, should be capable of withstanding the weight of a Staffordshire firefighting appliance (G.V.W. of 17800 Kg).

AUTOMATIC WATER SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS (SPRINKLERS) I wish to draw to your attention Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service's stance regarding sprinklers.

In the interest of preventing deaths and injuries from fires within domestic dwellings Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service strongly recommend the provision of a sprinkler system to a relevant standard.

Early consultation with the Fire Service when designing buildings which incorporate sprinklers may have a significant impact on reducing fire deaths and injuries in domestic premises and financial implications for all stakeholders.

SFRS are fully committed to promoting Fire Protection Systems for both business and domestic premises. Support is offered to assist all in achieving a reduction of loss of life and the impact of fire on the wider community.

Early consultation with the Fire Service when designing buildings which incorporate sprinklers may have a significant impact on reducing financial implications for all stakeholders. If you require any further advice or assistance regarding the above please do not hesitate to contact me.

Page 108 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Further information can be found at www.basfa.org.uk The website of the British Automatic Fire Sprinklers Association Ltd.

Development and Waste Management Unit No Comments Received

Severn Trent Water Ltd

With Reference to the above planning application the company's observations regarding sewerage are as follows.

I can confirm that we have no objections to the proposals subject to the inclusion of the following condition: o The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and o The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use. This is to ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to prevent or to avoid exacerbating any flooding issues and to minimise the risk of pollution.

Environment Agency The Environment Agency have no comments to make on the application as the constraints fall outside our remit. We recommend you consult with Staffs CC for advice regarding the FRA and surface water drainage/flooding issues on site.

Natural England

No objection - subject to appropriate mitigation being secured We consider that without appropriate mitigation the application would have an adverse effect on the integrity of Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation

In order to mitigate these adverse effects and make the development acceptable, the following mitigation options should be secured:

Guidance set out in the Council's approach to delivering mitigation by means of the Strategic Access Management & Monitoring (SAMM) measures agreed by the SAC Partnership should be followed. These measures will facilitate sustainable residential development while safeguarding the SAC.

We advise that an appropriate planning condition or obligation is attached to any planning permission to secure these measures. Natural England's advice on other natural environment issues is set out below

Additional Information required The application site lies within 5.5km of Cannock Chase SAC.

Page 109 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Your Authority is a partner in the Cannock Chase SAC Partnership project. South Staffordshire District Council has recently published an evidence base, including recommendations on the mitigation of recreation related impacts on the Cannock Chase SAC. Review of this evidence base has shown that recreation associated with new housing development within 15km of this European site would have a significant effect on the SAC unless mitigation measures are put in place. The effects arising from recreation comprise the creation of new paths, path widening, erosion and nutrient enrichment. This evidence base is reflected in your local plan policy EQ2. This guidance sets out the Council's approach to delivering mitigation by means of the Strategic Access Management & Monitoring (SAMM) measures agreed by the SAC Partnership. These measures will facilitate sustainable residential development while safeguarding the SAC.

To ensure compliance with the Habitats Regulations, we consider that the LPA will need to demonstrate, in advance of granting permission for a development management application, that there is sufficient certainty of the required financial commitment to deliver the SAMM measures. If such security can be demonstrated the council should complete an HRA 'screening' record accordingly. Provided that the Council as competent authority is satisfied the proposal can be screened out of the HRA process, we do not need to be re-consulted. If the HRA screening process cannot demonstrate that the required financial contribution will be delivered then please consult us again.

Landscape advice The proposed development is for a site within or close to a nationally designated landscape namely Cannock Chase AONB. Natural England advises that the planning authority uses national and local policies, together with local landscape expertise and information to determine the proposal. The policy and statutory framework to guide your decision and the role of local advice are explained below.

Your decision should be guided by paragraph 115 of the National Planning Policy Framework which gives the highest status of protection for the 'landscape and scenic beauty' of AONBs and National Parks. For major development proposals paragraph 116 sets out criteria to determine whether the development should exceptionally be permitted within the designated landscape. Alongside national policy you should also apply landscape policies set out in your development plan, or appropriate saved policies. We also advise that you consult the relevant AONB Team. Their knowledge of the site and its wider landscape setting, together with the aims and objectives of the AONB's statutory management plan, will be a valuable contribution to the planning decision. Where available, a local Landscape Character Assessment can also be a helpful guide to the landscape's sensitivity to this type of development and its capacity to accommodate the proposed development.

The statutory purpose of the AONB is to conserve and enhance the area's natural beauty. You should assess the application carefully as to whether the proposed development would have a significant impact on or harm that statutory purpose. Relevant to this is the duty on public bodies to 'have regard' for that statutory

Page 110 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 purpose in carrying out their functions (S85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act, 2000). The Planning Practice Guidance confirms that this duty also applies to proposals outside the designated area but impacting on its natural beauty.

Green Infrastructure Natural England welcomes the provision of Green Infrastructure within this proposal particularly the open greenspace which surrounds the housing areas. We suggest that this area is designed with maximum benefit to biodiversity which allows linkage along green corridors throughout the application site and into the other open green spaces identified on the site masterplan. The linking of the green spaces through the site and into the wider locality would create benefits for both people and biodiversity. In order to secure a comprehensive scheme of green infrastructure creation, Natural England would advise the attaching of a suitably worded planning condition(s) which would allow further detail to be addressed through a subsequent full application. Multi-functional green infrastructure can perform a range of functions including improved flood risk management, provision of accessible green space, climate change adaptation and biodiversity enhancement. Additional evidence and case studies on green infrastructure, including the economic benefits of GI can be found on the gov.uk website (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/natural-environment)

Badger Conservation Group

Thank you for providing us with the ecological survey for this application, we are happy with the findings and recommendations and the only comment we have is that in view of the comment that "It is considered that the woodland and grassland areas of the site offer some foraging opportunities for Badgers, while the hedgerows offer some limited dispersal opportunities" it would be prudent to implement site management measures detailed below. o Ensure trenches and ditches have escape slopes built in or fitted at the end of each working day. o Drainage or sewage pipe-work 150mm diameter, or over, be blanked off at the end of each working day. o Workers on site are advised not to handle badgers that become trapped or fall victim to site conditions. Call out details of experienced badger rescue worker(s) included. (Such advice should form part of any site induction document

Campaign to Protect Rural England Staffordshire No comments received

Staffordshire Wildlife Trust No Comments Received

Cadent Gas Limited (formerly National Grid) No Comments Received

National Grid Transco No comments received

Network Rail No Comments Received

Open Spaces Society No Comments Received

Page 111 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Ramblers Association

There is a Public Right of Way, Footpath No 31 of Penkridge Parish that crosses the development site from east to west with access via a stile on the Stafford Road crossing the field to a footbridge over the railway.

I wish to advise the developer that this is a well used path by local residents and must be respected. Ideally it should be incorporated into the design of the development and treated sympathetically with green landscaping and a gravel path rather than tarmac. It should be easy and attractive for the public to use and not obstructed in any way. If this is adhered to The Ramblers' Association will have no objections to the proposed development.

Public Comments

There have been 58 comments from members of the general public [set out in full on Public Access - Council Website]. 33 of these public responses are objections and 25 are comments in support of the application.

Set out below are extracts taken from the 33 objection comments where I have aimed to capture the range of issues covered by the objectors (full comments available on Public Access - Council Website under Planning): -

-lf we carry on over developing Penkridge it will lose its appeal as a nice rural community to live in and be subjected to all the social issues larger towns face. About fairness to the people of Penkridge, why are all social housing needs falling on Penkridge, we never see the larger developments in the neighbouring villages except for the individual designer homes. I have included the key faxes from my previous letter as to my concerns to this continual developing of housing in Penkridge. Authorities across the country are required to build their quota of homes for their residents, and the Chancellor, Philip Hammond has announced in his 2017 budget that 300,000 homes per year are the government's target. Penkridge is fulfilling its obligation by building new homes on the south side of Penkridge by the contractors Persimmon Homes.

- Making sure there are good medical facilities where people choose to live are very important as public transport has been reduced and not everybody has the use of their own vehicle to attend alternative medical centres. Preserving the existing practice to a manageable proportion is imperative, and by expanding the population with more dwellings does not help.

-With no plans to increase our schools this could pose problems with families as to where to send their children, I am sure developers think they are trying to improve people's lives, but I ask them and South Staffordshire Planning Department to consider other areas that would be more beneficial than Penkridge.

-This land is classed as 'open countryside'. According to Policy OC1 Staffs Council document, countryside, landscapes, the diversity of wildlife and habitats are meant

Page 112 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 to be protected, conserved and enhanced. It must be protected also because of its ecological and agricultural value. Important objectives in GB1, GB2, OC1 Support Policy, relate to both green belt and open countryside - to protect, maintain and reinforce countryside. I understand there is a requirement to maintain 'gaps' between settlements, e.g., Penkridge and Dunston/M6 area. If the proposed plans are approved, where will the border of Penkridge be situated in the future and how is the countryside being maintained and reinforced?

-Regardless of building design, the countryside would be damaged. Many species of wildlife live on this land, including animals, a variety of birds, old trees and hedgerow borders. Apparently, according to developers, this is not the case. Flooding is an issue on this land which is somewhat higher than the village centre. Where will the water from these fields be directed should planning be approved? Again, apparently the land is not prone to any kind of flooding. Perhaps the area might be investigated a little deeper

-As at 06/02/2018 there are 804 vacant residential properties both private and housing association in South Staffordshire. There are 80 properties for sale in Penkridge, including over 30% which are New Builds on the Persimmon Estate. These range from 2-4 bedroom properties and also include bungalows and shared ownership initiatives. There are also many established properties in the area, many of which have been for sale for a considerable amount of time and have had to have been reduced. 53 of the properties are £250,000 or less and 68% of these are less that £200,000. The properties include retirement homes, affordable accommodation, family homes and executive homes. The above demonstrates there is NOT a need for additional housing in Penkridge. The housing allocation has been met in Penkridge and this application is premature and speculative and unnecessary.

- We have a significant number of major concerns with the proposals for Bloor Homes and I wish to record objections based on the following: 1. 1. Impact on the distinct and historic identity of the Village of Penkridge 2. 2. Shows total disregard for South Staffordshire Council SAD, Strategy, Planning Policy and Documentation 3. 3. Prematurity - SAD is currently in the process of being reviewed. 4. 4. Staffordshire has already produced a local plan fulfilling Government house building objectives, and is currently completing new homes at twice the national rate 5. 5. Destruction of Open Countryside and of agricultural land (currently used for grazing), impact on wildlife etc. 6. 6. The village infrastructure will not be able to cope with a further influx of new homes a. Nursery Places b. Schools c. Medical d. Roads and Congestion 7. 7. The lack of demand for additional homes in Penkridge 8. 8. Security 9. 9. Privacy / Will be overlooked

Page 113 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

10. This is a done deal - Bloor Homes are already advertising the housing development on their social media. 11. Biased Feedback process from Bloor Homes to try and 'prove a need'

-Traffic i) The increased traffic flow would be significant and would increase the risks to others using the A449 road. ii) The speed limits are largely ignored on the A449; there is no reason to believe the situation would improve following this development. iii) Pedestrian footfall will increase alongside the A449 into the village but the western side of that road does not have a footpath. Pedestrians will be faced with crossing the A449 on a bend, as vehicles are accelerating out of the speed limited area, a less-than-satisfactory situation. To gain access to the western side of the A449, say to visit the market, pedestrians will have to cross back over that road, then negotiate an awkward junction at Goods Station Lane, then cross Levedale Road on a bend with restricted lines of sight. The developers must be tasked with sorting that out, at their expense not that of the respective Councils. iv) The positioning of the roundabout on the plan is most alarming and demonstrates a deplorable understanding of traffic management. It must be rejected forthwith. North-South A449 traffic will approach the roundabout downhill so relatively quickly, and will be able to negotiate the roundabout with only minor steering movements and correspondingly quickly. Traffic entering the roundabout from the planned development and intending to turn south, or that intending to do a 'U' turn to return to the village, will be in conflict with southbound A449 vehicles. South - North A449 traffic will meet a significant chicane and will, naturally, reduce speed accordingly. Exiting the roundabout that traffic will be faced with a significant hill and no momentum to help carry them up it, the result will be slow vehicles accelerating hard to regain momentum, with corresponding noise and pollution. The intention of the developers to re-instate the hedgerow to the west at this point making claim that this will mitigate the noise from vehicles, especially heavy goods vehicles, in these circumstances again show a blatant disregard for the comfort and welfare of those living alongside.

-Our schools, doctors and local services are already overstretched. If there is a problem on the motorway the A449 and surrounding roads which are already heavily congested virtually come to a stand-still. The Lyne Hill estate is not yet finished and if the Gailey Freight Hub goes ahead I am worried that the village will not be able to cope with the extra demand. The land acts as a natural soakaway for excess rain water and if built on I am worried about the increased risk of flooding. The proposed site has an abundance of wildlife, we have many wonderful birds such as, herons, kestrels, buzzards, sparrow hawks, green finches, woodpeckers, tree creepers, long tail tits, gold finches, blue tits, great tits, sparrows and this year we saw the magnificent starling murmurations which were even commented on in the local media. These birds rest and nest in the hedges and trees on the proposed site. Please do not take away all of our green spaces, any new housing will take away the village feel and put even more pressure on local services

Page 114 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Set out below are extracts taken from the 25 comments of support where I have aimed to capture the range of issues covered by the supporters (full comments available on Public Access - Council Website under Planning): -

-We feel that the village needs more housing to accommodate first time buyers and also people like ourselves who are looking to downsize. I don't believe that the new housing will have a detrimental effect on the village especially with the plans for a traffic island being proposed. In support of it because: 1. New housing stock is required within Penkridge. 2. The siting of a new island north of the village will help with speeding traffic through the village. 3. I don't believe that local amenities such as schools and the doctors will suffer as the problems with these are a national problem

-Looking to purchase a new property in Penkridge and see the proposed development as providing a good opportunity to do so -Currently living at home with my family. Myself and my partner are both wanting to move onto the property ladder within the next two to three years. The development plan located in Penkridge would be the perfect location as it fits well with both of our jobs. I support the development plan and think it would be a fantastic opportunity for first time buyers and families to get onto the ladder.

-I believe the new housing would be a great idea for Penkridge because as a first time buyer I would love to stay near to home. The development would suit my needs in terms of travelling to work and seeing family as they all live within the area. New housing and accommodation would bring more business to the village and students into the local schools building their own portfolio.

-This new development makes it exciting times for Penkridge it can only be good for the village. The local market should benefit and all the local shops. A lot of complaints will come from people who will be worried about doctors and schools, but this problem already exists. Penkridge is already desperate for another surgery so this can only help this decision happen sooner. Definitely gets my vote. As I said it can only be good for the village.

-We are from Penkridge originally but due to our family circumstances needed a large 4 bed bungalow so were forced to move outside Penkridge to a rural community. However we are very keen to move back to Penkridge and feel that Bloor Homes are very receptive to local community wishes and work with local residents to ensure their desires for the local area are taken into consideration. We were pleased that the development has open spaces and is not just shops and thus keeping the smaller local businesses alive in the village. Bloor Homes took the time to send a representative out to meet us and discuss our concerns which makes a more considerate developer than other more well-known builders in the area. I am sure that this development will also help further Penkridge's amenities eg another doctor surgery increase size of schools, increase trade at local shops which can only be of a bonus to the community.

Page 115 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

-I believe it to be essential that new houses are built. As a first time buyer I find that availability of houses limited and would so like to stay within this village I now call my home. New development and affordable housing will allow the village to develop, provide more custom for the local community and allow first time buyers, like myself, to stay in the village rather than seek housing elsewhere.

-As a business owner in Penkridge I hear often from customers that family and friends have had to move out of Penkridge for more affordable housing and more suitable housing for the elderly eg bungalows etc. I support an application for more affordable housing and meets the needs of Penkridge.

-Having recently moved into the new Persimmon Homes Lyne Hill Meadow development we feel there are several items lacking. We feel this new development will provide a better quality of home more in keeping with Penkridge as a village and offer more variety for existing home owners as well as new.

-I'd like to start by pointing out what a great opportunity this is to bring additional jobs, accommodation, people/residents and business to the village. Penkridge is a wonderful village and deserves to be appreciated by all. I am currently trying to save to buy my first property and would love to see some affordable housing available to the young people of the village. I feel this would be a credit to the village.

-The mix of properties being proposed will be welcomed as we have a high demand for not only first time buyer homes but also family and retirement homes too

-More affordable housing needs to be built in the village

Site notice – expired 15.12.2017 Newspaper advertisement – expired 12.12.2017

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 This application is being referred to the Planning Committee as the proposal is contrary to Policy OC1 (Development in the Open Countryside beyond the West Midlands Green Belt) of the adopted Core Strategy.

5.2 Key Issues

-Principle of development -Housing Delivery/5 Year Housing Land Supply -Encroachment into open countryside: -Impact upon landscape character -Cannock Chase SAC -Ecological Value -Historical Environment and Archaeological Value -Agricultural Value -Recreational Value -Sustainability of development

Page 116 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

-Highways/transport -Flood risk and drainage -Residential amenity and design -Housing Market Area (HMA) - Unmet Housing Needs -Representations -Planning Obligations [Section 106] -Unilateral Undertaking (UU) for Cannock Chase SAC

5.3 Principle of development

5.3.1 Core Strategy Policy 1 (The Spatial Strategy for South Staffordshire) sets out the strategic approach to the delivery of new homes in the district over the plan period. Core Policy 1 defines the main service villages for the main focus for housing growth, employment development and service provision.

5.3.2 The site lies within the Open Countryside, on the edge of a Main Service Village. Main Service Villages are considered in our adopted Core Strategy to be the most sustainable locations in terms of the level of essential community facilities and services available, access to public transport and supporting infrastructure. Therefore the majority of development and service provision should be focused on the Main Service Villages. The application site is located just outside the Penkridge development boundary and is defined in the Core Strategy as Open Countryside (see Policy Inset Plan 41). Policy OC1 (Development in the Open Countryside Beyond the West Midlands Green Belt) states development within the Open Countryside will normally be permitted where the proposed development is for either of the categories listed (agriculture, forestry, small scale sport facilities etc.) This proposal does not fall within those categories and is therefore deemed contrary to policy OC1 of the Core Strategy. The application site is not an allocation for residential development within the Council's emerging Site Allocations Document (SAD).

5.3.3 However, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is based on a presumption in favour of sustainable development (known as the 'golden thread' running through the NPPF) when assessing and determining proposals [NPPF Paragraph 14]. One of the aims of NPPF is 'to boost significantly the supply of housing' in a sustainable way and to 'encourage and not act as an impediment to sustainable growth'. To achieve this, paragraph 47 of the NPPF requires the Council to "identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years' worth of housing against their housing requirements…" It is also clear that the Core Strategy must meet "the full objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in the housing market area, as far as is consistent with the policies set out in the Framework…"

5.3.4 The Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 Year Supply of Housing Land [3.42 years as set out in the Council's Housing Supply Statement May 2018]. Accordingly, the housing policies in our adopted Core Strategy are now considered to be out-of- date - and therefore carry less weight in the planning balance. A decision handed down by the Supreme Court on 10 May 2017 (Suffolk Coastal DC v Hopkins Homes Ltd and SSCLG, Richborough Estates Partnership LLP and SSCLG v Cheshire East BC

Page 117 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

[2017]), confirmed that in law this relates only to housing policies regarding the numbers/quantum of houses and their distribution/location.

5.3.5 In these circumstances the NPPF provides a clear direction that Paragraph 14 [the presumption in favour of sustainable development] applies. This has become known as 'the 'tilted balance' in favour of a grant of planning permission. In these circumstances planning permission should be granted unless the benefits of granting planning permission would be significantly and demonstrably outweighed by the harm or if there are specific policies in the Framework that indicate that development should be restricted.

5.3.6 However, this does not mean that the simple presence of a housing land supply shortfall means that housing developments must automatically be granted planning permission. Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise [NPPF Paragraph 196]. The NPPF is a material consideration in planning decisions. Accordingly, this proposed development needs to be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development, defined by the Framework as encompassing economic, social and environmental dimensions which give rise to corresponding roles for the planning system.

5.3.7 Therefore, as indicated above, this does not imply that Policy OC1 should be disregarded in determining the application in question; it is for the decision-taker to determine how much weight can be given to the policy in the planning balance of this specific application. The main issues for consideration therefore are whether, in the overall planning balance, the application can be considered as sustainable development in the terms of the National Planning Policy Framework, having particular regard to the key issues listed below.

5.4 Housing Delivery/5 Year Housing Land Supply

5.4.1 Core Policy 6 (Housing Delivery) sets out the level of housing growth proposed for each of the villages in the settlement hierarchy, defined in Core Policy 1. Penkridge has a housing target in Policy CP6 Housing Delivery, of a minimum of 370 dwellings up to 2028, although this figure has been exceeded through planning permissions the numbers identified in the table are labelled as a minimum and not a maximum figure. Furthermore supporting policy text goes on to say;

'In addition to the proposed housing development in the [above] table...should further housing be required during the Plan period to respond to changing circumstances this will be focused on the Main Service Villages that are identified in the table [above] and apportionment between settlements shall have regard to the factors set out in Para 8.8 of this Core Strategy DPD'.

5.4.2 Given that Penkridge is identified as a sustainable location within the settlement hierarchy (one of 9 Main Service Villages) the proposal would comply

Page 118 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 with Core Policy 6 and the golden thread of presumption in favour of sustainable development and is therefore compliant with Para 14 of the NPPF. Therefore I attach significant weight to this consideration.

5.5 Encroachment into Open Countryside

5.5.1 Whilst the site abuts the edge of the Main Service village of Penkridge, it is located outside of the development boundary and is therefore in planning policy terms defined as open countryside. The site is rural in character, it's adjacent to agricultural fields and hedgerow boundaries therefore encroachment into the open countryside would result in a loss of agricultural land and incidental open space on the edge of the village.

5.5.2 Policy OC1 of the Core Strategy seeks to protect open land from this form of development. Therefore given the location of the site the proposed development is considered to be a departure from the development plan and the loss of this land [from development] could have an impact upon the character and amenity of the area contrary to Policy OC1.

5.5.3 However in light of the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) the current housing land supply position renders the development boundary, and those policies restricting development to within those boundaries, including OC1, as out of date, since they are relevant to the supply of housing. This is not to say that these policies are to be disregarded, they are to be given the weight they are due in light of the matters to be considered in this application by assessment of harm and benefits.

5.5.4 Core Policy OC1 offers protection to the open countryside for its landscapes, areas of ecological, historical, archaeological, agricultural and recreational value. Therefore in order to determine the amount of weight that should be afforded to this policy objection it is fundamental to establish the degree of harm the proposed development would have on this application site. In this report sections 5.6 to 5.10 describe the degree of harm to the open countryside. It is considered that the proposed development would not, in this case, have a significant adverse impact on the site's environmental value.

5.6 Impact upon Landscape Character

5.6.1 Policy EQ4 (Protecting and Enhancing Character and Appearance of the Landscape) and EQ12 (Landscaping) states the intrinsic character and local distinctiveness of the South Staffordshire landscape should be maintained and where possible enhanced. Paragraph 17 of the NPPF sets out 12 core land use planning principles, which amongst others; include the provision to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside.

5.6.2 The application site does not lie within, near to or form part of a Special Site of Scientific Interest (SSSI). A Public Right of Way (Penkridge 31) runs through the site, but the indicative layout confirms that this can be retained within the final scheme.

Page 119 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.6.3 A Landscape Visual Impact Assessment has been submitted as part of the application that concludes, in summary, that any landscape and visual impacts would be localised to the immediate area surrounding the site. It concludes that any landscape impacts will only be slight in nature once mitigation (i.e. landscaping) is put in place, and that the only substantial adverse visual impact will be on users of the PRoW and as it runs through the site and immediately adjacent residential properties, with impacts on other views being less substantial once mitigation is provided.

5.6.4 It is accepted that the site is not subject of any specific planning policy, environmental or landscape designation and is not of such demonstrable value to be considered part of a 'valued landscape' (as referred to a paragraph 109 of the Framework). It is my view there would be some impact on the landscape character and views achieved from the A449 and nearby Public Rights of Way, however these impacts are mainly localised to the immediate vicinity of the site. Subsequently, there is limited conflict with policies EQ4 and EQ12 and paragraph 17 of the NPPF, which requires decisions to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside.

5.6.5 However given the points above, the residential curtilage set back from the A449, significant planting, hedgerow mitigation the creation of some open space site landscape planting I consider that the issue of landscape harm/conflict with policies EQ4 and EQ12 can only be afforded very limited weight.

5.6.6 Therefore it is my view that with the mitigation proposed the development would have a limited landscape and visual impact and would only have a minor degree of conflict with local plan landscape policies or the NPPF.

5.6.7 The application site is situated 6 km from the Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and therefore lies within the 15 km zone of influence identified around the SAC. This zone is estimated to encompass the area from which 75% of visits to the SAC are generated. Core Policy EQ2 (Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation) relates to the Cannock Chase SAC.

5.6.8 The Habitat Regulations place restrictions on the ability of a 'competent authority' to agree to a plan or project where it will adversely affect the integrity of the European site (such as the Cannock Chase SAC). The site lies within the Zone of Influence for the Cannock Chase SAC where evidence, supported by Natural England, clearly demonstrates that any net increase in housing will have an adverse effect on the SAC. 5.6.9 However, the Council has an agreed approach to mitigation with Natural England, which indicates that such impacts can usually be satisfactorily mitigated and avoided through the provision of a commuted sum of £232 per unit towards an agreed set of mitigation projects. This sum has been agreed and will be secured through a Unilateral Undertaking (UU) - see Section 5.18 below. This ensures that there are no adverse impacts on the Cannock Chase SAC arising from the development, meaning that, with the secured commuted sum, the Council has the legal authority to decide this planning application without acting outside of the scope of the Habitat Regulations.

Page 120 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.7 Ecological Value

5.7.1 The NPPF seeks to minimise impacts and provide gains in biodiversity. This is echoed within Policy EQ1 (Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets) which states that permission will be granted for development that does not cause significant harm to sites or habitats of nature conservation. As part of the application several documents were provided to address ecological impact. The Ecologist has reviewed the documents submitted with the application and states the proposals are in accordance with NPPF and Local Policy for biodiversity and would provide a small scale contribution to Staffordshire Biodiversity Action Plan objectives. An additional hedgerow mitigation plan has been provided and the details pursuant to an outline consent shall be developed in accordance with the plan. No objections subject to conditions are confirmed.

5.7.2 The reports provided with the application along with their recommendations are deemed acceptable, subject to conditions complying with Policy EQ1 and the NPPF.

5.8 Historic Environment & Archaeological Value

5.8.1 The Historic Environment Officer Archaeology has recommended that a condition be imposed that requires site investigation/recording prior to commencement of development in accordance with national policy set out at NPPF (Paragraphs 128 & 141) and in accordance with Core Strategy EQ3 (Conservation, Preservation and Protection of Heritage Assets) and EQ4. An appropriate condition is set out at Condition 11.

5.8.2 The Historic Environment Officer Archaeology goes on to comment that the Sketch Masterplan which supports the application proposes to retain all of the significant extant hedgerows. The wider field pattern within which the proposal site is located has been defined by the Staffordshire Historic Landscape Character (HLC) as comprising 'Reorganised Piecemeal Enclosure' which suggests a degree of field boundary loss within the wider landscape during the 20th century. The field pattern originated in the post medieval period and is associated with the incremental enclosure of the medieval open fields associated with the historic town of Penkridge to the south. The ADBA identifies that the majority of the field boundaries within and encircling the development area were present by 1754 with some removal and relaying of boundaries occurring between this date and the mid to late 19th century. In contrast to what is suggested by the HLC within the wider landscape there has been very little change to the development site's field pattern in the period since the mid to late 19th century. Consequently the intention to retain these clearly historic field boundaries and the framework of the field pattern is to be welcomed.

5.9 Agricultural Value

5.9.1 Paragraphs 17 and 112 of the NPPF requires for local planning authorities take into account the economic and other benefits of best and most versatile agricultural

Page 121 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 land and that areas of poorer quality should be used in preference to areas of higher quality.

5.9.2 The Agricultural Land Classification for the site is Grade 3. Therefore this site is consequently afforded a degree of protection from development but this would not prevent development taking place.

5.9.3 The Council recognises that Grades 1, 2 and 3a are classified as the 'Best and Most Versatile' (BMV) agricultural land category as defined in the NPPF. Significant areas of South Staffordshire lie within these areas therefore, in order to meet housing supply in this region, and provide the appropriate level of new residential development, the loss of some BMV land would be unavoidable.

5.9.4 Although the land will no longer be available for agricultural production the proposed scheme would include landscaped areas, formal and informal open space along with domestic gardens. Therefore the development in general will allow for some soil reuse. Providing these soils are handled when dry, they will retain a proportion of their structure and functional ability to provide benefits through ecosystem services.

5.9.5 Although it is required to account for economic benefits of BMV, the NPPF does not place a restriction to the development of BMV. In light of the above reasons I am of the view that the proposal does not involve a significant loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land and afford only limited weight to its loss [to development] and the proposed is therefore broadly consistent with the framework.

5.10 Recreational Value

5.10.1 The site is largely private green space albeit the public footpath; therefore limited weight can be afforded to its recreational value in this case.

5.11 Sustainability of Development

5.11.1 Sections 5.6 to 5.10 have considered the degree of harm to the open countryside - with regard to impact on landscape character, ecology, historic environment and archaeology, agricultural and recreational value. It is considered that the proposed development would not, in this case, have a significant adverse impact on the environmental value of this site.

5.11.2 Whilst located outside the development boundary of Penkridge, the site is located within a reasonable distance of the local services and facilities; these being a local convenience store, bank, children's nursery, St Michaels School, a railway station and wide range of shops. Many of these services are located between 550m and 900m from the site, most around a 6-12 minute walk.

5.11.3 A number of regular bus services (54, 75, 76 and 878) run via Penkridge on its route between Stafford, Cannock and Wolverhampton; Mondays - Saturdays. Additionally a rail service between Penkridge and Birmingham New Street operates

Page 122 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 every 30minutes. In addition, Stafford Town can be accessed from Penkridge by train with a frequency of approximately one hour.

5.11.4 It can therefore be said that the application site is well served by public transport and is in a sustainable location. Public comments of objection have referred to the doctor's surgery being at full capacity and having to wait too long for an appointment. With regards to this point the agent approached the medical practice to see if there was any way of assisting. However it became apparent that the medical practice is failing to attract sufficient number of GPs hence the waiting time problem.

5.11.5 Public comments of objection have also referred to increased pressure on school places. County Education has commented that this development falls within the catchments of Marshbrook First School, Penkridge Middle School and Wolgarston High School. The development is scheduled to provide up to 200 dwellings. Excluding the 40 RSL dwellings from years 7 & 8 at Middle and High Schools, a development of 200 houses including 40 RSLs could add 30 First School, 22 Middle School, 14 High School and 5 Post 16 aged pupils.

5.11.6 The First schools in Penkridge Town and Penkridge Middle School are projected to be full for the foreseeable future. There are plans to increase the capacity within one of the first schools in Penkridge and increase capacity at Penkridge Middle School in order for this development and other approved developments to be mitigated; options are currently being explored and considered.

5.11.7 Wolgarston High School is projected to have sufficient space to accommodate the likely demand from pupils generated by the development and therefore no request will be made towards High School provision.

5.11.8 The education contribution for a development of this size would be as follows;

30 First School places (30 x £11,031 = £330,930) and 22 Middle School places (22 x £13,827 = £304,194). This gives a total request of £635,124 for up to 200 dwellings.

5.11.9 Economically, the construction and fitting out of the dwellings and creation of new road infrastructure would create employment and generate demand for services as well as for various plant and material. The increase in the population of Penkridge will potentially boost the spending power of the local economy to some extent. This economic benefit adds some weight in favour of the planning balance.

5.11.10 Socially, the proposed development would provide additional housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations with accessible local services that reflect the communities' needs and supports its health, social and cultural well-being. Although indicative, the development is proposing a relatively high proportion of bungalows that would help serve the district's ageing population.

Page 123 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.11.11 Environmentally, the development will not significantly harm the natural environment, it will help to improve biodiversity, minimise waste and pollution through mitigation measures.

5.11.12 The combination of these benefits would secure economic growth and boost the supply of housing compliant with the NPPF, and these are therefore sound arguments carrying considerable weight in favour of the proposed development.

5.12 Highways/Transport

5.12.1 County Highways has confirmed no objections subject to conditions. In the response County Highways comments that this proposal is accompanied by a Transport Assessment (TA) which reports in detail on transport issues and the site's proposed access; a roundabout junction on the A449. The TA considers the site's compliance with Transport policies and address whether the site is accessible via sustainable modes of travel. With the provision of a footway over the site frontage the site would be accessible on foot to facilities within the village which is important when trying to reduce car usage and further lessen the impact from the development. I would expect to see any subsequent detailed planning application to provide direct pedestrian access through the site's frontage on the A449.

5.12.2 The site would be accessed via the provision of a new roundabout junction on the A449. This proposal would not only provide access to the site it would also provide a 'gateway feature' to the village of Penkridge which would help to reduce vehicle speeds when entering the residential area.

5.12.3 The proposed roundabout junction would also require the relocation of the 30mph speed limit further north along the A449 with the speed limit enforced by this junction. Any relocation of the speed limit would need to replicate the current reductions which are stepped from 60mph to 40mph to 30mph. This will need to be covered in the condition for off-site highway works. The TA has also modelled the traffic impact generated by the proposed development.

5.12.4 County Highways conclude that whilst the development does generate traffic through the local junctions the level of impact would be negligible with queues and delays increasing slightly. They are in general agreement with the conclusions of the TA and that information submitted demonstrates that the proposal would be acceptable in highway terms

5.13 Flood risk and drainage

5.13.1 The site comprises of a watercourse that starts from the south east and finishes North West.

5.13.2 Originally the flood risk officer raised concerns with the application and sought additional information. There is a culvert crossing the site and its future maintenance is to be secured through a suitable planning condition.

Page 124 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.13.3 The Flood Risk Officer concludes no objections conditions. The Environment Agency recommended that we consult with Staffordshire County Council for advice regarding Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and surface water drainage/flooding issues on site. There have been no objections from Severn Trent Water. In conclusion, I am satisfied the proposed development would accord with Policy CP3 (Sustainable Development & Climate Change) of the Core Strategy and NPPF.

5.14 Residential Amenity and Design

5.14.1 The application is in outline with details of access arrangements only to be agreed at this stage. All other matters (including layout, appearance, landscaping and scale) to be secured at reserved matters stage. The illustrative layout plan submitted with the application does demonstrate that suitable separation distances could be achieved, however condition 3 makes it clear that no indicative drawings are agreed at this stage.

5.14.2 To ensure the amenities of nearby residents are protected, in accordance with Policy EQ9 (Protecting Residential Amenity), a construction management plan will be conditioned (condition 8).

5.15 Housing Market Area (HMA) - Unmet Housing Needs

5.15.1 Planning law requires applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Framework [NPPF] is a material consideration in planning decisions (NPPF Paragraph 196). The achievement of sustainable development is the golden thread that runs through the Framework (NPPF Paragraph 14). To boost significantly the supply of housing is a principal policy driver in the Framework (NPPF Paragraph 47).

5.15.2 In March 2018 the Government consulted on a Revised NPPF. The introduction to the draft revised NPPF stated: -

'The country does not have enough homes. For decades the number of new homes has not kept pace with rising demand. That has created a market that fails to work for far too many families, resulting in sparing prices and rising rents. The Government is clear that the country needs radical, lasting reform that will allow more homes to be built.'

It is anticipated that Government will publish the revised NPPF during Summer 2018.

5.15.3 For these reasons, I consider that unmet housing needs within the Housing Market Area (HMA) is another material consideration that should be afforded significant weight in the 'planning balance' in considering the merits of this proposed development.

5.14.4 The Localism Act 2011 introduced local financial considerations as another material consideration in planning decisions. It is for the decision-taker to decide how much weight should be attributed in each specific case.

Page 125 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.15.5 Accordingly, I shall assess the significance of these other material considerations under 3 headings: -

A) Greater Birmingham Housing Market Area (GBHMA) - Housing Shortfall B) Local financial considerations C) Sustainability

A) Greater Birmingham Housing Market Area (GBHMA) - Housing Shortfall

5.15.6 The Birmingham Development Plan 2011-2031 was adopted in January 2017 and commits Birmingham City Council to work with the 13 other local planning authorities within the GBHMA in order to address the housing shortfall within emerging local plans. Birmingham's objectively assessed housing needs (oan) were evidenced in the plan as 89,000 dwellings. The plan will deliver 51,100 dwellings and so this leaves a shortfall of 37,900 dwellings.

5.15.7 The 14 local planning authorities (Lpas) across the GBHMA have recently commissioned a Strategic Growth Study (SGS) to identify potential strategic locations for growth across the HMA. The GL Hearn/Wood SGS was published on 21 February 2018 and included an update on the housing shortfall (previously evidenced by the Peter Brett Study 2015).

5.15.8 The GL Hearn/Wood SGS 2018 found that the HMA shortfall to 2031 had reduced to 28,150 (partly because of local plan progress since consideration of the Birmingham Development Plan 2031). The Strategic Growth Study (SGS) has also suggested that around 13,000 dwellings from this shortfall could be accommodated through densification, without requiring identification of new sites. This would reduce the shortfall (up to 2031) to circa 15,000 dwellings. The SGS looks further ahead by 5 years (up to 2036) and finds that the shortfall is likely to increase to around 48,000 dwellings.

5.15.9 The Chancellor (in his Spring Statement 13 March 2018) announced a new Housing Deal for the West Midlands (Second Devolution Deal). The Government has committed £350 million towards housing delivery/infrastructure across the geography of the WMCA (constituent and non-constituent members). In return the WMCA (through the Mayor) has committed to deliver 215,000 homes by 2030/31 and local plans for constituent and non-constituent authorities are to be updated as necessary by the end of 2019 to deliver the 215,000 new homes by 2030/31. The geography of the constituent and non-constituent members comprises a total of 4 Housing Market Areas (HMAs) - Greater Birmingham & the Black Country HMA, the Coventry & Warwickshire HMA, Telford HMA and Shropshire HMA. This combined authority geography (constituent and non-constituent members) omits 4 local planning authorities who have plan-making functions - the district councils of Lichfield, Bromsgrove, South Staffordshire and Warwick.

5.15.10 The commitment to deliver 215,000 new homes by 2030/31 represents an increase in delivery to nearly 16,000 dwellings/annum (from an average of 12,000 dwellings/annum over the last 3 years) and significantly increases the amount of

Page 126 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 land released for housing. This ambitious target is above the level proposed under the Government's Housing Needs Assessment set out in the draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Draft NPPF (2018) is a consultation document which had a deadline of 10 May 2018 for receipt of comments.

5.15.11 The GL Hearn/Wood SGS 2018 is not a policy document. It is a body of evidence that the 14 local planning authorities across the Greater Birmingham HMA (including South Staffordshire Council) will be required to test through their emerging local plans. In April 2018 the Government amended Local Planning Regulations to make it a legal obligation on local planning authorities to review their local plans every 5 years. The Council's adopted Core Strategy (December 2012) is now more than 5 years old and the emerging Site Allocations Document (SAD) includes Policy SAD 1 (that commits the Council to an immediate local plan review). The SGS findings recommended that 11 (specified) strategic locations, across the Greater Birmingham HMA, be considered/tested (through local plan reviews) - for urban extensions (1500 to 7500 dwellings), employment-led strategic development (1500 to 7500 dwellings) or new settlements (10,000+ dwellings). For South Staffordshire, 2 strategic locations are recommended for consideration -North of Penkridge (urban extension) and North of Wolverhampton/i54 (employment-led strategic development).

5.15.12 The existence of an evidenced housing shortfall and the recommendation to consider urban extensions north of Penkridge, are matters for the plan-making process. However, there is currently no agreement as to how the evidenced housing shortfall across the Greater Birmingham HMA (up to 2031) will be apportioned across the 13 local planning authorities within the HMA [Birmingham excepted]. In addition north of Penkridge has been recommended as a sustainable location for housing growth (GL Hearn/Wood SGS 2018). These are other material considerations to which I attach significant weight in the 'planning balance' in the consideration of the merits of this proposed development.

B) Local financial considerations

6.15.13 The Localism Act 2011 brought about changes to primary planning legislation which means that local financial considerations are capable of being material considerations in the outcome of planning decisions. How much weight should be attached is for the decision-taker to decide based on the circumstances of the individual case. In this case it is considered that local financial consideration should carry moderate weight in favour of the proposed development. The local financial considerations are the generation of increased council tax payments, potential payment of New Homes Bonus, the construction and fitting out of the dwellings would financially be of benefit locally, together with employment creation, generating demand for materials and the increase in the population of Penkridge will contribute to the spending power of the local economy to some extent.

Page 127 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

C) Sustainability

5.15.14 The proposed development would deliver 40% affordable housing, a mix of market and affordable homes and apartments with care (C2), it would deliver a further choice of new homes in a sustainable location. This would boost South Staffordshire's existing housing supply and assist with accommodating the districts ageing population in accordance paragraphs 47, 50 of the NPPF and policy H1 of our adopted Core Strategy. The proposed housing mix includes a significant amount of bungalow development - 10% of the total market housing element would be bungalow, 10% of the social rent element of the affordable housing mix would be 2 bed bungalows and 5% of the intermediate housing (shared ownership) would be 2 bed bungalows.

5.15.15 Although the application is contrary to Policy OC1 and conflicts with Policy EQ4 the site is not of high recreational, landscape, historical, archaeological or ecological value and is very close to a main service village, within close walking distance of facilities and services. This will limit the extent of the conflict with Policy EQ4. Therefore whilst the proposal would not accord with Policy OC1, it would contribute to some of the strategic aims by creating sustainable development in terms of environmental, social and economic factors.

5.15.16 The access to this site is to be facilitated through the construction of a new roundabout. County Highways/Planning consider (and I agree) that this means of accessing this site will create a gateway feature to the village of Penkridge. This will force traffic to slow down as they enter/leave the village to the north and will represent a positive planning benefit.

5.16 Representations

5.16.1 There have been 33 public comments of objection and 25 public comments of support for this application. I have taken extracts from these public comments in an attempt to cover the range of comments made in respect of this application. These are set out above under Section 4 Consultation Responses (Public Comments). I have sought to address these concerns throughout the report.

5.17 Planning Contributions

5.17.1 Policy EQ13 (Development Contributions) states that contributions will be sought from developers where necessary to achieve sustainable development. Although the application is in outline form with all details reserved except for access, it is common practice to try and get the particulars that would require entering into a Section 106 Agreement secured at this (the outline) stage.

5.17.2 Policy H2 (Provision of Affordable Housing) seeks 40% affordable housing on greenfield land for 10 or more dwellings. Policy H4 states that affordable housing should be secured in perpetuity and set 50% social rental and 50% intermediate tenures. The draft S106 stipulates that 40% of the dwellings constructed will be affordable and comprise 50% social rented units and 50% intermediate housing

Page 128 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 units. This is considered to be acceptable for when the final S106 is finalised, complying with policies EQ13, H1 (Housing Delivery), H2 (Provision of Affordable Housing) and H4 (Delivery of Affordable Housing).

5.17.3 The draft S106 states that an educational contribution is to be paid. There is also provision for the cost of the monitoring of the agreed Travel Plan.

5.17.4 The proposal includes the provision of green infrastructure including the provision of formal and informal open space. The Parks and Open space officer has commented and the applicant has agreed to the financial contribution. This would be secured as part of the S106 agreement.

5.The Heads of Terms (which will include financial contributions) to be agreed are as follows:

Affordable Housing - In terms of quantum of houses 40% affordable housing for residential dwellings.

Public Open Space (POS) - £65,190 per ha maintenance

Educational contribution - 30 First School places (30 x £11,031 = £330,930) and 22 Middle School places (22 x £13,827 = £304,194). This gives a total request of £635,124 for up to 200 dwellings.

-Travel Plan monitoring fee of £6430

5.18 SAC Unilateral Undertaking (UU)

5.18.1 The site lies within the Zone of Influence for the Cannock Chase SAC where evidence, supported by Natural England and set out in Policy EQ2 of the Core Strategy clearly demonstrates that any net increase in housing will have an adverse effect on the SAC. To assist in mitigating this impact a developer contribution of £232 per unit has been agreed and is considered acceptable provided this is secured through Unilateral Undertaking (UU).

5.18.2 In April 2018 the European Court of Justice (ECJ) issued what appears to be a landmark judgment [People over Wind and Sweetman Collite Teoranta] from the Irish Republic on habitats regulation assessment (HRA). Under the European Union (EU) habitats directive, local planning authorities are required to carry out these assessments to make sure plans or projects affecting sites in and around EU designated special areas of conservation (SACs) or special protection areas (SPAs) have no harmful effect on them. It is considered that the UU, which is supported by Natural England NE), will provide satisfactory mitigation for the effect of granting planning permission for up to 200 new homes north of Penkridge.

Page 129 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

6. CONCLUSION

6.1The application site is not an allocation for residential development within the Council's emerging Site Allocations Document (SAD). However, the Council cannot demonstrate a five year supply of housing land therefore the policies for the supply of housing (as set out in the development plan [adopted Core Strategy 2012]) cannot be considered to be up-to-date. In these circumstances the presumption in favour of sustainable development applies (NPPF Paragraph 14). This is referred to as 'the tilted balance' - where planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits (when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole) or specific policies in the Framework indicate development should be restricted.

6.2 Penkridge is a main service village with access to local services and facilities within walking distance and a regular bus and rail service that could be used; such are likely to be required by future occupiers on a daily basis. The site would deliver a range of economic, social and environmental benefits. It would secure some economic growth, contribute to the Greater Birmingham Housing Market Area (GBHMA) housing shortfall and boost significantly the supply of housing (which is compliant with the NPPF). Therefore, these are sound arguments to which I attribute significant weight in support of this planning application.

6.3 The proposed development is of a scale that is commensurate with the function and character of Penkridge. Policy OC1 is a policy that is out of date (adopted as policy more than 5 years ago) and therefore I attribute it less than full weight in the 'planning balance'. In this report it has been demonstrated that the adverse impact on the open countryside, north of Penkridge, would not be significant, having regard to impact on landscape, ecology, historic environment and archaeology, agricultural and recreational value. Neither is there significant harm to highway safety nor existing infrastructure (such as schools and the provision of doctors surgeries).

6.4 The construction of a roundabout to access the site will create a gateway feature that will force traffic to slow down to the north of the village and this would represent a planning benefit. Furthermore the proposal is a suitable use which will not cause harm to surrounding residential amenity. In this respect the proposal is considered to represent a sustainable form of development and accords with the NPPF.

6.5 Core Policy 6 (Housing Delivery) of the adopted Core Strategy relates to housing land supply and distribution. It is stated that 'should further housing development be required in the plan period to respond to changing circumstances this will be focused on the Main Service Villages and Local Service Villages…'. Penkridge is one of the Main Service Villages in the adopted Core Strategy.

6.6 I acknowledge that there would be some conflict with the development plan as a consequence of the localised harm arising from the loss of open countryside, the loss of BMV agricultural land, together with the impact on the existing landscape and local character. However, in the 'planning balance' this is not sufficient to

Page 130 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of boosting the supply of open market and affordable housing. The proposed development would make an important contribution to the achievement of sustainable development in South Staffordshire (as defined in the NPPF).

7. RECOMMENDATION - Delegate APPROVAL to the Chief Planning Officer to issue the decision on completion of a satisfactory Section 106 Agreement and Unilateral Undertaking (UU).

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun no later than whichever is the later of the following dates: a. The expiration of three years from the date on which this permission is granted; 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.

2. Before the development commences, and within 3 years of the date of this permission, full details of the following reserved matters shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval: a. The Layout - The way in which buildings, routes and open spaces are to be provided within the development and their relationship to buildings and spaces in the vicinity of the site; b. The Scale - The height, width, length and overall appearance of each of the proposed buildings, including the proposed facing materials, and how they relate to their surroundings; c. The Appearance - The aspects of a building or place which determine the visual impression it makes; d. The Landscaping - The treatment of private and public space through the introduction of hard and soft landscaping.

3. This permission does not grant or imply consent for the indicative layout shown in the Planning Statement & Heads of Terms [October 2017 - 236 PS241017] and Sketch Master Plan DE 236 SK01 Rev D, nor does it grant or imply consent for any other indicative layout sketches/drawings included within the documentation submitted as part of this application.

4. Before the development commences a landscape scheme demonstrating enhancements for biodiversity and future management/maintenance shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full concurrently with the development and completed within 12 months of the completion of the development. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the

Page 131 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

scheme has been completed. Any failures shall be replaced within the next available planting season and the scheme shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, the submitted landscaping scheme must include planting to compensate for hedgerow loss and for measures for biodiversity benefit, as recommended in s.5.0 of the Ecological Appraisal and s.5.6 of the Design and Access Statement, and detail of SuDS planting as well as long-term management arrangements.

5. Before the development commences a lighting scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. The submitted details shall seek to reduce the amount of light projecting on to hedgerows and trees that are identified as important habitats for bats and nesting birds. The agreed lighting scheme shall be implemented in full concurrently with the approved development.

6. The development hereby permitted shall not commence unless and until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and thereafter the agreed scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use.

7. Prior to the commencement of any construction, including demolition, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved management plan shall include details relating to construction access, hours of construction, routing of HGV's, delivery times and the location of the contractor’s compounds, cabins, material storage areas and contractors parking and a scheme for the management and suppression of dust from construction activities including the provision of a vehicle wheel wash. It shall also include a method of demolition and restoration of the site. All site operations shall then be undertaken strictly in accordance with the approved CEMP for the duration of the construction programme.

8. No occupation of any dwelling shall take place until such time as the associated driveway has been surfaced in a bound material and sustainably drained, in accordance with details to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

9. No building shall be occupied until the vehicular access onto Stafford Road has been fully constructed in accordance with approved plans drawing SK14 A and until consequential off site works within the public highway have been completed. For the avoidance of doubt these works shall include the relocation of the 30mph speed limit further north along the A449 with the speed limit enforced by this junction. Any relocation of the speed limit would need to replicate the current reductions which are stepped from 60mph to 40mph to 30mph.

Page 132 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

10. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a written scheme of archaeological investigation ('the Scheme') shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The Scheme shall provide details of the programme of archaeological works to be carried out within the site, including post excavation reporting and appropriate publication. The Scheme shall thereafter be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details.

11. Before development commences details of the existing and proposed ground levels of the site (and finished floor levels of the buildings) shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. The development shall be carried out to the approved levels.

12. a) No development shall take place within the bird breeding season March- September inclusive unless preceded no more than 48 hours before by a breeding bird survey by a suitably qualified and experienced ornithologist or ecologist that demonstrates that no bird breeding (including ground nesting birds) will be affected or that works can be carried out while protecting breeding sites. The survey report should be submitted to the Local Planning Authority within two weeks of commencement of any works taking place; and

b) Felling of T1 should be carried out between November and February or be preceded by a resurvey for bat use, or that this be included in a revised CEMP.

13. The landscaping scheme to be submitted (as a requirement of condition 4 above) shall comply with the agreed Sketch Masterplan and Hedgerow Mitigation Plan and (if submitted for approval after November 2018) shall include a re-surveys for protected species (including badgers, bats, great crested newts and breeding birds) together with a plan showing how trees and hedgerows will be protected.

14. The details to be submitted pursuant to this outline planning permission shall include a phasing plan that demonstrates the time-frame within which the development shall be delivered. Prior to the commencement of each new phase of development there shall be a re-survey of badgers.

15. The details pursuant to this outline planning permission shall comprise the following housing mix:

Market housing mix:

35% 2 beds 40% 3 beds 25% 4 beds 10% of the total market housing is to be provided as bungalows.

Affordable housing mix:

Page 133 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Social Rent:

22.5% 1 bed apartments 10% 2 bed bungalows 37.5% 2 bed houses 25% 3 bed houses 5% 4 bed houses

Intermediate Housing (i.e. shared ownership):

5% 2 bed bungalows 55% 2 bed houses 40% 3 bed houses

16. All finished floor levels must be set no lower than 83.830mAOD, which is 150mm above the crest level for the existing road.

17. No phase of development shall begin until a detailed surface water drainage design for that phase has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Lead Local Flood Authority. The design must be in accordance with the overall strategy and key design parameters set out in the Flood Risk Assessment (Project No: 16124, Rev B, 16 April 2018).

The design must demonstrate:

Surface water drainage system(s) designed in accordance with national and local standards, including the Non-statutory technical standards for sustainable drainage systems (DEFRA, March 2015). SuDS design to provide adequate water quality treatment, which can be demonstrated using the Simple Index Approach (CIRIA SuDS Manual 2015). Limiting the discharge rate generated by all rainfall events up to the 100 year plus climate change critical rain storm to 43.0l/s to ensure that there will be no increase in flood risk downstream. Detailed design (plans, network details and calculations) in support of any surface water drainage scheme, including details on any attenuation system, and the outfall arrangements. Calculations should demonstrate the performance of the designed system for a range of return periods and storm durations inclusive of the 1 in 1 year, 1 in 30 year, 1 in 100 year and 1 in 100 year plus climate change return periods. Plans illustrating flooded areas and flow paths in the event of exceedance of the drainage system. Site layout and levels should provide safe exceedance routes and adequate access for maintenance.

Provision of an acceptable management and maintenance plan for surface water drainage to ensure continued performance of the system for the lifetime of the development. This should include a schedule of required

Page 134 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

maintenance activities and frequencies, and contact details for the organisation responsible for carrying out these duties.

Reasons

1. To define the permission.

2. In order to define the permission, to avoid doubt and to safeguard the amenity of the area.

3. To define the permission.

4. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 and EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5. To safeguard the amenity of the area and protect important habitats for bats and nesting birds in accordance with policies EQ1 and EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

6. To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to prevent or to avoid exacerbating any flooding issues and to minimise the risk of pollution in accordance with policy EQ7 and Policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

7. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework and in the interest of Highway safety and residential amenity in accordance with Core Strategy Policies EQ9 and EQ11.

8. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and in the interest of Highway safety.

9. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and in the interest of Highway safety.

10. In order to preserve and record any items of archaeological interest in accordance with policy EQ3 of the adopted Core Strategy.

11. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with Policies EQ4, EQ7 and EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

12. In order to protect any protected species/biodiversity on the site in accordance with EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy

13. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with Policies EQ4 and EQ12 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Page 135 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

14. To enable the local planning authority to monitor (and seek to achieve the timely delivery of) new homes in South Staffordshire in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (Paragraph 47-49)

15. To comply with Policy H1 of the adopted Core Strategy

16. To reduce the flood risk to properties in the event of culvert blockage.

17. To reduce risk of surface water flooding to the development and properties downstream for the lifetime of the development.

PROACTIVE STATEMENT

INFORMATIVES

County Highways

The travel plan is to be secured via a legal agreement which will require a monitoring fee of £6,430. This consent will require approval under Section 7 of the Staffordshire Act 1983 and will require a Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980. Please contact Staffordshire County Council to ensure that approvals and agreements are secured before commencement of works. Any future development of the site will require to be designed in accordance with guidance in MfS 1 and 2 and Staffordshire County Design Guide, where appropriate. So the highways should all link through where there are opportunities to do so. Notwithstanding the submitted plans appropriate surface treatments will be decided through the adoption process and small element paving will not be acceptable in certain areas where there are likely to be turning movements. Any use of block paving and trees in the highway boundary will require a commuted sum.

The conditions requiring off-site highway works shall require a Highway Works Agreement with Staffordshire County Council. The applicant is requested to contact Staffordshire County Council in order to secure the Agreement. The link below is to the Highway Works Information Pack including an application form. Please complete and send to the address indicated on the application form or email to ([email protected]). The applicant is advised to begin this process well in advance of any works taking place in order to meet any potential timescales.

Page 136 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Biodiversity enhancements

This application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or the installation of bird nest boxes. The authority should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity of the site from the applicant, if it is minded to grant permission for this application. This is in accordance with Paragraph 118 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Additionally, we would draw your attention to Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) which states that 'Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity'. Section 40(3) of the same Act also states that 'conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat'.

Crime Prevention

In order to prevent crime and reduce the fear of crime I recommend that this development attains Police Secured by Design (SBD) accreditation. There is no charge for my advice or for the Secured by Design award, and once awarded the Police SBD logo can be used on advertising material.

SBD can contribute towards BREEAM assessments. Staffordshire Police request that should this proposal gain approval that they consulted further when "reserved matters" are discussed.

At this stage the only areas that requires comment is the proposed alleyway between plots 13 & 14; an 1800mm fence and gate, with anti-lift hinges and a lock, should be erected as close to the front elevation as possible; this removes a long, narrow, dark, alley between dwellings in which an offender

Page 137 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

can hide and helps prevent unauthorized persons gaining access to the rear of properties where most burglaries take place.

All rear gardens should be secured with a robust fence or wall, without footholds, to a minimum height of either 2000mm or 1800mm with trellis. The rails of any timber fence should face the garden to prevent climbing access, the topography of the land should be taken into account when installation takes place to ensure that the height of the fence is maintained.

Timber fencing panels should be secured to the fence posts to prevent offenders lifting them to gain access to adjacent gardens.

The proposed trees lining the P.O.S. should not hinder or prevent natural surveillance into the P.O.S. in order to afford children playing there a measure of security particularly at the water’s edge.

'Smart' utility meters should be installed to prevent bogus caller sneak-in burglaries. Further information on Secured by Design and accredited products can be found at www.securedbydesign.com

Page 138 of 210 Andrew Johnson: Chief Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

17/01022/OUT - Land North Of Penkridge Stafford Road Penkridge

Page 139 of 210

Page 140 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00107/FUL Mr Merrick Platts ESSINGTON Councillor D J Clifft Councillor P J Lever

Old Mitre Bursnips Road Essington Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV11 2RE

Existing building (Old Mitre public house) demolished. Proposed residential development to form 9 apartments (all 2 bed), with associated parking, cycle and bin storage. Existing vehicle access altered.

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site description

1.1.1 The site in question contains a building previously used as a public house (the Old Mitre) and its associated curtilage. The pub building itself is a two storey pitched roof building, with substantial single storey extensions to its southern elevation. The remaining curtilage of the building is occupied by hardstanding used to accommodate car parking and seating areas, with several single storey storage structures sitting in the immediate surrounds of the site. The ground level of the site rises from east to west, resulting in a 1.4m gain in height towards the western edge of the site.

1.1.2 The site is bounded to the south-west by the substantial landscaped boundary associated with the M6 motorway, which sits approximately 35m from the site's south-western edge. To the east the site is bounded by Bursnips Road, which is a heavily trafficked A road leading to the urban edge of Wolverhampton, which lies approximately half a mile to the south. The site is bounded to the north by a dense complex of buildings associated with the Old Mitre Farm.

1.2 Relevant Planning history

1994 - Sewage Treatment System - Approved [94/00237] 1994 - Kitchen Extension Bottle Store Extension and Porch - Approved [94/00666] 1995 - Conservatory and Porch - Approved [95/00038] 1995 - Conservatory and Alterations - Approved [95/00405]

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Proposal

2.1.1 The application proposes the demolition of the existing public house and removal of the associated storage buildings in its curtilage. In its place, an apartment block will be erected, comprising of two built elements. A two and three storey block providing eight apartments will be erected towards the front of the site, measuring 17.2m at its widest point and presenting a 21.5m frontage towards Bursnips Road.

Page 141 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

The ridge height of this block will be 10.1m to 11m for the three storey elements and 7.8m for the two storey elements, as compared with an existing ridge height of 8.1m for the existing public house building. A separate two storey structure will be constructed towards the rear of the site, which will act as a garage containing four car parking spaces at a ground floor level, whilst providing another apartment at the first floor level. This building will measure roughly 7.1m to the ridge. The ground will be made level across the site, resulting in the finished floor level at the western edge of the site being approximately 1.4m lower than the existing ground level.

2.1.2 Following objections from the County Highways officer, amendments have been made to the scheme's parking provision. The amended proposal would provide nine car parking spaces and three visitor spaces to serve the proposed development within the site curtilage, with four of the total parking spaces being provided in garages. 100sqm of amenity space and waste and cycling stores would be provided to the rear of the proposed apartments.

2.2 Agent/applicant submissions - Design and Access Statement - Planning Statement - Tree Report - Bat Report, later supplemented by Bat Presence Absence Surveys (received 08/06/2018)

3. POLICY CONTEXT

3.1 Within the West Midlands Green Belt

3.2 Adopted Core Strategy Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt Core Policy 2: Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment Policy EQ1: Protecting, Expanding and Enhancing Natural Assets Core Policy 3: Sustainable Development and Climate Change Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design Policy EQ11: Wider Design Considerations Core Policy 6: Housing Delivery Policy H1: Achieving a Balanced Housing Market Policy H2: Provision of Affordable Housing Core Policy 10: Sustainable Community Facilities and Services Policy EV9: Provision and Retention of Local Community Facilities and Services Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport Policy EV12: Parking Provision

3.3 Adopted local guidance Green Belt and Open Countryside SPD

3.4 National Planning Policy Framework [NPPF]

Page 142 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

- Achieving sustainable development - Section 3: Supporting a prosperous rural economy - Section 4: Promoting sustainable transport - Section 6: Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes - Section 7: Requiring good design - Section 8: Promoting healthy communities - Section 9: Protecting Green Belt land

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

4.1 Comments received

Ward Councillors (expired 25.06.2018)

Essington Parish Council Original comments (received 09.03.2018) Objections over development of site - concerns that there are insufficient parking spaces & the proposal is too near the main road

Comments on amended plans (received 29.06.2018) No objections

Local Plans (comments received 02.05.2018)

The proposal is for the redevelopment of the site of the Old Mitre Public House to form nine 2 bedroom apartments. The site is situated within a Green Belt location approximately 200metres from the eastern edge of Essington though ready access to the settlement is severed by the M6 motorway between the site and the settlement. The site would be classified as previously developed land.

Housing Land Supply The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is based on a presumption in favour of sustainable development when assessing and determining proposals. One of the aims of the NPPF is 'to boost significantly the supply of housing' in a sustainable way and to 'encourage and not act as an impediment to sustainable growth'. To achieve this, paragraph 47 of the NPPF requires the Council to "identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years' worth of housing against their housing requirements…". The Council at this present time is unable to robustly demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land to meet the requirements of paragraph 47 of the NPPF. In light of this, paragraph 49 of the NPPF indicates that relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date when considering housing applications, and that such applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development and permission granted except were adverse impacts outweigh benefits or where specific restrictions as identified in the NPPF are applicable. The NPPF is clear that such restrictions do apply to sites located within the Green Belt.

Green Belt

Page 143 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

The site is within the Green Belt where there is a general presumption against inappropriate development. The NPPF does however identify a number of potential exceptions which includes 'the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites …which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt.'

It is considered that the redevelopment of the proposed site would satisfy the requirements detailed in the NPPF in terms of 'exceptions' developments permissible in Green Belt locations. The site is confined by residential and agricultural development to the north and west and by Bursnips Road and the M6 to south and east. It is therefore reasonable to suggest that any encroachment arising as a result of this proposal would be marginal and constrained.

Sustainability of Location The site is located outside any of the core strategy CP1 defined settlements and would be subject to Green Belt and Open Countryside protection policies. Whilst the site is within reasonably close proximity of the settlement of Essington, direct access appears to be severed due to the presence of the M6 motorway potentially increasing the degree of isolation from existing services and facilities.

The NPPF promotes rural area housing in sustainable locations where this will help to enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. The creation of isolated new homes should be avoided (para 55), though a number of exceptions are considered to qualify as special circumstances including 'where the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and lead to an enhancement to the immediate setting.'

Loss of Facilities NPPF Section 3, para 28 promotes the 'retention of local services and community facilities in villages such as … public houses'. Section 70 supports an approach to plan positively for the provision of community facilities such as public houses. In order to protect sole facilities, communities can register them as an 'Asset of Community Value' under the Localism Act 2011. There is no indication that this pub has been registered.

Conclusion It is suggested that the principle of development on this site is broadly acceptable in policy terms.

Housing and Regeneration (received 10.04.2018) My comments regarding the housing mix for the above application are as follows:

Policy H1 confirms that proposals for housing development should provide a mix of housing sizes and types to meet a range of needs of the community. It also encourages the provision of more 2 and 3 bedroom homes in all areas of the district in order to better balance the housing market. Mix should be informed by local need as identified in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment. The 2017 assessment indicates a substantial need in this area, in terms of market housing, for 2 bedroom

Page 144 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 homes, followed by 4 bedroom properties. There is also a small need for 1 and 3 bedroom homes.

The proposed mix for this development makes a clear contribution to meeting the local need for 2 bedroom homes and complies with Policy H1's requirement for more smaller properties to be provided. In order to create more of a mixed community, the inclusion of a small number of other property sizes would be preferred. However it is acknowledged that the development is restricted to an extent by green belt policy and this will therefore impact on layout/mix.

Environmental Health Officer (received 19.02.2018) In principal I don't have any objections to the proposed development, any noise mitigation is unlikely to have any major impacts other than a reasonable sized acoustic fence along the motorway boundary of the development to protect the outside amenity space. As a result I would recommend the following condition:-

- Before the development commences a noise report will be carry out by a qualified and competent person in accordance with BS 8233:2014 and is then submitted to the Local Planning Authority for consideration. Any necessary mitigation measures recommend in the noise report should then be implemented as part of the development.

Trees Officer (received 26.03.2018) The proposals do not affect the existing trees as they all appear to be within/on the existing tarmaced car parking areas (other than those 3 trees shown to be removed on western edge of site where the new 2 bed annex is proposed).

I have no objection to the proposals on tree grounds.

County Minerals & Waste (received 16.02.2018) The County Council as the Mineral and Waste Planning Authority has no comments on this application as the site is: -Not within or near to any permitted waste management facility; and -Exempt from the requirements of Policy 3 - Mineral Safeguarding in the Minerals Local Plan for Staffordshire 2015 - 2030.

County Highways Original consultation response (received 02.03.2018) This application should be refused for the following reasons:-

The proposed development fails to make adequate provision for the parking of vehicles within the site curtilage resulting in an increase in the likelihood of highway danger due to the likelihood of vehicles being parked on the public highway.

Contrary to the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Consultation response to amended plans (received 22.06.2018)

Page 145 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

There are no objections on Highways grounds to the proposed development subject to the following conditions being included on any approval:-

1. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the existing access to the site within the limits of the public highway has been reconstructed and completed. 2. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive, parking, servicing and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. 3. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the footway fronting the site within the limits of the public highway has been reconstructed and completed. 4. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until an off-site traffic management scheme comprising of; - Routing of construction vehicles - Wheel washing facilities - Measures to remove any mud or deleterious material deposited on the public highway - Car parking facilities for staff and visitors - Timetable for implementation has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved traffic management scheme shall thereafter be implemented prior to any works commencing on site.

County Ecology (SUMMARY) Original consultation response (received 09.03.2018)

I have not visited the site but have viewed aerial photographs and application photographs.

Policy and Legislative context in relation to this application

The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended); along with the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, provide the main legislative framework for protection of species. In addition to planning policy requirements, the LPA needs to be assured that this legislation will not be contravened due to planning consent. In addition to these provisions, section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 places a duty on all public authorities in England and Wales to have regard, in the exercise of their functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. Section 41 refers to a list of habitats and species of principal importance to which this duty applies.

Natural England Standing Advice which has the same status as a statutory planning response states that survey reports and mitigation plans are required for development projects that could affect protected species, as part of obtaining planning permission.

Assessment of Submitted Documents and Plans

Page 146 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

In accordance with Natural England Standing Advice and Circular 05/2006 further bat survey is required prior to consent and prior to demolition. The Initial Bat Survey found potential for use of the building by roosting bats with an inability to inspect roof voids and other potential roosting locations. As recommended by the report at least two emergence/re-entry surveys are required between May and August to determine presence/likely absence, and if present, the type of roost, number of bats and access points so that appropriate mitigation can be designed into the project. Should bats be found using the building during the two surveys it is recommended that a further survey be carried out to inform mitigation design. It is likely that mitigation would need to consist of a bat loft and/or bat boxes, depending on species found. Any mature trees proposed to be removed should be surveyed for bat use also.

A number of great crested newt ponds are found in the local area but the distance of these from the site and the small scale of the development means that no survey for this species is required.

A condition is recommended for protection of nesting birds which may be occurring within the building including in crevices that are not clearly visible. If demolition is proposed within the bird breeding season (March-August inclusive) this must be preceded by nesting bird check by a suitably experienced ecologist or ornithologist that demonstrates that no breeding is taking place.

Conclusions and Recommendations

In accordance with Natural England Standing Advice and Circular 05/2006 further bat survey is required prior to consent and prior to demolition.

A condition is recommended for protection of nesting birds.

Consultation response to amended plans (received 25.06.2018)

I have not visited the site but have viewed aerial photographs, application photographs and data held by Staffordshire Ecological Record.

Assessment of Submitted Documents and Plans Advice from my predecessor (Ali Glaisher, March 2018) recommended that bat emergence surveys should be carried out at the appropriate season. These have now been completed satisfactorily. No evidence of bats emerging from the buildings was found. The survey (section 5.1) advises reasonable avoidance of harm to bats during demolition and enhancements in the form of bat boxes to be installed. I agree with these recommendations.

Conclusions and Recommendations Conditions are recommended for 1. the protection of nesting birds 2. reasonable avoidance measures for bats 3. enhancements in the form of 2 bat boxes

Page 147 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

County Flood Risk Team Original comments (received 05.03.2018)

The site is not within the uFMfSW 1 in 100 year outline and there are no recorded flooding hotspots within 20m or Ordinary Watercourses within 5m. There will be no significant change to the impermeable area and so little change to the surface water runoff generated by the site. The Flood Team therefore have no further comments to offer on this application.

Comments on amended plans (received 12.06.2018) The site is not within the uFMfSW 1 in 100 year outline and there are no recorded flooding hotspots within 20m or Ordinary Watercourses within 5m. There will be no significant change to the impermeable area and so little change to the surface water runoff generated by the site. The Flood Team therefore have no further comments to make on this application.

Highways England Original consultation response (received 07.03.2018) Referring to the planning application referenced above, consultation dated 16 February 2018, existing building (Old Mitre public house) demolished. Proposed residential development to form 9 apartments (all 2 bed), with associated parking, cycle and bin storage. Existing vehicle access altered, Aspire Pub Company Limited Old Mitre Bursnips Road Essington Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV11 2RE, notice is hereby given that Highways England's formal recommendation is that we: a) offer no objection;

Highways Act Section 175B is not relevant to this application.

Revised consultation response to amended plans (received 28.06.2018) We raise no objection to the application.

Campaign To Protect Rural England (expired 25.06.2018)

Environment Agency (received 21.02.2018) We note the proposal involves discharging foul waste from the site to an existing package treatment plant, which currently serves the public house. The Environment Agency has assessed this proposal and considers it to pose a low risk to the environment, and as such will not be providing bespoke comments in response to this matter.

Natural England Original comments -Summary (received 01.03.2018)

Internationally and nationally designated sites

The application site is within or in close proximity to a European designated site (also commonly referred to as Natura 2000 sites), and therefore has the potential to affect

Page 148 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 its interest features. European sites are afforded protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, (the 'Habitats Regulations 2017'). The application site is in close proximity to the Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC) which is a European site. In considering the European site interest, Natural England advises that you, as a competent authority under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations, should have regard for any potential impacts that a plan or project may have. The Conservation objectives for each European site explain how the site should be restored and/or maintained and may be helpful in assessing what, if any, potential impacts a plan or project may have. Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

The application site lies 10km from the Cannock Chase Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and therefore lies within the 15 km zone of influence identified around the SAC. This zone is estimated to encompass the area from which 75% of visits are generated. The scale of housing development predicted within this zone is thought likely to increase the number of visitors on the SAC by 15%. Natural England has advised that an increase in visitor numbers on this scale is likely to have a significant effect on the interest features for which the SAC was classified. The likely effects arise from wear and tear and dog fouling along paths, which alter the important heathland vegetation of the SAC.

If granted permission, this development, in combination with other housing development would contribute to the predicted increase in visitor numbers on the SAC. Natural England advises that, in combination with other development, this proposed development is likely to have a significant effect and therefore, unless exceptional circumstances apply3, we advise that it will be necessary before planning permission is granted:(1) to secure measures which will avoid the likelihood of significant effect from arising; or (2) to undertake an appropriate assessment of the effects of this development, with regard to the conservation objectives of the SAC.

We have advised the SAC Partnership that the implementation of an agreed package of access management measures for the SAC can offer a proportionate and cost effective means of avoiding the likelihood that an effect would arise. This form of mitigation is likely to be less costly at application level than appropriate assessment of effects and it would remove the need for such an assessment. In addition it would offer a considerable cost saving compared to the SANGS proposals, on which a standard development contribution has been calculated by your authority. Whilst this means that this level of contribution may not be needed, and this presents the likelihood of a cost saving to developers, it means that there is current uncertainty as to what level of contribution will be required.

Final costing of the measures required to avoid the likelihood of significant effect must await the proposal of a specific package of measures by the managers of the SAC and adjacent land. The planning authorities will need to ensure that the overall impact of development is mitigated and will need to consider how to divide this cost between developments. We recognise that your council and the other planning authorities may decide that it is necessary for all residential development within the

Page 149 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 zone of influence to make a contribution or it may limit the requirement to certain categories of development. We will therefore seek to understand and remain in touch with your council's overall approach and will take this into account in providing any further case level advice.

Protected species We have not assessed this application and associated documents for impacts on protected species. Natural England has published Standing Advice on protected species.

Biodiversity enhancements This application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or the installation of bird nest boxes. The authority should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity of the site from the applicant, if it is minded to grant permission for this application. This is in accordance with Paragraph 118 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Additionally, we would draw your attention to Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) which states that 'Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity'. Section 40(3) of the same Act also states that 'conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat'.

Comments on amended planning application (received 29.06.2018) Natural England has no comments to make on this application.

Staffordshire Wildlife Trust (expired 25.06.2018)

Severn Trent Water (comments received 22.02.2018.)

I can confirm that we have no objections to the proposals subject to the inclusion of the following condition: . The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and . The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use. This is to ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to prevent or to avoid exacerbating any flooding issues and to minimise the risk of pollution.

Neighbours x2 objections (both received 22.03.2018) Concerns raised regarding the following points; - Claims that the public house is a listed building - Loss of amenity for Essington - No public transport or amenities in walking distance of site - Reliance on car transport - Overdevelopment of the plot of land

Page 150 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

- No shortfall in need for apartments or flats - Height of the proposal's effect on surrounding Green Belt - Fears over setting a precedent for car park across road

Site notice (expired 16.03.2018)

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 The application has been referred to Planning Committee because it involves the loss of a community facility and must be considered against Policy EV9 of the Core Strategy. The proposal is also contrary to Core Policy 1 of the Core Strategy.

5.2 Key Issues - Principle of the development - Green Belt - Location - Loss of community facility - Housing Mix - Ecology - Highways/parking - Impact on neighbouring amenity - Impact on character - Cannock Chase SAC - Representations

5.3 Principle of development

5.3.1 The Council cannot currently demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply, with supply currently sitting at 3.42 years. In such cases, paragraph 14 of the NPPF (which is an important material consideration) indicates that permission must be granted unless:

"any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted".

5.3.2 The footnote which sits under paragraph 14 indicates that NPPF Green Belt policy is a policy capable of restricting this presumption in favour of development.

5.4 Green Belt

5.4.1 The proposed site lies on previously developed land, being entirely covered by structures and hardstanding previously associated with the site's use as a public house. Policy GB1 of the Core Strategy sets out the acceptable forms of development which will normally be permitted in the Green Belt, subject to a proposal conforming to the terms of the NPPF. The Green Belt and Open Countryside SPD makes clear that reference should also be made to the NPPF in determining whether a proposal is an appropriate development within the Green Belt. Paragraph 89 of the NPPF

Page 151 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 indicates that the construction of new buildings should be regarded as inappropriate in the Green Belt. Paragraph 89 sets out specific exceptions to this. These include bullet point 6 of that paragraph, which allows for "the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use… which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development".

5.4.2 As indicated by the applicant's planning statement, there would be an approximate increase in floor area of 50% from the proposed development and a more modest 28% increase in volume of built form, which largely results from the introduction of a third storey to part of the proposed buildings. The footprint of the proposed development would be approximately 4% smaller than the existing public house and the proposals would result in a slight reduction in the spread of hardstanding within the site due to the landscaped areas to be introduced at the front of the site.

5.4.3 A recent decision indicates that judgements on the impact of a proposal on Green Belt openness are not narrowly limited to measurements of existing and proposed built form, and other factors are capable of being relevant, such as the visual impact of the development on Green Belt openness. In the case of the current proposal, the site is tightly bounded on all sides by development or planting which acts to contain the visual impact of any proposal on the surrounding Green Belt. A substantial landscape buffer and the M6 motorway sits to the south west, a dense complex of buildings associated with the Old Mitre Farm is adjacent to the north and the sites south eastern boundary is adjacent to the A462, a heavily trafficked A road, which is also bounded by substantial tree and hedge planting. Therefore, the site would have tightly contained visual envelope, acting to restrict the impact of the proposal on the surrounding Green Belt. In this context, having regard to the proposal's reduction in built footprint within the site and the lowering of the floor level towards the rear of the site, I do not view the proposed increase in built form within the site as having a materially greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development.

5.4.4 Paragraph 89 also requires consideration to be given to a proposal's impact upon the purposes of including land within the Green Belt. The proposal would not increase the sprawl of a large built up area, encroach into the countryside or merge neighbouring towns, given that it is tightly bound by other built form, is entirely contained within the curtilage of an existing developed site and does not propose to increase the footprint spread of development within the site's curtilage. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the development of the site would undermine the use of other urban sites, given the unmet housing needs present in both South Staffordshire and the Black Country. There would also be no impact on the setting of any historic town. Therefore, the proposal would not negatively impact the purposes of including land within the Green Belt, as set out in paragraph 80 of the NPPF.

Page 152 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.4.5 Therefore, as the proposal would not have a greater impact upon the openness of the Green Belt or the purposes of including land within it than the existing development, it falls within the appropriate forms of built development allowed within the Green Belt under NPPF paragraph 89, bullet point 6. Therefore, the scheme still benefits from the presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in paragraph 14 of the NPPF, as specific Green Belt policies do not indicate the development should be restricted.

5.5 Spatial Strategy/Location

5.5.1 The proposed site is not within a Main or Local Service Village identified for residential growth in Core Policy 1 of the Core Strategy. The Core Strategy also expects development proposals to make efficient use of land and to prioritise the use of brownfield land in sustainable locations. This is supported by similar provisions in paragraph 55 of the NPPF, which advises that isolated new homes in the countryside should be avoided. Similarly, paragraph 34 of the NPPF requires decisions to ensure that developments which generate significant movement are located where the need to travel will be minimised.

5.5.2 The site of the existing development sits in close proximity to the urban area of the Black Country and the village of Essington. However, the only likely means of access from the proposed development to either of these locations would be via the Bursnips Road travelling south. Whilst this does have some narrow footways, residents are likely to rely on car transport given the distance to both Essington and the conurbation from this location. Therefore, whilst the proposal would represent the efficient use of a brownfield site, the site itself does not have the same sustainable links to services and facilities that are present in the Main or Local Service Villages.

5.5.3 It is important to note that the site already has an established use for a public house which would likely generate a substantial number of car trips were that use to recommence, as evidenced by the extensive car parking set aside within the site curtilage and the former pub car park on the opposite side of the A462. Therefore, the proposal is unlikely to cause any substantial increase in unsustainable travel compared to the existing use established on the site. Furthermore, a redevelopment of the existing site would not be physically isolated from other built development of a similar scale, given the large detached properties present to the north and south along the A462. Therefore whilst the proposal is not in a location identified from growth in Core Policy 1, the degree of harm arising to the Spatial Strategy would be minor.

5.6 Loss of a community facility

5.6.1 Policy EV9 introduces provisions which aim to support the retention of community facilities and services, where these make an important contribution to the vitality of the place and the quality of life/wellbeing of local communities and the maintenance of sustainable communities. Proposals to redevelop facilities and services which support the local community will only be permitted in specified

Page 153 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 circumstances set out in the policy. These include instances where "the facility or service which will be lost will be adequately supplied or met by an easily accessible existing facility in the local area or the village concerned" and "the facility concerned was not required to be provided and or retained as part of a planning permission for new development".

5.6.2. The current public house sits in on a busy transport corridor with intermittent residential dwellings along its length and therefore is unlikely to be considered a sustainable community for the purposes of Policy EV9. Furthermore, as set out in 5.5.2, the proposed site is some distance from the nearest village. Although Essington sits a few hundred metres to the south-west of the site, it is severed from it by the M6 motorway, with direct car and footway access to the site being more easily achievable from the Black Country to the south. Equally, Essington is a relatively small village with an established pub in a central location. Therefore, the facility/service to be lost will be adequately supplied or met by an easily accessible existing facility in the village concerned. Furthermore, no objection has been received from the Parish Council on these grounds and there is no planning permission requiring the retention of the Old Mitre. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to be contrary to Policy EV9.

5.7 Housing mix/affordable housing

5.7.1 Policy H1 requires that all applications encourage the provision of more 2 and 3 bedroom homes. The scheme would assist in meeting this fundamental policy aim through the provision of nine 2 bedroom apartments. The Council's Housing Strategy Officer indicates that whilst a mix of properties would be preferred, there is limited scope to achieve this without further spread of development and resultant impacts on the Green Belt. Furthermore, the most recent Strategic Housing Market Assessment confirms that the predominant need in this locality is for 2 bedroom properties. Therefore, I consider the proposal to be compliant with Policy H1 of the Core Strategy.

5.7.2 The affordable housing requirements set out in Policy H2 of the Core Strategy are not to be enforced in the case of this development, as changes to the planning practice guidance indicate that affordable housing contributions should only be sought on schemes of greater than ten dwellings.

5.8 Ecology

5.8.1 An ecology survey was submitted with the application and, following concerns raised by the County Ecologist, further bat presence/absence surveys were undertaken at the site. Following these supplementary surveys the County Ecologist has confirmed that there is no objection to the development with regards to impacts upon protected species, subject to the imposition of conditions. Therefore, the proposal is in accordance with Policy EQ1 of the Core Strategy.

5.9 Highways/parking

Page 154 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.9.1 The Council's car parking standards are set out in Policy EV2 and Appendix 5 of the Core Strategy. Following objections to the original level of parking provision proposed, the proposed layout has been amended to accommodate an increased level of car parking spaces. The County Highways officer has since confirmed that there are no objections to the amended plans on highways grounds, subject to the imposition of conditions.

5.10 Noise/amenity

5.10.1 Policy EQ9 of the Core Strategy sets out the relevant tests. The proposal would not introduce any facing windows which would contradict the minimum separation distances required by the Council's Space About Dwellings standards, as it does not propose to introduce any facing windows in the north-east elevation, parts of which face principal windows at Old Mitre Farm. The proposal would also provide the Space about Dwellings requirement for 10sqm of private amenity area per proposed apartment. Furthermore, subject to conditions, there is no objection to the proposed development from the Council’s Environmental Health Team. Therefore, the development is considered acceptable in terms of its impact on the amenity of future residents and neighbouring properties, complying with Policy EQ9 of the Core Strategy.

5.11 Impact on character

5.11.1 The proposal sits adjacent to the A462, which is a busy A road characterised by a pattern of dispersed large detached properties of no strong built character. In this context and given the degree of visual containment offered to the site by the surrounding planting, built form and motorway, there are no concerns about the proposal's impact on the character of the wider area, subject to the imposition of a condition to control materials used. Therefore, the proposal complies with Policy EQ11 of the Core Strategy.

5.12 Cannock Chase SAC

5.12.1 The site lies within the 0-15km zone of influence of the Cannock Chase SAC but is outside of the 0-8km zone of payment where charges towards SAC mitigation are sought from new residential development. The likely significant effects of residential development on the Cannock Chase SAC has been appropriately assessed in the evidence base to support the Council's adopted Core Strategy and emerging Site Allocations Document as have the mitigation measures which are secured by payments from the 0-8km zone of influence. This evidence base includes the 2017 document 'Cannock Chase SAC- Planning Evidence Base Review', which confirms that the currently adopted mitigation measures remain fit for purpose in advance of future Local Plan reviews. Furthermore, Natural England's most recent consultation response confirms that the proposal is not likely to significant effects upon internationally designated sites. Therefore, it is clear that any likely significant effects arising from the proposal will be satisfactorily mitigated by development in the 0- 8km zone of influence.

Page 155 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.13 Representations

5.13.1 Objections were initially received from the Parish Council with regards to the lack of car parking on the site. However, following the submission of revised plans, the Parish Council now confirm they have no objection to the proposal. Objections have also been received from a property (Conway) which lies further north along Bursnips Road. The majority of the points raised are addressed elsewhere in this report. For clarity, it should be pointed out that the pub is not a listed building and proposals to develop the car park across the road do not form part of this application.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1 The proposals do not represent inappropriate development within the Green Belt due to the provisions of paragraph 89, bullet point 6 of the NPPF. Whilst the proposal involves the loss of a community facility, it would not contravene the relevant tests in Policy EV9 and concerns regarding the proposal's car parking provision and impact on ecology have been satisfactorily addressed. There is a limited degree of conflict with Core Policy 1 of the Core Strategy as the proposal would introduce new dwellings outside of a settlement identified for growth. However, harm arising from this in the form of non-sustainable travel patterns is tempered by car movements that would likely be associated with the existing use on site.

6.2 Given the lack of five year housing land supply, the presumption in favour of sustainable development in the NPPF is engaged, which is an important material consideration. Therefore, the application must be approved unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole. I do not view the limited harm arising from the development's location as being sufficient to outweigh the benefits, in terms of the proposal's re-use of brownfield land and boost to the Council's housing supply. Therefore I recommend that the application be approved.

7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: Drg. no. (90)01 rev A received 01/06/2018 Drg. no. (PL) 04 rev A received 01/06/2018 Drg. no. (PL) 01 rev A received 21/03/2018 Drg. no. (PL) 02 received 05/02/2018 Drg. no. (PL) 03 received 05/02/2018.

3. Notwithstanding what is shown on the approved plans, before development commences details of the facing materials to be used on the wall and roof of

Page 156 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

the development shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The development shall be carried out in the approved materials.

4. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the existing access to the site within the limits of the public highway has been reconstructed and completed.

5. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access drive, parking, servicing and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans.

6. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the footway fronting the site within the limits of the public highway has been reconstructed and completed.

7. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until an off-site traffic management scheme comprising of; - Routing of construction vehicles - Wheel washing facilities - Measures to remove any mud or deleterious material deposited on the public highway - Car parking facilities for staff and visitors - Timetable for implementation has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved traffic management scheme shall thereafter be implemented prior to any works commencing on site.

8. Before the development commences a landscape scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval.

The approved scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and completed within 12 months of the completion of the development. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified when the scheme has been completed. Any failures shall be replaced within the next available planting season and the scheme shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

9. The development hereby permitted should not commence until drainage plans for the disposal of foul and surface water flows have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, and the scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is first brought into use.

10. Before the development commences a noise report will be carry out by a qualified and competent person in accordance with BS 8233:2014 and is then submitted to the Local Planning Authority for consideration. Any necessary mitigation measures recommend in the noise report should then be implemented as part of the development.

Page 157 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

11. Two integrated bat boxes must be provided in line with the recommendations set out in paragraphs 5.1 of the document titled 'Bat Assessment- Presence/Absence Surveys of the Old Mitre PH, Bursnips Road, Staffordshire', dated 7th June 2018; namely:

1x Schwegler 1FR bat tube for use by common pipistrelle 1x Schwegler Brick Box 27 for use by Daubenton's

Boxes should be sited to face north or east and away from the M6 and the Bursnips Road. They should be placed directly under the eaves or just below a gable apex and should not be illuminated by streetlights or security lights.

Reasons

1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

3. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

4. In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Staffordshire County Council requirement for vehicular access crossings.

5. In the interest of highway safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

6. In the interest of highway safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. In the interest of highway safety. To comply with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

8. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

9. To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to prevent or to avoid exacerbating any flooding issues and to minimise the risk of pollution.

10. To safeguard the amenity of future residents, in accordance with Policy EQ9 of the Core Strategy.

Page 158 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

11. In order to protect any protected species on the site in accordance with EQ1 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Proactive Statement

INFORMATIVE 1 Should evidence of bats (such as bat droppings or individuals) be found during works, the works must stop immediately, and Natural England contacted for advice on how best to proceed.

INFORMATIVE 2 The site should be surveyed for nesting birds prior to commencement of works by a person competent to do so. If evidence of nesting birds is found during the construction process, no works should be undertaken that may cause disturbance until after all chicks have fledged.

INFORMATIVE 3 The reconstruction of the existing vehicular access and footway shall require a Highway Works Agreement with Staffordshire County Council and the applicant is therefore requested to contact Staffordshire County Council in respect of securing this Agreement. The link below is to the Highway Works Information Pack including an application Form. Please complete and send to the address indicated on the application Form or e-mail to [email protected]. The applicant is advised to begin this process well in advance of any works taking place in order to meet any potential timescales.

http://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/transport/staffshighways/highwayscontrol/ HighwaysWorkAgreements.aspx

Page 159 of 210 Patrick Walker: Senior Planning Officer - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00107/FUL - Old Mitre Bursnips Road Essington South Staffordshire WV11 2RE

Page 160 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00200/FUL Dr S Taylor Wombourne Councillor K Upton Councillor R Williams

Mount Cottage Redcliffe Drive Wombourne Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV5 0JE.

Single and first floor extensions, internal alterations, new detached garage (works relating to C2 Therapeutic Children's Home).

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site Description

1.1.1 Mount Cottage is a two-storey detached residence with double detached garage to the side and residential curtilage extending to approximately 4.8 acres. The dwelling is positioned within the southern section of the application site and is accessed via a private gated track which leads off a public right of way. The public right of way, a single width track, extends between Redcliffe Drive and Copper Beech Drive and runs from north to south along the western boundary of the site. The northern-most portion of the site is a large area of grassland with a large number of trees. The trees along the northern site boundary are covered by a blanket Tree Protection Order.

1.1.2 The site is within the Green Belt and adjoins the Wombourne Development Boundary formed by the rear garden boundaries of dwellings fronting Redcliffe Drive.

1.2 Planning History

1985, Replacement house and garage, approved (85/00045) 1990, Extensions, approved (90/00625) 2017, Change of Use from Use Class C3 to C2 (Therapeutic Residential Children's Home), approved (17/00620/COU).

1.3 Pre-application Discussions

No discussions have taken place.

1.4 Agents submission

1.4.1 The application is to address an identified shortage/need in Staffordshire for this type of care facility. The facility will be managed by a consultant clinical psychologist who is an expert in this field of work.

1.4.2 The manager has developed the psychological model over a number of years and it is unique, successful in that it makes a difference and is expected to inform the way that care is delivered in the UK in coming years. Care is provided on a one-to-

Page 161 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 one basis by trained carers. The staff are specialist mentors/carers/psychologists and teachers who make a real difference to the lives of these young people that local authorities have a statutory responsibility to look after.

1.4.3 The proposed extensions allow a better equipped living and in particular an enhanced learning environment - education is a critical component of what will be provided for the children.

1.4.4 The proposed extensions marginally exceed the prescribed range in GB1 and the GB/OC SPD. However, it is considered any minor harm to the openness of the green belt, and the weight of the position of ‘inappropriate by definition’ is outweighed by the benefits of the scheme in addressing an area of identified shortfall in services and need to provide suitable housing for all members of the community (Para 50. of the NPPF). The intention of this site is that children will be placed here until age 18 – it is not a short-term facility.

1.4.5 The C2 use has already been approved and implemented, OFSTED have now granted permission for the premises to operate as a residential therapeutic centre which the proposed extension will facilitate.

1.4.6 The application is supported by the Staffordshire County Council Children’s Placement Service to provide a specialist care facility for Staffordshire children and young adults. This is a much-needed facility which will provide an innovative approach to care and well-being incorporating a significant element of education on site to provide a settled base to learn and maximise life opportunities/ the potential of children and young people in need of such care. The educational facility provided by the new building is crucial to the schemes capability to meet the complex needs of vulnerable children.

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Proposal

2.1.1 Planning permission was granted in September 2017 to change the use of the building from a dwelling house (Use Class C3) to a Therapeutic Residential Children’s Home (Use Class C2), with 5 bedrooms, so the principle of use has already been established.

2.1.1 This application proposes a 9.5m x 6.4m x 5.8m pitched roof ridge height extension on two floors. It would provide an activities room, and a classroom at ground floor with a 3m wide single storey ‘link’ element to the main care home building. At first floor 2 therapy rooms and a library/educational resource room and an accessible w.c/bathroom are proposed. This building would replace the existing 57 sq.m detached garage (4m ridge height) on the same siting. The number of residents would remain at 5, the same number as previously proposed.

2.1.2 A replacement double garage is proposed (5.6 x 5.2m x 4m ridge height).

Page 162 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2.1.3 The property is set in substantial landscape grounds. The proposed development would not extend closer to the nearest neighbouring dwelling ‘Park Mount’ which is located a minimum distance of 37m to the south. The development would be 5m from the garden boundary with this property and screened by mature boundary planting.

3. POLICY CONTEXT

Within the Green Belt

Adopted Local Plan

Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt Policy EQ1: Protecting, Enhancing and Expanding Natural Assets Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Policy EQ11: Wider Design Considerations Policy H5: Specialist Housing Accommodation Policy EV12: Parking Provision Core Policy 15: Children and Young People

National Planning Policy Framework

Chapter 8: Promoting Healthy Communities Chapter 9: Protecting Green Belt land

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

No Councillor comments (expired 12/04/2018):

Wombourne Parish Council (comments received on 19/04/2018):

Disappointed that such a large proposal has been made so soon after last year's COU request, and are concerned the application exceeds the general rules of extensions within the Green Belt. Management of construction traffic on the bridleway should be considered.

4 Neighbours (comments received between 12/04/2018 and 24/04/2018) object on the following grounds:

 The access route to Mount Cottage is along a narrow public footpath that is regularly used.  The development will involve large, heavy site lorries that will be delivering bricks and other materials along a route that is very narrow and contains 'blind spots'.  The frequency of vehicles will certainly increase over a period of months and will present a danger to any pedestrians using the route on a daily basis.

Page 163 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

 Increase in noise and air pollution generated by more regular vehicle journeys along Redcliffe Drive and the 'track' that leads to Mount Cottage will have an adverse impact on the quality of the environment for families adjacent to the routes.  Local residents consider that it is inappropriate to add an extension to the Residential Home within such a short time span from it being granted C2 Commercial status.  The proposed extension will exceed the maximum of 40 percent enlargement to the original area of the building as specified in the Green Belt and Open Countryside SPD. The Supplementary Planning Document states that extensions of 20-40 percent can be considered proportionate. I feel strongly that this is an attempt to breach regulations and is totally unjustified, especially when residential households have to rigidly adhere to laws concerning alterations to properties within residential areas. Allowing such development would set an undesirable precedent for other forms of inappropriate development in the Green Belt. If the plans are passed then the planning office is ignoring the SPD requirements and allowing the extension to exceed the maximum (40%) allowance by 14.5 sq m.  The property at Mount cottage is within 15 metres of the rear of my property. The proposed first-floor extension gives rise to great concern due to overlooking my property and this will be blocking out any natural sun light reaching my property. I have to strongly oppose any first-floor extension. There are parts of the property grounds that are as close 2 meters from my rear gardens.  Loss of peaceful amenity of our private residence gardens resulting from noise and disturbance.  Whilst I am in full favour of supporting organisations which are clearly for good causes and are needed within communities I feel that the property at Mount Cottage is not best located for this purpose. It is far too close to neighbouring properties.  Concerns that grounds are unsafe for young children as there are dangerous areas in close proximity to Mount Cottage including a cliff.  Overcrowding of rooms would not provide a calming/healing environment for residents.  The existing garages should be retained for that purpose without the need for new development.  Restricted access to the field adjoining Mount Cottage. There was and has been an access way via this field for some 30 years or more and when the applicants purchased this field approx. one year ago they are now refusing all access to and via this field.  These proposals should have been considered alongside the application number: 17/00620/COU. There was no mention of extension and further constructions at the time when the principle of the use was considered. It seems that the applicants have mislead the authorities, applying for these planning permissions little by little.  Mount Cottage was originally a pair of farm buildings with a total floor area of 210 sq metres. A conservatory and living room have been added increasing

Page 164 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

the floor area by 16.5 sq m. A further 73.5 sq m are permissible under the Green Belt and Supplementary Planning Document rules (40 percent maximum increase) from the original. The current plans amount to a total of 82 sq.m. above the original because they have already enlarged their building by 16.5 sq m. This exceeds the recommended increase by 25 sq m. A further addition of the new proposed extension of 82 sq m will amount to a total area of 308.5 sq m. 40 percent of the original floor plan of 210 sq m is 84 sq m which totals 294 sq m. If the plans are passed then the planning office is ignoring the SPD requirements and allowing the extension to exceed the maximum (40%) allowance by 14.5 sq m.  Large, heavy site vehicles and associated large machinery gaining access to Mount Cottage in order to deliver building materials, via the narrow lane, will not only have a profound negative effect on the neighbourhood but also has the potential of unsettling the foundations of the 220 year old cottage (102, Rookery Road) as they travel within a few feet of it.  The first-floor plan submitted shows a total of five bedrooms. If five young people with socio - psychological problems were accommodated at Mount Cottage they would need extra Carers as they are operating on a one to one basis. This would generate even more traffic along the narrow lane , so exacerbating the problem outlined in the original planning application which a number of local residents objected to last year.

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 The application has been referred to Planning Committee because the proposal is contrary to Policy GB1.

5.2 Key Issues - Principle of development & Impact on the Green Belt - Neighbour Amenities - Traffic generation

5.3 Principle of development & Impact on the Green Belt

5.3.1 The Councils adopted Special Planning Guidance relating to extensions within the Green Belt advises that extensions and alterations to existing buildings do not constitute inappropriate development provided that development is not disproportionate and harmful to the openness of the Green Belt. It advises that 20- 40% additional floor area is the appropriate range for proportionate extensions, but that a ‘one size fits all’ approach is not always suitable, that all cases will be considered on their individual merits and that the LA will make a judgement as to whether an extension is disproportionate or not.

5.1.2 The proposed extensions plus the existing, previously approved conservatory and lounge extension (16.5 sq.m.), and including the replacement garage, amount to a total increase in footprint above the original dwelling of approx. 125 sq.m. The existing garage/workshop footprint of 57 sq.m. is to be demolished must therefore

Page 165 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018 be deducted in the equation. The overall increase in footprint is therefore approx. 68 sq.m. This represents an increase in footprint of approx. 60%. However, the proportionate percentage increase in volume/mass of development would be significantly lower, given that the proposed height and mass of the extension is clearly subdominant in relation to the original two-storey house.

5.1.3 The proposed development will serve an important social/community care service and will help meet the health and well-being Policies of the adopted Core Strategy including Core Policy 15 ‘Children and Young People’.

5.1.4 This is an extensive site with suitable space and amenities to serve residential care purposes, in convenient proximity to the services and facilities of Wombourne village.

5.1.5 Given the individual circumstances and merits of this application I consider that the proposals do not conflict with Green Belt Policy and Guidance and would not set a precedent for inappropriate development.

5.2 Neighbour Amenities

5.2.1 Given the distance separation between the proposed and neighbouring development there would be no material loss of privacy, or light.

5.3 Traffic generation

5.3.1 Residents in care would not have cars. Staff care would be on a one-to-one basis. There would be 5 residents in care using the 5 bedrooms within the original house element. The amount of traffic generation would be limited to the number of people in care and would not detract from the safety or convenience of highway use.

6. CONCLUSIONS

6.1 The proposals will provide an important care facility in relation to the identified needs of the area, meeting the sustainability and well-being aims of the adopted Core Strategy. Given the siting and design of the proposals and the circumstances weighing in favour of the application there will be no conflict with Green Belt Policy and guidance.

7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans: Proposed Site Plan (Ref. 18.08.05) and Proposed Garage Details (Ref. 18.08.03)

Page 166 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

received on 13/04/18 and Proposed Floor Plans & Elevations (Ref. 18.08.02C) received on 13/06/18.

3. The extension hereby approved shall be for a Therapeutic Children’s Home (Use Class C2) only and no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class C2 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or any other subsequent equivalent order.

4. Staff changeovers and deliveries shall only take place between the hours of 07.00am to 11.00pm at all times.

5. The premises shall retain the appearance of a private dwelling and no signs (other than one business or trade plate complying with the requirements of Class 2B of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) (England) Regulations 2007 shall be displayed without the express consent of the Local Planning Authority.

6. The parking areas shown on the approved Site Plan under Condition 2 above shall be suitably surfaced, marked out and drained, constructed concurrently with the development and thereafter retained as such throughout the life of the development.

7. The public bridleway shall be kept clear from obstruction at all times and any damage to the bridleway as a result of the development shall be made good.

Reasons:

1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

3. To ensure that the use of the premises does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

4. To ensure that the use of the premises does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

6. In the interests of public and highway safety and convenience and to ensure that adequate parking facilities are available to serve the development and to conform to the requirements of policy EV12 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Page 167 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

7. In the interests of public and highway safety and convenience and to conform to the requirements of policy EV12 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Proactive Statement

Page 168 of 210 Paul Turner: Planning Consultant - Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00200/FUL - Mount Cottage Redcliffe Drive Wombourne South Staffordshire WV5 0JE

Page 169 of 210

Page 170 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00269/ADV Mr Scott Gwinnett BREWOOD & COVEN Councillor W J Sutton Councillor J Bolton Councillor D Holmes

The Four Ashes, Station Drive Four Ashes Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV10 7BU

2 x Fantastic Inflatable World signs

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site Description

1.1.1 This application relates to the Four Ashes Inn public house which fronts the A449 dual carriageway between Gailey Island and Standeford. A carpark for the pub is situated to the east, accessed off Station Drive. There is an overflow carpark, sports changing room building, and 3 hectares of sports playing fields further to the north.

1.1.2 There is a small ribbon of residential properties further east along Station Drive, and 3 immediate neighbouring residential properties to the south/southwest of the public house.

1.2 Relevant Planning History

2018: Fantastic Inflatable World Ltd temporary public play park, Pending Consideration, 18/00270/FUL 2017: Retention of advertisement billboards, Withdrawn, 17/00677/ADV 2011: To operate a hand car wash at the top end of the car park next to the changing rooms, Refused, 11/00228/COU and subsequent appeal dismissed, 11/00036/REF 2011: To operate a hand car wash at the top end of the car park next to the changing rooms, Withdrawn, 11/00118/COU

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Pre-application Advice

None.

2.2 The Proposal

2.2.1 This application seeks Advertisement Consent for 2 x non-illuminated signs each displaying "Fantastic Inflatable World Theme Park" logo and temporary event details.

Page 171 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2.2.2 Both signs would be constructed from correx (corrugated plastic), measuring maximum dimensions of 2.4m wide x 1m tall x 5mm deep. Both signs would be finished predominately in a white background with dark blue coloured text.

2.2.3 Sign 1 would be a single-sided sign attached to the west-facing gable end of the public house building, sited 1m above ground level.

2.2.4 Sign 2 would be a single-sided sign affixed (facing northwest) to an existing free-standing sign for the public house, located on a grass verge on the opposite side of Station Drive (to the south).

2.2.5 This application is being considered concurrently with planning application reference 18/00270/FUL, which seeks temporary planning permission for the above- mentioned play park.

2.3 Agents Submission

2.3.1 The applicant has requested a temporary advertisement consent between 01/06/18 - 02/09/18.

3. POLICY CONTEXT

Within the West Midlands Green Belt.

Core Strategy Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy GB1: Development in the Green Belt Core Policy 3: Sustainable Development and Climate Change Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design EQ11: Wider Design Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework 7. Requiring Good Design 9. Protecting Green Belt land

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Ward Councillors (expired 14/06/18): No comments received.

Brewood & Coven Parish Council (received 06/06/18): No objection.

Environmental Health Officer (expired 14/06/18): No comments received.

County Highways (received 08/06/18): There are no objections on Highway grounds to this proposal. The above comments relate purely to the effects of the development on roads for which Staffordshire County Council is the Highway Authority. For

Page 172 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018 consideration to be given to the effects of the development on the A449 Trunk Road, it will be necessary for you to consult Highways England.

Highways England (expired 25/05/18): There are no requirements to consult Highways England on applications where they are unlikely to have impact on the Strategic Road Network (SRN). I can confirm we have no comments to make on this application.

Neighbours (received 29/05/18): 1 neighbour raised concerns over litter, loss of light, noise and disturbance, antisocial behaviour, loss of privacy, pollution, additional traffic, highway safety, and impacts on wildlife. These issues more specifically relate to concurrent planning application 18/00270/FUL, and there were no specific comments in relation to the proposed signage subject of this application.

Site Notice (expired 19/06/18): No comments received.

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 This application is being referred to Planning Committee as it is being considered concurrently with planning application 18/00270/FUL, which is also being referred to Planning Committee as the proposal is contrary to Policy GB1 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5.2 The Key Issues are:-

-Principle of Development -Visual Amenity -Impact on Neighbouring Amenity -Public Safety/Highways -Temporary Advertisement Consent -Representations

5.3 Principle of Development

5.3.1 The NPPF states that advertisements should only be subject to control in the interests of amenity and public safety.

5.3.2 The site is located within the Green Belt however the proposed signage would have no material impact on its openness. The principle of development is therefore considered acceptable, subject to further considerations below.

5.4 Visual Amenity

5.4.1 Policy EQ11 of the Core Strategy states that development should create good design that respects visual amenity. The NPPF also states that poorly placed advertisements can have a negative impact on the appearance of the built and natural environment and that advertisements which have an appreciable impact on a

Page 173 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018 building or their surroundings should be subject to the local planning authority's detailed assessment.

5.4.2 The proposed signage to be fixed to the public house would be non- illuminated, and would appear relatively small-scale against the backdrop of the existing premises. Any visual impact from this sign would be temporary, and it is considered there would be no adverse impacts on visual amenity as a result.

5.4.3 The proposed free-standing sign would cover-up one side of an existing free- standing sign on the adjacent grass verge. It would be similar in size to the existing pub sign, would only be single sided, and would be non-illuminated. There would therefore be no adverse visual amenity concerns from this temporary sign.

5.4.4 Both temporary signs are considered acceptable in scale, design, siting and material finish. The proposal accords with Local Plan Policy EQ11 and the NPPF.

5.5 Impact on Neighbouring Amenity

5.5.1 Policy EQ9 seeks to protect the amenity of local residents.

5.5.2 The proposed signage raises no residential amenity concerns in this instance and fully accords with Policy EQ9.

5.5.3 The neighbour's comments regarding impacts from the temporary play park itself shall be addressed under the concurrent planning application 18/00270/FUL.

5.6 Public Safety/Highways

5.6.1 The proposal raises no public safety or highway related concerns.

5.6.2 The neighbour's comments regarding increased traffic and highway safety are noted, however County Highways and Highways England raise no objection, and therefore a refusal on these grounds would be considered unwarranted.

5.7 Temporary Advertisement Consent

5.7.1 This application is being considered concurrently with planning application 18/00270/FUL, which seeks temporary planning permission for the related theme park itself.

5.7.2 It is considered appropriate for any advertisement consent to be given on a temporary basis, expiring the same date as any planning permission for the temporary theme park.

5.8 Representations

5.8.1 The neighbour's comments have been addressed in the main body of this report.

Page 174 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

6. CONCLUSION

6.1.1 The proposed temporary signage will not have an adverse effect on the visual amenity or public safety of the application site or the surrounding area; in accordance with Policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy and the NPPF.

7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The 2 signs hereby approved shall be displayed only between the specified dates listed below and this consent shall expire at the end of this period, on 31/08/19. At the end of each approved display period specified below, the 2 signs hereby approved, together with all means of additional supporting fixtures/fittings, shall be removed and the affected part of the building/structure/site and restored to its previous condition, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:-

2018 approved display period 15/06/18 - 31/08/18 [11 weeks] 2019 approved display period 15/06/19 - 31/08/19 [11 weeks]

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with approved drawings listed below all received 23/05/18:-

1. 'OS Plan B&W'; 2. Untitled Site Block Plan at 1:500; 3. 'Fantastic Inflatable World Theme Park' untitled indicative photo elevation plan. 4. Untitled signage specification plan (width, height, depth, materials, non-illumination)

3. The advertisement consent hereby granted does not grant or imply consent for the installation of any means of lighting for the two signs hereby approved. Any lighting scheme for the two signs shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval before installation.

Reasons

1. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

3. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Page 175 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Proactive Statement

In dealing with the application, the Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems in relation to dealing with the planning application, in accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2012.

Page 176 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00269/ADV - The Four Ashes Inn Station Drive Four Ashes Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV10 7BU

Page 177 of 210

Page 178 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00270/FUL Mr Scott Gwinnett BREWOOD & COVEN Councillor W J Sutton Councillor J Bolton Councillor D Holmes

The Four Ashes Station Drive Four Ashes Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV10 7BU

Fantastic Inflatable World Ltd temporary public play park

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site Description

1.1.1 This application relates to existing sports playing fields situated directly north of The Four Ashes Inn public house, and immediately east of the A449 dual carriageway between Gailey Island and Standeford.

1.1.2 The public house, a car park, a sports changing room building are all located to the south, with access to them off Station Drive. The application site is bounded by agricultural land to the north and east, with densely tree-lined boundaries.

1.1.3 There is a small ribbon of residential properties further southeast along Station Drive. The application site lies within approximately 70 metres of the nearest residential curtilage of these properties.

1.2 Relevant Planning History

2018: Fantastic Inflatable World Ltd temporary public play park, Pending Consideration, 18/00270/FUL 2017: Retention of advertisement billboards, withdrawn, 17/00677/ADV 2011: To operate a hand car wash at the top end of the car park next to the changing rooms, Refused, 11/00228/COU and subsequent appeal dismissed, 11/00036/REF 2011: To operate a hand car wash at the top end of the car park next to the changing rooms, withdrawn, 11/00118/COU

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Pre-application advice None.

2.2 The Proposal

2.2.1 This application proposes a temporary change of use of the sports playing fields for use as a public play park known as "Fantastic Inflatable World".

Page 179 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2.2.2 The event is to run throughout the summer holidays, and the applicant has requested a temporary permission for the next 3 years on a temporary basis.

2.2.3 The proposed "event area" would measure some 100m wide x 50m deep (1.2 acres), and a proposed site plan indicates the following inflatables / play equipment / stalls as part of the proposal -

-2 inflatable slides -2 sand pits -1 paddling pool -1 paint ball -1 zorbing balls area -1 trampoline -1 set of bumper cars -1 rodeo bull -1 "hook-a-duck"/face paint/striker stall -1 set of water boats -1 "avalanche" -1 toddler area -1 food/sweets/toys stall -1 climbing wall -9 inflatable castles -1 first aid stall

2.3 Applicant's Submission

2.3.1 This will be a temporary event, through the summer holidays. We would like to establish planning permission for the next 3 years on a temporary usage basis.

2.3.2 Proposed dates and times -

07/07/18 - 02/09/18, between 10am - 6pm daily

2.4 Amended Plans

29/06/18: A more detailed site block / layout plan for the event and parking areas was provided.

3. POLICY CONTEXT

3.1 Within the West Midlands Green Belt.

3.2 Core Strategy Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt Core Policy 2: Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment Policy EQ1: Protecting, Expanding and Enhancing Natural Assets

Page 180 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Policy EQ4: Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape Core Policy 3: Sustainable Development and Climate Change Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design Policy EQ11: Wider Design Considerations Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport Policy EV12: Parking Provision Core Policy 14: Open Space, Sport and Recreation Policy HWB1: Protection of Open Space, Sport and Recreation Facilities

3.3 Adopted local guidance Green Belt and Open Countryside Supplementary Planning Document [SPD]

3.4 National Planning Policy Framework 2012 [NPPF] Chapter 9: Protecting Green Belt land

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Ward Councillors (expired 14/06/18): No comments received.

Brewood & Coven Parish Council (received 06/06/18): No objection.

Environmental Health Officer (expired 14/06/18): Should planning permission be granted, I recommend the following conditions are put in place to protect the amenity of neighbouring residential properties:-

1. The opening hours are restricted to 10:00 - 18:00, Monday - Sunday. 2. Noise from and entertainment/music or generators is inaudible at the boundary of any residential properties or other noise sensitive premises. 3. Lighting on site shall be positioned so it doesn't spill onto or cause a nuisance to any neighbouring properties.

County Highways (received 08/06/18): There are no objections on Highway grounds to the proposed development subject to the following conditions being included on any approval:-

[1] The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans.

The above comments relate purely to the effects of the development on roads for which Staffordshire County Council is the Highway Authority. For consideration to be given to the effects of the development on the A449 Trunk Road, it will be necessary for you to consult Highway England.

Members should refer to the Committee update list for County Highways' comments on the amended site plans received 29/06/18 (please see section 2.4 of this report) - which are expected by 13/07/18.

Page 181 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Sport England: Members should refer to the Committee update list for Sport England's comments on this application - which are expected by 13/07/18.

Site Notice (expired 19/06/18): The LPA received a second response however the contributor requested anonymity, and therefore the comments made cannot be registered or addressed in this report.

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 This application is being referred to Planning Committee as the proposal is contrary to Policy GB1 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5.2 The Key Issues are:

- Principle of Development - Very Special Circumstances - Impact on Landscape / Visual Amenity - Impact on Residential Amenity - Highways/Parking - Temporary Permission - Representations

5.3 Principle of Development

5.3.1 Policy GB1 of the adopted Core Strategy supports certain forms of development in the Green Belt that are not considered to be inappropriate, as reflected in the NPPF. This includes the carrying out of engineering or other operations, or the making of a material change of use of land, where the works or use proposed would have no material effect on the openness of the Green Belt, or the fulfilment of its purposes.

5.3.2 In this instance the proposed change of use of the sports playing fields for an inflatable play park would clearly result in the loss of Green Belt openness even only for a temporary period. Therefore it is considered that the proposal is inappropriate development, and in-line with the NPPF, very special circumstances will need to be demonstrated.

5.4 Very Special Circumstances

Page 182 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.4.1 Paragraph 88 of the NPPF states that local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. 'Very special circumstances' will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.

5.4.2 Paragraph 79 of the NPPF states that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open, and the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.

5.4.3 The proposed change of use and consequently loss of Green Belt openness is not permanent in this instance as the applicant has requested a temporary permission. Green Belt openness would be restored to its present condition when the temporary change of use ceases.

5.4.4 It is therefore considered that the above reasons do amount to the very special circumstances required to clearly outweigh the proposal's harm on the Green Belt, which is this case is only temporary.

5.5 Impact on Landscape / Visual Amenity

5.5.1 Policy EQ11 requires that new development "respect local character and distinctiveness, including that of the surrounding development and landscape […].

5.5.2 It is considered that the introduction of various play equipment on this scale would be harmful to the local character and landscape, however this harm would be limited as it would be temporary and not permanent.

5.6 Impact on Neighbouring Amenity

5.6.1 Policy EQ9 seeks to protect the amenity of local residents.

5.6.2 The neighbour's comments surrounding noise and disturbance from the play park is duly noted, however the Environmental Health Officer's condition to prevent unacceptable noise levels at the boundaries of any residential properties or noise sensitive premises is considered appropriate to prevent undue noise and disturbance. A condition to restrict the opening times for the play park shall also prevent any noise and disturbance occurring at unsociable hours.

5.6.3 There is no indication that the temporary change of use would cause adverse impacts on wildlife, as the site is not designated for its biological importance. Full details of refuse bins, and recycling storage areas can be requested by condition - to ensure these are provided and maintained on site during the life of the development. A further condition can insure that any residual rubbish/litter is cleared from the site when the use ceases. The Environmental Health officer has raised no concerns over pollution.

Page 183 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.6.4 The boundary of the nearest residential property (on Station Drive) would be separated approximately 70 metres from the application site, and therefore there are no concerns regarding loss of light from the play equipment, or loss of privacy given the separation distances involved. The LPA has no control over members of public using other sports pitches which fall outside of the application site boundary. Antisocial behaviour is a civil matter which falls outside of planning control.

5.6.5 Concerns regarding traffic and highway safety are considered in the following section.

5.6.6 No details of lighting have been provided in the application documents and therefore the Environmental Health Officer's recommended condition to prevent harmful light spill or nuisance is not considered relevant or necessary. A condition to request details of any lighting for the play park is considered more appropriate.

5.7 Highways/Parking

5.7.1 The neighbour's comments are noted, however County Highways have raised no objection on parking, traffic or highway safety grounds, subject to conditions.

5.7.2 A more detailed site block plan for both the event area and parking area has been provided (29/06/18). Members should refer to the Committee update list for County Highways' comments on the amended site plans received 29/06/18 (please see section 2.4 of this report) - which are expected by 13/07/18.

5.7.3 Highways England has no comments to make on this application.

5.8 Temporary Permission

5.8.1 The applicant has requested a temporary permission for 3 years (including this year), however a period of 2 years is considered more appropriate so that the impacts of the development and effectiveness of planning conditions applied on this occasion (under any approval) can be reviewed at the end of this period.

5.8.2 This application is being considered concurrently with an application for advertisement consent for 2 x "Fantastic Inflatable World" signs. The application is recommended for approval for a limited period of 2 years (18/00269/ADV).

5.9 Representations

5.9.1 The neighbour's comments have been addressed in the main body of this report.

6. CONCLUSIONS

6.1.1 The proposed temporary change of use constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt however it is considered that there are very special circumstances to clearly outweigh the proposal's harm on the Green Belt.

Page 184 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

6.1.2 There would be limited harmful impacts on the local landscape however such impacts would be acceptable as the development would be temporary and not permanent.

6.1.3 There are no adverse residential amenity concerns subject to appropriate use of conditions, and no parking or highway-related issues. I therefore recommend the application for approval subject to conditions.

7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The development hereby approved including site set-up/site clearance, shall only take place between the specified dates listed below, and this permission shall expire at the end of this period on 01/09/19:-

2018 approved development period 17/07/18 - 04/09/18 [7 weeks] 2019 approved development period 07/07/19 - 01/09/19 [8 weeks]

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings listed below:-

1. 'OS Plan B&W' Site Location Plan at 1:1250 (received 22/05/18) 2. 'Block Plan 1' and 'Block Plan 2' (received 29/06/18)

3. The approved opening hours for the play park are between the hours of 10am - 6pm, Monday - Sunday, unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

4. Within 2 weeks of the date of this permission full details of refuse bin and recycle storage areas for the temporary play park hereby approved shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The agreed details shall be carried out/provided concurrently with the remaining period of approved development and shall thereafter be maintained throughout the life of the approved development period(s) listed in Condition 1 of this consent.

5. All site set-up/site clearance works, involving installation/removal of play equipment, temporary structures and other paraphernalia associated with the play park, including deliveries to and from the site, shall only take place between the hours of 10am - 6pm, Monday - Sunday, and only during the approved development period(s) listed in Condition 1 of this consent.

6. All play equipment, temporary structures and other paraphernalia associated with the play park, including residual rubbish/litter, shall be removed from the application site and the land shall be restored to its former condition as sports playing fields / football pitches, on or before 04/09/18 [in 2018] and 01/09/19 [in 2019], in pursuance of Condition 1 of this consent.

Page 185 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

7. Noise from entertainment, music, generators, fans or any other equipment associated with the play park producing audible noise shall be inaudible at the boundary of any residential properties or other noise sensitive premises.

8. The permission hereby granted does not grant or imply consent for the installation of any means of lighting on the site. No lighting shall be installed on the site until full details of a scheme for any lighting is first submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

9. The event 'parking' area indicated on approved drawing 'OS Plan B&W' (received 22/05/18) shall remained closed for visitor parking between the hours of 6pm - 10am Monday - Sunday.

10. The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the parking and turning areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans.

Reasons

1. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

3. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt, and to ensure that the temporary change of use of the land does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

4. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt, and to ensure that the temporary change of use of the land does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

6. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

7. To ensure that the temporary change of use of the land does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

8. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Page 186 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

9. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt, and to ensure that the temporary change of use of the land does not detract from the reasonable enjoyment of surrounding residential properties in accordance with policy EQ9 of the adopted Core Strategy.

10. In the interests of public and highway safety and convenience and to ensure that adequate parking facilities are available to serve the development and to conform to the requirements of policy EV12 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Proactive Statement

Page 187 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00269/ADV - The Four Ashes Inn Station Drive Four Ashes Wolverhampton South Staffordshire WV10 7BU

Page 188 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00338/FUL Ms Pamela Penny BREWOOD & COVEN Councillor W J Sutton Councillor J Bolton Councillor D Holmes

1 Broomhall Cottages, Horsebrook Farm Lane, Brewood Stafford South Staffordshire ST19 9LD

Demolition of existing semi-detached dwelling and erection of detached dwelling.

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1. Site description

1.1.1. The two-storey, semi-detached cottage is in a remote rural location, facing a shared driveway almost at right angles to Horsebrook Farm Lane. The cottage is constructed from brickwork and has a single bay, a central chimney stack, gabled roof, the ridge of which is parallel to the track. It measures 7.5 metres long x 7.5 metres wide x 6.6 metres tall.

1.1.2. Documents submitted with the application describe the NW elevation as 'front' and SE as 'rear', although primary access to the building appears to be via a flat-roofed, single-storey, rendered extension off the gable end. Building Control records indicate this is post-1974, possibly accompanied by porch on SE elevation, but there is no planning history to confirm this.

1.1.3. Open amenity space is to the side and rear and is separated from the highway by a post-and-rail fence, with some close-boarded fencing closer to the extension.

1.1.4. The site is level and is largely surrounded by open agricultural land and hedgerows, except to the ESE, in which direction is Bellview Cottage, some 50 metres away. The surrounding topography is mostly flat, with a slight rise to NW.

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1. Proposal 2.1.1. It is proposed to completely demolish one of the existing two semi-detached cottages and replace it with a 1.5/two-storey; two-bed house at the northern corner of site, facing N towards junction between the track and the Lane. Parking for two cars is to be provided within footprint of existing cottage.

2.1.2. The new dwelling is to be 10.2 metres long x 7.8 metres wide x 6.6 metres tall. It has a symmetrical, split-gable roof: two-storey to front with a central feature gable, oak-framed porch and cat-slide roof element; 1.5-storey to rear, with three gabled dormers in the roof slope. There is an oak-framed porch on east gable end and a chimneybreast on the west.

2.2. Pre-application discussions

Page 189 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2.2.1. A pre-application enquiry was submitted to establish the acceptability of a first-floor side extension to the existing cottage.

3. POLICY CONTEXT

Within the West Midlands Green Belt.

Adopted Core Strategy Core Policy 1: The Spatial Strategy Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt Core Policy 2: Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment Policy EQ4: Protecting and Enhancing the Character and Appearance of the Landscape Core Policy 3: Sustainable Development and Climate Change Policy EQ9: Protecting Residential Amenity Appendix 6: Space about dwellings standards Core Policy 4: Promoting High Quality Design Policy EQ11: Wider Design Considerations Core Policy 11: Sustainable Transport Policy EV12: Parking Provision Appendix 5: Car parking standards

Adopted local guidance Green Belt and Open Countryside Supplementary Planning Document [SPD]

National Planning Policy Framework [NPPF] 7. Requiring good design 9. Protecting Green Belt land

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

No Councillor comments (consultation period expired 18 May 2018).

Brewood & Coven Parish Council (received 25 May 2018): no objection.

One neighbour objects (received 11 June 2018): 'I strongly object to this planning application based on the close proximity and the impact it will have on the outlook from my house. I also have concerns regarding the recent tree felling and drainage on Horsebrook Farm Lane which floods each year with heavy rain.' One neighbour consulted: no response (consultation period expired 18 May 2018). Site notice posted (expired 18 May 2018).

5. APPRAISAL

5.1. This application must be determined by the Planning Committee because it is a materially larger replacement building, contrary to Policy GB1: Development in the Green Belt.

Page 190 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.2. Key issues -principle of the development; -very special circumstances; -impact on residential amenity; -impact on local and landscape character; and -impact on parking provision and highway safety.

5.3. Principle of development 5.3.1. The property is within the West Midlands Green Belt. According to the NPPF, the essential characteristics of Green Belt land are its permanence and its openness. New buildings reduce that openness, and are therefore inappropriate.

5.3.2. Replacement buildings are an exception to that rule, provided they are not materially larger than the buildings they replace. The Green Belt and Open Countryside SPD defines 'materially larger' as being up to between 10 and 20 percent larger, including both floor area and volume.

5.3.3. Here, the floor area is about 73 square metres, of which 26 are at first-floor level. The proposed dwelling would provide 100 square metres, an increase of 27 square metres or 37 percent, with 45 square metres now being at first-floor level. I am obliged to conclude that the proposed building would be materially larger than that which it replaces.

5.3.4. As such, the current proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Inappropriate development is harmful to the Green Belt by definition, and any harm to the Green Belt is to be accorded substantial weight in the planning balance. Inappropriate development should only be approved where the harm to the Green Belt is clearly outweighed by other considerations, known as very special circumstances.

5.4. Very special circumstances

5.4.1. The agent has advanced one material consideration in support of the development, namely the potential for an extension at the existing cottage that would be considered 'permitted development' (PD)—that is, permitted automatically by planning law. It is well established in planning practice and case law that such extensions, if a viable alternative to the actual proposal, can be used to justify approval of larger extensions than policy would otherwise permit. It is then known as the 'fall-back position' (FBP).

5.4.2. The FBP here is a single-storey extension projecting six metres past the original southeastern elevation of the existing cottage (with the single-storey side extension and porch being ignored for these purposes). It would add about 24 square metres to the existing house, only three square metres less than the current proposal.

5.4.3. The FBP would be lawful only upon successful completion of the 'prior notification' procedure, which involves a neighbour consultation. However, the

Page 191 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018 procedure in this case would be something of a formality, since a PD-compliant extension in this location would have no impact on the neighbour's amenity. Neighbour amenity is the only material consideration in the prior notification procedure.

5.4.4. The legislation permits extensions like the FBP provided they project past the original rear elevation of a dwellinghouse. Both 'original' and 'rear' are terms requiring further definition: 'original' means how the property was when it was built, or on 1 July 1948 if it was built before that date. The 'rear' elevation is generally taken to be that opposite the 'principal' elevation, which is usually (but by no means always) that featuring the front door and facing the main highway serving the address. No more precise definition of 'rear' is available, although it has been tested extensively at appeal.

5.4.5. Here, the agent posits the southeastern elevation as the rear and the northwestern as the front (and thus, by implication, the principal). The northwestern is unambiguously the neighbouring cottage's current principal elevation, so that character extends to the same elevation on the application cottage. The northwestern elevation is also described as the 'front' on the 2006 planning permission for the neighbouring cottage, and I consider it to be the principal elevation on the plans showing the property as it stood then.

5.4.6. The agent's assertion remains somewhat contentious, however. Considering the application property on its own, the northwestern elevation merely features two windows and exhibits no particular character of its own. Access is via the south- and northeastern elevations, both of which feature a porch or similar structure. The northeastern elevation comes closest to fronting the highway.

5.4.7. The situation is complicated by the comprehensive internal alterations and external extensions undergone by both properties. Certain symmetries and artefacts in the internal layout (including openings and the direction and position of the staircases and landings) might even suggest the southeastern as the original principal elevation. 5.4.8. Nevertheless, a delve into the archives proves enlightening. The cottages are recorded on the earliest readily available map at a useful scale, which was published in 1884. At that time, their shared driveway was the head of a track that served another pair of cottages on the opposite bank of Horse Brook, which flows eastwards just south of the application site. From there, the track continued westwards to skirt a field, at the centre of which was one of several old marl pits dotting the estate of Broom Hall, the track's destination and the source of the cottages' name, some 500 metres southwest of the application site.

5.4.9. Notwithstanding the demolition of the second pair of cottages at some point between then and the turn of the century, both the track and the self-evident relationship between Cottages and Hall were still readily apparent in 1903 and 1924. By 1961 the track had been downgraded to the footpath that still runs alongside (and disappears into the hedge at the end of) the cottages' shared drive today. More recently still, a cottage or pair of cottages adjoining the application site were

Page 192 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018 enlarged considerably to form 'Bellview Farm', which now appears to be the Cottages' 'parent' building. 5.4.10. Taken together, the changes I have described in the preceding two paragraphs obscure the relationship between Broom Hall and its Cottages, and thus between the modern cottages and their original frontages. But by unspooling the years, it becomes clear that both the Cottages and 'Bellview Farm' would originally have fronted the track leading to the 'big house'.

5.4.11. Consequently, I agree that the northwestern elevation was originally the principal. The FBP would thus be PD, subject to the successful completion of the prior notification procedure, which, as I have said, would be a formality.

5.4.12. Furthermore, given the pre-application discussions, it would appear that the applicant and agent consider the FBP or a first-floor side extension (which the FBP would also support) a viable alternative. Providing additional floorspace in this way— something of a necessity, given that the existing cottage barely meets the Core Strategy's minimum internal space standards—would have an impact on the openness of the Green Belt comparable to that of the current proposal, the three square metres' difference being effectively negligible.

5.4.13. In terms of local character and visual amenity, I consider that the current proposal's greater volume and first-floor bulk are evils far lesser than the FBP's patchwork sprawl. If the FBP were used to support a first-floor side extension to the existing property, moreover, the difference disappears altogether.

5.4.14. Having considered the matter at some length, therefore, I find that the FBP clearly outweighs the harm that the current proposal will do the openness of the Green Belt, notwithstanding that I have afforded that harm substantial weight. As such, it represents the very special circumstances required by paragraphs 87 and 88 of the NPPF.

5.4.15. It remains the case, however, that the proposed dwelling is inappropriate development in the Green Belt, and materially larger than the existing building. One final consideration, therefore, is that granting permission for the proposed dwelling would confer a fresh set of PD rights upon it, which would allow it to become considerably larger than the submitted plans suggest.

5.4.16. As such, I consider it reasonable, relevant and necessary to uphold the principles of the Green Belt by recommending a condition removing PD rights for extensions and outbuildings, which will allow the Council to maintain control over future development on the site.

5.5. Impact on residential amenity

5.5.1. Policy EQ9 states that new development 'should take into account the amenity of any nearby residents, particularly with regard to privacy […] and daylight.' It goes on to specify standards for the spaces around and between dwellings.

Page 193 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.5.2. The neighbour's objection refers to the 'close proximity' of the proposed dwelling to his own and to the 'impact it will have on the outlook from [his] house'. The proposed dwelling will be some 50 metres from the neighbour's nearest habitable-room windows, several times the minimum acceptable distance set out in the Core Strategy. My subsequent conversation with the neighbour reveals that his primary concern is his outlook, and specifically that the new dwelling will obstruct his views of the sunset.

5.5.3. The neighbour's concern is valid, broadly speaking, and I sympathise. However, one has no legal right to a view over someone else's land, and there is nothing in applicable planning policy to preserve such a view. As such, I cannot attach any weight to this consideration.

5.5.4. That aside, the new dwelling would clearly have no impact on either neighbour's privacy or daylight. There would be no increase in the requirement for or provision of garden area or length, nor any facing windows. As such, there is no conflict with Policy EQ9.

5.6. Impact on local and landscape character

5.6.1. Policy EQ11 requires that new development—respect local character and distinctiveness, including that of the surrounding development and landscape […] by enhancing the positive attributes whilst mitigating the negative aspects[.] In terms of scale, [design] and materials, development should contribute positively to the street scene and surrounding buildings, whilst respecting the scale of spaces and buildings in the local area.

5.6.2. Policy EQ4 adds that: the design and location of new development should take account of the characteristics and sensitivity of the landscape and its surroundings, and not have a detrimental effect on the immediate environment and on any […] medium and long distance views.

5.6.3. The existing cottage has been extended poorly, and without any real attention being paid to its significance as a non-designated heritage asset. Its complete demolition will further diminish whatever significance remains to its neighbour by reducing the pair of historic cottages to two separate dwellings.

5.6.4. Nevertheless, it will remove a directionless, compromised building contributing little or no significance to the historic environment beyond the basic fact of its existence, allowing the remaining cottage to stand alone, its own significance less muddied. The new building will make a considerable positive contribution to the street scene, the design incorporating both visual interest in its rooflines and sensitivity to its context in the gabled dormers and oak-framed porches.

Page 194 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5.6.5. More widely, the existing development and surrounding vegetation will help to screen the new development. As such, I do not consider that it will intrude upon medium- or long-distance views accessible to the public.

5.6.6. Taking these matters into account, I have no objections under Policies EQ4 or EQ11.

5.7. Highways/parking 5.7.1. Two parking spaces will continue to be both provided and acceptable. There will be no increase in traffic.

6. CONCLUSION 6.1.1. This proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt, and harmful to it by definition; however, that harm is outweighed by the very special circumstances that obtain in this case, as required by paragraphs 87 and 88 of the NPPF. Furthermore, it will cause no significant harm to the amenity of neighbouring residential properties and will be sympathetic to local and landscape. As such, I recommend the approval of this application.

7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: 060 Proposed Ground Floor Plan; 061 Proposed First Floor Plan; 067 Proposed Dwelling Elevations.

3. Before the development commences details of the facing materials to be used for the external elevations shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The development shall be carried out in the approved materials.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 or any subsequent equivalent legislation, no development within the following class(es) shall be carried out at the application site without the local planning authority's prior approval: o Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A - enlargement, improvement or other alteration o Schedule 2, Part 1, Class D - porches o Schedule 2, Part 1, Class E - garden building, enclosure, pool or oil or gas storage container

5. The existing dwelling house on site shall be demolished concurrently with the development. All materials resulting from the demolition shall be reused in

Page 195 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

the proposed development or removed from the site and lawfully disposed of.

Reasons

1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

3. To safeguard the visual amenity of the area and the existing building in particular in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

4. The site is within the Green Belt within which, in accordance with the planning policies in the adopted Core Strategy, there is a presumption against inappropriate development

5. The site is within the Green Belt within which, in accordance with the planning policies in the adopted Core Strategy, there is a presumption against inappropriate development

6. Proactive Statement

Page 196 of 210 Paul Thompson: Graduate Planner – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00338/FUL - 1 Broomhall Cottages Horsebrook Farm Lane Brewood Stafford South Staffordshire ST19 9LD

Page 197 of 210

Page 198 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

18/00371/OUT Mr Stephen Collins ACTON TRUSSELL, BEDNALL & TEDDESLEY HAY Councillor L Bates Councillor I Ford

South Staffordshire Housing Association Acton Court Acton Gate Stafford South Staffordshire ST18 9AP

The proposals are the erection of 2 No. buildings (materials store and machinery store) on the vacant land at Acton Court, Stafford.

1. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING HISTORY

1.1 Site Description

1.1.1 This application relates to a parcel of vacant land measuring approximately 40m wide x 35m deep within Acton Court, Acton Gate, located off the A449 and adjacent to Junction 13 of the M6 motorway.

1.1.2 The area of land is a grassy hollow situated directly north of the access road into Acton Court, screened from the A449 by an established belt of trees and vegetation on the eastern boundary of the site.

1.1.3 Acton Court has a long established use for commercial development and currently contains a large office block, hotel and public house all with associated parking areas.

1.2 Relevant Planning History

2018: 2 No. additional carpark areas creating a total of 28 No. additional car parking space (each area holding 14 No. spaces), with timber post and rail fencing around perimeter, Approved, 18/00364/FUL 2018: The proposals are the erection of 2 No. buildings (materials store and machinery store) on the vacant land at Acton Court, Stafford, Pending Consideration, 18/00371/OUT 2011: Installation of solar photovoltaic panels on four roofs of the building and addition of an external flue as part of the internal boiler room refurbishment, Approved, 11/00721/FUL 2010: Construction of a car park with 1.8m high double leaf gate, Approved, 10/00589/FUL 1998: Offices, Approved, 98/00179

2. APPLICATION DETAILS

2.1 Pre-application Advice

Page 199 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

None.

2.2 The Proposal

2.2.1 This is an outline application for the erection of two storage buildings, with all detailed matters regarding Layout, Scale, Appearance, Access and Landscaping reserved for a later stage.

2.2.2 The applicants have provided a site layout plan demonstrating how two separate buildings for use as a "machinery store" and "material store" could be accommodated within the site, as well as a new access road adjoined to the existing. However, these details do not form part of the current application and are for indicative purposes only.

2.3 Agent's Submission

Not applicable.

2.4 Amended Plans

17/05/18: The proposed site layout plan was clarified as being for indicative purposes only.

26/06/18: The application site red edge was adjusted to define the whole application site.

3. POLICY CONTEXT

Within the Open Countryside

Core Strategy National Policy 1: The Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Core Policy 1 - The Spatial Strategy Policy OC1 - Development in the Open Countryside beyond the West Midlands Green Belt Policy EQ9 - Protecting Residential Amenity Core Policy 4 - Promoting High Quality Design Policy EQ11 - Wider Design Considerations Core Policy 7 - Economy and Economic Development Core Policy 11 - Sustainable Transport Policy EV1 - Retention of existing employment sites Policy EV11 - Sustainable Travel Policy EV12 - Parking Provision Appendix 5 - Parking Standards

Adopted Local Guidance Green Belt and Open Countryside Supplementary Planning Document [SPD]

Page 200 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

National Planning Policy Framework 2012 [NPPF] 7. Requiring Good Design

4. CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Ward Councillors (expired 31/05/18): No comments received.

Acton Trussell Parish Council (expired 31/05/18): No comments received.

Environmental Health (received 26/06/18): As long as it's just storage I don't have any comments, I wouldn't want them carrying out any maintenance in or at the proposed.

County Highways (received 25/05/18): There are no objections on Highway grounds to this proposal.

County Flood Risk Team (received 17/05/18): The footprint of the proposed buildings is not within the uFMfSW 1 in 100 year outline and there are no recorded flooding hotspots within 20m or Ordinary Watercourses within 5m. There will be no significant increase in impermeable area and so little change to the surface water runoff generated by the site. Considering the scale of the development, we have no further comment to make on this application.

Internal Drainage Board (received 29/05/18): The above application lies within the IDB district and indicates that: - The application will increase the impermeable area to the site. Therefore, the applicant should ensure that any existing or proposed surface water discharge system has adequate capacity for any increase in surface water run-off to the area.

The IDB as a Consultee give the following comments/recommendations: Our current guidelines for any increase in surface water discharge are as follows:-

If the surface water were to be disposed of via a soakaway system, the IDB would have no objection in principle but would advise that the ground conditions in this area may not be suitable for soakaway drainage. It is therefore essential that percolation tests are undertaken to establish if the ground conditions are suitable for soakaway drainage throughout the year. If surface water is to be directed to a mains sewer system the IDB would again have no objection in principle, providing that the Water Authority are satisfied that the existing system will accept this additional flow. If the surface water is to be discharged to any watercourse within the Drainage District, Consent from the IDB would be required in addition to Planning Permission, and would be restricted to 1.4 litres per second per hectare or greenfield runoff. No obstructions within 9 metres of the edge of a watercourse are permitted without Consent from the IDB.

Advice/recommendations: Should consent be required from the IDB as described above then we would advise that this should be made a condition of any Planning decision.(Recommended

Page 201 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Condition): Any surface water discharge into any watercourses in, on, under or near the site requires consent from the Drainage Board.

Crime Prevention Design Advisor (received 16/05/18): I ask that South Staffs District Council consider my comments, which are site specific, and made in accordance with;

Section 17 of the 'Crime and Disorder Act 1998': places a duty on each local authority: 'to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent crime and disorder in its area to include anti-social behaviour, substance misuse and behaviour which adversely affects the environment'.

National Planning Policy Framework: Paragraph 58 'Planning policies and decisions should aim to ensure that developments create safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion.'

Paragraph 69. This paragraph looks towards healthy and inclusive communities. The paragraph includes:-

"Planning policies and decisions, in turn, should aim to achieve places which promote: Safe and accessible developments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life and community cohesion"

South Staffordshire District Council LDF Core Policy: Core Policy 13, Community Safety states; The design of buildings and spaces can make a significant contribution towards reducing the scope for crime, and create more pleasant and reassuring environments in which to live, work and play. The opportunities for crime to occur can be minimised by designing and planning out crime in new development. The Council supports the national guidance 'Secured by Design' and will continue to work with Staffordshire Police architectural liaison officer in relation to the design and layout of development proposals.

Policy CS1: Designing Out Crime: In accordance with Core Policy 13, the design of development must include, means of reducing the opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour, and must also seek to reduce the potential for fear of crime. This will include support for: Social facilities to be provided in locations which can be adequately controlled and supervised; Development to be designed to increase natural surveillance of public and private spaces, with continuous public surveillance as an alternative; Liaison with the Police to design out crime and fear of crime in specific schemes which also meet other design objectives in Policy EQ11. Development proposals should be consistent with other local planning policies.

Page 202 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Core Policy 13 sets out the strategic policy for community safety that supports the aims and objectives of the Sustainable Community Strategy and the Community Safety Partnership Plan. The above Policy provides further detail on the design of development and 'Secured by Design', and in turn supports Policy EQ11 covering wider design considerations.

The Human Rights Act Article & Protocol 1, Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention and PINS 953.

All security equipment installed should be to the relevant British Standard and/or Loss Prevention Certification Board Standard. Installers should be certified to install such equipment to obtain the maximum crime resistance from the product.

Roof Should construction dictate installing a lightweight roofing system, I recommend installing one certificated to STS 202 BR1. LPS 1175 SR 1 which is less vulnerable to intrusion by cutting through the deck, attempts to gain access via the roof can be prevented by fixing expanded metal to the topside of rafters.

Unit Walls Composite panels and profiled metal cladding are vulnerable to forced entry; the first 2m height of all walls, internally or externally, should be brickwork or materials of similar strength. All grilles should use security screws or bolts.

Windows (if installed) The minimum Association of British Insurers (ABI) and Police security standard for ground floor windows and those easily accessible above ground floor, is that the window shall be successfully tested and Certificated (BSI Kite mark or similar) to; LPS 1175: Issue 6, Security Rating 2 or higher STS 202 Burglary Rating 2 or higher (Note 62.3.1) (Note 62.3.1; STS 202 is the equivalent standard to LPS 1175 and is published by Warrington Certification Laboratories)

Windows must also be fit for purpose and must be certificated to the relevant material standard i.e.: BS 6510:2010 (Steel) BS 7412:2007 (PVCu) BS 644:2012 (Timber) BS 8529:2010 (Composite) BS 4873:2009 (Aluminium)

Additional security may be gained by installing internal grilles or open slatted external roller shutters certificated to STS 202 or LPS 1175.

Perimeter Doors The minimum Association of British Insurers (ABI) and Police security standard for perimeter doors is that they should comply with PAS 24;2012, STS 202 BR2, LPS 2081SRB or LPS 1175 SR2, the opening leaf of perimeter double doors must be fitted

Page 203 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018 top and bottom with key operated rack mortise bolts and the meeting styles should be rebated.

Roller Shutters (if installed) Roller shutters should comply with STS202 or LPS 1175 Security Rating 1/2 (SR1/2 or WCL 2 Burglary Rating 1/2 (BR1/2). Locks should be applied internally if possible otherwise a close shackled padlock should be used. If the shutters are electrically operated an electrical cut off switch should be fitted away from the doors so as to disable the shutters when the premises are closed. All shutters should have contacts fitted and be linked to the alarm system.

Drainpipes New build premises drainpipes/down spouts should be either flush fitting or concealed to prevent use as a footstep or climbing aid.

Alarm System An intruder alarm system should be installed compliant with BS EN 50131-1:1997 Grade 3, and BS 8418. The management of the system should be to ISO 9001:2000. A unique reference number for the installation will be required for a Police response.

CCTV System Consideration should be given to installing a detector activated, recording CCTV system. A full operational requirement should be written to identify vulnerable areas prior to installing

The following link provides access to H.M. Government's Surveillance Camera Commissioner's Passport To Compliance, following the passport to compliance will help organisations meet the 12 guiding principles in the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice and, whilst not a guarantee, other relevant legislation such as the Data Protection Act and Human Rights Act. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/surveillance-camera-commissioner-launches- a-passport-for-compliance

Further information on Secured by Design and accredited security products can be found at www.securedbydesign.com and www.soldsecure.com

Neighbours (expired 31/05/18): No comments received.

Site Notice (expired 05/06/18): No comments received.

Page 204 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

5. APPRAISAL

5.1 This application is being referred to Planning Committee as the proposal is contrary to Policy OC1 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5.2 The Key Issues are:

- Principle of Development - Justification for Development - Impact on Residential Amenity - Highways/Parking - Remaining Matters - Representations

5.3 Principle of Development

5.3.1 This outline application must consider the principle of the development, and then whether the remaining matters of Layout, Scale, Appearance, Access and Landscaping can be adequately achieved at a later stage.

5.3.2 The application site is located within the Open Countryside beyond the West Midlands Green Belt. Policy OC1 of the Core Strategy stipulates that new buildings in the Open Countryside will only be permitted where they fall within one of a number of acceptable categories listed within OC1. These include buildings for purposes directly related to agriculture or forestry or appropriate small-scale facilities for sport and recreation.

5.3.3 The proposed materials/machinery store buildings do not fall within any of the acceptable criteria for new buildings given in Policy OC1, and therefore special justification is required to overcome the automatic policy objection.

5.4 Justification for Development

5.4.1 Policy OC1 protects the Open Countryside "for its own sake". It receives particular protection for its "landscapes, areas of ecological, historic, archaeological, agricultural and recreational value".

5.4.2 Whilst the application site is designated as Open Countryside in the Local Plan, Acton Court has a long established use for commercial development and it currently contains a large office block building, a hotel and a public house, all with associated parking areas. The proposed development would be contained within the confines of Acton Court, representing a logical expansion to the existing commercial development within the site.

5.4.3 The reserved matters concerning appropriate Layout, Scale, Appearance, Access and Landscaping, are all considered achievable without any adverse landscape, ecological, historic, archaeological, agricultural or recreational impacts or

Page 205 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018 undue harm to the character of the Open Countryside. On this basis the principle of the development is therefore considered acceptable.

5.5 Impact on Residential Amenity

5.5.1 The proposed development would be sited approximately 100m from the nearest residential properties to the north off Old Wolverhampton Road. The proposed development raises no residential amenity concerns, and based on the proposed buildings being used for storage purposes only, the Environmental Health Officer raises no objection.

5.6 Highways/Parking

5.6.1 County highways raise no objection to the principle of the proposal. Precise details of access are a reserved matter to be considered at a later stage.

5.7 Remaining Matters

5.7.1 The site appears large enough to accommodate two storage buildings, and the reserved matters concerning Layout, Scale, Appearance, Access and Landscaping, are all considered achievable without any adverse impacts on the visual amenities of the area.

5.8 Representations

5.8.1 The Internal Drainage Board's (IDB) comments are noted, however full details of surface water drainage shall be considered at a later stage in consultation with Severn Trent Water. Should any surface water drainage be discharged into any adjacent watercourses, the requirement for the applicant to gain separate consent from the IDB can be highlighted as an informative to any outline permission granted.

5.8.2 The Crime Prevention Design Advisor's recommendations can also be attached as an informative to any consent granted.

6. CONCLUSION

6.1.1 The principle of the development is acceptable, and the reserved matters concerning Layout, Scale, Appearance, Access and Landscaping, are all considered achievable without any adverse impacts on visual amenity, residential amenity or car parking/highway related concerns. I therefore recommend outline permission is granted, subject to conditions.

7. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE Subject to Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s):

1. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later that whichever is the later of the following dated: -

Page 206 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018 i) The expiration of three years from the date on which this permission is granted; ii) The expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

2. Before the development commences, and within 3 years of the date of this permission, full details of the following reserved matters shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority:

a. The Layout - The way in which buildings, routes and open spaces are to be provided within the development and their relationship to buildings and spaces in the vicinity of the site;

b. The Scale - The height, width, length and overall appearance of each of the proposed buildings, including the proposed facing materials, and how they relate to their surroundings;

c. The Appearance - The aspects of a building or place which determine the visual impression it makes;

d. The Access - The accessibility to and within the site for vehicles, cycles and pedestrians in terms of the positioning and treatment of access and circulation routes and how these fit into the surrounding access network;

e. The Landscaping - The treatment of private and public space and the impact upon the site's amenity through the introduction of hard and soft landscaping.

3. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawing numbered BSP660-A-01-02 Revision A 'Site Location Plan' (received 27/06/18).

4. Before the development commences, full details of existing and proposed ground levels within the site, and finished floor levels of the building(s) shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval.

5. Before any development takes place a scheme for the provision and implementation of surface water drainage works shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be occupied/brought into use until the approved scheme has been completed.

Reasons

1. The reason for the imposition of these time limits is to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Page 207 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

2. The application is in outline only.

3. In order to define the permission and to avoid doubt.

4. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy EQ11 of the adopted Core Strategy.

5. To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage as well as to reduce the risk of creating or exacerbating a flooding problem, in accordance with policy EQ7 of the adopted Core Strategy.

Proactive Statement

Informative That the applicant's attention is drawn to the Crime Prevention Design Advisor's comments dated 16/05/18. Contact details for Gordon Scott at Staffordshire Police are:-

Mr G Scott (22944) Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA) Crime Reduction Unit Block 9 Staffordshire Police H.Q. Weston Rd, Stafford. ST18 0YY. Telephone number: 01785-234181 or 07817-737-333

Informative That the applicant's attention is drawn to the Internal Drainage Board's comments dated 29/05/18 in reference to the separate consent process for discharging any surface water to any watercourses.

Page 208 of 210 Gareth Dwight: Planning Officer – Planning Committee 17/07/2018

Page 209 of 210

Page 210 of 210